General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhite House Staff Dishes on Clintons: Hillary Hit Bill With a Book, Crooks Had Open Door
....
The Clintons were the most polarizing, the first Bush the most beloved.
In chapter after chapter, the consensus seems to be that George H.W. Bush and Barbara Bush were the most beloved and respected of the presidencies covered in the bookwhich may have had to do with the fact that they were somewhat used to staff. On the other hand, the book is filled with quote after quote about how difficult the Clintons were and how paranoid they were. Friends of Bills consistently set off alarm bells for the Secret Service for having criminal records. On the other hand, many of the women interviewed in the book felt that Hillary was very, very sympathetic to working women and had a good relationship with the female staff.
Hillary hit Bill with a book.
The Monica Lewinsky era in the book is perhaps the juiciest. One anecdote that has made the rounds is that Hillary hit Bill so hard with a book that there was blood all over the bed and the president needed stitches. That time period also took its toll on White House workers, who would often find themselves berated for little things by Hillary. The staff was also consistently shocked by the couple throughout their time in the office, from their vicious cursing and periods of stony silence.
....
The staff thought Hillary knew about Monica.
In the eyes of some of the staff, Monica Lewinsky was not part of some vast right-wing conspiracy, and Clinton knew about Lewinsky long before it came out.
....
George W. Bush was exactly how you would imagine him.
In what will come as a surprise for few, Brower writes that President George W. Bush would mess with the residence workers by turning photos on their side or by chasing imaginary flies with fly-swatters when they walked by.
Ronald Reagan had a penchant for sharing national-security secrets with the staff.
Among the many concerns on Nancy Reagans plate apparently was that she was always wary of having him talk too much to the staff, especially when it came to divulging national-security secrets. This observation came after an anecdote in which Reagan tips off the White House chef that he just gave orders to bomb Libya.
....
Daily Beast
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)White House staffers should be sworn to silence by contract when they take their jobs.
No kiss and tell books.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)Jackie Kennedy Onassis used them for her staff.
I'm perplexed by that idea.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)already have too little privacy without having to worry about staffers at the White House opening their mouths. If any of them are still working there, they should be fired immediately. Would you want your housekeeper talking to the press about your life? Frankly, I think this book is a disgusting display.
Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)It should be expected that you keep your mouth shut - just like when you work in private industry and they have you sign a non-disclosure agreement covering varying aspects of a given job.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)or that the behaivor of the first families should be classified.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)...and discretion and all that.
Non-disclosure agreements are common among the famous and/or wealthy who don't want to be famous, as they are in private industry.
Do you really feel the public is entitled to know every detail of an elected official's private home life? And why would that be?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I think that people who work there should be able to write about their experience. If Presidents, First Ladies and various appointed members of the exectuive branch can write books, then so should those who work to make their stay in the White House a comfortable one.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)Why the hell would anyone, and I mean ANYone, take a job if it meant they had no zone of privacy ever?
Why not demolish the White House and construct a glass house with no curtains? Really, why not?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I knew it!
Hekate
(90,913 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)people working there would not have access to medical information.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)But how do we really really really know they are unless we can see them ALL? During the time she was SOS a lot happened in her family, including, iirc, the death of her mother and the marriage of her daughter. But she could be lying, right?
By the way, I am pretty much going with the demands made right here on this board. The sonogram is just my spin, because it's the kind of thing proud families actually do share in their emails. But we've got people here claiming that the President and First Family have absolutely no expectation of a zone of privacy.
So about that glass house. Medical records should be private? Anything else?
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I have seen people share such records on facebook, which is not private in any way, shape, or form. I would not share such things on email, Facebook, or anywhere else. That inforamtion belongs to Chelsea, and she has the right to share them with her mother and family, whether it is wise to do so is a different matter.
In my opinion, Hillary did not handle her email correctly, but there is no indication that she broke the law or regulations in power at the time.
The issue to me is who is allowed to write memoires. If the family of the President and his cabinet can write a juicy, tell all memoire, then so should the people who work for them.
The people who work in the Whitehouse own their memories. If they want to share them, that is their choice.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)That really isn't debatable.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)...that a President and First Family have no expectation of privacy whatsoever. They will gladly gobble up whatever garbage is published from the worst sources in the name of that spurious "right."
I've gone beyond being appalled to being completely disgusted.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)have been written for centuries.
I don't think we should bind those who serve the famous from writing about them. Servants should have the same rights to publish their memories as those they work for.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)have been written for several centuries.
If a President, first lady, or cabinet member are allowed to write a memoir, then so should the people who served them.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)DURHAM D
(32,616 posts)Response to Capt. Obvious (Original post)
ronnie624 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)Why don't you try Free Republic next?
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Nothing's stopping you from sharing it there.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)over and over again, it must be the second favorite site of some folks here.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Hey freepers get all your horseshit teaparty/fox news talking points right here on democratic(?) underground!
Buzz cook
(2,474 posts)"Former White House florist Ron Payne told the author that he overheard an exchange between Chelsea and a Secret Service agent. Chelsea was on the phone with friends from Sidwell Friends school when she said, Oh Ive got to go. The pigs are here. When the agent retorted that his job was to stand between you, your family, and a bullet, Chelsea reportedly replied, Well thats what my mother and father call you.
The first family knows their security detail by name, I seriously doubt anyone would call someone they knew on a first name basis a pig.
I also seriously doubt that a member of the secret service would say anything about such a gaff if it had happened.
Too implausibilities in one anecdote.
This book might have come out too early to affect the election but it'll feed the anti-Clinton base some fine red meat.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)No? Don't worry, that smear will soon be resurrected as well.
HeiressofBickworth
(2,682 posts)I thought she was lovers with the guy she had killed, or did she kill him herself, and was that before or after they took delivery of the plane load of drugs from Central America in the black helicopters?
Oh, dear, it's so difficult to keep all these "facts" straight....... maybe if I watched Fox it would all be clear to me...
Hekate
(90,913 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)for them when she was on Walmart's Board of Directors? And if she was stonewalled, why didn't she resign?
Darb
(2,807 posts)It doesn't work that way. The directors don't call the shots day to day, they oversee what is happening, sometimes without any direct input at all.
How many board members are there at Waldemort anyway? I'd say probably about 12 or more.
Your complaint sounds specifically like a right wing meme about how Hillary really doesn't look out for women, ala the whole Clinton Foundation thing about accepting donations from nations that have bad track records with regard to women's rights.
Coincidence?
closeupready
(29,503 posts)No thanks.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)In 1986, Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-Mart, had a problem. He was under growing pressure from shareholders and his wife, Helen to appoint a woman to the companys 15-member board of directors.
So Mr. Walton turned to a young lawyer who just happened to be married to the governor of Arkansas, where Wal-Mart is based: Hillary Rodham Clinton.
------
Fellow board members and company executives, who have not spoken publicly about her role at Wal-Mart, say Mrs. Clinton used her position to champion personal causes, like the need for more women in management and a comprehensive environmental program, despite being Wal-Marts only female director, the youngest and arguably the least experienced in business.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/us/politics/20walmart.html?pagewanted=all
Here's a photo of the "inclusive" Wal-Mart 1986 board of directors. All male and all white, except for Hillary.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)They sure weren't stymied by misogynist obstacles, were they?
Beacool
(30,253 posts)and the other board members to her way of thinking because she had that kind of power. She did what she could while she was there to convince them to promote women to management roles and for the company to develop an environmental program.
Sorry if it's not enough for you.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)Do your own research. That is a ridiculous statement.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Funny how all of their "cookie cutter" responses to charges of Hillary not being as liberated and pro-woman as Hillary would like everyone to think, just don't match up with the history of other feminists.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)Not that anyone whose mind is already made up anyway is listening.
By the way, did you get the secret decoder ring message sent to all us Paid Clinton Operatives? Very hush-hush; say no more here.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)It's amazing how some people think that she should have waved a magic wand and instantly Walton and the board would have agreed to every proposal that Hillary would have made. Ridiculous....
I know, I'm still waiting for my paycheck.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)...that he got when he went to Hogwarts. They were bitter from Day One.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)'peons' who work at Wal-Mart. I expect White House staffers would feel more like people in her in-group.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Nevermind that she was only making $18,000 a year at the time....YEAH they were paying her the BIG bucks.... that's how influential she was!....LMMFAO! As if Hillary Clinton was born with a silver spoon in her mouth and didn't earn her degree and work....a working woman!!!
Shame on you!
FactCheck: Pushed Wal-Mart for women managers & environment
Obama attacked Clintons one-time membership on the board of directors of the worlds largest retailer, saying, While I was watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.
Its true that Clinton sat on the Wal-Mart board for six years while her husband was governor of Arkansas, where the chain has its corporate headquarters. She was paid about $18,000 a year for doing it. At the time, she worked at the Rose Law Firm, which had represented Wal-Mart in various matters.
But according to accounts from other board members, Clinton was a thorn in the side of the companys founder, Sam Walton, on the matter of promoting women, few of whom were in the ranks of managers or executives at the time. She also strongly advocated for more environmentally sound corporate practices. She made limited progress in both areas. In 2005 she returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing serious differences with its current practices.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Dem. Debate , Jan 21, 2008
Marr
(20,317 posts)Yes, poor Hillary Clinton. She was only on the Wal-Mart Board of Directors because of her deep and abiding desire to help the poor!
lol. Jesus Christ.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and by the way...she was only making $18,000 a year...DAMN dude! $346 a week BEFORE taxes! You act like she was some bigwig making bank!
And you might want to read up on her position on Corporations...
OpEd: Disagrees with progressives on corporatism & military
Is Hillary a progressive? The answer is unambiguously no; Hillary is a liberal centrist. Progressives support "fair trade," which means that free trade agreements should include environmental and labor clauses; Hillary is an ardent free-trader. WikiLeaks' Julian Assange is a hero to progressives who believe in open government and oppose secrecy, but a traitor to Hillary. Progressives ardently oppose military intervention abroad; Hillary is a hawk. And progressives are ardently anti-corporate, while Hillary is pro-corporate.
Often the difference is a matter of degree: progressives would tax capital gains as regular income; Hillary might only moderately increase it, as illustrated in this exchange:
The capital gains tax under Bill Clinton was 28%. It's now 15%.
CLINTON: I wouldn't raise it above the 20% if I raised it at all. I would not raise it above what it was during the Clinton administration.
Source: Jeb vs. Hillary On The Issues, by Jesse Gordon, p.37,66,&168 , Dec 10, 2014
Take back $55B in Bushs industry give-aways
We need a fighter back in the White House. We need someone whos going to take on the special interests.
I have a plan to take away $55 billion of the giveaways and the subsidies that the president and Congress have lavished on the drug companies and the oil companies and the insurance companies and Wall Street. And I have a plan to give that money back--give it back in tax cuts to the middle class--to people who deserve it, who have been struggling under this president, who feel invisible, who feel like theyre not even seen anymore.
Now, obviously, I cant do this alone. I can only do it if I get people who believe in me and support me and who look at my track record and know that Ive spent a lifetime trying to empower people, trying to fight for them.
And I will turn this economy around. We will get back to shared prosperity and we will see once again that we can do this the right way so its not just a government of the few, by the few and for the few.
Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary , Apr 16, 2008
FactCheck: Pushed Wal-Mart for women managers & environment
Obama attacked Clintons one-time membership on the board of directors of the worlds largest retailer, saying, While I was watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.
Its true that Clinton sat on the Wal-Mart board for six years while her husband was governor of Arkansas, where the chain has its corporate headquarters. She was paid about $18,000 a year for doing it. At the time, she worked at the Rose Law Firm, which had represented Wal-Mart in various matters.
But according to accounts from other board members, Clinton was a thorn in the side of the companys founder, Sam Walton, on the matter of promoting women, few of whom were in the ranks of managers or executives at the time. She also strongly advocated for more environmentally sound corporate practices. She made limited progress in both areas. In 2005 she returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing serious differences with its current practices.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Dem. Debate , Jan 21, 2008
World Bank should impose rules on sovereign wealth funds
Q: Citigroup and Merrill Lynch have both gone overseas, hat in hand, looking for $20 billion in investment to stay afloat, from foreign governments. Is foreign ownership a problem?
A: Im very concerned about this. About a month and a half ago, I raised this concern because these are called sovereign wealth funds. They are huge pools of money, largely because of oil and economic growth in Asia. And these funds are controlled often by governmental entities or individuals who are closely connected to the governments in these countries. I think weve got to know more about them. They need to be more transparent. We need to have a lot more control over what they do and how they do it. Id like to see the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund begin to impose these rules. And I want the US Congress and the Federal Reserve Board to ask these tough questions. Id like to see us move much more aggressively both to deal with these sovereign wealth funds.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas , Jan 15, 2008
Bush defanged the Consumer Product Safety Commission
Q: All the Chinese recalls of toxic toys & products still represent fewer than 1/100th of all imports. Is this an over-reaction?
A: The reason we have such few recalls, even though they have been increasing because the evidence has been so overwhelming is because this administration has basically defanged the Consumer Product Safety Commission. They do not have any real appetite for going after these companies and countries that are flooding our markets with dangerous products, and that has to stop.
Source: 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR , Dec 4, 2007
FactCheck: Yes, Bush shrunk CPSC; but it shrank before Bush
When discussing the safety concerns about toys imported from China, Clinton accused the Bush administration of crippling the Consumer Product Safety Commission, saying, The reason we have such few recalls... is because this administration has basically de-fanged the CPSC.
Its true that Bush has made some controversial appointments to the CPSC. Congressional Democrats have opposed his choices several times, accusing his nominees of having conflicts of interest or being weak on product safety. CPSC is also widely reported to be understaffed and underfunded. During the Bush administration, the commission has gone from 480 to 401 full-time employees (including only one full-time toy tester).
But not all of this can be pinned on Bush. CPSC has been shrinking for decades. Between 1980 and 1982, during Ronald Reagans administration, the agency went from 978 employees (its peak number) to only 649. Even during Bill Clintons time in office, the agency went from 515 to 480 employees.
Source: FactCheck on 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR , Dec 4, 2007
Outraged at CEO compensation
[In Bills cabinet, Labor Secretary] Robert Reich was gladdened by Hillarys passionate condemnation of corporate-executive compensation. These are real issues, Bill, she said, pointing out that the average CEO of a big company is now earning 200 times the average hourly wage. Twenty years ago the ratio was about forty times. People all over this country are really upset about this.
Source: For Love of Politics, by Sally Bedell Smith, p.220 , Oct 23, 2007
Stop bankruptcies to get rid of pension responsibilities
The pension system is broken. Weve got to stop companies going into bankruptcy in order to get rid of their pension responsibilities. We have to have defined benefits pension plans again. When I am president, well have a Department of Labor that actually cares about labor.
Source: 2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum , Aug 8, 2007
Enough with corporate welfare; enough with golden parachutes
Lets finally do something about the growing economic inequality that is tearing our country apart. The top 1% of our households hold 22% of our nations wealth. That is the highest concentration of wealth in a very small number of people since 1929. So lets close that gap. Lets start holding corporate America responsible, make them pay their fair share again. Enough with the corporate welfare. Enough with the golden parachutes. And enough with the tax incentives for companies to shift jobs overseas.
Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference , Jun 20, 2007
Close lobbyists revolving door; end no-bid contracts
I believe that the foundation of a strong economy doesnt begin with giving people who are already privileged and wealthy even more benefits. I think it comes from shared prosperity.
Lets start by cleaning up the government, replacing this culture of corruption and cronyism with a culture of competence and caring again. Lets stop outsourcing critical government functions to private companies that overcharge and underperform! Lets close the revolving door between government and the lobbying shop, and lets end the no-bid contracts for Halliburton and the other well-connected companies!
And how about the radical idea of appointing people who are actually qualified for the positions that we ask them to hold for us! Well, when Im president, the entrance to the White House will no longer be a revolving door for the well connected, but a door of opportunity for the well qualified.
Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference , Jun 20, 2007
1976 Rose Law: Fought for industry against electric rate cut
Clashing interests of the well-to-do & the rest of Arkansas were in evidence in 1976 in the form of an initiative. The initiative had been launched by advocates for the poor, a group called the Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN).
With utility rates in Arkansas skyrocketing, ACORN pushed through a ballot initiative requiring utilities to lower rates for residential users in Little Rock and to increase them for business. The measure passed.
Business fought back. The engine driving the challenge was the Rose Law Firm, which enlisted Hillary to help. Hillary could hardly decline to fight her friends, especially so early in her career. This was the by-product of Hillarys choice to join Rose. She would advocate for clients who would be on the opposite sides of the causes she had formerly championed.
The winning brief was crafted by Hillary and a colleague. The judge embraced the theory--that the ordinance amounted to an unconstitutional taking of property.
Source: Her Way, by Jeff Gerth & Don Van Natta, p. 57-58 , Jun 8, 2007
Corporate lawyer at Rose Law while Bill was Attorney General
It was Hillary who decided that she wanted to be financially secure, and took the steps to accomplish that, said Betsy Wright. Bill would live under a bridge--as long as it was okay with Chelsea.
Upon Bills election as attorney general, Hillary faced how to resume her legal career. She was now willing to consider corporate law. Bill recommended the Rose Law Firm.
Rose was the ultimate establishment law firm, representing the most powerful economic interests in the state. The most powerful argument against Hillary was that she was a woman. The firms partners were all white men, most of whom were already wealthy and graduates of the two Arkansas law schools. Hillary, with her Wellesley and Yale credentials and her view of the law as an instrument for social reform, would be a radical departure.
Source: A Woman in Charge, by Carl Bernstein, p.127-129 , Jun 5, 2007
Corporate elite treat working-class America as invisible
Q: Overall, is Wal-Mart a good thing or a bad thing for the United States of America?
A: Well, its a mixed blessing. When Wal-Mart started, it brought goods into rural areas, like rural Arkansas where I was happy to live for 18 years, and gave people a chance to stretch their dollar further. As they grew much bigger, though, they have raised serious questions about the responsibility of corporations & how they need to be a leader when it comes to providing health care & having safe working conditions and not discriminating on the basis of sex or race. This is all part, though, of how this administration and corporate America today dont see middle class and working Americans. They are invisible. They dont understand that if youre a family that cant get health care, you are really hurting. But to the corporate elite and to the White House, youre invisible. So we need to get both public sector and private sector leadership to start stepping up and being responsible and taking care of people.
Source: 2007 South Carolina Democratic primary debate, on MSNBC , Apr 26, 2007
Companies get rewarded with hard-working people left hanging
So many of us grew up with what I call the basic bargain: If you worked hard and if you played by rules youd be able to build a better life for yourself and your family. Well, I dont think in the last six years our country has actually been living up to that basic bargain. The leadership here in Washington seems to ignore middle class and hardworking families across our country. Under this presidents leadership household debt has soared, healthcare costs have skyrocketed, assuming that you have it. Wages have remained stagnant. Now corporate profits are up. And productivity is up, which means Americans are working harder than anybody in the world, but were not getting rewarded. Ill tell you who is getting rewarded. Companies like Halliburton are getting rewarded with no-bid contracts, then they move their CEOs across the ocean to another country and leave us hanging right here at home.
Source: 2007 IAFF Presidential Forum in Washington DC , Mar 14, 2007
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program
As governor, I hosted a lunch for Wal-Mart executives and our economic development people to encourage the company to buy more products made in America and to advertise this practice as a way to increase eases. Wal-Mart's "Buy American" campaign was a great success and helped to reduce resentment against the giant discounter for putting small-town merchants out of business. Hillary loved the program and supported it strongly when she went on the Wal-Mart board a couple of years later. At its high mark, Wal-Mart merchandise was about 55 percent American made, about 10 percent more than that of its nearest competitor. Unfortunately, after a few years Wal-Mart abandoned the policy in its marketing drive to be the lowest-cost retailer, but we made the most of it in Arkansas while it lasted.
Source: My Life, by Bill Clinton, p.321-322 , Jun 21, 2004
1970s: Potential conflict of interest when GM sued Arkansas
No sooner had Hillary joined the Rose Law firm than a major case pitting us against the state--in other words, her husband [as Attorney General].
General Motors had been one of Roses clients for many years. Mostly we defended it in liability cases. GM was gearing up for consumer lawsuits around the country arising from the discovery that Chevrolet engines were being put in Oldsmobiles--this was a major piece of national business that GM was handing over to Rose Law. The only problem was that GM expected the various state attorneys general to take the lead against the car company. In fact, a nationwide steering committee of AGs was being formed, and [Bill Clinton] was taking a high profile role in it.
This, of course, was the very scenario everyone dreaded. Hillary was in an awkward position. GM agreed to let us remain as council--provided that all files were locked in a cabinet in my office. Ultimately, the case was settled on a national level, so no real problem arose.
Source: Friends in High Places, by Webb Hubbell, p. 57-58 , Nov 1, 1997
Businesses play social role in US; govt oversight required
For those who live in urban areas with few businesses of any kind, the impact of changes in the private sector is most direct & devastating, with high unemployment & crime, drug abuse, welfare dependency, & school failure. Problems elsewhere eventually affect us all [so] government has a big responsibility to help remedy them. But its resources are limited.
Other developed countries, like Japan & Germany, are more committed to social stability than we have been, and they tailor their economic policie to maintain it. We have chosen a different path, leaving more of our resources in the private sector.
As a society, we have a choice to make. We can permit the marketplace largely to determine the values & well-being of the village, or we can continue, as we have in the past, to expect business to play a social as well as an economic role. That means we have to look realistically at what government must require business to do, principally in the areas of health, safety, the environment [and so on].
Source: It Takes A Village, by Hillary Clinton, p.274-275 , Sep 25, 1996
Family-friendly work policies are good for business
One of the most hopeful signs I have seen is the growing interest of the business community in assisting employees with child care. Businesses are recognizing that when employees miss work to stay home with sick children, the bottom line suffers too.
The Du Pont Company was one of the first large companies to institute work-family programs such as job sharing and subsidized emergency child care. A study of employees confirmed the view that family-friendly policies are a good business practice.
On October 31, 1995, I hosted an event at the White House honoring 21 companies in the American Business Collaboration for Quality Dependent Care that have pledged to contribute $100 million for child and dependent care in 56 cities. All the companies participating believe in our theme: Doing together what none of us can afford to do alone.
Source: It Takes A Village, by Hillary Clinton, p.220-221 , Sep 25, 1996
Angry at unacceptable acquiescence to greed in the 1980s
In the 1980s, Hillary Clinton had overheard a conversation between her husband and a Japanese executive. "You could do a lot to stimulate your economy," the executive told Clinton, "if your executives in American industry weren't so greedy." Her husband replied that American executives were being given permission to grab the most at the top by Reagan economic policies, which were designed so wealth would allegedly trickle down to those at the bottom. But those at the bottom weren't seeing the benefits. Hillary agreed. She was angry at what she called "the unacceptable acquiescence in greed that had occurred during the 1980s."
Source: The Agenda, by Bob Woodward, p. 25-26 , Jun 6, 1994
Serving on boards provides ties but requires defending too
Hillary's positions on the boards of Wal-Mart, TCBY, and Lafarge from which she earned close to $200,000 in director's fees over 1986 to 1991, hardly make her a foe of industry. But those connections served her well when she tried to gain business support for programs like HIPPY. But it did not create much goodwill when it was reported in April that a Ohio subsidiary of the Lafarge Corp., from which Hillary Clinton was earning $31,000 a year in director fees, was burning hazardous waste to fuel cement plants. The Ohio company, Systech, had been hotly attacked by environmentalists, community activists, and government regulators for polluting the environment. Whether or not Hillary had made board decisions affecting Systech is unclear. At the time she said that Lafarge was taking steps to dispose of tens of millions of gallons of hazardous waste that would otherwise have been dumped in landfills.
Source: The Inside Story, by Judith Warner, p. 217 , Aug 1, 1993
Voted YES on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore.
Amendment to repeal the tax subsidy for certain domestic companies which move manufacturing operations and American jobs offshore.
Reference: Tax Subsidy for Domestic Companies Amendment; Bill S AMDT 210 to S Con Res 18 ; vote number 2005-63 on Mar 17, 2005
Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy.
Vote to pass a bill that would require debtors able to repay $10,000 or 25 percent of their debts over five years to file under Chapter 13 bankruptcy (reorganization and repayment) rather than Chapter 7 (full discharge of debt).
Reference: Bill HR 333 ; vote number 2001-236 on Jul 17, 2001
Rated 35% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record.
Clinton scores 35% by US Chamber of Commerce on business policy
Whether you own a business, represent one, lead a corporate office, or manage an association, the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of AmericaSM provides you with a voice of experience and influence in Washington, D.C., and around the globe.
Our members include businesses of all sizes and sectorsfrom large Fortune 500 companies to home-based, one-person operations. In fact, 96% of our membership encompasses businesses with fewer than 100 employees.
Mission Statement:
"To advance human progress through an economic, political and social system based on individual freedom, incentive, initiative, opportunity, and responsibility."
The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
Marr
(20,317 posts)Trying to paint Hillary Clinton as some sort of outsider is simply hilarious. But copy/paste all the bullshit sales pitches you like.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I am not the one trying to "paint" Hillary Clinton ..I am merely pasting her public record that contradicts your narrative....and that is exactly what I am copying and pasting....Every bit of it sourced! Now as for what you post.....I never seem to see much in the way of evidence to support even in the flimsiest sense of the word....as predicted... Just rhetoric and exaggerated overhyped opinions! Somehow THAT kind of argument is what you see as "valid" you follow those that also produce no evidence... but not someone's "copy and pasted" record to the contrary....yet some just repeat it and repeat it because it jibes with their narrative but NEVER produce any evidence....the rest us are just supposed to swallow that by the proverbial hook line and sinker....even though the vast majority of Democrats do NOT accept that narrative....in fact quite the contrary! It seems the majority of Democrats are the ones most well informed here...
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)It's common for elites like Hillary to sit on multiple boards drawing tens of thousands from each company. The work involved is minimal, showing up at required meetings.
It is common for companies to reserves a few spots for the very powerful, even if they know absolutely nothing about the industry, with the expectation they will use their influence to further the goals of the company. It's essentially a bribe. The amount of work involved might only be a few weekends a year in a luxurious suite at shareholder meetings and rare times when the board needs to vote.
It isn't work unless you consider working to be drinking $5000 a bottle Bordeauxs and schmoozing at caviar-filled events
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)thats about $40,000 a year. Hardly "living in high cotton" even in those days. My ex husband who built powerlines for a living made more than that in those years...
So YES I do know....and apparently NO you don't!
Hillary's positions on the boards of Wal-Mart, TCBY, and Lafarge from which she earned close to $200,000 in director's fees over 1986 to 1991
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Sitting on one board might only require a weekend's worth of work every year, mostly spent lavishly.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)if she feels it for even someone like George Bush (in some alternate universe thinking she knows how hard it is to be part of a famous political family...?), then great. It's potentially a foundation on which she can build empathy for an even wider group.
I'm just not gonna buy this idea that she is a feminist, or that she cares - in a more general sense - about women's issues enough in order to make those issues a real priority. It's a phoney appeal to Democratic women who have REALLY put themselves out there, and have paid the price - sometimes very high - in order to make a real difference.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)but that is bullshit...Hillary was on that Board of Directors SPECIFICALLY to improve Walmarts treatment of its female workforce....she was gone before Sam Walton died.
FactCheck: Pushed Wal-Mart for women managers & environment
Obama attacked Clintons one-time membership on the board of directors of the worlds largest retailer, saying, While I was watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.
Its true that Clinton sat on the Wal-Mart board for six years while her husband was governor of Arkansas, where the chain has its corporate headquarters. She was paid about $18,000 a year for doing it. At the time, she worked at the Rose Law Firm, which had represented Wal-Mart in various matters.
But according to accounts from other board members, Clinton was a thorn in the side of the companys founder, Sam Walton, on the matter of promoting women, few of whom were in the ranks of managers or executives at the time. She also strongly advocated for more environmentally sound corporate practices. She made limited progress in both areas. In 2005 she returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing serious differences with its current practices.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Dem. Debate , Jan 21, 2008
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)The same outfit currently presenting a story on how the poor Republicans are just misunderstood in Indiana. They aren't really bigots.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)The Daily Beast has a contingent of Right Wing 'reporters'.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I have said that time and again here. I also hope to have the opportunity in the primary to vote for a more fiscally progressive candidate with less stick and more carrots when it comes to foreign policy. It just burns me to see ops like this at the same time a poster is asking when the Clinton operatives are going to show up here posting. It is a feat of mental gymnastics I cannot wrap my head around.
As far as Snowden, my personal opinion of him is truly insignificant in the big picture. What is significant is the conversation that is still front page with respect to the blatant attack on the protections the constitution provides us against the government. I may say a negative word or two about him here or there but my main thoughts when I think of him are simply "thanks." Sometimes it's a little more difficult for me to be mature and I jump in the mix when I shouldn't with Snowden. That is specially true when the topic is about him personally.
I know you didn't solicit a reply like this. When you have replied to me, occasionally to disagree, you have done so with thought and thoroughly.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)really care whether I like them on a personal level or not. I was a devoted Clinton (President) supporter and fought for years against his detractors. I didn't and still don't care about his personal life. What I was blind to at that time, were his policies. It amazes me now when I look back that I was unaware, or made excuses for, many of the things he did while President. Even to the point of vehemently denying FACTS when presented with them.
Now, I realize that liking or not liking a politician is irrelevant. I can like a politician and hate their policies and vice versa.
Wrt to Hillary, I am so disappointed in her. I met her when she was first lady and had a chance to thank her for the work she and her husband were doing to bring peace to the North of Ireland. They definitely deserve credit for that.
However since then she has shocked me at times with her hawkish views on Foreign policy. So for that reason alone I cannot support her.
However I do not like articles like this. They have zero to do with policy and have zero affect on my views of her as a potential presidential candidate.
She may have reasons for her positions on FP but they are far too much in line with everything we opposed during the Bush years.
Regarding Snowden, I feel the same way, and thank you for focusing on what he has revealed rather than on him as a person.
We know this is a tactic used to distract people, re Hillary in this OP, and Snowden. It is a diversionary tactic to distract people from focusing on what is important.
I know we have not always agreed but that doesn't bother me, everyone has a right to their opinion, and I know I have changed mine over time when I have learned things I didn't know before.
But you have always been respectful and I appreciate that. None of us know everything, and sometimes we are wrong. I am far more easily persuaded that I might be wrong, by people who are respectful and sincere, rather than by those who are not.
Thanks again for your post.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)He does art, travel and books.
But I know that piece on Snowden upset you, so it's no wonder you feel a need to cast aspersions.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Even if she is the nominee!
KMOD
(7,906 posts)One of the more bizarre sections was LBJs presidency-long obsession with getting a shower that could truly blast and scald him. When White House plumbers went to look at the shower in his private home, they discovered one nozzle was pointed directly at the presidents penis, which he nicknamed Jumbo. Another shot right up his rear.
I guess it's a tabloid book.
MineralMan
(146,339 posts)I had no idea. I still have no idea. This kind of book deserves no publicity on DU, in my opinion. White House gossip books are just that, and should never be taken at face value.
This one sounds like the typical bullshit usually contained in those books. The Chelsea "pigs" story has been bandied about before this, but there is no credible evidence that such a thing ever occurred.
I give no credence to this book, nor to its being posted on DU. We can do better than that, here. Promoting gossip mongers doesn't seem to me to be how opposition to Hillary Clinton should be done on Democratic Underground somehow.
Try harder, please. You're embarrassing yourself with this kind of garbage.
Tom Ripley
(4,945 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)Last time I jumped to def9end one, didn't work out so well.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)Just sayin'.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Word is, they trashed all the furniture and removed "Ws" from the keyboards. Granted, it's a rather stupid word believed by the gullible and the half-witted ideologue; but still, someone wrote that in a book too. So... bless their little hearts.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)Search "The Clinton Body Count".
johnp3907
(3,734 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)Any day now.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)...and I watched that shitstorm unfold across the public media. I looked through some of the tell-all books and went and washed my hands afterward.
Aside from being accused of murder, Hillary was accused of being the reason for Bill's wandering ways. And that reason, stated openly by slime-mongers, was her alleged lesbianism. It found its way into that horrible "joke" about their little girl being the family dog, and being "ugly" because "Janet Reno is her father."
It's "obvious" you want me to do your research for you, and the answer is no. You go dig that muck for yourself, since you seem to enjoy it.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)I'm asking for a link to the news that that rumor is coming back and from the source I used.
I'm not going to do your research for you.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Please post to Free Republic next time.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)Full disclosure, she also worked at Bloomberg and CBS News.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Oh how this place has changed.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)link: http://thehill.com/capital-living/in-the-know/75363-new-book-claims-bill-clintons-affair-plagued-hillarys-2008-campaign
By Christina Wilkie - 01/12/10 12:45 AM EST
Former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) may not be the only 2008 Democratic presidential primary candidate whose staff covered up an extramarital affair.
According to a new book out this week, then-Sen. Hillary Rodham Clintons (D-N.Y.) did, too.
Game Change, written by reporters John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, describes a war room within a war room at the Clinton campaign made up of Hillarys closest aides, tasked with investigating rumors of infidelity involving Clintons husband, former President Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton has admitted to having at least one extramarital affair, with former White House staffer Monica Lewinsky, but rumors of infidelity have dogged the former president through much of his career.
While much of the gossip in 2008 reportedly turned out to be false, the authors write, The stories about one woman were more concrete, and after some discreet fact-finding, the group concluded that they were true: that Bill was indeed having an affair and not a frivolous one-night stand but a sustained romantic relationship.
From that point forward, the authors claim, those staffers who knew about the relationship lived in constant fear of it being discovered.
Despite their success at keeping the affair under wraps, Clinton ultimately lost the Democratic nomination to President Barack Obama.
The book doesnt name the woman, although tabloid reports in mid-2008 alleged that Clinton was romantically involved with a woman who lived near the couples home in Chappaqua, N.Y.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Didn't read it, though.
riqster
(13,986 posts)What a coinkeedink.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Can't say he didn't deserve it.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,123 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)Fla Dem
(23,809 posts)6000eliot
(5,643 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)herding cats
(19,569 posts)Gee, I guess that quirky ol' Reagan was kind of funny too judging from the article.
The Democrats sure come off cast in a bad light though. What with their cursing and having water jets installed in the shower to tend to their unmentionables. They're downright icky sounding. Huh. I wonder what market they're targeting with this book, don't you?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Reagan was a kindly old fart, Poppy was best of all.
Carter's kids were potheads, LBJ was some sort of shower pervert, Michelle Obama wears sweatpants, Chelsea was programmed by her parents - who apparently had a rolodex full of criminals on speed dial- to call the Secret Service "pigs".
isn't that incredible?
i wonder if they have any anecdotes about how tender Nixon was, when holding kittens.
herding cats
(19,569 posts)While the Republicans were a slice of wholesome Americana goodness. It's a fact because it's in a political gossip book!
Are you implying it's anything other than the truth? Just because this book is about to hit the shelves during a presidential election does not mean it's in anyway intended to be partisan. No siree.
As to Nixon... I have it on good authority from the cousin of a friend of the assistant grounds keeper - he was the man in charge of fertilizing the WH lawn - that Nixon loved puppies. He used to secretly bring strays in off the street and let them sleep in his bed at night. Don't believe all that other drivel the media said about him. My source knows things they don't.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)If that isnt a measure of a man's decency, i dont know what is.
herding cats
(19,569 posts)Well played!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Come on, fess up.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)I already have more information than I need.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Im envisioning him nude except for a 10 gallon cowboy hat.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)I admire a guy with no inhibitions.
Hekate
(90,913 posts)Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)spanone
(135,907 posts)Hekate
(90,913 posts)...and they are just a-pushing that meme. Gasp! and they made sure to mention that "The Clintons want back into the White House." It must all be true because it was on my local news.
NBachers
(17,155 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Sitting down in the morning in the White House dining room to eat his breakfast of 2 fried eggs, 2 strips of bacon, 2 pieces of toast, and then after taking a few bites, he looks up at the White House chef and nods and says, "Well, I just got off of the phone to the Admiral ordering the Navy to start the bombing of Libya. These eggs sure are good. I wonder if they eat fried eggs like this in Libya? Well, probably not."
What a phony SOB he was!!!!!
Autumn
(45,120 posts)anytime a Clinton is running for anything you can bet that these books will be "written" by the White House or the Governors Mansion staff. They are releasing the dirty details a little early, looks like they jumped the gun instead of saving them for her campaign.
I remember the leaks when Bill was running for President , I think it was a lamp that Hillary threw at him then. Time these people come up with some new shit to throw.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Maybe this is why Congress is always complaining Obama doesn't invite them over?
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)truly lovely to the staff--given the things they have done publicly and the spawn they created.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)by Kate Andersen Brower
You can see her list right wing hit piece books here.