Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Beast)   Richard Mellon Scaife the man who bankrolled the "vast right-wing conspiracy" that created Whitewater, "Troopergate" and almost all the other Clinton-era "scandals" died July 4th, but not before he and Hillary became close friends   (thedailybeast.com) divider line 46
    More: Strange, Clinton-Scaife, Troopergate, Paula Jones, Iraq invasion, Joe Conason, David Brock, William F. Buckley  
•       •       •

4044 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Jul 2014 at 2:57 PM (29 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-07-07 01:50:26 PM  
11 votes:

borg: If Whitewater was a conspiracy then why did 18 people go to prison over it including a Governor of  Arkansas. Amazing everyone involved was dirty except The Clintons.


Mostly for absurd charges only tangentially related to the original ones.  When you have a prosecutor who was appointed to look into a land deal in Arkansas investigating the president's mistress on non-criminal sexual conduct in the White house that happened a decade after said land deal, well you know precisely how far off the rails the whole thing went
2014-07-07 11:44:27 AM  
9 votes:
In 2008 when I read about Hillary's sit-down with Scaife's paper that was referenced in the Article, I wrote this on my own blog I had at the time (I was an angry young man way back then)

"If Richard Mellon Scaife teetering on the brink of endorsing a Clinton isn't a sign of the apocalypse I don't know what is.

But I do know one thing.  The only thing more astonishing, and debasing, than him granting it; is the fact that Hillary apparently  Soughtit.

You know how people have been urging Hillary to get out while she still has a few shreds of dignity left?
Too late.

She could be revealed to have had a prior career as the featured performer in a Tijuana donkey show  and emerge with more dignity than what she has now after abasing herself before the one man who, more than any other in this country, attempted to smear her and destroy her husband and daughter.

 Selling your body is a comparatively honorable to make a living, particularly when you are in desperate straits.  But selling your soul like this?  Is there any way to come back from it? To NOT have the awful stain of what you were willing to do for personal gain eat away at you for the rest of your life?  (sorry for the cliche but)  At long Last, has she no decency left?

And for what?  Does she seriously believe that there are thousands of PA democrats hanging on the words of the country's most notorious arch-conservative before they decide how to cast their votes?  And even if they were, were they REALLY worth cozy up to THIS man to get?

What the HELL was she thinking?

Well, if It's any consolation to her,  I think this has to be rock bottom.  I'm not sure it's physically possible to sink any lower."

In retrospect, given everything that's happened since.  I stand by each and every one of those words.  A bit purple, maybe, but not by much.   This is why I was overjoyed when I say the other GL thread about Obama reportedly quietly promising Warren support if she runs.  I really do want an alternative to Hillary.  I simply do not trust her judgment.
2014-07-07 03:20:27 PM  
8 votes:
Wait wait wait....

You mean the fabulously wealthy oligarchs that control the entire farking country aren't really divided by issues, but  are instead united by their love of money?

Why, it's almost as if politics is nothing other than theater to keep the plebes entertained!
2014-07-07 04:15:34 PM  
6 votes:
I'm a conservative (not a bomb everyone on behalf of Exxon and AIPAC neocon, but a Reagan/Goldwater type) but I don't consider Hillary a liberal.  It infuriates me how people call HRC and her ilk "liberals."  She's not progressive, she's a friggin' puppet sponsored by Goldman Sachs.  She and Obama are liberal the same way Romney and McCain are conservative.  The left and right are merging, and it's all being orchestrated by the delicate hand of Wall Street.

Additionally, I refuse to vote for another Clinton or Bush.  Half of my life has been under a Bush or Clinton presidency.  We live in the US of A, not some banana republic where politically connected families take turns wearing the presidential sash.

I'm 100% behind Rand Paul in 2016, but if we can't have a libertarian leaning republican I'd much rather see a true liberal win than another hedge fund sponsored candidate.  I don't agree with Obama on most of his choices, but I do respect the fact that he believes in some of them.  His abuse of executive orders and trampling of the 4th Amendment is inexcusable though.  He has to pick his fights, but for a constitutional scholar (which he legitimately is) he should know ending illegal snooping is more important than distributing free birth control.

But I shudder to think what's next.

It's nauseating watching elected offices being bought and sold like tickets on Craigslist.
2014-07-07 04:12:13 PM  
6 votes:

Triple Oak: Hillary is a perfect example of how our country continues to shift right

She's more an example of how broken the establishment Democrats are.  She has no principles I'm aware of, just a lust for power backed up by a sense of entitlement.  Back in '08 she campaigned like we owe her the Oval Office.  I don't expect idealism, but usually candidates have some sort of pitch beyond, "I'm a woman and a Democrat."  Besides, she throws her constituents under the bus so often her party affiliation doesn't matter, and her gender justifies her actions only to the most crazy man-hating harpies.  To anyone else she was sympathetic back in the 1990s when the GOP really was harassing her well beyond what I'd consider stalking and her hubby was banging an intern, but at this point the victim status has worn off and we're exposed to just another self-serving Beltway whore.

There's a reason she lost the damn primary and it's not because anyone fell for Obama's speeches (beyond him simply not sounding like an idiot).  The '08 Democratic primary was all about gender and race but I rooted for Obama mainly to keep an aristocrat out of the White House.
2014-07-07 02:28:37 PM  
6 votes:

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Scaife was a big deal in my neck of the woods. He had his hands in a lot of non-profits, think tanks, and media in order to facilitate his agenda. It'll be interesting to hear the dirt that comes out over the next few months. (It'll also be interesting to see which ones collapse without his largess.)


He was basically the Koch brothers before the Koch brothers,   I think they've probably absorbed most of his initiatives by now, or at least put the the same gang of useful idiots on the payroll
2014-07-07 01:31:12 PM  
6 votes:
If Whitewater was a conspiracy then why did 18 people go to prison over it including a Governor of  Arkansas. Amazing everyone involved was dirty except The Clintons.
2014-07-07 05:05:03 PM  
5 votes:

nickdaisy: ccundiff: anfrind: ccundiff: nickdaisy: I'm a conservative (not a bomb everyone on behalf of Exxon and AIPAC neocon, but a Reagan/Goldwater type) but I don't consider Hillary a liberal.  It infuriates me how people call HRC and her ilk "liberals."  She's not progressive, she's a friggin' puppet sponsored by Goldman Sachs.  She and Obama are liberal the same way Romney and McCain are conservative.  The left and right are merging, and it's all being orchestrated by the delicate hand of Wall Street.

Additionally, I refuse to vote for another Clinton or Bush.  Half of my life has been under a Bush or Clinton presidency.  We live in the US of A, not some banana republic where politically connected families take turns wearing the presidential sash.

I'm 100% behind Rand Paul in 2016, but if we can't have a libertarian leaning republican I'd much rather see a true liberal win than another hedge fund sponsored candidate.  I don't agree with Obama on most of his choices, but I do respect the fact that he believes in some of them.  His abuse of executive orders and trampling of the 4th Amendment is inexcusable though.  He has to pick his fights, but for a constitutional scholar (which he legitimately is) he should know ending illegal snooping is more important than distributing free birth control.

But I shudder to think what's next.

It's nauseating watching elected offices being bought and sold like tickets on Craigslist.

Except for that part, you made a lot of sense.

Libertarians tend to be very good at identifying problems, but absolutely terrible at solving them.

Aren't there a ton of non-crazy libertarian politcals out there? Why are people so fixated on the Pauls? Not my cup-o-tea, but Gary Johnson seems like a much more sane choice.

gary johnson is a terrific choice but the Pauls, not unlike Obama, were in the right place at the right time, and actually have a chance of rocking the boat.

to the guy who said libertarians don't offer solutions-- if you believe in ...




Libertarians fail spectacularly at one thing: history. The ratio of problems committed by big business unregulated far exceeds any benefits brought forth by therm.

Under a liberal ideology, the United States had almost 50 years of growth, health and infrastructure improvements that benefited all- not the chosen few.

As a result of the libertarian influence of Republican Party, we have dismantled every safety feature that lead directly to the biggest economic crash since the a Great Depression.

While not every government solution is viable, it sure beats the solution of "Everything will work out in the end"
The Government is all that stands between the people and enslavement by corporations.
2014-07-07 05:03:42 PM  
4 votes:
Hilary Rodham Clinton has always been a corporatist. Before she became Fist Lady, she sat at the Board of Directors at Walmart. And we all know what Walmart is like.

This was the big deciding factor for me when I chose to vote for Obama instead on that cold January night during the 2008 Iowa Caucuses (you're welcome).

Hilary made a good Secretary of State and maybe even a good SCOTUS judge. But as President? Iiiiiiiiiii'm not too happy with that idea. I know I won't ever vote for a republican with the way they're acting. That much I certainly know.
2014-07-07 04:28:12 PM  
4 votes:

ccundiff: nickdaisy: I'm a conservative (not a bomb everyone on behalf of Exxon and AIPAC neocon, but a Reagan/Goldwater type) but I don't consider Hillary a liberal.  It infuriates me how people call HRC and her ilk "liberals."  She's not progressive, she's a friggin' puppet sponsored by Goldman Sachs.  She and Obama are liberal the same way Romney and McCain are conservative.  The left and right are merging, and it's all being orchestrated by the delicate hand of Wall Street.

Additionally, I refuse to vote for another Clinton or Bush.  Half of my life has been under a Bush or Clinton presidency.  We live in the US of A, not some banana republic where politically connected families take turns wearing the presidential sash.

I'm 100% behind Rand Paul in 2016, but if we can't have a libertarian leaning republican I'd much rather see a true liberal win than another hedge fund sponsored candidate.  I don't agree with Obama on most of his choices, but I do respect the fact that he believes in some of them.  His abuse of executive orders and trampling of the 4th Amendment is inexcusable though.  He has to pick his fights, but for a constitutional scholar (which he legitimately is) he should know ending illegal snooping is more important than distributing free birth control.

But I shudder to think what's next.

It's nauseating watching elected offices being bought and sold like tickets on Craigslist.

Except for that part, you made a lot of sense.


Libertarians tend to be very good at identifying problems, but absolutely terrible at solving them.
2014-07-07 03:27:35 PM  
4 votes:
The problem with Hillary running for President is that it would be a race between a hard-core conservative willing to sell their soul for a political career and whoever the GOP picks.

Seriously, I don't like Hillary. She co-sponsored a bill to criminalize flag-burning, for God's sake! I have never met anyone who has burned a flag as part of a protest who was not a total douche, but you can't say it isn't political speech. It is one of the most clear-cut cases of "I don't like it, but I will defend your right to do it" that there is.
2014-07-07 03:33:15 PM  
3 votes:

The One True TheDavid: Those frigging Clintons are too right-wing for me.


Considering Hillary's center-right politics, her vote FOR the war in Iraq and generally bullish foreign-policy views I would say that, even though you're being facetious, you're not far from the mark.
2014-07-07 03:31:34 PM  
3 votes:

beefoe: Ummm, it was Hillary that invented the term "vast right-wing conspiracy".  She claimed that it was a "vast right wing conspiracy" that was making stories about her husband banging pretty much anything with a heartbeat, instead of the actual fact that her husband was actually banging anything with a heartbeat.


Hilary Clinton said a "vast right-wing conspiracy" tried to bring her husband down by any means necessary.   She was right, and Scaife paid for most of it.  The "Arkansas Project" as it was known, involved  created the whitewater story, found Paula Jones by dragging $100 bills through trailer parks, created "Troopergate" and invented from whole cloth the Vince foster was murdered story.  David Brooks the man who was the lead "hitman" later had a change of heart and laid it all out chapter and verse.
2014-07-07 03:22:44 PM  
3 votes:
This is the bastard who was sending letters to my senile uncle back in the 90's, asking for donations to the Paula Jones defense fund. My uncle sent $25 a month to this dubious cause for lord only knows how long until his wife and daughter asked me to look into his financials because they were having money problems. Since his daughter went out to get the mail every day, I told her to make sure these letters went into the trash instead of onto my uncle's desk. Then they started calling the house after a few months, forcing them to change their phone number.

So he's dead, eh? Good riddance to bad rubbish. Hell beckons.
2014-07-07 03:05:04 PM  
3 votes:

beefoe: Ummm, it was Hillary that invented the term "vast right-wing conspiracy".  She claimed that it was a "vast right wing conspiracy" that was making stories about her husband banging pretty much anything with a heartbeat, instead of the actual fact that her husband was actually banging anything with a heartbeat.


Which is funny since no one cares now, nor cared then, that Clinton was a poon-hound.  

I still remember the GOP jumping up and down and screaming "He had sex in the oval office!!11one"  and the rest of us went '...cool'
2014-07-07 03:03:00 PM  
3 votes:
Ummm, it was Hillary that invented the term "vast right-wing conspiracy".  She claimed that it was a "vast right wing conspiracy" that was making stories about her husband banging pretty much anything with a heartbeat, instead of the actual fact that her husband was actually banging anything with a heartbeat.
2014-07-07 08:18:48 PM  
2 votes:

nickdaisy: I refuse to vote for another Clinton or Bush.


Okay, Bush I get. Third generation political dynasty family with a terrible track record.

Yes, avoid. Hillary on the other hand is a political animal in her own right and has been since before she met and married Bill. The comparison is inapt.

A Clinton dynasty by definition would involve offspring of the Clintons.

In order to break free of this tendency towards political power running in families what do you suggest?

I'm 100% behind Rand Paul in 2016

Aaaaand that's where I stop taking you seriously.
2014-07-07 04:24:26 PM  
2 votes:

nickdaisy: I'm a conservative (not a bomb everyone on behalf of Exxon and AIPAC neocon, but a Reagan/Goldwater type) but I don't consider Hillary a liberal.  It infuriates me how people call HRC and her ilk "liberals."  She's not progressive, she's a friggin' puppet sponsored by Goldman Sachs.  She and Obama are liberal the same way Romney and McCain are conservative.  The left and right are merging, and it's all being orchestrated by the delicate hand of Wall Street.

Additionally, I refuse to vote for another Clinton or Bush.  Half of my life has been under a Bush or Clinton presidency.  We live in the US of A, not some banana republic where politically connected families take turns wearing the presidential sash.

I'm 100% behind Rand Paul in 2016, but if we can't have a libertarian leaning republican I'd much rather see a true liberal win than another hedge fund sponsored candidate.  I don't agree with Obama on most of his choices, but I do respect the fact that he believes in some of them.  His abuse of executive orders and trampling of the 4th Amendment is inexcusable though.  He has to pick his fights, but for a constitutional scholar (which he legitimately is) he should know ending illegal snooping is more important than distributing free birth control.

But I shudder to think what's next.

It's nauseating watching elected offices being bought and sold like tickets on Craigslist.


Except for that part, you made a lot of sense.
2014-07-07 03:33:52 PM  
2 votes:

GameSprocket: The problem with Hillary running for President is that it would be a race between a hard-core conservative willing to sell their soul for a political career and whoever the GOP picks.

Seriously, I don't like Hillary. She co-sponsored a bill to criminalize flag-burning, for God's sake! I have never met anyone who has burned a flag as part of a protest who was not a total douche, but you can't say it isn't political speech. It is one of the most clear-cut cases of "I don't like it, but I will defend your right to do it" that there is.


TO say nothing of her involvement with "The Family" that cult-like group of bible thumpers who helped push Uganda's anti-gay laws and tried to cover up John Ensign's affair because they teach that if you are in power than you are God's anointed one, and therefore can also do no wrong.
2014-07-07 03:30:16 PM  
2 votes:

GameSprocket: The problem with Hillary running for President is that it would be a race between a hard-core conservative willing to sell their soul for a political career and whoever the GOP picks.

Seriously, I don't like Hillary. She co-sponsored a bill to criminalize flag-burning, for God's sake! I have never met anyone who has burned a flag as part of a protest who was not a total douche, but you can't say it isn't political speech. It is one of the most clear-cut cases of "I don't like it, but I will defend your right to do it" that there is.


And as long as the GOP is diaper-chewing insane, the majority of Americans will vote for her instead.
2014-07-07 03:20:29 PM  
2 votes:

beefoe: Ummm, it was Hillary that invented the term "vast right-wing conspiracy".  She claimed that it was a "vast right wing conspiracy" that was making stories about her husband banging pretty much anything with a heartbeat, instead of the actual fact that her husband was actually banging anything with a heartbeat.


No, that is what they settled on.  Instead they were saying he and Hillary had people assassinated.  You are an idiot, please sit down and STFU.
2014-07-07 03:20:12 PM  
2 votes:
I worked for the Pittsburgh Trib for a while. Unfortunately, any good journalism they turned out (and they were capable of turning out good journalism) was overshadowed by an editorial page that reflected Scaife's political views -- which could turn bizarre (for example, an editorial suggested that Katharine Graham had her husband killed and took over the Washington Post).
I think it's particularly telling that the only people who are speaking well about him are the ones who drew a paycheck from him -- and might not continue to do so for much longer. According to divorce filings from his second wife, the Trib lost about $30 million a year, and I can't imagine things have gotten better. The one owner who could stomach those kinds of losses is dead now, and I've got a lot of friends still at the Trib who are kind of nervous right now.
2014-07-07 03:16:56 PM  
2 votes:
Those frigging Clintons are too right-wing for me.
2014-07-07 03:08:18 PM  
2 votes:
As James Carville and Mary Matalin have shown, it *can* be done.
2014-07-07 02:59:30 PM  
2 votes:
If there's such a thing as Hell, Richard Mellon Scaife is home now.
2014-07-08 12:06:36 AM  
1 votes:
I think I may need to bookmark this thread, with all the disdain for Hillary Clinton from a good chunk of us Farklibs, for the 2016 general election race and beyond, when we'll be told that we worship the ground Hillary walks on.

Count me in on the disdain, by the way. Given a chance, I'll vote for anyone remotely viable besides Clinton in the Democratic primaries/caucuses, but if she gets the nom, I'll take her over almost anyone who's actually likely to get through the Republican primaries.

/don't waste my time with "but but third party" unless we get to use IRV, approval voting, or anything like that in Presidental elections by then
//odds of that are slightly lower than those of Ralph Nader getting the Republican nomination
2014-07-07 09:35:00 PM  
1 votes:

PunGent: TV's Vinnie: Hilary Rodham Clinton has always been a corporatist. Before she became Fist Lady,

Scariest super villain ever..

4.bp.blogspot.com
2014-07-07 09:09:49 PM  
1 votes:
This happened  with both former governor George Wallace and with Lee Atwater. Atwater died of a brain tumor. I tend to believe his me culpa was genuine and sincere. I wouldn't believe anything George Wallace told me but apparently many, many blacks and others in Arkansas forgave him.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/09/16/opinion/forgiving-george-wallace.h tm l

PBS did a documentary on George Wallace called Setting the Woods on Fire. Pretty interesting.
2014-07-07 08:44:25 PM  
1 votes:

cleek: Hillary is also "good friends" with Henry Kissinger.

because she's such a liberal.


Well to be fair the President Kissinger served under was one of the last liberal presidents we had.
2014-07-07 07:32:59 PM  
1 votes:

Rent Party: Wait wait wait....

You mean the fabulously wealthy oligarchs that control the entire farking country aren't really divided by issues, but  are instead united by their love of money?

Why, it's almost as if politics is nothing other than theater to keep the plebes entertained!



Stand by for a special NBC report from....................... Chelsea Clinton.
2014-07-07 06:07:41 PM  
1 votes:

Rent Party: Wait wait wait....

You mean the fabulously wealthy oligarchs that control the entire farking country aren't really divided by issues, but  are instead united by their love of money?

Why, it's almost as if politics is nothing other than theater to keep the plebes entertained!


This.
2014-07-07 05:29:32 PM  
1 votes:

nickdaisy: Darth_Lukecash: nickdaisy: ccundiff: anfrind: ccundiff: nickdaisy: I'm a conservative (not a bomb everyone on behalf of Exxon and AIPAC neocon, but a Reagan/Goldwater type) but I don't consider Hillary a liberal.  It infuriates me how people call HRC and her ilk "liberals."  She's not progressive, she's a friggin' puppet sponsored by Goldman Sachs.  She and Obama are liberal the same way Romney and McCain are conservative.  The left and right are merging, and it's all being orchestrated by the delicate hand of Wall Street.

Additionally, I refuse to vote for another Clinton or Bush.  Half of my life has been under a Bush or Clinton presidency.  We live in the US of A, not some banana republic where politically connected families take turns wearing the presidential sash.

I'm 100% behind Rand Paul in 2016, but if we can't have a libertarian leaning republican I'd much rather see a true liberal win than another hedge fund sponsored candidate.  I don't agree with Obama on most of his choices, but I do respect the fact that he believes in some of them.  His abuse of executive orders and trampling of the 4th Amendment is inexcusable though.  He has to pick his fights, but for a constitutional scholar (which he legitimately is) he should know ending illegal snooping is more important than distributing free birth control.

But I shudder to think what's next.

It's nauseating watching elected offices being bought and sold like tickets on Craigslist.

Except for that part, you made a lot of sense.

Libertarians tend to be very good at identifying problems, but absolutely terrible at solving them.

Aren't there a ton of non-crazy libertarian politcals out there? Why are people so fixated on the Pauls? Not my cup-o-tea, but Gary Johnson seems like a much more sane choice.

gary johnson is a terrific choice but the Pauls, not unlike Obama, were in the right place at the right time, and actually have a chance of rocking the boat.

to the guy who said libertarians don't offer sol ...


Well, if your options are tax and spend or borrow and spend I'll take the former.  The spend is always going to be there, the government is always going to have to spend money, the only question is the amount of spending and how it is funded or if it is funded.
2014-07-07 05:16:44 PM  
1 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: nickdaisy: ccundiff: anfrind: ccundiff: nickdaisy: I'm a conservative (not a bomb everyone on behalf of Exxon and AIPAC neocon, but a Reagan/Goldwater type) but I don't consider Hillary a liberal.  It infuriates me how people call HRC and her ilk "liberals."  She's not progressive, she's a friggin' puppet sponsored by Goldman Sachs.  She and Obama are liberal the same way Romney and McCain are conservative.  The left and right are merging, and it's all being orchestrated by the delicate hand of Wall Street.

Additionally, I refuse to vote for another Clinton or Bush.  Half of my life has been under a Bush or Clinton presidency.  We live in the US of A, not some banana republic where politically connected families take turns wearing the presidential sash.

I'm 100% behind Rand Paul in 2016, but if we can't have a libertarian leaning republican I'd much rather see a true liberal win than another hedge fund sponsored candidate.  I don't agree with Obama on most of his choices, but I do respect the fact that he believes in some of them.  His abuse of executive orders and trampling of the 4th Amendment is inexcusable though.  He has to pick his fights, but for a constitutional scholar (which he legitimately is) he should know ending illegal snooping is more important than distributing free birth control.

But I shudder to think what's next.

It's nauseating watching elected offices being bought and sold like tickets on Craigslist.

Except for that part, you made a lot of sense.

Libertarians tend to be very good at identifying problems, but absolutely terrible at solving them.

Aren't there a ton of non-crazy libertarian politcals out there? Why are people so fixated on the Pauls? Not my cup-o-tea, but Gary Johnson seems like a much more sane choice.

gary johnson is a terrific choice but the Pauls, not unlike Obama, were in the right place at the right time, and actually have a chance of rocking the boat.

to the guy who said libertarians don't offer solutions-- if you ...


there's a difference between libertarianism and corporatism.  when corporate entities are treated like people, yet without the personal liability that would be mandated in a libertarian system, you end up with what we have now.  what we have now, and have had for a very long time, is corporatism.

the economic growth you speak of is illusory.  you can only borrow and spend for so long.  if taxing and spending were the key to economic growth the we'd all be soviets.  but now we're into a political debate, and as i pointed out earlier, that's not allowed.  you can either vote for Hillary Clinton, sponsored by the Wall Street, or whatever republican they choose other than Paul (because there's no way the establishment will ever, ever give him the nomination), who will also be sponsored by Wall Street.
2014-07-07 05:11:36 PM  
1 votes:
The.. Ironic, I guess,  thing is that this guy bankrolled the Heritage Foundation, which gave us the individual mandate part of the ACA/Obamacare. When you are always opposed to everything, sometimes you get what you demanded and it does not turn out to be what you wanted.
Here is a link to that liberal rag Forbes about it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2011/10/20/how-a-conservat iv e-think-tank-invented-the-individual-mandate/
2014-07-07 04:45:03 PM  
1 votes:

Infernalist: Which is funny since no one cares now, nor cared then, that Clinton was a poon-hound.


I don't remember anyone who cared about that.

I do remember a couple of rape accusations and a perjury charge, though.
2014-07-07 04:39:16 PM  
1 votes:
ccundiff:
Aren't there a ton of non-crazy libertarian politcals out there?

No.
2014-07-07 04:15:18 PM  
1 votes:

mongbiohazard: Oh I trust that she'll sign any legislation Wall Street wants her to. I trust she'll be roughly 90% as hawkish as any Republican who would be running against her.

And I'd still vote for her without a second thought when the alternative is to give the current GOP a single shred more power.

But yes, Warren would be greatly preferrable.


This.  Unfortunately Warren is the very epitome of an East Coast Liberal.  She was even a Harvard professor fercrisakes.  That's pretty much political poison in Real 'Murica.  Ask Mike Dukakis or John Kerry how much the rest of the country likes East Coast Liberals, especially well educated ones.  If Warren wins the nomination, she'll lose the general election.  Sadly, we're probably better off with Hillary on the ticket.

Besides Wall St. hates Warren.  She wants to aggressively investigate and prosecute the lot of them for tanking the economy in 2008.  Oh and she also thinks the minimum wage should be at least $10/hr and has made noise that it would be $22/hr if it had been tracking worker productivity since the 1960s.  No way the business community wants her in charge.
2014-07-07 03:51:42 PM  
1 votes:

Magorn: In 2008 when I read about Hillary's sit-down with Scaife's paper that was referenced in the Article, I wrote this on my own blog I had at the time (I was an angry young man way back then)

"If Richard Mellon Scaife teetering on the brink of endorsing a Clinton isn't a sign of the apocalypse I don't know what is.

But I do know one thing.  The only thing more astonishing, and debasing, than him granting it; is the fact that Hillary apparently  Soughtit.

You know how people have been urging Hillary to get out while she still has a few shreds of dignity left?
Too late.

She could be revealed to have had a prior career as the featured performer in a Tijuana donkey show  and emerge with more dignity than what she has now after abasing herself before the one man who, more than any other in this country, attempted to smear her and destroy her husband and daughter.

 Selling your body is a comparatively honorable to make a living, particularly when you are in desperate straits.  But selling your soul like this?  Is there any way to come back from it? To NOT have the awful stain of what you were willing to do for personal gain eat away at you for the rest of your life?  (sorry for the cliche but)  At long Last, has she no decency left?

And for what?  Does she seriously believe that there are thousands of PA democrats hanging on the words of the country's most notorious arch-conservative before they decide how to cast their votes?  And even if they were, were they REALLY worth cozy up to THIS man to get?

What the HELL was she thinking?

Well, if It's any consolation to her,  I think this has to be rock bottom.  I'm not sure it's physically possible to sink any lower."

In retrospect, given everything that's happened since.  I stand by each and every one of those words.  A bit purple, maybe, but not by much.   This is why I was overjoyed when I say the other GL thread about Obama reportedly quietly promising Warren support if she runs.  I really do want an alternative to Hillary.  I simply do not trust her judgment.


Oh I trust that she'll sign any legislation Wall Street wants her to. I trust she'll be roughly 90% as hawkish as any Republican who would be running against her.

And I'd still vote for her without a second thought when the alternative is to give the current GOP a single shred more power.

But yes, Warren would be greatly preferrable.
2014-07-07 03:48:14 PM  
1 votes:
Hillary is also "good friends" with Henry Kissinger.

because she's such a liberal.
2014-07-07 03:30:43 PM  
1 votes:
He bankrolled the White House Travel Office?  Isn't that illegal?
2014-07-07 03:30:21 PM  
1 votes:

Magorn: In retrospect, given everything that's happened since.  I stand by each and every one of those words.  A bit purple, maybe, but not by much.   This is why I was overjoyed when I say the other GL thread about Obama reportedly quietly promising Warren support if she runs.  I really do want an alternative to Hillary.  I simply do not trust her judgment.


I am right on board with you, maybe not as passionately but with similar reason. Hillary is a perfect example of how our country continues to shift right, but she's getting to the point where she's next to the big seat. Either Bernie Sanders moves a ton of new weight into the Independent scene or Warren takes back her denial of the chance, otherwise it's Hillary's election to take. Better than the choices with the R next to their names, but still not ideal.

This is by no means over yet though, as we saw in 2007 and 2008. It would be funny to see all the vitriol for her just up and disappear if she loses another primary and the hatemongers need to fear the person who beats her instead. Years of effort...

/but really, voters need to get out there in the midterms and slow some of the anti-progress that could happen
2014-07-07 03:16:49 PM  
1 votes:

Magorn: borg: If Whitewater was a conspiracy then why did 18 people go to prison over it including a Governor of  Arkansas. Amazing everyone involved was dirty except The Clintons.

Mostly for absurd charges only tangentially related to the original ones.  When you have a prosecutor who was appointed to look into a land deal in Arkansas investigating the president's mistress on non-criminal sexual conduct in the White house that happened a decade after said land deal, well you know precisely how far off the rails the whole thing went


fishingtroutunlimited.files.wordpress.com

The Whitewater prosecutor in action
2014-07-07 03:14:31 PM  
1 votes:

Apos: As James Carville and Mary Matalin have shown, it *can* be done.


Most politicians are passionate about getting elected and staying in office.  Anything else is secondary.
2014-07-07 03:11:07 PM  
1 votes:
So, how long till they update the Clinton Murder List with his name?

/and will it be on the Obama Murder List too?
2014-07-07 03:06:48 PM  
1 votes:

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Scaife was a big deal in my neck of the woods. He had his hands in a lot of non-profits, think tanks, and media in order to facilitate his agenda. It'll be interesting to hear the dirt that comes out over the next few months. (It'll also be interesting to see which ones collapse without his largess.)


My guess?  He walked around with a butt plug fashioned in the shape of Bill Clinton shoved up his cheeks.  Went nowhere without it.  It'll wind up in the Smithsonian.
2014-07-07 02:18:09 PM  
1 votes:
Scaife was a big deal in my neck of the woods. He had his hands in a lot of non-profits, think tanks, and media in order to facilitate his agenda. It'll be interesting to hear the dirt that comes out over the next few months. (It'll also be interesting to see which ones collapse without his largess.)
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report