Bill Clinton: Obama 'Literally Not Part of Any of the Good Things' From the 1990s

Let's remind people of the not-so-good times during the Clinton's administration. So far, Hillary has:

Failed to reach out to the youth vote, yet she says that she "is" experienced. Failed to reach out to the smaller states, yet she says that she "is" experienced. Failed to conduct an early grassroots platform, yet she says that she "is" experienced. Failed to use current technology as a new force to get voters involved, yet she says that she "is" experienced. Should we revert back to the 90’s, so that we can redefine the meaning of the word, ‘is’?”

For those of you who do not remember Bill Clinton's presidency in the 1990's, he was almost impeached for lying under oath about having relations with his intern, Monica Lewinsky, and he narrowly escaped by redefining the word, "is." Read this excerpt from Wikipedia on what Bill Clinton told the grand jury:

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."

Timothy Noah, a senior writer for Slate Magazine went on to state, "Bill Clinton really is a guy who's willing to think carefully about "what the meaning of the word 'is' is." This is way beyond slick. Perhaps we should start calling him, "Existential Willie."

Sigh, the good ole 90's.

The best thing Bill Clinton can do for the Obama campaign is keep talking. It only resurrects "the ick factor"- the sense that the Clintons are primarily political animals who have greater than average difficulties with the truth. Fair or not, those negative impressions matter, as do the positive ones that tend to follow Obama. Hillary's campaign must minimize the importance of Obama's ability to connect and inspire voters, as well as sell the idea that he lacks substance. They have no choice. But both of those claims are hollow, and making them only reinforces the Clintons' image as being creatures of politics more than principle.

Obama?!?...

- Only a short time as Senator from Illinois.
- Most accomplishments as a young lawyer and community organizer.
- Thinks he can change the country to make things better for those who are not getting a fair part of the American dream.
- Gives speeches that are full of promises for a better future and unity.
- Trying to move our government in a new direction?!?

Does all his hope, inspiration and promises stuff sound familiar?

Think about it and vote!!!

First of all, Obama didn't vote for the war because he wasn't even in the senate at the time. He did not get elected unitl 2006! Secondly, he may state he was against the war from the beginning, but he has voted for every appropriation bill that has passed through the senate since he got there. If Obama is so against this war, why does he continue to give Bush the money to fight it? This sounds like more Kerry double speak to me, but instead this time it goes like - "I was against it before I voted for it".

Please, do not let this vote be an emotional one, but instead a logical one. Any Democrat voting logically would support Hillary Clinton.

Lots and lots of Dem will vote for McCain, if sweet talk Obama become nomanee. you can count on it.

Obama was not a part of any good things happening in the 90's and God Willing, Obama will stay out of the 2000's and 2010's, so more good things will happen!

True Kris but no one can predict the future so who are any of us to say what will happen if Hillary wins. Im sure that many people were not expecting George Bush to win in Florida and I remember people disliking him. Now look at the future he is loved by many many Republicans. I personally believe many Senators should grow up and all work together..but like thats ever gonna happen.

True Kris but no one can predict the future so who are any of us to say what will happen if Hillary wins. Im sure that many people were not expecting George Bush to win in Florida and I remember people disliking him. Now look at the future he is loved by many many Republicans. I personally believe many Senators should grow up and all work together..but like thats ever gonna happen.

Kate, let's not forget that we have an institution in our federal government called the Senate, without the support of, nothing can get done. That's where the Hillary polarization will be most evident, outside of the high negatives that she has in the polls. Without 60 votes in the Senate, nothing gets done. It's not like the House, where the majority party can ram things down the throat of the minority. That means that if you have a polarizing person in the white house, as Clinton definitely is as evidenced by the Republican rhetoric against her and by the nearly 50% negative numbers that she polls at, nothing will get done. So she might sound like she can get everything done, but without working together, without the 60 votes in the Senate, NOTHING happens. Unless the democratic party wins a bunch of upsets in Senate bids this year, but right now, that looks like a pipe dream. We'll be able to get more done with a less controversial, less polarizing person sitting in the White House. Plain and simple.

The republicans are loving the obama game

Makes it far easier for them to win the Presidency

I say wake up America

Don't be pumped up on False hopes and empty promises. A President needs to be able to do more than give you pipe dreams.

It is time for a Reality Check

It appears that both Bill and Obama are birds of the same feathers. Neither of them really like to remember the ugly parts of their experience during the 90s.

Bill Clinton: "Obama 'Literally Not Part of Any of the Good Things' From the 1990s".

I wouldn't say ANY of the good things, but certainly SOME. It all depends on what your definition of "GOOD" is. I'm quite certain that Obama doesn't WANT to be part of some of the "good" things Bill Clinton did in the WH during the 1990s.

"Here Is A Wake Up Call"; These 2 Presidential Candidates here John McCain and Hillary Clinton, do alot of traveling around together.1 is a Republican, and the other a Demoract! We got a angrey Old man and a lady who talkes about not having Hope!

Hillary says speeches and talk is cheap, and not to have hope in Politics? Wake up Americans this is a Presidential Candidate! So is she telling us not to have Hope amd Faith in voting for a President? I think she is! Come-On this is like having a stack of bricks hit you in the head! This Country was built on Hope;Hope, that there can be a better tomorrow! The Time for Change is now, and his name is Obama, he gives America Hope for a better Tomorrow!

My profound appologies to Jason Wynguard and any others who may have been offended by my posting. I intended to only draw attention to concequences of getting caught up in the rhetoric of charismic people.he was indeed "white as a lily"and I totaly agree with you the sooner we can judge people purely on their character and substance instead of Biases (race ,gender etc.)the sooner we will truly be a united nation.

Has anyone really looked at Obama's record? All I hear from Obama supporters is he's about "hope and change", he's "inspirational", of course he has specifics and positions just "check his website", his nomination and potential Presidency would be "symbolic". I totally understand the relevence and merit of hope, inspiration, change and symbolism
but I swear if I told the Obama supporters I personally know that Obama had made a statement that the first thing he would do in office is nuke Iran, I don't think they'd really care.
I have waited years to see the Democrats come up with a nominee who has charisma to the degree Obama has and who doesn't come off like he/she has the personality of a can of corn but there also needs to be substance.
All of Obama's attributes are important but so is experience. If you look closely at his record it's no more impressive than Clintons- his 6-7 times where he pressed the wrong button to vote and then could comfortable say " I voted this but meant to vote this"; his 140-150 "present " votes where he could do things like block anti-abortion bills but escape the political repercussions- hey, you're either on board or not, talk about a lack of political courage; his public scolding and good bill he came up with when one of his primary contributors Exelon, one the of the country's largest nuclear power producers, had leaks in their plant which outraged residents in the Illinois area and then he turned around and rewrote the bill to accomodate Exelon, the nuclear regulators and Republicans (that bill didn't make it through the Senate- he did the public scolding of one his largest contributors and can say he came up with a good bill and tout that in his speeches but then he turns around and tries to appease the other side at the expense of the resident's in that area; he comes out against going to Iraq before he's even in a position to vote and then we he is in the Senate he votes identical to Clinton on funding a war he didn't believe in or support with one exception, he supported the confirmation of Condoleeza Rice and she didn't; he votes against a bill that would have capped credit interest rates at a maximum of 30%, why?, because according to him 30% "was just a random number" and yet he says he's got the better interests at heart of those most vulnerable to predatory lenders being the young, the elderly, people of color and those struggling financially. You can throw all the crap you want out there about Clinton but Obama is no better- he takes less money from lobbyists (she acknowledges this while he talks like he's taken none- he took more than Edwards did) but he matches or surpasses Clinton if Corporate contributions from places like Exelon and financial insitutions like JP Morgan Chase. Clinton should account for her record but so should Obama and I'm sick of hearing everytime he's called to task how it's "negative" or "racist" and how when the Clinton camp brings up his record they're "attacking" but when Obama does it he's "suggesting".

We are in this mess of 8yrs Bush term and all thanks to Bill Clinton. If he had not screwed Monica, lied under oath and caused all those dirty scandals, Al Gore would have won that election against Bush. What does Bill want us to do now? to vote for his wife and have another Clinton in power? Hell no, Hillary can't be our next president and the earlier we get this into our big heads, the better for we all. We got to sit up, think of where our economy is gonna be in the next 3 or 4 yrs.

Yes, Obama came out vocally against going into Iraq before he was ever in the Senate and could vote. A brave thing to do, no doubt, while in the middle of a campaign. Once Obama actually entered the Senate though where was his voice? He got in and supported unconditional funding for the war, his votes being identical to Hillary's with one exception and that vote was a pro-Bush vote. Obama broke with other Democrats, including Hillary, and voted to confirm Condoleeza Rice. He made no speeches in the Senate regarding Iraq until almost a full year after being there and then he asked for a reduction in troops without a timetable and in fact voted against an amendment Feingold and Kerry had with a timetable in place. He campaigned in 2006 for pro-war Lieberman rather than anti-war Ned Lamont. He made a statement that had he actually been in the Senate at the time of the vote, the vote he's pummeling Hillary about, that he really couldn't say how he would have voted having been given information that he was not privvy to while not in the Senate. His explanation for that statement today (and he acknowledges having made it) is that he was basically trying to make Lieberman feel good and justify his support of Lieberman. If you want courage and inspiration in regards to his stance on Iraq than real courage would have demanded he not vote to fund a war he felt was wrong and did not believe in. He never even came close to doing so. If he had his presidential aspirations would have been shot down because his not voting to fund the war would have been construed as not supporting our troops. So he's done nothing different than Clinton with the exception of having placed one pro-Bush vote she didn't and having spoken out about the war while she was in the Senate and he was not- but did nothing different afterwards.

Let take a good hard look at Bill Clinton's detractors. First, there was Rep. Henry Hyde who was one of the nine representatives from the House who prosecuted President Clinton. Rep. Hyde had an affair with a woman for over 20 years while still married.

Then there is Newt Gingrich. He left his wife while she was suffereing from cancer and undergoing chemo therapy for a 27-year old woman.

Then there is Dick Morris, a clear Clinton detractor, who was fired by the Clintons when his affair was discovered. His wife did forgive him, and Mr. Morris stayed married.

During the height of the impeachment frenzy, a newly elected Speaker of the House had to resign because Larry Flint of Hustler Magazine revealed the new Speaker's previous infidelity.

Lets talk about George W. Bush. He AWOL from the Texas National Guard to go to Harvard B-school. He was also a lush for many years and had business relations with Salem Bin Laden.

Need I go on? The issue is that we all have our skeletons. I think that is time to sit at the grown ups table and acknowledge that people are not perfect.