Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member
Good luck, Cali. marym625 May 2015 #1
YOU MUSST NOT SPEAK ILL of the Clintonesss...We loves them my precious... Katashi_itto May 2015 #28
hee hee marym625 May 2015 #38
:) Katashi_itto May 2015 #39
Brilliant. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #64
Lol! Cool! Katashi_itto May 2015 #88
lol LiberalLovinLug May 2015 #48
Lol! BeanMusical May 2015 #51
The easy to get at Precious is mostly in the Middle East eridani May 2015 #120
They are flawed for sure unlike Bernie redstateblues May 2015 #154
Same As The Bushes billhicks76 May 2015 #145
I have no problem with them making money out of office redstateblues May 2015 #2
Last time we had a Clinton as president we didn't go into Bosnia? GummyBearz May 2015 #7
too bad he didn't go into rwanda certainot May 2015 #60
No shit! L0oniX May 2015 #133
Ouch! 7962 May 2015 #138
+1000 marym625 May 2015 #146
Somalia too. beltanefauve May 2015 #169
No boots on the ground. No thousands of our soldiers dead redstateblues May 2015 #153
Got a picture for you... Scootaloo May 2015 #172
thanks for your reply and its non-defensive tone. cali May 2015 #16
The quid pro quo is what Exilednight May 2015 #37
I agree with you. It's extremely naive to think there is no quid pro quo when rhett o rick May 2015 #101
Even when it's not completely intentional... rbnyc May 2015 #129
I find this to be the same in journalism Exilednight May 2015 #140
great point rbnyc May 2015 #141
Money Interests - Especially in the Hundreds of Thousands in Greenbacks LovingA2andMI May 2015 #166
There was no quid pro quo awoke_in_2003 May 2015 #180
If you are being sarcastic please give me a sign I am sarcasm deficient. rhett o rick May 2015 #185
Sorry, when I read it awoke_in_2003 May 2015 #186
No it's me. I usually have a chip on my shoulder just waiting to unload. nm rhett o rick May 2015 #188
Read 1939 May 2015 #23
I don't have a problem with them making money if they get a job and work for it. rhett o rick May 2015 #102
+1 who cares how much money they make? treestar May 2015 #106
Then let's stop criticizing Republicans who do the same thing. People want to hear them also, sabrina 1 May 2015 #162
Thank You!!! LovingA2andMI May 2015 #167
But other people are deciding they want to pay the money treestar May 2015 #174
And Hillary pulled herself out of poverty!!!! nt Logical May 2015 #122
Because that $25,000,000 was all because they are so entertaining, not that everyone knew Dustlawyer May 2015 #124
Perhaps the focus should on the efforts the Clintons do rather than the money issue. Thinkingabout May 2015 #3
that's right. And when we look at some of what BC did while in office, we cali May 2015 #18
If you want to say this, it was also a time when Bernie was in Congress, what did Thinkingabout May 2015 #24
You do realize Bernie Sanders voted against repealing Glass-Steagal right? think May 2015 #27
He was still a part of Congress which repealed the Glass-Steagal, he should be looked Thinkingabout May 2015 #34
So he's responsible for the Democrats that sold out and voted for it? That's really twisted logic. think May 2015 #45
Did he try to influnce others? Did he talk to other Congressional members? Thinkingabout May 2015 #47
He VOTED against it. And what did Bill Clinton do? Oh ya, He made it law..... think May 2015 #56
May I ask, how far back does your "know your current events" date back to? 2banon May 2015 #104
From the Congressional Record OnlinePoker May 2015 #114
owned. Qutzupalotl May 2015 #151
"Did he try to influence others?" Why are you asking that. If you are trying to make rhett o rick May 2015 #187
Speaking of IWR vote neverforget May 2015 #99
Did you forget the conditions of the IWR? Thinkingabout May 2015 #109
I know Senator Clinton is not responsible for her vote. She's blameless. I get it. neverforget May 2015 #116
But just a few posts above that poster said Sanders was responsible for ALL of congress' cui bono May 2015 #160
Yes it certainly is possible neverforget May 2015 #164
Did I say she was blameless for her vote? Even Hillary has said she would like to Thinkingabout May 2015 #173
That vote had a consequence which you seem unable to acknowledge. It gave President Bush legal neverforget May 2015 #175
Okay, wait... so Sanders is responsible for all members of Congress' vote even though he voted cui bono May 2015 #158
He did actually, when he votes against a bill his habit is to use his floor time to speak forcefully Dragonfli May 2015 #117
Have you ever known him to just sit quietly and not speak? 7962 May 2015 #139
Wow. So now one member of congress is responsible for the votes of all other members cui bono May 2015 #157
Senator Sanders.... LovingA2andMI May 2015 #168
You need to do some research. He voted against the repeal of Glass-Steagall cali May 2015 #40
I did not say Bernie did not vote for the repeal of Glass-Steagall, he was a part of Congress Thinkingabout May 2015 #43
you are not thinkingabout this too clearly are you? LiberalLovinLug May 2015 #52
Oh, wow, they can never compromise, guess this is why we have a do nothing congress, Thinkingabout May 2015 #53
disingenuous blather. cali May 2015 #66
Woooooooooooooooosh LiberalLovinLug May 2015 #67
and there's the stupid food fight- which I stupidly got sucked right into cali May 2015 #71
you are so full of.... nonsense that it's pointless trying to have a discussion with you cali May 2015 #65
Perhaps bringing up subjects such as Glass-Stegall may be overwhelming for some. Thinkingabout May 2015 #82
You don't even make any sense. defensive garbage cali May 2015 #84
There will never be a sane conversation, won't happen. Some has Thinkingabout May 2015 #115
I think there was a great effort... rbnyc May 2015 #131
Jaw dropping Comment. Absolutely Devoid of Logic alone, forget pretense of intellectual honesty. 2banon May 2015 #105
Welfare "reform", the Telecom Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act hifiguy May 2015 #89
same old same old, nothing new. Thinkingabout May 2015 #110
Given the immense damage Clinton-backed policies caused, hifiguy May 2015 #112
More of the same, still nothing new. Thinkingabout May 2015 #113
What do you mean? rbnyc May 2015 #135
OK - let's start with NAFTA, Banking deregulation, brutal welfare "reform", offshoring whereisjustice May 2015 #79
So true. And they have to raise money. treestar May 2015 #107
Chump change to a Koch Brother, a Walton, or an Adelson. onehandle May 2015 #4
No the real enemy is within. zeemike May 2015 #15
+1 marym625 May 2015 #42
Blammo. hifiguy May 2015 #90
yes, but that's not the only point. The Clintons are wealthy today because of their close cali May 2015 #21
Somewhat tangentially, this reminds me again to ask Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #5
You're right, but let's face it. Any attempt to discuss the intersection of money and politics cali May 2015 #22
Nah, then they'd have to actually discuss the "attack". jeff47 May 2015 #119
The "Clintons" aren't running BainsBane May 2015 #6
Regarding their income it is a joint effort madville May 2015 #9
How about the Sanders and the O'Malleys? BainsBane May 2015 #11
The topic is their income madville May 2015 #13
Sure, let's discuss it. I don't know much about the O'Malley's finances cali May 2015 #25
sorry, I don't buy that. Far more than most potential nominees- and not just cali May 2015 #29
+1 BeanMusical May 2015 #46
I don't have it any way BainsBane May 2015 #62
THEY made it. cali May 2015 #73
She has already run for President and was a Senator, if her positions are so different then it TheKentuckian May 2015 #178
That is true but I seem to remember that during his term she was called one of his advisors. And jwirr May 2015 #41
Members of political dynasties forfeit to some degree their ability to be viewed as individuals. tritsofme May 2015 #55
A dynasty BainsBane May 2015 #58
You may view it that way. tritsofme May 2015 #63
Worshipping... LovingA2andMI May 2015 #170
She conflates the two herself shaayecanaan May 2015 #165
I still would have voted for John Kennedy given the chance. DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #8
Poor comparison. Kennedy didn't make his money through being in politics. cali May 2015 #30
Precisely...His dad set him and his siblings up with trust funds so they would never have to work... DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #35
We have had many rich Presidents but how they made their money was not always okay with the jwirr May 2015 #44
Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband made at least $30 million over the last 16 months, stonecutter357 May 2015 #10
Exactly MaggieD May 2015 #121
First, change the system. procon May 2015 #12
In other words "don't hate the playa, hate the game." DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #14
I was going to point this out too justiceischeap May 2015 #17
The obvious solution is publically funded national campaigns. procon May 2015 #81
I actually suggested in another post in this OP an justiceischeap May 2015 #91
Most of it came from speeches to corporate interests. Quid pro quo? Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #19
I'm not even suggesting that. But to deny influence is INSANITY cali May 2015 #32
The quid pro quo I'm talking about IS influence. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #36
"I'd be happy to stipulate that they haven't done anything illegal" brooklynite May 2015 #20
thing is bigtree May 2015 #26
I prefer to discuss the policy differences between Secretary of State Clinton, Senator Agnosticsherbet May 2015 #31
Cali, you are spot on. Mbrow May 2015 #33
Kick and R. Good post. BeanMusical May 2015 #49
Here's a list of the 10 richest politicians in US politics justiceischeap May 2015 #50
Small correction... F4lconF16 May 2015 #96
Government is a profitable business... kentuck May 2015 #54
Whether people want to talk about it or not..... daleanime May 2015 #57
I'd like to know what she is saying in the speeches fadedrose May 2015 #59
I agree fadedrose. I've heard it called RiverLover May 2015 #70
Wow fadedrose May 2015 #85
Payola extrodinaires. L0oniX May 2015 #137
It comes down to the question of, do you want to continue this miserable status quo, or not. Enthusiast May 2015 #61
They couldn't wash the political stink off the "foundation" with bleach and a firehose. eom whereisjustice May 2015 #68
I think what that actually means is... wyldwolf May 2015 #69
The polls may not be rigged, but our sources of information are RufusTFirefly May 2015 #87
You're assuming you have some special insight... wyldwolf May 2015 #94
This is a dumb post: Its takes money to become President!! lewebley3 May 2015 #72
bullshit propaganda. Not even tangentially connected to reality. cali May 2015 #75
Paved the way for offshoring our jobs as well with NAFTA & China's PNTR's status. RiverLover May 2015 #78
You are probably a right wing troll, not a Bernie supporter: lewebley3 May 2015 #191
Let's examine that proposition, genius. cali May 2015 #192
Using the word stupid: Detracts from your argument lewebley3 May 2015 #195
calling me a right wing troll discredited every already lame word YOU cali May 2015 #197
Troll, is the right word for someone pretending to be Bernie supporter: It fits! lewebley3 May 2015 #198
There is something wrong with how they earn their money. They take cash from corporations whereisjustice May 2015 #80
No there is not something wrong with earning money: Its what it takes to become President! lewebley3 May 2015 #100
There is something wrong with the WAY they earn money. See the difference? Or are you whereisjustice May 2015 #176
There is no free market: Thats a GOP lie: but Senators are being hired and sold. lewebley3 May 2015 #181
gee, funny that not all Senators are hired are sold. One of mine is the longest cali May 2015 #193
They politicians, they had to get their money from somewhere: They are for Sale too! lewebley3 May 2015 #194
fail. your record of fail is impeccable- if you don't know cali May 2015 #196
I would agree they have to be at least middle class treestar May 2015 #108
To put it into simple-minded terms, Jackpine Radical May 2015 #74
yes, and it's insane to think that the banksters weren't grateful cali May 2015 #76
evaluating US politics is dishonest and incomplete until the left certainot May 2015 #77
Isn't just the money. It's their friends, too. Octafish May 2015 #83
Thank you, Ocatafish, for truthtelling. NYC_SKP May 2015 #161
That picture has always disturbed me too LovingA2andMI May 2015 #171
Hillary Clinton is highly respected and KMOD May 2015 #86
125 million is walking around money for the Koch bros workinclasszero May 2015 #92
Polarization and partisanship are not sane carolinayellowdog May 2015 #93
I'm a HRC supporter and I agree. BKH70041 May 2015 #95
I disagree. F4lconF16 May 2015 #98
Of course, no one person can give $50k. The limit is $2700. salib May 2015 #128
We can talk about it all we want to, nobody is stopping us. Rex May 2015 #97
If the Bushes got rich for destroying the republic... DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #103
NAFTA, banking deregulation, throwing poor people into the street with brutal welfare reform? Both whereisjustice May 2015 #177
Under Bill Clinton DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #182
He signed the laws that nearly destroyed us with corruption and sent a million jobs away and whereisjustice May 2015 #183
Presidents are responsible for their tenures... DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #184
Presidents are responsible for the laws they design to impact the next generation, the data whereisjustice May 2015 #189
I trust HRC will usher in another era of unprecedented peace and prosperity like her husband... DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #190
I do agree heaven05 May 2015 #111
Gee, the last time I talked to Bill Clinton, it cost me....... DFW May 2015 #118
I would say anyone if pretty accessible if you get past their handlers! WTF? nt Logical May 2015 #123
Don't spend a lot of time in DC, do you? WTF? DFW May 2015 #159
That would be great. You start. MineralMan May 2015 #125
wow rbnyc May 2015 #126
I wish you could, too. nt aka-chmeee May 2015 #127
"I wish we could talk sanely about the Clintons" azureblue May 2015 #130
The way I read the OP and this reply: rbnyc May 2015 #132
Hmm, the OP made the prospect of even-handed discussion a nonstarter kjones May 2015 #156
Thank you so much! workinclasszero May 2015 #144
Great post. The idea that Clinton is corrupt because redstateblues May 2015 #155
It started in Arkansas with the Waltons , Tysons and The Stephens boys. LiberalArkie May 2015 #134
Here??? Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #136
I'm an idiot. joshcryer May 2015 #142
It seems like all you do is talk about it. nt BreakfastClub May 2015 #143
dunno cali. you have pretty much done nothing but talk the horrors of clinton vs sanders the savior seabeyond May 2015 #147
Put in my Twonies worth... Thespian2 May 2015 #148
are morals needed, for a presidential candidate? quadrature May 2015 #149
Thanks for trying dreamnightwind May 2015 #150
Okay. OnyxCollie May 2015 #152
OK, what did they talk about? What did they say? nt jazzimov May 2015 #163
"Money buys access" awoke_in_2003 May 2015 #179
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I wish we could talk sane...»Reply #161