Showing posts with label Bill Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Clinton. Show all posts

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Those Speech-Giving, Convention-Having, Truth-Telling, Liberal Elitists

They have some nerve pointing out the obvious to the voters of America. It's as if they think people are so stupid that some of them might actually still vote for John McCain after seeing the GOP's true colors on full display for the last eight years.

Seriously though, I think this convention has been excellent and relegated the GOP talking heads to either jumping on board with their sincere praise or flailing helplessly with rumors of discord between the Clinton camp and the Obamas. And they look like fools stoking up those divisions because the speeches by the Clintons were perfect. Had they heaped on any more praise or been any more strident in their calls for the election of Barack Obama, they would have been ripped apart for going over-the-top or for mocking the nominee. Mission accomplished by the Clintons.

I was not disappointed one bit with the Big Dog's speech. Oyster highlighted his favorite parts. I can see why President Clinton wanted so badly to go into the economy during his speech. There was a lot of buzz early in the week about Bill not being happy with his speech topic or whatever. I think this was a load of bull. Do you think the Obama camp, after all the work that's been done to heal the primary wounds, went to Bill Clinton and told him what he had to talk about? Did people expect the Obama camp to be so stupid that when Bill Clinton came to say 'I'm going to absolutely roast the GOP on the economy during my speech,' he was told no?

Totally worth watching.

For all the talk about the wounds of Clinton supporters not being sufficiently heeled after the primary campaign, what about all the insults absorbed by Obama supporters after the borderline Rovian campaign run by the Hillary camp?

I'm generally not a holder of grudges but I lost a lot of respect for the Clintons during the primary season.

They needed to earn back that respect from me as a young Obama supporter just as much as the Obama camp needed to heel wounds with the Clintons. That wasn't the dominant media storyline but it's true.

Anyways, both Bill and Hillary's speeches were superb and really castrated the media make-believe over the seriousness of the supposed rift. Was there supposed to be some sort of armed coup? Give me a break.

The Clintons praised Obama, they praised his ideas, they went after McCain, and they excoriated his agenda. They challenged the Democrats to propel Senator Obama to the Presidency.

I'm ready.

--

Hillary Clinton's best line: "Was it really just about me?"

Bill Clinton's best line:

It was really more of a moment. Go see Oyster's highlights. I think it came at the end of Oyster's orange. President Clinton speaks to "the example the Republicans have set" and absolutely roasts them.


American workers have given us consistently rising productivity. They've worked harder and produced more. What did they get in return? Declining wages, less than ¼ as many new jobs as in the previous eight years, smaller health care and pension benefits, rising poverty and the biggest increase in income inequality since the 1920s. American families by the millions are struggling with soaring health care costs and declining coverage.

Then he pivots emotionally, getting angrier while still preserving an appropriate enthusiasm, showing that authenticity that have the GOP fits for so many years. He brought down his finger and said with an inflection that suggested he was gritting his teeth in outrage:

I will never forget the parents of children with autism and other severe conditions who told me on the campaign trail that they couldn't afford health care and couldn't qualify their kids for Medicaid unless they quit work or got a divorce. Are these the family values the Republicans are so proud of? What about the military families pushed to the breaking point by unprecedented multiple deployments? What about the assault on science and the defense of torture? What about the war on unions and the unlimited favors for the well connected? What about Katrina and cronyism?

America can do better than that. And Barack Obama will.

But first we have to elect him.

That crescendo was perfect. Here's the video, the passage in discussion hits at around the 11 minute mark.



And of course, Jeffrey is right about the line about "Katrina and cronyism." I'm happy with it, not just because it was placed to get a big audience pop, but because it is a catchall that implicates Ray Nagin (an unequivocal embarrassment to national democrats) as a friend of the Bush administration just as much as it does Halliburton and the Shaw Group.

===

The DNC box score thus far:

Home Runs: Michelle Obama, Sasha Obama, Malia Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry.

Josh Marshall is also all about John Kerry's speech. It was excellent.

Key line: "Are you kidding me folks?"

Watch it:




There were late rumors of Kerry maybe being vetted as an Obama veep. I think the Biden choice is better but Kerry would have been pretty compelling given how toughened he has become. John Kerry is a good Democrat. In 2016 when Tim Kaine or one of the Udall boys from out west or Donna Edwards (if we're lucky) is the Democratic nominee for President, he or she could pick John Kerry as the 'experienced attack dog' running mate.


A Double Down the Line: Joe Biden

The life story telling went well. The family photo ops went well. The delivery was solid. It just wasn't as well-written as some of the others. Biden just got called up off the bench, it's hard to get a good swing on the ball when you've been riding the pine. So Biden took the pitch he was given and went the opposite way, blooping one over the first baseman's head and hustling into second base. I have full confidence in Joe Biden's talent. He'll be swinging a hot bat the whole rest of the summer and will be batting cleanup by the World Series this October.

Strike Outs: The DNC farm system.

The rookie call ups were nervous. Mark Warner can give a good speech and the substance within probably works well in centrist swing Virginia. But as the key note, there wasn't so much to wow over. Brian Schwietzer showed some promise out of Montana but needs some more seasoning. I expected more polish from Missouri's Claire McCaskill.

It's not as if the DNC is devoid of young talent. I would have enjoyed to seeing Udall out of Colorado or Udall out of New Mexico. Rep. Donna Edwards out of Maryland brought down the house at Netroots Nation; I would have loved to have seen her get in a few swings at the DNC. What about giving a shot to a few long-shot Senate candidates from this cycle that maybe could use some cash. We're really threatening to get 60 in the Senate. Why not give Noriega from Texas an opportunity to close the gap on Cornyn. Or what about Allen in Maine? Or Cowboy Kleeb from Nebraska? Or Rice from Oklahoma? Or Hagan from North Carolina? Look how close the Dems are to 60 in the Senate. They just need to push a little bit harder to get there and they could have used the convention pulpit to help out in Oregon, Maine, North Carolina, Texas, etc.

Also it would have been nice to have a John Edwards speech at this thing. Too bad he blew that for us.

Saturday, February 23, 2008

Bill Clinton and the Definition of Insanity

I'd like this video to be broadcast more often




props to huck upchuck

I imagine 1992 Bill Clinton endorsed Mr. Obama on many more occasions during that campaign.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

The Bill Clinton Legacy

Oh the 90s! So much prosperity!

And the scandals! How could I forget the scandals?

So frivolous and spiteful, those Republicans were! Remember that, Bill? Stupid little sex scandals and half-important real estate deals from 30 years ago - remember when they tried to remove you from office for having do-it?

Can't wait to have another go-round, myself!

From the New York Times: (so sorry I was insinuating biased pro-Clinton coverage the other day)

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.

Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader’s bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy. Mr. Clinton’s public declaration undercut both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, Mr. Clinton’s wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Within two days, corporate records show that Mr. Giustra also came up a winner when his company signed preliminary agreements giving it the right to buy into three uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstan’s state-owned uranium agency, Kazatomprom.

The monster deal stunned the mining industry, turning an unknown shell company into one of the world’s largest uranium producers in a transaction ultimately worth tens of millions of dollars to Mr. Giustra, analysts said.

Just months after the Kazakh pact was finalized, Mr. Clinton’s charitable foundation received its own windfall: a $31.3 million donation from Mr. Giustra that had remained a secret until he acknowledged it last month. The gift, combined with Mr. Giustra’s more recent and public pledge to give the William J. Clinton Foundation an additional $100 million, secured Mr. Giustra a place in Mr. Clinton’s inner circle, an exclusive club of wealthy entrepreneurs in which friendship with the former president has its privileges.

---

In a statement Kazakhstan would highlight in news releases, Mr. Clinton declared that he hoped it would achieve a top objective: leading the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which would confer legitimacy on Mr. Nazarbayev’s government.

“I think it’s time for that to happen, it’s an important step, and I’m glad you’re willing to undertake it,” Mr. Clinton said.

Mr. Clinton’s praise was odd, given that the United States did not support Mr. Nazarbayev’s bid. (Late last year, Kazakhstan finally won the chance to lead the security organization for one year, despite concerns raised by the Bush administration.) Moreover, Mr. Clinton’s wife, who sits on a Congressional commission with oversight of such matters, had also voiced skepticism.

Eleven months before Mr. Clinton’s statement, Mrs. Clinton co-signed a commission letter to the State Department that sounded “alarm bells” about the prospect that Kazakhstan might head the group. The letter stated that Kazakhstan’s bid “would not be acceptable,” citing “serious corruption,” canceled elections and government control of the news media.

In a written statement to The Times, Mr. Clinton’s spokesman said the former president saw “no contradiction” between his statements in Kazakhstan and the position of Mrs. Clinton, who said through a spokeswoman, “Senator Clinton’s position on Kazakhstan remains unchanged.”


Sorry, Bill. Thanks to that funny movie, we're all aware of the existence of a place called Kazakhstan.

So nice to see Mr. Clinton jet-setting around the world with James Bond villains. I especially liked the part where the former President of the United States decided to support an authoritarian dictator's pledge to lead a UN organization on elections in exchange for a mining contract for a uranium magnate - all over caviar.

No wait, the best part was when his charitable organization got 30-some million dollars from the uranium tycoon in exchange for the exclusive uranium mining contract that shocked the mining world.

No, the best part was when Mr. Clinton's actions in support of an authoritarian dictator directly contradicted with US foreign policy principles, and the statements of his own wife, who only happens to be running for US President.

Oh man!

I hope Moneypenny and Q aren't waiting up. Clinton, Bill Clinton is going to get the girl!

Billions of dollars, fine cognac, cigars, private jets, presidential palaces, uranium, dictators, tycoons, and the former President of the United States of America - in Kazakhstan? Sexy time, alright!

---

Um......... so.......... Mr. Clinton?

Um......... if your wife, er, if Senator Clinton becomes the President........

What........ will..........

What exactly will your role be, anyway?

Do we get a cut?

Obama for President.

----
Here are some more pretty shocking snippets from the article, this whole secret world of international billionaire tycoons is both fascinating and sinister:

Indeed, in December 2005, Mr. Nazarbayev won another election, which the security organization itself said was marred by an “atmosphere of intimidation” and “ballot-box stuffing.”

After Mr. Nazarbayev won with 91 percent of the vote, Mr. Clinton sent his congratulations. “Recognizing that your work has received an excellent grade is one of the most important rewards in life,” Mr. Clinton wrote in a letter released by the Kazakh embassy. Last September, just weeks after Kazakhstan held an election that once again failed to meet international standards, Mr. Clinton honored Mr. Nazarbayev by inviting him to his annual philanthropic conference.

-

Within 48 hours of Mr. Clinton’s departure from Almaty on Sept. 7, Mr. Giustra got his deal. UrAsia signed two memorandums of understanding that paved the way for the company to become partners with Kazatomprom in three mines.

The cost to UrAsia was more than $450 million, money the company did not have in hand and had only weeks to come up with. The transaction was finalized in November, after UrAsia raised the money through the largest initial public offering in the history of Canada’s Venture Exchange.

Mr. Giustra challenged the notion that UrAsia needed to court Kazatomprom’s favor to seal the deal, contending that the government agency’s approval was not required.

But Mr. Dzhakishev, analysts and Mr. Kurzin, one of Mr. Giustra’s own investors, said that approval was necessary. Mr. Dzhakishev, who said that the deal was almost done when Mr. Clinton arrived, said that Kazatomprom was impressed with the sum Mr. Giustra was willing to pay and his record of attracting investors. He said Mr. Nazarbayev himself ultimately signed off on the transaction.

Longtime market watchers were confounded. Kazatomprom’s choice of UrAsia was a “mystery,” said Gene Clark, the chief executive of Trade Tech, a uranium industry newsletter.

“UrAsia was able to jump-start the whole process somehow,” Mr. Clark said. The company became a “major uranium producer when it didn’t even exist before.”

-

In February 2007, a company called Uranium One agreed to pay $3.1 billion to acquire UrAsia. Mr. Giustra, a director and major shareholder in UrAsia, would be paid $7.05 per share for a company that just two years earlier was trading at 10 cents per share.

That same month, Mr. Dzhakishev, the Kazatomprom chief, said he traveled to Chappaqua, N.Y., to meet with Mr. Clinton at his home. Mr. Dzhakishev said Mr. Giustra arranged the three-hour meeting. Mr. Dzhakishev said he wanted to discuss Kazakhstan’s intention — not publicly known at the time — to buy a 10 percent stake in Westinghouse, a United States supplier of nuclear technology.

Nearly a year earlier, Mr. Clinton had advised Dubai on how to handle the political furor after one of that nation’s companies attempted to take over several American ports. Mrs. Clinton was among those on Capitol Hill who raised the national security concerns that helped kill the deal.

Mr. Dzhakishev said he was worried the proposed Westinghouse investment could face similar objections. Mr. Clinton told him that he would not lobby for him, but Mr. Dzhakishev came away pleased by the chance to promote his nation’s proposal to a former president.

Mr. Clinton “said this was very important for America,” said Mr. Dzhakishev, who added that Mr. Giustra was present at Mr. Clinton’s home.

Both Mr. Clinton and Mr. Giustra at first denied that any such meeting occurred. Mr. Giustra also denied ever arranging for Kazakh officials to meet with Mr. Clinton. Wednesday, after The Times told them that others said a meeting, in Mr. Clinton’s home, had in fact taken place, both men acknowledged it.