Bill Kristol and John Dickerson think so. I don’t. To simplify, they both make the point that he’s a good politician and therefore it was all an act. But Clinton also consistently proved himself a disastrous politician at times, a politician who made colossal blunders in public when his self-discipline slipped — and I’m not talking about Lewinsky here. Those blunders usually involved his awful temper, a quality discussed by everyone who worked for him. There’s a particularly good description of it in George Stephanopoulos’s book All Too Human. Stephanopoulos called it “the wave,” while DeeDee Myers called it his “morning purple rage.” That “purple rage” is a perfect word-picture of Clinton’s reaction to Chris Wallace.

Kristol and Dickerson think Clinton did it in part to rally the Democratic base. That might be true and might happen, but there’s something peculiar about the notion that Democrats will be stirred to action by an enraged defense of the Clinton administration’s anti-terror efforts. This is without question the most problematic aspect of the Clinton presidency even for those who might feel fond and defensive of him, and having it an open topic of discussion a few weeks before Election Day really can’t be helpful — even if it’s accompanied by some Fox News Channel bashing.