Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remembering and then forgetting the Clintons
Arkansas News Bureau ^ | Feb 17, 2008 | David Sanders

Posted on 02/17/2008 10:55:26 AM PST by kingattax

Hillary Clinton is far from being an afterthought in the Democratic presidential contest, but she is fading fast. It would be easy, but inaccurate, to assert that she has no one to blame but herself. At least some of the blame for her downward trajectory must be placed at the feet of her husband.

Bill Clinton turned into an attack dog in New Hampshire and played the race card in South Carolina, but it's more than that. Conventional wisdom held that she needed him around to win, but having him around probably reminded Democratic voters of the Clintons' unsavory side, which has led some to seek a clean break from the past by way of Barack Obama.

There was another time when Democrats wanted to forget the Clintons. It was a slow fade.

In his farewell address to the nation in 2001, President Clinton extolled the virtues of his accomplishments and instructed the incoming president to stay the course.

Before Bill and Hillary jetted to their new New York home following George W. Bush's inauguration, he told supporters and former administration officials at a crowded Andrews Air Force Base hangar, "We are not going anywhere!"

At the time, Democrats hoped he would retain his rightful place as spokesperson for the loyal opposition by taking a page out of the British parliamentary system - Clinton as a shadow president?

The thought at the time was that he who would be free of the White House's trappings and scandals and could help propel the Democrats back to power as the majority party in Congress. But, when presented with a fresh start, Clinton made no use of it. The same clouds of scandal and controversy, which cast shadows over HIS entire presidency set in at the beginning of his post-presidency.

Clinton garnered unwanted publicity for a greedy duo of mini-scandals first, by lifting several thousands of dollars of White House furniture and his pursuance of a high-priced office in a palatial New York City high-rise.

Then there was his pardon of fugitive-financier Marc Rich, who had been on the run for evading millions of dollars in taxes and doing business with the Iranian government while it held American hostages?

There was an indissoluble link between the pardon and the millions of dollars given to the Clintons by Rich's ex-wife, Denise, through campaign contributions, donations to the presidential library and even personal gifts. Despite his assurances at the time to the contrary, the pardon had all the appearances of a quid pro quo.

Clinton was on his own, calling friendly reporters and opinion-makers trying to explain his pardon. Democrats, who had defended all of Clinton's intolerable actions in office, openly castigated the former president.

Daily, Democratic members of Congress made the rounds on the 24-hour cable news channels to express their disgust for Clintons' departing actions. Even The New York Times reported at the time that the Clinton/Rich scandal had a dramatic impact on the Democratic Party's fund-raising efforts. Various donors, who were being hit up at the time for campaign cash, cited the "cash for pardons" scandal as a key factor in their decision not to give. Shortly after he left office Democrats just wanted Clinton to go away, because - they'd had enough.

Just last week, Hillary all but guaranteed that her husband wouldn't be the source of scandal in her White House if she was elected president. How could she be so confident? She can't control him when he's out on the campaign trail.

Democrats have had to come to terms with what putting the Clintons back into the White House might mean for their party. Apparently more of them are seeking the same clean break some Democrats sought in 2001.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: badpenny; billary; clintons; hillary
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

1 posted on 02/17/2008 10:55:27 AM PST by kingattax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Even if Shrillary loses the nomination, she’ll start running again the day after the inauguration, no matter who wins. She’ll be especially obnoxious if she lost to a ‘Pub, and slightly less so if she loses to Obama.


2 posted on 02/17/2008 11:02:12 AM PST by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

They are just awful people.


3 posted on 02/17/2008 11:02:42 AM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

They remind me of a fungus, like athlete’s foot.


4 posted on 02/17/2008 11:07:04 AM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

I will forget them after I ignore the signs at their graves that read: “No spitting, urinating or dancing”.


5 posted on 02/17/2008 11:08:05 AM PST by Migraine (...diversity is great... until it happens to YOU...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
Be interesting to see how well a President Obama’s agenda would do in DC after he beats Clinton and McCain, the two most politically vindictive Senators in the US Senate
6 posted on 02/17/2008 11:08:16 AM PST by MNJohnnie (http://www.iraqvetsforcongress.com ---- Get involved, make a difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
Sanders seems to think there was only one scandalous pardon at the end of Bill Clinton's time in office.

The flip side of the Clinton legacy is that Hillary would have been hard-pressed to have won a Congressional seat in a heavily-Democratic district on her own, if she hadn't been the wife of Bill Clinton, let alone be regarded as a serious contender for the Presidency of the United States. President of NOW or President of the National Lawyers' Guild, maybe.

7 posted on 02/17/2008 11:13:52 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
If she loses the nomination she and Bubba will leave the country. The two of them have burned enough bridges and divided enough people in this country for the justice department to have a sit-down with them and lay out the cards. In exchange for them aggreeing to skiddaddle our shores and STFU, justice will not indict them.

This is why they will fight to the death up to the convention. All their cronies will become unemployable hacks who will not even have any value as prosecutorial witnesses.

It's my thinking that that's where Tony, Hughy, Roger, Livingstone, and countless other Clintonista risks are parked already. They are all hiding out away from the press and media on some isolated island somewhere.

8 posted on 02/17/2008 11:14:21 AM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

WHY CAN’T THEY JUST GO AWAY!!!


9 posted on 02/17/2008 11:18:37 AM PST by Sacajaweau ("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blackdog
If she loses the nomination she and Bubba will leave the country. The two of them have burned enough bridges and divided enough people in this country for the justice department to have a sit-down with them and lay out the cards. In exchange for them aggreeing to skiddaddle our shores and STFU, justice will not indict them.
This is why they will fight to the death up to the convention. All their cronies will become unemployable hacks who will not even have any value as prosecutorial witnesses.
It's my thinking that that's where Tony, Hughy, Roger, Livingstone, and countless other Clintonista risks are parked already. They are all hiding out away from the press and media on some isolated island somewhere.

Wow; you said a trainload there with great economy of words. They are the ultimate carpetbaggers and scalawags.

10 posted on 02/17/2008 11:22:03 AM PST by Migraine (...diversity is great... until it happens to YOU...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: blackdog

I am with you that the Clintons will continue to run and to do ANYTHING to get back into the WH. If they fail, their crimes will be used to publically destroy.


11 posted on 02/17/2008 11:22:57 AM PST by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

I enjoyed Rush’s last caller this week that plainly stated “Hillary Clinton is a criminal”. Rush let the whole thing stand.


12 posted on 02/17/2008 11:34:02 AM PST by Misschuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
Conventional wisdom held that she needed him around to win, but having him around probably reminded Democratic voters of the Clintons' unsavory side

Damned if she does, and damned if she doesn't. After all, what claim does hillary have to the White House other than having been married to bill clinton? Otherwise, I can think of thousands of people with more "experience" than she has.

13 posted on 02/17/2008 11:45:53 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

A third-party run by Hillary Clinton would be fun. For his good deed in 1992 she could reward Ross Perot with the vice-presidential slot on the ticket.


14 posted on 02/17/2008 11:54:37 AM PST by AZLiberty (President Fred -- I like the sound of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Clinton was in total disgrace. And who rehabilitated him? GHW Bush and GW Bush.


15 posted on 02/17/2008 11:56:35 AM PST by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blackdog

One could only hope the Clintons will go away for good, however I doubt it’s in their blood.


16 posted on 02/17/2008 12:02:42 PM PST by TribalPrincess2U (I heard it on the grapevine and saw it in the paper, so it must be true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

The mistake the Clintons made is assuming the MSM would line up and assist them in trashing their opponent, like it did when their opponent was a Republican. The Clintons are so arrogant they thought they had invented media partisanship. Like Leon Trotsky, it’s their turn to sacrifice for the cause.


17 posted on 02/17/2008 12:34:00 PM PST by Spok (Ignorance is no excuse-it's the real thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kjo

They are just awful people.
________________________

Yes, they are.


18 posted on 02/17/2008 1:24:37 PM PST by cowdog77 (Circle the Wagons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cowdog77

Someone needs to get all three of these Senators to resign their Senate seats while they are out campaigning instead of WORKING...


19 posted on 02/17/2008 1:35:07 PM PST by Pikachu_Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

I still can’t believe that Bill and Hillary never served serious jail time. They have broken so many laws, and offed so many people, yetwalk freely. My ultimate political fantasy is to see those two in orange jumpsuits, wearing handcuffs and being frogmarched to a prison suite.


20 posted on 02/17/2008 1:36:27 PM PST by reaganbooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson