Bill Clinton, Colombia, 2005

for al lthe naysayers, there is so much more to this story of colombia. do you know we have american troops fighting in colombia in a their civil war? google mena airport, the cocaine importing agency (CIA) and bill and hill are all over it. they are are an insidiuos lot.

If Bill and Hillary filed a joint return
what part of the $800,000 speaking fee was used to loan $5million toHillary's campaign? Isn't it against the law for a foreign government to contribute to a Presidential canpaign?

I have to ask people, what is wrong with Michelle speaking her mind of being proud of her country for the first time in her adult life? Heck, I am too. People who are unaware accuse her of a crime for saying that. Can you imagine, she's traveled from coast to coast and people are chanting for her husband even in the deep south. It is very emotional and impressive. So, saying that does not make her a bad person, just HUMAN! Please people get on with the real problems and quit making evil of Michelle's sincerity.

FREE TRADE IS NOT ALWAYS FREE, and Not all trading partners are alike.

Here's an example of free trade's headaches when dealing with a not so friendly foreign power ....

Chavez making decisions on a Lousiana refinery? Rules are needed and some oversight is required.

what is your choice?

Hillary, along with the input of Bill who will go down in history as one of our most successful presidents..

or
Barry, who can't talk the talk without listening to someone elses solutions first... and then only when the teleprompter work.... and his beloved wife, the unbeloved Michelle once he releases her from prison..../
Oh yeah.... and the third member of this triumvirate.... the very wrong pastor wright...

Or

Mcain and his beloved Cindy.... who at least keeps her mouth shut?

Joan - I agree - if this was a simple disagreement - say about whether Americans should carry the Olympic torch, who cares? Of course married couples disagree - especially political ones.

The problem is a lot bigger than that, though. 1) Since day, the Clintons has presented themselves as a joint team. Hillary's "35 years of experience" is based on a foundation of 8 years in the White House. 2) This involves money, and a lot of it - almost a million dollars. The Colombians gave Clinton that mney for the same reason lobbyists get paid - influence. 3) The Clintons didn't bother to let us know they had their hands in the pot until they were forced to - when they finally released their tax returns. 4) Hillary is running on a fiercely pro-union platform when her husband, and two of her chief strategists were accepting money to fight for the most violent anti-union government in the Americas (fairplay - Wolfson resigned his day job first). 4) The free-trade agreement with Colombia has as much to do with human rights as it does with money or influence. the Colombians are not just opposing union leaders, they are murdering them. I do not want anyone who supports the Uribe government even in the White House, let alone in a position as an unelected co-president.

She benefited in her personal joint bank account for the lobbying. How can she not be held accountable for this? Wow, this is a bullet train to the biggest gross abuse of power I have ever seen. She says one thing, he does another. She gets off, they both benefit financially. Clever, but we cannot let this happen.

Well Well, Hillary backers:

Now let's see if we got this right.

Bill is promoting trade with Col0mbia, but Hillary disagrees.

Bill was in support of NAFTA, but Hillary disagrees.

Bill was in support of Monica, but Hillary disagrees.

Hell, Bill's the man.

Or we are all being lied to again as Bill and Daddy Bush hold hands going all over the world preaching the same message that Hillary will allow Bill to do (another Bush) and get away with.
Just as she has done with her own family problems.
Love Bill and Hillary, but (BIG BUT), WE NEED A CHANGE FROM THE BUSH IDEAS.

BLEEDING IS NOT FUN; BEING BEATING BY THE RIGHT WING RULE IS NOT FUN.

OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT

If we elect Hillary, we get Bill. Plain and simple backdoor business deals and God know what else. If we get Hillary and Bill, she will SAY one thing publicly and he will DO ANYTHING HE WANTS TO behind the scenes. That $109 million will be chump change to what they could pull off.

Bill can make all the backdoor deals he wants to, Hillary will run cover for him, but the deals will get done. The deals get done on the backs of small Americans.

We can't let that happen to this country. We are in real economic straits and they just want to line their pockets. We have to say NO MORE CLINTONS and hope in the process we cripple them forever politically.

Come on, the Colombians didn't pay Bill Clinton $800,000 for a speach without quid pro quo. The Colombians didn't fire Penn for no reason. They thought he was speaking for the CLINTONS and was going to deliver them the whole Clinton Package.

Dear Mrs. Clinton,
I am deeply concerned by the fact that you are surrounded by people who accept money from foreign powers and corporations. What if your now famous 3am call turns out to be from a Sheikh reminding you you owe him a favor? How can you fully defend US interests (or for that matter Israel's) under such circumstances?
Would you be kind enough to explain why the solutions you now have to all America's problems have not been implemented during the 8 years of your husband's presidency or defended since you are a Senator? Also, I wonder how (I mean HOW, not what) you will set up a decent health care system. You failed to do so a few years ago, having all the time you needed to focus on the matter. And how about trade treaties such as NAFTA (which you once supported) and Colombia? What about Wal-Mart from whom you have received benefits in the past while workers were being paid the lowest possible wages?
Could you explain why you now want to urgently end a war you have voted for before goals you have supported are reached?
I would be most grateful to receive information on your generous tax-deductible donations to charities. How much of that went to the Clinton Library or Foundation, if anything? And, by the way, could you let us know who are the contributors to these institutions, including the amounts paid by each of them?
It would be good to clarify your position concerning the role of super-delegates. I heard you saying only super-delegates will count at the Convention. I have also heard you telling voters in States like Pennsylvenia, Florida and Michigan that their votes are crucial and that democracy is democracy. This seems contradictory.
These answers will help voters to make up their minds.
Thank you very much.

The Clinton's are despicable. Not as despicable as Obama but despicable nonetheless.

You all are funny, comparing Michelle Obama's job with the hospital when he was a state official and one of Obama's 50 advisors who didn't have the authority to speak on behalf of Obama... to Bill Clinton who is entrenched in national government pitching a massive trade initiative and taking a million dollars "for speaking" ... he is a lobbyist...a very powerful lobbyist with a different name who will be living in the white house with Sen Clinton.

The Commander Guy -- You're absolutely correct. What was it that Goolsbee was saying to Canada while Obama was pitching his message to Ohio?

Would this not be like a lobbyist living in and sleeping in the same bed as the president of the United States.

Different Opinions are fine...but if someone takes money or should I say close to a million dollars from an organization whose purpose is to pass legislation through the American government and gets up and says they believe in that groups cause ...isn't that a lobbyist.

At worst should we elect someone who is a spouse of someone who actively takes political involvement in a cause that is the opposite of what they say and are running on?

Will we see any stories on Michelle and the hospital where she worked, the connections to Obama and the $300,000 raise Michelle received?

LOM

I'm not sure having a candidate that is both for and against the trade deals is a good thing.

LOM,

I agree. Of course, the Clintons can and do differ on free trade with Columbia. After reviewing the issue, I see two very arguments, for and against. In fact, from what I now see, I would probably be voting for a full free trade agreement. I am not anti-union at all, but Columbia/Uribe, as a staunch ally in South America, should not be discounted. Think of the SA despots who hate the USA.

@antoine | Apr 10, 2008 10:44:27 AM:

And they aren't allowed to have differing views? In that experience as first lady, we now know that she had reservations about NAFTA, according to recounts by David Gergen. So, she was able to have conflicting views then but not now?

people place Hill and Bill together because she running off of his experience, being his first lady meaning bill will be hers. See the point.

Jack, no personal opinion quip at the end of this story? No, thoughtful question for us discerning bloggers to ponder and thus post a comment?

Well, allow me to shoehorn one in for you:

Hmmm, per David Gergen, she was a "good soldier" during the ratification of NAFTA, but secretly denounced it. What about Bill on this issue? Is this sexism?

What are your thoughts?