When Warren was asked what she made of Clinton's 'dead broke' remarks:

[Whisp]

How Hillary Clinton flubbed the wealth question
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/23/politics/clinton-populism-wealth/

'When I ask what she made of Clinton's book tour comment about being 'dead broke' on leaving the Whitehouse,
Warren paused for a full 19 seconds. 'Um, I was surprised', she finally said.

The tightly orchestrated book tour for her new memoir has closely resembled a campaign -- with war rooms and surrogate coordination. So one would expect that Clinton was prepared to answer questions on any topic.

But when the wealth question came, Clinton, the political heavy hitter, whiffed.

Twice.

--

Between her campaign for president in 2008 and her time as the head of a global foundation, she spent a considerable amount of time courting the money of millionaires and billionaires.

Her foundation -- The Clinton Foundation -- has also become a bastion for corporate donors. Stephen L. Bing, the founder of Shangri-La business group; Tom Golisano, the founder of Paychex and Cheryl and Haim Saban, Democratic megadonors and the owners of Univision, have donated between $10 million and $25 million.

[Thinkingabout]

1. Do you know the debt the Clintons had when Bill's presidency ended?

[Whisp]

2. From the link:

She wasn't wrong when she said the first family left the White House way behind financially. She said they were burdened by legal bills and still had to keep a roof -- actually two -- over their heads and send their daughter to college.

But here's a mighty big difference between Clinton and the average person.

For starters, she and her husband were obviously well positioned to quickly capitalize on the post-presidential custom of cashing in.

[Thinkingabout]

17. Then Hillary's statement they was broke when the left the presidency was not wrong.

[Whisp]

28. Depends what ones definition of broke, is, 'is'. n/t

[Thinkingabout]

31. Would you be broke at $12 million in debt? I would. George W Bush thought he would be on

the speech run but guess what it did not happen. Bill and Hillary has written books and made money, Bill and Hillary gets money from their speeches, they are popular and are able to get their fees. Doesn't make them bad. Bet Elizabeth can also get money for her speeches, is that going to make her bad?

[Whisp]

33. Do you think Goldman Sachs would pay Warren $400,000

for what she can and is doing for and to them?

I don't think so.

[Thinkingabout]

47. If she was in demand and her speeches was $400,000 or $200,000 yes they would pay them.

She might chastise them but yes she would.

[Whisp]

50. so they would pay big money for Warren to chastise them?

really.?

[AgingAmerican]

91. She would definately accept the gig

Really

[Whisp]

92. Say hi to Elizabeth for me, seeing as you are her confidant. n/t

[AgingAmerican]

93. So you say she wouldn't accept it?

In that case, say hi to Elizabeth for me, seeing as you are her confidant.

[Phlem]

104. Fail

[AgingAmerican]

90. How much will they pay Obama?

I guarantee that the Obamas will make tens of millions writing books and making speeches when he is out of office.

[CBGLuthier]

41. No one has ever blamed her for making money. I do not like her use of the term DEAD BROKE

because when the rest of us are fucking DEAD BROKE we do not get to eat and live in fine houses and travel the world. We starve and die as the poor and the underclass has always done in this country.

And no one who does not understand that has a right to lead this country and never fucking has.

[deutsey]

46. I have experienced being "dead broke" growing up

What that meant for my family was having the electric shut off because my mom, who worked as a waitress, couldn't pay the bill and later being evicted from our apartment for falling behind on the rent.

That's what "dead broke" means to me. What Hillary experienced was what I'd call a "temporary financial setback." There's no denying that they were in the hole after leaving the White House and they probably did have to juggle and hustle a little to hold on to their position, but they also had plenty of opportunities to turn that around quickly.

My family had to go live with my grandparents for a while or else Social Services was going to put my sister and me in foster care. So we were fortunate we had that personal safety net where many other poor families do not.

[Thinkingabout]

106. You know, being jealous of someone living in a big fine house and traveling the world is not one of

the things in this world which bothers me. I have been dead broke before, might be again but a big dose of hurt is not going to fix my dead broke problem. Would you be happy if you would be able to make the money those two have since they left the WH? Be happy a middle class family has gotten up in the world. I would be happy to see you rise up in income also

[BuelahWitch]

107. I don't think anyone here is "jealous" of the Clintons

Her choice of words shows a disconnect with what is really going on. We don't need anymore of that. When she and Bill have to eat ramen noodles for weeks on end (the ones in the package, not the fancy ones in the styrofoam cup), then Mrs. Clinton can talk about being "dead broke."

[tularetom]

32. "Dead broke" sort of implies there is no hope for the future

By the time they left the white house they had in excess of $10 million in book deals and in 2001 Bill Clinton earned several millions in speaking fees. No bank in the world would have refused them a loan with that kind of earning potential and no law firm was going to come after them for the legal fees they owed.

And she fucking well knew it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

55. i have been dead broke and i am not any more...so?

You guys are just like teabaggers......desperate to smear the Democratic front-runner. Desperate to smear ALL of the Clintons even Chelsea. In what way is this any different then they do? Its becoming your own BENGAHZEEEEEE!

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

95. This ^ ^ ^ ^

[cali]

40. It was plain old politically STUPID to the nth degree.

[JaneyVee]

3. 5 mil in legal bills.

[Logical]

6. With 10 million dollars in earning potential! nt

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

96. Was the potential $10 million known at the time?

[LeftyMom]

5. They paid all of it and two luxury houses off by 2004.

So it was proportionately less of a strain on their income than an average family's Visa bill, which is precisely what makes her poor mouthing so offensive.

[laundry_queen]

7. Exactly.

Here's something equivalent to a 'normal' person...it would be like how I have some credit card debt...this debt was recently acquired during my last year of my degree because I had some unforeseen circumstances. *IF* I get a job within a few months, I should be able to pay it off relatively quickly...within a few months. Now imagine I was guaranteed a job with a large pay off. And THEN I whined about how in debt I was to someone who couldn't keep a roof over their head and had hungry children. That would be extremely insensitive now wouldn't it, since I had a guaranteed, well paying job that was sure to put my financial situation right side up in a hurry. It's all about empathy. It's not hard to avoid these kind of silly gaffes when you have empathy, no matter how rich you are.

[Thinkingabout]

18. Yes they had earning power, good for them, like student loans, but the potential earning power

goes up after one gets a degree. Would this be a bad thing?

[CountAllVotes]

27. Her poor mouthing sickens me

at all for the likes of HRC. She has not a clue what it is do "do without".

She's never had to eat gov't commodities nor had to go to a food bank IN HER LIFE!

She sickens me and will never receive MY vote. That you can believe in.

Poor, dead broke, etc. MY ASS!

[juajen]

56. You aree so wrong. She has been broke in her life.

They lived in a rented house when she first moved to Little Rock and when she was pregnant. He was not governor than. She also worked in Alaska in a fish cannery to pay for college. Her parents were not rich by any means.

I agree that she should have worded that better. No former President is broke unless Bush is the exception. But, they pulled themselves up. They both had law degrees and experience in governing, so, it soon was alright. However, there are many things that could go wrong with that scenario, like the books don't sell, and they do not get the bookings for speeches. There were a lot of what ifs. They were both very smart and worked their tails off.

Stop this running down of our best candidate. This is really ridiculous.

I lived in Arkansas when she did. We worked right across the street from each other. No, I was not her friend, but she had visited my law firm, so I was familiar with her. She was as ordinary as I was. Our parents worked hard.

Frankly, she might not want the hassel that she is getting, and could decide not to go through with it. Of course, there goes our chance of having a female President because, believe me, no one else will ever be considered knowledgable enough to run. The democrats could well lose where she would win, and the SCOTUS will be even more red. God help us, we are our worst enemy.

[Beacool]

70. Her father paid for her undergrad degree, but not for law school.

She had to get grants, scholarships and various jobs to pay for law school. Yale was never cheap.

[CountAllVotes]

87. Many people do not plan to vote for her

and yes, said persons are indeed Democrats.

We've got to find someone better than an old has been as far as I am concerned. Bill carries a lot of baggage and this follows him no matter where he goes and yes, he is her husband last time I checked. Many don't much care for this "two for one" idea. Nope.

Eight years of Bill was enough already for me.

I also have some serious questions/doubts about her health and that episode that was rather quickly swept under the rug that occurred about 2 years ago. What exactly was that all about?

No one ever said. Subject closed. She's no spring chicken by a long shot.

Maybe she should work on being a Senator and a grandmother dare I suggest?

[cali]

53. well said n/t

[former9thward]

65. It was not traditional debt or traditional debt holders.

The people that held the debt were not going to be hounding the Clintons to pay it until they were ready to pay it. That is far different than the debt of ordinary Americans who have to pay mortgages, food and utility bills.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

4. She's a freakin' 2%er. I really don't care to hear anything from her that

doesn't jive with that because if it doesn't jive, it's bullshit pandering.

[Whisp]

8. I wonder what went through Elizabeth's mind during that 19 seconds...

She might have been weighing whether she should just start the debate right then and there and throw her hat in the ring and point out the disconnect that many of the wealthy have with ordinary people - but decided against it.

Maybe this, yes.

[Thinkingabout]

20. Do you think Elizabeth is going to be debating her net worth?

[Whisp]

26. She will be asked that, and rightly so

if the subject is the Clinton's wealth.

The difference is how they got their money - I can't see Warren taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from the likes of Carlyle Group and Goldman Sachs - the people she has been a thorn to, and then whimper that bills had to be paid, ya know. can you?

The Clintons have not been thorns to Wall Street - in fact the very opposite. They have been very very kind and generous to the big money people, and now they are receiving bribe money from them for more future favours and getting paid very well for past favours - like Glass Steagal.

[Thinkingabout]

30. Do you know how Elizabeth Warren has gotten her net worth? If she is a smart ecomonist then

she has been in the stock market also. Are you thinking Elizabeth Warren will not be receiving donations from Wall Street, if so think again. Bribe, yea right.

[MannyGoldstein]

54. Well...

http://influenceexplorer.com/politician/elizabeth-warren/42ccd9758603419ba38a2546d96a0f02

http://influenceexplorer.com/politician/hillary-clinton/597e02e7d1b04d83976913da1b8e2998

[Whisp]

58. I'll draw you a picture, from the link above:

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Thinkingabout]

61. Let me help you with the picture, Elizabeth Warren spent $42 milliom running

For Senator in a Blue state. Running for president is in 50 states, some very red. Multiply $42 million times 50 and then determine how far your picture is from making the cut.

[Bluenorthwest]

34. She was probably thinking of her own 15 million dollar net worth and pondering how that was going

to play in the context of her own image. She is wealthy. She can not start preaching about how shitty the wealthy are. She is the wealthy.
If her wealth is acceptable and Clinton's is not, what are the metrics? How many millions or tens of millions can one have and still be all connected to the little guy? What's the cut off? How far above the limit is Hillary, and how much more can Elizabeth 'earn' before she is over the limit?
I once heard Warren compare herself to those who have large stock portfolios in a way that made it seem she was saying she is not rich. But she's rich. Not Romney rich, which was her point much as it was Hillary's. But she's a wealthy woman. If there is something wrong with wealth, there is something wrong with her.

[Whisp]

37. There is something very wrong with wealth attained by being paid by

the very people like Goldman Sachs that rob the rest of the people blind and give big cash bonuses to the likes of the Clintons for their precious thousand dollars a word or whatever ridiiculous amount it comes to, who were instrumental in deregulating laws that helped make these greedy behemoths.

[Bluenorthwest]

64. That's not responding to what I said and what I asked at all. Why is that? Let's try it this way...

are you ready to endorse all the ways Warren and her husband 'earn' a million a year? How do you feel about representing Insurance Companies during asbestos litigation for a few hundred K?

Do you think people in finance gain millions by handing out free lunch to school kids? By working for non profits?
Your OP feigned the idea that Warren, worth 15 Million Dollars, was just trying to hold back her condemnation of rich people like Hillary. That's just hypocrisy and there is no excuse for it. Warren can not attack 'the rich' because she is and has for many years been the rich.
She was rich when she was a Republican and she just got richer and richer. Consulting and advising and this and that. Lord knows you don't get 15 million running a small boutique or a Food Bank.

[Whisp]

68. How about them Koch bros? If you say rich is the same for all, how about them?

I don't think rich is the same for all.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

97. I think Hillary made the same point in another interview.

Interesting how selective you are in your application.

[Metric System]

9. Can you imagine her taking that long to respond during a debate or televised interview, when it

really counts? 19 seconds of dead air is uncomfortable. And this is who DUers want to see running for President?!? (You know that's how some DUers would spin and focus on a throwaway line like this if this had been Hillary).

[Ino]

10. No, I can't imagine that.

But good effort at manufacturing outrage over something that didn't happen! And insulting a whole group of people for something they didn't do either!

[BrotherIvan]

11. OMG, she THOUGHT before she spoke!

That's it! I'm so glad you pointed that out because now I know exactly who she is!

[Metric System]

12. I was just kidding.

[BrotherIvan]

13. I wasn't.

I really really hope EW doesn't disappoint, because I truly like her. It's really hard to have "hope" anymore.

[Union Scribe]

14. She was thinking of a nice way of saying

"Wow what a dumb fucking thing she said."

She would not have a problem sparing the feelings of a Repub.

[SammyWinstonJack]

36. Really?

[freshwest]

15. When this statement is made, I had to think, too:

Between her campaign for president in 2008 and her time as the head of a global foundation, she spent a considerable amount of time courting the money of millionaires and billionaires.

Yes, candidates and foundations beg big donors. I can't afford to give millions to Haiti or other places, or ad time or legal teams to run for office. My viewpoint is that these things are 50-50.

People are not giving her or Bill money to make them rich. They are giving money for the causes which are ignored by many and that charismatic and famous people can draw money into.

It would be better if we were not in this place. MLK, Jr. said:

Philanthropy is commendable, but it must not cause the philanthropist to overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which make philanthropy necessary.

We do not have a world wide nation that spends its money on all these things. Humans do have needs around the world that are no longer being met by governments. This is the fault of these same donors - maybe - maybe not.

The ones that are really giving the world a bad time don't donate to foundations that don't advance their plutocratic agenda and seek to make them richer.

HRC is not my candidate. She does not inspire me, but she has been on the right side of the rights of women.

The world is at a turning point. We will let the misogynists make our lives hell or we vote into office those who will ensure half the population is treated equally.

That's more impoortant than the populism or net worth of HRC, Rubio or any other politican that claims to be populist. I don't see the situation as B&W. For many years foundations have helped the liberal causes, so they aren't all bad, nor are the people who are able to fund raise for them.

[Thinkingabout]

22. The Clintons have given much to those less fortunate, the Clinton Foundation works hard

for others. Both Bill and Hillary gets paid nicely for their speeches, good for them. They are well connected not only in the US but around the world. Bill gave time and raised money for Haiti. What is wrong with this? This should be feathers in their caps but it appears some wants to hold their ability to make money against them. Hillary has worked for human rights around the globe, but again not good enough for some folks. Now I can see FOX and others like Rush running with this.

[freshwest]

23. Fully agreed. And I'm certain Faux, Rush and those who absorbed the meme are running with it.

[Thinkingabout]

24. They make me happy to say I am a Democrat.

[CountAllVotes]

29. Yep, like when Bill cut welfare

I remember that. It was not nice at all.

These are people that are not "of the people".

They are a couple of rich people pandering to the poor. Good damn luck w/that IMO.

[Thinkingabout]

44. Did he cut your welfare? He sent people to training so they could provide for themselves, there was

means of providing for day care so the parents could work, sorry, I am not about leaving people on welfare for ever. Give a man fish and he has a meal, teach him how to fish and he has food for life. Don't cry the cut the welfare to me, I work on a minimum wage job, I know what it is to live on the bottom, I have been down and gotten up.

[CountAllVotes]

51. Not me ...

I've never been on welfare but I know of a single disabled woman that is on it to this day. At the time Bill cut welfare, she had two young infants and little money to live on. And then came that cut ...

I remember watching Bill talk about it on the teevee. I thought to myself, "What a total creep you are Bill Clinton." His face told all one needed to know.

I never particularly cared much for any of the Clintons.

They are a greedy lot that enjoyed cutting benefits for a disabled single woman with two infants. Nice job there Bill!

[Thinkingabout]

81. Welfare does not always go to the disabled, I know disabled people on the welfare, medicaid and food

stamps, I don't have a problem with this, it is those who are as able to work as I do I have a problem with. In fact I think it is our responsibility to care for our truly disabled. I get a little tired of hearing about "nerve problems" and don't like to see substance abusers abusing the system. Welfare for those temporally in need, children whose parents do not make enough money to properly feed them. BTW, he started welfare reform in Arkansas, I personally know of those at the time which needed to be removed from welfare. He set up training to give them a trade so they could work. Welfare should not be abused.

[CountAllVotes]

88. For one so quickly to condemn those on welfare, etc.

you sure seem to know an awful lot about it.

What IF I was on welfare? Does that make me nothing but a useless bum of some sort.

Sh*t happens in life FYI.

And sometimes, the sh*t that happens in life drives some folks to have to seek assistance and/or welfare for Christ's sake!

[Thinkingabout]

89. Do you think assisting with training for someone to get set up to successfully seek employment is

bad? I have not used welfare in my life, wont say it will not happen but I would be seeking ways to return to self sufficiency. Relying on welfare for a life time when one is able to work, no.

[CountAllVotes]

94. Most people that end up on welfare on on it for ...

Less than 6 mos.

So find some hate elsewhere for those that end up having to file for welfare because they have nothing left.

Shame on you!

[Thinkingabout]

99. Did you miss the part where training is given to assist people to find employment?

If you did then shame on you. I don't have a problem with those who need welfare assistance for six months, but a lifetime is too long. BTW, welfare reforms should not be any longer than two years except for the handicapped, this is allowed for welfare reform. There is daycare assistance, housing assistance, etc. I work on a minimum wage job, it can be done. Shame on those who thinks lifetime welfare for the able is right.

[reddread]

42. yes indeed, Haiti is one of our proudest accomplishments

funny how rhetoric flown to cover military misadventures in Iraq and elsewhere dont apply
down there.

I flat out cant believe Haiti is being cited.

[Thinkingabout]

45. Did you send money to Haiti and go out and gather money to assist those folks? How do you relate

Haiti and Iraq, two totally different things, Clinton did not charge into Iraq. Have you visited the really poor of the world? If not, don't start throwing stones. I cant believe you have brought Iraq into this.

[reddread]

48. sensitive much?

I will throw stones.
I didnt actually bring Iraq into this.
Someone brought Haiti into it.
Bush,Clinton,Bush,Obama policies on Haiti
DESPICABLE, but the phoney hypocritical double standards
offered these satellite interest/colonies receive is worth noting.

[Thinkingabout]

49. Is this your post

yes indeed, Haiti is one of our proudest accomplishments





funny how rhetoric flown to cover military misadventures in Iraq and elsewhere dont apply
down there.

I flat out cant believe Haiti is being cited.

yea, you brought Iraq into this.

[reddread]

76. and elsewhere

what do crickets eat?

[Whisp]

59. Clinton harassed and bombed Iraq for 8 years...

funny how that is overlooked all the time.

He was the meat in the Bush shit sandwich - right in the middle of slices of Bush bread from the gulf war to Dim Son's blunder.

[Thinkingabout]

62. You have the facts wrong. it was Bush and Bush in Iraq.

We can't rewrite history. This is left to the RWs.

[Whisp]

66. I think you should be Thinkingabout facts on this.

Brutal sanctions and bombings throughout Clinton's both terms is writ in history. Sorry that doesn't fit your ideas of who the Clintons really are. Like being Poppy Bush's adopted son. Gee, I wonder why.

[Thinkingabout]

72. yea yea yea

[Whisp]

74. Step right up folks and Welcome to The Price Was Worth It!

Last edited Tue Jun 24, 2014, 02:54 PM - Edit history (1)

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[reddread]

77. +1

every Clinton supporter must sign onto this essential fact of their attitudes.
or have it both ways, its just dead men, women and children.

[CountAllVotes]

102. +1,000

Just amazing how uninformed some people are and they take on the truth and treat it as fiction.

eh?

[Beacool]

78. I once read an article about the Clinton Foundation.

It was written by someone familiar with NGOs and charitable foundations. In this article it was mentioned that, thanks to the deals the foundation had been able to make between pharmaceutical companies and African governments, that there were millions of people alive in Africa that would have died without the AZ-Ts needed to treat HIV.

I didn't bookmark that article, but here's one that mentions how the Clinton Foundation managed to get a reduction in price of one of these medications. There's a mention of it after the chart in the first page and in the first paragraph of the second page.

http://www.i-mak.org/storage/MSF%20Facts%20on%20Lopinavir-Ritonavir.pdf

The Clintons may not be perfect, but they are good people who do care for others. The way they are treated here by fellow Democrats sickens me.

[freshwest]

80. Agreed. However, the Starr Chamber continues.

[Thinkingabout]

82. I agree Beacool, here a couple has worked in their life to help others and then get shot down

for being able to get a net worth, sounds like jealously.

[Beacool]

84. To me too.

They never had any substantial money until they left the WH. Why do so some begrudge the money they were able to accumulate? It has never bothered me before when other WH couples have done something similar. I'm sure that the Obamas will also be cashing in when their time comes. I see nothing wrong with it.

[hedgehog]

16. This is what bothers me:

"Her foundation -- The Clinton Foundation -- has also become a bastion for corporate donors. Stephen L. Bing, the founder of Shangri-La business group; Tom Golisano, the founder of Paychex and Cheryl and Haim Saban, Democratic megadonors and the owners of Univision, have donated between $10 million and $25 million."

We have got to limit or eliminate these foundations. All too often, they are tax free methods for the 1% to impose its vision of the world upon the rest of us. It's nice when something we all agree on gets done - say Bill Gates using his money to improve health in the 3rd world. It's not so nice when Bill Gates uses his foundation to make changes in the US public school systems or the Koch Brothers set up foundations to issue the Libertarian message and infiltrate colleges with chairs endowed to preach the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Foundations can do real harm to people -

"Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America's most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as Stamford, Yale, Harvard, and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics' racist aims.

Stanford president David Starr Jordan originated the notion of "race and blood" in his 1902 racial epistle "Blood of a Nation," in which the university scholar declared that human qualities and conditions such as talent and poverty were passed through the blood.

In 1904, the Carnegie Institution established a laboratory complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island that stockpiled millions of index cards on ordinary Americans, as researchers carefully plotted the removal of families, bloodlines and whole peoples. From Cold Spring Harbor, eugenics advocates agitated in the legislatures of America, as well as the nation's social service agencies and associations.

The Harriman railroad fortune paid local charities, such as the New York Bureau of Industries and Immigration, to seek out Jewish, Italian and other immigrants in New York and other crowded cities and subject them to deportation, trumped up confinement or forced sterilization.
- See more at: http://www.hnn.us/article/1796#sthash.JxauuqVn.dpuf

[warrior1]

19. Probably because she thought is was a stupid question.

[closeupready]

21. Please PLEASE run, Elizabeth! The country NEEDS you, and we all know

Hillary is NOT going to help working families. Certainly, NOT like you would.

K&R

[dionysus]

35. but how can she help unless we own both houses of congress in huge munbers? (BTW i like EW)

[closeupready]

57. I'll concede that no matter what, I'll vote for the Dem ticket.

It may be Hillary, it may not, but I will vote Dem.

Further, we do very much need a Democratic Congress to go along with a Democratic White House.

I'm just fantasizing about 'what if'...

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

100. Yep

I remember the 2000 meme "There's no difference between Bush and Gore." 4000+ dead American service people, countless wounded, countless dead Iraqi civilians and several trillion dollars in additional debt later.

[SammyWinstonJack]

39. +1.

[CountAllVotes]

52. Even if EW does not run ...

I will write her name in. Beats this sicko game of poor mouthing, etc.

Enough already.

[Baitball Blogger]

25. That's a very honest answer.

[Nye Bevan]

38. When a politician takes 19 seconds to answer a question, you know the wheels are whirring.

Obviously Warren had to be very careful answering this, given her own personal wealth and multimillion dollar stock portfolio.

[arthritisR_US]

43. If Hillary really wants to run for president then I think

this was a horribly stupid move on her part. Most of us know what it is to be dead broke and the uncertainty that comes with it. There is no way that her and Bill were facing financial uncertainty when he left office.

[Whisp]

60. There seems to be an important piece missing from the Clintons mindset.

To them it sounds like the voters are just an obstacle of annoying rabble to hurdle over without much thought, just to get to the prize of more power. If their intentions were truly to make a better life for all that rabble, how could they continuously talk like they don't have a clue or want to have a clue about how the truly unwealthy live.

[arthritisR_US]

63. I think that is a fair assessment. It's like "ok I've got mine and good luck getting yours".

There has been a few missteps as of late and if she thinks because she didn't win the first primary that she is "entitled" to it this time around, I think she is sorely mistaken. Right now I don't see her connecting with the average person

[Bluenorthwest]

67. What is missing from a mindset that tries to foist a multi millioniare off as a revolutionary

holding back her anger at the rich? Something is missing, 15 million somethings in fact....What is the goal of trying to pretend a wildly wealthy woman is not wildly wealthy?
What I notice about the former Republican Warren, aside from her vast wealth, is that many who boost her are also boosters of Pope Francis, another Conservative that poses as a 'working man's hero' while being anti gay, anti choice and rolling in vast sums of wealth and power. I do not take kindly to such balderdash.
I have zero problem with someone having money, I do very much have problems with wealthy people who pose as less than wealthy. I stopped watching Rachel Maddow when I read an interview with her in which she claimed she was not very rich. Her base salary is about 2.5 million. 'I'm not rich, people keep saying that!' she says. It would be better to say 'I have a TV show, yeah, I make a lot of money that's why I do it' rather than pretend she's on a PBS work study program.

[Beacool]

69. Warren is worth millions and she made a remark in the past about not being wealthy.

Stop polishing her halo as if she were the savior of the nation. I like her just fine, but give me a fucking break already with the deification of someone who has barely been in the Senate since 2012 and who was a Republican until her mid 40s. Let's say that in the Left's fantasies she gets elected president, and then what????? Will she have a magic wand that will get Congress to go along with her? How many bills that she has sponsored have become law?

Here's the quote:

A crusader for the middle class, U.S. Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren's personal finances were bound to come under scrutiny. Warren raised eyebrows Thursday when she said she isn't a wealthy individual who owns a lot of stock.

"I realize there are some wealthy individuals -- I'm not one of them -- but some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios," Warren, a Harvard professor, told MSNBC.

Warren was making a point that members of Congress either shouldn't own stocks, or should put them in a blind trust so that they are not drafting laws that benefit their own investments. But the financial disclosure report Warren filed last month shows that by most people's standards, she's pretty well off.

Warren earned more than $700,000 from Harvard, book royalties and consulting fees, and lives in a $5 million house, the report shows. She has multiple mutual funds and stock in IBM, the sole individual stock she owns. The total portfolio is worth nearly $8 million.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/elizabeth-warren-wealth-income_n_1237607.html

Her net worth in 2011 was $14.5M.

[Whisp]

71. Sorry, money is not evil, how you get it could be and what you do with it.

Get back to me when Warren makes the kind of cash the Clintons do - by taking money from the rich people who got richer because of Clinton finance deregulation.

We aren't even talking about apples and oranges here, we are talking car engines and daffodils.

[Beacool]

73. Whatever, Whisp.

If I had noticed that this was your OP I wouldn't have bothered to type a response.

[Whisp]

75. Okay, bye bye

[karynnj]

79. This likely is the kindest response she could make

Clinton's comments were gaffes - even if their combined debts were greater than their assets when they left the White House. I assume these were comments to define herself as one "of us". It is a response to an American meme that they want Presidents who are like them.

I would hope that people would see they need leaders who are better than them - smarter, more creative, more eloquent and articulate, with whatever it is that makes someone a calm, secure leader who has the courage to face problems, the honesty to speak the truth, the self confidence to seek the smartest people as experts and the intelligence to listen to their various advice and make sensible action plans. Whether they used those very skills to make money before they entered public life or if they were born to money, it really shouldn't matter.

What hurts here is NOT that Hillary and Bill Clinton - for the first time in their life - used the skills that made him President in the first place, to make a huge amount of money through books and speeches, but that it is insulting to anyone who ever really did have major money problems - where everything they could think to do to raise money was inadequate. At the point they left the WH, she had an $8 million advance. I have no idea how much of that was upfront, but some of it was. In addition, Bill would soon have a book contract too. These alone likely covered the huge debts they had. The average dead broke person had no such opportunity.

I suspect the root of this is that Bill Clinton was genuinely poor ND Hillary was middle class growing up. They had to feel poor at Yale, where many classmates were from families that had money for generations. However, neither choose the easy get rich immediately route. They went to Arkansas and he went into public service. (Consider that BC could easily have made a John Edwards type law career.) From the time they left law school - through the years in the WH, there was never a point that making money was their goal.

From that perspective, when looking back to 2000 - it is easy to see how - in retrospect she saw them as having accumulated no financial assets. True, if considered narrowly, but obviously the potential gains were astronomical and, at least for teh books, something of undeniable value for history and the country. Their autobiographies are important to understanding that time.

[JI7]

83. i think she is personally still angry over the Legal Bills which were a result of the right wing

pushing fake scandals.

it's not the money itself as much as what it was wasted on .

also if we go back to 2000 and 2001 as soon as the Clintons left the white house there was a lot of negative views about them. remember the lies about the clintons trashing the white house ?

even after 9/11 there were a lot of right wing lies to put up with . Hillary got booed at some event after 9/11 to raise money for victims.

it took a few years for them to be seen in the positive way as they are now.

anyways, i think that is what she is thinking about when she talks about those days.

[SomethingFishy]

85. Well on the bright side..

With Donations from Cheryl and Haim Saban she's got an in with the Power Rangers.

[warrior1]

86. She probably thought it was a stupid question

[KamaAina]

98. Dead broke?

I thought she just said they "were not well off".

[VanillaRhapsody]

101. so what EW didnt say is important......but when she

Said "I am not running for President" that gets dismissed. I love pointing out hypocrisy!

[Turbineguy]

103. Bill Clinton

said they had done very well thanks to the Bush tax cuts. He didn't think it was good policy.

[djean111]

105. My bottom line - I will not vote for Hillary in a primary.

No matter what Warren or anyone else says or does, the TPP is still out there, waiting.
Oh, and people are not upset that the Clintons are rich, that's just spin. People are upset by her clueless remarks.
Think the GOP won't use those remarks?