Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Monday, December 01, 2008

President-elect Barack Obama will hold a veto over Bill Clinton's $400,000-a-pop speaking engagements under a detailed legal deal that allows Hillary Clinton to become Secretary of State.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

Geo_W_Bush

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

I am still trying to figure out what group of morons would pay Bill Clinton $400,000 for a speech?!!!

What's he going to tell you - how to bang a young intern, provide no oversight during the dot com stock crash and lose millions of jobs but still get credited with great economic expansion, miss Osama which led to 9/11 and failured to go over al Qaeda after the first World Center bombings, get impeached and still get dumb liberals to shell out $400,000 a speech? Hmmm. Than again, maybe I can sneak in and see that speeach afterall.

"Trustees" who have donated at least $1m to the foundation include the Saudi royal family, the governments of Dubai, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei and Taiwan, Saudi businessmen, the Deputy Prime Minister of Lebanon, Issam Fares, the film director Steven Spielberg and the heir to the Wal-Mart retail empire Alice Walton.

----

Hhhhmmmm...interesting.

The only way the Clinton's would agree to such an deal is if Hillary's new gig will hold better dividends for them in the bigger picture.

Now, what could that be...hmmmm...

Have they published the secret donor list yet?

The problem with Bill may not be over the past list of donors and groups he has spoke in front of--


The problem is what he does in the future..


And since this is going in front of the Senate--so we should be able to see the list.

Someone should I suppose. They're all parasites drunk on power, in it together for power, power only, power, power, power. The Repubs are not better. Sigh....

I'm getting very depressed....

I am still trying to figure out what group of morons would pay Bill Clinton $400,000 for a speech?!!!
#1 | Posted by utastaff


Think it might be the same crowd that paid Reagan $2 million to deliver a pair of 20-minute speeches and make a few pubic appearances when he left the presidency in disgrace?

"...when he left the presidency in disgrace?"
#6 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

I don't know if I'd call it a "disgrace". His VP did win the 88 election you know. Other than that, I don't disagree with your point.

I'd call Iran-Contra a disgrace. On that one it strikes me Reagan was (pick one or more): (a) in the loop and lying, (b) out of the loop and clueless.

Hmmm.... I would call the Iran-Contra a defining moment in Reagan's Presidency that made him a Great President. Thanks to Reagan I was able to move to Colts Neck and buy a few horses

I'd call Iran-Contra a disgrace. On that one it strikes me Reagan was (pick one or more): (a) in the loop and lying, (b) out of the loop and clueless.
#8 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Yes, but most of the major players never had to pay a price. Hell, Even Oliver North has a multi-million dollar deal as a broadcast "journalist". So while you are technically correct from a constitutional perspective, in a practical sense, in terms of popular opinion, you are off the mark.

It's similar to the kind of disgrace Bush will be remembered as.


Yet another stallion milker.

The idea that a former president has to have his speaking engagements approved by a sitting president is unprecedented. I'm not sure if I think this deal is ethically sound, but I guess his refusal to go along would be a dealbreaker for Hillary.

Maybe Bill and Hillary really do love eachother?

"The idea that a former president has to have his speaking engagements approved by a sitting president is unprecedented."

Certainly as is having the spouse of a former President serving at Cabinet level in an Administration. Such a situation is inherently precedent-setting. And all cabinet members' spouses are subject to certain restrictions on their activities. I don't think this is really that much different.

And yes, I really do think Bill & Hill love each other. Who are we to judge, IMO.

"And all cabinet members' spouses are subject to certain restrictions on their activities. I don't think this is really that much different."
#13 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I don't know how I feel about that, but I'm not going to argue the point with you.

"And yes, I really do think Bill & Hill love each other. Who are we to judge, IMO."
#13 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I'm just saying that Bill Clinton's williingness to go along with an agreement like that in order to Sec State for his wife has to be proof if ever there was any question of his love for her.

I mean this is Bill f'ing Clinton we're talking about. Who'd ever have thought that anybody would be able to muzzle HIM?!

How in the world is Barry going to enforce this? Bill is going to jerk his chain the first chance he gets.

all you have to do is read this from a poster to know that they are off the wall

left in disgrace???

please..............


and there is word out that he is being considered to REPLACE THE LITTLE WOMEN IN THE SEnate......

surely not

I guess approval of Clinton speeches is just too important an issue to vote "present" over.

Glad to see Obama is getting his priorities straight!

Poor old Theo. The shock of Obama's easy victory has locked his ability to communicate into recycling old, now insignificant talking points.

...blinds him to what is coming!

#19 | Posted by TheOneBS


Ooh quick... let me add clairvoyance to Theo's many, many talents.

But thanks for being a true American and hoping the new President fails.

You're quite welcome. I'm taking my que from the left these last eight years.

You're quite welcome. I'm taking my que from the left these last eight years.

#21 | Posted by TheOneBS

"cue"

And our criticism came AFTER Bush was in office and began his never-ending series of policy blunders and tragic errors in judgment.

You're wising failure on Obama before he even takes office.

Nice.

*wishing

You're wising failure on Obama before he even takes office.


Nice.

#22 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue


wrong again old boy

BARRY HAS TAKEN OFFICE

its called the office of the president ELECT.>> I know because I saw it on the lecturn that he got at business world.............lol

and IF you listen to media, he has already begun anyway...........well ONLY IF THEY ARE Talking about anything other than finance or the market.....THEN its still bush's fault

must go

have a great day

"I'm taking my que from the left these last eight years."

Que queue?

*wishing
#23 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Wising was funnier.

And our criticism came AFTER Bush was in office and began his never-ending series of policy blunders and tragic errors in judgment.


You're wising failure on Obama before he even takes office.


Nice.

#22 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue


Bullshit. All we heard from the left BEFORE Bush took office were conspiracy theories about how the election was stolen. There were no well wishers on the left. None.

Bullshit. All we heard from the left BEFORE Bush took office were conspiracy theories about how the election was stolen. There were no well wishers on the left. None.

#27 | Posted by everlong

Well, I won't speak for the entire Left, but personally I hated the way Bush ended up in office and hoped fervently he would be one and done. I never wished for him to fail as leader of our country.

As luck would have it, he did it all on his own with absolutely no need of my wishes.

Well, do you think the right should treat Obama the same way the left treated Bush. No...

I will wait and see. I have that right to complain when I feel he has failed the test. I voted, I service my country for 37 years. I have put up with the crap from the left.

But they sure did forget about Sep 11th. And the service members who are fighting today, so they can complain about Bush.

It will be interesting if Billy can keep his hands to himself these next few years. Me things not...

Go get them Bill.....

Well, do you think the right should treat Obama the same way the left treated Bush. No...

LOL!

How was bush treated in 2000? Quite nicely, and the man even began vacations after the first few months of office.

I obama does the same deceptive job bush has done I would expect the same treatment, infact, I will be first on the list.

But they sure did forget about Sep 11th. And the service members who are fighting today, so they can complain about Bush.

Bullshit.

What did Bush do after 9/11? Did he take up Arab countries offers to help root out Islamic radicals? Nope. He told us to go shopping.

Now he's claiming that he wouldn't have invaded Iraq if he'd "known the intelligence was wrong".

Bullshit on that one too.

He told Brit Hume during an interview he'd have invaded whether or not Saddam had WMD's.

It's our soldiers who've had to pay the price for this completely inept and incompetent spoiled loser in the WH. And 1,000,000 dead Iraqis too.

Bush is a total fucking moron.

Now he's claiming that he wouldn't have invaded Iraq if he'd "known the intelligence was wrong".


AU - I don't think he's even gone that far in his, ahem, thought process yet. Here's how screwed up the little bastard is:

"The biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq," Bush told the ABC TV. "I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess."
...
"A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein. It wasn't just people in my administration," Bush told ABC.

"A lot of members in Congress, prior to my arrival in Washington, D.C., during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of nations around the world were looking at the same intelligence," he added.

However, Bush refused to speculate on whether he would still have gone to war if he know Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.

"That is a do-over that I can't do. It's hard for me to speculate," he said.
www.norsorpor.com


Lives shattered and destroyed, national treasure squandered, the country's reputation in the shit bucket and all this pathetic excuse for a carbon-based lifeform can come up with is, "I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess."

Same old Arbusto.
Others thought blah, blah.
Don't blame me yuck, yuck.
I can't speculate blah, blah.
Don't blame me yuck, yuck.
Let history judge heh, heh.
Don't blame me yuck, yuck.
When's tee time?
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

But they sure did forget about Sep 11th.

#28 | Posted by yoemanbob

You may have forgotten that Bush had a 90% approval rating and the whole country was behind him. It was his to lose... and he sure did.

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable