A memo to William Jefferson Clinton, from those of us with a memory
by Stephen Pizzo | January 19, 2008 - 10:19am


Memo
To: William Jefferson Clinton
From Those of us with a memory

Listen big guy, we really need to talk.

Over the last few weeks we've seen you lose your cool as you campaign for your wife.

Knock it off!

You need a long overdue reality check, dude. You are the last person in the country who should be indignantly lecturing anyone. Why?

Oh, let us count the whys:

1) In part -- how large a part we can argue another time -- the presidency of George W. Bush is your fault. That's right, your fault. By the time your second term was over your juvenile, self-indulgent, adulterous behavior had rendered you so radioactive Al Gore was unable to leverage the many positive things you did while in office. Your embarrassing behavior nearly got you impeached, invigorated the sheep on the religious right, virtually handing the keys to Oval Office to the Neo-cons we've had to endure for the past seven years.

Deny that at your own peril, Bill. Bush's margin of "victory" in 2000 says otherwise. No reasoning person could believe that tens of thousands of folks who would have voted for Gore didn't because of the stain (pun intended) your behavior left on the Clinton/Gore administration.

2) Your misbehavior also served to lower the bar to the US Presidency. Your behavior so diminished the grandeur of the office of President of the United States that a half-wit blowhard like George W. Bush suddenly became electable. He wasn't electable because he offered solutions, vision or substance, but because he reassured voters he'd "restore dignity to the Oval Office."*

*(Translation: "I won't get hummers in the Oval Office from bimbo-interns.")

3) In late 1993 I was covering the White House for Mother Jones magazine for a story on campaign finance reform. I was invited to interview your point man on that issue, Michael Waldman. (Read that story here) Reforming the corrupt campaign finance system had been a central plank of your campaign and hopes were high that someone was finally going to do something about it. But when I got to the Executive Office Building to interview Mike I found his office empty. When I inquired where he was I was told he had been taken off campaign finance reform and transferred to the administration's current priority -- getting NAFTA passed. I could not even talk to Mike because he was sequestered in the White House "NAFTA War room."

So, great. We didn't get campaign finance reform but we did get NAFTA. Have you checked lately how that's worked out? Not well. Not well at all. We've taken note of that.

more...

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/12264

Was Clinton's behavior significantly worse than most past presidents (and other higher office holders) or was the media coverage heavier?

Every previous occupant was a monk who only had sex in the missionary position and with his wife. They didn't even get stiffies unless they were having sex, in the missionary position, with their wives. Clinton, and only Clinton, discovered sex with employees. No President in the history of the US did so before him.

report his affairs and LBJ once boasted about having more affairs than JFK. Get real. Bush was elected for the same reasons Reagan was elected: A buffoon is easier to control than a thinking being. They were against affirmative action, big government, small government and any other kind of government that purported to help people, especially black people. You can't blame Bill Clinton for the attitudes of the racist American people.

It is the bible thumpers we have to worry about.

truth.

I don't understand if this comment means that you think highly of JFK because you know the truth, or that you are part of the some that know the truth, and that some is separate from the some that thinks highly of JFK.

Basically, I am trying to discern whether you think highly of JFK or not, and does the truth make you think highly of or not think highly of JFK.

Do yourself a favour and do so. I am not agreeing with Bill Clinton's behaviour as he should have fired Lewinski and not allowed what happened to happen, but his blow-job is nothing compared to what other presidents have done, before Clinton and of course, now the Chimp. Let the Lewinski story die as it should have from day one, its infantile.

It is amazing how after Woodstok (free love) and other behaviour that has transpired in this country that so many people can claim higher morality...

was laughing at us. Presidential marital affairs are considered very unimportant practically everywhere but here.

chased him for twenty years yet he still did it like no one could see it coming. Gary Hart had the same idiot belief that no one would see him shagging someone not his wife. I could hardly bear the year or two of the inquisition that followed. He needs to be the wife in this election and shut up. Hillary did it for him. He should do it for her.

He should stay in the background where he belongs.

bill is running for a third term right now, right under your nose.

HRC has been preparing for this, consciously or not, since before she gave her valedictorian address at Wellesley. She won't be anyone's puppet.

If you think for even a heartbeat that Hillary isn't driving this campaign bus, you need to have a Come to Jesus meeting with a representative sample of the women in your life... if there ARE any women in your life.

Most men have been learning not to underestimate women. You might take a page out of that book.

you cannot excuse any of it, sorry.

like the :sarcasm: ?

I am about 2/3rds of the way through Michael Farquhar's "A Treasury of Great American Scandals" and Clinton was by far not the first POTUS to have extramarital dalliances.

Can you check out the book...no spoilers from me!

FDR cheated on Eleanor with his SECRETARY!
is your knowledge of history so short??

Many of the recent presidents have had affairs. Never before, however, had the opposing party spend $70 million investigating them.

that his behavior with other women was an issue way before the Impeachment proceedings started, and he STILL went ahead and had an affair in the White House.

It's like he was asking to get caught. He knew he was under the microscope and he STILL fooled around.

That's inexcusable.

than a sound analysis.

I don't like self-appointed paragons of virtue, Miss Manners. I would rather Clinton be a man with defects of a personal nature, than a sociopath, like Bush.

This is nothing but "bashing by extension" for Hillary haters. I am no fan of HRC because of her Corporatism, but only Obama can rival her in that regard amongst the candidates.

He embarassed himself and his wife. Regardless of whether his behavior is better than Bush's, that's not the issue. The issue is whether you do something completely irresponsible and put your own personal addictions ahead of what's good for your wife, your family, your party, your supporters and the nation as a whole.

And that's not even counting the theory that if CLinton didn't do what he did, there would have been no Bush at all.

the media.

Billy boy wasn't the first, by any means, to lose the respect of many people because of his adolescent behavior.

I, personally, didn't give a damn what he did in that arena, but he sure make a mess.

What I *DID* care about is how he threw welfare mothers to the wolves for his political advantage. That was DESPICABLE!

And deadly.

The Miami Herald did a tag team on Hart with the National Enquirer. A female British citizen with connections to Rupport Murdoch "borrowed" certain now infamous photographs from Donna Rice. This may, or may not, be the same anonymous source who called the Miami Herald. (The identity of this anonymous self-described "liberal Democrat" remains a mystery. Would a liberal Democrat speak with a British accent? Some in the Hart camp believe the source was none other than Hillary Clinton.) The Herald then claimed to have followed Donna Rice, lost her in the D.C. airport, and then proceeded to stake out Hart's Washington D.C., Townhouse. Knight-Ridder, which owned The Herald, then having paid at least three reporters to cover this story, airfare and hotels, etc., then falsely reported that Rice had spent the night with Hart. (The Herald's reporters never saw how Rice had entered Hart's townhouse, the normal way when driving was through the garage in the back, so they never saw how she left.) Four witnesses could vouch for the fact that it wasn't true, but the Herald wasn't going to let facts get in the way of making money from cheap sensationalism, which was unprecedented in covering a Presidential candidate.

To cover up the fact that they were merely engaged in cheap sensationalism, the Herald's lead reporter, Tom Fiedler, found a quote from Hart in a long interview with E.J. Dionne in the New York Times Magazine. (According to the Fiedler, he read this quote on the plane on the way to D.C., after the Herald had been pursuing this story for weeks, and only after two other Knight-Ridder where already in the street spying on Hart. More likely, with the way the New York Times is distributed, he read this quote after arriving in D.C. For the Herald to write that they had followed Hart around, which they didn't, in response to his "challenge" was another Herald cheap shot, since it was demonstrably false.) The "follow me around" quote appeared in an otherwise very favorable article about Hart, in which his wife took responsibility for much of their marital problems. The quote appeared without context to exactly what question Dionne asked to illicit such an angry response from Hart. Dionne merely wrote that it was in response to "womanizing" allegations.

The problem with calling Hart's relationship with Rice "womanizing" is that she denied their relationship was sexual, and twenty years later has not changed her story, nor made a dime from the notoriety. (She now heads an organization called "Enough Is Enough" to protect children from online pornography.) When she finally did speak at greater length about the matter she talked about how she had been date raped by another man, and how much of a gentleman Hart was to her. Rice also denied the Herald's claim that she met Hart at a New Year's Eve party. (She attended that party as Don Henley's date and did not speak to Hart that evening.)

DONNA RICE IS NOT WHY GARY HART SUSPENDED HIS CAMPAIGN IN MAY 1987!

That story was survivable. According to Gallup 64% of the American public thought the news coverage of the matter was "unfair". More to the point, 20 years later there is not a single woman who has come forward by name to accuse Hart of any kind of sexual impropriety, or has claimed to have had sex with him.

The problem was that the Washington Post decided that it was going to start "outing" women rumored to have had a relationship with Hart in the past, even when the woman herself denied it. (During two public separations from his wife, Hart had apparently been dating.) The Washington Post told Hart it would publish this smut if Hart stayed in the race. Since this kind of invasion of a candidate's privacy was unprecedented, (Nixon said it was wrong), Hart suspended his campaign until he could get the Post to kill the story.

Paul Taylor was the reporter responsible for this story. He later resigned for his part in this, but not before addressing his many critics among his peers:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE0D91438F931A15756C0A961948260
Taylor implied that Hart was somehow being a hypocrite, "Gary Hart chose to run for President and present himself as a happily married man." That was, however, not the case. Hart had been publicly separated from his wife on two occasions. On one of those occasions, he had roomed with Bob Woodward. If Taylor had read the E. J. Dionne article in the Times, he would have read that in 1972 as McGovern's campaign manager, Hart had stated that he was in favor of "marriage reform" when asked about his marriage. What must have become clear to Taylor, the reason he resigned from the Post, was that Hart's problem wasn't that he was a hypocrite about his marriage. The problem was that he wasn't. (For perspective, Lee and Gary Hart have now been married for 50 years.)

To blame Hart for the media invasion of his personal life is both factually wrong and it is also engaging in hindsight. To put the matter in perspective, no candidate had ever had to deal with the problem that Hart did before. FDR, JFK, and LBJ all were adulterers. How did that effect their performance as President? No one in the media ever reported on that kind of stuff before.

As a Democrat, what becomes clear is that there is a media double standard when dealing with a candidates personal life. During the '88 campaign,it was common knowledge that Bush, Sr. had a mistress. No less of an authority than Nancy Reagan told everyone she could about it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Fitzgerald

The popular fiction is to blame Hart for how he responded to the questions about his personal life.

THAT COMPLETELY BEGS THE QUESTION OF WHY THE MSM NEVER EVEN ASKED THESE QUESTIONS OF BUSH, SR.!!!

If a candidates personal life was fair game for reporters, why weren't the same questions asked of Bush, Sr.?

They weren't.

The continuing media black out on Dick Cheney and his numerous phone calls to the D.C. madam tells you all you need to know about the continuing media double standard when addressing a politicians marital or sexual problems.

Republicans can solicit prostitutes with out publication, but Dem's can't have marital problems with out the world knowing.


:rant:

and would do with his behavior is what he should have know when he did it. Gary Hart had just been butchered because of his behavior - the warning was clear - the RW was watching. JFK's behavior had also been criticized. No one was safe. Bill was smart enough to know better. He said he did it because he could - WRONG.

Bill got a hummer from an intern in the oval office.

Sorry, but that is just plain dumb, whether you get caught or not. It shows a severe lack of judgment, regardless.

If you drink and drive and kill someone, does it matter whether or not you get caught or not by the local paper? No, it's still wrong. Same goes with Bill Clinton's irresponsible behavior.

HUMMERS DON'T KILL! They Rock!

To say otherwise is a tad touched.

corporation was getting hummers from a summer hire or a general from a private? The age difference and the fact that he was her boss would have gotten him fired or cashiered out of almost any organization in this country, let alone fooling around on company time in the office.

let me set up an appointment for you with the wizard.
Let us not forget that Monica was the self proclaimed needy person in the Clinton affair and that it was consensual. Clinton is human. Where I am in conflict is how he handled it.

office by giving her a lollipop.

Gore chose not to run on his history with Clinton, and I think that was a mistake. Also, let's not forget that Gore won the White House in 2000.

The media, the Supreme Court, and crooked machines took it away from the Democrats.

but that was before 7 years of the * swindle.

might have swung Gores way.........But the biggest mistake made by Gore in 2000 is he did not spend more time in his home state of Tenn.
and winning that state of course would have taken Florida out of the equation. But who knows the Repukes might have picked up an additional state for their vote theft... I think we underestimate just how powerful and organized this corporate power group is and 2008 could be another stolen election in the planning stage....

JFK was nicknamed "Jack The Zipper" for Satan's sake! The difference is that sometime in the seventies and eighties, the US media (heavily abetted by "social conservatives") eliminated the divide between a politician's private and public lives.

It was rumored for years that his wife poisoned him in revenge. JFK's reputation was tarnished and for some young people he is only a joke because of his affairs. "The other guys did it too!" is hardly a good argument.

people who have hunted him for decades. He did it with open eyes with no regard for his marital status. If you are going to fuck around, get divorced first. He did what he did, drawing the evil of the world to the door and that can't be diminished or relavatized or glossed over. It was bad enough that it sunk Al Gore and gave us Bush nuts. That is bad in my book.

EVERY FUCKING THING. And this was arguably one of the most intelligent, capable men to ever sit in the Oval Office. He willingly endangered his Presidency because the little head decided to do the thinking for the big head. Had I the opportunity, I would have slapped him upside the head screaming "WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU THINKING?"

I do think it is fair to point out THAT AL GORE DID WIN FLORIDA AND THE PRESIDENCY OF THE UNITED STATES. This inconvenient truth seems to escape many, especially many on this discussion board. While the Clenis did have some bearing on (S)Election 2000, the electoral fraud perpetrated by Jeb Bush and Cruella de Harris--in many forms and variations--was by far the predominate reason Gee-dumbya bush* was able to STEAL the pResidency.

helped defeat Gore along with a hostile press and a very crooked election in Florida.

This writer would do better to write about how to impeach the remaining 3 of the 5 Supreme Court justices who anointed Bush.

Maybe it is easier to just whip on Democrats.

...that was an embarrassment for the nation in front of the world -- more than Bill's behavior.

He owes us big, those of us who supported him back when, but I don't think he sees things that way. He has now bonded with the wrong kind of people. The same kind of people that have brought us to ruin.

Clinton's '92 campaign centered on his promise to give the middle class a tax cut.

When he was in trouble in New Hampshire, and getting bad PR in the media, the Clinton campaign was distributing videos promising the middle class a tax cut. We never did see that middle class tax cut. Before taking the oath of office, Clinton reneged on that promise with all of the sincerity of the student who says the dog ate his homework.

Reneging on a a campaign promise before taking the oath of office was a first for Clinton. I don't know of any other President to have tried that one. He started off on the wrong foot with much of the country with that stunt, but he got himself elected, right?

Do we really want to go down that road again?

But then again, old GW could just go a ahead and give it to some rich greedy ass oil exec. Sure that oil exec needs more than more, and old GW is there to deliver. That way we could just quit playing games here and cut out the middle man. ME

Screw a tax break. Nothing more than right wing bull shit.

I don't blame him so much for reneging on the middle class tax cut. Greenspan blackmailed him into not doing it.

Anyone with a brain knew it wasn't going to happen, but Clinton promised it anyhow. It was a typical professional politician's lie. Tell the people what they wanted hear, even if it was pie in the sky.

What the Clinton's promise and what they actually do, are two different things.

. . . Gore actually won the 2000 election.

on his wife.

Monicagate came after the 96 election. If you are asserting the "rumors" were widely accepted before 1996, I'd like to see you prove it.

for that reason

in November. Long after Gennifer came forward.

Everybody pretty much knew there was some truth to at least some of the rumors, because there were so many of them. You would have had to have your head pretty far up your ass NOT to suspect strongly that ol' Willie Boy liked women...women other than his wife, that is.

the crooked pug machine, the pug swindlers which now includes SCOTUS and the corporate media.

won, by enough percentages that it wouldn't have been even close.

I knew that was the kiss of death for Gore, when he kept his distance from Clinton. In spite of everything, and in spite of the OP's revisionist history, Clinton was still immensely popular when he left office.

FIRST..GORE BROKE WITH THE DLC TO BECOME A POPULIST:

Published on Sunday, August 20. 2000 in the Boston Globe
Thank You, Al Gore
by Robert Kuttner
A funny thing happened to Al Gore on the way to his surprisingly effective acceptance speech. He became a liberal.

The speech was as liberal as anything FDR or LBJ or Jesse Jackson or one of the Kennedys might have delivered. It was built around a commitment to fight for ordinary people, against large and powerful interests. This, of course, is precisely what made it effective.

The emotional heart of the speech, Gore's honoring of four ordinary American lives, did not just salute the struggles of workaday families, the way Ronald Reagan often did. It identified who was dishonoring their struggles - corporations. He singled out heartless HMOs who pressure a family to sacrifice a child; drug companies that force a pensioner to choose between food and medicine; corporate polluters; corporations that pay workers inadequate wages.

And he identified the solution: strong, reliable public Social Security; better Medicare; welfare reform that rewards work rather than punishing the needy; higher minimum wages; and more investment in public - not voucher - schools, so that working families don't have to send kids to crumbling classrooms.

What is the evil? Corporate power. What is the remedy? Effective government.

-snip

http://www.commondreams.org/views/082000-105.htm

IMO Gore's decision not to make 2000 a referendum on the Clinton presidency was partly due to Bush being an outsider who was removed from the thugs that impeached Clinton.

If Gore had been running against Newt Gingrich, he would've been a fool not to make the election a referendum on Clinton.

voter intimidation, purging of the voter rolls, crooked machines and the simple fucking fact that the Governor and Secretary of State of Florida were both RABID rethuglicans AND controlled the electoral infrastructure, Gore would have been the sitting President of the United States, as he was lawfully and legally entitled to do so. You can blame Nader, Bill Clinton's dick and/or whatever else the spin machine spews out, but the fact-of-the-matter is that electoral fraud and a blatantly biased, partisan, rethuglican-majority Supreme Court installed Gee-dumbya at 1600. GORE WON 2000. That matter is no longer in dispute. Wake up and smell the coffee, the coup d'etat coffee.

it becomes very very clear Gore won Florida by a LARGE MARGIN, Nader or no Nader. I, for the life of me, don't understand why some on DU continue to perpetuate the "Nader did it" smokescreen. This is nothing more than a DELIBERATE distraction from the indisputable fact that Jeb Bush and Cruella de Harris committed electoral fraud on an UNPRECEDENTED scale. And further, with so many on both sides so eager to help perpetuate the "Nader did it" meme, the stage was EASILY set for Ohio.

I swear that alleged "progressives" bring up Clinton's penis more often than Republicans do. Some on "our" side are just as obsessed about it, if not more, than the Republicans are.

#2 is a complete load of shit. Bush got elected because a chunk of the 59 million idiots who voted for him thought he'd be a great guy to have a beer with.

Is that really what passes for intelligent analysis around here?

you're in denial.

Clinton's approval rating went UP after the Lewinsky bullshit and he left office with the highest approval rating of any post-WW2 president.

It is not me who is in denial....

This crap was no doubt posted because there are a couple of positive posts here today about DEMOCRATIC President William Jefferson Clinton, he who prevented the continuing Raygun/Bush,- since the Bush/"Quail" agenda was a continuation of Raygun/Bush radical right wing policy - assault on America. I sometimes wonder if the extremist fringe left wing would be happier if Clinton/Gore had lost and Dole/Kemp had followed an additional 4 years of Bush/"Quail."

I wrote this yesterday but it worth repeating...

Clinton laid the foundation for the mess we're in today.

NAFTA.... The Iraqi Liberation Act, calling for the oust of Saddam...Keeping our military privatized in the hands of Cheney's Halliburton...Advising senators to sign the IWR....The Telecommunications Act, which led to the consolidation of the ownership of our media. Thank Bill for the corporate controlled media we have now. .... Pardons!!! Rendition!!

It drives me crazy to see people here (at a place where I think smart people gather) support the wife of a president who WAS impeached. We need to win in ‘08 to make changes!! If Hillary wins it's because the fix is in, corporate America will continue to thrive with Hillary as president.

Hillary wants every American to purchase their own healthcare insurance. She once said that we would need to prove (with an ID card) that we bought insurance before we could get hired for a job. ...Talk about taking the burden of healthcare insurance off of big business.

Whitewater, treating the White House like it was a motel, withholding requested White House documents. ...By no means should Hillary be our top candidate.

Hillary’s alliance is questionable. She say’s she’s against Bush, but when it’s not election season, she supports Bush with her senate votes.

We have to think about the corporations which prospered the most in the last two decades; -Bush/Cheney holdings and Hillary’s Wal-Mart.

:puke:

I'm sure Bill would be working for the Carlyle Group if Hillary wasn't running for President.

K&R :kick:

Damn, are you sure you're in the right forum? The Starr Report is available on the "internets" and highly recommended reading. What a load of radical right wing bullshit. I think you forgot the theft of the White House silver wear. :puke: :puke:

I love America. During the primaries is the only time we really have a choice. I rather not see Hillary as our candidate. Like I said before, Clinton laid the foundation for the mess we're in today.

..On the "internets" you could learn more about the effect's of Clinton's NAFTA, his Telecommunications Act of ’96, his Iraqi Liberation Act of ’98, his advising our senate to vote “yes’ to the IWR...I’m sure others here could jump in and to give examples of how Bill Clinton helped the neo-cons bring us to where we are today.

grow up desi

Some of them told me at the time that Gore and Bush were two peas in a pod. Honest to god truth. I was pissed at the time and when the Iraq war broke out, I had to do some venting with a few of them.

but harping on his extramarital activities is hardly the most important. When the first two bullet points are about his admittedly stupid private life choices I expected the bullet list to be much longer, but the writer has only four points and the latter two are far more important reality checks for Clinton.

Missing from the list are bad policy choices like Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Clinton didn't need to compromise with a Republican congress on that one. As commander in chief he could have directed the military differently.

so Clinton couldn't have just 'directed the military differently'. He would have needed broad bipartisan support in the House and the Senate, and I don't think there's any way he would have gotten it.

He could have publicly decried it even as he allowed it.

if he had made a big deal about gays in the military (which was a big step for him to even attempt), he probably wouldn't have been able to get anything done, like the budget or his crime bill or NAFTA (which I know many disagree with, but it was an administration priority for them).

aren't Republican plants.

God forbid that anyone voice a difference of opinion, support of a different candidate, or post facts you don't particularly want to hear.

MUCH better to just have Republicans doing the talking. I mean, they're the ones writing your talking points anyway, right?

They may sound like repukes but they are way on the other extreme of the political spectrum. Hillary's win, should it come to pass, will drive them even further left of where they stand today. They are the Democrat's version of radical right-wing wingnuts.

FBI files? I remember going around with some wingnuts about the same horseshit we see here on a daily basis about the Clintons. I showed them where to go for all that BS.. www.conspiranut.flake

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/mod%20mom

The Clintons, Jackson Stephens and the East Liverpool OH Incinerator:

EAST LIVERPOOL OHIO, THE SITE OF THE WTI TOXIC WASTE INCINERATOR SITS IN A FLOOD PLAIN AND HAS A MICROCLIMATE THAT CAUSES AIR STAGNATION, AND YET ONE OF THE LARGEST WASTE INCINERATORS WAS BUILT THERE.
DID CORPORATE INFLUENCE PEDDLING PLAY A ROLE? YOU BE THE JUDGE:


Here is a portion of activist/mother, Terri Swearingen's acceptance speech for the Goldman Environmental Prize, given April 14, 1997:



I am not a scientist or a Ph.D. I am a nurse and a housewife, but my most important credential is that I am a mother. In 1982, I was pregnant with our one and only child. That's when I first learned of plans to build one of the world's largest toxic waste incinerators in my community. When they began site preparation to begin building the incinerator in 1990, my life changed forever. I'd like to share with you some of the lessons I have learned from my experiences over the past seven years.

One of the main lessons I have learned from the WTI experience is that we are losing our democracy. How have I come to this sad realization? Democracy is defined by Merriam Webster as "government by the people, especially rule of the majority," and "the common people constituting the source of political authority." The definition of democracy no longer fits with the reality of what is happening in East Liverpool, Ohio. For one thing, it is on the record that the majority of people in the Ohio Valley do not want the WTI hazardous waste incinerator in their area, and they have been opposed to the project from its inception. Some of our elected officials have tried to help us, but the forces arrayed against us have been stronger than we or they had imagined. Public concerns and protests have been smothered with meaningless public hearings, voodoo risk assessment and slick legal maneuvering.

Government agencies that were set up to protect public health and the environment only do their job if it does not conflict with corporate interests. Our current reality is that we live in a "wealthocracy" big money simply gets what it wants. In this wealthocracy, we see three dynamics at play: corporations versus the planet, the government versus the people, and corporate consultants or "experts" versus common sense. In the case of WTI, we have seen all three.

The second lesson I have learned ties directly to the first, and that is that corporations can control the highest office in the land. When Bill Clinton and Al Gore came to the Ohio Valley, they called the siting of the WTI hazardous waste incinerator next door to a 400 student elementary school, in the middle of an impoverished Appalachian neighborhood, immediately on the bank of the Ohio River in a flood plain an "UNBELIEVABLE IDEA." They said we ought to have control over where these things are located. They even went so far as to say they would stop it. But then they didn't! What has been revealed in all this is that there are forces running this country that are far more powerful than the President and the Vice President. This country trumpets to the world how democratic it is, but it's funny that I come from a community that our President dare not visit because he cannot witness first hand the injustice which he has allowed in the interest of a multinational corporation, Von Roll of Switzerland. And the Union Bank of Switzerland. And Jackson Stephens, a private investment banker from Arkansas. These forces are far more relevant to our little town than the President of the United States! And he is the one who made it that way. He has chosen that path. We didn't choose it for him. We begged him to come to East Liverpool, but he refused. We begged the head of EPA to come, but she refused. She hides behind the clever maneuvering of lawyers and consultants who obscure the dangers of the reckless siting of this facility with theoretical risk assessments.

-snip

http://www.ohiocitizen.org/campaigns/wti/e...



There has always been something incongruous about Stephens Inc. Despite the Little Rock firm's attempts to portray itself as a small- city operation that closes for the duck season and got fabulously lucky on a couple of down-home deals like Wal-Mart, it was, at the incinerator's inception, the ninth-largest investment bank in the country. Since it is not headquartered in New York, its dealings are local news, little noticed by the national press, even when they have national implications. And, as a source close to the company once remarked, "The farther you get from Arkansas, the better it looks."

Stephens Inc. was founded by Witt Stephens, a state legislator's son who parlayed a Depression-era belt-buckle, Bible, and municipal-bond business into an immense personal fortune. After his retirement in 1973, the company was run by his shy younger brother, Jackson (a classmate of Jimmy Carter's at the Naval Academy). Witt Stephens and Stephens Inc. did much to create the economic paradox that is modern Arkansas: a desperately poor state with a scant 2.3 million inhabitants that is nonetheless home to a number of wealthy companies. Without the financial assistance of the Stephens brothers, Sam Walton might have ended his days as the most innovative merchant in Bentonville. Stephens money was also important to the fortunes of enterprises as various as Tyson Foods and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason, the television producer and reigning First Friend. Stephens Inc. is an important client of the Rose law firm, whose chairman, C. Joseph Giroir, made Hillary Rodham Clinton a partner. And back in 1977, Stephens assisted BCCI's infiltration of the American banking system by brokering the latter's purchase of National Bank of Georgia stock held by Bert Lance, former President Jimmy Carter's friend and disgraced budget director.

Jackson Stephens (who turned over the reins to his son, Warren, in the late eighties) and his firm were both substantial contributors to the campaigns of Presidents Reagan and Bush (to the tune of at least $100,000 in 1980 and 1989), but they have been closer still to Bill Clinton (whom Witt Stephens had been known to call "that boy").

On two occasions, once when Clinton was running for reelection in Arkansas in 1990 and again in March 1992, when his battered presidential campaign was broke, the Stephens family saved Clinton's bacon with an infusion of money. Indeed, it may not be too much to say that their Worthen Bank's emergency $3.5 million line of credit saved the presidential campaign from extinction. --L.J.D.

-snip

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/19...




Who is the octopussy that might be lurking in the Ohio River Valley? Perhaps we should start by asking shy Arkansas billionaire Jackson T. Stephens. After all, Stephens introduced BCCI from Pakistan to the United States and the WTI waste incinerator to East Liverpool, Ohio. Stephens would be a good sketch artist because he's seen some monstrous scandals in his day. Stephens' family firm is the largest privately owned investment bank outside Wall Street. In September 1977, President Jimmy Carter's Budget Director Burt Lance was forced to resign amid allegations about his bank dealings with Stephens (Stephens and Carter were classmates at the Naval Academy). In 1978, Stephens, Lance and BCCI were charged with violating U.S. security laws. The charges were dropped after the defendants promised not to violate security laws in the future, even though they admitted no guilt.

The New York Post reported in February 1992 that it was Stephens who enabled BCCI to gain a foothold in the U.S. and helped the fraud-plagued bank secretly acquire U.S. banks. In Peter Truell and Larry Gurwin's book, False Profits, perhaps the best account of the BCCI scandal, the authors outlined how opium revenue from Afghanistan Mujahedin fighting the Soviets ended up in the accounts of BCCI, founded by Agha Hasan Abedi. The Post reported that Stephens allegedly introduced Abedi to Lance shortly after Lance resigned.

In 1991, Lance testified that he urged Abedi to acquire a Washington bank holding company, but he denied any knowledge of BCCI's subsequent secret ownership of First American Bankshares. The Post reported that Securities and Exchange Commission documents from 1977 substantiate that the idea originated with Stephens.

During Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential run, Stephens and his son Warren boasted of raising more than $100,000 for the campaign. The Stephens family also owned a 38 percent share in Worthen National Bank that extended a crucial $2 million line of credit to Clinton in January 1992.

-snip

http://www.ohiocitizen.org/campaigns/wti/b...

Maybe we can give them another 70M and send the dogs after Bill again.

Let's compare this OP smear and contrast your laundry list with this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4110544#4113434

and had a major role in bringing BCCI to the US.

but he purposefully overlooked something and instead settled on a blow-job. Right.

focusing on Clinton corruption instead of the BCCI government corruption left over from Reagan/Bush. No, the Republicans certainly don't want any of this exposed, better to talk about stains on blue dresses.

Not conspiratorial because it came from the Justice Dept. Don't worry I won't post it again because it got COMPLETELY erased anyway.

that they prefer to be roll-over artists for the rightwing.

Tell us what exactly did Hillary fight for when she was doing all that fighting the vast right-wing conspiracy. Oh, yeah... her and Bill.

Hillary supporters sure do like it both ways. On the one hand they're going to "fight the right wing" on the other hand they get scared if anyone on the left gets too loud, after all we wouldn't want to be labled extremists.

and that - in a nutshell - is why Hillary (and - to be fair - most of the Dem Senate) voted for the IWR resolution over the strenuous objection of the few Democrats who actually have a clue.

To those DUers who constantly defend the center and pragmatism. What the FUCK has pragmatism achieved other than a long slow slide into authoritarianism.

Repukes in Dem disguise abound here at DU.

calls the progressive wing "Repukes"

:crazy:

I'm thinking of starting a private army to fill my down time.

(Seriously, I have no idea what your post is supposed to mean)

I'll vote for Kucinich out of principle and you vote for Hillary out of expediency, and then we can argue about who is the Republican afterwards.
My primary is Feb 5th see you then!

No shit, Sherlock. :eyes: :rofl:

Medic! Thorazine, stat! There now, just let us slip this stylish white coat over your arms (tighten the leather straps up good on this one). Now make yourself comfortable in this quiet room with the padded walls. We'll be back to check on you soon. Have a pleasant stay.

but go fuck yourself asshole. :mad:

A gun in the hands of an anger management case is a deadly invitation to trouble.
I weep for the world with you in it.

Go fuck yourself.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It was supposed to be ironic in any case, but I wouldn't expect you to care.

Your posts have been insulting, condescending, patronizing and stupid. I'm embarassed that I've allowed you to get my goat, but I could not stand your smugly superior attitude. I would hazard to say that you deserve much more hostility than I could ever waste on you. My apologies for the nick, now I will leave you to continue to rationalize how the liberals who attack Hillary for being too conservative are actually Republicans in disguise.

Don't bother responding I'm done here adn you are (belatedly) on ignore.

for writing in a candidate, if someone's favorite doesn't make it to the general.

so hold on to that thought.

#2 is about nothing but the Clenis.

Why did we go from a smart guy who led us to a great economy to a religious guy you wanted to have a beer with? Because Bill screwed around...

Your right it could have happened with other presidents but the internet and media weren't around to open it up.

But that also goes to the writers point of view, Bill is a smart guy and should have known better, at least how to keep his affairs secret.

And yes Gore did win but barely and would have won with enough to have been our pres for the last 7 yrs if Bill hadn't screwed around and both of them hadn't been so caught up in her senate campaign instead of helping Al.

I used to like Bill but the more I see who he really is along with his wife the less I like them.

to big Willie. It just amazes me that a man's private parts can be to blame for absolutely everything from the Iraq War to a hangnail. That logic still does not compute with me.

A most common human frailty is believing what others are saying about you. Clinton's popularity was normal, until the impeachment hearings began. The country recognized that the entire process was a political stunt and that's why approval ratings shot up. It was like a quasi-referendum. In fact, I, along with many others, don't like the Clinton's but we get even more passionate when they're attacked by the same cast of clownish characters that formed the posse the first time around.

So Clinton struts out of office actually believing that he was an immensely successful president. However, he had betrayed the progressive base of the party. Many fail to recognize that his approval was not entirely about job performance. Rather, it was inflated by the victim sympathy support.

Well he convinced himself that it was about his performance. That arrogance is well reflected by Hillary.

But once they allowed themselves to stray away from the warm glow of sympathy by victimizing others within the party, the reality of what constitutes Bill Clinton's popularity is laid bare.

:thumbsup:

they didn't think it an impeachable offense. Now, if he'd had the opportunity to run again, he might not have the reputation of being popular.

:puke:

But they survived the VRWC so it is likely they will also survive the VLWC.

To this day the Clintons defend NAFTA and the decision to back off of healthcare for the ginormous payout in "donations" from Big Pharma.

Its only swiftboating if you make stuff up that isn't true. Hillary is proud of the aforementioned items -- some of us just happen to disagree with her about it.

It was a slap in the face for all of us who worked so hard to get him elected.
Yes, the media gave it way too much coverage, but that's the harsh reality of the
current 24 hours news and information age. Other presidents had an easier time hiding their flaws and
failures. They also didn't have DNA testing back then. Now they do. He was totally busted and he LIED.
What a jackass.

He reneged on several promises he made those of us who worked for him, we got:
"Don't ask, don't tell"
NAFTA
deregulation of telecoms which led to the telecom bust and loss of thousands of jobs

I don't think his BJ was a big deal either, but the reality is that he wasn't the martyr some here like to think he was.
He wasn't even all that liberal.

If he had campaigned as a true liberal...He would have lost! We could have had 8 more years of PIGS in office...plus we'd have more Conservative SCJs.
Think about it before you complain! We'd have lost R vs W by now for sure.
Sure he made some mistakes...who hasn't...he's human!

he dumped once elected. That sucks.

I agree, everyone makes mistakes. Not everyone LIES about them.

bush hasn't acknowledged a single one yet! by the way...what was that big lie? The one that has nothing to do with sex.

Because I probably agree.

;)

they would use clintons fellatio against him....Gore nor his campaign ie strum and others failed to understand the peoples approval of clinton with 68 to 71% rating. Gore failed to use clinton is states ie florida over the long haul. The american people approved of clintons presidency and gore failed in understanding the difference....

You cannot blame clinton for the election of bush. Hell the mediawhores day in and day out told the public bush did not need to be the smartest man in the room becasue he was so liked and everyone wanted to have a beer with the guy. I blame the stupid 20 second sound bite public for one: voting for bush and 2: voting for Nader(you nader people like your vote in 2000 now?)For Nader to get that many votes it meant that gore did not do his job convincing those independent leaning dems and left wing dems to vote for him.

on your third point just why in hell would a new president in office less then a year even consider campaign finance reform within the top 10 issues the adminstration would tackle? Well McCain Feingold did pass and look how that campaign finace reform turned out.

So here again people are still under the impression that Clinton's cock is all powerful and thus contributed to america's downfall. Now take a look over these last seven years and tell me the actions of bush was sooooooooooooo influenced by the all powerfull clinton cock?

I am backing you because I know you are going to get flamed. What happened in the WH was much of the cause of our close 2000 election. What i fear about a Clinton win again is that this and Bill's behavior will once again become the axe the RW will use to defeat us again in 20--. It does not matter what we Democrats say. What matters is what the media will pound into the heads of the sheeple of the good old usa.

We are in deep trouble in this country and we need a president who will not be consumed with combating the Hunting of the President. All his/her time will need to be focused on fixing the mess *ss has gotten us into.

he wouldn't get past the first month without attacks and then....god knows what would surface...look at who he hangs with...shall I list them... I can do that within minutes! Quit FUcking trying to be a DEM you are NOT! I 'll say it again! Dems don't eat their own! Or that is at least until NO_bama entered the race! very troubling... :grr:
:nuke:

trying to blow smoke up peoples asses.

the Clinton presidency. He sold us all out when he lied about his 'affair' with Chunky Lewinsky. He should have told the truth. Better yet, he should have kept it in his pant for the sake of the country, the party, and most of all his family. But Billy gets what Billy wants (except for Poopy bush's backing on a world tour to support his wife's candidacy).

He lied. He was caught red-handed (and blue dressed) and he lied.

Whatta guy.

And the American way of life is dying under NAFTA/CAFTA. I can hear those NAFTA trucks rolling across our highways as I type.

Thanks Bill.

today and one of the two folks seeking a divorce lied.....What business is it of ours. Sure he was the president but the american people did not approve of his getting fellatio, but the american people had enough sense to see that clinton did his job as president and rewarded him with one of the highest approval ratings in his last year in office.....but this post seeks to cut open the clinton presidency and say he did jack shit for america.....well all you now haters of the clintons, dispute the following on how clinton and his administration helped black, latinos....and this should dis-spell this notion that reagan somehow inspired all americans when the black, latinos and poor whites suffered under this racist bastard.....

Since the economy is the hot topic these days, let’s just look at what President Clinton did for minorities in terms of economic gains — even though Obama dismisses those achievements.
Unemployment Rate for African Americans and Hispanics Remains Historically Low. Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, the Hispanic unemployment rate has dropped from 11.3 percent in January 1993 to a record low of 5.8 percent in March 1999. The unemployment rate for African Americans has fallen from 14.1 percent in January 1993 to 8.1 percent in March 1999–one of the lowest levels on record for African Americans.

Here are additional economic accomplishments of the Clinton/Gore administration — as of 1999 (during the administration’s second term) — that also had a direct positive effect for minorities:

18.2 Million New Jobs. …
Unemployment at 4.2 Percent in March …
Highest Share of New Jobs in Private Sector in 50 Years. Since the President and Vice President took office, the private sector has added 16.7 million new jobs–with 2.4 million jobs added in the past year. Since 1993, 92 percent of the 18.2 million new jobs have been in the private sector–the highest percentage in 50 years.
Fastest and Longest Real Wage Growth in Two Decades. Last month, average hourly earnings increased 0.2 percent. Under the Clinton-Gore Administration, real wages have risen 6.1 percent–compared to declining 4.3 percent during the Reagan and Bush Administrations. After adjusting for inflation, wages have increased almost 2.7 percent in 1998–the fastest real wage growth in more than two decades and the third year in a row–the longest sustained growth since the early 1970s.
Construction Jobs Are Coming Back. …
Manufacturing Jobs Have Increased. After losing 2.1 million manufacturing jobs between 1981 and 1992, the economy has created 350,000 new manufacturing jobs since 1993. After losing 46,000 jobs in the auto industry during the Bush Administration, the United States has 147,000 new auto industry jobs under the Clinton-Gore Administration.
Inflation Rate Is the Lowest Since the 1950s. …
President Clinton signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, “which passed Congress without a single Republican vote.”

It raised taxes on the wealthiest 1.2% of taxpayers,<35> while cutting taxes for 15 million low-income families and making tax cuts available to 90% of small businesses.<36> Additionally, it mandated that the budget be balanced over a number of years, through the implementation of spending restraints.

Obama and those supporters of him in the DU have exposed how uninformed you all are about the brutal history of U.S. politics where every PROGRESSIVE step is spattered with the blood, sweat and tears of all who fought so hard for those gains.

fucking years. Clinton rode in on the dot.com bubble and left as it was about to blow (get the pun there Jackson?).

And don't tell me how Obama fanatics have the keys of knowledge to history, economics, and politics in America. So far it's impossible to sort out what the hell Obama stands for, what he believes in, and what he would be like as the president of this country. He plays both sides of every fence while denying being on either side.

voting record, it tells a whole lot about what he stands for, what he believes in, and what he would like to do as president( obviously checking the issues area of his site would also help, personally i love most of his issues in the tech area)

when it went back to Red China a ton of money got pulled out of their stock market and invested in Silicon Valley. Is Hillary counting on a similar perfect storm? We'll have to see.

bubble going on in 93,94,95,96 etc etc and sure as heck the dot.com industry did create 23 million jobs.......

and should not have made any references to memory.

"1) In part -- how large a part we can argue another time -- the presidency of George W. Bush is your fault. "

and had he been able to run again would win

Al gore came close to losing to bush because american media at the time and to a large degree american citizens wanted a more affable and less intellectual president.

dont blame clinton for this.

nafta is another story.

A myth.

Anti-fascists -- the vast majority -- rejected the fascists attempt to overturn our will with their ludicrous impeachment from day one.

And the fascists -- (probably at most 20%, many of whom hate Bush for ruining "their Party") still hang onto the lie that "everybody knows" Clinton committed some sort of crime (didn't you know he was a murderer?) or that the Clinton administration (most investigated without turning up anything) was "corrupt."

If Bush were impeached the breakdown would be the same, but their reaction would be the opposite. Anti-fascists would be delighted (and so would some of the fascists.). Those who follow bushncheney-ism would parrot whatever blatantly false defense bushncheney put out.

:)

I think the former President is doing a fantastic job and should keep on keeping on, if not ratchet up the rhetoric another notch.

:evilgrin:

after vetoing the republicans changes to the welfare bill he finally compromised and signed the bill that "changed welfare as we know it". the bill has been reauthorized ever since.

Bill Clinton is democrat and former president. Bashing democrats with right wing talking points like republicans do, has no place on DU.

Thank you

Massdemm

tell us valid criticism of any Dem isn't allowed.

They are extreme left wing fringe talking points.

Probably not but since he slams someone you may detest he is sooo cool. Is he a "real Democrat/Progressive" unlike the rest of US LIBERALS? Or is he a Green or other third, fourth or fifth party fringe leftist? I don't care who or what the fuck he is. He slanders/bashes a DEMOCRATIC President, MY President, he can go kiss my Liberal ass.

when it comes to the Middle Class, we'll see who sides with the elite.

It just wasn't referenced first and DU has copyright limits on how much can be reposted.

Sure, Bill's screw up did not help, but the media placed a giant microscope on him. Still... you have a point.

from this poster.

As a matter of fact, I wrote almost the exact same thing that you said to this poster, the last time I noticed her spewing this vitriol.

Does me. :cry:

for their objective truth telling ... it's been difficult to watch partisian positioning skew their perspective.

The OP was one of them. Since primary season started, it's down to about 2 or 3.

appreciate him thinking he could speak for the American people in stating we're not interested in impeachment.

I am getting older too and I know how little things can sometimes bring you down quicker then you would even think a few years ago. Bill and I and W. were all born in 1946. We have been through a heck of a lot in our lives. Good and bad. I have defended Bill for umpteen years now and feel that the NAFTA thing really hit me a few years ago after he was out of office. This is one of the worst things the U.S. has ever done to itself! It is the start of the NAFTA highway and bringing the U.S., Mexico and CA as one country. Here is the government link if someone is still skeptical about this:

http://www.nascocorridor.com/naipn/index.html

Makes one wonder just on whose side he really is on.

Be Vigilant!

levelling out the playing field of the world is certainly an honorable goal, but when it comes to keeping tarrifs in place and forcing Americans to pay the ultimate price, it becomes downright anti-American. Allowing corporatists to profit hugely from the undertaking is rubbing salt into the wounds.

You're an idiot.

Lecturing a former President of the United States is a tad above your station, doncha think? Frankly, you're embarrassing.

And regardless, the President works for us.

Above your station! What elitist bullshit!

You just made the ignore list with that "above your station" pure class-motivated shit. Go back to the medieval Old World, where that crap carried some weight and you could tell the peasants where to go.

I am soooo sick of Bill and Hillary.

I never thought about why we didn't try to tackle healthcare again, but this makes complete sense to me.

The Clinton's traded in their hopes and ideals for $ and power.

Pisses me off big time.

I mean really...Why should we go any LOWER! DRUGS!! CROOKED Real Estate deals under FEDERAL investigation by Fitzgerald! Give me a fucking break!!

No, More, Empty. Suits.

:dem::patriot::headbang:

Kicked and recommended.

:thumbsup:

I understand having an appetite, but let's remember who really needs devouring.

clinton and his personal problems!

:shrug:

:toast:

Also, what a difference a win makes
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4110544

in this thread.

I used to think Monicagate had little to do with 2000. I was dead wrong.

(on edit) Oh and by the way Clinton WAS impeached, and anyone who thinks that did not dramatically alter the 2000 election is naive.

he was acquitted.

The jerks who were after him were doing the same thing. Hell one of them even left his wife after having an affair while he was after clinton, but he left her while she had cancer. I actually had to listen to an elderly man who went on and on how this man should be the next president. The truth is the media and the repub pukes used and abused us. The man got a blowjob, who cares. If his biggest weakness is women, I share his pain, at least he wasn't a god delusional ex cocaine addict. The only reason this chimp in charge got in is, because allot of people (not me) got duped. They should learn to deal with it.

Instead of saying at the press conference in which he was ambushed that this is a Diplomatic press conference to ask I believe, if memory serves) the French President some questions and to get this git "reporter" out of my face and revoke his press pass. Sure he would have had to deal with a hostile press but he had that anyway. But the real ammo came when he said these words that essentially gutted democratic credibility and gave the corporate media the cavernous opening to put * in the oval office, "I did not have sex with that woman" and that, thanks in no small part to Lie-berman, was the death knell to Gore winning a landslide which would have been impossible for the swindlers to steal.

Leaders everywhere else in the world aren't even asked about this. Are you trying to say that if I lie to you about something that is not your business, it is worse than being so hypocritical as to go after someone for doing something that is only against the law in alabama while I'm doing it now. So if you aren't upset about the blowjob, you're upset he lied about the blowjob?

It was, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Not, "I did not have sex with that woman"

Which shows just how ridiculous this argument is. We have been lied to as a people to get us into approximately 5 wars now, but no one blames the changes in the party of the president for 8 years on any of those. But a blowjob lie for blame is just bullshit.

to destroy a person and his legacy on the flimsyest nonsense, the complicit corporate media included. In the end we still got * and it was because Clinton gave that crooked complicit corporate medea the ammo to blow him up (pun intended). I supported Clinton through all of this media hyped debacle, but it did not matter. The corporate media was still able to usher in the swindler * administration by hook or by crook and it is appropriate to dissect that and learn from it.

The responses from some on this thread make me wonder where they were during the 90's.

Supporting NAFTA and Welfare deform tells me a lot about them.

he held onto his office for dear life..and a lot of it was due to the tremendous support he got from black people everywhere.

He always prided himself on being "the first black president", and now because his wife decided to run (was it her decision or his?)..he's now finding himself in the position to tear down all those bridges he spent a lifetime building...and damaging his legacy at the same time.

If Hillary were not running, I could see him and Obama campaigning together, and his being the champion of Obama (the embodiment of MLK's dream)..

Kismet it ain't. Whomever emerges victorious, will bear the scars of the battle. Hillary wins, and it's "Bill's 3rd term" (just like W was Poppy's revenge..or so we all thought at first)

If Obama wins, he is somehow lessened by the non-support of Clinton..and if the black people support him by ditching Hillary, his tenure will be seen as a "black victory"..when he tried to make it a colorblind effort.

The loser, either way is Hillary, since her husband seems to want the office back, more than she wants it at all. and even Bill loses, since his image gets tainted too. because of the harsh rhetoric that does not match up with his past actions.

He has gone from elder-statesman, to campaign spinner, and I'm not sure he will ever get the full support back from the people he will have pissed off.

the other losers? US..

Republican media types are busily making commercials to slam either candidate who emerges, and the leg-work & lingo is being provided by dems attacking each other.

he caused much of this himself. He dragged the country through the muck (with the help of the Repugs who were happy to aid him.) What if he'd been strong like the Bush Bots (he came IN with Dem Majority) and just shut down the Starr Investigation...not given away the Media and stood UP to all of them?

I look back on what Bill could have done in the light of this Fascist Dictator we now have in office and I think that Bill was very weak...wouldn't use his power because his guilt kept him from going that route. The BushBots have no GUILT..NO CONSCIENCE. Bill's behavior shouldn't have had to play out on the National Stage because he allowed himself to get into the stuff with Monica. He was already being attacked by Repugs from the moment he took the "Oath of Office" and what does he do? He allows Janet Reno to do anything she wants including the Starr Investigation. I think the Clintons are weak...pawns and when they had opportunities to stand up to the PTB they caved and caved and caved. And we live in some growing Fascist Hell because of them NOT STANDING UP!

I'm sick of apologizing for them....

probably because he's a "pleaser".. Growing up the way he did, it's not hard to see why. He became his mother's confidant (much like georgie was).. He wanted people to LIKE him..

I actually never voted for him. I voted for Perot :silly:..and then for 96, I was sick in bed and did not even vote.

For the smartest president we ever had, he did not apply himself..and ended up squandering his opportunity..

:thumbsup:

and working diligently on already. These facts have been printed in bold print and trumpeted add nauseum for the last 15 years. The fact that we are dissecting them does not redound to their favor, if anything it harms them and lets them know we are on to them. Truth should not be frightening to honest people yet deadly to the pug swindlers.

When is the last time you talked to him about that?

If there's one thing Bill Clinton has realized since he left office,
it is how very many things he cared about that he was able to get done
more efficiently outside of the White House than while inside it.

Wanting the Oval Office is really and truly Hillary's goal. Of course
Bill is supportive, but if she had been content to stay in the Senate, he
wouldn't have raised an eyebrow. They both know the truth of what Hillary
once said (seemingly) in jest: "The White House is like box of chocolates.
It's pretty on the outside, but inside, it's full of nuts."

His administration is a long list of caving power to Repugs ...starting off with the GREAT NAFTA GIVEAWAY...going down to Media Deregulation in his last years of his Second Term where he allowed the very "Powers that Be" to GET MORE POWER!

:shrug:

:rofl: :spray: :rofl:

It was so funny, everyone from Gore to Gingrich was convulsed with laughter
(including yours truly). If she loses the nomination and doesn't want to play
Senate any more, she could make a fortune doing stand-up comedy.
I shit thee not.

...in the last 8 years?

for DECADES! And...they want ANOTHER CHANCE AT IT? :eyes:

And let's not forget his very first action in office, which was to betray every promise he made to gay Americans. It was the first of many, many acts of cowardice on his part. Clinton gets a lot more credit than he deserves, largely because of an economic bubble he had nothing to do with.

to cross the adultery line.

The major mistake Clinton made was not realizing that the media wasn't going to follow the old playbook -- of ignoring Presidential "indiscretions" and letting themselves be used by the partisans on the other side.

a Special Prosecutor or an impeachment trial because of it.

Clinton would have had no reason to expect that the sea change had occurred.

and indicate that there'd be no more bimbo eruptions to stay in the nomination race.

and he should quit talking about Americanism being a global idea...it makes him sound like a damn PNACer.

At this juncture.

the blow job. Who cares? The real disgraces are NAFTA and WTO. Nobody gives a fuck about Monica, but those two tragedies will live on for a very long time.

election. :grr: :nuke:

He also had the highest approval rating ever recorded for a departing President.

This is always my argument when somebody tries to tell me that Clinton harmed Al Gore's chances of beating Bush. The fact is that Clinton's approval rating was 65-67% when he left office and that Gore lost because Bush had help from his brother and from the Supreme Court.

Now it's possible that his approval rating may have been even higher if not for his fling with Monica, but to say that he significantly harmed Gore's chances is really stretching it don't you think?

:grr:

And I find that intolerable. It is like a slap in the face to those of us who supported Dean as chair.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/838

Carville was traveling with Bill Clinton in NV, and he is quite involved.

My vote won't count. Too damn bad. It was her campaign chairmen here who pushed the early primary and sued the DNC.

BACK THE FUCK
OFF OF BILL CLINTON.

Hillary projected winner in Nevada.

:yourock: :toast:

Yuck. And we are to support this kind of hypocrisy in this day and age. A president who can be mindlessly boning interns 'because he can' while pandering to 'family values' is not a president worth having. I am not a prude. I have an open relationship and would have had no problems with Hillary admitting that she had the same deal with Bill. What I have a problem with is the lip service to...nay, promotion, of the 'family values' crowd exclusively whilst one is indulging one's one carnal whims. Anybody still remember Jocelyn Elders? She just wanted to tell school kids that masturbation wouldn't make ya blind... and Bill canned her for being controversial to the fundie 'morals' crowd.

I got pretty apolitical in the Clinton years. I defended ol' Bill and Hill on account of the magical 'D' after their name which supposedly made them all right people, but I would listen to NPR aghast because I didn't think a democratic president should have made the many of the de scions he did. Decisions that have made it easier for chimpy to shut out the poor, wreck the environment and screw us 98-per centers three ways to sunday.

Because he got caught, it enabled the repukes to win the WH and the Congress. If he was going to get blow jobs from an intern, he should have been a bit more discreet. Unfortunately, he held the future of our nation in his zipper.

Listen you fucking idiots. Why do the Defeatocrats run from their only successful President since FDR while the Repubic-hairs run to their "so-called" successful President? The only reason, the ONLY REASON, the Democrats lost in 2000 is precisely because THEY RAN FROM THEIR ONLY SUCCESSFUL PRESIDENT SINCE FDR. What the FUCK IS THE MATTER WITH YOU IDIOTS?

the psycho-in-chief, but I DO agree with the sentiment of your post.:)

6 million votes were thrown away nationally, so, don't start with the Monica BS.
Obviously 50% of women in Nevada didn't mind either - and maybe some union people didn't like the "brilliance " of the Raygun worship. What garbage! Now I can really say: I don't care that Hillary won, but for posts like these - I am happy Reagan's boy LOST today!

The Corporatists won today.

That is bad for our Country.

Of course, most here won't appreciate the phrase, "I told you so", including me, because we all lose, when a Corporatist wins, no matter their race or gender.

rant. Truer words were never spoken.

:kick:

now..gone and brought out the ugly truth and it resonates with some but he gets called a rw by others.

no asshole we are at fault. how much did we protest, how much did we get involved? gwb is our albatross. i'll take bill back in a heart beat, i was getting 10% raises. i do not care who he fucked, it was not me!!!!! if nafta had worked the way it was supposed to, everyone would have benefited. this web site is anti-hillary, even if you have to drag past sexual daliances into it. drop dead!!!!!