HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » "More Fun With Bill ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 06:50 AM

"More Fun With Bill & Hill" or, w/friends like Bill, who needs enemies? Explosive piece.

A biting examination and analysis of Bill Clinton's motives for his comments re President Obama, published in today's international New York Times edition.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/opinion/sunday/bruni-more-fun-with-bill-hill.html?hpw&rref=opinion&_r=0
BEFORE President Obama administered his fix to the Affordable Care Act last week and even before it was clear that he was leaning that way, Bill Clinton piped up, opining that Obama should honor his claim that Americans with insurance they liked could keep it. This advice wasn’t exactly solicited. And inasmuch as it gave detractors of Obama and Obamacare a fresh cudgel, it wasn’t terribly helpful, either.
. . . . . . .
You can alternately view what he (Clinton) said as payback. He’s no doubt aware of a widely publicized nugget from the new book “Double Down: Game Change 2012,” which reports that Obama finds him a tad insufferable, the guest who overstays his welcome, and has said that he’s best savored “in doses.” So he gave Obama a dose all right. It was more vinegar than honey, with just the slightest trace of arsenic.
. . . . . .
Or you can view what happened last week in grandly strategic and utterly gallant terms, which is where things really get interesting and which may be the most accurate appraisal of all. Clinton is looking to 2016, and he’s helping Hillary. It’s less dicey for him than for her to second-guess Obama, which could wind up being a prerequisite to succeeding him. His presidency at this particular moment looks more and more like one of those unlucky Florida homes perched unsuspectingly over a sinkhole. Soon only the top of the chimney will be visible.
. . . . . . .
And in precisely the way that he sometimes makes Obama seem tepid, he could outshine Hillary, inadvertently or not. A friend of mine who went to a public event of hers last week was blown away by how not blown away he was. Amid all of the Hillary hullabaloo, he’d forgotten that she’s no dynamo on the stump. Many Democrats overlook this, but not the ones whispering sweet encouragements in Elizabeth Warren’s ear. Part of what they see in Warren — and part of what they believe could make her a spoiler — is a sizzle that doesn’t come as naturally to Hillary.

40 replies, 2440 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply "More Fun With Bill & Hill" or, w/friends like Bill, who needs enemies? Explosive piece. (Original post)
Divernan Nov 2013 OP
polichick Nov 2013 #1
Divernan Nov 2013 #2
polichick Nov 2013 #3
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2013 #32
GeorgeGist Nov 2013 #4
polichick Nov 2013 #5
Divernan Nov 2013 #7
polichick Nov 2013 #10
Laelth Nov 2013 #6
LuvNewcastle Nov 2013 #8
karynnj Nov 2013 #15
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2013 #33
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2013 #40
LibGranny Nov 2013 #9
dsc Nov 2013 #11
Divernan Nov 2013 #12
dsc Nov 2013 #19
Divernan Nov 2013 #13
dsc Nov 2013 #18
karynnj Nov 2013 #16
dsc Nov 2013 #17
Beacool Nov 2013 #14
libdem4life Nov 2013 #20
Divernan Nov 2013 #21
Beacool Nov 2013 #23
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2013 #34
Beacool Nov 2013 #37
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2013 #38
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2013 #39
libdem4life Nov 2013 #24
Beacool Nov 2013 #22
libdem4life Nov 2013 #25
madrchsod Nov 2013 #26
Skip Intro Nov 2013 #27
CreekDog Nov 2013 #28
Skip Intro Nov 2013 #29
CreekDog Nov 2013 #30
Skip Intro Nov 2013 #31
CreekDog Nov 2013 #35
InAbLuEsTaTe Nov 2013 #36

Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:00 AM

1. I don't think anyone cares about Hillary's or Warren's "sizzle"...

They care about POLICIES that help 99% of the PEOPLE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polichick (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:04 AM

2. Um, you're dodging the issue of Bill's interference with Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:13 AM

3. Just highlighting the part I care about...

Sure, Bill is a stage hog - no surprise.

Sorry Obama caved - again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:32 AM

32. The only thing Bill cares about is Bill. The Clintons need to just go away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polichick (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:21 AM

4. The marketers will care ...

and in America they sell Presidents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeorgeGist (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:23 AM

5. I'd like to think the people have had enough of the marketers...

At least in Warren's case, it's the people choosing her to run - that should help if she does get in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polichick (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:35 AM

7. In a utopian world, you'd be right. Unfortunately Citizens United tilts the playing field.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:07 AM

10. People didn't elect Romney - and more and more voters understand that...

both party establishments want corporate partners rather than reps of the people.

I'm not so sure it'll be as easy to fool voters if there is an actual populist choice, especially one who was drafted to run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:23 AM

6. Interesting. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 07:36 AM

8. Bill might just fuck Hillary's chances up.

Americans have only seen the good side of the Clintons since 2000. Now we're about to be reminded of all their flaws and all their baggage. Hillary is a long way from inevitability. I wouldn't be surprised if her chances are doomed before she even starts running officially. I'm becoming less worried about the strength of her competition all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LuvNewcastle (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 03:15 PM

15. How can you forget the first half of 2008 - where many on this very site and Daily Kos

wrote of having lost respect for Bill Clinton having preciously been very supportive of him.

Bill Clinton managed to be more under self control during the years Hillary was Secretary of State. The real question is whether he will EVER be able to take a back seat to Hillary. He failed in 2008 - being both a major asset and a major liability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LuvNewcastle (Reply #8)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:33 AM

33. Might? Hillary is toast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LuvNewcastle (Reply #8)

Wed Nov 20, 2013, 02:26 AM

40. No question, but Hillary hasn't helped her cause either.

Elisabeth Warren's stock rises with each passing day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:40 AM

9. Bill has always been the downside to

voting for Hillary IMHO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 12:01 PM

11. Let's remember who Bruni is

he is the reporter who was Bush's stenographer on the campaign trail while the NYT made up lies that Gore supposedly told. This article is all that is wrong with journalism today. Bruni just plain makes shit up here and attributes it to Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 01:23 PM

12. You're wrong. Bill agreed w/McCain; said Obama risks looking like a "total fool"

Hey, you may not like what Bruni has to say, or his opinions, but the facts he refers to are documented. So what FACTS are you claiming are "made up shit"? One article he linked to included the further powerful facts, that Obama found Bill Clinton so impossible to stomach that he couldn't even stand to finish 18 holes of golf with Clinton and Obama included aides at what had been planned as a private dinner to talk politics with Clinton, and kept the conversation topic to everyone's children.

Bill Clinton splits with President Obama on Syria
By MAGGIE HABERMAN | 6/12/13 6:11 PM EDT Updated: 6/13/13 8:13 AM EDT

Bill Clinton told Sen. John McCain he agrees that President Barack Obama should act more forcefully to support anti-Assad rebels in Syria, saying the American public elects presidents and members of Congress “to see down the road” and “to win.”

At another point during a closed-press event Tuesday, Clinton implied that Obama or any president risks looking like “a total fool” if they listen too closely to opinion polls and act too cautiously. He used his own decisions on Kosovo and Bosnia as a point of reference.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/bill-clinton-splits-with-obama-on-syria-92683.html#ixzz2kvWab5uq

And as to Obama's distaste for Bill Clinton, the OP link provides a link to this article, discussing an about to be published book that the New York Times obtained from people in the publishing industry.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/01/us/politics/book-details-consideration-of-replacing-biden-on-2012-ticket.html

Even after Mr. Obama named Mrs. Clinton as secretary of state, seemingly binding the wounds from their hard-fought 2008 primary campaign, the book says, he still could barely endure spending much time with the often-exhausting Bill Clinton. Mr. Obama rarely contacted his Democratic predecessor in the first years after taking office, but after the midterm losses for his party, the incumbent and his inner circle realized that they needed the still-popular Mr. Clinton.

When the two of them golfed together in September, 2011, an effort aides hoped would bring them closer, they did not even finish 18 holes. Mr. Obama succinctly expressed his view of Mr. Clinton to an aide after coming off the course at Andrews Air Force Base. “Obama grimaced and replied, ‘I like him ... in doses,’ ” the authors write.

Earlier in the year, “Clinton held Obama captive in the presidential limo” outside a fund-raiser at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York, the authors write, grabbing Mr. Obama’s hand as he reached for the door. Instead of having a one-on-one meal together that night, as was planned, Mr. Obama, unable to “handle any more undiluted Clinton,” invited aides from both of their staffs to join the dinner and talked to them about their children, rather than talking about politics with his predecessor.

And Mr. Clinton’s praise, in the spring of last year, of Mr. Romney’s business record as “sterling” infuriated top Obama advisers and even prompted Mrs. Clinton to tell her aides that “Bill can’t do that again.”



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 04:25 PM

19. the whole article is about clinton's mind

and he has no way of knowing what is in Clinton's mind. It is the worst of journalism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 01:29 PM

13. Bruni is a distinuished, award winning journalist, thank you very much!

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/frankbruni/index.html

Frank Bruni
Earl Wilson/The New York Times

Frank Bruni, an Op-Ed columnist for The New York Times since June 2011, joined the newspaper in 1995. Over his years at The Times he has worn a wide variety of hats, including chief restaurant critic (from June 2004 through August 2009) and Rome bureau chief (2002 to 2004).

He has also written two New York Times best sellers: a memoir, "Born Round," that was published by Penguin Press in 2009, and "Ambling Into History," a chronicle of George W. Bush's campaign for the presidency, published by HarperCollins in 2002. That same year HarperPerennial reissued, in paperback, "A Gospel of Shame: Children, Sexual Abuse and the Catholic Church," of which he was a co-author. (It was initially published by Viking in 1993.)

Mr. Bruni came to The Times from The Detroit Free Press, where he wrote a profile of a convicted child molester that was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in feature writing. At The Times he first worked for the metropolitan desk and, along with three colleagues, won the George Polk Award for metropolitan reporting for coverage of the child-abuse death of Elisa Izquierdo. He later relocated to the Washington bureau, covering Congress and then Mr. Bush's presidential campaign and his first year in office. He left Washington for Rome.

He has consistently contributed to the Times's Sunday magazine, and during two periods, most recently from 2009 to 2011, was one of its staff writers. For the magazine he has profiled an array of prominent politicians and entertainers, including Hillary Clinton and J. J. Abrams. His work has also frequently appeared in the newspaper's Travel, Arts & Leisure and Book Review sections. From 2010 to 2011, he additionally wrote a column on bars and drinking, "The Tipsy Diaries."

Born in White Plains, N.Y., on Oct. 31, 1964, Mr. Bruni received a B.A. degree (Phi Beta Kappa) from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, where he was a Morehead scholar, in 1986. He received an M.S. degree in journalism, with highest honors, from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism in 1988, graduating second in his class and winning a Pulitzer Traveling Fellowship.

(I particularly admire Mr. Bruni for researching and publishing a book documenting the Catholic Church's part in sexual abuse of children - BACK IN 1993. One of my kids also has a master's degree from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism - rated the world's best journalism program. Graduating 2nd in his class & getting a Pulitzer Traveling Fellowship are outstanding achievements.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #13)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 04:23 PM

18. I am not saying everything he has ever done is bad

but his career with the times is. He covered Bush and was far from a skeptic. In addition this particular piece is an exorcise in mindreading.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #11)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 03:26 PM

16. If he was traveling with Bush, he likely was NOT the NYT reporter reporting

on Gore. It seems to me that in both 2000 and 2004, the NYT had relatively positive on the road Bush reporting - in 2004 it was Elizabeth Brumiller, not Bruni.) There coverage of Kerry was even more biased than their coverage of Gore. One article, even caused a major issue with the NYT's then public editor when Jodie Wilgorin referred to Kerry as a "social loner" - her (laughable) defense was that she had spoken to 20 some long (since college in most cases) friends! (Because all social loners have more than 20 friends with tight friendships lasting 40 or so years)

I suspect that this was because the NYT, trying to not be biased, assigned tougher reporters to the Democrats. My observation was that, in general, most reporters were relatively positive to the candidate they covered -- in almost all other campaigns. Thus the deviation from the norm was not Bruni or Brumiller, but the reporters assigned to Gore and Kerry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 04:21 PM

17. He did cover Gore for a week

and he was no stenographer for him. Only for Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 02:11 PM

14. The media loves the drama.

Every utterance of either Clinton is dissected on the off chance that they may have said something that would create a rift between them and Obama. Of course, as is their wont, the Left eats up the crap dished by the media and asks for more.

Funny how the actual people involved in all this fake drama are getting along just fine. The Clintons and the Obamas will be at JFK's grave on Wednesday and Obama is about to give Bill the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

"President Barack Obama will visit John F. Kennedy’s grave on Wednesday in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of JFK’s assassination, a senior administration official told NBC News.

The president and first lady will be joined by their predecessors former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton at a wreath-laying ceremony at Arlington National Ceremony Wednesday afternoon, as first reported by the Associated Press. The actual anniversary falls on Friday.

Obama will also be honoring one of Kennedy’s last initiatives, presenting this year’s awards for the Presidential Medal of Freedom on Wednesday, the highest civilian awarded by the United States. Former prominent recipients of the medal will join the president in a tribute to JFK, who established the modern version of the medal months before his death."

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/16/21494452-obama-to-visit-jfk-grave-to-commemorate-50th-anniversary-of-assassination




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 06:59 PM

20. His bad behavior has humiliated her continually. She has stayed strong, consistent, courageous

and classy. I watched her through the amazingly degrading times from "the dress" to the Impeachment. She stayed steady, collected and classy. I watched her while Rush The Pig was humiliating her daughter as ugly...when she was an adolescent. Chelsea has grown up well, possibly due to the fierce protection from her mother. And she looks every bit to be her mother's daughter, not inclined to her father's ways.

She stayed on target and was the glue, in someways helped the country deal with his lying and cheating and big, fat mouth (can you tell I'm not a fan?) and did what she had to do. Stand tall and firm. It amazed me... her capacity for obvious humiliation, grief, pain, but handled it. She was criticized for not leaving him by the Left...just cut and run and show the bastard. She was accused of enabling abusive husbands. The Right sometimes not so coyly, suggested she wasn't a good enough wife...because we all know it only happens to bad wives, or it was just that she needed to cling on to him for her own political purposes. Didn't she even go through a "She's Gay" period?

At best, Bill has been a mixed bag as to her success politically, especially with this latest stunt. He made a fool of himself, yet again, and I can't for the life of me see the logic in that "it's for her political good." Duh. She has to endure him. There is a strong and powerful human being, who happens to be a female, there.

And I don't think she had Vince Foster killed, but given she had an affair with him as they were certainly intellectual and professional confidantes, and who would blame her for that. No, that would be more in line with the jilted ego-damaged side of the coin, IMO...then and now. If she was in love with Foster, as he was clearly her equal...Bill wasn't even close...then this public time and accusations must have cut her to the quick. The other stuff kind of pales as to the insinuation of hired murder.

Now some nitwit wants to compare her "public charm" to her idiotic husband's ability to grandstand at the drop of a hat...or a dress? Oh my, she's not a slick, speak out of all sides of the mouth politician, she does not BS well, she doesn't "sizzle".

As Sheriff Barney Fife used to say, Well, excuse me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 08:56 PM

21. Leaving a lying, cheating, adulterous, lecherous spouse is NOT to "cut and run"

And Mrs. Clinton neither had to remain married to him nor "has to endure him". Having taught Womens' Studies for several years, I am well aware of studies detailing that many emotionally and/or physically abused wives stayed with their abusive husbands because they were too impoverished, too insecure, too frightened to leave. Mrs. Clinton had the ability to make an excellent living all on her own, and the legal knowledge on how to get out of her marriage fast and quick. None of us can know the psychological process through which she decided to remain married. But please do not glorify her for remaining as if she had no other "classy" choice, or put down women who end marriages to cheating husbands as "cutting and running".
And what an incredible stretch you make to equate Elizabeth Warren having "sizzle", which as the article portrays it, refers to a fiery delivery, to being slick, BS-ing and speaking out of all sides of the mouth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:28 PM

23. Every person needs to decide for themselves how to handle their marriage.

Hillary chose to stay and work on her marriage. Other women choose to leave. There's no right or wrong answer, only what's best for that individual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #23)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:35 AM

34. Be honest, Hillary is an opportunist, simple as that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #34)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 09:29 AM

37. That's how much you know her.

Hillary loves Bill. It's not that complicated. Anyone who has been around her when she talks about Bill can tell you that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #37)


Response to Beacool (Reply #37)

Wed Nov 20, 2013, 12:20 AM

39. Never said Hillary didn't love Bill and what he brings to the table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:48 PM

24. I can see you don't agree. A degree in women's studies is nice...I took a few classes back in the

day, as well, did a little community work, stuff like that. Also, I burned my bra in the 60s, more or less. OK, then.

So you believe she should just leave him...as a lesson to other women? Good lord. I didn't notice any bruises or broken limbs. I think, as an attorney, she would have been able to support herself, and was not personally insecure, or lacking information. I was noting the Right Wing/Left Wing/Political Detractors/busybodies. Frankly, you just kinda made that point. Women go to counselors when they need help. And since the 60s, we've made a lot of progress. We have choices...personal choices.

What I know is what I saw. I observed. And yes, she was classy. That's "glorifying"? She held her head high. I also didn't hear her asking for or giving advice, although she sure got one heck of a lot. I wouldn't begin to tell her what to do with her marriage. Maybe she was cheating on him...there was talk. Most of us didn't think it was our business and it was theirs to work out.

I'm sure you found out from your studies that every marriage is different and very personal.

As to the slick "the sizzle" comment about Elizabeth ... that was in the OP. I agreed...she does have it ... she's also classy, has a way with a camera, comes off incredibly well. I love her. And the point was ... again ... It Is True, Hillary doesn't have "the sizzle", but she has other things.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 09:25 PM

22. Wait a minute, there's zero proof that Hillary and Foster had an affair.

That was pushed by the RW. As for her marriage, it's their business. I don't know why Americans always act like teenagers when it comes to sex. I've lived in several countries and we seem to be more repressed than most.

Hillary moved to AR because she loved Bill. It's as simple as that. She had many opportunities, but chose to follow her heart. Every marriage is a world, I don't presume to know what's going in other people's marriages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:07 PM

25. My point is that it took 3 years..she was literally under investigation and the press numerous times

carefully worded, but implicated continually that it was caused/covered up by her or Bill and there were other issues as well. She guaranteed continued for conspiracy theorists and Kenneth Starr for a very long time. I don't know, nor do I care about the affair part...but it was one of the most expensive and public dramas ever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_of_Vince_Foster

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 10:24 PM

26. bill is pissed because he could`t get his healthcare plan passed.

one of the biggest problems he had was letting his wife get involved with his plan.

remember the "hillarycare" meme?

so far obama`s plan has been blessed by the kings and queens of the supreme court and an presidential election.
i think obama might have been better but i understand the reality he faced. maybe someday in the future when the democrats decide to stop undermining themselves medicare/single payer will become the healthcare system in america.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Divernan (Original post)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:06 PM

27. BS. Clinton has as much right to speak his mind as anyone else.

Here's what he said on some website that I never heard of, where all this started:

When OZY sat down with President Clinton, one of the things we were most interested to hear was his impression of the recent national health care rollout. Here’s what he had to tell us.

1. The country is better off with the Affordable Care Act than without it.

2. The enrollment website problems are not unlike enrollment issues during the Bush administration’s Medicare drug benefit rollout in 2006. Even though it was less complicated, it was considered a disaster – but in time, it was fixed.


3. People living in states with Republican governors who took advantage of the Supreme Court’s decision to allow them to opt out of the healthcare law’s Medicaid provision are going to experience a bizarre situation. Individuals with incomes between 133 and 400 percent of the poverty level can buy insurance at new, lower premiums, but working people with incomes under 133 percent of the poverty level will have no coverage. This will then stress hospital emergency rooms. Once this becomes evident, more and more states will flip their position and join the program.

4. “If you like what you’ve got, you can keep it.” This is a promise young people heard clearly, and it’s one President Obama needs to keep — even if it requires a change in the law.



http://www.ozy.com/c-notes/assessing-the-healthcare-rollout-with-bill-clinton/3639.article

The reason Clinton is answering a question, honestly, about a broken promise is because Obama made one. Of course, the Obama blame-shifters would rather bash Clinton than deal with the actual reality of the situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skip Intro (Reply #27)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:51 PM

28. You're extremely confused or devious, nobody said Bill Clinton didn't have the right to speak

they are taking issue with the correctness and helpfulness of what he said.

you're obviously trying to make a straw man out of anyone criticizing Bill Clinton's words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CreekDog (Reply #28)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:53 PM

29. Is he supposed to read from a script?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skip Intro (Reply #29)

Sun Nov 17, 2013, 11:58 PM

30. again confused?

i'm sorry your guy didn't win in 2012.

you don't have to take your unhappiness out on liberals and Democrats here. there are places where you can defend Romney, Republicans, tea partiers and places where the only racism they talk about is reverse racism, it's not here though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CreekDog (Reply #30)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:05 AM

31. Bill Clinton didn't break a promise. He commented on a broken promise.

And this sad attempt to make the fallout of the broken promise all about him is as transparent as they come.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skip Intro (Reply #31)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:35 AM

35. Ok, then you confirm that you are completely lost, since I didn't say anything about Bill Clinton

I commented originally when you said that Bill Clinton has the right to say whatever he wants.

I agree with that.

What I disagree with is you characterizing the rest of us as people who don't think Bill Clinton should have the right to say what he wants to say.

But you're lost.

Cavers treat DUers and their opinions here better than you do. Assuming you're not one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skip Intro (Reply #27)

Mon Nov 18, 2013, 12:37 AM

36. Yes, Bill has the right to speak. And we have the right to tell him to STFU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread