silly question (maybe) but on DU why so much dislike for Hillary and love for Bill?

*Let me say I'm a supporter of Dennis Kucinich upfront.

I see lots of posts which rip Hillary apart, some of them deserved, others cheap shots. Yet I see many other posts which praise and long for Bill Clinton. To me it's kind of weird because Hillary is a "Clinton Democrat" meaning the type of Democrat who supports NAFTA, Welfare Reform (such as what Bill got passed), and incremental changes in Health care rather than a more radical plan (but advocated as far back as 1948 by Harry Truman) of National Health Care. She, like Bill, believes in the Dick Morris concept (when Morris worked with the Clintons) of "triangulation politics"--which in essence means co-opting your opponents ideas--maybe making them a bit less unsavory--and moving the two major parties closer.

My guess is that what people respond to is Bill's personality and charisma when compared to Hillary, herself a very intelligent and able person. And probably when compared to Bush--Bill looks and acted like a president. But I still remember that some people also consider Bill Clinton (warmly praised by Alan Greenspan) "the best Republican president" this country has had in a long time.

I guess my essential question is "If you liked Bill as president--why wouldn't you like Hillary?"

At first, I wanted anyone but her to win the Dem nomination. But after months of impressive debate performances and nuanced policy views, her siren song became too much to resist. I admit it! I like her now.

PS. I agree with Kucinich on more specific points (like almost everything he says) but frankly, I think he's a very long shot for the nomination at this point, wrong and sad though that is.

Bill signed that awful meanspirited welfare bill of 1996 that the Republicans passed in their rabid desire to bring back the 1920's.

I was hired as legal counsel to our welfare office when welfare reform passed. I thought "this will be another failed social experiment on the backs of the poor" (I'd worked as a public defender, at legal services and as a workers' comp and civil rights attorney before being hired at the welfare office.)

I was shocked to find the VERY liberal professionals at the office were all in favor of welfare reform. It was neither mean spirited or awful. Helping the poor is my job, and in many ways my life. Welfare reform, with the provisions Bill insisted on (expanded child care and medicaid) was a good idea and has worked.

When you make people work for welfare benefits you hire slave labor.

Oh and what about the 5 year lifetime time limit?

Both points make it mean spirited to me.

You may have good intentions but Marian Wright Edelman resigned from the Clinton administration after the 1996 atrocity got passed.

I must disagree with you.

Alot of liberals suffer from battered wife syndrome after the 13 year battering that Republicans have done to this country since 1994.

Not me. I do not suffer from this battered wife syndrome. I see where the antisocial behavior comes from and it comes from the Republican party for the most part and the moderates and conservatives in the Democratic party.

Does a moderate position on helping the poor not leave the poor to the ravages of predatory capitalism as opposed to responsible capitalism?

Having worked with the poor for 30 plus years it makes sense to me that the best thing we can do is help the poor is to help them move out of the disenfranchisted underclass. I get up and go to work every day because my parents did. That's where I learned it. If I'd grown up in a welfare family, more than likely, I'd be on welfare. Society (not just ours) makes a value judgment against people on welfare. People who are on welfare know what society thinks of them, they feel it. They come to see themselves as as worthless as society tells them they are. You empower people when you get them off welfare and make them productive, engaged members of society. Without a time limit, fewer people had the incentive to make huge changes in their lives. Welfare reform gave states freedom to try different ways to help people get off welfare. That is our focus. If people have legitimate hardships that prevent them (or make it too difficult for them) to work, the 5 year limit does not apply. AFDC (old "welfare" program) was the worst. The current system gave us more money for training, child care and medicaid benefits for people after they go to work.

By your definition, we are all slave labor. We all work for benefits. I wouldn't work if I didn't get paid for it.

http://ucdavismagazine.ucdavis.edu/issues/sp06/feature_1d.html">The Poor Get Poorer

snip-->

Welfare-to-work reforms passed by Congress a decade ago have put more people to work in low-wage jobs but have done little to raise them out of poverty.

snip-->

And with a 25 percent cut in federal funding for job training in California over the past five years, even successful programs have been eliminated or threatened. “You still have to provide enough money to get the job done,” Campbell said. “Moving people from welfare to work takes a lot of one-on-one attention.”

A budget-cutting bill passed by Congress in February further reduced funds for job training programs and imposed tougher work requirements for welfare recipients, as well as reducing health programs for the poor, disabled and elderly and raising interest rates for student loans.

Meanwhile, the fastest-growing types of jobs are the lowest paying, Campbell said. “We seem to be unique as a society in having the idea that the market will just take care of everything. That’s never been true, and it’s certainly not true now.”

snip-->

The United States spends far less than other industrialized countries on social programs, even when noncash benefits—like food stamps, housing subsidies and Earned Income Tax Credit refunds—are taken into account. “Aid for poor people in the United States is at such a low level that’s it’s very unlikely to move people above the poverty line,” Hoynes said.

the reauthorization sucks. No doubt about it. But that's not Clinton. It increased work requirements and cut funding for training.

The original welfare reform bill of 1996 was much better.

The idea is right. Put the money behind supporting people who get jobs (child care medicaid) and provide training so they can get a better job. If they can't work, no time limit. That was the ideal. We could use more money for supportive services but I don't see how an increase in poverty is a result of people leaving welfare. They were in poverty while on welfare.

Open your eyes and do some reading about poverty, the job market, minimum wages, etc.!

You shouldn't be bragging about your hand in this!

And I've spend my life not only reading about poverty but working with the poor.

It worked for the assholes who voted for it but certainly not for welfare recipients and poor kids!

And the scum that reduced the budget for job training helped keep them there!

You must be soooo proud! :puke:

WILL never vote for her in the primary - but after watching her in the debates I thought MAYBE I can vote for her in the general - BUT even though she often says good things in the debates I DON'T TRUST her

AND after the Iran vote the other day I'm back to maybe NOT voting for her in the general.

I have come to not like Bill nearly as much as I use to - I was a much bigger supporter of him because they impeached him which I thought was beyond ridiculous - his constant hanging out and friendship with poppy Bush turned me against him/them - but I do not have the hatred for him I have for her and I can only attribute to that to the charming southern boy syndrome - but I wouldn't vote for either one of them again - I have Clinton and Bush fatigue - I want both families to retire gracefully and leave us all the hell alone - ENOUGH ALREADY

I definitely have Clinton nostalgia.

with ladies are... Besides that... it was like a light compared to the years of darkness this Bush admin. has brought us. The world wasn't great, but it felt a lot better. Now, we have a moran in charge and bunch of neo-cons running the show. People just want to get back to normal. They just want things to be good again... and not one impeachable offense after another brazenly thrown in our faces and not one person seems to be doing anything about it. How can a president say... we are torturing on t.v. and no one grabs him and puts him in jail... No our wonderful crusaders for the constitution and moral guidance congress, write a law and excuce his b.s.

The love affair was because of a gentler, kinder time when it seemed easier.

I WANT my president, male or female, to be strong, confident, intelligent, management material, and alot of other characteristics.

Actually, it doesn't matter whether I personally "like" a presidential candidate. I want that person to be able to function on the job and be productive.

I have always felt the party platform is important. We don't discuss party platforms very much anymore.

She, like Bill, believes in the Dick Morris concept (when Morris worked with the Clintons) of "triangulation politics"--which in essence means co-opting your opponents ideas--maybe making them a bit less unsavory


Yes triangulation and adopting the policies of the other side to make them less unsavory.

Shall we bring back cross burnings but kinder and gentler? getting rid of the minimum wage or only raise it every 7 years when the Republicans refused to do it for 10?

Should Democrats give Medicare part D to the entire country for their entire health care needs when the Republicans gave retired and disabled people a useless benefit for the middle class?

or perhaps we should stay in Iraq and when Bush killed a million innocent Iraqis should the Democrats triangulate and kill only 500,000 innocent Iraqis in the next Democratic presidential term?

Their records and their statements reveal that they're nothing more than corporate whores, doing what their corporate masters want. Hillary has enabled one illegal, immoral war and looks as though she's going to enable another one with her vote on Kyle/Lieberman. Meanwhile, she is giving no plan or timetable to get us out of either.

I can do without either one of them.

EDIT: Which makes sense. With all of the Hillary-hate, something has to be done about everything *affiliated* with her. The two basic options are (1) hate the affiliate, and (2) don't talk about the affiliate. With Bill, DUers are apparently choosing option (1). With Wesley Clark and Joe Wilson, DUers are choosing (2).

Spreading like a bad rash.

(Some people call this charisma). He was responsible not only for Nafta, but for enabling media giants that propagandize for government and Wall Street; and responsible for high/long rates of imprisonment for small time criminals-many of them women with children busted for minor drug offenses.

I voted for him because he demonstrated an ability to take a lot of crap-NY primary and the like-and remain standing afterward. (A trait he also exhibited as president).

I don't think of him as a great liberal.

I see those revisionist Republicans attempting to say that FDR did not want people on the dole. Well when 20 to 30 percent of the population had no work, in 1933 these people lived on the dole. They sought work but could not find work after the banks, the stock market and many businesses failed.

It has nothing to do with Hillary's Gender. It has mostly to do with Hillary's corporatist agenda.


AGENDA NOT GENDER.

in simple words, please.

Corporatism ala chauvinism to the companies that give money to her.

Not to mention a lazy, head in the sand approach.

Why should people have to like both just because they're married?

I don't want to revisit the 1990's but move forward. Hillary is her own person and she has very few personal accomplishments.

Of course she was First Lady and unable to have a separate profession.

Another reason is personality. Bill was elected governor and was a leader and executive. He was a consensus builder who was also reliant on the will of the voters.

Hillary has won 2 easy elections in liberal new york and hasn't shown the leadership or human touch that Bill displayed.

Its time to move forward and not to the past.

of hillary is locked.

Hillary hanging onto Bill for dear life because she knows that she's proven nothing without him.

There are many accomplished female politicians but Hillary's lack of real experience takes her off that list.

Have you even read her resume? After you have, would you please explain why she is nothing without Bill. I honestly believe the opposite is true. You know, "Behind every great man, etc., etc. You can find her resume on www.hillaryclinton.com. Go for it.

N/T

that are ruinous to this "democracy" that I really dislike Hillary as a candidate. It has nothing to do with personality.

that Hillary proposes that would be ruinous to this "democracy."

My second similar question of today's topic.

Don't get any answers.

She advocates continuing our presence in Iraq, keeping all options open in a potential conflict with Iran, and a very watered-down health care reform that does not ensure equal coverage for the less affluent. You ask a question, and before I can answer - you have already discounted me by saying you get no answers. Nice.

Both have been cited for their coziness with the Bushes. I think that's the most inciting aspect.

I don't believe I have read of either of them visiting Kennebuckport or Crawford. Maybe they've had dinner at the White House and I missed that. Fund raising for the poor refuges of disasters is something they both worked hard at, to their credit. As a Senator, of course Hillary has to be polite. What else am I missing here?

Always have.

I held my nose and voted for Bill twice as the lesser of two evils as he "triangulated" (aka pandered) the party to the right.

Enough.

There's no other way to put it. Never mind that she has no apparent intentions of ending the war.

If she's the nominee, I'll hold my nose and vote for her - but in the primaries, I'm voting for someone else, and hope that the rest of the party comes to its senses.

If she's the nominee, the 2008 presidential campaign will make 2004, with all of the SwiftBoat crapola, look like a tea party.

so many feel this, but don't want to express it, so they dance around it.

Thanks for being honest.

Personally, I think most of the hate is engineered by the right wing.