Discussion for article #224463
âBill Maher Tells Hillary To âJust Go Awayâ For A While Before 2016â
Yes,Yep and Bingo!
"Maher has spoken critically about Clinton in the past, describing her and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ÂŽ, another possible presidential contender, as âcorporatist.â And add Cheif Justice Roberts to that corporatist list.
Yes,Yep,Bingo and T-O-U-C-H-E !
The fact remains, the Clintonsâ net worth was negative as they left the White House.
Hillary was correct on the narrow set of facts. But as has been said many times you have to be worth quite a bit to get so seriously in debt. The larger fact is that the attorneys to whom they owed a pile of money were never going to try to collect.
Maher is correct. And Hillary needs new PR people if they approved what she said in the book and if they like what sheâs saying on the road.
I think Bill Maher adds very little to the national conversation but in this case focusing on Mrs. Clinton or on a future presidential run is a silly media obsession. By the way does everyone get to write a book?
The Clintons have always had a knack for snatching defeat.
While I will certainly vote for Hillary if sheâs the Democratic nominee in 2016, I will sorely miss the simple candor and eloquence of Barack Obama. Hillary is the formulaic politician whose only goal seems to be to avoid offending anyone or making anyone mad. Her clumsy attempts to take both sides of any given issue is what got us into Iraq, sacrificed our rights to the âfear and smearâ politics of Scorched Earth McBush and left her in a tizzy over Benghazi when surrounded by a congressional mob of craven Republican hypocrites. She is too weak to truly lead and lacks the cold-eyed political genius of Obama. But the Republican alternative is too ghastly to imagine.
The silly mediaâs outstanding characteristic is pure laziness. They simply mimic each other and avoid any unexplored territory for fear of being cast out of the club. Endlessly theorizing about Hillary is childâs play.
It appears Maher aspires to be the leftâs Ingraham and make policy and/or crush and/or encourage according to how much air time he has to fill. Media talkers are just that, even if as Maher did for the president they can donate big bucks to campaigns. HRC must tread lightly in a media world filled with women-hating men (and women), and one underestimates her at their own peril. Remember âWhat difference does it make?â at the BENGHAZI!!! hearing? Thatâs what sheâs capable of as POTUS, resolute and unflinching.
LOL! Now and then, Bill really hits it out of the park.
This is one of those times.
The Anointed One needs to stay in the closet for as long as she can, even as the Zombies of Iraq and NAFTA beat on the door.
If we let media talkers run policy we become as desperate as the right.
Youâre being disingenuous. Because of his celebrity status, Bill Clinton was due to make millions from books and speaking deals. And, Hillary was making good coin as the junior senator from NY.
As for their legal fees, by February 1998 their defense fund raised $8.7 million and applied $7.4 million of that toward their legal bills. By the time Clinton left office, they owed $3.9 million in legal fees.
And, despite being âdead brokeâ that didnât stop the Clintonâs from buying $1.7 million home in New York in 1999 and a $2 million home in Washington, D.C. is 2000.
Boy, the Clintonâs had it rough.
Yeah, if I ever run for office, the first thing Iâll do is hire Smirky Blurtout there to run my campaign.
While I think media talking heads/pundits have been nitpicky and petty in their attacks on Clinton for saying they were dead broke when they left office, I do think Maher has a point. This publicity tour hasnât gone too well for her. Clinton needs to go away for a year and work on her message, find a platform to run onâa populist message the majority of Americans can get behind.
Why donât you lead by example, Bill Mahr? You and the rest of the liberals will have more than enough time to bib-dribble and spoon-clang about how you much hate her later.
Thatâs a terrific description of Maher and similar media types (and I agree that âone underestimates her at their own perilâ)
I agree that the Clintons were not in the same financial situation as many Americans - and you have a right to cite their resources. I hope you were just as willing to criticize the Romneys as being out of touch when they described Annâs multiple Cadillacs, borrowing thousands of $$ from parents, etc.
While I like Bill Maher and often agree with his take more than I disagree, he is not a âliberalâ.
When was the last time you owed millions in legal fees? Yet you pooh-pooh it as though itâs nothing. And when did HRC says anything remotely like âshe had it roughâ?
You just confirmed that Hillary spoke the truth, and thatâs within all the out-of-context quoting that youâve taken on as truth. So the Clintons had great credit â I would expect no less from such a powerful couple. They managed a deal for an expensive home. Would you prefer the former Commander-in-Chief live in a 2-bedroom walk-up?
And what does that have to do with her actual quote? You seem to be responding to the out-of-context version that much of the media has passed along. She didnât cry poverty â she was merely stating a fact about their financial position vis a vis the âtruly well off,â which was completely accurate. Yet you seem intent on deriding her for telling the truth.
The only relevant question here is, why do you hate Hillary? With Maher, I have no doubt that itâs just an easy way to get laughs, and adhering to the truth takes second fiddle to quick yuks. Whatâs your excuse?