Really- now you are just embarrassing yourself.
Speaking of the ol' Horn Dog Bill Clinton, his little library may foul out the top two cabinet appointments of President Obama.
We already know that Eric Holder’s appointment as attorney general hinges on how hard people want to press the Marc Rich pardon, which he prepared. That pardon came after Rich’s ex-wife donated to the Bill Clinton presidential library.
But now the 200,000+ other donors to that fund have been released and that may foul out Hillary Clinton because the Rich affair shows that when it comes to quidding a pro, the Clintons are pros.
“[C]onsider — because it already happened — the case of a wealthy investor who is seeking business opportunities in, say, Kazakhstan. He gives millions to the Clinton foundation, visits the country with the former president and obtains the sought-after contract. No one in the Obama administration will vet such a gift in advance; the public will learn of it only with the yearly disclosure. The new administration is buying itself a heap of potential trouble with this arrangement,” the Washington Post said.
Add to that Bill Richardson bungling the Los Alamos spy case...
...and you have 3 Clinton-tainted Cabinet members.
Bubba could be the Obamalbatross of the Obamadministration.
More popcorn please!![]()
Really- now you are just embarrassing yourself.
So the guy who says the president with the 30% favorable rating is going on Mt. Rushmore thinks the ex-president with the 46% favorable rating is going to scuttle the appointments of the president-elect with the 67% favorable rating.
![]()
Oh nevemind, Yoni is just pretending to be Don Surber again.
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber.../bill-clinton/
Yoni has no respect for the law.
I didn't like Clinton while he was in office. But he was at least relatively competent. All things considered, I much preferred Clinton's years over Bush's.
yoni wants an iden y for christmas.
I believe history will judge Bill Clinton as a mediocre president who did little of historical significance. History will remember George Bush as a consequential president. Whether history will judge him as a good president or a bad president, I don't know. I do know that mediocrity is not in the cards for George Bush.
If Iraq ends up being a strong and peaceful country with democratic ins utions, then Bush will be remembered as a very good president. If Iraq's success also sparks democratic reforms in other Middle Eastern countries, then Bush will be remembered as a great president. If Iraq descends into full-blown civil war, or if a new mini-Stalin emerges to brutalize the country and to threaten Iraq's neighbors, then Bush will be remembered as a failure. It's as simple as that.
Bill Clinton was a basically a caretaker president who did some good things and some bad things. If history is kind, he will be remembered as someone who helped reform welfare and balance the budget. I suppose he may get some credit, undeservedly, for the 90s economic boom. (Maybe he'll also be remembered for his role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland. His record on the former Yugoslavia was a little spotty, but overall pretty good, I think.) If history is unkind, he will be remembered as someone who did what he had to do to remain in office, and in the process he neglected our foreign policy and national security interests--by failing in Somalia, by showing weakness in Yemen, and by not taking bin Laden seriously. All in all, he'll be remembered as a forgettable president. A mediocre "Eisenhower Republican" president.
Anyway, on the issue of lying. Did Bill Clinton lie to the public about extramarital sex when he wagged his ing finger at us? Yes. Was that a big deal? Not really. Did he lie under oath about extramarital sex, thereby breaking the law and bringing shame upon himself? Yes. The man got disbarred and impeached because of his cavalier disregard for the law, and for what? To lie about sex? What kind of person does that?
So we all know that Bill Clinton lied and broke the law. Bush might have lied about WMDs, but he might have just been wrong. We know for a fact that he never committed perjury. I think Bush was itching to go to war in Iraq for a variety of reasons, and he put forth as strong a case as he could to the American people. He may have wrongly disregarded evidence that Iraq did not possess WMDs. I don't know. It's really hard to say.
sex is WAY more important than war
E-mail Don Surber at [email protected] to let him know you enjoy reading his blogs on Spurstalk.com
Clinton will never be known as a President of absolutes....of the 'your with US or against US' garden variety....but a President of triangulation...what'd that get us? A projected deficit surplus (that Dubya and the do-nothing quickly spent), relative peace, except for Bosnia which he handled with no ground troops...economic expansion for one of the longest periods in the last.........well...ever.....I believe history will judge Bill Clinton as a mediocre president who did little of historical significance. History will remember George Bush as a consequential president. Whether history will judge him as a good president or a bad president, I don't know. I do know that mediocrity is not in the cards for George Bush.
Who's calling who stupid, stupid?![]()
Chump I hate to say it, but you are correct. Obama's appointments
will sail right through the Senate. And the dimm-o-craps deserve
much of the Clinton administration back in power, right along with the ultra-libs. Was America great or what?
Your question was why Daley hasn't had any dirt thrown his way.
It's because he has nothing to do with the Blagojevich scandal.
The cabinet doesn't look very liberal at all -- which is fine with me.
Sellout!!![]()
Doesn't surprise me. You never met a liberal you didn't like.![]()
Doesn't surprise me. You have no idea what you're talking about.![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)