Skip to comments.Bill Clinton Going to Minnesota to Save Obama
Posted on 10/29/2012 10:47:36 AM PDT by markomalley
This worried: theyre sending Bill Clinton there for a visit tomorrow. Clinton is taking his show around the country to states where Obamas firewall is collapsing: Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, Virginia, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and Ohio.
A Star Tribune Minnesota Poll, published Sunday, shows that Obamas lead has plummeted to the point where there is only a three-point differential between Obama and Mitt Romney, which is within the polls margin of error.
Both campaigns have stepped up their advertising in Minnesota, and Romney or Paul Ryan may stop there this week.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
How telling.....send out the liar of all liars to lie for Obama.
BJ Clintoon should have gone to Benghazi to save Bam Bam’s rear. BJ could have tried to BS the terrorists on Bam Bam’s behalf.
Before they help Clinton “save” Obama by using his “persuasive” powers, Minnesotans should remember - the ‘93 WTC bombing, the Cole, the fact that during his watch, cells were developed and had become capable of attacking America from inside its own borders within only 8 months of his leaving office, and that, even now, the Benghazi story to protect the President’s narrative initially was spread by a member of his family.
What was the name they gave to it when Clinton campaigned on behalf of a candidate who would subsequently lose .... the Clinton Thud?
I remember when Clinton was sent into CA back when Arnold was running against Grey Davis. Didn’t do a thing to help Davis.
Clinton is going to Minnesota for Obama?
You’re kidding, right?
This more than anything tells me Obama knows he’s toast.
I was sure Clinton would be heading to Atlantic City, especially after hearing about how hard Sandy was going to be blowing.
Ooh, that’s bad, but oh so funny.
If the past is any guide, this won’t help Obama. Some years ago the Dems sent him all over the country and it didn’t help a single candidate.
Calling all lady parts and sluts. Billy’s coming to town. Bring your liberal kneepads!
Yet they are trying to convince people that OHIO is close and the election is a squeaker...
DON’T BUY IT FOLKS!
Fight like its neck and neck, but the reality is OBAMA DOESN’T HAVE HIS BASE!! AND HE KNOWS IT!!
This is going to be a repudiation of a sitting president the likes of which have not been seen since HERBERT HOOVER!
We are honestly expect to believe Obama is winning, when he is on the defensive in MN????????
FIGHT LIKE ITS NECK AND NECK, but don’t buy into this nonsens.
Romney will take Ohio by AT LEAST 4 points... He will win 2 if not all 3 of IA,WI and PA.. He Will take FL, NC, VA and CO.
Ever day that goes by the margin Obama will lose by grows, don’t kid yourself.
And all u folks here who thought The Klintons were turning on Obama.
Drudge has a story that Obama flew to Florida this morning, and delivered pizzas to a campaign office. He was supposed to have a fundraiser, but it was canceled, and he’s returned to the White Hut. One reporter dubbed the trip, “the most expensive pizza delivery in history.” Nothing like wasting fuel, not to mention the poor people who had to fly his ass in this weather. He never thinks about anyone or anything else except his own selfish needs.
Any others think Clinton might go there and give the knife a little twist for Auld Lang Syne? Just a little nudge over the cliff while shouting “Forward”? Reach down to pull up his “Ol’ Buddy” who’s hanging by his fingertips, and just happen to step on those fingertips really, really hard—OOPSIES!
The real question is why does Bubba have to save him in Minnesota? That should be a safe state for him. LOL
I like it when they send out Billyboy for it seems wherever he goes, the election goes to us.
I wonder what his W/L record aactually is???
For those who may have forgotten what kind of a President Bill Clinton was:
1) Clintons own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:
``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the governments ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees. -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993
``The purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people - Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993
``We cant be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans that we forget about reality. -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful by Debbie Howlett
When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare However, now theres a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say theres too much freedom. When personal freedoms being abused, you have to move to limit it. Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995
2) Clinton inevitably pursued his own political advantage at the expense of American interests and national security. Here is just one of many possible examples:
It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese Peoples Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clintons decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.
The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities. Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to Americas security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.
3) On two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:
On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that days grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese chemical weapons factory, and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.
Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: "...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development." Kroll Associates, one of the world's most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clintons action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: "When I take action, Im not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.
Clintons pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinskys grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they werent a total loss.
On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddams weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."
Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clintons chances of dodging impeachment.
The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.
Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure, he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.
Whether or not one buys Clintons assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachment. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harms way for purely political reasons.
4) Clintons reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security:
Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was only about sex. But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.
To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?
What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising Americas real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?
Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.
And dont even get me started on the war crime in Kosovo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.