Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Waiting For Everyman

(9,385 posts)
91. I think you're right, and I can prove it.
Fri Mar 25, 2016, 10:20 AM
Mar 2016

This is a TYT video from May 2011 which I had not seen until this week. I was appalled. Not only because Bill and Ryan were discussing cuts to Medicare, but because it was Bill Clinton doing it.



He was not in office at that time. WTH business was it of his to be discussing ANYTHING about policy? What right did he have to be negotiating with Paul Ryan over cuts to our programs?

I remarked in that thread, "So he's to be the shadow President. Well isn't that a milestone for women?" Clearly this "first woman President" selling point is a fraud. What a great feminist icon, when in reality Hillary would be, and was at that time, a mere front for Bill.

I had NOT thought about the 2-term limit though. That is actually a very interesting question, now that you mention it. This video shows us the sort of thing Bill has been doing. He has been conducting the nation's business surreptitiously using Hillary as a screen. It is not at all unreasonable to expect that he will keep on doing in the future what he has already been doing in the past.

And that isn't the only indicator. Several writers on the email scandal are of the opinion that the private server was used so that Bill could have access to official documents, and have input into her role as Secretary of State. The Blackberry that Hillary was so adamant about having for herself and her staff, kept her in constant contact with her "coach" Bill and his staff.

The email hadn't made any sense to me until I thought about it this way. She had two motivations. One, to keep the Clinton Foundation pay-to-play transactions out of view at the State Department. And two, keeping Bill's participation out of State's view too.

I also have said here before, and I will say again, HRC's prior experience as Senator from New York and as Secretary of State are both offices that she probably would not have gotten if she had not been Bill Clinton's wife.

I don't believe Hillary Clinton has been doing any job on her own. Her own actions and choices have led to this being the most likely objective conclusion.

I think if the Republicans wanted to press this point about Bill's 3rd term, they might get some traction with it, given the video above. I think it's another potential liability, and worse, I think it's the truth of the matter.

It doesn't even need to be a stand-alone scandal, it fills in the gap between the two scandals that are already cooking.

This is my opinion on what the few facts we have now might mean all fitted together. Lots of pieces are not filled in yet, and so of course I could be wrong, but on the other hand I could be right. What all the pieces add up to is...

Hillary Clinton is a huge liability. She needs to withdraw before things get worse.
Well, no. Hillary Clinton is running for HER first term. auntpurl Mar 2016 #1
BS, he is taking over already, she can't control him tularetom Mar 2016 #8
You seem very angry. auntpurl Mar 2016 #9
Why do you say they are 'angry'? Trajan Mar 2016 #46
Actually, he's running around campaigning for her. MineralMan Mar 2016 #30
It's not necessarily sexist of they are a team Armstead Mar 2016 #83
You just can't give a woman the respect she deserves can you? upaloopa Mar 2016 #2
+1 KMOD Mar 2016 #22
I do have the utmost respect for women. Seeinghope Mar 2016 #40
Sexism is when you take the most qualified candidate in the election and accuse others of PeaceNikki Mar 2016 #44
That is your opinion. I have heard COUNTLESS women want her to win because it is "TIME" Seeinghope Mar 2016 #71
Well you eclipsed yourself upaloopa Mar 2016 #58
Hillary Clinton was a superstar KMOD Mar 2016 #68
merely having a superstar husband treestar Mar 2016 #72
+1 Firebrand Gary Mar 2016 #57
I recall all his administration (that I voted for twice) being referred to as the "co presidency". bobthedrummer Mar 2016 #3
No NWCorona Mar 2016 #4
His roll is usually 4. MineralMan Mar 2016 #32
You got me NWCorona Mar 2016 #33
I just couldn't resist. MineralMan Mar 2016 #36
No worries 😀 NWCorona Mar 2016 #42
This is an IMPORTANT QUESTION BEING IGNORED! Seeinghope Mar 2016 #43
What a sexist and misogynistic thread. WOW, I don't like these Sanders people at all. Trust Buster Mar 2016 #5
What are you talking about? "these Sanders people" understand all the games that used to work. bobthedrummer Mar 2016 #13
Why is it sexist of they advertise themselves as a team of equals? Armstead Mar 2016 #84
She's a very accomplished woman in her own right. Trust Buster Mar 2016 #85
Sorry, I'll remember not to invite you to my next barbecue Armstead Mar 2016 #86
Don't be silly. That's not humanly possible expect in science fiction. kydo Mar 2016 #6
HRC told US about the VRWC years ago kydo. So what are you talking about? n/t bobthedrummer Mar 2016 #14
So you ask if a woman can really do anything that's no for her husband's benefit? Agnosticsherbet Mar 2016 #7
I don't generally alert on things... auntpurl Mar 2016 #11
Has the courage of your convictions failed you again, auntpur re: alerts? What is "what this is"? bobthedrummer Mar 2016 #23
1. I actually have no idea what you're talking about. auntpurl Mar 2016 #24
Read it through... bobthedrummer Mar 2016 #29
I see both the rational and those who rationalize. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2016 #69
She's running for Reagans 10th term. Fuddnik Mar 2016 #10
Well done! nt BernieforPres2016 Mar 2016 #52
Short but sweet Laughing Mirror Mar 2016 #55
Ding! We have a winner.[n/t] Maedhros Mar 2016 #59
BULLSEYE!!!!! n/t Nedsdag Mar 2016 #81
Impeachment and all? =P Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #12
She's running for Reagan's tenth term. PeteSelman Mar 2016 #15
^^THIS^^ CharlotteVale Mar 2016 #51
She doesn't appear to know what she's running for ibegurpard Mar 2016 #16
This thread is full of sexist crap leftofcool Mar 2016 #17
Your concern about a woman being able to do her job has been noted. PeaceNikki Mar 2016 #18
Yes--Obama is still kryptonite for the general election so she's trying to run as Bill-3rd term TheDormouse Mar 2016 #19
A former president's spouse of either sex marions ghost Mar 2016 #20
Bill's, Barack's, W's, H.W."s, Reagan's.. she doesn't care as long as she gets elected. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #21
. KMOD Mar 2016 #26
I disagree with her being the most qualified or experienced or knowledgeable candidate. Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #49
Hillary Clinton did not run for President in 2008 KMOD Mar 2016 #56
Your alert results: Juicy_Bellows Mar 2016 #25
Des to Hill-tremists: Please give it a rest. desmiller Mar 2016 #54
There was a second alert and jury bananas Mar 2016 #61
Those are different alerts - yours is for this thread - the one above was for a different thread by PeaceNikki Mar 2016 #62
Ok, thanks. nt bananas Mar 2016 #63
I can understand the confusion. Both threads are very similar in certain ways. yardwork Mar 2016 #67
Uh, no. MineralMan Mar 2016 #27
The question is inherently misogynist, implying that a female president cannot be... Tarc Mar 2016 #28
Do you think Bill was "sufficiently separate and independent" of Hillary when he was prez? jonno99 Mar 2016 #41
The "co-president" thing was silly media innuendo, not fact. Tarc Mar 2016 #45
Of course you're right. But that doesn't change anything I said. jonno99 Mar 2016 #48
Reagan had early alzheimers so yes, that made Nancy somewhat more powerful. zappaman Mar 2016 #87
You may be correct, but that is not what I've heard. nt jonno99 Mar 2016 #89
Wouldn't they all be, including Nancy Reagan? treestar Mar 2016 #73
This is the Bernie Brothiest thread I've ever seen ... nt salinsky Mar 2016 #31
lol @ Bernie Brothiest PeaceNikki Mar 2016 #34
Seriously. nt auntpurl Mar 2016 #47
BernieBroth; the boiled-down concentrated quintessence Codeine Mar 2016 #70
Well, because she'll always be "The little woman?" MineralMan Mar 2016 #35
A woman can't be her own person? RandySF Mar 2016 #37
I'd expect a Clinton Admin to operate very much like an Obama Admin. Garrett78 Mar 2016 #38
Hillary Clinton is running for her own term, on her own terms kennetha Mar 2016 #39
You could take Hillary Clinton out and substitute it with Bernie Sanders and all would still be true Seeinghope Mar 2016 #78
Bill is ineffectual greymouse Mar 2016 #50
It's worse than that. n/t Herman4747 Mar 2016 #53
+1 n/t bobthedrummer Mar 2016 #90
There are no limitations restrictions or guidelines because there don't need to be any onenote Mar 2016 #60
There have been past President of the United States family that almost both Seeinghope Mar 2016 #80
And if Hillary got elected and then died in office would "co-President" Bill still be "President" onenote Mar 2016 #82
I still don't see how having an extremely competent married couple, MoonRiver Mar 2016 #92
Sounds like grounds to impeach another Clinton. I'm sure republicans would have thought of this pampango Mar 2016 #64
Another conspiracy theory? Wow so many today nt Sheepshank Mar 2016 #65
No loyalsister Mar 2016 #66
The assumption is that the first 2 were all Bill? 😐 AgadorSparticus Mar 2016 #74
Is Bernie Sanders running for Jane Sanders' first term? KingFlorez Mar 2016 #75
Oh, I didn't know that Bernie Sanders was a previous President of the United States Seeinghope Mar 2016 #77
My point was that candidate's are individuals KingFlorez Mar 2016 #79
There is no mechanism in place to prevent her from office LanternWaste Mar 2016 #76
No. She is running for her first term. gollygee Mar 2016 #88
I think you're right, and I can prove it. Waiting For Everyman Mar 2016 #91
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Is Hillary Clinton runnin...»Reply #91