Posted on 09/26/2008 7:09:56 AM PDT by george76
For many months now we have been treated to Bill Clinton’s intermittent displeasure with Barack Obama.
Sometimes it has been overt, sometimes covert.
Most recently, while being fawned over by the ladies at The View, he allowed as how Hillary did not really want the vice-presidential nomination after all. (This makes sense to me, by the way.)
At the Democratic Convention, he delivered a far better speech than the candidate, showing up the less experienced Illinois Senator without really doing anything for his presidential campaign.
In fact, he seems to speak more postively of McCain–especially off the cuff–only the other day lavishing praise on the Arizonan and defending his decision to skip the first debate to work on the financial crisis with an obvious fact most of us had forgotten - McCain had previously asked Obama for repeated, even constant debates, which the Democratic candidate refused. (The mainstream media made nothing of this, needless to say.) Indeed it seems Clinton wants Obama to lose.
The explanation for this behavior, says the conventional wisdom, is that Clinton wants McCain to win to give his wife another shot at the presidency in 2012. I wouldn’t doubt there is validity to this. But I submit there is a second reason, perhaps equally important: Clinton genuinely wants McCain to win for the good of the country.
I have no proof of this, I know, other than my instincts watching the man. But we all have a lot of experience of Bill Clinton - the good Bill and the bad Bill, the charming, brilliant politician and the liar.
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
.
Clinton sees the writing on the wall. Federal investigations are coming on the financial crisis he and the democrats brought upon us. He knows the dems are going to take the fall and he doesn’t want to go down in history as having been a part of that. Witness his statements last year how the democrats stopped his attempts and also Bush’s attempts at trying to avert the crisis.
"... But I submit there is a second reason, perhaps equally important: Clinton genuinely wants McCain to win for the good of the country.
Um, what?
Yeah, sure.
Next thread, please.
he may want to raise some taxes here and there but I don’t think he wants his life savings totaled just because obama wants a socialist state.
Given Clinton's track record of deeds that were undertaken only to benefit Clinton, party, country, and friends be damned, I find this motivation highly dubious.
I won’t discount Hillary as president until January 22, 2009.
I think they(hill and bill) have something up their sleeve.
it’s about the $$$ and he’d lose it under carter 2.
Clinton is extremely insecure and jealous. He thinks he has carried the burden's of Atlas in his life (and suffered unjust attacks), and he thinks people like Obama has been handed his political success with no sacrifice.
Somehow he convinced himself it was better for Barry to sink or swim on his own without Hillary as a life jacket.
Bill has a great memory, except when it comes to telling the truth under oath.
Bill will never forgive OBama for labeling him as a racist. BIll knows he’s not a racist and wanted to prove it to everyone by telling the world he sired a mulatto baby with a black prostitute and had multiple affairs with black women/hookers. He was all about to do so until Hillary told him no and compromised that he could go fly to England to meet Monica again.
I seriously doubt the author’s conclusion — there is no evidence that Clinton has ever acted for the good of the country.
His motivation beyond setting up Hillary for another chance in 4 years is to wrest control of the party back from the nutroots; only a spectacular Obama failure can really do that.
I second your motion. My guess is that Clinton is trying to preserve his power within the Democratic Party. His stock-in-trade of political influence is what brings in millions from international “investors” like Riady and others. So long as Clinton can maintain that he and his wife are still the powers-that-be in the party, they are likely to keep reeling in the dough. If they lose their grip on the party, the investors start looking for other politicians to fund.
Bill cares for Bill. See my earlier post.
Given Clinton's track record of deeds that were undertaken only to benefit Clinton, party, country, and friends be damned, I find this motivation highly dubious.
Believe it or not,and despite his obvious self interest, I find this plausible:
0 is that bad.
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.