Hillary would let Bill roam the world

I think Bill should rove the world. Gives him more chance to troll for babes.

Trolling for babes AND keeping him out of her hair. Do these two EVER spend any real time together?

Just a marriage of convenience to power, nothing more, nothing less.

When Hillary gets elected will Bill be the 'First Man'of the country?

Big Bill would be able to send the same mixed messages for his wife as he did and be a regular fall guy for his wife like she was. I hope the voters send these two out to pasture, where they can stand in the muck they shovel.

At least Bill Clinton is respected as a leader by the other nations around the world, as contrasted to the current doofus in the White House. Having Clinton work to improve America's image and reputation around the world can only be a good thing. Too bad the Neocons and Republicans can't see the obvious.

To John D. & Bruce; jealous your marriages aren’t as strong?

Think of it this way. Clinton will have to do a lot of traveling around the world to repair the trashed image of the United States after Bush leaves office.

You didn’t think Obama could do it all by himself, even with eight years in office?

JohnD, I'm just so glad for you that you have a loving wife who's happy just to be in your presence and to take care of your healthy, active children. It must give you so much satisfaction to be in a position to sit in judgment on other peoples' marriages.

Hide your daughters World, Big Bill is on the prowl...

Clinton an image improvement. Yeah, right. I have this swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you.

Jeff, if you've actually gone outside of the country, you'd realize how much of a emberassment Bush has been for the United States. It's humiliating for me to admit I'm from this country when I travel abroad.

Roman B, the Clintoons have a strong marriage? You mean the more a husband fools around and cheats on his wife indicates a strong marriage? You mean all of his affairs and hits on ladies like Juanita Broadderick, Gennifer Flowers, Denise Rich, Monica Lewinsky and more means that the Clintoons have a good marriage?

And then all the time they spend apart, going months without ever seeing each other is another sign of a strong marriage?

And, op109, you're kidding, right??

A quick look at Bill's dealings with the UAE and you might think twice about crowning him the US's cheerleader. We can do better.

Please post constructive remarks, not personal ones. The leaders around the globe respect Bill Clinton and they respond to him. Actaul polls and interviews of people from around the world admire him and look up to him. He is probably one of the few people in the world who can try to UN-do some of the damage done to our reputation throughout the world by this current administrations' war-mongering.

You mean all of his affairs and hits on ladies like Juanita Broadderick, Gennifer Flowers, Denise Rich, Monica Lewinsky and more means that the Clintoons have a good marriage?

John D. You forgot Paula Jones, the one who got him up a tree to begin with. Which one was it, that he bit their lip and said "you better get some ice on that" ?

If there is such a thing as the most loaded thread ever, this has got to be it: "Hillary would let Bill roam the world."

Clinton's marriage has no bearing on how affective he would be in reversing the damage done with eight years of Bush around the world. After Bush's term, he might as well just stay in Texas & figure who he's going to hit-up for his half a billion dollar library.

Wow. Bill will be making illegitimate babies all over the world! Sounds like the democratic party in action. Then hilary can put them on her new healthcare plan, which includes illegal aliens.

You mean all of his affairs and hits on ladies like Juanita Broadderick, Gennifer Flowers, Denise Rich, Monica Lewinsky and more means that the Clintoons have a good marriage?
Posted by: John D | Apr 23, 2007 10:32:59 AM

John D, : You forgot to mention Paula Jones , she was the one who got him up a tree to begin with. What was the name of the woman whose lip he bit and then told her "you had better get some ice on that" ? Sounds like he was a caring fellow.

Bill IS respected around the world. It's too bad he's not the candidate. But remember we heard this "two for one" argument in the first (Bill) Clinton election and it didn't exactly turn out that way. Hillary screwed up the health care reform task force sooooo badly she helped usher in the Republican Revolution of '94. She left such a stench around the issue that it's only now, 14 years later, that anyones willing to get near it again.

And after that screw up that was the last job she took on for her husbands administration. The remaining six years she filled the traditional 'First Lady' role as hostess-n-chief.

Bill Clinton is the best (and really the only) argument in favor of voting for Hillary. Yet he's not the candidate--she is.

I've often said, 'If Hilary is elected President, we already know Bill will make a great First Lady!'

Bruce and John D.

I know you low level, RNC minions are employed to post to blogs. Just curious, do you get a bonus for being the first posters?

For most Americans, personal prosperity and quality of life improved significantly during the Clinton years. We can't say the same has happened during Bush's Administration. Ex-President Clinton is a masterful and eloquent Statesman who is respected on the world stage and would be a wonderful choice as an American Ambassador. As for the 2 for 1 comments; hell, why not ? Can't go anywhere but up from here now anyway.

Clinton an image improvement. Yeah, right. I have this swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you.

Posted by: Jeff | Apr 23, 2007 9:45:10 AM

Jeff... you can have a debate all you'd like on whether Bill Clinton or George Bush are better for the US, but to debate on who's image is better received overseas is asinine. There's no debate needed, no swampland in Florida, no possible debate here.

To argue that sending undoubtably the most popular American politician outside of america (whether you like it or not) overseas to help mend some hurt fealings will somehow not be an image improvement from the current image of the US overseas is simple head-in-sandery.

Believe it or not, many outside the US don't have the same hang-up on leaders getting a little action on the side that our puritanical right-wingers do. Wars of aggression however? Not so popular.

Moderator, I made a post this morning that stated nothing but the truth about Bill Clinton and quoted Teddy Roosevelt. Why hasn't it been posted yet? You can't protect Bill Clinton here, this is an open forum.

Dave, I'd have to care what you or France's opinion of the US is in that case. I don't. The US is the greatest nation in the world and France, Russia and the rest will all come running to us when they need military help or economic aid, I promise you that.

This is the great quote from another American President who was "hated" outside the US for waging wars and fomenting revolution (in Panama).
What he says pertains directly to our former Philanderer-in-Chief. Let's see if the swamp posts it THIS time:

"The man who loves other countries as much as his own stands on a level with the man who loves other women as much as he loves his own wife."
-Theodore Roosevelt

Clinton would sell out his native country for international political power the same way he jeopardized his family to hang on to the domestic political power.

Dave, who says Clintoon is popular overseas? I am not aware of any grand popularity of this vulgar man.

And, really, who cares what his image might be in France or wherever he may be popular. This I do know: When it came to actually funding aid to Africa, George Bush did it, not Clintoon. Even Bono, a good friend to both Clintoon and Bush, has said that no U.S. president has been so giving of aid to Africa as George Bush.

Immediately following the tsunami, George Bush sent billions as well as billion in military aid. He even sent your god, Bill Clintoon, as an ambassador with George Bush the father, to help raise money for that destructed area.

And as far as puritanical Republicans are ocncerned, yeah, I do have a problem with a man who has allegedly raped a woman (Juanita Broadderick), sexually harrassed countless others (Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey, in particular), traded a pardon in exchange of cash for his library and sex in Denise Rich, received a blowjob (can we sav that in the Swamp?) from under the desk while talking Congressman into sending American troops into harm's way in Bosnia, and countless other incidents.

It's not "puritanical" to expect a husband and president from screwing or fondling every woman that happens to walk by.

For those of you who are saying Bill is respected in the world have another thing coming. I lived in France during his presidency, and they thought nothing of him, they just laughed at him.

I am not saying Bush is great, but I am saying Clinton was not as respected as people think.

Ole' Bill, he'll be out shaggin ladies in every lattitude.

Just make Bill the Secretary of State.

Immediately following the tsunami, George Bush sent billions as well as billion in military aid.

Posted by: John D | Apr 23, 2007 3:08:31 PM

Well, John D. of the RNC

How about the real story of the "most generous President Bush".

Friday, December 31, 2004
Lack of U.S. Aid Indefensible
Crossposted at Dark Days Ahead...
This is what the U.S. government's spending priorities are:

$15,000,000 allocated for tsunami victims initially (1)

$35,000,000 allocated after criticism that U.S. is stingy (2)

[Update 2]$350,000,000 allocated after further criticism that U.S. is stingy (3)

$350,000,000 = billions? Must be republican math.

With Clintonism, and Bushism I see that Americanism will soon go the way of the dinosaur.We all tend to blame our Uncle Sap for all of the ills at home and throughout the world. These so called political, spell binders who offer us the moon, But leave us in the the gutter of social and moral decay. So don"t blame Uncle Sap, Your vote put him there in the first place.

Ahh.... the kneejerk "Who cares about France!" reaction of a righty on the ropes in a foreign affairs discussion. It's equivalent to screaming "Uncle!".

So in a discussion over what/who would help foster a positive image of the US overseas, the best you could muster is "Why should we care? The US is great! USA! USA! USA!"

Nice.

And that's a nice quote Jeff, but I don't see anywhere in that quote where it says that wanting the US to have a positive image overseas (and reaping the benefits of positive foreign relations) in any way means we love other countries more than the United States. That dog don't hunt.

A little late on this one. Newsweek already did an article a few weeks ago now all about "2 for 1" husband and wife teams. During Bill Clinton's first presidential campaign, he bragged about his intelligent, Yale Law educated wife who would be involved and proactive with her own issues in the White House. Then you have Obama, and his wife who graduated from Harvard Law.

Hardly a new phenomena, the husband and wife political teams. Its just that this instance is on a larger scale with the prospective of a 1st Husband/former president.

Dave, who says Clintoon is popular overseas? I am not aware of any grand popularity of this vulgar man.
Posted by: John D | Apr 23, 2007 3:08:31 PM

Chew on this article, John D. He came in second to Nelson Mandela. He even topped the Dalai Lama.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4298568.stm

Just make Bill the Secretary of State.
Posted by: JB | Apr 23, 2007 3:58:13 PM

JB: If she wins , i don't believe she can make him a cabinet member.
I could be wrong though.

Dear Bill H (America hater): Look at this link dated March 2005:
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/EGUA-6AKTLU?OpenDocument&rc=1&emid=ACOS-635PJQ/

Nearly $900 million from the U.S. in aid. It does not take into the account the money spent via the military in search, rescue and rebuilding efforts.

And monetarily, the U.S gave even more, with more money part of the 2006 federal budget. So between money spent and costs of the U.S military it is in the BILLIONS, and that doesn't include the $2 billion in donations from private U.S. citizens.

Funny, how you use news reports of just a couple days after the tsunami and not money spent within months. Everyone was slow cause it took time to assess the damage and costs. In the end, between federal U.S aid, military and private donations, the U.S. far outpaced any other country's financial commitments.

By the way, Bill H., did you donate any money, clothing, etc. to help those affected by the tsunami? I gave $150 and coordinated a fundraising effort at my church, which netted another $2,500.

Dave, surely you jest. Was "speak softly and carry a big stick" designed for the US to "have a postive image overseas?" Heck no, it was for the US to have a STRONG image overseas, no matter if France, Russia, Germany, Spain or the other colonial powers cared or not. It was that policy that got Europe out of our sphere of influence once and for all. And it didn't care much for those that hate the US of A. I promise you, Kofi Annan (former UN Secretary General) is one of those US haters. Today, Old Europe, Russia and the rest might dislike the US, but I promise you they respect us. Just like they did all those times we bailed them out of wars. Image means nothing if it's not backed by action.

You can try to frame the argument to your liking all you want, but I simply won't play along. The fact of the matter is, Bill Clinton has said before that he'd love to be UN Secretary General and if the Bush administration has done nothing else it has thoroughly and completely exposed the UN as the corrupt debating society it is and made it irrelevant. It's obvious what Clinton wants, the same thing he wanted when he was President, even more power. He'd sell the US down the river (along with his own mother) for international power. The man's a classic narcissist and I say let the UN have him. They'll be perfectly matched in their irrelevance.

If you don't believe that truth look at the comments from some of the international posters above. They realize that Clinton is a joke just like most US citizens do.

I can't help but laugh at this. When Clinton was in office, everyone complained that Hillary was controlling the White House. Now that she wants to do it for real, we worry that Bill will try to run it instead?

I guess, when you look at it that way, they'd both have served their terms, even if it wasn't while they were elected. It works out in the end.

I think Bill Clinton would be the ONE person who could clean up Bush's mess. The world did like Bill Clinton because he is an itelligent endearing guy. yeah, he let his nether regions go wild, but he is human. I believe having him involved would start a healing of sorts. I am a big Obama fan, and would welcome the Clintons involvement if Obama does win the nomination.

It is nice to have some Democrats to talk about!!!!!!!!

John D makes my stomach ache...............The same feeling I get when I see a bumper sticker that says "W" on it. blech......... I admire your passion John D, but remember, Hitler was passionate too.

Dear Bill H (America hater): Look at this link dated March 2005:
Posted by: John D | Apr 23, 2007 7:37:33 PM

Hey John D. from the RNC

This is from the post you reference above.

"The bill left intact $656 million in direct disaster-relief funds for the tsunami. It also includes $222 million to replenish U.S. military accounts used for early tsunami relief aid."

This is from your previous post.

"Immediately following the tsunami, George Bush sent billions as well as billion in military aid."

Posted by: John D | Apr 23, 2007 3:08:31 PM

See John, we are off to a bad start, I point out that you won't let the truth get in the way of your argument and right away you start calling me names, is that what your church teaches you?

I still don't see how these numbers add up to billions from President Bush but then the facts never seem to interfere with your arguements.

Dear Bill H (America hater): Look at this link dated March 2005:
Posted by: John D | Apr 23, 2007 7:37:33 PM

Hey John D. from the RNC

This is from the post you reference above.

"The bill left intact $656 million in direct disaster-relief funds for the tsunami. It also includes $222 million to replenish U.S. military accounts used for early tsunami relief aid."

This is from your previous post.

"Immediately following the tsunami, George Bush sent billions as well as billion in military aid."

Posted by: John D | Apr 23, 2007 3:08:31 PM

See John, we are off to a bad start, I point out that you won't let the truth get in the way of your argument and right away you start calling me names, is that what your church teaches you?

I still don't see how these numbers add up to billions from President Bush but then the facts never seem to interfere with your arguements.

Ah more Loony left nonsense: Bush is Hitler, Bush is Hitler.

For all the Loony Lefters in love with Bill Clintoon. How many innocent people did Bill Clintoon kill when he bombed Iraq in 1993? 1995? 1998? He just didn't bomb strategic military locations, he just bombed away.

How many innocent people did Clintoon kill when he bombed Bosnia for 46 straight days?

Clinton is Pol Pot! Clinton is Pol Pot! Clinton is Pol Pot!

Wow, that was fun!!