The Politics of Hypocrisy in the American Election - What happened to the Gatekeepers of Truth?

.
First Published May 8, 2009

The Politics of Hypocrisy in the American Election

Obamaville - April 23 - The Clinton Legacy - Public Service or Public Con Job - and who is being conned?

With Bill and Hillary Clinton continuing to soar in popularity in the minds of some Democrats, although not in the eyes of liberal and progressive Democratic institutions like The New York Times, Newsweek, and The Washington Post, the stunning article today in The New York Times raises more questions.

The newspaper disclosure about the manipulation of hundreds of millions of foreign dollars in the Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State probably explains better than any other explanation why Hillary erased tens of thousands of emails from her personal server covering that period.

Of course, Clinton apologists say it was just the Clintons being the Clinton's and they are just targets of a Right Wing conspiracy.  However, no one would label the Times or Post right wing radicals.

Bill Clinton is almost certainly the most popular person in American politics. A new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll showed that 56 percent of people have a positive view of the former president while just 26 percent hold a negative one.  It makes him more popular than his wife; 44 percent of Americans have a positive view of Hillary Clinton while 36 percent have a negative one.

Most Clinton fans point to the lead Hillary holds in the choice to be Democrat nominee for president, a number that wavers around 60%.  Running against Joe Biden who has not said he is in the race, nor campaigned, he sits at about 10% of the Democrat votes, Clinton has already lost 40% of the Democrats with no opposition.

People may be tired of the Clinton love of walking the tightrope when it comes to federal laws and regulations.  Bill Clinton spent over $7 million on legal fees to avoid impeachment and settlements for lawsuits against him by women.

Of course, he smoked pot but did not inhale and had oral sex with an intern but did not actually have sex, so one must adjust to the Clinton definitions.

We are yet to open the book on the changes Clinton made in the twilight of his presidency, which may have directly led to the collapse of our economy.

In addition, there is Goldman Sachs and their relationship with both Clintons in bailing out his legal expenses.  They also arranged for $500,000 speaker fees, and channeled tens of millions of foreign, and somewhat illegal dollars, into the Clinton Foundation of which she was a director, even while Secretary of State.

Did I mention their relationship to former Goldman Sachs executive Rahm Emanuel, Clinton's chief fundraiser, and Obama's Chief of Staff?

You get the idea, if Hillary runs unopposed as it now looks she may spend far more money defending herself against the acts of her husband, their family foundation, the $200 plus million dollars in their bank accounts, and their very strange relationship with the richest people throughout the world, some from countries whose money is banned.

Just what transpired to lift the Clinton couple from being broke according to Hillary in 2000 when Bill left office millions of dollars of debt from legal fees and lawsuit settlements, to being worth up to $200 million along with the assets of the Clinton Foundation 14 years later.

Most disappointing if I were a Democrat is how they continually sucker in the progressive wing of the party with promises of helping the little people, as they rocket up the ladder of former politicians who got rich manipulating the power of government.

Not only are they the classic politicians who have run Washington for far too long, but they show  no signs of stopping their efforts to convert public service to personal gain.

Ironically, Obama seemed to have been wary of the wily Clinton clan.  The White House said when he made Hillary Secretary of State she signed an agreement to publicly report all Clinton Foundation sources of money, and she was subject to preserving a permanent email record of all her dealings as Secretary.  Both promises seem to have been broken.

This might raise the question did the Clinton's tell Obama they would support him in the elections if she became secretary of State?  It could be the appointment was a bribe or a payoff but not being a right wing Republican I have no grounds to pursue such an abuse of power.

Hillary's biggest fear should be not having an opponent and having to spend the next 15 months before the general election explaining the Clinton actions over the past two decades.

.