GOP: The Eldritch Ones Arise Again

… Questing, once more, for the blood of the innocent:

LAS VEGAS — Many of the Republican Party’s most powerful insiders and financiers have begun a behind-the-scenes campaign to draft former Florida governor Jeb Bush into the 2016 presidential race, courting him and his intimates and starting talks on fundraising strategy.

Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOP’s brightest hope to win back the White House.

Bush’s advisers insist that he is not actively exploring a candidacy and will not make a decision until at least the end of this year. But over the past few weeks, Bush has traveled the country delivering policy speeches, campaigning for Republicans ahead of the fall midterm elections, honing messages on income inequality and foreign policy, and cultivating ties with wealthy benefactors — all signals that he is considering a run.

Many if not most of Mitt Romney’s major donors are reaching out to Bush and his confidants with phone calls, e-mails and invitations to meet, according to interviews with 30 senior Republicans. One bundler estimated that the “vast majority” of Romney’s top 100 donors would back Bush in a competitive nomination fight.

“He’s the most desired candidate out there,” said another bundler, Brian Ballard, who sat on the national finance committees for Romney in 2012 and John McCain in 2008. “Everybody that I know is excited about it.”….

“Jeb has the capacity to bring the party together,” said Fred Malek, a top Republican official who said he has been in regular contact with Bush…

That would be this Fred Malek (per The Wire):

Every year or so, poor old Fred Malek, the GOP fundraiser, has to suffer through a callback to his youthful indiscretions, like that one crazy time in his twenties that he and his friends were caught drunkenly barbecuing a dog on a spit, or the wacky moment in his thirties when he counted the Jews in the Bureau of Labor Statistics so President Nixon could demote them, or the hilarious time in his sixties when the Securities and Exchange Commissioned ordered him to personally pay a $100,000 fine for allegedly using taxpayer funds to reward a political supporter. *(Youth!)…

Yeah, okay, but apart from that guy…

Bush is in regular touch with foreign policy thinkers such as former secretary of state Henry Kissinger, who said in an interview that he would be “delighted” if Bush ran — although Kissinger said he also likes Christie.

“He would be outstanding,” Kissinger said of Bush. “He is someone who is experienced, moderate and thoughtful.”…

“The Bush family has an enormous number of friends who would be liable to go back to a place where they have been before,” Kean said.

And that place is… the HELLMOUTH!

Confirmation:

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

144 replies
  1. 1
    Hunter Gathers says:

    A Bush V. Clinton race would pretty much signal the end of this thing we call existence. The Black Hole of Stupid that will be generated will eat the entire Universe.

  2. 2
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    Desperation, thy name is Bush. Bush would be the only one I would really be concerned about, because he could actually sound reasonable. He hasn’t publicly embraced the crazy (prove me wrong) and the teapartiers seem unable to organize a game of solitaire.

  3. 3
    Thomas F says:

    All effort must be expended to stop Hillary Clinton from being the 2016 Democratic Party nominee. We all know this.

  4. 4
    patrick II says:

    Isn’t this the brother of the guy who’s presidency was so disastrous he was discouraged from coming to the last Republican convention? The man republicans have disavowed as no true conservative? Do they get whiplash when this happens?

  5. 5
    RobertDSC-Power Mac G5 Dual says:

    He hasn’t publicly embraced the crazy (prove me wrong)

    Terri Schiavo?

  6. 6
    Suffern ACE says:

    I’m still trying to think about who these conservatives are who disapprove of Rand Paul. I mean, he’s born himself again. He supports the social policy they’ve been preaching. He supports ending whatever parts fo the welfare state there are. He would remove all of those pesky regulations. Are they honestly frightened that he’d be able to make any changes to their national security state? Or are they worried about the return to the gold standard. Heck, these guys probably havle most of the gold already.

  7. 7
    patrick II says:

    @Thomas F:
    Not by me. It is not that I love Hillary (or Bill) that much. But she is the one democrat who could win big and maybe get some coattails. The next election after that is 2020 and maybe some redistricting could get done.

  8. 8
    Robert Sneddon says:

    Would Jeb actually run and perhaps pre-empt the future destiny of his son George P. taking his rightful place in the Bush White House in a decade or two? I mean I could see the American people electing a father and two of his sons to the White House in their turn but taking it to the third generation might look a little, well, hereditary. Comparisons might be made with countries like North Korea, Saudi Arabia or Syria rather than elective democracies like, say Iran or Venzuela.

  9. 9
    p.a. says:

    “History repeats itself first as tragedy and then as farce”.-K.Marx

    “The beer is warm the women are cold and I’m hot under the collar”- G.Marx

  10. 10
    Sophist says:

    Ladies and gentlemen and smizmars, I give you The Party of Ideas.

  11. 11
    moops says:

    Clinton vs Bush?

    We get a choice of ineffective dynastic rulers.

  12. 12
    Mnemosyne says:

    @CarolDuhart2:

    Bush would be the only one I would really be concerned about, because he could actually sound reasonable.

    Unless he changes his last name, I really don’t think he’d get very far in the general election. He has enough plutocrats supporting him that he could probably get the Republican nomination, but he’d basically have to run on I’m totally different from my brother except for the things you liked about him! which won’t go as far with voters as you’d think.

    Besides, the last time there was a direct Bush vs. Clinton match-up … Clinton won.

  13. 13
    GHayduke (formerly lojasmo) says:

    @Thomas F:

    Snark? She’s not my favorite candidate, but I would certainly vote for her…maybe in the democratic primary (caucus here)

  14. 14
    Kay says:

    They never actually nominate a long shot candidate, Republican primary voters. They had zero enthusiasm for Romney here but they were all resigned to him, immediately.

    Clinton is popular in this state, so this doesn’t surprise me but I would think Bush would be better off than this:

    Clinton leads 51-36 percent over former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and 50-36 percent over Florida Sen. Marco Rubio. She leads Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan 49-40 percent, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz 51-34 percent, and even Ohio Gov. John Kasich 51-39 percent.
    “Mrs. Clinton remains far and away the leader at this point in Ohio,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
    Asked whether Clinton would make a good president, Ohioans said she would by a 55-39 percent margin.
    On the Republican side, every potential contender had negative numbers on the question.
    Only 32 percent said Paul would make a good president, while 47 percent said he would not; for Christie, the numbers were 31-48 percent negative; Kasich 34-47 percent negative; Cruz, 20-45 percent negative; Ryan 36-44 percent negative; Bush 33-48 percent negative; and Rubio 27-43 percent negative.

  15. 15
  16. 16
    GHayduke (formerly lojasmo) says:

    @Kay:

    Wow. Ohio? that’s great news. I know in the 2008 primary, Hillary had STRONG support in Ohio

  17. 17
    raven says:

    Michelle Nunn
    ·
    “Our race was just moved from “Lean Republican” to “Toss Up” by famed analyst Charlie Cook!”

  18. 18
    patrick II says:

    @RobertDSC-Power Mac G5 Dual:

    For me, although he seems more genteel than his brother, Jeb has every bit the disregard for law as his entitled brother and father. Between Iran/Contra, torture and the Florida election in 2000. All of these guys should be in jail.

  19. 19
    raven says:

    @patrick II: Yes, he could spell cat if you spotted him a C.

  20. 20
    patrick II says:

    @raven:

    Point taken.

  21. 21
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @raven: No, no! That’s bad. Because nepotism and dynasty, or something.

    If the public career of John Quincy Adams teaches us anything, it’s to reject out of hand any aspirant for high office whose parent(s) held it previously.

  22. 22
    Kay says:

    @GHayduke (formerly lojasmo):

    She did. I always felt it was resilient, too, that she had strong supporters who voted for her once and would vote for her again. I like them, generally, the “activist” local Clinton supporters, then and now, although I was not one of them.

    We didn’t have a divisive primary here, partly because we’re a political minority so we don’t really have the luxury of splitting off into warring factions :)

    I think people feel they “know” her, not in the ordinary “you’re my pal” sense but because they have followed her career over decades and they’re Democrats. That’s tied to trust. It makes sense to me. I could see that.

  23. 23
    Kay says:

    @raven:

    Yay! That must be exciting for her. I love a long shot.

  24. 24
    KG says:

    Clinton v Bush would probably make me consider becoming an ex-pat

  25. 25
    Kay says:

    @KG:

    It is sort of awful to contemplate. Talk about “relitigating”. Maureen Dowd has a whole new lease on punditry if this occurs.

    I think Bush is already running. He has an ad up that is supposedly not about him but is instead about his fake claims of an education miracle in Florida, but he’s running, IMO.

    We’ll re-run the Bush family fake claims of education miracles. Texas and then Florida.

  26. 26
    Jay C says:

    It’s kind of telling that in 2014, Republicans still feel they have go get the imprimatur of Henry Fucking Kissinger to polish up their foreign-policy credentials – talk about “yesterday’s news”….

  27. 27
    JGabriel says:

    WaPo:

    “The Bush family has an enormous number of friends who would be liable to go back to a place where they have been before,” Kean said.

    Liable? Does that mean we can sue them for supporting the last Bush Presidency?

    ‘Cause I’m all up for that if we can.

  28. 28
    Cacti says:

    Nothing excites me like the thought of the Bushes and Clintons re-fighting the battles of 1992.

  29. 29
    Chris says:

    Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOP’s brightest hope to win back the White House.

    … If this is true, they are well and truly nuts.

    His name is Bush. End of story. Democrats wouldn’t even need to campaign. Just sit back and munch popcorn while looping videos of his idiot brother’s various pronouncements, juxtaposed with stats and images of what his presidency cost us. Is it fair to Jeb? Maybe not, but that’s how it is all the same.

  30. 30
    JPL says:

    Maybe Liz Cheney will run. That would lead to some interesting debates. My dad is a bigger torturer than your dad. Oh yeah and those banks, well never mind.

  31. 31
    JGabriel says:

    Post deleted by author because RobertDSC-Power Mac G5 Dual got there first with the exact same response.

    (Damn you, RobertDSC-Power Mac G5 Dual, for copying my post before I could even post it!)

  32. 32
    debbie says:

    Was Fred Malek in on that boyish prank with Mitt Romney at college, when they tackled, held down, and cut the hair off a guy they thought was “weird”?

  33. 33
    Amir Khalid says:

    The sense I get from the Washington Post story is not so much that anyone particularly wants Jeb Bush to be president; but rather, the Bridgegate stink isn’t washing off Chris Christie, which leaves him, Jeb, as a candidate of last resort. Jeb himself seems to like the attention, to a point. But he is aware that he’s been out of the game for a while, and doesn’t sound all that keen on running.

  34. 34
    rikyrah says:

    Kay,

    are you going to be doing a post on the Voter Bill of Rights in Ohio?

    A post on State Senator Nina Turner who’s running for Secretary of State?

  35. 35
    Cacti says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    I’m still trying to think about who these conservatives are who disapprove of Rand Paul. I mean, he’s born himself again. He supports the social policy they’ve been preaching. He supports ending whatever parts fo the welfare state there are. He would remove all of those pesky regulations. Are they honestly frightened that he’d be able to make any changes to their national security state? Or are they worried about the return to the gold standard. Heck, these guys probably havle most of the gold already.

    I think it’s more the fear of Paul the lesser losing in a Barry Goldwater-esque landslide to Hillary Clinton.

  36. 36
    JGabriel says:

    Chris:

    WaPo
    Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOP’s brightest hope to win back the White House.

    … If this is true, they are well and truly nuts.

    Just because the hope is dim doesn’t mean it isn’t the GOP’s brightest. It just signifies how little hope they really have.

  37. 37
    Fenwick says:

    “The Bush family has an enormous number of friends who would be liable to go back to a place where they have been before,” Kean said.

    The Hotel California?

  38. 38
    raven says:

    What a great b-ball game!

  39. 39
    Amir Khalid says:

    @JGabriel:
    In other words, Jeb is the Republican party’s least-dim hope — possibly in two senses of the word “dim”.

  40. 40
    Chris says:

    @JGabriel:

    I would rank Christie higher, personally. Simply for the fact that he doesn’t have the name “Bush.”

  41. 41
    debbie says:

    @Kay:

    They had zero enthusiasm for Romney here but they were all resigned to him, immediately.

    And yet, every Republican operative in Columbus is pointing to Romney’s winning the White vote in 2012 as proof no Democrat (running for state or national office) has a chance! I think the disconnect that enabled Karl Rove to insist Ohio would go Republican is even stronger today.

  42. 42
    🍀 Martin says:

    @Kay: Polls are crap 30 months out from an election. The 2008 Presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani should prove that well enough.

    We really should be focused on helping get the obvious first-choice of Republicans to run, that being Vladimir Putin. I have it on good authority that he was actually born in Alaska and kidnapped at the age of 4 by a pair of KGB agents on orders from Khrushchev who recognized early on that the USSR would inevitably fail if they couldn’t get someone who was more rugged and entrepreneurial to lead the nation and elevate it to the goals first set out by Stalin. Obviously they needed a hearty American, so they sought one out from a pair of pioneering American conservatives who were helping with the statehood movement there. The agents harbored the child back to Russia, faked his birth certificate and trained him to be a future leader. Alas, the USSR didn’t last due to the sheer brilliance of another American patriot, Ronald Reagan. Putin would have to pick up the pieces of a fractured nation, reassemble it by force if need be, and when the moment was right, reveal his true nature, return to and take the leadership of his homeland and from the position of having been leader of the two greatest nations, unite the patriotic conservative forces of both nations into a single dominant force – the Federated United States of Russiamerica. After the failed movements of socialism in both nations, the time will be right in 2016. The FUSR will finally gain dominance of the existential threat that is Canadian hockey.

  43. 43
    mai naem mobile says:

    I say I feel the tingle going up mah leg when I hear the gop is going to run Jebbie! Awesome! Where do I sign up to volunteer in the primaries. Also too, I offer Ben Quayle as the veep from the great state of Arizona. He’s only lost one political race for the House and he’s young and hip. He’ll bring in the young voters for sure.
    Seriously,though,I wonder if Bush would be running to keep his son P’s chances viable down the road when Dubbya is forgotten.

  44. 44
    ruemara says:

    Dear Thomas F, et al.,

    I would campaign my ass off for the Democratic candidate of Polished Driftwood & Self-pleasuring Bonobo. Seriously. I’d extol the virtues, make phone calls, offer to give ride to the polls and donate what little I could spare. I don’t care who the very serious Republican candidate is, I deeply care who the Democratic candidate is, but no matter who it is, I will work my ass off and promote the Democratic nominee at all costs. I don’t have the luxury of the Hillary Hate.

  45. 45
    Wag says:

    @Davis X. Machina:

    Yeah. JQ Adams was an unaccomplished nobody who did nothing to raise civil discourse in America.

    Oh, wait…

    While a member of the Senate, Adams also served as a professor of logic at Brown University.[23] Disowned by the Federalists and not fully accepted by the Republicans, Adams used his Boylston Professorship of Rhetoric and Oratory at Harvard as a new base.[24] Adams’ devotion to classical rhetoric shaped his response to public issues. He remained inspired by classical rhetorical ideals long after the neo-classicalism and deferential politics of the founding generation had been eclipsed by the commercial ethos and mass democracy of the Jacksonian Era. Many of Adams’ idiosyncratic positions were rooted in his abiding devotion to the Ciceronian ideal of the citizen-orator “speaking well” to promote the welfare of the polis.[25] Adams was influenced by the classical republican ideal of civic eloquence espoused by British philosopher David Hume.[26] Adams adapted these classical republican ideals of public oratory to America, viewing the multilevel political structure as ripe for “the renaissance of Demosthenic eloquence.”

    Never mind.

  46. 46
    JGabriel says:

    debbie:

    And yet, every Republican operative in Columbus is pointing to Romney’s winning the White vote in 2012 as proof no Democrat (running for state or national office) has a chance!

    Because the Republicans are going to take every step they can to prevent non-whites (and women and under 30’s) from voting in 2016.

  47. 47
    eric says:

    I am assuming that the GOP money want Jeb because they are used to having to pay for Bush.

  48. 48
    Kay says:

    @rikyrah:

    I haven’t been posting on voting rights in Ohio because I’m going back to poll-working, and for whatever reason I don’t do both at the same time, opine and work the polls :)

    I did pass a petition on the VBOR last week and we got 30-some sigs easy, without leaving the union hall. My middle son signed, and he’s not one to talk about politics and doesn’t consider himself aligned with any particular group. I know he voted for Obama in 2012 because he told me, but he’s not a “Democrat”.

    He does vote, though, and the unfairness of the targeting (AA, students, etc.) would bother him. He’s actually an early voter himself, because he works bizarre hours and changing shifts.

    I think it’s a great idea. if I can help them as it goes forward, I will.

  49. 49
    Dedc79 says:

    I count maleks. One is too many.

  50. 50
    JGabriel says:

    @Chris:

    I would rank Christie higher, personally.

    To be fair, I’m surprised Bridgegate has hurt Christie as much as it has. I always thought the GOP liked Christie because he was a vindictive bullying asshole. I expected the Bridgegate scandal would move them to orgiastic cries of “One of us! One of us!”

  51. 51
    JGabriel says:

    @eric: Clever. Nice one.

  52. 52
    Ruckus says:

    @Amir Khalid:
    Least dim.
    Let that sink in a moment.
    What does that say about this country and how horribly screwed our politics are?

  53. 53
    Kay says:

    @🍀 Martin:

    Polls are crap 30 months out from an election. The 2008 Presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani should prove that well enough.

    But I knew Rudy Giuliani didn’t have a chance in hell and was 100% a media-generated candidate, and I also knew Clinton would be strong and hard to beat in a Dem primary (and she was) and you probably did, too :)

    One of the funniest political pieces I have ever read was a straight reporting piece in the WSJ about Rudy campaigning in a mall in Florida. I was in tears it was so unintentionally funny. He ended up screaming at them, basically.

  54. 54
    JGabriel says:

    @Amir Khalid: You take my meaning precisely!

  55. 55
    JPL says:

    @🍀 Martin: Thanks to Jon Stewart he will always be akimbo boob man, to me.

    @raven: hmmm.. The SEC looks pretty strong but the game is still close.

  56. 56
    feebog says:

    Florida BJers may want to chime in, but from what I know about Jeb Bush’s tenure as Governor, it wasn’t so great. He is not only vulnerable because his last name is Bush, but because his record in Florida is pretty shitty.

  57. 57
    Mike G says:

    @Chris:

    His name is Bush. End of story. Democrats wouldn’t even need to campaign.

    I recall a poll where something like 13% of people who voted for the Chimp in 2000 thought they were voting for GHW Bush.
    For a party whose base is apparently bone-stupid and easily manipulated, he might just pull off a win.

  58. 58

    There are too many remakes of Dumb and Dumber.

  59. 59
    Librarian says:

    I’m amazed that Fred Male k is still alive.

  60. 60
    kindness says:

    What has Senator Ted Cruz said about all this?

  61. 61
    Xecky Gilchrist says:

    @Wag: I think that post might have been snark.

  62. 62
    gene108 says:

    What worries me about 2016 is Republicans need someone, who can tap 2%-3% of the vote that went to Obama, in order to win the Presidency.

    Democrats can talk all they want about shifting demographics and how the GOP will struggle, but the gap the GOP has to close to win back the White House in 2016 is much smaller compared the what Clinton had to flip, from GHWB’s 1988 win, in order to become President.

    Basically the Republicans need someone, who has some limited cross-over appeal. Christie* was the guy until the GW bridge closing was tied to his administration and thus dooming his candidacy. Rand Paul maybe the guy, because of his “tough talk” about the NSA overreach, but I guess his ties to the religious folks makes the Wall Street money want a non-Rand Paul candidate.

    The fifty state field operation is a huge step up to the plate for Sen. Paul. Only Romney, in 2012, had a 50 state operation. The rest of the “hopefuls” had damn near next to no logistical support anywhere.

    In short, 2016 could be a lot more interesting than we Democrats hope, because I think many of us are wanting to settle into a blow-out.

    *Anybody notice a lot of the condemnation about Christie’s problems with closing the GWB center around how it hurts his chances for the Presidency and not how it was a terrible thing to do? If his staff hadn’t put their thoughts to Twitter or e-mail, and the closing could not be traced back to his administration, I think the MSM would be a okay with the fact a major thoroughfare in this country was closed for political reasons. I think the MSM is more upset with the fact his staff is so bush league as to get caught, versus actually doing something bad.

  63. 63
    Ruckus says:

    @feebog:
    Can’t run on his name or his record.
    He’s not a candidate, he is the least worst thing they’ve got.
    The conservative politics of screw almost everyone and lie, lie, lie is starting to bite them in the ass.

  64. 64
    raven says:

    Jesus christ this is a game for the ages!!!!

  65. 65
    JPL says:

    @raven: Who is going to win?

  66. 66
    gene108 says:

    @JGabriel:

    I’m surprised Bridgegate has hurt Christie as much as it has

    I think it’s the fact he got caught with his fingers in the cookie jar that has folks pissed off. I mean look at all the crap Reagan and Bush, Sr. got away with and look at how Bush, Jr. made sure to never communicate anything by his official e-mail ID.

    I think in this day and age, the Republican leadership would expect anyone running for President to have a team around him smart enough to know that their dirty tricks should never be put down in writing; the dirty tricks are secrets to one takes with him to the grave.

  67. 67
    JPL says:

    wow

    also, too.. talking about the kentucky shot

  68. 68
    raven says:

    @JPL: 2.3 down 3. Ky proly

  69. 69
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    I don’t see it. The Bush oedipal loop-de-loop (Yeah, I’m quoting MoDo, but I think she nailed that one) is strong, but it’s also one (more) reason Jebbie doesn’t want to taint the family name by losing to Hillary. Also, I think Paul and Cruz will be a bit more ruthless about exploiting the Bush family tradition of cronyism and failing up than people were with Dubya.

  70. 70
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Kay: Hmmm. If I were the Republicans, and a saavy type, I’d take a poll like that and start eating away at those plusses for Hillary. “The country doesn’t need a great president right now. The country needs a less than great one, and who better than the Republican candidate to be less than great.” Turn those negatives into strengths.

  71. 71
    raven says:

    yup, what a barn burner

  72. 72
    Hill Dweller says:

    The dirtiest program(and coach) makes it to the Final Four.

  73. 73
    mai naem mobile says:

    Obviously these idiot gop muckety mucks are in the .1% because if you were in the 99.9% you would know just how unpopular the Bush name is and would not even consider Jeb!

  74. 74
    Kay says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    Oh, I have a whole bullshit theory. I think people want some economic security (understandable!) and so if her horrid campaign people can resist the urge to “reinvent” her and instead just let her be a practical, grounded Democrat who talks about health care and “green jobs” she’ll do fine. She was really strong in the Ohio primary. She hit a stride on just that note.

    But they won’t. Because they feel they have to make her into something else. Which is sort of tragic, if you think about it. Why are they so paranoid that someone will think she’s not “tough” on foreign policy? I get the female thing, but good God, people have heard her on that. Is there anyone who thinks she’s “weak” on foreign policy? Why do they focus there?

  75. 75
    Patricia Kayden says:

    “caught drunkenly barbecuing a dog on a spit”

    What is it about Republicans and the mistreatment of dogs?

    Good luck, Jeb. Hilary will have you for lunch.

  76. 76
    Mike in NC says:

    The American corporate media would like nothing more than another (JEB) Bush/(Ben) Quayle candidacy. 1988 all over again? Nostalgia, baby! Break out the acid-washed denim and Madonna videos.

  77. 77
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    What is it about Republicans and the mistreatment of dogs?

    Yeah, this is at least three I can think of right off the bat — also Huckabee’s kid, and the Mittster’s roof-cage. I expect there are others, I just can’t bring them to mind right now.

  78. 78
    jharp says:

    Any chance of waiting til Jeb locks up the nomination and then charging his brother with the war crimes he committed?

    Hillary will smoke him

    What voter would prefer going back to the W. years over the Clinton years? About 27% as near as I can figure.

  79. 79
    Hill Dweller says:

    Why do they think this Bush would be any better than the previous two? I realize he is “the smart one”, but that isn’t saying much in a family of lightweights.

  80. 80
    Chris says:

    @Kay:

    For whatever reason (memories of the shellacking of the Nixon and Reagan eras, maybe), a number of Democrats seem to have completely internalized the meme of “must be careful not to seem *too* liberal, America hates that” (center right country, doncha know). Since Bill Clinton won through triangulation, it stands to reason that his campaign would be ground zero for that kind of sentiment – and that he’d pass it on to Hillary.

  81. 81
    KG says:

    Well, they could run Condi… until they realize that she’s pro-choice, has said nice things about gay couples (and then there’s the whole whisper campaign about her own sexuality). Ok, maybe not.

    I still think the GOP nomination is Huckabee’s if he wants it. And Jeb could definitely win the nomination, because he’s a Bush and the name still carries weight within the GOP. Could either of them win a general election? I don’t see how.

    It’s really a shame though, I was hoping to have more than one presidential election in my lifetime that didn’t include a Bush or a Clinton.

  82. 82
    Just One More Canuck says:

    @debbie: No that was a different set of entitled sociopathic assholes

  83. 83
    jheartney says:

    @gene108: It’s not just that their emails went public. The real problem is that the dirty trick was so stupid. Extremely high profile, unlikely to hurt its intended target, and attracted a spotlight not only on itself, but also on Sandy and 9/11 shenanigans. Christie has ruthlessly thrown underlings under the bus, but all that’s done is give them reasons to pull him down with them. And on the state level you can’t use “national security” and the pardon power to hide your crap the way you can in the WH. Everything will eventually come out.

  84. 84
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Chris: That’s fine. But they have her triangulating into a position that is not popular with voters. Yes, she was secretary of state so we’ll have to talk about her foreign policy experience. But seriously, voters are not going to be enthralled by a candidate who looks like he or she is going to spend their time involved with foreign policy. That’s not “triangulating”. Triagulating is supposed to attract voters to you by focusing on micro-issues specifically targeted to small blocks of voters, not give large numbers of voters reasons to vote against you.

  85. 85
    KG says:

    Also, because I couldn’t help myself, I went looking for 2016 Republican polls. BEHOLD!

    It’ll be a three man race: Paul; JEB!; and, Huckabee.

    Just let that wash over you for a minute, go take a shower, and then feel free to laugh.

    ETA: also of interest, general election polls for 2016. Yes, it’s early, but those numbers don’t look good for any Republican – Hillary winning Arizona?

    ETA x2: Yes, we are a long way out, lots of things could change, blah blah blah

  86. 86
    CaseyL says:

    I don’t know if we’re seeing the death throes of the GOP, or an early warning of voter suppression on a monumental scale as that seems to be the only way the GOP can win the Presidency in 2016 (after which, we will be living in a completely different country).

    If Jeb gets the GOP nomination, and Hillary the Dem nod, the MSM and GOP will indeed cast the 2016 election as the Battle of the Oligarchs, and many people will fall for it. It’s going to be fashionable to dismiss them both as “no different from one another,” which worked out so well in 2000.

    But the Clintons aren’t oligarchs, much less plutocrats. They’re self-made, and Bill’s Foundation is second only to Jimmy Carter’s in international do-goodery.

  87. 87
    Chris says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    Oh, I know. “It stands to reason” means I understand where they’re coming from, not that I approve of it or think that it’s in any way connected to reality. They’re living in the nineties. It’s probably friggin Pavlovian at this point.

  88. 88
    Chris says:

    @CaseyL:

    or an early warning of voter suppression on a monumental scale as that seems to be the only way the GOP can win the Presidency in 2016 (after which, we will be living in a completely different country).

    I am definitely not ruling that one out.

  89. 89
    p.a. says:

    2016 is a long time off. Don’t forget Bamz Obamz as a former Senator is an outlier for winning Presidential elections. The modern trend is governors. Hillary was completely outmaneuvered in 2007-08. And (again, it’s early) but there does seem to be a DLC tinge (stench?) to people around her. If we’re talking governors, how deep is the Dem. bench?

  90. 90
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Chris: I’m actually still kind of concerned about the Republican plan to assign electoral college votes by congressional district. Thankfully, the Dems took the governorship back in Virginia so that state is safe. But looking at PA, Michigan and Ohio and Florida going that route would be a problem. I’m hoping that the Dems can take the governors mansions back in at least two of those states.

  91. 91
    Kay says:

    @Chris:

    I don’t think it’s a mystery, though. The same horrible people are saying it. That was the point of the whole “don’t get too liberal, Democrats!” editorial from the former members of the DLC.

    Honestly? I think it’s about them. The triangulating operatives. Them personally. They feel they brought the Democrats “back” from some imaginary brink and they continue to claim credit, because it makes them relevant.

    It would be okay if it was some reflection back to the trauma of McGovern losing, but it’s not. It’s a reflection back to Bill Clinton winning.

    My big fear about the Clintons is that they are too far removed from ordinary people to get back to them. I see her going to these conferences and such and I just think it’s oddly out of time. No one gives a shit about conferences or roundtables or whatever. I think the country is a little harder, a little harsher, than it was in the 1990’s and there’s a reason for that. Ordinary people went thru a lot in the prolonged crash. It was hard. They didn’t come out unscathed.

  92. 92
    Anne Laurie says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    What is it about Republicans and the mistreatment of dogs?

    Well, they’d prefer mistreating women/children/people of color, but everybody’s sooooo ‘politically correct’ about a little happy-time gang-rape’n’assault party, these days…

    Honest answer? Back when my younger brothers were Boy Scouts, they and their pack members would brag to each other about ‘fun camping pranks’ like putting razor blades in apples & giving them to racoons. These kids were (mostly) not sociopaths, and when I got on their cases individually, they’d be really defensive (also, they’d confess that most of the worst stories were complete inventions). No one or two of those kids (or probably even most of the blithe spirits in Malek’s frat) would even think about doing stuff like that. But you put three or more pubescent boys together, and they’re going to torture whatever unfortunates they can find — the weakest member of the group, if there aren’t dogs or racoons or frogs around. It’s a bonding thing, anthropologists say. Repubs are the guys who don’t outgrow their “Lord of the Flies” phase when they’re technically adults.

    See also: Authoritarians. It’s not a real hierarchy unless you get to kick down, as well as kissing up.

  93. 93
    divF says:

    @KG: Not to mention any poll showing Hillary ahead of any Republican (in this case, Ted Cruz) in South Carolina. Even South Carolina recognizes what a repellent character Tailgunner Ted is.

  94. 94
    Baud says:

    @Kay:

    I see her going to these conferences and such and I just think it’s oddly out of time. No one gives a shit about conferences or roundtables or whatever.

    I agree it’s a problem if she keeps it up. But she really shouldn’t be “campaigning” yet.

  95. 95

    @Kay: Did you see Diane Ravitch’s interview on Bill Moyer’s show on PBS? She was saying all the things you say about charter schools, testing and public schools.

  96. 96
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @KG: Extremely early polls are entirely about name recognition. Hillary Clinton has ultimate name-recognition superiority over anyone else who could be in the 2016 race. It’s the same reason she was the early favorite in 2008. It doesn’t actually mean much as a projection, because major-party presidential candidacies generate their own name recognition.

  97. 97
    WaterGirl says:

    @Patricia Kayden:

    What is it about Republicans and the mistreatment of dogs?

    They are sociopaths.

  98. 98
    Cervantes says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    Triagulating is supposed to attract voters to you by focusing on micro-issues specifically targeted to small blocks of voters, not give large numbers of voters reasons to vote against you.

    As Clinton (or rather, Dick Morris) used the term in the mid-90s, triangulation was the act of presenting one’s ideology as neither Left nor Right but in between those “extremes,” and somehow “above” them. For example, Clinton’s explicitly adopting the deficit as a driving issue — more than that, taking credit for successfully reducing the deficit — took that issue out of political contention. Republicans trying to criticize him as a “tax-and-spend liberal” found themselves losing spectacularly.

    The use of small-bore issues to attract voters in particular niches — a strategy that was also used, yes — was not the thing we called triangulation.

  99. 99
    KG says:

    @Matt McIrvin: oh, I know, I learned all this stuff while getting my BA in political science. But if you think about it, Jeb has as much name as Hillary (that’s where the family name is an asset). Huckabee has decent name recognition too, he’s been in the public eye since 2008.

    Also, remember the old line: Democrats want to fall in love, Republicans fall in line

  100. 100
    Enhanced Voting Techniques says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    Or are they worried about the return to the gold standard. Heck, these guys probably havle most of the gold already.

    Yes they are. Remember the difference between a rich man and a poor man is rich man has bigger debts. Gold standard means deflation, which means they will never be able to pay off their debts.

  101. 101
    Cervantes says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    Did you see Diane Ravitch’s interview on Bill Moyer’s show on PBS? She was saying all the things you say about charter schools, testing and public schools.

    Diane has also put up a post at NYRB on Mayor De Blasio and NYC’s charter schools.

  102. 102
    J R in WV says:

    @raven:

    @Hill Dweller:

    So what game are you guys talking about? Soccer? Isn’t that the game you play with a round ball?

    Seriously, I used to like BBall, and then I got a job working at a TV station that covered the state HS tournament. I got to watch 4 games a day for 4 days, with no real breaks from watching the action to keep a good shot the director could pick at any time. After the second season of that my BBall appreciation brain cells were burnt!

  103. 103
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @gene108: I’m not sure you can extrapolate simply from Obama’s vote share to any other presidential candidate’s. He ran superb election campaigns in both ’08 and ’12, far better ones than Hillary Clinton did in ’08; but he was also black, which almost certainly lost him significant margin in many states, both in the Democratic primary and in the general election. It certainly helped him with some groups of voters as well, but every serious statistical analysis I’ve seen suggests that it can’t have helped him on the whole.

    Then again, the Democrats’ apparent early frontrunner is a woman, and that throws all sorts of other weird, not-entirely-known distortions into the mix. But I suspect that, for obvious and somewhat disturbing reasons, she can win some votes in Greater Appalachia that Obama just had to write off. Her electoral map might look a little different.

  104. 104
    Enhanced Voting Techniques says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    Jeb, as a candidate of last resort

    “Who the fuck else are you conservatives going to vote for in 2016?” now there is campaign excitement.

  105. 105
    KG says:

    @Enhanced Voting Techniques: so, Jeb will run Mitt’s 2012 campaign?

  106. 106
    efgoldman says:

    @JGabriel:

    To be fair, I’m surprised Bridgegate has hurt Christie as much as it has. I always thought the GOP liked Christie because he was a vindictive bullying asshole

    Among TeaHadi primary voters, sure. But the big money guys aren’t going to pour millions into Big Chicken [h/t Pierce] and then watch it all get blown up by a federal indictment.

  107. 107
    Cervantes says:

    @Enhanced Voting Techniques:

    Bush/Romney 2016: At least it’s not Romney/Bush!

  108. 108
    Kay says:

    @Baud:

    I agree it’s a problem

    To be clear, it’s not a “problem” for me. There’s nothing wrong with expertise or speeches on policy and I would expect both Clintons to know all those people and be invited to all those places. What bothers me about it is I take it as an indication that they’re too far removed. I don’t know how one authentically “gets back” when you lead the kind of life they do. It’s admirable, it’s mostly public service, but boy it is high up. He hasn’t been the governor of Arkansas in a very long time. I think it will be a hard balance to strike, authenticity on that without veering into just bullshit : “I’m like you!”. No, you’re really not.

  109. 109
    Baud says:

    @Kay:

    They may be too removed, but I don’t take what they’re doing right now as an indication of that. She’ll have to do the retail politicking when the time comes. I guess we’ll see then.

  110. 110
    WaterGirl says:

    I just wish Hillary would either announce that she’s running OR I wish she would announce that she hasn’t decided yet, and say that even if she does run she’d like to see a full field competing for the democratic nomination, so no one should sit it out while she decides.

    What she’s doing now is the worst of the worst. Once again it feels like she’s doing what’s best for Hillary, not what’s best for the country. I’ve had enough of that.

  111. 111
    Cervantes says:

    @Kay:

    There’s nothing wrong with expertise or speeches on policy and I would expect both Clintons to know all those people and be invited to all those places. What bothers me about it is I take it as an indication that they’re too far removed. I don’t know how one authentically “gets back” when you lead the kind of life they do. It’s admirable, it’s mostly public service, but boy it is high up. He hasn’t been the governor of Arkansas in a very long time.

    The conferences, the policy shindigs, the Renaissance Weekends — they were doing all those through the ’80s and ’90s. The only difference now is that they are somewhat wealthier, partly because of all the appearances they’ve been paid to do since leaving the White House and Senate/State.

    Are their lives — is her life — far removed from ordinary people’s lives? Maybe, but the other candidates on both sides aren’t exactly Ma or Pa Kettle, either. Marketing will work its wonders again (or conceal the truth, depending on how you look at it).

  112. 112
    Baud says:

    @WaterGirl:

    I hope no one announces anything until after the 2014 elections.

  113. 113
    Baud says:

    @Kay:

    Did Hillary say anything noteworthy (good or bad) at that Bush education conference?

  114. 114
    mclaren says:

    “He is not dead that only sleeping lies
    “And after slow electoral cycles, even death may die”

    Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Bush White House wgah’nagl fhtagn!

  115. 115
    Kay says:

    @schrodinger’s cat:

    No. I read her book and I sometimes comment on her blog. I also correspond by email with two of the “edbloggers”.

    She was the keynote at the public ed conference I went to in Austin but I had to leave before she spoke so I missed her.
    I saw John Kuhn, who is a principal from Texas and Karen Lewis, who is the president of the CTU. I thought Kuhn’s speech was just great. My daughter came with for that part and she loved it too.

    I don’t agree with Ravitch on everything. I read the fifth grade Common Core (I have a fifth grader) and the standards are fine, as far as I can tell. I think the testing is okay too, although I’m not wild about it and it might turn into a money sink and public schools are strapped and grifters and crooks abound. . What I don’t like is little kids taking HIGH STAKES tests. I think that’s outrageous, and way too grim and joyless an ordeal for grade schoolers. It’s unprecedented, probably because it’s a really bad idea so no one was dumb enough to try it before. I’m shocked that adults could be so irresponsible and reckless, so I am really grateful to Ravitch for the full-throated opposition. They’re on the wrong track. They need a sharp correction. Reading some of this stuff about “accountability” and “grit” I honestly think “have you lost your minds? These are third graders“.

  116. 116
    WaterGirl says:

    @Baud: That makes sense. But every single democrat and every single potential candidate and every single political hack should do everything they can for us to win in 2014. I just want to smack anyone who plans to sit that one out.

    Just imagine what we could be doing with Obama as president if we had both houses. Just think about the difference it could/would/will make in the last 2 years of Obama’s presidency.

    But no, people want to talk about why everybody thinks we’ll lose both houses, like feeling discouraged is going to help us win them. We are doing the work of the republicans by repeating this to one another. I just want to smack everyone who is doing this.

    I know you know all this already, I am just venting.

  117. 117
    Baud says:

    @WaterGirl:

    Vent away. You are 100% correct.

  118. 118
    mclaren says:

    @CaseyL:

    But the Clintons aren’t oligarchs, much less plutocrats. They’re self-made, and Bill’s Foundation is second only to Jimmy Carter’s in international do-goodery.

    The Clintons are not only oligarcs, they’re hideously corrupt oligarchs. Bill Clinton’s nepotism is legendary — heir daughter Chelsea manages to become vice provost of Columbia University before she even finishes her degree. My oh my oh my, how does that work? It works the same old way as Boss Tweed worked things back in the 1880s in New York: you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.

    As for doing good, the Clintons came to Washing to do good, and they did very well indeed.

    Chelsea Clinton to buy $10.5 million apartment on Madison Square Park (PHOTOS)
    Chelsea Clinton and her husband, Marc Mezvinsky, are in contract to buy a four-bedroom, 5,000-square-foot apartment in The Whitman, on the north end of Madison Square Park.

    Just your ordinary average charitable works folks. Whose daughter married one of the Masters of the Universe at Goldman Sachs. And then buys a 10.5 millon dollar apartment overlooking Central Park. And then Hillary Clinton, presumptive presidential candidate, just happens to give a speech (for which she gets paid $400,000) at Goldman Sachs explaining that bashing the bankers is “unproductive and needs to stop.”

    former Secretary of State and likely 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had some harsh words related to progressives in her $400,000 speeches for Goldman Sachs and friends. Clinton decided to use her speaking opportunity before the super rich to attack those criticizing Wall Street and its numerous criminal practices.

    (..) Clinton offered a message that the collected plutocrats found reassuring, according to accounts offered by several attendees, declaring that the banker-bashing so popular within both political parties was unproductive and indeed foolish.

    Source: “Hillary Clinton tells Wall Street she believes Anti-Wall-Street rhetoric `Foolish,'” firedoglake, 12 December 2013.

    Meanwhile, let’s hear from Barack Obama:

    …we know that people’s frustrations run deeper than these most recent political battles. Their frustration is rooted in their own daily battles — to make ends meet, to pay for college, buy a home, save for retirement. It’s rooted in the nagging sense that no matter how hard they work, the deck is stacked against them. And it’s rooted in the fear that their kids won’t be better off than they were. They may not follow the constant back-and-forth in Washington or all the policy details, but they experience in a very personal way the relentless, decades-long trend that I want to spend some time talking about today. And that is a dangerous and growing inequality and lack of upward mobility that has jeopardized middle-class America’s basic bargain — that if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead.

    I believe this is the defining challenge of our time: Making sure our economy works for every working American. It’s why I ran for President. It was at the center of last year’s campaign. It drives everything I do in this office. And I know I’ve raised this issue before, and some will ask why I raise the issue again right now. I do it because the outcomes of the debates we’re having right now — whether it’s health care, or the budget, or reforming our housing and financial systems — all these things will have real, practical implications for every American. And I am convinced that the decisions we make on these issues over the next few years will determine whether or not our children will grow up in an America where opportunity is real.

    Source: Remarks by the president on economic inequality, 4 December 2013.

    So Wall Street has found its candidate. Yes, oligarch Hillary Clinton is here to tell us that, contrary to the noises that pesky scary angry negro is making, income inequality is not an important issue, and we need to stop talking about it. Let those billionaires be. Let the U.S. economy continue to slide into kleptocracy. Let the American middle class continue to disintegrate and vanish.

    None of that matters, as long as Chelsea Clinton can afford a nice 10.5 million dollar apartment overlooking Central Park.

    Holy fuck.

    What the hell are you people drinking? Are you on drugs? Did you suffer head trauma in a car accident?

    “The Clintons are not oligarchs”????!?!?!?

    What the fuck planet are you people living on?

  119. 119
    mclaren says:

    @WaterGirl:

    …every single democrat and every single potential candidate and every single political hack should do everything they can for us to win in 2014. I just want to smack anyone who plans to sit that one out.

    Goddamn right.

    If every twenty-something in America voted in 2014, it would transform America beyond recognition. The shameful fact remains that people over 60 (the Fox News lunatic crowd, who believe Obama is a Kenyan Manchurian candidate intent on turning America into an Islamic caliphate with his hypnotic mind-control sooper-powers) vote at a rate of 75%, but people under age 25 (who overwhelmingly agree with the progressive agenda of income equality, jailing the Wall Street financial crime lords, re-regulating the financial system, breaking up giant corrupt monopolies like Wal Mart and the big banks, cracking down on the corrupt anti-labor-union practices of giant U.S. corporations, instituting cap-and-trade for carbon emissions, starting up a Manhattan Project for clean energy, building out high-speed rail throughout America, etc., etc.) vote at a rate under 45%.

    That’s pathetic.

    Youth turnout was strong in 2008, compared to the average since 1972, but it fell again in 2012. CIRCLE’s final estimates (from the Census Current Population Survey November Supplement, or CPS) suggest that voter turnout in 2012 was 45% for people between the ages of 18 – 29 and 41.2% for 18 – 24s. These rates were lower than those observed in the 2004 and 2008 elections…

    Source: “The Youth Vote in 2012,” Tufts Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement, 10 May 2013.

    Just take a look at this jaw-dropping chart of voter turnout by age, and you can see plainly why America has been turning into a reactionary shithole.

    If you’re under age thirty and you hate the way America has been going over the past thirty years, VOTE!

  120. 120
    Cervantes says:

    @mclaren:

    The Clintons are not only oligarcs, they’re hideously corrupt oligarchs. Bill Clinton’s nepotism is legendary — heir daughter Chelsea manages to become vice provost of Columbia University before she even finishes her degree. My oh my oh my, how does that work? It works the same old way as Boss Tweed worked things back in the 1880s in New York: you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.

    How does that work? It doesn’t. She’s not the Vice Provost of Columbia University. Her position is at NYU. She’s not the Vice Provost of NYU. She’s not even the Assistant Vice Provost of NYU. She is the Assistant Vice Provost of NYU’s “Global Network University.”

    In any event, I’m sure her last name was not a disadvantage; but she’s no dummy, either.

  121. 121
    efgoldman says:

    @Cervantes:

    How does that work?

    mclaren hates everything Clinton. One or another of them could cure cancer, get the Israelis and Palestinians into a permanent group hug, turn Vlad Putin into Winston Churchill, clean up Fukushima and all US superfund sites unilaterally, find jobs for forty million people and medical care for forty million more, and they’d still be Hitler and Stalin combined.

  122. 122
    Suffern ACE says:

    @Cervantes: Boss Tweed’s daughter never was a provos of any sort. So in many ways, Clinton’s corruption goes beyond even Tweed.

  123. 123
    mclaren says:

    @Cervantes:

    Ms. Clinton also serves as an assistant vice provost for the Global Network University at New York University.

    She took the job in 2010, after working in the financial-services sector and earning a master’s degree in public health at Columbia University.

    Source: People, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 26 February 2012.

    Chelsea Clinton got that assistant vice provost position before she finished her masters degree.

    Kind of unusual, no?

    Oh no, of course, it’s common for graduate students to get appointed as Vice Provost for a major Ivy League university before they finish their advanced degree.

    You need to improve your lying skills.

    Incidentally, the Global Network University is the latest scam perpetrated by the Ivy League. It’s an effort to charge Ivy-League-level prices for a set of canned lectures and internet-delivered tests. The same old story: reduce the cost, degrade the product, keep the price sky-high.

    Standard stuff. This is the response of the Ivy League to the fact that college tuition has been rising faster than the rate of inflation to the point where college tuition costs are now faster-growing bubble than the subprime housing market was.

    Trust the Clinton octopus to thrust their blood funnel into anything that smells like cash. Chelsea is carrying on the family business: grifting on the Big Con scale that impoverishes millions, not just a handful of suckers.

  124. 124
    mclaren says:

    @efgoldman:

    mclaren hates everything Clinton. One or another of them could cure cancer, get the Israelis and Palestinians into a permanent group hug, turn Vlad Putin into Winston Churchill, clean up Fukushima and all US superfund sites unilaterally, find jobs for forty million people and medical care for forty million more, and they’d still be Hitler and Stalin combined.

    Show me the evidence that I “hate everything Clinton.”

    Let us see the quotes.

    Got nothing?

    Of course you don’t have anything, you’re just making shit up.

    Of the recent president, Clinton was the best since Jimmy Carter. Unfortunately that’s not saying much.

    Bill Clinton did some good things — he kept us out of a major war, he didn’t go forward with the Clipper chip, he vastly increased government transparency (unlike Barack Obama, who has prosecuted more whistelblowers for revealing government crimes than all other presidents combined), and Bill Clinton used the dot-com bubble to pay down America’s deficit, rather than piss it away on tax cuts for the rich or on a military buildup.

    That’s in the plus column.

    In the minus column, Bill Clinton was the guy who started extraordinary rendition. Bill Clinton was the guy who signed off on repealing the Glass-Steagal act. Bill Clinton was the guy who lied NAFTA into existence, and in the process destroyed millions of American middle-class jobs. Bill Clinton was the guy who trashed welfare, impoverishing millions of the poorest American single women with children.

    Bill Clinton may look like Socrates compared to George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, but Clinton has a lot to answer for. His “triangulation” helped trash the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Bill Clinton also has an awesome ability to pick truly horrible people to serve in public office around him, from Robert “Greed is Good” Rubin to
    Larry “The Third World is Underpolluted” Summers
    to Mark “Democrats need to run against progressives” Penn to Dick “I paid a whore to suck her toes” Morris to Rahm “They’re DEAD! (smacking a knife into the kitchen table repeatedly)” Emanuel.

  125. 125
    Chris says:

    Hey, I just saw the Newsmax headline: “Romney backers want Jeb Bush.”

    Ah.

    Romney backers.

    So, the masterminds behind “unskewed polls?”

    That explains a considerable deal.

  126. 126
    mclaren says:

    @Chris:

    “Romney backers” is a code phrase for “Wall Street crime lords.”

    Simple questions, simply answered.

  127. 127
    Kay says:

    @mclaren:

    Well, I didn’t know Chelsea was in that, so thanks.

    This makes more sense now:

    Their presidential plans may be uncertain but one thing is clear: Jeb Bush and Hillary Rodham Clinton keep bumping into each other.
    Bush and Clinton were taking the podium Monday at a higher education conference in suburban Dallas organized by Bush, the former Florida governor who is the brother and son of Republican presidents. The former secretary of state, whose husband, Bill Clinton, served two terms in the White House, is the leading Democratic contender in 2016 if she runs for president again.

    So Jeb Bush is a disaster, I genuinely believe one should not allow him into a public school because he might sell it right out from under the first graders, and the conference wasn’t sponsored by Bush’s scam edu-PAC, it was sponsored by a for profit ed company.

    This is what I mean about a certain… disconnect. Why is this a smart appearance for her, politically? The public ed liberals hate, hate, hate it and she didn’t say anything different from any other Democrat about higher ed.

    What is the point of this? “I’m bipartisan!” Well, bully for you, but Bush is a disaster, an edu-profiteer.

    Or is it simpler, “my daughter is involved in this so I went”? I think she needs a normal-person advisor. Friend. Acquaintance. Something.

    I will keep an eye on this edu-profit leaning, mclaren! :)

  128. 128
    Cervantes says:

    @mclaren:

    You need a break.

    Ms. Clinton also serves as an assistant vice provost for the Global Network University at New York University. She took the job in 2010, after working in the financial-services sector and earning a master’s degree in public health at Columbia University.

    Source: People, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 26 February 2012.

    Yes. That’s just what I said: she is “assistant vice provost for the Global Network University at New York University.”

    Chelsea Clinton got that assistant vice provost position before she finished her masters degree.

    That’s not what your own reference says. Look at it. “After” and “before” are not synonyms.

    Kind of unusual, no? Oh no, of course, it’s common for graduate students to get appointed as Vice Provost for a major Ivy League university before they finish their advanced degree.

    Nonsense, but I don’t have the time to correct you again. Just look above.

    You need to improve your lying skills.

    What “lying skills”? You made a mistake. You said she is the Empress Pretendatrix of Ruritania. I corrected you: she’s merely an entry-level bureaucrat at NYU.

    Incidentally, the Global Network University is the latest scam perpetrated by the Ivy League. […]

    No. NYU is a fine school but it’s not a member of the Ivy League. You don’t like their so-called “Global Network University”? Fine, but I’m not really interested.

    Trust the Clinton octopus to thrust their blood funnel into anything that smells like cash. Chelsea is carrying on the family business: grifting on the Big Con scale that impoverishes millions, not just a handful of suckers.

    Of course.

  129. 129
    Cervantes says:

    @Suffern ACE:

    Boss Tweed’s daughter never was a provos of any sort. So in many ways, Clinton’s corruption goes beyond even Tweed.

    Au contraire, Tweed had six daughters (true) and they were all provosts (false), which proves yet again that Chelsea Clinton is an avaricious mollusk and only goodness knows what that makes her mother.

  130. 130

    […] of goat-molesters and slime people that are queuing up for the 2016 Goat Rodeo (h/t Tengrain), the Big Money Sociopaths and Greedheads are trying to set JEB! Bush as the next anointed Republican Presidential Asshole.  Yee-hah.  Yeah, yeah, complain all […]

  131. 131
    mclaren says:

    The Clinton Global Initiative has done some praiseworthy things. It is by all accounts the best-managed of all the big philanthropic organizations, along with Jimmy Carter’s various enterprises. The Clinton Global Initiative is much bigger financially than Carter’s organizations because Bill Clinton has gotten large multinational corporations to sign on as donors and participants.

    This has had some advantages (lots of cash and corporates resources) and some drawbacks (a lot of sleazy corrupt organizations have signed on as donors — can you say, for example, “Blackwater International”? How about the Saudi Princes, those delightful gentlemen who remain major players in sex slavery and the international trafficking of underage girls?).

    A word about tax law: current U.S. tax law does not require transparency for non-profit NGOs, and there is currently no tax rule requiring non-profit organizations to spend a given percentage of money on their stated goals, as opposed to management fees/salaries/perks/featherbedding and so on. This makes non-profit organizations an exceptionally good means for raising funds and living a lavish lifestyle without having to spend much of the proceeds on actual charitable good works.

    Soon after the 10th anniversary of the foundation bearing his name, Bill Clinton met with a small group of aides and two lawyers from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. Two weeks of interviews with Clinton Foundation executives and former employees had led the lawyers to some unsettling conclusions.

    The review echoed criticism of Mr. Clinton’s early years in the White House: For all of its successes, the Clinton Foundation had become a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest. It ran multimillion-dollar deficits for several years, despite vast amounts of money flowing in.

    And concern was rising inside and outside the organization about Douglas J. Band, a onetime personal assistant to Mr. Clinton who had started a lucrative corporate consulting firm — which Mr. Clinton joined as a paid adviser — while overseeing the Clinton Global Initiative, the foundation’s glitzy annual gathering of chief executives, heads of state, and celebrities.

    Source: “Unease at Clinton Foundation Over Finances and Ambitions,” The New York Times, 13 August 2013.

    Now Chelsea Clinton has joined the board of this multibillion-dollar organization.

    CGI is a non-partisan organization that convenes global leaders to devise and implement innovative solutions to the world’s most pressing problems. Each year, CGI hosts an Annual Meeting in September, scheduled to coincide with the U.N. General Assembly. Throughout the year, CGI helps its members – primarily corporations, NGOs, and government leaders – maximize their efforts to create positive change. CGI is not a grant-making organization. CGI Annual Meetings have brought together more than 150 heads of state, 20 Nobel Prize laureates, and hundreds of leading CEOs, heads of foundations and NGOs, major philanthropists, and members of the media. As of 2013, CGI members have made more than 2,300 commitments, which have improved the lives of over 400 million people in more than 180 countries. When fully funded and implemented, these commitments will be valued at $73.5 billion.

    Source: Wikipedia article on “Clinton Foundation.”

    Vast rivers of cash flow through the Clinton Global Inititative, yet “It ran multimillion-dollar deficits for several years, despite vast amounts of money flowing in.”

    Anyone else skeptical about this kind of “non-profit” organization?

    Kind of reminds you of those charities that take in millions per year, and wind up spending only 2% of their resources on actually helping orphan kids or curing cancer, doesn’t it?

    Is the Clinton Global Initiative a giant scam designed to funnel cash to the Clintons while creating the false appearance of charitable good works? As usual with Bill Clinton, that’s a gray area. The record suggests that Bill and Hillary Clinton genuinely have good intentions…somehow, along the way, they always seem to wind up vastly enriched. And their lofty ambitions all too often wind up getting left by the side of the road.

    Very clearly Bill Clinton is not the kind of rapacious shark expemplified by species of vermin like George W. Bush or David Petraeus. Recently Petraeus joined Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, a leveraged buyout firm that specializes in vampiring cash out of businesses by strip-mining their assets and firing all the workers. George W. Bush is of course heavily involved in the Carlyle Group, another hedge fund vampire organization specializing in leveraged buyouts but with even more sinister tentacles in businesses like international private security firms (mercs like Blackwater) and international arms dealing.

    Basically, George W. Bush and David Petraeus have gone in to business with the people depicted every week on the TV series THE BLACKLIST as the bad guys. The Clintons are not anywhere near that level of pure evil.

    Still, there’s a vast amount of money sloshing around organizations like the CGI and a remarkable amount of it seems to wind up in Bill and Hillary’s coffers. Meanwhile, Hillary makes speeches to investment bankers explaining how we need to stop bashing the bankers because it’s not “productive.”

    Bill & Hillary probably mean well. Even so, the sleaze factor remain high, and the stink of corruption stick to them like soap to a baby’s eyelashes.

  132. 132
    mclaren says:

    @Cervantes:

    What “lying skills”? You made a mistake. You said she is the Empress Pretendatrix of Ruritania. I corrected you: she’s merely an entry-level bureaucrat at NYU.

    Please provide the citation showing that I said Chelsea Clinton is “the Empress Pretendatrix of Ruritania” or stand revealed as a liar.

    I corrected you: she’s merely an entry-level bureaucrat at NYU.

    Vice provost is hardly an “entry-level bureaucrat.” An entry-level bureaucrat would be, for example, the assistant to the registrar.

    According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

    provost: an official of high rank at a university. The head of a college at a university.

    The vice provost, second in charge to “the head of a college at a university” is hardly an “entry-level bureaucrat.”

    This is what I mean by “needing to improve your lying skills.” You are misusing words and twisting the truth and distorting the plain facts. The plain fact is that a provost is “an official of high rank at a university,” second only to the dean. A provost is very nearly as high as you can get in a university.

    And your claim that NYU is not a notable or wealthy institution is simply laughable. Looking at Wikipedia’s entry for NYU, we find that

    New York University (NYU) is a private, nonsectarian American research university based in New York City. Founded in 1831, NYU is now one of the largest private universities in the United States.

    Considering that Harvard boasts a thirteen billion dollar endowment, NYU is clearly rolling in the dough.

    So once again this is what I mean when I say “you need to improve your lying skills.” You’ve tried to dispute plain facts several times now, and a simple googling of sources like Wikipedia shows that you’re flatly wrong. You are grossly mis-stating the facts. You need to stop it. Right now, you’re just digging yourself a deeper hole.

    The plain fact of the matter is that Bill Clinton managed to wangle for his underqualified daughter a very high position at one of the largest and wealthiest universities in America. This kind of thing stinks of nepotism and corruption, and it’s been a pattern with Bill Clinton since day one.

    Compare with Jimmy Carter. How many of Jimmy Carter’s children have concidentally wound up in high positions pulling down big salaries at some of America’s wealthiest and most prestigious institutions?

    Zero. Jimmy Carter has ethics. Big Bill…well, that’s a different matter.

  133. 133
    Cervantes says:

    @mclaren:

    Is this you after a nap? If so, you need another.

    What “lying skills”? You made a mistake. You said she is the Empress Pretendatrix of Ruritania. I corrected you: she’s merely an entry-level bureaucrat at NYU.

    Please provide the citation showing that I said Chelsea Clinton is “the Empress Pretendatrix of Ruritania” or stand revealed as a liar.

    Don’t be silly.

    I corrected you: she’s merely an entry-level bureaucrat at NYU.

    Vice provost is hardly an “entry-level bureaucrat.”

    She’s not vice provost of anything.

    An entry-level bureaucrat would be, for example, the assistant to the registrar.

    Here you’re approaching the truth, but accidentally, so you’re unaware of it.

    According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary: provost: an official of high rank at a university. The head of a college at a university. The vice provost, second in charge to “the head of a college at a university” is hardly an “entry-level bureaucrat.”

    Again, she’s not vice provost of anything.

    This is what I mean by “needing to improve your lying skills.” You are misusing words and twisting the truth and distorting the plain facts. The plain fact is that a provost is “an official of high rank at a university,” second only to the dean. A provost is very nearly as high as you can get in a university.

    Again, she’s not provost of anything.

    And your claim that NYU is not a notable or wealthy institution is simply laughable. Looking at Wikipedia’s entry for NYU, we find that

    New York University (NYU) is a private, nonsectarian American research university based in New York City. Founded in 1831, NYU is now one of the largest private universities in the United States.

    I did not say “NYU is not a notable or wealthy institution.”

    You said it was an Ivy League institution. It’s not. I corrected you.

    Considering that Harvard boasts a thirteen billion dollar endowment, NYU is clearly rolling in the dough.

    You’re wrong about Harvard’s endowment. You’re not wrong to say that NYU is a relatively wealthy institution.

    So once again this is what I mean when I say “you need to improve your lying skills.” You’ve tried to dispute plain facts several times now, and a simple googling of sources like Wikipedia shows that you’re flatly wrong. You are grossly mis-stating the facts. You need to stop it. Right now, you’re just digging yourself a deeper hole.

    There’s definitely a pony in there somewhere.

    The plain fact of the matter is that Bill Clinton managed to wangle for his underqualified daughter a very high position at one of the largest and wealthiest universities in America. This kind of thing stinks of nepotism and corruption, and it’s been a pattern with Bill Clinton since day one. Compare with Jimmy Carter. How many of Jimmy Carter’s children have concidentally wound up in high positions pulling down big salaries at some of America’s wealthiest and most prestigious institutions? Zero. Jimmy Carter has ethics. Big Bill…well, that’s a different matter.

    Get some sleep.

  134. 134
    J R in WV says:

    @mclaren:

    <blockquote cite="Chelsea Clinton got that assistant vice provost position before she finished her masters degree.

    Kind of unusual, no?

    Oh no, of course, it’s common for graduate students to get appointed as Vice Provost for a major Ivy League university before they finish their advanced degree.

    You need to improve your lying skills."

    This is a total fabrication, with falsehood by omission thrown in for free. The person with no need to improve their lying skills appears to be mclaren!

    Wikipedia provides this detail about Ms Clinton’s work at Oxford, a little school that’s only been around for about a thousand years: “In 2003, Clinton completed an MPhil in International Relations.[29] Following her graduation, she returned to the United States.[21] In 2011, Clinton began pursuing a DPhil in International Relations from Oxford, doing her doctoral work from New York City where she resides.”

    Wikipedia also provides this information about other graduate work Ms Clinton has done: “In the spring of 2010, Clinton completed a Master of Public Health degree at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health[32][33] and she began teaching graduate classes there in 2012.[34]

    Starting in 2010, Clinton began serving as Assistant Vice-Provost for the Global Network University of New York University, working on international recruitment strategies.[31] ”

    It looks to me like if she completed that Masters of Public Health degree in the spring, that leaves three quarters of the year for her to start work AFTER completing her second graduate degree, for a total of three degrees all from institutions among the best in the world.

    FYI, NYU isn’t an Ivy League school, merely a very good school. So the Global NEtwork University on NYU can’t be an Ivy League plot. I can’t tell if that’s a deliberate lie or just ignorance.

    Here’s a free tip: When you are in a deep hole, stop digging immediately. You just make yourself look more stupid or a bigger liar.

    I don’t know why anyone would attempt to attack a young, attractive, successful, well educated and intelligent person using such easily revealed falsehoods – it’s almost as if mclaren intended to fail at the chosen task of denigrating Ms Clinton’s career. She is obviously far more qualified to be president than G W Bush was, and perhaps more qualified to be first woman president than her mother, depending upon her age/birthdate, the 2016 election cycle, and the constitutional requirement that she be 35 years old to hold the office.

    I would vote for her, support her in the race(s), and expect to have the opportunity some day. Although she was close to the Clinton Impeachment firestorm, and that may put her off a little bit.

  135. 135
    Cervantes says:

    @J R in WV:

    This is a total fabrication, with falsehood by omission thrown in for free. The person with no need to improve their lying skills appears to be mclaren!

    I’m happy to posit that it’s not dishonesty — no need to make such an accusation.

    It is, however, comical.

  136. 136
    Fester Addams says:

    Does anyone know where I can order a “No more Bushes–ever!” bumper sticker?

  137. 137
    Paul in KY says:

    @raven: I sent Michelle some money. You can see a family resemblence between her & Sen. Nunn.

  138. 138
    Paul in KY says:

    @🍀 Martin: I’m guessing they are very happy they didn’t go to the wrong house & kidnap Sarah!

    (I know, she wasn’t up there then, but you have to go with the joke you’ve thought of, not the joke you wish you’d thought of, etc. etc.)

    Good post, Martin!

  139. 139
    Paul in KY says:

    @gene108: I think some of his ’50 State Blitz’ coordinators still live in their mother’s basement.

  140. 140
    Paul in KY says:

    @mclaren: You would, I assume, still rather Mrs. Clinton was elected president than Jeb Bush?

  141. 141
    Paul in KY says:

    @mclaren: I think ‘provost’ of any variety at a lot of universities is sorta like ‘vice president’ at a bank.

    Not an entry level position, but not a top executive either.

  142. 142
    Cervantes says:

    @Paul in KY:

    I think ‘provost’ of any variety at a lot of universities is sorta like ‘vice president’ at a bank. Not an entry level position, but not a top executive either.

    Provost at NYU is a high rank. But Ms. Clinton is not a provost or even a vice provost. She’s an assistant vice provost — and not of NYU per se but of one of its many initiatives.

    On this subject, mclaren is clue-free.

  143. 143
    Paul in KY says:

    @Cervantes: ‘Asst vice provost’ does have ‘provost’ in title, so it counts (IMO).

    Good job playing whack a fact with mclaren.

  144. 144
    J R in WV says:

    I recall that every financial adviser in the local branch of the national big cheese stockbroker firm was a vice president. The guy who approved our home construction loan (the 4th real estate loan from the same bank) was a vice president of the (largest) bank in the state.

    So if being assistant vise provost is anything like being VP at a financial institution… I bet it’s a very part time job allowing for other real occupations, like being a professor of international relations, or health care management.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] of goat-molesters and slime people that are queuing up for the 2016 Goat Rodeo (h/t Tengrain), the Big Money Sociopaths and Greedheads are trying to set JEB! Bush as the next anointed Republican Presidential Asshole.  Yee-hah.  Yeah, yeah, complain all […]

Comments are closed.