I am a lifelong democrat who cannot understand why so many in my party are so blind when it comes to the Clintons.

Haven't they proved time and again they are liars and muddy and will stoop to anything for their own wants and needs.

Haven't they proved time and again that the only people they care about is themselves and not the people or the country.

Democrats laugh and make fun of the hapless right who stand by Bush regardless of his behavior and crimes and yet they do not see they are just as bad when it comes to the Clintons.

Many moon around saying 'but the 90s were so great."

no they were not. And even if we did have jobs or money, it was because of the internet bubble and not Bill. Besides, alot has happened in the past 8 years. Things have changed alot. You cannot recreate the past. You cannot go home again.

The only way we get out of the mess this country is in is to look to the future and stimulate things with new blood and new thinking and people who's last names are not Bush or Clinton.

Thank you for this honest and true article.

The 90s were so great for some of us because the first president we could remember was Nixon. Then came Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I. For the first time in our lives there was a smart, engaging Democratic president. And the rest of the world loved him too. So, in exchange for having the time of our lives, we overlooked some things. Not that we liked the Clinton family drama, but when, in our lives, had things been better?

Now, however, Obama looms on the horizon and we can imagine a president who is smart and engaging AND keeps his trousers zipped . Plus that, he wants to bring us together. He wants for us to think more about what unites us than about what divides us. Wow.

Lately I find myself angrier at the Clintons that I have ever been. I guess I feel that we did them this huge favor by sticking with them through all the BS, and rather than packing up and making a graceful exit when their day was done, they're back--kind of like in a horror picture.

My point is, that I could not have been a bigger Clinton fan in the 1990s. But their day is done. Eventually they will notice that they're not playing to the same crowd that they once were.

Hitchens is a political lout. But that doesn't mean that he is always wrong. Too bad that the message was delivered by such an erratic source.

Still, I can't argue with Hitch's broad stroke in this case.

When Bill Clinton won the presidency I literally went to the White House and danced (with many others). And when I compared either Clinton to their enemies over the years, it was clear that the Clintons were the better choice. (Example: Clintons v. Gingrich—Clintons win.)

But the right wing attacks on the Clintons over the years turned the left into apologists for political operators who placed corporate interests over those of the people. Though vilified by Republicans as leftists, the Clintons pulled the Democratic party to the right.

I don't hate the Clintons. Bill still retains a certain charm. And until her run for the presidency, I had both sympathy and bit of affection for the Hillary, especially the one that I remember from the early days of their presidency—when she seemed scrappy and idealistic.

The impeachment was ridiculous. And the attacks on Hillary Clinton were absurd and reprehensible.

But now that the dust has settled, we can admit that the Clintons have not behaved honorably. They are not the demons that the right wing made them out to be, but they are no angels. They have allowed their dysfunctional marriage and drive for power overshadow the needs of their nation. The thought of another Clinton presidency makes me ill.

Yes, Bill owes Hillary. Big time. But it seems like there's some kind of national hypnosis at work to convince us that WE owe it to Hillary because she had to put up with Bill and play second fiddle when she was just as capable. No, we do not owe it to Hillary. That is a family matter. The Clintons are not gods who can claim divine reckoning in this world.

I do not hate Hillary Clinton. Let her be a great New York Senator. Let her find joy in service to her fellow citizens there. Let her work out her morality there—figure out how she wants to vote on issues (like the war) without putting a finger in the wind to see where the presidential winds are blowing. (When it seemed that a vote for the war would be the best way to secure the presidency, she voted for it; when winds shifted, so did she.)

Hillary Clinton needs to find herself before asking us to give her the presidency. Who is she? The evidence suggest that she (like her husband) is someone who puts power over scruples. Of course, deep down, she's so much more. When she has more experience working as the authentic, principled Hillary Clinton (not the political operative), I will gladly change my opinion of her.

I am tired of apologizing for the Clintons. Let them please just fade into public service and not put the country through another neurotic, divisive, unscrupulous presidency.

Excellent post Giacomo!

I could easily vote for the Clinton her/him combo but there is a "Fairy Tale" being told in their electioneering speeches.
The fairy tale is that Hillary can remotely match Mr Obama's ability to affect change in Washington. She can claim more experience in the legislative process, etc. but the fact that so many people despise her and Bill will end up with any post election legislative process being hallmarked by brutal antagonism. Look for the first ever Republican congressperson to perform self immolation rather than give Bill and Hillary passage of any historic legislation. Sadly, Hillary is dead on arrival as a change agent. The Clintons are quite simply laden with too much animosity and other negative baggage to approach Mr. Obama's potential for a massive November turn out and his potential for systemic change in Washington leading to a modicum of national healing.

"They have allowed their dysfunctional marriage and drive for power overshadow the needs of their nation. The thought of another Clinton presidency makes me ill."

Exactly. Perfectly said. Thank you.

I agree with this entire thread.

As much as I would love to see a woman be president, Hillary is not that woman.

I have been impressed by Obama since his speech in 2004. There is no other candidate out there who can unite this country the way he can--and actually has a shot to win!

Hillary's sense of entitlement w/ the "crying" speech sealed her fate w/ me. I'll vote for her w/ my nose pinched if she wins the nomination (I just can't vote for ANY of the republicans in the current field. I could have voted for McCain in 2000, but his pandering to the right has ruined it for me too). I REALLY don't want to have to cast another vote with my nose pinched. :(

No they haven't proved that--what are you even talking about (SPECIFICALLY). What are their crimes exactly?!

And if it's discovered that Obama (who is a golden boy as much as Clinton was a golden boy back in 92) can't keep it in his pants? Uh oh! That would be the end of civilized society. Oh no wait, it would just be another opportunity for right-wing zealots and puritanical hypocrits to make a big deal out of something stupid.

There is so much wrong with this thread, I just can't handle it anymore. Clinton is this, Clinton is that, Clinton does this, Clinton does that (none of it being based on anything concrete, and none of it reprehensible enough to constitute much of anything).

Just to be clear on a presidential candidate finding themselves: Obama has not voted on a single difficult issue since he entered the Senate. He was not in office for Iraq, he abstained on the vote on Iran. He has missed 40 percent of the votes that have been cast while he was in office, yet people seem to think he's so firm and Clinton is not (what?). Sure he can vomit rainbows, but can he back it up? That has yet to be seen. Moreover, he has changed his opinion on Iran around three times so far, and he has made conflicting statements about Iraq, but Hilary is indecisive? Okie dokie.

My point is: just know what you're talking about when you form opinions about any presidential candidate, judge them by more than superficial standards, and don't be a hypocrit (or will this country never learn?)

I know I am cross-posting this thought, but I really need some responses.

Who is going to be in Obama's cabinet? I mean, let's just say he wins, and he gets to do his "changes"...who is going to work with him? Does anyone have thoughts on the matter? I honestly can't think of people and I think it may make me vote for McCain just for efficiency.