The Clintons? Again? Why?

Texan Molly Ivins was one of the savviest political reporters of all time. She once said (paraphrased) "As I survey the pack of sycophants in the Washington press corps, wriggling on their bellies to kiss the feet of those in power, I feel plumb discouraged about the future of journalism." Many syndicated pundits frequenting the pages of our newspaper are most certainly wriggling on their bellies to kiss Hillary Clinton's feet and crown her even before the election.

These "journalists" have conveniently forgotten and buried the commodity market and land development scams the Clinton's were involved in, the political favors she and Bill sold, and Bill's 140 pardons and 36 sentence commutations in the last hours of his presidency, including multiple felons who paid Hillary's two brothers huge sums of money to "represent" them. Marc Rich, who fled to Switzerland to avoid prosecution on tax evasion, was pardoned after his wife contributed $70,000 to Hillary’s Senate campaign and even more to Clinton's presidential library.

Just as many in the corrupt Bush administration are escaping punishment through obfuscation, lies, and withholding of documents, the powerful Clinton's escaped...though several of their partners went to prison. The Bush Administration has refused to release unredacted Dept. of Justice records regarding the Clinton's involvement in these matters claiming "executive privilege." If Bush is claiming executive privilege in behalf of the Clinton's, one can only wonder if Obama's opinion that Hillary is "Bush Lite" is more than corroborated by Bush's help in keeping their secrets under wrap.

It should also be mentioned that Clinton’s advocacy and passage of NAFTA was the beginning of outsourcing and the end for America’s manufacturing industry and many good paying jobs. Just as Hillary has refused to say that her vote on Iraq wasn't so smart in hindsight, she also denies the damage done by NAFTA...saying only that it wasn't implemented the way Bill had in mind.

And, as we all know, Hillary has no plan to implement needed changes to our health care system.
Who wants the Clinton's in the White House again...and why?

Comments

I do not want hillary

anywhere near the white house.

A question i heard:

If the person hillary was not a clinton, but just someone else, should/would she even be in the running for president today?

What has she done as a senator? What has she done as a person that enables her the knowledge needed to be the most powerful person on the planet? It seems to me she is just like liddy dole as far as accomplishments are concerned, and i dont want liddy as pres either.

She is pressing for affordable health care for all, but I do not see in her plan how this is going to be paid for. Right now, lots of folks are paying $300 - 800+ a month for health insurance.

Nearly 45 million Americans -- including 9 million children -- don't have health insurance. And it's not just the uninsured who are at risk, but those who are underinsured: those who have insurance, but when they need a certain medication, treatment, or surgery, their insurance company refuses to pay for it.

How is her plan going to fix this AND keep the payments down for us paying these monthly expenses? source for quote

She has been a senator and has been in the white house for 8 years. She has already stated that she should not have voted for this war. When it was popular to vote for the war, she was all over it. I do not want someone who sways which ever way the winds blow as my pres. I want someone with conviction, integrity, and purpose in there leading us. She is not someone that will lead us anywhere. By her own admission, she is a follower, and not a leader.

To fulfill our promises to the nation's veterans, Hillary has proposed:
* Fully funding our veterans' health care system and providing intensive care for vets suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injuries.
* Reducing the red tape our wounded service members and veterans face.
* Increasing pay and benefits for our troops and their families.
* Expanding educational benefits for those who serve.
* Providing support and assistance for the children, spouses, and families of those troops who make the ultimate sacrifice for our country.

source
by looking at this statement, these are proposals. She has not accomplished any of these things for vets. Maybe she will, maybe she wont. I am not holding my breath that she will take these items on as a personal crusade for the military.

By the way, all these proposals are always being proposed by the senate armed services committee. This is nothing earth shattering new on the part of hillary. She is not the vets champion on these issues.

No, I do not see one good thing with this clinton in the white house.

My understanding is that Hillary

has previously said she will not address health care until sometime in her second term. The only reason she's talking about it now is that Edwards and, to a lesser degree, Obama are talking about how they would do something.

My issue, beyond that, is I believe Hillary and Billary are crooks. She says if elected Bill is going to play a major role... Woo Hoo...just what we need...someone who hasn't the good judgement to keep his Johnson zipped has his finger near the doomsday button.

SE NC Dems

Stan Bozarth

Well, honestly, all that info come from the Scaiffe, et al.

(Arkansas project or some such thang) efforts to destroy Bill. Hillary and Bill are not crooks. I want Edwards as my Pres. I do NOT like corporatist Democrats. But this "crook" myth is just ridiculous. I'd suggest David Brock's Blinded by the Right for weekend reading.

This does, however, give us a peak about what the R campaign will look like if Senator Clinton is the Dem nominee. It will be the all anti-Clinton all the time show. Zero substance. And unless the general public is as sick of the anti-Clinton meme as this not-a-fan-of-Hillary is, it might just give us trouble getting the WH back. It's not an insurmountable thing ... just something to think about. I personally think that frame -- the Clinton as crook thing -- rings like a hollow bell here in 2008. The general public now views the Clinton Presidency through a big ol' W lense and I do believe everybody who isn't surgically attached to Rush Limbaugh's arse sees those years as much better days than these.

"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum Then they charged the people a dollar 'n a half just to see 'em. Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone? They paved paradise and put up a parking lot."

yeah...the crook thing

regardless of whether or not you like Sen Clinton, it has to be said that the whole Whitewater investigation was a crock.

The Republican Congress spent 10 years and $20 million dollars on the investigation which resulted in exactly 0 indictments.

Larry Kissell is MY Congressman

Hillary Clinton not like Liddy Dole

Liddy's big career highlight was running the Red Cross into the ground and then tanking as a Senator.

Before she spent two terms in the White House as First Lady, Hillary was a successful attorney. Since her election in 2000, Hillary has been a very good (and popular) Senator for New York. She's done a lot of work to spur economic development in some of the poorest, rural parts of the State and is highly regarded because of this work and more.

I'm not trying to persuade you to like Senator Clinton...just pointing out that she is not at all like Senator Dole.

Larry Kissell is MY Congressman

I am no big fan of Hillary

Let me be clear - I want Edwards to win. But lets set the record straight on a couple things. Despite 8 years and $80 million worth of special prosecutor investigations of "commodity market and land development scams the Clinton's were involved in", there was nothing there. No money was made by the Clintons on Whitewater, no convictions were had.

All that was accomplished was to sour the country on special prosecutors and impeachment, something we Democrats sorely regret now. Of course, maybe that was the GOP plan all along - look what they are getting away with now.

And in regard to President Clinton's pardons, while the total number was more than those granted by Reagan or Bush I, Clinton issued fewer pardons than any other president since the Garfield/Arthur administation, 1881-1885.

Presidential Pardons

The 56 total pardons issued by Clinton in his first term was the fewest since the 45 granted by Thomas Jefferson in his first term. Clinton's 465 total is comparable to Carter's 509 and Reagan's 397.

This is an interesting article on the history of Presidential pardons.

I'm in agreement with you.

I think we do ourselves no favors by parroting Republican talking points. I don't agree with Clinton on the issues, I hate that she has become such a weanie on health care. BUT, that is the only reason I don't support her. For Christ's sake - the Republicans logged 140 hours of sworn testimony on the Clinton's Christmas card list. And, after all that, no wrong doing.

I won't support SwiftBoating of our candidates, even if I don't support them in the primary.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Thanks for the perspective.

Facts are good.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

I am pretty well sick and tired of folks trying to

tear down HRC based on flimsey facts, about 50% concerning someone else, presented as negatively as possible. It's like an ongoing Fox "News" smear campaign, and it is especially disturbing seeing this tripe on otherwise liberal sites.
The link below is to a Project Vote Smart web page that lists how HRC is rated by various interest groups. From that page you can view her voting record in detail if you wish.
As you will see, Senator HRC well represents many progressive ideals. As for her caution on the stump, give her a break. She's trying to break through the highest glass ceiling there is.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=55463

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?