I'm curious. If Bill Clinton is so great at political manurevering.....

[icymist]

then where is he during this fight for our Democracy? In such times when our country is facing the complete dominance of one political idealogy.... to the point of ramming it down the opposition's throat, I need to ask, where are our leaders? I mean this for you Bill Clinton... stop joining yourself to the hip of George Bush senior and come to the aid of the American people! We're the ones who gave that power to you. Please don't abandoned us.

[DistressedAmerican]

1. On Wolf Refusing To Celare Bush's Folly "A Mistake".

I thought it was "weasel words"! Rather spineless.

[bluestateguy]

2. It was implied

He said he favored the inspections being allowed to work. If he were in the White House this war would not have happened.

If he said it was a mistake then the news media would all go into a conniption and very little would be substantivley gained. The current president has a lot more influence over what happens in Iraq than Bill Clinton.

[Jamastiene]

5. You are right.

I posted too about this situation. Clinton is doing the best he can under the circumstances. He doesn't have the power any more. He can only advise the party on what would be the best strategy to win American for '08 and try to work for peace as an ex-president. He doesn't have the power to stop Bush, unfortunately. And he is walking a fine line. If he came out and said anything antiwar at all, I'd go as far as to predict he'd be assassinated by the Bush supporters. We definitely DO NOT want that.

[anitar1]

10. So tell me what it is that he is doing, please.

He is a creature of the DLC, as is Hilary. DLC people are practically in lockstep with the Pugs.

[Jamastiene]

20. Providing relief effort organization for the

tsunami victims. That's all for now, that I know of.

[Skidmore]

32. He can step up and be a conscientious citizen. I don't think

he will because it will affect Hillary's whatever plans.

Too bad, because they could speak as one, if they chose.

[DistressedAmerican]

22. If He Can Imply It, Why He Can Very Well Say The Fucking Words.

He should be leading marches and trying to stop this war. As should the rest of this miserable fucking country.

ANYONE that does not act to end this was is as bad as those that support it, as they are willing to sit back and watch the death continue.

He is not a leftist, he is an appeaser! Plain and simple.

Bill, work against the war or you are no better than its supporters.

[Jamastiene]

3. Well. I think it's a tricky proposition.

We do need to stop terrorism. And we do need to do something to stop the wave of extremism that has lead to all this anti-America hate that others have for us, but when it comes to how we are supposed to do it, Clinton doesn't have that much power. Going over to help organize the Tsunami relief may keep people in those areas from joining militant groups. And it's possible that in the devestated shape they are in they would be tempted. Helping them out as much as possible is one of the best ways to show them we aren't all bad. It's a start. It shows the kinder side of America for him to do that. I, like you, do wish he could or would do more for us here in America too. At least if he could rally the party to stand up in the important legislative issues.

[DistressedAmerican]

23. Our Country Has Been Taken Over By Fascists And He Is Running Around With

Poppy!

If he was an american patriot, he's be fighting these fuckers as hard as I am. When I look at someone that has that kind of influence and they are not willing to take a stand for AMERICA, I have to call him part of the problem.

Tsunami relief is wonderful. But, it does nothing to restore sanity to HIS HOME COUNTRY, which is in utter chaos!

[Jamastiene]

27. Has it ever ocurred to you that he may well be

fighting them under the radar. Look, the truth is that while making public statements against Bush and his cronies might seem glamorous and may rally some of us, it doesn't ever really lead to any real change or anything substantial. If we want to do some real damage to the right wingnuts who have total power right now, our best bet is to pull the rug out from under them without them knowing it. :D

The best thing to do is to try to stop terrorists before they hatch. Terrorists, let's face it, are a threat to our country. If Clinton can aid in tsunami relief and sprout some roots in that area of the world, then he can also at the same time show a new face of America they haven't seen before. That will stop many budding terrorists from a psychological standpoint. And it will have effects that aren't immediately seen. Later, when this terrorism threat begins to dissipate, and stopping new ones from plotting against us will help the real war on terror, Bush will have no more excuses for more new wars. He will have no legs to stand on when it comes to invading countries that have oil for profit. He'll have to actually answer why he profitted in his oil wars and didn't nothing substantial to fight terrorism while the dems did the real work to stop terrorism.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tritsofme]

12. The same problem that has given us our only two Presidential wins

over the past 7 elections?

If a once in a generation politician like Clinton is the problem, I'd hate to see the solution.

[Doo_Revolution]

13. Solution?

The solution is to elect people like Paul Hackett for every position, and stop putting faith in any pity-patsy candidates which is what the DLC has created. They are the party of Al From and Will Marshall, the corporations party.

[JHB]

21. ...Our only two presidential wins, and ONLY our two presidential wins...

...keep that in mind. Meanwhile the Repugs advanced in congress and every other political front. BC's charisma and intellect seems to make a lot of people forget it, but he mostly looked out for himself and would sell out anyone who merely trusted him and didn't keep one of his arms twisted (see NAFTA, the telecom bill, Sista Souljah, etc.). A lot of people who bought the propaganda/wishful thinking that BC was a liberal or progressive found themselves left high and dry.

* may prove that there's worse things than that, but for all his talent and ability, BC's been almost as much a part of the problem as the Rethugs. He won, but he didn't build any sort of infrastructure that would stop them. And he's still not doing it.

You want to get him working for a real progressive cause, for a fair, just America where "the little guy" has some sort of protection from the razor blades of "free trade" and a modicum of security? The find a way to twist his arm, and threaten to break it if he forgets who's twisting it.

[Jamastiene]

30. I'm with you.

He was also the first dem re-elected in a long long time too.

[icymist]

6. In the ditch with Cindy Sheehan, where is he?

He doesn't actually have to be in the ditch, but express something!? Bill Clinton, where are you here? Since I've first heard your name mentioned as a presidential hopeful, I've had my hopes on you. I always knew you would do good towards the American people and the world in general. Please speak up here. You are needed.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KG]

8. many people still don't get it about the clintons.

[Disturbed]

9. What I get is that they are both...

Repub Lites. They are in the Power Club of the Oligarchy that rules Amerika. Corporate Amerika is Multi-Natl. Capitalism is the priority, not democracy.

[anitar1]

11. AMEN! I have no illusions about them. n/t

[Pepperbelly]

14. clinton haters ...

As bad as the righties...

Same shit.

I challenge any of you to find any living politician who did more to raise the standards of living for the average American than Bill Clinton.

If you want someone who agrees with you 100% of the time, go run for office. Otherwise, point out to me what you've done that is so vastly superior to what Clinton did for us.

[Larkspur]

15. Well, Clinton lovers, explain to me why the Dem Party declined under

Clinton's term? Clinton and the DLC decided to court corporate cash and screw blue collar and low income workers. That decision helped sow the seeds of the problems we face now.

Clinton is mainly interested in only himself and his legacy. He could care less now about ordinary folks.

[Pepperbelly]

16. so ... who has done more?

When people get far enough to the left, they are virtually indistinguishable from those on the far right.

I am a "low income" worker. So are my co-workers. And we would take Bill Clinton back in a microsecond. It is only those who are comfortable that don't know the difference.

[Jamastiene]

28. I wish I could afford to stand on

"there is no difference between the two parties" line, but I'm with you. I'd take Clinton back so fast, it'd make a person's head spin. It's bold to point out that there ARE problems with both parties taking corporate big bucks and screwing average Americans over, but if you are barely surviving AND are working full time, you have to take help where you feel you could best get it the quickest to keep from absolutely dying, literally. And for now, that is still, why it's too early for the argument. While it's absolutely true what Ralph Nader said, the fact is that most of us can't make that kind of leap yet, because we are one paycheck away from homelessness or possibly death in some cases. The working poor still when it comes right down to it has to deal with the harsh reality that a sick family member could die without the medicines and extra warmth and help that that paycheck and only that paycheck are going to help us with because we don't qualify for medicaid, welfare, medicare, or any other form of government help. We are living from hand to mouth and our lives depend on it.

[Jamastiene]

26. While NAFTA was a disaster and needed some real "fair trade"

provisions added to it, Clinton still did a lot to help those of us who were below the poverty level but not on welfare. That's right. Many of us don't get help from the government because we don't have x number of children, so we can't have welfare. Believe it or not, he helped those of us who fall in that category and he gave us one of the most important things we needed, hope.

And yes, I will concede that he made a mistake by not properly grooming some of the less charismatic dems in the party in time for his departure from the White House. I'll agree the party could have used some help. If you think about it though, logically his best hopeful "next of kin" to run for our party was his vice president who hardened into a knot on a log when he tried to run for president. If Al Gore had just relaxed and tried to be himself, like he is on talk shows, while running, he would have been able to win easily enough that they wouldn't have been able to claim there was a "close call". All he had to do was be himself. The man has charisma when he's relaxed, but when he tries to turn serious, he blows it. I hate that, because I liked him. Unfortunately, we are screwed.

Arguing about what Clinton or Gore could do isn't going to change the thing that hangs over all our heads right now. If 911 had never happened, we might stand a chance. As of right now, we just have to stick together and not argue so hard about things that aren't going to happen. Clinton would get massacred if he went out on a limb publicly. If you think about it, it's better not to make controversial public remarks in the situation we are in right now. Right now, staying under the radar and taking the one thing the right wing has over our head out from under them, like more new terrorists to name and target in order to keep people's knees knocking is probably the best effort he can make. I say just give it time. You'll see that Clinton is doing a lot more than you think he is. Later. It will be known.

While I agree he made a few compromises that didn't completely satisfy those of us who lean more to the left that he did, you have to give him credit for being the first politician to keep his promises. That is something that impressed me. Like I said, for me personally, I have a few minor qualms about the things he did as president, but overall, I'd still rather have him than Bush.

[rman]

17. "criticism = hate"

Dude, you frame like a RW-er.

[Pepperbelly]

18. at least I stay away from their biggest obsession...

the Clenis.

And I look to the lives of regular people, the ones that struggle to make ends meet. Most of the lefties pay lip service to them but don't really understand. If you understood the lives of the working poor, you'd know that BC was their best friend. And most of us know it.

[rman]

19. Sure, NAFTA is real good for the working poor.

Things were better under Clinton then they were/are under the Bushies, but it's not very hard to be better then them.

[Pepperbelly]

24. better than under ANY past administration ...

it's easy to nitpick but I think you are as wrong as you can be. You seem to hold good hostage to perfect and that is a fool's game.

[rman]

31. I think it's foolish to apologize for the lesser of many evils,

merely on the ground that it is the lesser of many evils.

It suggest that we can't have or don't deserve better.

[Pepperbelly]

33. That's not where I went ...

I am just not in the business of denying reality to support an ideological stance.

[rman]

34. Do you have a pro-NAFTA ideology?

[Pepperbelly]

35. NAFA has been a reality bearing down on us ...

since the whole globalization movement started. I don't care for it much, just as I don't care much for the sol-called fair trade stances which seem to me would also be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, just a different baby.

But since you hav e decided to hold Bill Clinton repsonsible for it, there really isn't many other places to go.

I care for the WTO even less.

[rman]

36. Well, Clinton did not try to stop it did he? Which is why it is reality

Of course Clinton is not the only one responsible for it - but if politicians are not responsible for the creation and implementation of trade agreements, then who is?

FTA's are not an inevitability caused by globalization, but rather globalization is enabled by these FTA's. These agreements are one of the ways in which globalization is being implemented.

[Pepperbelly]

37. I certainly don't know what it would take to both enhance trade ...

opportunities while protecting our workers and manufacturing base. I suspect that you do not know how either. Neither did Bill.

What would you have had him to do? His embrace of trade was one of the factors in our prosperity in the 90s, a prosperity that lifted more poor people from poverty than any other period.

edited for typo

[rman]

38. If international trade agreements can be made that favor

corporations, then why not international labor agreements regarding minimum wage, worker protections and environmental protection? I know: because the powers that can make such agreements don't want to, because such agreements would not benefit them.

[Jamastiene]

29. Critisizing his isn't necessarily hate, but

not pointing out that he had good qualities along with the criticism does seem like hate. That's all.

[never_get_over_it]

25. i'm not a Clinton hater

but even though times were good under his Presidency he supported NAFTA which is a disaster for the working class - and a boom for the corporations. Also he won't speak up in anyway that might jeopardize Hillary's run in '08. I like Clinton way more than I don't the man is a brainiac and has done alot of good BUT he is an extreme oportunist for himself - and I think he should stand up and take advantage of his infulence - but he won't - he is close to repunk light and the really unfortunate part of it is that Hillary is more repunk light than Bill is - and repunk light won't win an election.

The other thing this "friendship" with Poppy Bush makes me want to puke.

[Liberal In Texas]

39. I have a little shock for you..**BILL CLINTON IS RETIRED.**

The man was a 2 term president. He is now doing other stuff.

His WIFE IS (political), but he is not.

And last I heard, he was still fighting for democracy.