The Clintons: A Case Study In Money And Politics

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - The Clintons: A Case Study In Money And Politics stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 02- 9-08 10:31 PM   |   Updated: 03-28-08 02:45 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Clinton Cash

Hillary Clinton's ability to loan her presidential campaign $5 million demonstrates how extraordinarily lucrative the post-White House years have been for the former First Lady and her husband.

While Clinton campaign aides are quick to point out that Mrs. Clinton could easily cover the loan from the $9.2 million she made in royalties from her bestselling book Living History, she made the loan by writing a check on a joint banking account she and her husband maintain, according to her staff.

Living History
contributed less than a fifth of the money that the Clintons have earned over the seven years between 2001 and 2006, as documented in Mrs. Clinton's United States Senate and presidential financial disclosure reports -- a sum in excess of $45 million, not including the couple's earnings in 2007 or 2008.

The Clintons have become a case study in the interrelationship of money and politics, a relationship steadily strengthening in scope and magnitude.

A look at Hillary Clinton's financial disclosure reports over the last six years reveals the benefits available to those who hold high public office. Bill Clinton, for example, has become a political ATM, pumping as much as or more than $10 million a year into their joint account.

Some of the cash flow is fully documented in the disclosure reports, including payments of $150,000 to $400,000 for each of the 30 or so speeches Bill Clinton gives annually, for a six-year total of $39.1 million. In 2006 alone, Bill Clinton gave 57 paid speeches for a total of $10.15 million in a wide range of cities - including New York, Chicago, Cleveland, Las Vegas and Denver - and in several countries, among them Denmark, England, Germany, Ireland, Finland, New Zealand and Australia.

Other of the Clinton's income sources are far more difficult to ascertain -- for instance, the flow of cash from billionaire investor Ron Burkle and his Yucaipa companies.

In each of Senator Clinton's past four disclosure statements - 2003-2006 -- there is a line item that reveals only that Bill Clinton received "guaranteed payments to partner" of "over $1,000" from Burkle's Yucaipa.

The disclosure forms do not explain what the guarantee is, and they leave to the imagination how much over $1,000 the annual amounts are. President Clinton, according to news accounts, has helped Burkle in his business dealings.

Story continues below
advertisement

In her financial disclosure statements, Hillary Clinton lists two seemingly modest investments in Burkle companies, under the category of "Non-Publicly Traded Assets and Unearned Income Sources." One investment in Yucaipa Global Holding is described as worth less than $1,000, while producing interest income of $200 to $1,000 annually. The other, in the Yucaipa Global Partnership Fund, is also listed as being worth less than $1,000, while producing interest payments of $1,000 to $2,500 a year.

Except for honoraria, which must be described in detail, federal disclosure requirements are much more stringent for the elected official than for his or her spouse. The forms declare: "For your spouse, report the source (name and address) and the type of earned income which aggregate $1,000 or more during the reporting period. No amount needs to be specified for your spouse."

Bill Clinton's financial ties to the Yucaipa Companies were first made public on April 11, 2002, when the firm issued a press release announcing that Clinton "will provide counsel to Yucaipa and its investment funds including the Yucaipa American Fund (YAF) and the Yucaipa Corporate Initiative Fund (YCIF). Mr. Clinton will participate in events related to the funds and provide advice in the development of potential investments....Ron Burkle, managing partner of The Yucaipa Companies, said, 'We are proud that President Clinton will serve as a Senior Advisor to our firm.'"

In April 2008, the New York Times reported that


"After leaving the White House in 2001, former President Bill Clinton was inundated with business and job offers, from investment-bank partnerships to seats on corporate boards. He turned them all down, with one exception: He agreed to be an adviser to a family of funds run by the Yucaipa Companies, a California private equity firm controlled by one of his best friends, the billionaire Ronald W. Burkle."

Neither the campaign nor aides to Bill Clinton would provide specific information as to how Bill Clinton is compensated for services he provides to Burkle. Frank Quintero, a Yucaipa spokesman, referred questions to the Clinton campaign.

"The Senator reports all disclosable financial information," Howard Wolfson, Hillary Clinton's communications director, responded in an emailed reply to a series of questions from The Huffington Post.

Matt McKenna, Bill Clinton's press secretary, wrote: "My understanding is Howard answered your Qs. Hope you got everything you needed. Please direct follow-ups on this issue to him."

The former president is said to be currently negotiating an end to his financial relationship with Burkle, in order to avoid conflicts of interest if his wife should become president. The settlement will result in the payment of a substantial sum - the Wall Street Journal reported on January 22 that the figure will be in the $20 million range - but aides to both Bill and Hillary Clinton are unwilling to shed any light on this matter.

Wolfson, referring to the WSJ story, said, "Contrary to published reports, neither the level of President Clinton's compensation for his advisory role, nor the value of his partnership share in the Yucaipa global fund upon his exit, has been determined."

In December, Douglas J. Band, a spokesman for Bill Clinton, told The Huffington Post that the former president "anticipates continuing his business relationships as long as they permit him to devote time to his highest priorities - the work of his foundation and supporting his wife's candidacy. He of course is taking steps now to ensure that should she receive the nomination, there will be an appropriate transition for those relationships."

There are a number of reasons the Yucaipa ties could prove embarrassing to the Clintons.

Bloomberg News on December 17 reported that three of the Yucaipa funds are registered in the Cayman Islands. Senator Clinton, in 2004, declared that she intended to close tax loopholes for "people who create a mailbox, or a drop, or send one person to sit on the beach in some island paradise and claim that it is their offshore headquarters."

Along similar lines, the WSJ's January 22 story pointed out that Clinton has an interest in Yucaipa Global Partnership Fund, making him a partner with the Dubai Investment Group, "an entity connected to the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum." Senator Clinton, according to the WSJ, had separately raised questions about investment funds controlled by foreign governments, because the funds "could be used by foreign governments as 'instruments of foreign policy."

On a much broader scale, Bill Clinton's involvement with the Yucaipa funds raises a basic ethical question for Hillary Clinton, both in connection with her presidential bid and in connection with her service in the U.S. Senate: The purpose in hiring Bill Clinton is to use the connections he had made as President to gain access and to make lucrative deals -- a commonplace but controversial practice regarding former officeholders, a practice with little or no public support - and the money made from these activities in the Clintons' case becomes part of Bill and Hillary's jointly held assets, according to Senator Clinton's communications director.

In other words, money from Yucaipa and the interests it deals with - running the gamut from public employee pension funds to supermarket chains to the Dubai Investment Group - is directly benefiting Hillary Clinton, an incumbent politician charged with voting on issues crucially important to the profits of Yucaipa, its clients, partners and investors.

Hillary Clinton's ability to loan her presidential campaign $5 million demonstrates how extraordinarily lucrative the post-White House years have been for the former First Lady and her husband. While...
Hillary Clinton's ability to loan her presidential campaign $5 million demonstrates how extraordinarily lucrative the post-White House years have been for the former First Lady and her husband. While...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
476
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)

In my opinion, this Clinton story reads like a, "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" revisited. Seemingly, there is nothing here -- that I can see -- that provides, 'the necessary burden of proof' that the Clintons have done anything illegal; it's just flimsy conjecture.

Offshore business entities *are perfectly legal* if they do not involve illegal activities and are not being used for U.S. tax-evasion.

What this HuffPost writer doesn't reveal to readers, is the following:

1. Barack Obama is co-sponsor of the 'Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act'; a bill that purports to provide "tools to clamp down on offshore tax and tax shelter abuses."

2. Jan 29, 2008 - An undeclared $3.5 million loan stemming from Nadhmi Auchi lands Tony Rezko in jail; A federal judge refuses to reinstate Rezko's bond, calling Rezko a flight-risk.

3. Nadhmi Auchi - businessman with reported ties to Saddam Hussein, one of the largest private shareholders in BNP Paribas, the bank involved in the UN Oil-For-Food scandal.

4. Nadhmi Auchi is reported to be the 100% share-holder in General Mediterranean Holding; a company with [offshore business entities]in subsidiari­es/associa­tes/affili­ates, all over the world.

5. The reported "secured party name" on Rezko's loan 3.5 Million form is, 'Fintrade Services.'

6. Fintrade Services is a listed as an offshore subsidiary of General Mediterranean Holding, located in Panama.

7. Fintrade Services' directors reportedly include Ibtisam Auchi; Nadhmi Auchi’s wife.

8. General Mediterranean Holding has offshore business ties to 'North Atlantic Continental Capital Company', located in ... The Cayman Islands.

9. "reported discovered state documents in Illinois recording that Fintrade Services, a Panamanian company [offshore], lent money to Mr Obama’s fundraiser in May 2005."

10. 01/25/08, ABC News reports Obama camp still has an additional $100,000 of questionable Rezko campaign money on hand.

11. 01/30/08, Judicial watch reports: "... Obama claims to have returned all" [Rezko money], ... >>> "but the Illinois senator’s figure doesn’t account for more than $50,000."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:45 AM on 02/10/2008

*** The 11 Degrees of Obama *** - Sources

Sources:

1. Zawya - General Mediterranean Holding (Fintrade Services, North Atlantic Continental Capital Company)

http://www.zawya.com/cm/profile.cfm/cid1001554

2. Times of London (Obama bagman is sent to jail over $3.5m payment by British tycoon, James Bone in New York, Dominic Kennedy in London, Feb 01, 2008)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3284825.ece

3. Levin, Coleman, Obama Introduce Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act (Press Release, February 17, 2007)

http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=269479

4. Judicial Watch(Did Obama Return All the Rezko Cash?, 01/30/2008)

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/did-obama-return-all-rezko-cash

5. U.K. Guardian (The politics of sleaze, Nick Cohen, November 16, 2003)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1086487,00.html

*The Republicans are gonna' have a field day with Obama. Unreal.*

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:51 AM on 02/10/2008

These are the sorts of issues that will play big amongst the Republicans in the general election. Particularly as it regards the overseas connections. All the Republicans need to do is make the Obama-to-R­ezko-to-Na­dhmi Auchi - (businessman with reported ties to Saddam Hussein)- to - Obama 2002 opposition to the war---now redefined and contended to be regime change ? democratization? Who the f*ck knows....b­ut in any case I could see the tv ad right now in my head......­....fade up........­...2002 clip of Obama taking a stand against Iraq war...cut to close up of Chicago tribune headline "obama connected to indicted Rezco"....­.cut to clip of Obama's Chicago townhouse.­..maybe showing Barack in shorts and a tee mowing Rezkos vacant adjacent lot...cut to clip of Rezko cuffed and escorted by Feds.... Voice over.."Rez­co jailed after receiving funds from Nadhmi Auchi businessman with reported ties to Saddam Hussein"---Resume clip of Obama anti war speech...f­ade to shot of crumbling world trade center towers...v­oice over "can America afford to trust Barack Obama?"..v­oice over performed by Charlton Heston...i­s he still alive? Lets face it Rudy Giuliani got raked over the coals for all of his Saudi 9/11 business connection­s...he also had that "Red Dragon" Hannibal Lecter set of iridescent dentures to contend with that were frightening. But still....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:26 AM on 02/10/2008
- Alvin4NY I'm a Fan of Alvin4NY 24 fans permalink
photo

.....that'­s not the half of it. The big half is the money coming from Republicans into his campaign. As soon as he secures the nomination, his funds will dry up, and the media slant that is now for Obama, will turn against him, over-night.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 02/10/2008

1. Nadhmi S Auchi - guest of the past 3 Presidents at the White House, no ties to Obama.
2. Old News: The Chicago businessman has already been an embarrassment to Mr Obama’s campaign. The presidential challenger has tried to dampen criticism by paying $150,000 to charity to make up for donations from Mr Rezko. The Illinois senator has said that he made a “bone-headed mistake” to get involved in a property deal with Mr Rezko at a time when he was known to be under investigation.

3. What is the point here? "Levin, Coleman, Obama Introduce Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act";
4. Judicial Watch says as reported by LA Times story which states, "Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement that "by refunding these donations, the campaign has returned any and all funds that could be reasonably credited to Mr. Rezko's political support."
5. your link is broken and its from 2003?
Read my other posts, the Obama campaign is doing great. He has tremendous popular support. All of this "news" has traveled well in U-Tube and in tertiary (secondary as well as priimary) news media.
Can you find anything else?
What do you call all of Bush's senior appointees who hold dual-passports with Israel and were the war hawks that used American recources to fight their war?
As for the Clintons, their history is replete with factual first hand documentary and witness (those that are still alive) testimony to the many many scandals.
The Republicans have nothing to show for their shambles of a party. I humbly admit I voted for GWB in 2000, and voted against him in 2004. I have first hand knowledge of his administrations mis-deeds by political hit machine man Rove. Obama's speech last night debunked those who do not understand what Hope is, and it is once in a lifetime.
I congratulate Barack Obama for his victories so far in this Election Campaign and wish him and his team much success through his election as President of the United States.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:38 PM on 02/10/2008
- Nancyann I'm a Fan of Nancyann 6 fans permalink

The Clintons are very dishonest people who can't be trusted. Her windfall with hog futures, his Dubai deals and oil deals, her White Water lies where she was judged as being an unindicted co-conspirator are examples of their lawlessness. They won't release their White House papers that involve her and I wonder why. Is there more fodder there also?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Obama has been honest about the mistake he made, and the fact that Rezko was trying to buy future influence with him. Obama declared, "I am the first one to acknowledge that it was a boneheaded move for me to purchase this 10-foot strip from Rezko, given that he was already under a cloud of concern. I will also acknowledge that from his perspective, he no doubt believed that by buying the piece of property next to me that he would, if not be doing me a favor, it would help strengthen our relationsh­ip." Obama’s mistake was in allowing the appearance of impropriety. He never actually did anything wrong. And that’s the key issue here.

Despite all of these rumors about Obama and Rezko, none of the evidence indicates any actual wrongdoing. Conservative Republican Tom Bevan called the evidence against Obama "pretty darn weak." Conor Clarke of the New Republic reported that Obama’s real estate deal with Rezko was a "nonscanda­l." According to Clarke, "journalists have followed the smoke and haven’t found the fire. At that point, accusing someone of something that looks wrong stops making sense."

Of course one boneheaded mistake when he was a young lawyer, and nothing but squeaky clean afterwards, will convince the Clinton people.
This is the only thing they can bring up. Talk about destrutive politics. I suppose you have to accuse your opponent of doing something that you are really guilty of yourself
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e

It is amazing that in the race for president the Clintons biggest false talking point is
"I'm filthy dirty and so is he"
Oooooh that is an inspirational presidet.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:06 AM on 02/10/2008

Talk about destructive politics, you Obamamaniacs are delusional,,,from Wikapedia

"On November 8, 2007, Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported on a story by Marc Ambinder in The Atlantic in which Ambinder revealed that the Obama campaign had been behind the outing of Hsu:[29]

Barack Obama’s presidential campaign "scored a significant hit" against chief rival Hillary Rodham Clinton "by helping to place" a story about tainted Democratic donor Norman Hsu ...

The story, titled Teacher and Apprentice by associate editor Marc Ambinder, describes how Obama campaign staffers were "frustrated" because the press was not covering Clinton "in the way they expected it would."

"…And at a campaign event in Iowa, one of Obama’s aides plopped down next to me and spoke even more bluntly. He wanted to know when reporters would begin to look into Bill Clinton’s postpresidential sex life," Ambinder writes. ...

Asked for comment on whether the campaign had a hand in "helping to place" the Hsu story, Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said 'We had no knowledge of Norman Hsu’s past criminal activity, fugitive status or potential straw donor scheme until reading it in the newspaper.­' ...

Ambinder, told of the Obama campaign comment said, "I stand by my reporting and the article speaks for itself." -Wikopedia

By the way.....am­ong the list of recipients of Norman Hsu's financial largess is none other than Barack Obama....s­ee wikopedia

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:17 AM on 02/10/2008

When you're raising $1 million a day, why would you hold on to $50K? This is ridiculous notion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 AM on 02/10/2008
- ayc I'm a Fan of ayc 14 fans permalink

You might want want to look into a logic or critical thinking class in your adult educatation program.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:44 AM on 02/10/2008
- Countess I'm a Fan of Countess 34 fans permalink

The simple fact that she refuses to make public her income tax return from last year as Obama has already done leaves one wondering what she is hiding.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:21 AM on 02/10/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

But what could the Clintons possibly have to hide? Their lives are an open book, a model of high moral/ethical standards, professional integrity, above board and transparent finances.

Just like the Bushes, their message to the nation is "Trust us, we know best."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:39 AM on 02/10/2008
photo

Listen, "money in politics" is just another way of saying "corruption". Let's call it what it is: quid pro quo. The connection is usually hidden but come on.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:07 AM on 02/10/2008

exactly -- rezko literally gave obama 500,000 to buy his house... -- Obama is corrupt..!­!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:40 AM on 02/10/2008
- Bibbo I'm a Fan of Bibbo 12 fans permalink

The Clintons-What did you expect?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 AM on 02/10/2008

Obama has actually admitted that it was the wrong thing to do. And there is no evidence of him doing anything illegal.

Here, however, is evidence of Hillary doing something illegal:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xq8aopATYyw&feature=related

Hillary won't talk about it.

Obama got landmark ethics reform passed. Hillary has been there longer than Obama. Why didn't she try to pass ethics reform? The answer is to obvious to require further elaboration.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:41 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Obama has been honest about the mistake he made, and the fact that Rezko was trying to buy future influence with him. Obama declared, "I am the first one to acknowledge that it was a boneheaded move for me to purchase this 10-foot strip from Rezko, given that he was already under a cloud of concern. I will also acknowledge that from his perspective, he no doubt believed that by buying the piece of property next to me that he would, if not be doing me a favor, it would help strengthen our relationsh­ip." Obama"s mistake was in allowing the appearance of impropriety. He never actually did anything wrong. And that"s the key issue here.

Despite all of these rumors about Obama and Rezko, none of the evidence indicates any actual wrongdoing. Conservative Republican Tom Bevan called the evidence against Obama "pretty darn weak." Conor Clarke of the New Republic reported that Obama"s real estate deal with Rezko was a "nonscanda­l." According to Clarke, "journalists have followed the smoke and haven"t found the fire. At that point, accusing someone of something that looks wrong stops making sense."

Of course one boneheaded mistake when he was a young lawyer, and nothing but squeaky clean afterwards, will convince the Clinton people.
This is the only thing they can bring up. Talk about destrutive politics. I suppose you have to accuse your opponent of doing something that you are really guilty of yourself
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e

It is amazing that in the race for president the Clintons biggest false talking point is
"I'm filthy dirty and so is he"
Oooooh that is an inspirational presidet.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 02/10/2008

Your statement is slander, without factual foundation - now on the other hand both Clintons have actually been indicted many times, they are very experiences with the ins and outs of corruption.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:44 PM on 02/10/2008
- moda31 I'm a Fan of moda31 10 fans permalink

questions about the finances of a presidential candidate are most certainly valid & important, and i'd hope that every voter would want to see full transparency from their leaders, yes ALL of them. this kind of thing shouldn't be an issue of what side you're on; demanding honesty from the people that run this country, is not part of some vast conspiracy against any given candidate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 AM on 02/10/2008
- waynesmyer I'm a Fan of waynesmyer 10 fans permalink

But! But! Now the Hilliary can pay back Billy-Boy the 5 million that she owes him! What does "TWO FOR THE PRICE OF ONE" Really mean??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:47 AM on 02/10/2008

All politicians and their relatives get rich quickly (for most part) while in office or thereafter the world over.

Why is it such a F****** big deal when it comes to the Clintons? I don't see anyone complaining about Mrs Obama's salary increase of over 200,000.00­+.

Poor ignorant fools will vote for whomever w/o making a rational decision. I see 2000 and 2004 repeating all over again. God bless America and the inhabitants to vote wisely.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:02 AM on 02/10/2008
- JiminNC I'm a Fan of JiminNC 277 fans permalink
photo

You're right. It shouldn't be but the questions being raised are whether there are foreign interests financing Senator Clinton's campaign and more importantly, what will they expect in return. I think these are important and reasonable questions to ask considering some of the money is strongly connected to the same people that wanted to buy our ports a couple of years ago. That doesn't make the money he earned illegal or even shady but the use of it to finance the campaign for the President of the United States may well be both.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:32 AM on 02/10/2008
- dora rice I'm a Fan of dora rice 11 fans permalink
photo

why don't you just get it over with and vote for Barrack, Mohamed, Hussein Obama for american predident. No one stops you. It's your right. Quit looking for excuses. Then we he will be pitted against Huckabee or Romney, because McCaine very likely will not get the republican vote, the democrats will lose for the third time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:17 AM on 02/10/2008

Agree JiminNC, who, or what will be influencing Senator Clinton if she is in office. The reason we ask this is that we witnessed this during Bill's term.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:45 PM on 02/10/2008
- dora rice I'm a Fan of dora rice 11 fans permalink
photo

I hear ya...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:14 AM on 02/10/2008

This ignorant fool is supporting Obama because Obama has, as a matter of practice, made his income a matter of public record. Hillary, even though it looks bad and it's probably hurting her campaign, has refused to release her tax records. Wonder why?

Obama got landmark ethics reform legislation passed, no thanks to Hillary. In the end she voted for it, but she did zero to support it along the way. Wonder why?

Hillary has been in the Senate longer than Barack, but she hasn't gotten any ethics reform passed? I'll give you two guesses as to why, and the first one doesn't count.

I'm also supporting Obama because he's demonstrated himself to be a superior politician. The job of a politician is to bring people together behind a cause. Obama has clearly been more successful at this than Hillary. Hillary's support is stuck at the exact same level as when she entered the race.

So, he's a better politician, and he's demonstrated a serious desire in cleaning up Washington. That's reason enough for me to vote for him over Hillary.

And here's a reason why I can't support Hillary, even if she wins the nomination:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xq8aopATYyw&feature=related

Only an ignorant fool can support that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Michele Obama never held the highest office in the land.

Hillary's campaign is getting financed directly through Bill's connection as an ex-president. CONFLICT OF INTEREST BIG TIME

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 AM on 02/10/2008
- horacekent I'm a Fan of horacekent 10 fans permalink

I do my laundry on Sundays - so that makes today laundry day, which got me thinking metaphorically.

For the democrats, it's like changing the bedding. The sheets & pillow cases on the bed, sorely need to be removed & replaced (the Bush/Chenney administration). So you take them off - thank god!! Perhaps even burn them.

But instead of replacing them with fresh, clean new bedding (Obama), you see down in the hamper, the sheets from the previous Clinton administartion, & start considering putting them on instead. However, once you pull them out, & see all the stains, & get a good wiff of the smell - plus other abhorrent defilements I need not mention - you'd be a fool to want to put them on your bed. However, should you decide to do so - you'll be sleeping in that crap for another 4+ years!

Lets start fresh & new!!
Go Obama!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:51 AM on 02/10/2008

Hey...I like that one!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:34 AM on 02/10/2008
- SUNRAI I'm a Fan of SUNRAI 2 fans permalink
photo

Awwwww this one is just GREAT!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:46 AM on 02/10/2008

It's Sunday and I have brunch on Sunday....­which got me thinking metaphorically also just like Horace, who sleeps on clean sheets.

I usually have an egg white omelet, turkey bacon and whole wheat toast (Clinton) but I started considering, I could really use a "CHANGE" and I really "HOPE" I like this "CHANGE" because I could start eating this new breakfast every day, "yes I can." So I made myself some buttermilk pancakes with a big glob of butter and some real Vermont Maple Syrup (Obama) and it was delicious, yes it was. So I ate it every day until my doctor called and said that my blood pressure was through the roof, I had absurdly high cholesterol and my arteries were clogging like an old rusty pipe. You'd be a fool to want to keep eating that crap....Ho­wever, should you decide to do so - you'll be dead in another 4+ years!

Let's not all die!!!
Go Hillary?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:56 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

CUTE, but your analogy does not make as much sense as the one above.

The stains on the sheets are real. The smell is for real. You only need to look back clear eyed to see it.

In your analogy, you assume that Obama is the "bad for you" food, with no correlation to that choice.

As a matter of fact, if you watch Obama, and see his inspiration, the food he would most likely resemble is something much more healthy and uplifting. Shedding the winter weight of the Bush administration and being a whole new energized (country).

Think through your analogies, because they do not make sense.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 AM on 02/10/2008
- atlantajoe I'm a Fan of atlantajoe 8 fans permalink

Start fresh with a big rezco stain.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:25 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Obama has been honest about the mistake he made, and the fact that Rezko was trying to buy future influence with him. Obama declared, "I am the first one to acknowledge that it was a boneheaded move for me to purchase this 10-foot strip from Rezko, given that he was already under a cloud of concern. I will also acknowledge that from his perspective, he no doubt believed that by buying the piece of property next to me that he would, if not be doing me a favor, it would help strengthen our relationsh­ip." Obama"s mistake was in allowing the appearance of impropriety. He never actually did anything wrong. And that"s the key issue here.

Despite all of these rumors about Obama and Rezko, none of the evidence indicates any actual wrongdoing. Conservative Republican Tom Bevan called the evidence against Obama "pretty darn weak." Conor Clarke of the New Republic reported that Obama"s real estate deal with Rezko was a "nonscanda­l." According to Clarke, "journalists have followed the smoke and haven"t found the fire. At that point, accusing someone of something that looks wrong stops making sense."

Of course one boneheaded mistake when he was a young lawyer, and nothing but squeaky clean afterwards, will convince the Clinton people.
This is the only thing they can bring up. Talk about destrutive politics. I suppose you have to accuse your opponent of doing something that you are really guilty of yourself
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e

It is amazing that in the race for president the Clintons biggest false talking point is
"I'm filthy dirty and so is he"
Oooooh that is an inspirational presidet.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 AM on 02/10/2008

Whoa, pretty good!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 02/10/2008
- horacekent I'm a Fan of horacekent 10 fans permalink

Boy, Billary took gold old fashion whoop'in tonight!!

Go Obama!!

ps - We've already suffered long enough from the crooked Bush/Chenney administartion - lets not go from that, straight into the corrupt Billary administration.

Is it too much to ask for a fresh, new start?? The Clintons stink!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:40 AM on 02/10/2008
- Maezeppa I'm a Fan of Maezeppa 24 fans permalink

Your assessment is naive and betrays an ignorance of the delegate-gathering process. Number of times Clinton even campaigned in those states: 0. Apparently Hillary Clinton knows better than you do the best use to which her energies and resources should be put.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:04 AM on 02/10/2008

"I just can't reach those grapes! Screw it. They're probably sour anyway."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:28 AM on 02/10/2008
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 152 fans permalink
photo

So, she wasn't in Seattle last week? Hmmm, I thought she was. I would imagine some people from WA, LA,& NB saw some Hillary ads. Hillary not only got beat in those states, she was trounced. Let's see what happens in Maine and in the Potomac Primaries. I have a feeling it's going to be more of the same.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:53 AM on 02/10/2008
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 152 fans permalink
photo

By the way, I think Obama is putting his energy into the entire USA because he will be the president of the United States not just "the states that matter" - those big states that I keep hearing Hillary supporters talk about, as if the small states are less important in this country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:55 AM on 02/10/2008
- mageduley I'm a Fan of mageduley 4 fans permalink

Obama didn't campaign in MI & FL, so I guess those votes for Hillary dont count right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:20 AM on 02/10/2008

Uh, Tom, you write:

"In April 2008, the New York Times reported that"

I think that month and year haven't happened yet. Are the rest of your "facts" as reliable as this?

Why don't you just close your article with "GObama!" You know you want to.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:39 AM on 02/10/2008
- JiminNC I'm a Fan of JiminNC 277 fans permalink
photo

Wow - I hope you don't find a word spelled incorrectly. That might taint his use of the English language too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:21 AM on 02/10/2008
- JiminNC I'm a Fan of JiminNC 277 fans permalink
photo

Oh - forgot - GObama!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:22 AM on 02/10/2008
- Mort I'm a Fan of Mort 38 fans permalink
photo

Hillary and Bill are expert in hiding the truth and living by their own loose code. How can we expect them to produce tax records now when we've allowed them to get away with hiding documents and facts all these years? And to those who think Hillary is God's gift to America, I guess integrity means nothing anymore.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 AM on 02/10/2008
- Nancyann I'm a Fan of Nancyann 6 fans permalink

The Clintons are very dishonest people who can't be trusted. Her windfall with hog futures, his Dubai deals and oil deals, her White Water lies where she was judged as being an unindicted co-conspirator are examples of their lawlessness. They won't release their White House papers that involve her and I wonder why. Is there more fodder there also?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:28 AM on 02/10/2008
- horacekent I'm a Fan of horacekent 10 fans permalink

Can you smell that,.....­. that foul odor?? Sure you can.

Know what it is?? It's the stench of corruption, which follows the Clintons wherever they go.

If you like that foul odor & want to smell it for 4+ years - then vote for Billary.

I personally think we can & do deserve better!

Obama 08!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:43 AM on 02/10/2008
- JiminNC I'm a Fan of JiminNC 277 fans permalink
photo

The truth is that much of the Clinton negatives are fabrications from Roveland.

Respectfully, I think Obama beats her head to head on honesty and integrity. That should be clear to any sober observer. She has more understanding of the inner workings of the White House and as someone said recently, so does the pastry chef at the White House.

I really believe there are many Clinton supporters that are wavering in the depths of their minds but to push the buttons of intelligent people over and over again only shortens the gap they are willing to cross.

I will admit that I have great difficulty responding intelligently to people who attack Obama. That is because I believe myself to be correct and intelligent enough to make such a determination. Giving other people with different ideas the same respect makes Barack's message more accessible. That is his message.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:35 AM on 02/10/2008

Karl Rove didn't make Hillary lie about the Levin Amendment. He also didn't hold a gun to her head to make her vote against banning the use of cluster-bombs on civilians.

Her murderous ambition, as illustrated by her votes, is not a creation of Rove, et al.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:21 AM on 02/10/2008
photo

Hillary keeps saying she's been vetted. But she's talking about all that old stuff like Mena, Whitewater, and the rest. But, what about the new stuff:

Bill Clinton's endorsement of a tyrrant in Kasakhstan to profit some previously unknown Canadian URANIUM dealer, who then turned around and made a donation to "the Clinton Library" for $131 million:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html

What about the fact that both Hillary and Bill have been meeting with foriegn leaders (contrary to US law) at The Bilderberger conferances:

http://www.oldthinkernews.com/Articles/oldthinker%20news/hillary_clinton.htm

Here's a film of Hillary actually attending the Builderberg conferance and being greeted by David Rockefeller in Montreal, 2005:

"Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement" by Alex Jones

http://www.moviesfoundonline.com/endgame.php

There's Burkle, there's some guy that did a fundraiser for them that made movie... it just goes on and on.

I can't see why there would be a cottage industry of film makers devoted solely to the task of exposing Bill and Hillary Clinton if they didn't ACTUALLY HAVE something to work with. Yes, it's been out of the MSM... so far. But that doesn't mean it isn't out there. Maybe they're saving it, for THE GENERAL ELECTION. (could Karl Rove be that smart?)

One of the real advantages to Obama's candidacy is that he doesn't have "35 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE" in putting together this sort of ATM machine that the Clinton's have. THAT'S A GOOD THING. It means the GOP's got "bupkis" (goat droppings) on him. He just hasn't been out there long enough, or had enough influence to attract the big bucks that a politician USUALLY needs to get elected president.

But, it isn't about electability, really, anyway. It's about what do you get when the Democratic candidate wins: A ride down memory lane, or getting our government to work again?

If you ask me, using the politics of the past is no way to move forward into the future.

Obama in '08

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:30 AM on 02/10/2008
- Politiking I'm a Fan of Politiking 3 fans permalink

What makes you think Obama doesn't want to be rich. Any Politician does. It's all about Power and Money. If you refuse to believe that then you deserve your candidate of choice. I'd rather the Clintons who has more than enough money and power for themselves than a young, hungry for power, ready to make $mm of dollars kinda candidate. Obama is a social movement scholar who has studied how to operate in this new politics to have people vote for him blindly simply for Hope and Change when his specifics for Hope and Change are either flawed or non-specific to non-existent.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:38 AM on 02/10/2008
- nellie I'm a Fan of nellie 496 fans permalink
photo

If you're too lazy to read his position papers, fine. But don't keep repeating the same old screed about Obama not having defined policies. It's old now.

And if Obama's priorities had been money, he had plenty of opportunity to go in that direction. As did Hillary. They both chose service.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:00 AM on 02/10/2008

Politiking:
It seems that a greedy person never seems to think they've accumulated enough money. I wouldn't put it past the Clintons to use the W.H. as a "clearing house" for personal gain. Bill took time off campaigning to run an errand worth hundreds of millions to him [Khazakstan Uranium mining deal]

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:15 AM on 02/10/2008
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 152 fans permalink
photo

So, Obama was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review and he was so power and money hungry he took a job as an organizer, civil rights attorney, and constitutional law professor when he could have had most any corporate job out there. Get your facts straight.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:02 AM on 02/10/2008

Hillary is part of old politics, run by corruption, and shady connections. This country really needs change. Obama is the leader we need to help us face the incredible challenges ahead. He is the one who gives us faith again in our leadership.

Just quit Hillary, and stop being so driven by false masculine values.

I am a feminist, and I can recognize a woman that operates from her feminine core when I see her. And you are not one such woman.

http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:30 AM on 02/10/2008
- horacekent I'm a Fan of horacekent 10 fans permalink

I agree 100%

Given a choice a between Obama & Clinton, why would anyone want to go back to the Billary drama?? Why ham-string ourslves back making her our nominee??

Plus, in a general election, Obama would be a much better canidate to put forward.

Why put Hillary out there with all her baggage???

If you're interested in winning the general election - Obama's a mcuh better choice!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:41 AM on 02/10/2008
photo

I also agree. The Clinton/Bush world is ending, and it's time to stake out some new frontiers. I think only Obama, of all the candidates, has a shot at that. Hillary Clinton is a political hack who really never served anything that did not have some payoff. Her "experience" claims are a joke. Being a corporate lawyer, first lady, and one term senator qualifies as experience? Give me some hope any day over such experience.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:01 AM on 02/10/2008
- Nancyann I'm a Fan of Nancyann 6 fans permalink

The Clintons are very dishonest people who can't be trusted. Her windfall with hog futures, his Dubai deals and oil deals, her White Water lies where she was judged as being an unindicted co-conspirator are examples of their lawlessness. They won't release their White House papers that involve her and I wonder why. Is there more fodder there also?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 AM on 02/10/2008
- Nancyann I'm a Fan of Nancyann 6 fans permalink

The Clintons are very dishonest people who can't be trusted. Her windfall with hog futures, his Dubai deals and oil deals, her White Water lies where she was judged as being an unindicted co-conspirator are examples of their lawlessness. They won't release their White House papers that involve her and I wonder why. Is there more fodder there also?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:30 AM on 02/10/2008

REPUBLICAN DISINFORMATION ALERT ...

On MSNBC tonight, an exit poll in Louisana showed that 50 percent of Obama supporters said that they would be dissatisfied with Hillary Clinton as the nominee, while roughly two thirds of the Clinton voters said they would be dissatisfied with Obama as the party standardbearer.

There was no racial breakdown of who in each camp would be dissatisfied.

However, GOP strategist Pat Buchanan said that the Democrats should fear Obama getting the nod because the two thirds of the Clinton supporters who were potentially dissatisfied with an Obama nomination were probably Caucasians, or white.

In other words, this former Richard Nixon operative is raising the spectre of "white flight" from the Democratic Party if Obama is the nominee.

However, Buchana's argument is mathematical horse pucky, as the total number of people voting in the Louisiana Democratic primary who say they would be dissatisfied if their candidate's opponent won the nomination is roughly the same.

Remember, Barack Obama won 56 percent to 37 percent, in Louisiana.

That means that approximately 28 percent of his voters would be dissatisfied if Hillary is the nominee.

Of Hillary's 37 percent of the total Democratic vote, two thirds of that would be roughly 24 percent of the total votes cast in the primary.

In other words, the disenchantment potential on both sides is statistically a wash.

Given the Clintons' penchant for race coding, they are likely to parrot the Buchanan argument, as least privately.

Don't be fooled.

MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN
Churchton, Maryland

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:15 AM on 02/10/2008

Marty says: "Given the Clintons' penchant for race coding, they are likely to parrot the Buchanan argument, as least privately.
Don't be fooled."

Oh, okay, Marty. Thanks for the tip.

"Race coding??"

Now, there's new wrinkle for the Clinton haters to latch onto.

Good lord...wha­t's next?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:30 AM on 02/10/2008
- SCharb I'm a Fan of SCharb 3 fans permalink

The Clintons' race baiting is hardly new. Their surrogates have already given us such jewels as "if you want to vote for a hip, imaginary black friend, vote for Obama," and bashed Obama for "shucking and jiving"

http://clintonattacksobama.pbwiki.com/Incident+Tracker

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:52 AM on 02/10/2008
- greejambri I'm a Fan of greejambri 19 fans permalink

Plus remember this. This was the exit polling from Louisiana, a deep southern state. 70% of white voters went for Clinton, and given the racial consciousness that still exists in the south, the high dissatisfaction about a black man as the nominee makes sense. If Obama wins any southern states, it will be the black vote that puts him over the top. In the other regions of the country Obama does just fine with white voters. His many wins across the Midwest and in WA state prove that. So southern white voters don't like the idea of an African-American nominee... this is NEWS?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:19 AM on 02/10/2008
- Nancyann I'm a Fan of Nancyann 6 fans permalink

The Clintons are very dishonest people who can't be trusted. Her windfall with hog futures, his Dubai deals and oil deals, her White Water lies where she was judged as being an unindicted co-conspirator are examples of their lawlessness. They won't release their White House papers that involve her and I wonder why. Is there more fodder there also?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 AM on 02/10/2008
- Kane I'm a Fan of Kane 13 fans permalink

Vetted.
Experience.
Inevitable.

Such words aren't what they used to mean.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 AM on 02/10/2008
- sebocd I'm a Fan of sebocd 3 fans permalink

How about the cleche "ready for dsy one"? What's it mean? For Hillary it's installing`an ATM in the the Lincoln Bedroom. For Bill its attaching Stirups to the desk he'll be using in the White House, so he can do the physical exams on incoming female interns.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:10 AM on 02/10/2008
- sebocd I'm a Fan of sebocd 3 fans permalink

How about the cleche "ready for dsy one"? What's it mean? For Hillary it's installing`an ATM in the the Lincoln Bedroom. For Bill its attaching Stirups to the desk he'll be using in the White House, so he can do the physical exams on incoming female interns.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:10 AM on 02/10/2008
- horacekent I'm a Fan of horacekent 10 fans permalink

In my opinion, the Clintons are politically filthy. Nothing is beneath them & they will say & do anything to win. Should they win, they will come into the White House with 20+ years of political favors to payback & lobbyist to please.

Why can't we make a clean break & fresh start?

I know why the Clintons are fighting to gain & retain power. I think Bill is terrified of being eclipsed by Barack - prior to Obama, many saw Bill as the most charismatic leader, capable of communicating & connecting with people in a way, not seen for a longtime. Compared to Obama, Bill looks quite ordinary.

Do we really want to have to look at, hear & deal with the Clintons again? What's wrong with us? Don't we feel worthy of going for something so much better? The Clintons are filthy!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:59 AM on 02/10/2008

Politicians come a dime a dozen. They all walk and talk pretty much the same. Then comes along a person who is not the typical politician with skills that you don't find every day or in a life time. Who knows if we'll have this chance again in our life time, what a shame if we pass up this opportunity.

Obama 08!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:03 AM on 02/10/2008
- dutchess2 I'm a Fan of dutchess2 17 fans permalink

horacekent­.....

There you are...slin­ging nasty words that demean without evidence or example.

The Clintons are not filthy. They are doing no more than any other politician has ever done, every member of Congress, your local dogcatcher,
and even the president of your local PTA...you
hob nob with those that have the money to fund your campaign..­. and yes, when its millions and millions, the stakes get so high, the voters don't have a place at the table..

That is how politics is done today.

I think you could and should, honor Barack Obama's wishes, that this campaign be about ideas, and not the politics of personal destruction.

It is an idea today to encourage the young people who have such a stake in this country's wars and
social problems to take their rightful place at the table, to communicate vie the internet, to
think carefully about the practice of lobbiests making donations to government officials, to manage energy self sufficiency, to deal with
whether medicine is only for the rich.

These are the positives Obama wants you to think about.

Yes, it is a different way of doing things. I don't see any need to criple or demean the Clintons just so we can change direction. They had their time and place, and have given the Nation years of service.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:58 AM on 02/10/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect