"We all KNEW" WTF?! Yep, yer right EC, she cleared it allllll up for me too. FUG, I will pro'ly have nightmares about those tits tonight, gawd--DAYUUUM!!! Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! :) Peace, Jodie

Your post is a perfect example of so much other misinformation, half-truths and spin that is swirling around Hillary and the Clintons these days, and frankly has been ever since Bill Clinton took office in January of 1993.

To begin with, if you are going to quote a source like Hillary's supposed "presidential financial disclosure report", why not at least say WHERE you found this info so that it can be verified? Anyone can mock up a PDF file, send it off on the web and say, "Here, this is Hillary's financial information". I'd like some actual proof please.

But in fact, those stock holdings you quote are completely MOOT anyway for two major reasons: 1) The Clintons didn't know what was in their stock portfolio because their stocks were held in what's called a 'blind trust', and 2) as soon as they found out which stocks were in their portfolio (as was required when Hillary began her run for President), they SOLD ALL their stocks in May of 2007, even though they weren't legally required to do so! This was to avoid even the slightest possibility of any conflict of interest, and they took a significant financial loss in doing so.

To quote the New York Times, 6/15/07, (link below): "In 1993, Mr. Clinton complied with federal ethics rules and created a qualified blind trust to hold and invest the family’s assets. Under the rules, public officials must disclose their assets at the time of the creation of the trust, and then hand off day-to-day management of the trust and its investments to an independent trustee. Officials who set up blind trusts are not aware of, nor do they have influence over, the investments chosen."

This makes sense because elected officials cannot then have any undue influence on any policy that would affect their stock holdings in any way. In 2001, when Hillary was elected to the Senate, she changed their previous presidential blind trust over to a Senate blind trust.

Here's the link to the above-quoted NYT article entitled, "To Avoid Conflicts, Clintons Liquidate Holdings": http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/15/us/politics/15clintons.html?_r=1&oref=...

Next, you describe the Clintons' jump in income after his last term as some kind of evil unto itself, inferring that they were involved in all sorts of nefarious dealings. In fact, like all presidents who leave office, the Clintons made the bulk of their post-presidential millions from large fees paid for Bill Clinton's speaking engagements. The rest of their income from 2001 on has been derived from book revenues from both their books' sales, a large portion of which (especially from Bill Clinton's book "Giving", ironically) were donated to charity.

All this is amply documented in the above-quoted NYT article, but if you need a second source, here's another article from an AP news writer:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PPD3781&show_article=1

To quote this article, "As a presidential candidate, Senator Clinton was required to make her assets public. As a result, she had to dissolve her blind trust. Upon its dissolution, she and the president chose to go above and beyond what was required of them and liquidate their assets in order to avoid even the hint of a conflict of interest."

The fact is, if you had cared to find out the TRUTH of the Clintons' finances, all you had to do was Google them and find twenty such articles just as I did, (and could have quoted all of them here if space had permitted).

Instead you chose to manipulate half-truths in order to support your obvious animosity for Hillary, as clearly shown in your statement, "As you can see from her stock portfolio alone compounded by her financial history, Hillary Clinton is absolutely profiting off the misery of the American public".

Wow, EVILCOW, words fail me... To put this politely, you don't have a leg to stand on, and to find this kind of dissemination of misinformation in a women's forum is deeply troubling to me. I would expect this from Fox News or the same folks that brought us the Whitewater investigations, but not here.

Remember Whitewater? The GOP goons wasted five million of our tax dollars trying to find ANY financial wrongdoings by Hillary and came up with a big, fat, nothing. The same nothing as your arguments against Hillary here...

She's still more electable than Obama.

He began with a strong messianic following but has blown it.

I freely admit that I am supporting Hillary for the "sole" reason she is a WOMAN. And, damn proud to do it. It's time for women to consolidate their power and put it into action. Men have been doing this for eons. Plus, she brings the credentials. She's a worthy, well qualified candidate. This is the first time in my lifetime (and, in American history) where I may have an opportunity to vote for FEMALE US president. Hillary Clinton is a FIGHTER. She's articulate, smart as a whip and is politically savy. Women have always had to fight their way to the table to even play in this "white, old boys" world. The fact that's she gotten this far speaks volumes about her ability to get things done. GO HILLARY!!

I like Obama but believe he is naive. I also know from the previous 8 years what can happen when we put inexperienced politicians in office - others behind the scenes will be the people who really set their own agenda in motion. Voting for Obama is voting for promises he may not be able to deliver on. A message of hope is great but at this point it's only "words". What has he really accomplished in his political life? Where has he put his vision in action? Plus, Obama is whining and equivocating over his pastor and that's not a quality I want in a president. Obama's past connections are gaining visibility. Can he stand the heat? Hillary has been put through the public and political grinder. I'm watching to see how well Obama can deal with the scrutiny.

I just had to login to tell you, evilcow, how much I'm liking your posts. And agreeing with.

Bravo.

Because she will make a better president than Obama. Period.

I don't think Obama's got the stuff to make it through the general election. All I hear is whining about Hillary's tactics. Does he or his supporters think the Repugnicans are going to go easy on him?

Your friend,
Rusty
[lesbian humor; what a concept]
+ + + + + + + +
“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”~ Martin Luther King, Jr.