| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:36 pm Post subject: MOVIN' ON UP: CLINTONS SAY THEY RESPECT THE RICH |
 |
|
Looks like Hill and Bill have officially joined the ranks of the super rich with the release of their recent tax returns. While this comes as no surprise to those of us who know they're hypocrites of the first order, it is amusing in an ironic and pathetic sort of way that only two decades ago the Clintons and other Democratic Party leaders were roundly criticizing Reagan for taking lucrative honorariums for speeches in Japan and elsewhere, capitalizing on the Presidency.
My, how the tune has changed. "Movin' on up, to de top, we finally got a piece of the pie..." George Jefferson would be proud.
Jim Kuhnhenn and Devlin Barrett, AP writers, had this to report:
| Quote: |
| Almost half the former first couple's money came from Bill Clinton's speeches. "I have absolutely nothing against rich people," Hillary Clinton told North Dakota Democrats at their party convention Friday night in Grand Forks. "As a matter of fact, my husband � much to my surprise and his � has made a lot of money since he left the White House doing what he loves doing most, talking to people." |
Ever the one to lend a helping hand, Bill accepted payment from such charities as Nelson Mandela's Children's Fund and the Boys and Girls Club of Los Angeles. Guess having to squeeze them into his speaking tour was too much of an inconvenience to do it gratis.
Now to be fair (although they rarely are themselves), they have donated the proceeds of Hillary's work of historical fiction to charity--well, a portion thereof.
Meanwhile, Obama donated 25% of his total earnings (on the strength of sales of his second book) to charity.
I've always said, most liberals are conservatives when it comes to hoarding their own money (Obama might yet prove an exception to that rule). But man do they love giving away our tax money!
If you dine with a group of liberals you can bet your last dollar that you'll get stuck with the bill or a disproportionate amount thereof. I've seen this happen at faculty luncheons back in the States.
So what say you to Hillary, who's now probably picking out her golf cart for retirement to join the High Rollers Clubhouse?
Does this bother any of you dyed-in-the-wool liberals on this board? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now now Steve...do you really want to get labeled a Clinton basher? Or even worse a sexist because you chose not to vote for her?
Oh wait, it's only about race. (NOT)
By the way, I pretty much guessed what reference you were going to use from your title. Clever indeed.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Does this bother any of you dyed-in-the-wool liberals on this board? |
Not nearly as much as bothered by the bad Limbaugh imitation you just pulled.
Anyway, I figure most "dyed in the wool liberals" know that the Clintons have become part of the neo-con cult, and that's why Obama is so appealing these days.
Clinton gets elected, it'll be Bushness as usual.
Good luck America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bill Clinton was consider right of centre in the democratic party by many democrats. You did post about Reich. Reich felt Clinton strayed to the right. The democratic party has always had wealthy people in the party like John F. Kennedy. Johnson stayed a regular old boy in many ways and so did Carter, but I think they were exceptions. Many politicians are like that. I think Biden, Obama, and Powell don't seem like overly materialistic politicians. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Czarjorge
Joined: 01 May 2007
Location: I now have the same moustache, and it is glorious.
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When is the revolution gonna come? And come hard?
It's about time the US had a Robespierre. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Adventurer wrote:
| Quote: |
| Johnson stayed a regular old boy in many ways and so did Carter, but I think they were exceptions. |
Perhaps in a manner of speaking, literally, but they were both rich before assuming office. LBJ had his ranch and Carter his peanut farm.
| Quote: |
| Clinton strayed to the right. |
He's always been right of center; his old staffer Dick Morris once observed that Bill is a moderate who can be a liberal when he needs to while his wife is a liberal who can be a moderate when she needs to. That about sums it up. Revealing that you choose the verb 'strayed,' implying that he was somehow too wayward by taking a more moderate and conservative-leaning approach. But then how else could he take credit for welfare reform during the Gingrich revolution?
Czarjorge suggested:
| Quote: |
| It's about time the US had a Robespierre. |
Yes, American politicos are just clamoring for another 18th century French-style reformer. Alas, only Sarkozy is available.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flip ant
Joined: 01 Jul 2004
Location: He's got high hopes!
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
| Good luck America. |
*beep* off Canada. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:09 am Post subject: Re: MOVIN' ON UP: CLINTONS SAY THEY RESPECT THE RICH |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
Does this bother any of you dyed-in-the-wool liberals on this board? |
Yes, and meanwhile something is happening in a mid-sized Chicago suburb that is 93.16% white. Barrack's spiritual adviser will soon be joining the ranks of the people he has professed to hate for the past 40 years.
Check it out
| Rev. Jermiah Wright wrote: |
BLACK VALUE SYSTEM
These Black Ethics must be taught and exampled in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Blacks are gathered. They must reflect the following concepts:
Disavowal of the Pursuit of �Middleclassness�
Classic methodology on control of captives teaches that captors must keep the captive ignorant educationally, but trained sufficiently well to serve the system. Also, the captors must be able to identify the �talented tenth� of those subjugated, especially those who show promise of providing the kind of leadership that might threaten the captor�s control.
Those so identified as separated from the rest of the people by:
Killing them off directly, and/or fostering a social system that encourages them to kill off one another.
Placing them in concentration camps, and/or structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.
Seducing them into a socioeconomic class system which while training them to earn more dollars, hypnotizes them into believing they are better than others and teaches them to think in terms of �we� and �they� instead of �us� �
|
Same old lefty thinking; Do as I say, not as I do |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Czarjorge
Joined: 01 May 2007
Location: I now have the same moustache, and it is glorious.
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stevesy quipped...
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
[b]Czarjorge suggested:
| Quote: |
| It's about time the US had a Robespierre. |
Yes, American politicos are just clamoring for another 18th century French-style reformer. Alas, only Sarkozy is available. |
Sarkozy is out for eliminating the traditional Nazi fighting Easter bell and replacing it with an alien, cow devouring Bunny.
www.scarygoround.com
What I was saying, if you weren't so willfully obtuse, is that the US needs a revolutionary that will knock the rich down a few pegs, and then have the good grace to quit, or in Robespierre's case die in a bathtub full of his own waste. Revolutionaries are good for revolutions, but generally not for governing. That's why our Founding Fathers are such exceptional characters, they were the exception. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CzarJorge explained:
| Quote: |
| is that the US needs a revolutionary that will knock the rich down a few pegs, and then have the good grace to quit, or in Robespierre's case die in a bathtub full of his own waste. Revolutionaries are good for revolutions, but generally not for governing. That's why our Founding Fathers are such exceptional characters, they were the exception. |
How can one be "willfully obtuse?" That's a new one, like saying a woman is "sorta pregnant."
But, hey, I actually agree with what you say here but it would be contingent on what kind of revolution you seek. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| or in Robespierre's case die in a bathtub full of his own waste. |
That would be Marat, not Robespierre. I think Robespierre was shot and then guillotined. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pluto again judiciously noted:
| Quote: |
| Yes, and meanwhile something is happening in a mid-sized Chicago suburb that is 93.16% white. Barrack's spiritual adviser will soon be joining the ranks of the people he has professed to hate for the past 40 years. |
I hadn't heard this; thanks for posting the link. As with you, it comes as no surprise to me. Most Far Left types are closet eltitists. Take Henry Giroux for example: he's got a lucrative position at some nondescript college in Ontario now and living the high life with his former colleague and their dogs. They all make me sick.
Wright, however, is just following in a long line of Blacks who make it big pandering to victimhood in the community and then move out to the suburbs.
Let's call it for what it is to all but the PC crowd: "Black Flight."
The civil rights movement long ago lost its integrity, sadly enough. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OTOH corrected:
| Quote: |
| That would be Marat, not Robespierre. I think Robespierre was shot and then guillotined. |
Shh...don't confuse the Czar with the facts; the revolution is ringing in his ears! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaykimf
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: Re: MOVIN' ON UP: CLINTONS SAY THEY RESPECT THE RICH |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
Looks like Hill and Bill have officially joined the ranks of the super rich with the release of their recent tax returns. While this comes as no surprise to those of us who know they're hypocrites of the first order, it is amusing in an ironic and pathetic sort of way that only two decades ago the Clintons and other Democratic Party leaders were roundly criticizing Reagan for taking lucrative honorariums for speeches in Japan and elsewhere, capitalizing on the Presidency.
|
I do remember Reagan being criticized for cashing out, but I don't remember that the criticism was coming from the Clintons. Are you sure about that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| twg wrote: |
Anyway, I figure most "dyed in the wool liberals" know that the Clintons have become part of the neo-con cult, and that's why Obama is so appealing these days.
Clinton gets elected, it'll be Bushness as usual.
Good luck America. |
The Clintons are not incompetent. George W Bush's administration's hallmark was incompetency.
Bill Clinton bombed Iraq. The Bush administrations invaded it. It was Clinton's bombing of Iraq that destroyed the WMD. The defining difference on Iraq? Competence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
