Politics News

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


When the dust settles on this primary election cycle I think pundits and historians will mostly all agree that Bill Clinton was Hillary’s undoing. His game worked when it was him attacking them, when it was Bill versus the right wing conspiracy; however, when it is Bill versus “other Democrats” it is an abject failure. Democrats are now looking in the mirror and seeing the “Clinton myth” and it’s not a pretty picture at all. The latest Bill Clinton attack, as subtle as it was, didn’t go unnoticed!

What was the headline this past weekend from Bubba? “John McCain and Hillary Clinton love America. So wouldn’t it be great to see those two who love America vie for the presidential title? Surely you get the inference! And it is statements just like this that’s turning the Democratic party away from Hillary as much as for Obama- who is at least conciliatory in his comments.

Hillary is just barely holding on. To what?

Hillary Clinton has virtually no chance of winning. Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.means the only way she wins is if Democratic super delegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party’s most reliable constituency. Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote, which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle, and use that achievement to pressure super delegates (like Bill Richardson?), she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

The Clinton invincibility myth is dying a slow death, and with it the Hillary Clinton campaign.

The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.The real question is why so many people believing that she has a chance, other than pulling off some back-room shady deal? The answer has more to do with media psychology than with practical politics.

Meanwhile, Bubba’s latest comments are causing the Hillary Clinton campaign to bob and weave, saying the comments were being misinterpreted and quickly posting a clarification on its Web site. But retired Air Force Gen. Merrill McPeak said he was disappointed by the comments and compared them to those of McCarthy, the 1950s communist-hunting senator.

Hey Bill. The fat lady is walking up the steps to take the microphone.

James William Smith asked:


Hillary Clinton had run a disciplined, mistake-free campaign for the first nine months of 2007. She had been able to portray herself as an experienced candidate for change. By contrast, the Obama campaign had an anemic nine months on the campaign trail without a clear message or momentum. Mrs. Clinton had Obama in a tough political spot.

To remain competitive in the race, Barack Obama needed to attack Mrs. Clinton as a candidate. The attack ads and negative campaigning would have left Obama open to criticism of abandoning his campaign’s primary theme of hope. It would challenge his assertion that he was a different kind of politician and it would appear to the voting public as a cynical attempt by him to get back in the race. Obama would look desperate and Hillary Clinton’s candidacy for the Democratic nomination would be inevitable.

However, Obama never had to go “negative” because Mrs. Clinton started making a series of unforced mistakes. Her political mistakes from late September through early December have allowed the Obama campaign to surge into the lead in the first voting state of Iowa. In addition Obama has moved back into contention in the state primary in New Hampshire.

Clinton started her parade of mistakes in the debate of September 26, 2007. Her handling of a hypothetical question on terrorist torture from moderator Tim Russert was inconsistent with answers she has given on that same question posed to her in the past.

The mistakes continued for Hillary in the Democratic debate of October 30, 2007. Her answer to a debate question concerning granting illegal aliens drivers licenses was incoherent. She appeared to take a position on both sides of the issue within about sixty seconds. Her performance validated her Democratic opponent’s claim that she was trying to parse her position on issues and have it both ways.

Next, Bill Clinton showed up stumping for votes for Hillary in Iowa to remind us how slick and parsing he can be. In Iowa, it was all about Bill and little about Hillary on the campaign trail. Bill even tried to convince us that he was against the Iraq war from the beginning, which is clearly not true. It sounded like Bill Clinton was running again and reminded the voting public about the fact that in electing Hillary, we would get Team Clinton back for President in the White House. This back to the future Clinton reminder to the voting public did not go over well.

Then, the voters got to see a Hillary Clinton interview with Katie Couric. This interview should have been a positive thing for Hillary. However, her poll numbers continued to drop after her appearance. In this interview, Hillary told Katie Couric that she has never contemplated losing this election. That she had not even considered the possibility that she would lose. The manner which she handle that question appeared presumptious to many voters. In fact, it fed into the negative image many people have of Hillary’s need and hunger for power. It was a continuation of the impression that she would say anything to win.

These mistakes from the Hillary Clinton campaign have helped to tighten the Democratic race for the 2008 Presidential nomination just weeks before the first vote is to be cast in Iowa. Barrack Obama clearly has the momentum in the race. Now it will be Hillary Clinton who will have to go negative to try and slow his campaign down.

For Obama to win the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2008, he must win Iowa in a decisive fashion. He also must win in New Hampshire or Hillary Clinton will absorb the Iowa defeat and move on. If Obama wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton would be reeling and John Edwards would be out of the race. The Edwards vote would probably move to Obama and he would have a chance to defeat Clinton, one-on-one in the subsequent primaries. Democratic voters would certainly be questioning Hillary’s prospects as a candidate against the Republican Presidential nominee in the general election in 2008. A primary election battle between Clinton and Obama could go unresolved for weeks since Obama has the campaign war chest to contest Clinton in every primary state.

An Obama victory against Hillary Clinton is still a long shot. However, a series of unforced Hillary Clinton mistakes since September 26, 2007 have allowed Obama to remain competitive. Indeed, the result of her political mistakes have, at the very least, given Barack Obama’s campaign of hope a prayer.

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


Much of the Democratic party is now finding out what all of the Republican party already knows. The Clinton’s are ruthless when it comes to winning. Get in their way and the IRS will come visit you (when Bubba was president). Attack Bill or Hill and a private detective will be employed to find out how much dirt that can find on you. But the latest delegate battle is a whole new thing indeed. All delegates are Clinton delegates or didn’t you know that?

Everyone is now getting acquainted with the super delegate fiasco of the Democratic party; however, the Clinton’s are taking even the pledged delegates to a new level (low).

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign intends to go after PLEDGED delegates whom Barack Obama has already won in the caucuses and primaries if she needs them to win the nomination. This strategy was confirmed by a high-ranking Clinton official on Monday. We’re not talking about super delegates- the 800 hot dogs who are not pledged to anybody. We’re talking about getting pledged delegates to switch sides.

Is that fair, legal? Yep!

A pledged delegate is pledged to a particular candidate and cannot switch, right? Wrong!

Pledged delegates are not really pledged at all, not even on the first ballot. This has been an open secret in the party for years, but it has never really mattered because there has almost always been a clear victor by the time the convention convened. But not now that Hillary is behind. This time, one candidate may enter the convention leading by just a few pledged delegates, and those delegates may find themselves being promised the sun, moon and stars to switch sides. Would Hillary or Bubba do that?

Duh!

“I swear it is not happening now, but as we get closer to the convention, if it is a stalemate, everybody will be going after everybody’s delegates,” a senior Clinton official said Monday afternoon. “All the rules will be going out the window.” Rules of good behavior, maybe. But, in fact, the actual rules of the party allow for such switching. The notion that pledged delegates must vote for a certain candidate is, according to the Democratic National Committee, a “myth.”

Winning with superdelegates is potentially party-splitting because it could mean throwing out the choice of the elected delegates and substituting the choice of the super delegates. So, to give some semblence of fairness, go after the PLEDGED delegates and have them switch their votes..

Hey, the Obama tsunami must be stopped at any odds. If the Wisconsin primary doesn’t do it, if Texas or Ohio doesn’t do it, then Bubba will do it!

So why are we going through all this primary hullabaloo? We do it to provide some sort of integrity and legitmacy; however, in the event truth does not work out as the powers that be want, then we’ll do it the old-fashioned way. Can you say power-brokering fraud and intimidation? And then they’ll point fingers at people like Jason Rae and say it’s his fault. Blame shift seems to always work these days.

I can’t wait to see how this all works out. Could it be that the history-breaking female and African-American dream candidates implode and shoot themselves in the foot and give us four more years of Bush-i-ness? God help us all!

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


We’ve had a sub-prime meltdown in the market that’s led to a financial markets meltdown, but the Feds are giving away money to prevent a Wall Street meltdown. So, here’s the question of the day. Is there anything that can be done to prevent a complete Clinton meltdown. Or is it too late for a modern day resurrection?

On the West coast it was Bill Clinton doing his red-faced, finger-pointing, and neck vein exploding act! Bubba was on the West coast trying to woo some super delegates. But guess what happened?

According to those at the meeting, Clinton, who flew in from Chicago with bags under his eyes, was classic old Bill at first, charming and making small talk with the 15 or so delegates who gathered in a room behind the convention stage. But as the group moved together for the perfunctory photo, Rachel Binah, a former Bill Richardson delegate who now supports Hillary Clinton, told Bill how “sorry” she was to have heard former Clinton campaign manager James Carville call Richardson a “Judas” for backing Obama.

It was as if someone pulled the pin from a grenade! That’s Bubba again.

“Five times to my face (Richardson) said that he would never do that,” a red-faced, finger-pointing Clinton erupted. The former president then went on a tirade that ran from the media’s unfair treatment of Hillary to questions about the fairness of the votes in state caucuses that voted for Obama. It ended with him asking delegates to imagine what the reaction would be if Obama was trailing by just 1 percent and people were telling him to drop out.

“It was very, very intense,” said one attendee. “Not at all like the Bill of earlier campaigns.” Bill just isn’t himself these days of is it that the Democrats never saw the real bill, the kill Bill personality that Dick Morris has mentioned that he had experienced: even having been tackled by Bubba!

Back on the East side of the country, it seems as though Hillary was having a poll meltdown in Pennsylvania. On Tuesday it was reported that her one-time 26 point lead which had dropped to 15 points a month ago was now just 5 points according to a Rasmussen poll.

But on Wednesday the latest Public Policy Polling survey had Obama up 45-43%! That’s a major meltdown for Hillary and major Obama momentum!

But of course we have almost three more weeks in which anything can happen! While the numbers are nbot out, nor official, it appears that Obama kept his advertising budget lead with what’s rumored to be $30 million to $20 million advantage for March donations. We’ll know officially in a few more days.

Meltdown does seem like a proper description of the overall Clinton campaign.

James William Smith asked:


Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the Democratic Party Presidential nomination has been over since early March. However, during the last two months, the Clinton campaign has exploited some very dubious Democratic primary election rules and a compliant media which profits from an uncertain Presidential race, to continue to run her failed Presidential campaign.
It is likely that both Clintons have realized for several months that Hillary Clinton would not be the Democratic Party nominee in 2008. In addition to craving the power of elected office, the Clintons are, if nothing else, very politically astute. So why does Mrs. Clinton continue her futile 2008 campaign? The answer to that question is becoming increasingly apparent with each passing day. She is using it as a political platform to launch her next campaign for the Presidency in 2012.
Make no mistake that at the right political time, after all the primaries and caucuses end in June, she will concede the 2008 Democratic party nomination to Barack Obama. Her concession speech will occur before the Democratic convention but only after all the delegates from Michigan and Florida have been seated.
In her speech, she will say that she is withdrawing from this close election for the good of the party and that she is acting for the high purpose of party unity. She will also say that she has stayed in the race to insure that the interests of every delegate in Florida and Michigan are treated properly.
Of course, prior to her public concession speech, she will have secured from the Obama campaign her own prime time televised speech at the Democratic convention and a pledge to absorb her campaign’s multi million dollar debt. Her reward for finally acknowledging the reality of her election defeat will be several more months of positive political visibility and an improvement in her finances to pursue a future campaign.
In addition she will experience the good will of a Democratic Party trying to avoid a divisive August Democratic convention. She will also be seen fighting for the victims of the Democratic primary rules in the states of Michigan and Florida. Overall, it is a 2008 political ending with the potential to launch another Presidential campaign for her in the future.
However, after the Democratic convention, Hillary Clinton will need some political luck in the fall. The truth is that she needs Barack Obama to lose the November Presidential election. His defeat cannot be traced back to either Hillary or Bill Clinton in any way. Surely, there will be many Clinton promises to campaign hard for Obama, but the actual effort by them for the Obama campaign will surely be constrained as it was for Democratic candidate John Kerry four years ago.
Two terms of Barack Obama in the White House and in control of the Democratic Party would leave both Clintons on the political outside looking in. In eight years, Hillary Clinton would probably be too old to seriously challenge for the Presidency, since she would be sixty nine years of age in the year 2016. Therefore, a Barack Obama victory in November 2008 would end for good the Presidential hopes of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
However, the outlook for the Clinton’s is much improved with a John McCain election victory in November. In fact, four years of Republican John McCain in the White House would provide one final opportunity for Mrs. Clinton to campaign for the nation’s highest office in the next Presidential election.
In 2012, John McCain would be celebrating his seventy sixth birthday. It is very likely that he would not run for a second term in office at that age. If he did, his advanced age would certainly be a major campaign issue. It is also very likely that with Republican, John McCain, in the White House, the 2012 election would once again provide a wide open field for Mrs. Clinton as the potential Democratic nominee.
Many mainstream political pundits are speculating that Mrs. Clinton may be offered the spot of Vice President on the 2008 Democratic ticket. The truth is that it is hard to see how such a ticket helps either candidate. In fact, such a ticket could create several major problems in the fall for the Obama campaign. First, it would bring the Clintons’ political baggage into the November campaign. Remember, she is currently viewed as untrustworthy in current public opinion polls by 6 of every 10 voters. Next, it would be hard to keep her husband focused on the campaign trail. He is a campaign trail liability as was in evidence in the recent Democratic primaries. In addition, both Clintons would probably upstage Barack Obama throughout the fall campaign and even into his first term of office in the White House.
It is also unclear what Hillary Clinton actually brings to the Democratic ticket for Obama. The fact is that Hillary Clinton’s primary base of support is white Democratic women. It is a voting demographic which should vote for Barack Obama without her on the ticket anyway. In addition, having Hillary Clinton as a running mate would compromise the Obama campaign of change while adding little actual experience in the area of United States foreign policy.
The Clintons’ thirst for a return to the White House is still clearly evident. However, the end of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential campaign is near. Her current political motivation is to position herself in defeat with a future Presidential campaign in mind. If Barack Obama loses in the fall general election, her next campaign for the Presidency in 2012 will have already begun.

Claudia Beckford asked:


It is Election Year in the United States of America! It will be the 56th consecutive presidential election and a very peculiar one as the Democrats’ party race for the White House has elected the first woman to run for president; Mrs. Hillary Clinton; former US First Lady; and the first African American, former Illinois State Senator; Barack Obama.

As the process starts to dig deeper there are more politics attacks on both sides; especially now that Obama leads with about 130 delegates after capturing Wyoming on March 8th followed the win on March 11th during the Mississippi primary. Despite his solid campaign representation and ideas to the American people many believe Obama is the eye-centre of a race issue exampling his 90 percent win of black votes in Mississippi and just one quarter of the white vote; a common pattern seemed in the southern states.

Clinton assures that if Obama was not who he is he will not be running for the office; a remark which is being polished due to the possible consequences in the remaining 10 contests in Indiana, North Carolina (May 6th), and the West Indies (May 13th). Let’s not forget the disqualification of the 366 delegates in Florida and Michigan due to unmistakable anomalies as Obama’s name was not on the ballot; therefore, Clinton won both primaries. It is very likely this voting will be repeated via regular mail with a higher than expected multi million cost.

On the other hand; there is the Republican candidate John McClain who many believe is the big winner of this controversial contest as he still has a good chance to win if the Democrats don’t get their act together and show the people what they could do for the United States and the countless problems the country is currently facing among which there is an eminent recession.

A recent nbc News/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 76 percent of voters claim for a president who will shift the current path President Bush has kept over the years and that only a 17 percent will be content with the way things are right now. Additionally, 43 percent claim their situation has worsen in the past four years and a 34 percent states they are better off than 4 years ago. Without a doubt; this is golden opportunity for either Clinton or Obama if they know what to do with it.

The controversial Obama – Clinton / Clilnton – Obama presidential nominee election will soon be decided for the first time in two decades by the North Carolina voters during the May 6th, 2008 primary; this win will ensure a number of delegates and a pattern of who could lead in the rest of the cities to vote. Then on November 4th we will encounter the two strongest US parties and the people make a final resolution.

James William Smith asked:


I walked into Dunkin’ Donuts two days before what would be a very close New Hampshire primary. As I was ordering my egg and cheese on a plain bagel (toasted), I glanced down at the newspaper stand near the counter. The Boston Herald had a front page headline that morning which exclaimed: “She’s So Yesterday”. The picture under the headline caption showed the face of an aging Hillary Clinton. Her picture was accompanied by an image of the vinyl record of the Beatles hit “Yesterday “.

Rush Limbaugh had done a somewhat similar story on Hillary Clinton several weeks ago. He had questioned whether people in this society would vote for an aging woman for President who had wrinkles in a culture of perfect faces and slim and tight figures. At the time I figured that coming from Rush Limbaugh, this was an attack from the right of the political spectrum on Hillary Clinton. Now I am beginning to think that he may have been on to something.

However, when I read that newspaper headline, I realized the trouble the Clinton presidential campaign is in against the much younger candidate, Barack Obama. In fact, these tabloid political attacks on her may now have reached the point of making the entire “Boomer” generation a potential thing of the past.

This has touched a little too close to home with me. I never thought I would say this but allow me to give the Hillary Clinton campaign some unsolicited advice in order for her to capture the younger voter of today from Barack Obama. Here is my ten point (tongue somewhat in cheek) makeover for candidate Hillary Clinton, a person whom the Boston Herald newspaper refers to as “So Yesterday”.

1. Get your husband (Bill Clinton) off of the campaign trail. He talks mostly about himself. He never received 50% of the vote in any election he has won. The two Presidents for the price of one approach makes people uncomfortable. The back to the future approach does not work. He looks like a relic and makes you both look like yesterday’s news. Have him advise you quietly behind the scenes. He can be heard but not seen.

2. Keep your smiling daughter (Chelsea) on the campaign trail. She makes you look like a good mother. She reminds voters that you could be the first female elected President. She makes you look less programmed and more human.

3. Look and act like a real person. Everything in your campaign appears scripted. All your responses look like they are measured and calculated to appeal to the latest poll numbers. Those spontaneous tears the other day may have been the reason for your margin of victory in New Hampshire. However you can’t expect to cry the day before the next primary election and have it work again.

4. Hope that you win the Democratic primary and run against Republican Fred Thompson in the fall. He is so “last week” while you are only “so yesterday“. I don’t think you will have to worry about winning the youth vote in that general election.

5. Stop running primarily on the issue of your experience. The voters are furious at politicians in Washington D. C. They think that things “inside the beltway” are broken and need to be fixed. Today’s voters are mentally storming the gates of their government. They don’t want someone to tell them they are an insider and know how it runs. The point is that they don’t like how it runs.

6. Really embrace the issue of change. Create a plan to change the government. The plan should be bold. The plan should mention the first 100 days and what you would do as the first female President. Don’t consult polls. Tell us what you honestly want to do. A politician that does that would certainly represent real change.

7. Insist that Barrack Obama tell everyone what he would change. What does his plan consist of anyway? We have heard much about “hope” and “change.” We have not heard many details. If you do not make him outline his plan, you can bet the Republicans in the general election will do so instead.

8. Stop using the phrase ” I have the battle scars to prove it” in reference to your experience in the 1990s with Universal Healthcare. It makes you sound like you should be honored with a pancake breakfast at the local war veterans post.

9. Say WIFI , Bluetooth, Xbox and GPS often. It doesn’t matter that you may not know what these terms mean. Just make sure you say them. Also, make sure you watch plasma and HDTV and have an Ipod. Do not mention the Beatles, Cher, Mary Tyler Moore, or Woodstock at any time.

10. Keep your chin up (don’t let it sag). Hold your head high (don’t worry about face lifts) and stop exercising to the Richard Simmons show every morning on those VCR tapes. We use DVD players now and Richard Simmons is “totally yesterday.”

If you do all these things, you still may not win this election. However, your campaign would feature a forward-looking real person, who has energy and who addresses the voters’ desire for real change. You could even transform yourself into the new age candidate of “today”.

At the very least, with this type of makeover, the newspapers would never again show you under the tabloid headline: “She’s So Yesterday”. For a Baby Boomer, that is fast becoming an important victory in itself.

Julie Smith asked:


What happened in Iowa last Thursday gave us a little idea of what the United States is willing to do for the next presidential elections. Though the selection process consists of a long way; Obama’s victory in the caucus with some 38% of the vote marks a turning point in the US political history.

The contrast between Clinton and Obama is visible; while Hillary Clinton is surrounded by well known faces from Washington, Obama’s speech appears to touch the feelings of many voters. The word “change” pronounced by Obama many times has penetrated deeply in the democratic side.

On the other hand, Bill Clinton appears to have lost some of his legendary political touch. Though he remains popular with many Democrats, he seems oblivious to the resentment within the Democratic “base”. The advantage of Barack over Hillary Clinton means more than a victory; Iowa’s triumph over race is a message to the world about the real nature of America and a ratification of Obama’s belief that this will be an election year where everything is on the table.

However, Clinton is the first wife of a former American president to run the office…basically no woman has ever been nominated as a presidential candidate by a major party. The 60-years-old lady is not giving up; actually, her campaign already announced that it would dispatch former President Clinton to New Hampshire for the next week seeking to resurrect the Clinton’s dynasty.

While the 46-year-old Illinois senator is focused on Tuesday’s New Hampshire presidential primary, Hillary Clinton is ready to attack his political inexperience as she will battle to prevent her rival from the democratic nomination.

Barack Obama is performing very well for New Hampshire and already started building up an unstoppable momentum. Iowa’s triumph seems to have generated a turnout from 2004 statistics. Apparently, Iowa’s decision was about style, and US citizens seem to be looking for something different…maybe a big change; the decision was not only pro-Obama, but visibly anti-Clinton.

Now, all the attention is focused on New Hampshire where the second round of Primaries will be held next week. The temperature is also expected to be high the next Republican debate with candidates as John McCain, who opinion polls now show leading in New Hampshire after some months of unpopularity.

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


There’s a big debate in tinsle-town tonight and the TWO BIG GUNS get to square off at each other and I am sure they will. Hillary needs to regain some MO as in momentum. The uncontested win in Florida where no delegate seats were up for grabs didn’t get Hillary anything but a few minutes of TV exposure. The South Carolina landslide is still sliding for Barack Obama- even past the Ted Kennedy kudos!

If you wondered whether if the Barack-Star could compete for the Super Tuesday sweepstakes. Think no longer! $32,000,000.00 says he can!

Barack Obama raised $32 million in the single month of January, matching his best three-month period last year, aides said Thursday. The money positions Obama for the sweeping Feb. 5 primary contests, when 22 states will be in play for the Democratic nomination. Aides also announced that with their money they can now advertise in states beyond the Super Tuesday.

Obama is advertising in all but two of the Feb. 5 states and plans to begin advertising in states with upcoming contests, including Louisiana, Washington, Nebraska, Maine, Maryland, Virginia and Washington, D.C.

Campaign manager David Plouffe said the campaign attracted 170,000 new donors for a total of 650,000 donors overall.

“We think that the strength of our financial position and the number of donors does speak to financial sustainability if it ends up going through March and April,” Plouffe said of the race. “We think we will have the financial resources to conduct vigorous campaigns in the states to come.”

And one of those contributors came from Hillary’s home state of New York.

The late New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan threw his considerable political weight behind Hillary Clinton, helping her win her Senate seat from a state where she had never lived, but that hasn’t deterred his widow from backing Hillary’s rival Barack Obama for 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

In a statement e-mailed to David Axelrod, a senior adviser to Obama, Elizabeth B. Moynihan attributed her support for Obama to Caroline Kennedy Schlosberg’s Times Op-Ed article where JFK’s daughter endorsed Barack Obama, as well as her own displeasure with Bill and Hillary Clinton’s recent hostility toward Obama’s candidacy. You just never know what one person’s endorsement might bring.

Mrs. Moynihan wrote that her husband, who died in 2003, “would have become excited, as I have, to see Barack Obama rekindle hope in our young as he encourages them to participate in the political process, and I know Pat would approve, applaud and encourage me to join Caroline Kennedy in supporting Barack Obama’s candidacy for the Democratic nomination for president. It is a rare gift to be able to inspire people to share a vision that requires commitment and dedication.

Barack should be all smiles before the debate tonight. We’ll have to wait until the debate is over to see if he’s still smiling. With John Edwards out for the Democrats (and Rudy for the Republicans) the stage is really small now for tonights Democratic debate.

Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


It’s a modern-day “rags to riches” story. If you ever wondered why a person would put them through the rigors and the hell of an election, now you know. The Hill and Bill team didn’t own a home, had almost no net worth when they came to Washington in 1992. And for eight years they lived on a meager $350,000 a year. But, sicne leaving the White House, together they have eared $109,000,000.00! Cinton income is good baby!

On the same day that Hillary proposed creating a cabinet-level position devoted to ending poverty, Hillary Clinton and her husband reported earning more than $109 million over eight years in newly released tax data. Now we know the following-

>They paid $33,000,000 in taxes

>They made $30,000,000 off the book royalties

>They gave $10,000 to charties (all to their own!)

Campaign funding is such a delicate matter. So, now we don’t know.

The campaign released tax returns from 2000 through 2006 and gave highlights from their 2007 return. The Clintons have asked for an extension for filing their 2007 tax returns, citing the dissolution of a blind trust last year. The itemized earnings the Clinton campaign provided in its summary only added up to $94 million, leaving $15 million unaccounted for. Wonder why the $15,000,000 or thereabouts is left unknown? When it comes to the Clinton’s one has to wonder don’t they!