By Ed O'Keefe

Apr 4, 2008 4:45pm

Clintons Report $109 Million in Gross Income

ABC News’ Kate Snow, Eloise Harper and Avni Patel report: Call them the Cha-Ching Clintons. 

Since leave office, former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., reported $109 million in gross income to the Internal Revenue Service for the years 2000-2007, according to a release from the Clinton campaign.

On that amount, they reportedly paid $33.7 million in taxes at a rate of 31% — a rate that is much higher than the average rate of 20.8% for that tax bracket.

They have filed an extension on their 2007 taxes.

The Clinton family donated $10.2 million to charity, or 9.5% of their adjusted gross income, including $1 million in proceeds from the former President’s book "Giving".

Some of the most significant sources of Clinton income: $10.4 million off her books, $29.5 million off his books, and a whopping $51.8 million for speeches given by Bill Clinton.

User Comments

They made alot of money – but they also gave ALOT to charity. How many % do most people give to charity – bet is is now where close to 10% of your income no matter what it is you do.
I am proud of Hillary and was deeply moved by her MLK speech today – she truly belives in Americans – ALL Americans.
She got my white male vote and has my continued campaign support!

Posted by: Drew | April 4, 2008, 4:58 pm 4:58 pm

surely no one can any longer question hillary’s claims that she is in touch with, and one of, the average, working class americans.

Posted by: davidfrat4 | April 4, 2008, 5:03 pm 5:03 pm

The fact:
Clintons: 10% to Charity for at least 8 years..
Obama: 1% to charity on 2007 and <1% for past
So Obama claimed he is a true Christan but he never paid his 10% share…..
Wonder God would still "bless" him…

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm

they’d actually be in the 35% bracket, not 31%, according to the IRS…but what does the IRS know, right?

Posted by: davidfrat4 | April 4, 2008, 5:08 pm 5:08 pm

I can see where the Clintons could make 109M on their trustworthyness and good character. It is not like they associate with known fellons.

Posted by: disambiguates | April 4, 2008, 5:08 pm 5:08 pm

Most notable so far (except for the unaccounted for 18 million):
51 MILLION FOR ‘JUST SPEECHES’ !

Posted by: hank | April 4, 2008, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm

greg, if you think Clintons owe money to Fed, why don’t you talk to IRS…

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 5:09 pm 5:09 pm

Hillary: “Speeches don’t put food on the table.”
Tax returns: 51,000,000 dollars for… speeches!

Posted by: marian | April 4, 2008, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm

Amy,
Good Job! This is what the liberal MSM won’t talk about.

Posted by: Mark | April 4, 2008, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm

It seems to be that some lame people in here actually think that this release by the Clintons is the same as their tax returns. THEY STILL HAVE NOT RELEASED THEIR TAX RETURNS. This release is just reported income. That’s all it is.

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm

Obama might be jealous to see Clinton earned $51M from speech since he claimed himself the king of “speech”…
Sorry, Obama should put more substance rather than empty shell..

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 5:14 pm 5:14 pm

Bloggers, this is just the beginning of the business. Let us give to media to digest these tax returns and give us somme feedback about what went where and what came from where. No quick conclusions. God bless America and God bless Obama. OBAMA08

Posted by: BKMC | April 4, 2008, 5:14 pm 5:14 pm

This stuff is pretty straight forward so why the big deal? She caused herself more pain by delaying the release.

Posted by: Elijah112668 | April 4, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm

VERY SAD…..
$109 million….. and Hillary thinks SHE can relate to the “working class”? What a hypocrite!
Hillary is “crying for the poor while taking their meager earnings” for her campaign.
Do you poor people supporting her get it now? SHE’S DOESN’T CARE ABOUT YOU….It’s about the POWER!

Posted by: Bebocampbell | April 4, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm

Way to go Amy #1. I applaud your tenacity for citing all those Obama facts. For Amy #2, Frederick and other Obama supporters, you are only showing your lack of a balanced view when you try to demean her for pointing out facts.

Posted by: mhhunt | April 4, 2008, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm

The fact:
Clintons: 10% to Charity for at least 8 years..
Obama: 1% to charity on 2007 and <1% for past
So Obama claimed he is a true Christan but he never paid his 10% share…..
Wonder God would still "bless" him…

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm

Elijah112668, it will take a few days to scritunize the tax returns and report anything that might harm her campaign. Do you have any idea how many pages of documents we are talking about here?

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

hm, you Obama should shut up now!! You just gave less than 1% to charity. I would not trust someone who claims he will change the country, but didn’t contribute certain amount of money to the country.

Posted by: golfgirlusa | April 4, 2008, 5:20 pm 5:20 pm

dissolution of trust?…to avoid releasing 2007 return….sorry that SMELLS to me.
selectively left out what she wants to hide.

Posted by: moeen | April 4, 2008, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm

TOTAL HYPOCRICY!
Shame on you Hillary!
With all that money… you could repair many villages…but then again why bother?
That village that you built is voting for Obama.
OBAMA 08…. because he doesn’t lie about relating to the working class.

Posted by: Bebocampbell | April 4, 2008, 5:23 pm 5:23 pm

Okay so does everyone realize…
they did not release the tax returns that counted…the ones they were specifically asked for …LAST YEARS!
This is deception at it’s finest. Oh I am disgusted once again that you all have been fooled.
The one year that everyone wanted they say they don’t have…but then put a big headline on a Friday “Clinton’s release tax returns!” …but they didn’t release the ones everyone was requesting and they know it.
They are not going to release the information before the 15th…
How can you all not see these are slimey people.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:24 pm 5:24 pm

Micro Penn see Maco…trend in Columbia.
Hill and Bill see Big bucks. Huummm!!!

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 5:24 pm 5:24 pm

Debbie there were not questions like the Clintons have about thoat year… and I am sure he will… the Clintons are throwing dust up now hoping people won’t realize they are not releasing the year everyone asked for.
they are going to say they had to ask for an extension…bet your life.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:31 pm 5:31 pm

Kevin
I am highly educated, married with kids executives. I guess you are one of the teenagers who are voting for Obama because he inspires you! No matter what Obama says and does, you believe it line, hook and sinker.

Posted by: Debbie | April 4, 2008, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm

stacy
so what… it doesn’t carry weight like you think it does…obviously

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm

Where are LAST YEAR returns??? Those are the ones in question. What is Hillary hiding??

Posted by: J.L. | April 4, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm

dl-Give it a break, dl. Just play with what you have. Or I could ask where’s Obama’s tax returns for last 10 years?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm

There seems to be lot of sniping here. Can we have a more civilized exchange?

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 5:35 pm 5:35 pm

Just the timing should say something to you all
they released them Friday afternoon…
…anyone who knows journalism and press releases knows that is the spot you dump bad news so it will pass somewhat and you can spin it out of the limelight or a work day before Monday.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm

If one were to write a laundry list of Clintons’ like the one Amy mostly made up, there woule be little or no room left in this bolg.
BUT one does not need to do that because just the 2 famous one outweighs any list of lies of any politicain in the whole world.:
[as afroza noted]:
4 PINNOCCIOS in one phrase (Hillary’s Bosnia story ..washnigtonpost) + I didn’t have any s… rel with that woman.

Posted by: moeen | April 4, 2008, 5:37 pm 5:37 pm

Ronald Reagan originated this whole business, he made huge amounts of money speechmaking after leaving office. It’s the way of the world.

Posted by: STEVE77 | April 4, 2008, 5:37 pm 5:37 pm

As an Obama supporter I wish I could gripe about this amount but they earned it and no one should belittle them for it UNLESS it was through channels that cost the American public and that still remains to be seen but the amount? Good for them though it kinda makes her “I feel yur pain” to the people in PA seems….like more lies.

Posted by: Sam | April 4, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm

Republicans are always for people making money… unless the people making money don’t agree with Republican politics. REAL American, huh? Agree with them, or you aren’t free and American.

Posted by: Troy Street | April 4, 2008, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm

Obama is an “honest” man:
He honestly admitted he had the least experiences;
He honestly admitted he had a 17 year close relationship with indicted Rezko until Fed said to him: Senator, you made a bad friend..
He honestly admitted has been listening to his “uncle” pastor without saying anything..
He honestly admitted he double talked NAFTA…
He honestly admitted he had no time table for War in Iraq..
He honestly admitted he is leading because he is black and he is charming…

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm

Debbie
You are “highly educated, married with kids executives.” Please help me make some sense of that sentence. perhaps you are educated (or highly educated, lol, forgive me, but you still come across as a buffoon. if you were even remotely smart, you’d know that all of those so-called lies posted by Amy are BS. Besides, it takes a certain amount of audacity for a Clinton supporter to challenge the intergrity of Obama, knowing that the Clinton are congenital liars. They make a living on their lies. Even Democrats know this. A 2-year old baby can come up with a text-book sized list of Clinton lies.

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm

Kevin-We’re on opposite sides here, yet I ignore the silly stuff and try to concentrate on what I hope to do, maybe even win someone over with logic. You’re a smart guy and can write with the best of us so use your strengths. Like yesterday you may even end up actually communicating with someone new and who knows what can happen with that kind word down the road. You might even win a supporter for Obama, maybe not today, but maybe in the general.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm

dogsoldier
I know…that you know that this is not good for them. I said months ago i would be surprised and this is where all the problems came out before…
There are questions about the ones they did release…
We know a couple of things definitively about the Clintons they will lie to cover a scandal…they don’t give up information and they hide things until they are caught …and even then they will continue…
You wonder most Americans don’t trust them…well this is why.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm

Way to go AMY – NEVER see a list of absolute daftness and “attempting to twist the truth” of that size before.
Well done. You truly are a dedicated person who seeks to twist history.
Are you sure your not a Clinton by chance?

Posted by: Sharon K | April 4, 2008, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm

dl, They announced Bill Richardson support of Obama at 3am on Friday night/Saturday morning. Were they trying to sweep that under the rug too by your logic? She released her returns like she promised , now you need to accept it, shut up and move on…

Posted by: Jay | April 4, 2008, 5:42 pm 5:42 pm

Amy,
GREAT work!!! Go Hillary!! NOBAMA!!
Watch it, someone has usurped your name to undermine you. That happened to me also.

Posted by: countallthevotes | April 4, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm

The Clinton’s net worth is around $90m. The Clintons are the most power/money hungry couple in the US.
The Clintons will say and do anything for a buck.
Maybe, the Clintons should apply for an academy award statue next year for running the worst and dirtiest campaign ever.
The Clinton’s went to MLK function looking for Black votes only.

Posted by: Lookup | April 4, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm

mhhunt
I don’t believe i ever said “real men” couldn’t support Hillary. Some of my closest friends support Hillary and even some women in my family support Hillary, but unlike the foolish women in here, they actually use FACTS to buttress their argument. Using silly lies to angrily mtry to make a fallacious claim, only undermines the credibility of your own candidate. Why is it that Hillary’s people in this blog cannot seem to lift their candidate up by stressing what they like about her? Instead they try to tear Obama down by lying and claiming (like the Republicans have for decades) that there is some kind of media bias against Hillary. Imagine that.
Besides, folks, i am not in college. I am done with that already. So trying to make me out to be one of the college robots, is really silly. But i wonder, what’s wrong with college kids? They certainly represent the best and brightest amongst us.

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm

I guess it pays well to use “Just Words.” I saw Hillary today give a speech at the Lorraine Hotel where Dr. King was actually killed my SNIPER fire…. How ironic…

Posted by: Dee | April 4, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

I guess no one on here has ever filed for an extension I thought thier income would be alot more than what it is he is the only Democratic President who served two terms since FDR And the only one who opened his office in Harlem and who has always attened MLK affairs he is at them every year but thats ok it is never enough is it.

Posted by: Bishop | April 4, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

Dl-If this is what makes you happy then you’re not real happy today or tomorrow or the days after. Relax. You’ll have your day, just not today. So join the silly season with the rest of us today.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

Did any of you Obama bashers read the article “They have filed an extension on their 2007 taxes” Hillary represents the same powers that are currently in Washington and there will be no change if she is elected. You may as well vote McCain into office and drag the country down for another four years.

Posted by: sameolpolitics | April 4, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm

Hey why did Dubai pay Bill Clinton 15 million? And is it really a good idea for a President to be so financially beholden to another foreign government?

Posted by: Russ G | April 4, 2008, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm

No one should begrudge the Clintons their healthy finances. What someone SHOULD require is an answer as to why they begrudge it of others. If it’s okay for them, why is it of paramount importance that they take more money out of my pocket. Sure, it doesn’t make a dent in their pocketbook so they couldn’t care less. But when you talk about raising my taxes to pay for your pet projects, it affects me directly. The real issue here is they’re on top and they want no one else up there with them. Everyone should have the same tax advantages they have had; they’re certainly sitting pretty.

Posted by: Helen | April 4, 2008, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm

Isn’t the chief concern 2007? She did just “loan” herself $5M. Where is some information about that? Amy can laundry list all she wants. Hillary is nothing more than a successful used car saleperson as far as I am concerned. Damn us all, if she ends up running this country.

Posted by: JRS | April 4, 2008, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm

No whining necessary. With all that money there should be no need to file an extension, other than to keep the wolves at bay until after the nomination goes to Obama.
Obama 2008 — Yes, WE CAN!!!

Posted by: Jackt51 | April 4, 2008, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm

Great work Amy. It’s funny to see those who complained all those years about Fox TV now support media bias in helping to get Obama elected. They complained about right wing Evangelicals but happily support a man who tolerates the most vile bigotry this country has seen in decades.

Posted by: sitting1 | April 4, 2008, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm

Yeah jay
that was Bill Richardson’s choice to endorse then at the end of what he thought was a tough week…
Why don’t you check on “the Friday dump” as it is called.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm

It takes a village to raise $109 mil. Follow the money and you will see no shortage of blood money. Payback the Whitewater investors!

Posted by: Vic Ferarri | April 4, 2008, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm

Jackt51, why don’t you tell American people how much Obama earned and how much he donated to Charity…
His own tax return spoke itself…If Obama can’t handle the truth, he is never entitled to be CIC..

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm

Maybe now they will pay their bills so their campaign employees can keep their health insurance.

Posted by: Elijah112668 | April 4, 2008, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm

The Clintons made all of that money and you folks think she is fighting hard to be the President of the United States of Anerica to look out for the peoples business. The hard working class??? The forgotten middle class??? Hell no!! Bill & Hillary are fight for this measley $200k a year job because they have an agenda for self, just like Bush has done for the last 8 years! They are looking to join the Super Rich club, nothing more! I would rather take my risk on a person who barely clipped the $1million dollar club a year salary than someone who is in the multi-million dollar club a yearly salary. Because no matter how you splice it there are no speaking engagements that pay that much for you to collect $40 million or more a year! At least I feel the other person worked his way up the food chain and have not sold/lost his soul to big business. I can see him being more able to relate to the hard working poor/middle class singles & families of America. You all criticized/dogged Obama for his measley barely a million dollar salary for him & his wife combined but you make excuses & congratulate the Clinton’s for their obscene amount of money by saying he earns it by making appearances. This kind of bias/ignorant thinking is why you keep putting the rich in to run this country who really in turn don’t give a darn about you, me or your children. I see no Difference in her candicy than what we have right now. You all can go ahead and fall into the Hillary wading money sess pool but I will pass.
I SAY NO MORE RICH FAMILY LEGACIES IN THE WHITE HOUSE!!!

Posted by: What a Shame | April 4, 2008, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm

Kevin….. you go man! It’s nice to know there are “real men” out in the world who appreciate a lady behaving like one.
If Hillary behaved the least bit “womanly” there might be many more of us supporting her. But like her many supporters (Ami)… They just want to rule the world (and the blogs).
Have a nice day!

Posted by: BeboCampbell | April 4, 2008, 5:53 pm 5:53 pm

Amy, for American President. She is a more talented lier than Hillary because it looks like it is the main qualification that the clintonians are looking for!

Posted by: TwentyFirstCentury American | April 4, 2008, 5:53 pm 5:53 pm

Bishop-You’re dealing with the hard left out there on the fringes of reality. The place where folks who make money are evil. Where those less fortunate to have an ivy league education are all stupid and idiots. You know, they tell us all the time how stupid we are and how uneducated and so forth. This apparently is the new CHANGE Obama was talking about. So how’s it working for you?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm

One less talking point for the Hillary haters. I bet that Michelle is green with envy.

Posted by: Mack | April 4, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm

Funny how Hillary releases information like this only when her campaign is in deep water.
Mark Penn meeting with the Columbian government is bad news for her. After blasting Obama for a minor advisor on NAFTA, Hillary basically said if it was an adviser in her camp, she would have quit.

Posted by: Dan | April 4, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm

I tell you until Hill gets out of the race…it is not a happy day for me…but soon!…and the country and party will finally reach for something better.
Maybe…get a chance to regain our standing with other countries and allies.
Nothing worse for an economy than to have people who won’t by American because they hate America. That will join the jihad because they hate America and not many people are telling them not to. That we look like we might lead forward instead of fight forward.
Clean up our own house. that’s what this is about.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm

Thanks Amy, I will make sure all my AF-AM friends see this. Not of course I expect that it will change any opinions but it gives me more information to argue my point that the only reason they are voting for Obama is because he is black and that is irresponsible of them to do so.

Posted by: winning0853 | April 4, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm

Rhys: The media isn’t destroying the Clintons the Clinton are destroying themselves.

Posted by: Lookup | April 4, 2008, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm

I also have to stress that many Obama supporters in these ABC News blogs, are also using very idiotic tactics in supporting their candidate. I loath stupidity, and even though i’m an Obama supporter, the perversion of what these two candidates actually stand for, on both sides, is the perfect recipe for Republicans taking the White House again. These lies, wild exaggerations, distortions, misrepresentation, is more prevalent on the Clinton side. The way someone like Amy represents Obama, IMO, is almost criminal. This is, pure and simple, character assasination. She ignores all the blatantly good things the man has done in his life, and stresses (falsely i might add) what she perceives as bad. She invents things and because she’s on the internet and we cannot see her face, posts them in here for us to read her lies and misleading assumptions. What do people like Amy think we are? Retards?
Amy,
i have two degrees and a Masters. I am a CPA working for a Big 4 firm and i am paid a lot of money for what i do. I have a 2 year old and a very smart wife. I’ve lived in many countries and am perfectly able to make my own decisions based on the facts, not BS. I am not an idiot. If you want to argue the facts with me, start with using the facts, not some idiotic rant filled with childish assumptions and lies.

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm

Rhys: The media isn’t destroying the Clintons the Clinton are destroying themselves.

Posted by: Lookup | April 4, 2008, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm

JRS, Hillary loaned herself $5million in 2008…would you like her to prepare a return for 2008 in April to make you and Obama happy?
Get a life and leave the Clintons alone!

Posted by: Sophia | April 4, 2008, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm

Debbie
You obviously don’t know anything about obama if you don’t know what he has done for others… go take a look at his bio…
from brining new women’s voices into the harvard Law review to leaving that to walk the streets of Chicago to help workers laid off from Plant closings…
oh yeah the Clintons gave 10% of their income…do you know at their income level how much of a write off that is?
If you are going to be against Obama first see who he is…

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm

Looks like the Clintons have benefited a lot from the Bush Tax Cuts. Of course, all that was released today was reported income, not the complete returns. And you can bet, the rest will dribble out every so slowly. And by the way, as an Independent watching this primary “opera” head into the last act, I can truly say that you Clinton Pin-Heads come across far worse then anything Rev Wright has ever said. You all should take a hard look in the mirror. What you see are the true BIGOTs. Both McCain and Obama have far more honesty and integrity than the Clinton sleaze machine. I have a lot of faith that the Dem Party will put forth the best Candidate for the Nov elections. I have no doubt that the nominee will be Obama.

Posted by: Den | April 4, 2008, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm

dl Is that all he has done? Kinda like his inexperience as a leader also. Pretty Lame! I’m not in politics and I’ve done more than he has..

Posted by: Debbie | April 4, 2008, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm

Wonder how much they did not claim, hid or what other scandals are involved here. After all we are talking about the Clintons LMAO!

Posted by: Jim Kiricov | April 4, 2008, 6:00 pm 6:00 pm

Remember, Hillary Clinton told Barack Obama: SPEECHES DON’T PUT FOOD ON THE TABLE?
Turns out Bill is making lot of CASH with WORDS. How hypocrite is that?

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm

Amy, Thanks for your post. I’m wondering if the mainstream media may be waiting until after Obama gets the Dem nomination to start doing these types of stories? It’s so obvious that they’ve been consistently favoring Obama over Clinton in their reporting. It’s like they treat Obama with “kid gloves”. Don’t know whether mainstream media is doing this to get him elected in November, or just to get him the Dem nomination so they can release the stories and ensure a win to McCain?

Posted by: WeNeedFairReporting | April 4, 2008, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm

I heard that the Clintons gave 10% of their income and Obama and his wife gave just 1% of their income. So what is the point that Obama is trying to raise?????????????????????????????????

Posted by: tom | April 4, 2008, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm

rs
You think it’s good or dignified for a woman that says (or claims) she supports Hillary, to come in here and post a bunch of lies in an attempt to tarnish Obama’s image? I don’t think so. Look, there are many credible arguments that could be made against Obama. I for one, although i support him, think that a little more seasoning will do him some good. When Clinton attacked him in Texas and Ohio on the legitimate basis of whether or not he was ready to be Commander in Chief, she got some traction and reversed his surge and momentum. She should have stuck to that theme because she raised LEGITIMATE questions. But all this other rubbish like Rev. Wright and character assasination BS, would not fly with Democrats because, unlike Republicans, we are sensible people.

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm

Justinteim,
Are you jealous how much money they made? Then blame yourself or buy lottey..

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm

Words matter… Bill is making $51 Millions. Do they know how much a blue collar makes in 30 years in PA?

Posted by: Blue Collar | April 4, 2008, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm

obama ” i never took and will never take money from the oil companies” another lie.
he has two Oil Industry Executives on his fundraising staff… change?

Posted by: greg | April 4, 2008, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm

Kevin: What do all those degrees have to do with good judgement. Bear-Stearns just went down the tubes based on all the judgements of some well educated individuals. And by the way, while it is true that we live under American laws, under German law, Obama’s church would be criminally prosecuted for inciting hate against others.

Posted by: sitting1 | April 4, 2008, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm

Debbie
You sound really informed… have you ever read anything on Obama before you got on here to root for Clinton…
You know he actually wrote 2 books about race and poverty and multi-culturalism and his own childhood…he wrote them all by himself.
Do you understand what it meant for him to make those changes at the Harvard Law review when he was already controversial as the first black President of that organization….bringing in voices in to the most notable “trade” that came from people like women judges and the like? It is still referred to as the Obama effect.
He gave up the opportunity to write a ticket to any law firm in the country to go help the poor …for years I might add. and yes he has done more… but no when he didn”t make the incomes of the Clintons he did not give that much of his income…he actually had student loans…that he had to pay himself.
I know I know not use to that with a politician.
so when you say you do more than that… I don’t think so.
but maybe you should read about the candidate that you are so strongly trying to disparage.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm

Lance D,
Here is the difference between speeches:
Obama – speeches with empty hope..
Clinton – speeches with substances..

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm

Wow. No wonder Hillary is one with the people and “stands by her man”, he’s got the bucks. Too bad none of this will ever create jobs, help the needy or promote the U.S. economy since we all know how selfish the Clintons have always been. She looks aged through this campaign, maybe a face lift is in order.

Posted by: jim 234 | April 4, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm

Wow. No wonder Hillary is one with the people and “stands by her man”, he’s got the bucks. Too bad none of this will ever create jobs, help the needy or promote the U.S. economy since we all know how selfish the Clintons have always been. She looks aged through this campaign, maybe a face lift is in order.

Posted by: jim 234 | April 4, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm

plus Sen. O picked up 215 k in oil money… this guy is brazen .. in his ad he says ” i don’t and won’t take money from the oil companies”… what the ????

Posted by: greg | April 4, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm

“The Clinton family donated $10.2 million to charity, or 9.5% of their adjusted gross income”
Wow! If the Obamabots were trying to find something incriminating about the Clinton’s income, I think it just backfired! How much, percentage wise, have the Obamas given to charity? 1%!!! And even then, it was to Obama’s racist church! I’m even more impressed and grateful for the Clintons. I really hope Hillary wins.

Posted by: Eric | April 4, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm

I am most disgusted with the way democrats have turned on each other. its worse the the republicans.
However, Clinton is not electable in the general elections. Every superdelegate should ask why are GOP biased news commenators, gop spokespeople, even the FL GOP governor trying to help Hillary get nominated? Cause McCain will beat her!
Bill is a great speaker, but 51MM bucks. Are we sure they are not buying access and influence to either him, his wife or powerful people. People pay big money like that for a profitable purpose. its great that they have done so well. I wonder how his fees and earnings post presidency compare to other recent presidents. I have not heard of Carter bringing in such big bucks. It creates an appearance that the payers of the income to the Clintons had other motivations other than a great speaker.

Posted by: scott jeffries | April 4, 2008, 6:11 pm 6:11 pm

“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“speehes don’t put food on the table”
“51 million dollars on speeches,it will feed a state for a week ”
Think about this hypocracy!

Posted by: adex | April 4, 2008, 6:12 pm 6:12 pm

“Since leave office?” Christ. Should a kindergarten writing error appear in the very first words of the opening sentence?
Is Our Children Learning? I guess not!

Posted by: Andre | April 4, 2008, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm

Lance.
Bill is valued for his words, he has delivered in his lifetime, more than any other president, ( keep your childish sarcasism to your self ). During this campaigning, Bill is still out there raising money for all his charities, just recently he was in Canada. Never heard anything on it, much like most of his work, but I heard it on the canadian radio. I am proud of what he has accomplished and what he has done for the world. 109 million, I hope he doubles it next year.

Posted by: D | April 4, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm

I don’t think the Clintons are being destroyed as far as the money goes after being a servent to the public for over fourty years why should they not be rich I am sure that all the talking heads will get going but 33mil paid in taxes is not a small amount or 10mil to charity you just might remember the clintons are welled loved around the world and why should’nt they be.

Posted by: Bishop | April 4, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm

scott jeffries,
Per poll today, three candidates are just tied up…If REp claimed Clinton was more beatable, you as Dems has to be think harder why REP likes to claim that in public…
Do not fall into Rep’s trap if you are a Dems

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

Who has been too busy campaigning and so could not attend State of the Black Union or go to Memphis to honor the memory of Dr. King?
Who has a headache at the mention of the name Rezko?
Who will have more laundry in the coming months…that 50% we may not know about? Thanks for the list Amy! ABO (Anybody But Obama) ’08

Posted by: MPWDC | April 4, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

Come on THE TRUTH,
You know that’s not true. It is not that because you are a famous person–specifically a president– that your words have more substance. This reminds me why people tend to listen to Hollywood celebrities even if they say dumb things.

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

This is as good a time to ask, if Obama is so electable as the Obama supporters claim, then why can’t Obama even win the democratic primary? And if he should what happens to us Hillary supporters? Do you think we’ll vote for Obama? Or have any of you thought that far ahead?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

Amy, I read most of that, and while I will have to take you at your word, because I don’t really know that much about him, I have been a little suspect of Obama from the start. I have always liked the Clinton’s and have felt that there really was something to that vast Right thing. Clinton’s only real fault is that he lives by his pants, but most of us do at some level (men that is). Those same folks don’t utter a peep about Bush’s last 7 years, so how credible is anything they said about Bill and Hillary???
Hope she can pull it out!!!
Jim Lilly
MSG, USA(Ret)

Posted by: Jim Lilly | April 4, 2008, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

People are willing to pay Bill big bucks to speak because they know he has credibility on the subjects he speaks on. I’ve heard him speak and walked away actually learning something. I heard Obama speak at one of his rallies. I walked away feeling cheated. I already know what he’s telling me. Nothing new. People might buy that feel good speech – but I can always get that from a $1.89 scoop of ice cream. :)

Posted by: Mindy | April 4, 2008, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm

Kevin
It appears that you have a problem with smart woman in leadership positions.

Posted by: Debbie | April 4, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm

Quote:…”51.5 Million dollars for “Speaking Engagements” sorry …I know the speaking engagement world and fees for top notch speakers… as unique as he is… that is moneys for “relationships” not one time speaking engagements”
Another anti-Clinton blow hard. Put up some facts, not the re-hashed crapola that’s been blowing around for 20 years.

Posted by: Jeff | April 4, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm

ObamasGranny
NO ONE CARES what kind of mixed culture he is…he is of a minority and a majority ethnic background…
worry about stuff that matters… but if that is your strongest argument against obama and for someone else…
well that’s just funny…I mean not kidding…I need to write that down.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm

Jim, you are right.
The nominating campaign is about choosing the Democrat’s nominee. Delegates pledged through the primary and caucus process is a barometer that normally is pretty clear. When there is a virtual or actual tie, the DNC through the “Super Delegates” effectively choose the nominee. In the event that it comes down to the SD, then all votes and every pledged delegate should and must be counted. You can’t and shouldn’t say that pledged delegates will determine the nominee when pledged delegates are based on the votes each candidate receives. If a candidate is winning by margin greater than the votes you are not counting, then I say fine, if not, count it all and stop with the political posturing!
Simply put, the voters in the states that are being penalized were not responsible for the decision. They were powerless to do anything about it. These voters were and are being disenfranchised by their own party, not the opposition, or a local band of fearful and uneducated average citizens. Nevertheless these voters went to the polls as is their right and they voted. The DNC was wrong enacting a sanction that effectively disenfranchises every Democrat in those states. They were just wrong! They made the penalty up with the stroke of a pen. They should undo it and call it a lesson learned! The DNC, BHO and HRC have no choice, but to count it for the hope of a unified party. There is no need to do it over. We just need to count it! Then and only then can you declare that every vote was counted and the winner is……whoever! Anything short of this is just politics that will cost the Democrats the White House!
It is only this tight race that has exposed this error. Since it is exposed, the party has to eat the crow it created and count the votes. BHO postured for Iowa with Michigan, because it looked like a freebie. He postured with a caveat that in fact gave him what he would have earned that day; the uncommitted vote was his, because his campaign requested it from those that wanted to support him. He was advertising all over Michigan that whoever wants to vote for Obama should vote for Uncommited.The message got out big time.
The Michigan results are: HRC 328,309, C Dodd 3,845, Mike Gavel 2,361, D Kucinich 21,715, and BHO’s “uncommitted” 238,168. Therein is the justice.
This is a simple, fair and economical solution. This solution does not hand the nomination to Clinton. It also simultaneously helps to avert a convention nightmare. A nightmare that will show the nation and the world the complete and utter chaos you can expect from the Democrats and their nominee. Conversely, we can be mature responsible adults, count the votes as they stand, and all move on!
Finally, someone who is being objective about the situation. All things were equal in FL. Both candidates names were on the ballot. The FL delegates should definitely be seated because the republicans of FL moved the states primary date up. The Dems. in FL had nothing to do with it and therefore shoudn’t be punished. False ego and arrogance and fear of losing is pushing one side asking other side not to count the votes which have already been recorded.
Like Dwit said It is up to the states, not the DNC to make that happen. That is how the organization is set up. They give the state committees the autonomy to run their state elections. Let the FL & MI state committees decide how the votes should be counted. Who are DNC bigwigs to decide against the will of the people?
Like Tyler said the current “DNC way” — don’t seat the delegations at all — seems draconian and vindictive to me. The “seat-em anyway” option seems fair and not partisan. Worrying about future that it will set up a bad precedent is something that we should not worry about NOW when our infighting will result in losing 2008 presidency.
In future we should run the same method that Republicans use –primaries with WINNER TAKE ALL so that by March we have a nominee not the micky mouse way we run our Caucuses and proportional voting which results in disunity and defeat in General Election. Name me a single intelligent person who does not think that Democratic leadership has created a MESS for themselves this year like in 2000 & 2004?
Like Jim said Isn’t our goal this year, to win back the Whitehouse?
THAT WOULD MEAN SUPPORTING THE PERSON WHO GETS THE NOMINATION HOWEVER THEY GET IT.
THIS MEANS MI AND FLA MUST BE COUNTED. IF THEY ARE IN THE MIX AND OBAMA GETS THE NOD, THEN I AM FOR HIM. ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THEY SWING IT TO CLINTON, THEN I AM FOR HER LIKE JIM SAID.

Posted by: Michael | April 4, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm

sitting1
As a general rule, anybody that mentions a candidates church to me or their Pastor, is placed under the “file retards here” category. I am Catholic. My church preachers have raped little boys (and girls) and have positions on abortion and gay rights that i completely disagree with. Yet i stay. When Kerry ran 4 years ago, nobody used those atrocities against him. But Rev. Wright, in nearly 40 years of preaching, said 6 crazy things and suddenly he is racist and evil. Not only is he racst and evil, his parishioners are also racist and evil. That’s the type of extrapolation that makes me worry about the IQ of the people that make such extrapolations. Truly, is this Rev. Wright issue the worst thing out there about Obama? If the worst thing about a candidate is are 6 of the worst thing his preacher said, then i’m fine with that. I can live with it. In fact, i think it’s rather remarkable. Thank God the polls shows us that MOST Americans are not as retarded as the people incredibly fascinated by this stupid Rev. Wright BS.

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm

kevin,
I think you have still not desctibed why you think Obama can beat McCain with his little experience and his little accomplishments in G.E….
Seems your vote for him is just because Obama has “less” scandals….

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm

Obviously Hillary knew that today was Dr. King’s day.
She released these tax returns 1 hour before the MLK march in Memphis and during the MLK rally.
Take from that what you will.

Posted by: kingston | April 4, 2008, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm

I could vote for a woman for president, but not Hillary. She is a liar. She will change her total focus once in office.

Posted by: kl | April 4, 2008, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm

I am astounded by the the level of stupidity of people on this blog!! How many of you are still asking where the money came from. Here’s an idea. READ THE BREAKDOWN IN THE ARTICLE!!! It really is abundantly clear if you take the time to read! Speeches, books, pension, salary and so on…. not to mention the fact that the Clinton’s are very generous as they donated 10 million to charity. What did Obama donate? Not much is the answer.. and by the way, he is a millionaire. Hmmmm…….Maybe some of you are just jealous that the Clinton’s have worked their tails off for years and have earned that money through hard work.
Let’s look at this from another prospective. The Clinton’s are wealthy and could easily retire and not give a hoot about what is happening in this country, yet Hillary is fighting for us and trying to bring about good change and getting bashed by the fools in the media and other igornat people. Does anybody ever mention all the great work Hillary has done involving women’s rights and children’s rights? Hillary Clinton is a respectable and admirable person whom I would be proud to call my President.
On another note, I do not understand all the hatred for the Clinton’s. The Bill Clinton years were economically prosperous for this country…and the Bush administration has destroyed that prosperity.
Obama has virtually no experience and that frightens me as well as the fact that we know next to nothing about this man. So go ahead and put a rookie in the White House….and we’ll all be sorry.
Hillary Clinton 08!!

Posted by: Trish | April 4, 2008, 6:24 pm 6:24 pm

D,
I like my childish humor not sarcasm (not sarcasism as you spelled it).
You seem so absorb in sniping on people who do not share your views. Maybe it’s time to relax. I am used to discussing politics and never get carried away.
Do you know how much money Bill makes at each suppose Charity event? I don’t want to take anything away from him. But if he really cares about people that much, he should be doing it for free.

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm

Great job Amy. I’m impress with your list. You got more dirt on him then I do. The man is just plain filthy.

Posted by: flex6100 | April 4, 2008, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm

Jeff
You’d think if the stuff is blowing around for 20 years …you would say…hmmm …maybe another red flag is more than just another red flag.
If Obama’s wife took millions from …lets say a Russian politico…or a pharmaceutical company for one speaking engagement…
and compared to other people of that same vain this was three to ten times the normal speaking salary (like someone like George Bush Senior or Jimmy Carter’s fees) what would you say…about obama…
what if she kept all that money ion accounts off shore… or had other accounts that you were not allowed to see how much was given …to a library lets say…
Lets say in the past Michele and Barack Obama had said there was nothing in their tax returns unusual and it turns out they had an “unusual windfall with several transactions”..and it was only discovered after they were forced to show them by the opposite political party.
You are telling me that everyone should look at this as just the same old slander of the Clintons… that’s just dumb.
The point of change for people was…to change this broken situation that 15 years at least has brought us to…the best we can.

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

True Truth
I don’t pick a candidate because i think they have a better chance against a Republican (even though polls show that Obama is running better against McCain). I pick a candidate based on my own conviction and my conviction is that Obama will make a better President than McCain. Gore had all the experience and still lost to Bush. We can go on and on. These political calculations are both futile and senseless. Vote your beliefs. That’s how my mother raised me. I don’t have time or the idiocy for political calculations. And if McCain wins the General, i can live with that too.

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

Its not like they have not sewed seed why shouldn’t they receive 100 fold return on thier giving when you actually give your life to other people I think you get it back plus some and the Clinton have good hearts.

Posted by: Bishop | April 4, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

Lance D.,
If you are jealous Clintons made too much money, then you may have to blame yourself or go buy a lottery ticket..
Clinton, as two-terms of US president, earned the price of his speeches. Don’t you think the speech from US president is cheap?
I will be very happy for you if someone offers you this price for a speech…

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

trish
“Tax Break”

Posted by: dl | April 4, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm

Kevin-I think you’re being deliberately dishonest about the Reverend Wright issue. Wright not only said those ugly things but he had gone much further. For instance, Wright did visit Gaddaffi. Wright has aligned himself with Farrakhan, a well known antisemitic, and so on. Now Hillary did not place Wright on his campaign team. The press did not put Obama in Wright’s pews. The Hillary supporters did not choose to name Wright a spiritual adviser, Obama did!

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm

golfgirlusa’s blind support for Hillary is very suspicious. The poor English ability might attest to the fact that illegal immigrants want to get their hands into our pockets. Me and my husband on the other hand, are real white Americans who are living in trailer park and enjoying our retirement. Vote for Hillary so you can pay for our retirement.

Posted by: DCVoter | April 4, 2008, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm

I’m not buying 51 million for speeches. Come on now. How easy is it for male Clinton to go to lets sayyyy, Columbia (sp?), rub a few elbows, make a few promises, shake a few hands, and walk away with a few mil and then file it under speeches?
Don’t be hoodwinked

Posted by: Oh Please | April 4, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm

No delay – Senator Clinton released her records one week after Senator Obama released his She released her calendar for her years in the White House. Mr. Obama says he never heard his Pastor’s racists anti-American rants and he never really met with Mr. Rezco (except at his future home). Will Obama now match Hillary by releasing his calendar so we can really see where he was and with whom?

Posted by: irving | April 4, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm

The TRUTH,
I don’t care about being rich. So I am in no way jealous of the Clintons. But you know everyone can have good words if you pay them $100000 a speech. Don’t you think?
One thing I know for sure is that if I give a speech at a charity event it is for free. Not to make bucks.
Maybe I am too idealistic!

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm

Kevin,
I am glad that you are not the one to pick your belief based on hate like someone’s else..
Be frank, all three candidates look the same typical politicians to me..
My concern is who has the most capability to lead this country for better…
Obama is just too in-experienced to me for this job and I can’t stand his arrogannce neither when he claimed himself he was the best and cleanest..

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm

C’mon guys, whether you’re for Obama or Hillary, wake up and chill out… These candidates TOGETHER have brought an unprecedented turnout to the polls over the past several months… D’s outvoting R’s by 2-1 or more… this should translate into a landslide victory to wash the Bush years away… but not if we keep this up… it’ll be 8 more years of Republican rule… are you REALLY OK with that????

Posted by: Paul | April 4, 2008, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm

Of couse rs, you are completely right.
Rev. Wright and Farakhan are the reasons why crime is high in black neighborhoods. Why 1 in 20 black men are in prison. Why our inner-city schools are crumbling because they are underfunded. Why less than 50 percent of black children graduate from highschool. Why Katrina happened and the government responded so pathetically. Wright built the levees and brough the rain. He is the reason why the south is still partially segregated. Why our inner cities are neglected and HIV rates amongst blacks in 4 times what it is amongst other races. Yes, of course, blame Wright for the results of centuries of discrimination and neglects. Wright marshalled segregation and left blacks out of the boom after the second world war. Out of the benfits of the GI bill and all that. It’s Wright. crucify that bastard. The frustration and anger and resentment that fuel racial tensions has NOTHING to do with Wright. This might be news to you, but it is not to sensible folks in America. Wright and Farakhan are TOO INSIGNIFICANT to have even the most minimal of effects. Your writing shows your basic lack of understanding of the issue. Funny though. When was the first time you hears about Rev. Wright? Compare that to how long these problems have existed. People like Wright, unlike you, are actually doing something to fix the problem. What are you doing besides whinning here on the internet and displaying your perplexing ignorance?

Posted by: Kevin | April 4, 2008, 6:38 pm 6:38 pm

Lance not every speech is a charity event.

Posted by: D | April 4, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm

Amy, nice work. Just maybe some of “Obama the Orator” supporters will realize just what he really is…an empty suit!
However, the other two candidates are also not fit to lead this once great country?
The future “ain’t” looking real good.

Posted by: whitehousewatcher | April 4, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm

Lance D..
I like to be idealistic as well. But every one is just human being.. Even God will ask something back when he gives his bless to you..
The bottom line: you are eligible to earn what you like in a legal way…

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm

They made some money and were Generous to Charity. Some would be Jealous.

Posted by: Tom | April 4, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm

Good List Amy!

Posted by: J | April 4, 2008, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm

BKMC,
Could you make sure you talk about Rezko and Wright direct connections if you are going to excoriate Hillary for distant connections.
By the way, aren’t you one of the people that have been hollering about Clinton’s tax returns? What did you learn? I learned that they paid a huge amount in taxes, and they paid a huge amount to charity. From Obama I learned that he paid a miniscule amount to charity.
Hmmm, what does this say about the guy?
========================================
Hillary will win the popular vote!
Hillary gives to charity!
Obama takes from Rezko!
========================================

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | April 4, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm

I’m appalled by the lead in this news piece. How does the fact that Hillary wants to appoint a Cabinet position solely dedicated to helping curb poverty have anything to do with how much money she and her husband have earned over the past eight years? They are, in fact, unrelated–unless you are trying to make the point that because she is so rich she shouldn’t have views on poverty. It was a very snotty way to open the segment. Why don’t you make your disdain for her a little bit more apparent? You could have done this piece in a more classy, responsible manner.

Posted by: Emily | April 4, 2008, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm

D,
I know but I still think that $100000 a speech, wether you are a former president or not, is too much.
It is the same thing we see with CEO. They make 10000 times the salary of the average employee.
Do you really think that HUMANLY someone is Ten Thousand more valuable that another?

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 6:47 pm 6:47 pm

I think it is awesome the Clinton’s have done well and given so much to charity. Obama wanted transparency–sooo–where is his PAST returns? The Clinton’s legacy is the economy, and with their charitable donations, I think they are good stewards. I am going to donate to Hillary’s campaign right now!

Posted by: Wow. Who knew? | April 4, 2008, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm

Obama is only 47 years old and already lives in a $2 million mansion, part of which he got surreptiously from Tony Resko, who is on trial for corruption.

Posted by: Syofie | April 4, 2008, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

OH yes she is for the little person bull She wants for nothing and cares lesss for those under her.She is a snob and He is worse.

Posted by: h | April 4, 2008, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm

Amy: A++ for research! Concise and to the point!

Posted by: russell | April 4, 2008, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

To Amy;
You made excellent points. Bravo. Bravo. Applaud! Applaud! Someone needs to give you an award or something. I like your style. You said everything I would like to say, but I knew someone, somewhere would say it.
God Bless!

Posted by: drpolitics1 | April 4, 2008, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm

Kevin,
I think the problem for Obama on his pastor is: Obama has given Americans the impression that he has been listening to the “hate” speech for 20 years without doing anything until media brought up…
Whether Obama agreed with what his pastor said for 20 years, we just don’t know..

Posted by: Truth | April 4, 2008, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm

You known, the only porblem with our government? There are two many Politicains.

Posted by: Tim | April 4, 2008, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm

Hey there’s hope for Jr. when he leaves office with his 21% approval rating, he will probably make at least 1.98 from his speaking engagements, oh, alright, 2.00

Posted by: Sue Filutze | April 4, 2008, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm

Amen, Hillary!
May the country prosper thusly under your leadership (as it did under your husband).
I’m voting for you no matter what.

Posted by: Jay in LA | April 4, 2008, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm

You known, the one problem with our government is? There are two many Politicains.

Posted by: Tim | April 4, 2008, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm

I absolutely love the Clintons! They are two brillant people who have always worked to help others. Bill Clinton was one of our most successful Presidents, and, like Jimmy Carter, he has continued to be a voice in the international community to help others in need. Hillary would be a success on her own no matter what her vocation. She has always had a purpose-driven life to help others.
It’s great that they have been able to make money on their books, and on Bill’s speaking engagements. They deserve it. Unlike others we could find, they put a good portion of their income back to people through their charitable giving. It looks like a good ole Baptist tithe to me.
Thus far, it looks like the Democrats who left office since Nixon have given back to others and the collective good of the world through their hard work and philanthrophy: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore. They makes a strong statement, too, for intelligent and strong men from the Southern states. It is great to see that there is plenty to do after the White House.

Posted by: georgia | April 4, 2008, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm

To KC+1971,
Your comments gave me a chuckle this Friday Afternoon. I read the writer’s comments, but they are well taken.
————————————–
All,
I have no problem with the Clinton’s income. It’s what I would expect for a former president. Once, the most powerful man inthe world, he should have something.
Happy to see them give to charity as well.

Posted by: drpolitics1 | April 4, 2008, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm

Kevin – I guess we have to disagree in terms of Clinton vs. Obama on certain policy issues. I don’t believe that we will get universal health care coverage in this country without a mandate. If you want to talk about playing politics, any non-mandated plan won’t work because too many people will choose to opt out. And the more people that opt out, the more people that will not be covered and that translates to higher health costs and taxes for those of us who to have coverage. Also, in terms of jobs creation, Clinton is the only candidate with a realistic plan of how to do it – beginning with the clean energy sector and transportation infrastructure sector. She has a well conceived plan to invest in science and technology which already drives a significant portion of our economy, but is sorely underfunded and championed by our current administration. It takes investment to make money. It takes a working public to drive economic prosperity. These are plans that Clinton has outlined in her policy platform and they are realistic. My final comment is about her vote on Iraq. Why should she apologize? Most of America supported that vote at the time and, frankly, given Obama’s deceptive past positions (taking corporate monies, acknowledgment of Wright and Rezko connections, supporting Nuclear Industry legislation that went against his constituency in Illinois….) and his lack of an actual voting record, I don’t know that I believe he would have taken the anti-war stance if he had actually been in the Senate at the time of the vote. So, I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on certain positions taken by these candidates.

Posted by: mhhunt | April 4, 2008, 6:58 pm 6:58 pm

Regarding Hillary:
If she claims to be ready on Day One for the Presidency, why wasn’t she ready for Day One of the Primaries. She’s and her staff are were totally caught off-guard. Is that somebody we want in the White House? I’d rather have BO in the White House than the Clinton stink of 15 years.

Posted by: Sheeza Lyer | April 4, 2008, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm

THANKS HILLARY! NOW THE OBAMA “FOLLOWERS” CAN SHUT UP. NOW LET’S SEE OBAMA’S TAX RECORDS FOR THE PAST 6 YEARS SO WE CAN SEE HOW HE REALLY PURCHASED HIS HOUSE FROM THAT SLUMLORD REZKO!
GO HILLARY!!! HILLARY 08!!!

Posted by: Justin | April 4, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm

So, a few questions come to mind
1) What “Charities” did they “donate” to? I’m willing to bet it’s not as “charitable” as you may believe.
2) Where are the actual returns? I just see reported income and tax paid… but i see no links to the returns themselves. Can someone point me to that?
3) With the past 8 years and them making 100M+, how in the world can you see they are for the “little” guy? They’re so far removed from the “little” guy there is no way for them to fight for us.
Basically, Hillary’s intentions may be honorable, but her constant insults at Obama are dispicable. No amount of $$ they earn and/or donate will erase my belief that she’s an evil, manipulative woman who would try to win this presidency at ALL costs including completely destroying the democratic party. THAT to me, is dispicable.

Posted by: CONCERNED CITIZEN | April 4, 2008, 7:05 pm 7:05 pm

Lance D. posted
“It is the same thing we see with CEO. They make 10000 times the salary of the average employee.
Do you really think that HUMANLY someone is Ten Thousand more valuable that another?”
—————-
Sorry, Lance, it is called competition…..
Just like a game, the first place earns 10x more than the rest…..That is why Michael Jordan earned that much…

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 7:06 pm 7:06 pm

It doesn’t matter what is said
What is written, what is read,
Some people choose not to discern,
Never lessons learn.
ONE THING ABOUT HILLARY, SHE SURE AIN’T IN THIS FOR THE MONEY ;-)
GIVE’EM HELL, HILLARY!!!!!

Posted by: questioner | April 4, 2008, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm

mhhunt: Great Post! I agree that if universai insurance is not mandatory it will be doomed to failure! What if Social Security were not mandated how long would it survive? This was what Newt Gingrich and the Republicans tried to do in their words “let it wither on the vine”. The central way that they were going to do this was to make social security voluntary. Thus there would not be enough younger workers contributing to pay for the older recipients,thus it would wither on the vine. So if everyone is not covered by insurance then those who are not covered will become free riders and the system will be doomed!

Posted by: russell | April 4, 2008, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm

Hillary doesn’t need money, I cann’t understand why
shes a politician, can enjoy life withouth the headache.

Posted by: Violeta Duarte | April 4, 2008, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm

@what a shame: try to keep up – the job now pays $400,000 a year – and obviously hillary is not in it for the money !

Posted by: scathinglybrilliant | April 4, 2008, 7:15 pm 7:15 pm

The TRUTH,
That’s not competition, that’s G-R-E-E-D!!! It is not the same. I don’t mind competition.
You see, both Obama and Clinton talk about Oil companies and big corporations–and I doubt either of them will do anything about it once they get into office. Do you think that it is normal that Exxon Mobil makes 10 billions of profit in a quarter when everyone is complaining about gaze prize? That is G-R-E-E-D.

Posted by: Lance D. | April 4, 2008, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm

Seblemal-Well, my friend, get used to it ’cause that’s the CHANGE Obama promised. So, how’s it working for you so far?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm

I don’t know why everyone is getting so upset. McCain is our next president.
Democrats = Socialists

Posted by: TN | April 4, 2008, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm

I doubt that the Clinton bashers will be satisfied now that the tax returns have been made public.. They`re already trying to make a big thing about how much money they earned in six years. There are some people who make that much in one year but the Clinton bashers don`t want to talk about that.
Now, is Obama gonna release all of his records or is he still trying to hide something.
We know he lied about who his big contributers were. [They were oil people.] So what else is he lieing about??

Posted by: Vince Casella | April 4, 2008, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm

Lance D-I work for big oil. Great pay and benefits. See you at the pumps. Please contribute to my salary and I will give your portion to the Clinton campaign. Thank you for your support, Lance.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm

After taxes she gave almost 20% of her net income to charity. I wonder how many hypocrites on this site can say the same. Alot better than Obama’s 1% donation!

Posted by: John in Cape May | April 4, 2008, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm

John in Cape May said…
“After taxes she gave almost 20% of her net income to charity. I wonder how many hypocrites on this site can say the same. Alot better than Obama’s 1% donation!”
Which Charities? Doesn’t anyone want to know which ones? Were they charities to fight breast cancer? or Hodgkins Disease or Heart Disease?? or was it mostly to other presidential fund raisers? I’d like to know.

Posted by: CONCERNED CITIZEN | April 4, 2008, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm

Dogsolider: I have been upset with big oil ever since they quit giving away those glasses with each fill up! Anything you can do will be appreciated,as I am low on glassware!

Posted by: russell | April 4, 2008, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm

In the years since leaving the White House, the Clintons have made a total of $109 million. They have paid tax of $33.7 million and given $10.2 million to charity. That means they paid more than 40 percent of their income to the government or charities. They put their money where their hearts are.

Posted by: hopesprings52 | April 4, 2008, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm

Gorgon,
Your statements only point out she is a good politician.
Are you saying Obama doesn’t have strategies?
He doesn’t make promises.
How about 700,000 going to superdelegates?
Talk about buying people off.
Richardson was bought with a promise of a cabinet spot or vp.
Are you kidding me?

Posted by: tejasoutlaw | April 4, 2008, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm

Lance D.,
That is the one of problems facing US: the gap between rich and poor is so huge…
It is because America is a free market, and the market price is not regulated by government like other countries…..
BTW, GREED means you have taken more than you should earn…..

Posted by: True Truth | April 4, 2008, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm

Why so much hatred against Obama? It is good that Senator Clinton released her tax returns. This must be required of anybody running for office. People have the right to know.

Posted by: worldsam | April 4, 2008, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

Hpesprings52 said:
“In the years since leaving the White House, the Clintons have made a total of $109 million. They have paid tax of $33.7 million and given $10.2 million to charity. That means they paid more than 40 percent of their income to the government or charities. They put their money where their hearts are. ”
Uh… they paid that 33.7 million to the gov’t because the LAW SAID THEY HAD TO OR THEY GO TO JAIL just like any of us. It’s fairly plain and simple
There’s lingering questions
1) Who are the charities they donated to?
2) Was their income BEFORE deductions 109M? or was that *after* their charitable contributions and other deductions (through loopholes and offshore accounts maybe?) did they take?
This is NOT the whole story yet. I want to see the actual returns.
Thanks in advance.

Posted by: CONCERNED CITIZEN | April 4, 2008, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

what I do not understand is how they let their accountant get away with making them pay more than than 33 percent in taxes which is the bracket they they were in! Next time go to H&R Block!

Posted by: russell | April 4, 2008, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

Who paid for these fees? Probably the very same special interests that she is vowing to fight. Bill was dealing with the Arabs from Dubai and got another 15 millions from them. It will take a family of blue collars 50 generations to make that kind of money.

Posted by: Blue Collar | April 4, 2008, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

Greg,
Even the media is still scurrying trying to find something wrong with the returns as they were just released a few hours ago. How did you come up with the 18 mil figure? To quote my daughter, “Sounds made up!”
For those sounding so shocked at their income, when was the last time this country had a poor President? Abe Lincoln? Politicians get out of office, write books, make speeches, and therefore make money, lots of it. Bet Kennedy, Kerry (all that ketchup), and Oprah have more money than the Clintons, but I bet no Obama supporters begrudge them their money. (You can bet the Kennedy’s didn’t get their money just on books and speeches either!)

Posted by: DW | April 4, 2008, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm

What charities have they given money to? The Clinton Foundation?

Posted by: Blue Collar | April 4, 2008, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm

I’m a single mother who with great difficulty has contributed 70 dollars every month to Hillary’s campaign.
I must confess that I felt outraged after hearing about the 109 million dollars.
Hillary has been asking for our donations constantly on her web site. I did everything I could, and I skipped going to the movies with my kids for some time now to be able to save those 70 dollars every month.
Now I wonder why Hillary doesn’t contribute a lot to her campaign herself, instead of giving a loan and even demanding interest for it.
Can anyone explain?
I feel VERY disappointed. I may still vote for Hillary but I will no longer donate. She has all the money she needs, and I certainly don’t.

Posted by: Sheena | April 4, 2008, 7:53 pm 7:53 pm

The Clintons reaffirm that the White House is for sale under the Democratic Party. It also reaffirms why there have only been 2 Democrats elected President in the last 40 years. They both (Carter and Clinton) have been severe, mega-failures! There’s nothing good about these losers.

Posted by: Mary | April 4, 2008, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm

The truth is that HRC quickly released her tax returns to turn the MSM from the Penn so called “error in judgement…” Interesting though is the fact that HRC and BC will only release their 2000-2006 tax returns, what about 2007. Well, they have asked for extension. Are they hiding something here ??? Seems to me like a stall strategy. Is this going to reveal their position with the Peter Paul lawsuit ??? C’mon… dems wise-up…

Posted by: Ton | April 4, 2008, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm

Where is Obama’s 2007 tax returns?For example, in 2002, the year before Obama launched his campaign for U.S. Senate, the Obamas reported income of $259,394 and $1,050 in deductions for gifts to charity, below the national average.
In 2006, the couple’s largest charitable gift — $22,500 — was to Trinity United Church of Christ, the home of Obama’s controversial longtime pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm

Matt in Ohio tell me why would his library get 50% profit.

Posted by: common sense | April 4, 2008, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm

Graham: How do you get your news? Pony Express? It seems that your man Obama has participated in Rev. Coles prayer meetings too. He has even spoken at them! Read Brian Ross’s report that was on this very site today! This is just like the tactics that they used to try to diffuse the Rev. Wright scandal,put out a photo of Bill Clinton giving Wight a courtesy handshake,and leak to the media MSNBC that his passport file had been breached! Well what he forgot to tell us is that he was spying on himself in order to cover up his spying on Hillary and McCain! You don’t hear much from him about that anymore! Wonder why if you listened to the media this was worse than watergate but when they discover that their boy was involved story goes away! So it goes!

Posted by: russell | April 4, 2008, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm

Yes, they made money. They are intelligent. They wrote books and Bill went out to make speeches. They also contributed A LOT of money to charity. I hope everyone is happy to see what the IRS already knew. The Clintons even released before April 15th as promised.

Posted by: Darla | April 4, 2008, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm

Ton: Keep diging!

Posted by: russell | April 4, 2008, 8:38 pm 8:38 pm

Well I am not a Clinton supporter, and never have been but congratulations to them for living the American dream.

Posted by: LADNARC | April 4, 2008, 8:39 pm 8:39 pm

CONCERNED CITIZEN-Where is Obama’s 2007 tax returns?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm

the raw % of how much the clintons and how much obama gave to charity are the wrong amount to gage. The clintons made at least 50x more money than obama. They were giving out of their excess. If you apply a weighted average obama gave more.

Posted by: Peter | April 4, 2008, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm

The fact is neither Clinton, Obama nor McCain have released their 2007 tax returns.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm

Listen up, you Obama supporters, no one really cares about the Clinton tax returns! And we don’t care about Obama’s tax returns. We care about not having a President who is a known liar and racist along with his pastor, his wife, and perhaps his kids from listening to all that “devil spew” for 20 years!! WE would really like to know is who is giving all that money to Obama’ campaign. Is it coming directly from the black churchs into the hands of the parishoners to donate…after all Obama’s campaign says these donations are only $97…takes a lot of $97 to get to the millions donated!!! Would be interesting to se his donor list and match it with the donors yearly income! Let’s ;ook at those tax returns!

Posted by: Carolyn | April 4, 2008, 8:45 pm 8:45 pm

alexis compton-There are millions on this side as well who disagree with Obama and we’re not even talking republican yet.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm

The Clinton’s came from very humble beginnings. They worked their way through school by payment or scholarship. They worked to attain their wealth, this is the american way.
The Obama’s are a product of affirmative action, as their grades and poor finances prevented them from getting into college on their own. Obama political career was started by dirty muslim money thanks to Resko and Auchi. Obama was raised by his wealthy step-father and grandparents. His drugs, drinking, association and support of corrupt characters is his inroad to success. Obama has lied, as he was never poor and used “race” as a crutch to get where he is today. What a hypocrite.

Posted by: Atisha | April 4, 2008, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm

Hey! Did you all know? Bush has millions! Maybe billions. Oh. No big deal? So then what’s the big deal here? Sheeeesh.

Posted by: Rudy | April 4, 2008, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm

I will always wonder why Obama got rid of his personal papers, daily schedule, et al, of his time while he was a state senator in Illinois.
When asked about it, Obama said they must have gotten thrown away or put in storage.
How’s that for hiding meetings and details that he might not want the press or the voting public to find out?
And yet, Hillary releases the taxes we’ve had to listen to Obamabots scream about for months, and they don’t acknowledge that their guy has gotten a huge pass from the press for not producing his personal documents that would have made for interesting reading I’m sure.
For those of you not keeping score, Hillary also provided similar information of her schedule while she was first lady.
So, from my standpoint, Hillary’s been a lot more forthcoming than Obama.
Maybe he should find out what storage company is holding all of his records? Maybe the press should wonder just as much about what’s contained in that information as they did about the Clinton’s tax returns.

Posted by: sherr | April 4, 2008, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm

Note that they release the tax return on Friday, the voters will say I see nothing, and that is the image that will stick but, by Monday the press will be all over it. As noted already they gave to their own legacy, Charitable?

Posted by: Thinking | April 4, 2008, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm

Danny-Wow. What a nice way to get folks on our side to ever vote Obama. Perhaps you aught to ask yourself are you doing Obama a favor or are you turning folks against him for the general?

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 8:58 pm 8:58 pm

moeen wrote:
OBAMA 08…. because he doesn’t lie about relating to the working class
Obama is an elitist! Went to an Elite PRIVATE school in Hawaii! Never had a real job. Became a black person to get elected “his stated goal in life” by smooshing with racist church.
do your research people!

Posted by: Kimo of Kauai | April 4, 2008, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm

51.8M for speeches? And I was calling him a SILVER tounged devil? My apologies.

Posted by: ToastOnDayOne | April 4, 2008, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm

@ geddesman
I guess that Obama has really raised you up to be a uniter hasn’t he?

Posted by: sherr | April 4, 2008, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm

Some of you people crack me up. So what they made millions.
Jealously!!!!
Stop crying. All Politicans are not poor they have money get over it.
I guess Hillary’s books are better than Obama’s. Ah Yes, the “The Audacity of false Hope.”
She has no standing what so ever to talk about poverty!?
Wait a minute…Niether does Obama he is not a broke a## politician.
Now release Obama’s and his real estate deal in Chicago.
Hillary 08

Posted by: sd | April 4, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm

This looks good for Hillary, She is wealthy and gave over 10 million to chairty. I am impressed. I will never vote for someone that doesn’t help others.

Posted by: martha | April 4, 2008, 9:04 pm 9:04 pm

Dogboy: The “TRUTH” is painful sometimes!
I’m not trying to get people to vote for Obama, I’m trying to get people to vote for the best candidate. The truth is… people *ARE* voting for Obama because he is the best candidate, plain and simple!

Posted by: Danny | April 4, 2008, 9:05 pm 9:05 pm

What’s the problem with someone paying money for speeches. After Reagan left office, he collected over $1,000,000 for speaking to the Japaneese. This is how ex-presidents make money. Bush may not be so lucky as he can’t even speak.
I’m not a Clinton supporter, but in all fairness, she and Bill used to do all sorts of projects dating back to the 60′s trying to help others. I wonder why people don’t remember that about them. Just because someone is rich does not mean they cannot relate to the working person. I know that as young people, the Clintons were very involved in helping poor communities. You can’t say the same about many people in general.
Besides, what someone earns is not anybodies business. I heard alot of Reps. Ok with the Country Wide CEO’s pay saying he earned it. So did they!

Posted by: sffinancial | April 4, 2008, 9:06 pm 9:06 pm

Thinking-I suppose anyone not on the far left must seem like a republican to you folks. Actually, I’m from the center, small right of the party as I believe Webb parks himself.

Posted by: Dogsoldier | April 4, 2008, 9:07 pm 9:07 pm

Should Senators spouses be able to give speeches for money? This should be illegal if it is not currently. Certainly, if a Senator got $51 million for giving speeches, he/she would be accused of taking bribes from people who want to influence legislation. I don’t see why this is any different.

Posted by: Michael | April 4, 2008, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm

The Clintons paid 33 million in taxes out of the 109 million. They also donated 10 million to charity. How about Barack?

Posted by: BikerNAz | April 4, 2008, 9:22 pm 9:22 pm

Rev. Wright has a 10 mill line of credit from TUCC and a 1.65 mill dollar home to live in courtesy of TUCC… so much for the work of the church to help its constituents… Obama giving 1% to charity?… pennies for him… 10.5 mill from the Clintons to charity?… nice chunk of change to help people in need… most of the earnings for the Clintons is Bill’s and is in line with former Presidents… take a look at Bush Sr, Carter, etc… they have earned the same or more… Hillary Clinton’s earnings are from her books and investments as Obama’s are… anyone bothering to scrutinize Obama’s shares in the biotech company he pushed legislation through to benefit after he bought 50K shares?… of course not… the media loves him and refuses to see or reveal the truth!… btw McCain hasnt released returns but is also a millionaire as is every other Senator… once again I suspect the accusations against Hillary Clinton will be baseless… dont hate the player hate the game

Posted by: The Commander Guy | April 4, 2008, 9:28 pm 9:28 pm

“”"colonizers caused salvery, disease, poverty”"”
Dang, those Brits were mighty men to have caused all the above.
Never existed before 1604.

Posted by: Kathryn | April 4, 2008, 9:29 pm 9:29 pm

This stuff is pretty straight forward so why the big deal? She caused herself more pain by delaying the release.
———————————–
Yes, but didn’t she make Obama appear as if he is the one participating “silly season politics” constantly demanding to see them? I remember when the call first went out for Hillary to show her taxes. Obama was talking to the press and said something to the effect that it sure would be nice to see her tax returns, but he would not ask, instead he would leave it up to the press to ask. When the press did not do it quickly enough, because they probably thought it was a non-issue, then his campaign started calling for it.
Obama talking about his grandmother: She reacted like a “typical white person”
Obama talking on Hardball with Chris Matthews on 4/2/08: I do not stereotype people and lump them together when I make my judgements.
Too bad Matthews admitted to getting tingles up his leg every time he hears Obama, otherwise he might have been able to do a proper interview and ask Obama how it is that he can claim he does not stereotype people after saying his grandmother had a “typical white person” reaction. MSNBC is worthless when it comes to holding Obama accountable.

Posted by: tiredofit | April 4, 2008, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm

Bill and Hillary donated 10 Million of their earnings to charity. That’s not an insignificant amount, and certainly demonstrates their generosity and good will. It would be interesting to find out how much Barrack and Michele donated to charity, other than the $27,000 they gave to Rev. Wright’s church since 2005. Our nation was founded on an individual’s right to freedom, liberty, and prosperity. It was also founded on the same spirit of generosity that the Clinton’s have exhibited.

Posted by: Emily | April 4, 2008, 9:38 pm 9:38 pm

Well spoken o. I need to interject something.
I am just appalled by the polls that say essentially 22% of Democrats will vote for McCain if their “’Til (democratic) death do us part” candidate doesn’t get the nomination. Shame on the 22% of you that will discard their beliefs and principles and cast a vote that you should know in your heart is just plain wrong!

Posted by: 1962ottumwa | April 4, 2008, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm

“MSNBC is worthless when it comes to holding Obama accountable.”
SOOO TRUE
Blessed are the truthsayers for they shall prosper.

Posted by: politicsIsdirty | April 4, 2008, 9:42 pm 9:42 pm

God Bless Hillary Clinton, the 44th President of the United States. It will take another Clinton to clean up the Bush mess.

Posted by: Milton | April 4, 2008, 9:42 pm 9:42 pm

“Obama giving 1% to charity?… pennies for him”
Obama only made about 1 Million last year. and still gave a large amount of his disposable cash. The clintons on the other hand were left over with millions after their donations.

Posted by: Peter | April 4, 2008, 9:47 pm 9:47 pm

where does the Clintons money come from? These people will never end deceiving the people.

Posted by: Blue Collar | April 4, 2008, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm

tiger, I hate to burst your ballon, but Hillary has only a 10% chance of winning the nomination. I just hope that you will not be one of those 22% that if you don’t get your way you will vote for McCain.

Posted by: 1962ottumwa | April 4, 2008, 9:53 pm 9:53 pm

Thank God she is not going to win the nomination and the war will soon be over.

Posted by: dirtymoney | April 4, 2008, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm

mamatuffy, you’ll never see those returns unless the Feds step in and make them.

Posted by: 1962ottumwa | April 4, 2008, 9:59 pm 9:59 pm

How much have the Bush’s made?

Posted by: Dan Wayment | April 4, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm

This so-called “book income” is a joke: all-times bestselling author, Steven King, made over his 30+ years writing career (an average 1.5 novels per year) a lousy $84 millions… Clintons, on the other hand, made more than King in just 7 years…
Talent, you know..:-))

Posted by: toroid | April 4, 2008, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm

None of the candidates running for office can relate to normal working class people. They all have 6 figure incomes and live way beyond the means of the average person. If they did not then they could not afford to run in the first place. Its seem to me Hillary is damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t. Give her a break!

Posted by: mt hayes | April 4, 2008, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm

Clintons know how to make money! We all had money during teh Clinton administration!
The economy was it’s best!

Posted by: Amy | April 4, 2008, 10:09 pm 10:09 pm

Obama, please follow Hillary to do same things please

Posted by: mike | April 4, 2008, 10:13 pm 10:13 pm

I expected those numbers but never thought they gave that much for charity!
Good work!
I decided to vote for Hillary in NC!

Posted by: David | April 4, 2008, 10:14 pm 10:14 pm

How much Obama gave to charity? Anyone knows?
Actually I am impressed by their charity giveaways!

Posted by: Ron | April 4, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm

President Clinton claimed $94,551 in expenses for cleaning and maintenance of his home office that year, and his wife claimed $52,889 for hers. The Clintons each got a tax deduction of about 10 percent of those amounts.

Posted by: dirtymoney | April 4, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm

I am no Clinton supporter, but to be fair I have done some checking. The Clintons have given their money to the Clinton Family Foundation, from what I have found there is nothing in there about giving to themselves. That is the Clinton Library.
You can find out where the Clinton Family Foundation, donations whent to here.
Just search Clinton, scroll down to the Clinton Family Foundation then select the year. Be and sure to select Clinton Family Foundation, there are a lot of Clinton foundations, but this is the one the Tax Return shows.

Posted by: Thinking | April 4, 2008, 10:23 pm 10:23 pm

Clintons talks like a poor mother standing in a line for food and shelter.
Now Reality Check shows Clintons have their own kingdom with lot more servants.
By voting to Clintons we should not make ourself as an unpaid servant for Clintons.
Bye, Bye, Clintons …. Eat all your money and stay away from public jobs.

Posted by: Marmayogi | April 4, 2008, 10:30 pm 10:30 pm

Charities are really monitored by the IRS and being in a republican government now, you can bet that the Clintons charities are closely monitored. You cannot use money that you put on a charity for personal purposes. Is the purpose of some bloggers here to find dirt where there is none, no matter what. People, get a life!

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 4, 2008, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm

OK, now its time to whip out those credit cards Hillary supporters and fund that dying campaign…because they’re….out of money??? But that’s OK, you can afford it.

Posted by: Twigster | April 4, 2008, 10:34 pm 10:34 pm

Look just look up where the Charities went.
You can find out where the Clinton Family Foundation, donations went to here.
Just search Clinton, scroll down to the Clinton Family Foundation then select the year. Be and sure to select Clinton Family Foundation, there are a lot of Clinton foundations, but this is the one the Tax Return shows.
http://www.foundationcenter.org/
There is nothing there to support that Clintons gave to themselves. They gave to their foundation which then distrubted the money. There is a little contribution to the Clinton birthplace foundation, but it is a spit compared to the donations made elsewhere by the foundation.
You may agree or not agree with where the money went, but in fact it didn’t go top themselves.
Obama08

Posted by: Thinking | April 4, 2008, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm

Sure, they gave a lot to charity. In 2006, the donations they made to charity went to the Clinton Foundation from what I heard.

Posted by: Twigster | April 4, 2008, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm

Why some people cannot understand that being privileged and having money not necessarily mean that you cannot relate to the poor. Assuming that argument is correct, then Obama cannot relate to the poor either since the last time I checked and as reported in his tax return, Michelle and Obama earned over $1M. So, with that kind of money, is he poor. By the way, can any of you please inform us to what charitable cause has Obama devoted any of his time?

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 4, 2008, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm

For you people who are still not satisified (and never will be), and say the Clintons should have given even more to charity, do you give more than 10% of your annual income to charity? How much…20%, 30%, 50%…wow, if you do, you should be nominated for sainthood. LIke I said before, Obama supporters seem to have no problem with John (Ketchup) Kerry, Teddy (backstabbing) Kennedy, Oprah (richest woman in the country)Winfrey, and all of the other wealthy backers having money which probably has benefited Obama, so give it a rest. Anyone who runs for President is loaded, which is why they can afford not to work while they run for President! I could care less about any of their tax returns, obviously it has to be legal or the IRS would be all over them. This clamoring for the tax returns was just another issue to try and say “gotcha” on. They just said on “On the Record” that the Clintons actually have disclosed more than McCain or Obama so far, so move on to something important. I just wish I had groups and organizations willing to pay me as much to give a speech or write a book and I could quit my day job. I don’t begrudge any talented person making money, especially when they pay their share of taxes and are generous in giving to charity, as the Clinton’s are. If Obama wins, he will probably be just as rich even more quickly after leaving office. (Also, so what if any contributions went to the Clinton Foundation, that foundation is helping with AIDS vaccines in Africa, hurricane Katrina reparations, and many other worthwhile causees. What is wrong with that???????) Maybe the Clintons should just change their focus on a few things if people who have been recipients of their giving continue to be so disrespectful and ungrateful for their help! There are sure plenty of other causes where their money would be appreciated I’m sure.

Posted by: dw | April 4, 2008, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm

There is only one conclusion that an outsider can conclude from reading all the blogs.
ALL POLITICIANS ARE RICH AND MAKE SO MUCH MONEY.
ALL POLITICIANS GET MONEY IN EXCHANGE FOR FAVORS.
ALL POLITICIAN LIE.
OK. IF A POLITICIAN PROFESS TO BE THE POLITICS OF THE FUTURE WHAT DOES THAT MEAN???
IF HE SAYS THAT HE IS A POLITICIAN WHO WILL NOT OWE ANYBODY ANY FAVORS, HOW DID HE MAKE IT TO THE TOP?? DEFINITELY HE OWES A GROUP, ORGANIZATION OR COMPANY SOME FAVORS TO BE PAID IN THE FUTURE??
DOESN’T THAT MAKE HIM A HYPOCRYTE??
MAYBE FROM NOW ONE SINCE WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT ALL CANDIDATES ARE NOT PURE AND HOLY AND DEVOID OF SINS, MAYBE WE CAN TALK ISSUES AND WHAT A CANDIDATE CAN DO FOR OUR COUNTRY.

Posted by: politicsIsdirty | April 4, 2008, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm

O…… thanks for the clarification. I wonder where is their heart (the Clintons), was it better to have a library, for we a have lot, than to donate it and feed the hungry and homeless.

Posted by: alexis compton | April 4, 2008, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm

That’s what i love more in USA, the free market rules :). Every single duck can earn a lot of money, if that ducka knows how to fly.

Posted by: Jocause | April 4, 2008, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm

O. Obama has not disclosed his 2007 return yet either! When is he going to release it? Have’nt you guys men embarrassed enough! 1% vs. 10 percent! Obama so tight he squeaks when he walks! He should take some lessons from his pal Oprah, and start a reality show about giving! Well how long could it last with 1%!

Posted by: russell | April 4, 2008, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm

George Will wrote an excellent column on the stinginess of the high liberal. They view charity as the unnecessary since the government (our tax money) should be handed out freely to all…hence the fact that need exists at all is a government policy problem. ..not an example of their cheapness. It is Republican who by far give more of their income to charity – how often will you EVER read that fact in the democrat media?

Posted by: Cheesedrippings69f | April 4, 2008, 10:42 pm 10:42 pm

And they are “poor” people, for the USA standers, because, a lot of persons make more, doing less…

Posted by: Jimba | April 4, 2008, 10:43 pm 10:43 pm

DW, but there is a big difference between (less than) 2 million and 110 million. Obama can’t just write a check for 5 million to his campaign…and then make donors pay him back!

Posted by: Twigster | April 4, 2008, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm

And do not fell sorry for the other’s like the Busch family, they eat well to…

Posted by: Lord Nelson | April 4, 2008, 10:49 pm 10:49 pm

Since 2002, the former president has provided investment advice and helped drum up business for several domestic and foreign funds in Yucaipa’s portfolio, one of two consulting arrangements he entered into after leaving office. Representatives of the Clintons have said that Mr. Clinton has made arrangements to dissolve his Yucaipa partnership if his wife wins the nomination, in order to avoid possible ethical conflicts.

Posted by: Kornaddickt | April 4, 2008, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm

I wanna know how many Clinton supporters are still determined to DONATE for that great cause! Anybody here still with Clinton all the way?

Posted by: Twigster | April 4, 2008, 10:52 pm 10:52 pm

It´s true, Clinton will not win, but the issue were is, how clever that women is to make more money than you made.

Posted by: Estaline | April 4, 2008, 10:55 pm 10:55 pm

Hillary Clinton supports and works with the following charities:
• American India Foundation
• Clinton Foundation
• Clinton Global Initiative
• Friends of the High Line
• Heifer International
• HELP USA
• Human Rights Campaign
• My Good Deed
• Stop Global Warming
You can checked them all.
Twigster: Yes, still willing to donate to her campaign; no problem with that.

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 4, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm

“The Clintons have now made public 30 years of tax returns, a record matched by few people in public service,” said Jay Carson, a campaign spokesman. “None of Hillary Clinton’s presidential opponents have revealed anything close to this amount of personal financial information.”
Mr. Obama’s tax returns show that he and his wife, Michelle, reported about $1 million in income in 2006, much of it from his book deals. Mr. McCain’s wife, Cindy, an heiress to a beer distributorship fortune, is believed to be worth tens of millions of dollars, but the exact amount is unclear.
Although there is no legal requirement that candidates release their tax returns, it has been common practice since the 1970s; a release typically occurs after a candidate becomes a party nominee, not during the primaries.

Posted by: Miterran | April 4, 2008, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm

Definitely Common Sense says: Twigster: Yes, still willing to donate to her campaign; no problem with that.
Well, Hun. I think you are the only one. It would not be me. No problem helping to pay off the “debts” of a multimillionnaire? 5 million in a loan..and other debts looming. She isn’t paying the health insurance of her employees. They are getting paid late. She’s got outstanding hotel bills. She’s got staffers and supporters carrying credit card debts for this campaign…and she’s netting over 50 million????
You are a bigger person and have deeper pockets than me!

Posted by: Twigster | April 4, 2008, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm

To answer your question, Drew, the standard is to donate 10% of your income to charity. The Clintons donated 9%. the Obama’s, who made 1/30th of what the Clintons made, donated 25% of their income to charity.

Posted by: Emily | April 4, 2008, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm

o. Think of this scenario to see if you think is reasonable. Clinton donates, for example, $1,000,000 to a charity; charity pays $1,000,000 to Clinton for work in the charity. End result? Clinton needs to report the $1,000,000 as income in her tax return. So what is the purpose to donate if you are going to earn it back and need to report it in your tax return. All the money that any of the charities paid Clinton needs to be reported as income.

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 4, 2008, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm

Homage, when was the last time you gave a third of your income to charity…most of which was to a charity in your name so it made you look better and therefore make more money.
If I had over $100 million, I could see giving that much to charity. Barack is nowhere near there but he managed to give more than 20% of his income to charity. And none of those charities were in his own name. Hmn…

Posted by: Twigster | April 4, 2008, 11:11 pm 11:11 pm

Bill Clinton made million dollar speeches in Dubai and lobbied at the same time for Dubai to be able to build ports in the u.s

Posted by: Sam | April 4, 2008, 11:13 pm 11:13 pm

Obama just started giving to charity when he knew he was going to run for the presidency. He’s pure show. He’s better off as an actor in Bollywood. He’s just greedy for power.

Posted by: Troy | April 4, 2008, 11:16 pm 11:16 pm

I do not understand why her campaign has strugled with money? They do will with there own money why can”t they do better with there own campaign funds?
I do not understand whats going on?

Posted by: smash | April 4, 2008, 11:16 pm 11:16 pm

Wow! They paid over 33 millions in taxes.

Posted by: bobby | April 4, 2008, 11:16 pm 11:16 pm

They could release any day of the week and be maligned. As for their 2007 extension. Their tax returns must be a real bear to do…I still have not done mine and I would bet many who post here have not done theirs yet.
Meanwhile Michelle while employed as vice president for community affairs annual compensation jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office.
That’s a $195,052 raise — not bad for someone who looks down her nose at the “money-making industry.”
All told, the total income declared by the Obama household on the couple’s 2006 income tax return, figuring his Senate salary, book royalties and her compensation from sitting on corporate boards, was $991,296.

Posted by: LL Barra | April 4, 2008, 11:22 pm 11:22 pm

o…..Sen Barack Obama changed the election map, there were no more red states and blue states, and he will win 49 states in the general election, nobody will gonna call you cause he will not be surpassed, not this time.

Posted by: alexis compton | April 4, 2008, 11:30 pm 11:30 pm

“I am proud of Hillary and was deeply moved by her MLK speech today – she truly belives in Americans – ALL Americans.”
Reply: Too bad ALL Americans don’t feel the same about the Clintons!!!
BTW – her great speech today was written for her by a staff of professional speech writers!
Same holds true for both of their books! They were written by a co-author!

Posted by: Tom Albright | April 4, 2008, 11:44 pm 11:44 pm

Seems the Bush economy was good to the Clintons.

Posted by: michaelryan | April 4, 2008, 11:47 pm 11:47 pm

If she becomes pres. she states she will have a czar for poverty…get real Stop selling out our jobs between you and Bill you are part of the problem ..Sure you don’t take oil money but billy boy sure does . Was it his 5million that got loaned to you or Dubii.
Oh the poverty Czar do you think that John got the point.
You could careless about the poor. Only care if they would vote for you.
Then you would not need them anymore til next election season.

Posted by: Lauren | April 4, 2008, 11:50 pm 11:50 pm

Garmmy Barb….why can’t Hillary donate the 5 million to her capaign if that she is good in donating anyway, think of it!

Posted by: alexis compton | April 4, 2008, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm

No wonder why Hillary prefers McCain to Obama…the wealthy 10% !!!!!!!

Posted by: NiceKid | April 5, 2008, 12:00 am 12:00 am

Hillary already released her tax return and I wonder why some of these people still complaining.
Some of you even said she released it because she is in deep water.
Come on…. don’t you know she promised it will release around this month?
She gave lots to charity and you said she did not build a village for you?
Look at Obama tax return!
He did not give lots of money to charity.
He received money from oil company.
PS: why he did not attend MLK anniversary today?

Posted by: crisis08 | April 5, 2008, 12:04 am 12:04 am

The average family makes 48,000.00 a year her and bill makes 41,000.00 a day ….yeah she for the the working poor.She has no idea what is like to struggle to make ends meet.Heck she does not pay her bills in a timely manner , where the business owners are struggling. yeah she for the average American. I wonder if she ever hd to stress if she wuld be able to make her Mortgage payment nand buy billy a new pair of shoes .?

Posted by: Lauren | April 5, 2008, 12:06 am 12:06 am

crisis08; Remember he is black so he did not need to attend the MLK anniversary today.
I am african american and I support Hilalry becasue Obama is a fake.

Posted by: bobby | April 5, 2008, 12:07 am 12:07 am

They made money yes but the fact is they also paid $33.7 million in taxes at a rate of 31% — a rate that is much higher than the average rate of 20.8% for that tax bracket.
That is a lot of money to pay in taxes and that goes toward the economy so they were not trying to cheat the government.
So nitpick all you want they paid their taxes, they also gave 10,mil to charity imagine that, rich people giving millions to charity amazing is it not?
Bottom line I would much rather a president that is financially secured to run this country than one that is just scraping by leaves less room for that person to get sticky fingers.

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 12:14 am 12:14 am

Lauren: For how many charitable entities have you donated your time? The Clintons, that do not have any real need to do it and can easily be in the Caribbean enjoying the sun, donate time and money to all kind of charitable causes. It is okay, though, if you cannot undersand that; some people are so biased that can’t see what is in front of their eyes. I know that when Katrina, Bill was one of the first there trying to help; where was Obama?

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 5, 2008, 12:15 am 12:15 am

Come, come, now. You must admit that Obama knows more about financial struggles than Hillary. He took a job making $13,000 a year after college to help laid off steel workers find jobs. Hillary after college?
At one point in his childhood, his mother had to receive some kind of PA, foodstamps I think. Hillary was on food stamps in Scanton, no in Illinois, right?
As someone who had to eat at the summer lunch program but who is now working on a Ph.D., I would love to one day say I wrote a best selling book that made me over half a million dollars. Wouldn’t you?

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 12:19 am 12:19 am

Tell Obama to take a hike our president were always financially secured not persons scraping the barrel.
This is the big league Obama you have to have the big mo when you want to run in this game, Obama has champagne taste on a bud lite pocket, nope sorry it just does not work that way.
I am always surprised as to how Obama ever got in this race in the first place, America is not use to having financially lean candidates running in the nomination race.

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 12:24 am 12:24 am

Well now we see how Hillary was able to lend her campaign $5m. Like the single mother above, I am somewhat mad that I have been donating $100 a month to her campaign. I won’t do that anymore until they spend a little more of their money. They have much, much more than me. I don’t begrudge them what they have earned, but I would feel a fool giving from my tiny pot to their substantially larger pot.

Posted by: Sami-jo | April 5, 2008, 12:24 am 12:24 am

For those asking about the 2007 tax return, Obama has not filed his either. So ask him to release his return too, please?

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 5, 2008, 12:26 am 12:26 am

The Clintons are wealthy yet SO PASSIONATE about helping others. Unlike Michelle and Barack Obama. With all that money they are out fighting to make a difference. Obama embraces Bloomberg who is a BILLIONARE.

Posted by: geevill | April 5, 2008, 12:26 am 12:26 am

What exactly is the point of this article? That the Clintons made a lot of money? That there is something wrong about this?
This is about as newsworthy as anything Obama has demanded in recent months from the Clintons. Obama, the great divider. Obama, the man who will ruin the Democratic Party.
Thank God we know that Bill Clinton gets a ton of money from speaking. Is this wrong?
The answer here is what it is for many of the circumstances that we have faced with the Clintons over the years. The Clintons are newsworthy and people value what they say.
So, fighting against the Clintons, even when you have every media outlet, the news on every channel, and the pundits calling for giving up, is tough. It is not easy, even when you outspend them by five to one. Yes, with all this you would think that the Democratic Party would see the light. But they cannot. They hate the Clintons too much, those interlopers who know how to win. They prefer the losers, the John Kerrys and the many Democrats who will lose in the Fall. All this because they want to kick the Clintons out of this race.
Good luck.

Posted by: Political Center | April 5, 2008, 12:27 am 12:27 am

There is no political gain for Obama here that I can see, so why persist in arguing about it?
Obama08

Posted by: Thinking | April 5, 2008, 12:31 am 12:31 am

“Speeches don’t put food on the table”
Yeah….
What kind of speeches put food on the table and which one are NOT.
Comparing Clinton’s speech and Obama’s speech .
One of them is only: HOPE…Change….
That is quite enough to inspire his people.
You can guess which one can put the food on the table now.

Posted by: crisis08 | April 5, 2008, 12:36 am 12:36 am

As a Clinton supporter like Sami-jo, this information sheds new light on donating to the campaign. Given my meagre earnings relative to the Clintons, it was a real sacrifice for me to send money to the campaign. I have a feeling of being used. Is a $5 million loan all they have been willing to “give” their own campaign while asking poor people to give, especially in this economic climate?

Posted by: Carl | April 5, 2008, 12:37 am 12:37 am

I know I will never pay 34 million in taxes and am very sure the majority of persons reading this blog will never ever pay that much, far less even give a couple thousand of their own money to charity.
As usual they must talk because they were all waiting to see what they could of dug up from the tax forms but unfortunately they are all dumbfounded by the fact that so much was paid out.
Rather than admit the Clinton’s have done well they will find all sorts of crap to say now. They sure cant call them uncharitable, they cant say they did not pay their taxes so what else is there to say.
Imagine now the cry is they are too rich to be a candidate, have they sat down and checked out past presidents and vice president they sure were not hungry persons, Bush, Cheany, Kennedy, Carter were these hungry men? Is Edwards, Romeny and even Huck people without cash?
Get over it people you wanted the tax forms you got it, there is nothing in there to pick over,sad as it is because I am sure many were waiting with breathed breath to get dirt to fling, well its done so move along now and deal with it.

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 12:39 am 12:39 am

the clintons donated ten percent to charity and obama donated one percent! i just don’t understand those of you who support him….i don’t get it!

Posted by: todd | April 5, 2008, 1:01 am 1:01 am

Point taken, Definitely Common Sense. You don’t have to be poor to have empathy and compassion for poor people. I was responding to someone else’s comment.
Glad you didn’t have it rough coming up. We need to find ways of making it better for all Americans. No one should have to live the way so many do in this country….
So, you’re saying you can afford that donation to cover Hillary’s debt then. Great!
Anyone else? Two have pledged so far to continue to donate! Help, she needs your money in order to continue. Obama is outspending her right now.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 1:05 am 1:05 am

Geneva, Mitt Romney spent over $33 million of his own money, so I don’t think tha the Clintons have contributed their limit. I certainly don’t think less of hem because they have done well financially, it’s just that for me to give more of my miniscule income, I would need to see them contribute more of their own money. It seems to date they haven’t (not counting the loan which will be repaid).

Posted by: Carl | April 5, 2008, 1:15 am 1:15 am

Sorry in my earlier post I should have said that as far as I can see the Clintons have not contributed anything at all to their campaign so far, not counting the loan of $5 million, which will be repaid. And of course as I said, Mitt Romeny spend over $33 million of his own money to his campaign. I certainly wouldn’t expect the Clintons to spend anything like what Mitt Romney did, but even a small amount would be in order, and would make me more likely to contribute in the future.

Posted by: Carl | April 5, 2008, 1:23 am 1:23 am

Person who are not saying they will not donate to Hillary after seeing her tax forms maybe never sent money in the first place.
The bar always seems set so high for the Clinton’s they must be the new martyrs of America, they always seem to have to go the distance in everything when others get a free pass and a ease in how they are viewed and what is required of them.
Hillary has to be the exemplar for all, she cant make a mistake, she always has to do what is right, she cant change a story, now she cant even have money its a crime.
On the other hand Obama can lie, flip flop with a story as if he is changing his socks, be evasive, have questionable associates, never answer a question, has a checked past, do everything under the sun and still seem to get the go ahead, now the new tune is looks like its good to be down and out as President, when you down and out you less prone to corrouption in office.
It it truly amazing at how some people think.

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 1:31 am 1:31 am

SJ, Just because you support a candidate does not mean that you have to agree with everything they say and do. If that is what you are arguing, then you sound like our president who says “If you’re not with us you are against us.” Complete rubbish! I am allowed to question every candidate, including the one I support. In fact as a responsible American I think I have a duty to do so. I question Obama and McCain, so are you saying that because I support Mrs. Clinton I should not have any question about anything she says or does? Please think carefully about what you are actually saying, SJ.

Posted by: Carl | April 5, 2008, 1:39 am 1:39 am

Does it matter if the candidate make lots of money or not as long as legal?
Seems like some of the comments here the candidate has to be poor to have support from blue collar workers.
At least she loaned some of her money to her campaign.
Anyway, it’s not her makes so much money, it’s her husband from his speech and his book.
The most important is she cares about this country and the people.

Posted by: crisis08 | April 5, 2008, 1:48 am 1:48 am

Sorry guys, I read the lawsuit trying to overturn the 1979 decision that not allowing a person to give as much as they want is considered a violation of rights. Apparently this has been a big issue. I admit that what I posted was inaccurate. There are certain specifications that have to be followed. I guess it has to be a loan that has to be paid back? How was Mitt gonna do that? Anyway…I apologize. Although, since she can give as much as she wants…it is nice to know that she has given more to charity than her own campaign. The popularity of the candidate tends to suffer as well when you receive more from yourself than individuals, and it is often reflected in your campaign. Looks like that’s what happened to Mitt.

Posted by: Geneva | April 5, 2008, 1:50 am 1:50 am

Clintons gave 10% to charity. Good for them. The clintons are walking the walk while others are talking the talk.

Posted by: The Lord of War | April 5, 2008, 1:55 am 1:55 am

Twig: I think we can all agree that 500 million ( the average of a long campaign)is A LOT of money that could be spent in better ways. However, someone sets the rules, and if you wanna run for office you have to have the money to campaign. If you prefer not to donate money to a campaign where the spouse brings in 70+million, that is your choice, but where do you draw the line? They are all multi-millionares! Honestly I would rather have a candidate that supports themselves rather than has small contributions, but that isn’t realistic.

Posted by: Geneva | April 5, 2008, 2:03 am 2:03 am

Twigster. You object to campaign donations to someone worth 100 miillion but accept it for someone worth a few million. An worth still way above the classification of “average working class” Why don’t you object to Obama spending between 20-40 million per month from the pockets of the working class as he so proudly boasts to advertise himself to secure a new job. Double the amount of the spending of the Clinton campaign, granted she hasn’t raisd as much but isn’t it disgusting that all candidates spend millions of donated money for basically job interviews? Does he need to spend that much? Isn’t it disgusting that millions of people will donate to a political campaigns to elect someone to best benefit their own needs but hardly ever donate to Charity.

Posted by: Strange Logic | April 5, 2008, 2:07 am 2:07 am

Well the 40 million dollars book thing is a clean earned money by the Clintons in fairness but the 5o millions speech fee thing and the 15 million partnership with that rusky businessman wow!!!! something fishy is in it.

Posted by: alexis compton | April 5, 2008, 2:11 am 2:11 am

50 million for over 280 speeches equating to roughly $160,000 per speech a very normal rate for someone of former President Clintons standing. In fact I’m surprised its not more.

Posted by: Apples and Oranges | April 5, 2008, 2:17 am 2:17 am

Obama has made over the last few years would barely buy you a house in my neighborhood–I live in NYC.
Yes, this is disgusting, but Obama is new to this game and was challenged from day one by the party to show that he could play by these well established rules. There were no superdelegates (party big wigs and politicians) backing him then.
Sure, he’s spending an awful lot more, but when you have an electorate that has been influenced by 3am ads that played ad nauseum less than a month ago, you have to spend money to counter this image. So many people are being told to fear him because he is unknown-Hillary’s campaign is saying the Wright thing might not be all that’s out there, but everybody knows her deepest darkest secrets and she’s a known commodity. On top of that, our society already fears Black people. He has to constantly put his face out there just to counter all this.
I would not be surprised if he pushes for campaign reform when he is president–I would rather see my money go to people who need it.
But in the mean time, he can’t president yet and I just feel like I need to help get him there. If he could do it financially without me, I would expect him to. But that’s not where he is right now.
I guess I shouldn’t be passing judgment on Hillary and her decisions, but to ask you guys to keep giving more when they have over 109 million (they are married so in the eyes of the law, it is both their money) and they’ve only LENT 5 million to the campaign–a campaign which she is saying is the cause of her lifetime…well, that seems wrong to me. Maybe if she said “OK, its not a 5 million loan but an investment,” I wouldn’t be so offended.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 2:23 am 2:23 am

You know what irks me? People try to find every bad thing they can about the Clintons. How about all the good they have done?
10.2 million to charity is NOT peanuts. So what if they are doing well, I am happy for them.

Posted by: J | April 5, 2008, 3:30 am 3:30 am

Nothing jumped out immediately as being so bad about the tax returns. No one should be arguing that the Clintons are squeaky clean. But Obama tries to come off as the “Great Clean Messiah” when he’s a lawyer-politician from Chicago, a place not typically known for political ethics. For people to put faith in a politician with such a slim record – and with a HUGE albatross (Wright) around him – is the height of foolishness. Hillary is the only choice for Democrats.

Posted by: K.F. Miller | April 5, 2008, 3:41 am 3:41 am

the clintons made money. the clintons paid lots in taxes. the clintons gave lots to charity.
the obamas made money. the obamas paid some in taxes. the obamas gave very little to charity.
and i refer to percentage-wise – the clintons gave 9.5% to charity. the obamas gave less than 1% to charity.
the obamas care about themselves. $600 shoes and mink coats for michelle. complaints about spending $10,000 a year for piano lessons and summer camp. a housekeeper, landscaper, etc.
michelle has a personal trainer four times a week.
but they give almost nothing to charity. most americans give a much higher percent than they do.
obamaites make excuses.
what else is new.

Posted by: so saddened | April 5, 2008, 3:42 am 3:42 am

When you have corporations financing elections, they must get back a return on investment. Conversely, when you are in power, you are in a position to influence government buying decisions. The law says there can be no quid-pro-quo. However, if you look at history, people do quite well after leaving office.
The only way to change that, short of finding another George Washington for President, is public-financing of elections. Corporations may have a tax-ID, but there is no reason to grant them freedom of speech — freedom of speech should be restricted to individual people.
I’ve nothing against President Clinton making a ton of money. He is charismatic, and can draw a large audience, so he will be attractive to any corporation. However, it’s also true, that many in his administration, and in previous administrations have made a lot of money after leaving office.
People contributing to Obama’s campaign at a grass-roots level is sure hope enough for change.

Posted by: tired-of-status-quo | April 5, 2008, 3:45 am 3:45 am

I would agree that Obama should spend less if Hillary can give back some of that name recognition and that feeling that people know all about her history. Up until 3 weeks ago, there were still many people who thought Obama was a muslim. How is the playing field level? Or are you just saying we should have a do-over and make it level from here on out?
I misspoke when I said noone supported him. You Hillary people know all about that word. But compared to Hillary, a whole lot less politicians were willing to back him in the early days. Hardly any.
And our society as a whole does fear black people. Not everybody, but too many-more than should. Been black all my life and I’ve seen a lot of things. But I won’t go there.
BTW, their house is worth 3 million and it is not fully paid for. He’s worth $1.8 mill–he can’t lend his campaign 5 million, but if he could, I sure would expect it.
Please, let us not BS each other here–it is too darn late (or too early). Obama doesn’t have half what the Clintons have-not in personal funds, not in connections, not in party experience, nor in publicity.
But somehow he’s still winning. He’s raised more, he’s better organized, he has more delegates, he has more individual votes…
So, she has your commitment too, Strange Logic, to help clear out that 5 million debt?
Why can’t she just call it her own donation? Why do her supporters have to pay her back? If Obama were in the hole and rich like her, I would expect him to pay it himself too…but if he were in the hole in January, everybody would have written him off already and Clinton would be the presumptive nominee, right?
Instead, Clinton gets to be the comeback kid on your dime. You all have got a good deal there.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 3:46 am 3:46 am

I would love to hear what the same people who choose to bash the Clintons earning would say regarding Dad Bush’s earning?
I personally could not care less what either of them are making. Bill Clinton and George Bush Sr are private citizens and it’s none of our business how they make it or how they spend it…… as long as it’s legal.

Posted by: dk | April 5, 2008, 3:46 am 3:46 am

Geneva,
You are right on the mark. These 2 have worked hard their entire lives and have done alot of good. I get tired of all the negativity and bashing of the Clintons no matter what they do. People need to think about this:
Why would this woman who has enough money to not have to work be running for President? Her and Bill could retire, but she is choosing to run for President and hopefully win so that she can bring this country out of trenches that it is in.

Posted by: J | April 5, 2008, 4:01 am 4:01 am

Tired of the status quo:
Ask your buddy Obama why he lied about excepting money from the oil companies? Ask him why it’s okay to accept hundreds of thousands of dollars from STATE lobbyists, but not federal? Why is one of his top donors Exelon corporation? Why is his co-chair Jim Demers a lobbyist for 20 pharm companies including phizer? Why is okay for him to give PAC money to officals in SC, IQ, NH etc to help their campaigns? He spent 42.4 % of that money to “buy” them off.
Are you really Tired of the status quo? Because it doesn’t sound like you are.

Posted by: Ohplease! | April 5, 2008, 4:01 am 4:01 am

If you having to pay her back for 5 mill when she has all that cash is what is better for this country…well, I, too am just as resolute that I have chosen the right candidate.
If he ever dared to do a thing like that, that would be it for me. I wouldn’t be voting for him in the GE.
I was a Hillary supporter at first. I didn’t trust Obama. Too much love going his way, like Strange Logic said. Must be a set up if all these top cats are supporting this nobody.
Then he announced he was running and I watched all those people who were encouraging him to run turn their back on him. Charlie Rangel, here in NY, when asked about that said, “Well I only encouraged him to run because I felt that if he hadn’t, he would regret it for the rest of his life.” In other words, I never said I would support you.
There weren’t a whole lot of $1000 dinners like Clinton had. There were mostly $25 talks. My first donation was solicited by a friend of mine who is a broke grad student like me who asked me for $5.
His campaign is nothing like Clinton’s.
Still, if he weren’t around, I would have voted for her…and I would be in bed right now. Clinton is good. Just think Obama is better for this country right now.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 4:07 am 4:07 am

Oil money? Whitewater! And do you guys know that the land that they sold was sold to seniors at an interest rate they could not afford so much of that land ended up being reposessed? The Clintons are better than the Obamas for this country? Please, let us not go there.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 4:17 am 4:17 am

For all of you carping and puling while saying : “Where is the 2007 information,….They didn’t release the one asked for, 2007s,…We want to see 2007, etc.” I say READ!
Then question your personal “reading comprehension” skills! The Clintons DID release their 2007 return information, as reported to the IRS. What part of “for the years 2000-2007″, do you not understand? To simplify: “The Information For 2007 Is Included”, they did not ask for “an extension on releasing the information to the media and public”, they released it. It is included!
From AP: *”The Clintons reported $20.4 million in income for 2007 as they gave the public the most detailed look at their finances in eight years. Almost half the former first couple’s money came from Bill Clinton’s speeches.”
The “extension they asked for is with the IRS not the public, regarding a filing of their 2007 tax returns, citing the ultimate plus or minus re the dissolution of a blind trust last year.
Also, review your knowledge of tax filing procedures. Have any of you ever filed a tax return, or asked for an extension?
Extensions are commonplace, and only relate to allowed statutory procedures, in no way do they imply malfeasance. Lower end and middle income taxpayers probably use them more than most higher end payers.
Please read for content, not just some “gotcha element”, when reading an article that you wish to comment on. Might save you from looking foolish by posting inaccuracies.
None of us serve our candidates well when we post without facts.

Posted by: MC | April 5, 2008, 4:17 am 4:17 am

Hillary is great, great, great!
You guys all have your checks ready to wipe out that 5million dollar debt, right?

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 4:30 am 4:30 am

DJ, I didn’t know paying taxes were a choice. And bringing in money? He pocketed 70% of that money from outside countries.
I will say this, if the avg rate for that tax bracket is 20% and they pay 30%, then maybe they need a new accountant.
And is this how they intend to manage my tax dollars? Because I don’t wanna pay 50% more than I have to for govt services.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 4:35 am 4:35 am

Geneva, what issue would you like sources for? Glad to provide.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 4:37 am 4:37 am

Twig: Jorge Cabrara. Please make sure it is a independent, credible news source please. Also…I live in Oh, and Obama had 2,500 lunches with 6 select ladies before the primary. Notice where I placed the comma.

Posted by: Geneva | April 5, 2008, 4:41 am 4:41 am

Sorry that was $2,500.

Posted by: Geneva | April 5, 2008, 4:44 am 4:44 am

That said, its nearly 5 and I’m tired.
I’m clearly pulling for Obama, but if Clinton is the nominee, she’s got my vote. Can’t live with McCain for 4 years-our economy can’t take it…and our military shouldn’t have to stomach a war in Iran.
Let’s keep it all in perspective.
Night you crazy Dems!

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 4:45 am 4:45 am

Geneva…before I go…Jorge Cabrara?
And no, I was talking about after he first announced–he couldn’t get too many people to eat with him for $1000. But lots of people flocked to hear him speak for $50 and $25.
My first donation was for $25 despite the $5 request. And that was only because I liked my friend and he was having a hard time personally. I didn’t think Obama would win, but I still supported him anyway.

Posted by: Twigster | April 5, 2008, 4:51 am 4:51 am

People should be worried about the National Debt instead of the Clinton income.
Bill Clinton is the only President in the last 27 years to reduce it, and is tied with JFK/LBJ, for the GREATEST reductions in the past 46 years!
Pretty fair fiscal record, I would say!
U.S. president Party Term years Start debt/GDP* End debt/GDP* Increase debt ($T) Increase debt/GDP
Roosevelt/Truman D 1945-1949 117.5% 93.2% 0.05 -24.3%
Truman Harry Truman D 1949-1953 93.2% 71.3% 0.01 -21.9%
Eisenhower1 Dwight Eisenhower R 1953-1957 71.3% 60.5% 0.01 -10.8%
Eisenhower2 Dwight Eisenhower R 1957-1961 60.5% 55.1% 0.02 -5.4%
Kennedy/Johnson D 1961-1965 55.1% 46.9% 0.03 -8.2%
Johnson Lyndon Johnson D 1965-1969 46.9% 38.6% 0.05 -8.3%
Nixon1 Richard Nixon R 1969-1973 38.6% 35.7% 0.07 -2.9%
Nixon2 Nixon/Ford R 1973-1977 35.7% 35.8% 0.19 +0.1%
Carter Jimmy Carter D 1977-1981 35.8% 32.6% 0.18 -3.2%
Reagan1 Ronald Reagan R 1981-1985 32.6% 43.9% 0.65 +11.3%
Reagan2 Ronald Reagan R 1985-1989 43.9% 53.1% 1.04 +9.2%
Bush GHW George H. W. Bush R 1989-1993 53.1% 66.2% 1.40 +15.1%
Clinton1 Bill Clinton D 1993-1997 66.2% 65.6% 1.12 -0.6%
Clinton2 Bill Clinton D 1997-2001 65.6% 57.4% 0.42 -8.2%
Bush GW1 George W. Bush R 2001-2005 57.4% 64.3% 1.15 +6.9%
Bush GW2 George W. Bush R 2005-2009 projection 64.3% 68.2% projection +3.9% projection

Posted by: MC | April 5, 2008, 4:58 am 4:58 am

Why do you people want to know Hillary’s Tax return? Was her income illegal or what? Is she very rich? so what? Did she pay her tax?

Posted by: Laughing | April 5, 2008, 5:05 am 5:05 am

Thanks Geneva and Chris. PS…Geneva, I am not a guy. lol…

Posted by: Ohplease! | April 5, 2008, 5:16 am 5:16 am

Kizeem 109 million in 8 years not in one. Obama made 9,000,000 last year and over 1.5 million in 2006. Of course there is a difference between what the Clintons and Obamas make. First the Clintons have been working at least 20 years more than the Obamas. Second Bill Clinton has been a President and his speeches are worth much more than Obamas empty sermons. Third the zClintons are more productive than te Obamas. Where is Michelle?

Posted by: Libertyandlife | April 5, 2008, 5:26 am 5:26 am

Actually, it would be most interesting to see the tax returns of all our boys and girls in Washington! Furthermore, I am unimpressed with “charitable donations” because we still do not know to whom or exactly what was donated (it could have been left-over books for all we know). I guess the point is the following: I would wager that a hugh majority of our elected officials from both parties have enriched themselves as the country languishes!

Posted by: Mary Snead | April 5, 2008, 5:27 am 5:27 am

Kizeem What is Senator Clinton self purpose in running for President? Do you think she needs the 400,000 salary?

Posted by: Libertyandlife | April 5, 2008, 5:28 am 5:28 am

To all those with such fond memories of Bill Clinton…He got lucky during much of his two terms with the technology age, lost the house, lost the senate,left office with the country going into recession and spent much of his second term fighting off scandels.Oh and I almost forgot he got impeached!!
Please no more of the Bush family or the Clintons.

Posted by: Davis | April 5, 2008, 5:28 am 5:28 am

Kizeem, misrepresenting facts? Rasmussen reports were updated an hour ago and this is what it shows:
Among Democrats:
“In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, Obama now attracts 48% of the vote while Clinton earns 42%”
“Among voters nationwide, McCain is now viewed favorably by 56% and unfavorably by 41%. Obama’s reviews are 52% favorable and 46% unfavorable. For Clinton, those numbers are 45% favorable, 52% unfavorable”
About SCHIP : “Kennedy, of course, is now backing Clinton’s rival, Barack Obama, for the nomination. But last year, before that endorsement, he was quoted by the Associated Press as saying something quite different, which the Globe did not note in its story:
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Oct. 6, 2007: The children’s health program wouldn’t be in existence today if we didn’t have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
In that same story, The AP’s Beth Fouhy concluded, “While Kennedy is widely viewed as the driving force behind the program, by all accounts the former first lady’s pressure was crucial.” She quoted Nick Littlefield, who had been a senior health adviser to Kennedy, as saying, “we relied on her, worked with her and she was pivotal in encouraging the White House to do it.”
Where do you get your information?

Posted by: Ohplease! | April 5, 2008, 5:29 am 5:29 am

Clintons 9.5% to charity
Obamas less than 2% to charity

Posted by: Libertyandlife | April 5, 2008, 5:33 am 5:33 am

Davis: The Clintons got lucky and the Bushes didn’t huh? So the Bushes don’t need to except responsibility for anything these last 8 years? It was just luck right? You expect us to believe that one man’s Presidency was just luck and the others was bad choices? Who are you fooling? (No one)

Posted by: Ohplease! | April 5, 2008, 5:35 am 5:35 am

Obama says that he is against Washington politicians and what they represent and the first endorsment he asks for is Ted Kennedy.I like Ted Kennedy’s work, but what better example of a Washington politician than him? Is Obama sincere? NO,NO,NO

Posted by: Libertyandlife | April 5, 2008, 5:39 am 5:39 am

To those trying to mitigate the Clinton’s charitable efforts by saying “it is easy to give that much, if you have that much”. 9.5% is 9.5% regardless of how much you have.
One’s cost of living normally increases with a rise in income. For instance the very large $33 milllion they paid into the Federal coffers, reducing said income by 31%. Not “chump change” by any reckoning.
If you had only $1000, you would owe no tax at all. Yet, would you be willing to give up $95.00 of it to Charity?
It is all relevant! Decide if, with their net income ($76mil) or yours $?would you be as/(or more) benevolent as they have been.
If you can honestly say you would, then fine “belttle them”. If you cannot, then “give them credit”, which seems well deserved.
My wife and I gave 7.8% last year and feel as if we did some good. The Clinton’s gave far more dollar wise, and 1.7% more percentage wise. They have my praise?

Posted by: MC | April 5, 2008, 5:51 am 5:51 am

Davis: Your assessment of the Clinton Presidency was that he had “good luck”, not that he did anything. He can’t be praised for anything he did as President, it was just luck. I am countering your argument by saying if you think that Clinton’s Presidency was luck…I’m gonna say for the sake of the argument, so was Bush’s. His Presidency was bad luck. He can’t be scrutinized for what he did…it was just luck right? You are suggesting that one man can’t be praised for his presidency, because he was just the President with good luck. At the same time you can’t blame a man for his Presidency then…it is just luck. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. You don’t get say Clinton isn’t responsible for anything good during his administration, but Bush is responsible for the bad. You contradicted your point.

Posted by: Ohplease! | April 5, 2008, 6:12 am 6:12 am

Davis,
I like that idea! :)

Posted by: J | April 5, 2008, 6:14 am 6:14 am

READING ALL THESE POST IT SEEMS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE EXTREMELY JEALOUS OF THE CLINTONS FOR MAKING MONEY. GO HILLARY YOU ARE THE BEST HOPE WE HAVE IN THIS ELECTION.

Posted by: S4B0 | April 5, 2008, 6:24 am 6:24 am

It is ambition of the highest order and competition to the core.
Posted by: Kizeem
———————
———————–
That is exactly why we need to elect her and pull this country out of the ditch that its in. There’s nothing wrong with either of those traits. I want a fighter and a worker, not a speech giver in the White House.
Instead of posting negatives about Clinton, why don’t the Obama supporters post why their candidate is supposedly better.

Posted by: J | April 5, 2008, 6:26 am 6:26 am

Geneva I agree totally. A bog is not a credible source. I was especially amused that the lead story currently on Judical watch is about Obamas lack of credibility on his claim of no paper trail and how they are now pursuing him.
If Kizeem likes criminal associations what about Obamas links to Auchi the Iraqi billionaire???
Or the fact that most of Rekos violations (10 of 13 I think) occurred in Obamas own district but he knew nothing.
Or how it is interesting that Obama has received glowing endorsements from Farrakan, Daniel Ortega, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez. Now I am not saying he sought their endorsement but I don’t think they are the sort I would want singing my praises.

Posted by: strange Logic | April 5, 2008, 6:33 am 6:33 am

I am not a Clinton lover. I’m Independent. I’m defending logic, not a candidate. People need to educate themselves about every candidate including their own. I have no tolerance for bias. That is my point. Everyone gangs up on the Clintons and that irks me, because it’s such a politically safe position. It gives them reasons not to educate themselves. Why would they need to? They can just blame everything on Clinton. Just like we blame everything on Bush. It seems that you are hard to please, and that you have unrealistic expectations of Presidency.

Posted by: Ohplease! | April 5, 2008, 7:01 am 7:01 am

The preceeding comment includes another of the trite assumed postures. I am a life-long Democrat, never liked Clinton.
Among many many excellent accomplishments that should have pleased any “true” Democrat.
Clinton Presidency created more than 22 million new jobs.
Reduced National Debt by more that 23% over eight years.
From 15.% icrease in’92 under GHWB to a 8.2% decrease under WJC
Inherited defiicit, left a since squandered surplus.
WJ Clinton despite impeachment, left office with a 65% National approval rating.
The “life-long” Dem poster must have resided in that 35% minority along with ALL the far-right Repiblicans.
Get Real!

Posted by: MC | April 5, 2008, 7:06 am 7:06 am

Where are Senator Obama’s records from his work as Illinois legislator? He states that their are no records from his work as a local and State Legislator. What? Where are these records? What is he hiding? It is impossible to beleive that they are lost or missing. Why isn’t a mainstream news organization asking about them? Something is fishy with this guy. We know absolutely nothing about the man that wants to be President. He has been in office. Why was there no record?

Posted by: glennmcgahee | April 5, 2008, 7:36 am 7:36 am

i really wish obama a good luck

Posted by: ethan | April 5, 2008, 8:00 am 8:00 am

Where did you guys get the 1% from? He may have only donated this amount in early 2000, but last year he donated 250k. That’s more than 10% of his income. How many of us can honestly say we donate 10% or more? It’s a fact that the more money you make, the more you can donate to charity. So for most people not making $50M in speeches, it’s difficult to fork over a large percentage. I also don’t think anyone should scold the Clinton’s for making a lot of money. This is America, right? My main concern is at whose expense? So far it all looks on the up and up, but of course that was because Hillary’s group released it. I’m sure we’ll find some more Wal-Mart/Tyson Foods/Big Oil connections in there after the analysts go through it. But hey, they’re politicians, they’re supposed to be dishonest, right… Right????

Posted by: Brad Smith | April 5, 2008, 8:08 am 8:08 am

I’m horrified! I would NEVER want all that money! I’m so glad all other presidential contenders are from the ranks of welfare – I’m sure Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain would turn AWAY from the opportunities to earn large amounts of money. Knowing this about her changes my mind, because I was going to vote for her, but what – she’s rich? How could she possibly be a good president? All of the good presidents have started out poor and remained so even after their presidency, – wait… is that NOT true?

Posted by: kcareymac | April 5, 2008, 8:39 am 8:39 am

Hey kcareymac,
Hillary is not richer than McCain. There was an article yesterday in the Washington Post “Beer heiress and connections propel McCain”
I mean if that the only reason you want to change your mind, it is not good enough.

Posted by: Lance D. | April 5, 2008, 8:44 am 8:44 am

Now some Obama supporters are attacking giving to charity. These folks are the saddest, most negative, hateful group I have ever seen.

Posted by: geevill | April 5, 2008, 8:59 am 8:59 am

Big News flash..Clintons have tons of money!! No kidding really?? Bill can make a cool million with one speech. Who cares, they have more money than they could ever spend in this lifetime.
Has anyone stopped to ask themselves why Hillary would put herself through all this negative fight for the Presidency?? They already have money and fame and power. PERHAPS, JUST PERHAPS…SHE REALLY CARES ABOUT AMERICA!!! HELLO!! WAKE UP FELLOW AMERICAN DEMOCRATS!!
True Americans will never unite behind this Obama fool, he is undeserving of the Presidency. He honestly thinks he is the messiah.
Get a clue fellow democrats/Americans. We will never ever trust this man to run this country. We dont even know him. Read his books, look closely and think deeply.
What an arrogant fool he is to think Al Gore would ever consider being any part of this. Oh…I forgot he’s the messiah and even Mr. Gore will do as he says!!! Obama is UNELECTABLE!!!
I love this country and I know we are way too smart to put a racist hate mongering person/people like the messiah in our white house.
We don’t need him to “unite” us. We are united as Americans and when all is said and done..Obama will lose. Wonder what kind of speech he’ll give then?? When the repubs finish with him he’ll be lucky to have any kind of political career left!!
Go Hillary!! All the way!! If not my vote is for Mccain!! For America!!!
4/5/2008 8:52:19 AM

Posted by: lmay | April 5, 2008, 9:04 am 9:04 am

geevil Do some more research, charitable contributions of SIGNIFICAN(Millions) dollars went to the Clinton Library…COME ON!!! Lift the Clinton Blinders from thy eyes.

Posted by: Wags | April 5, 2008, 9:04 am 9:04 am

During the Bill Clinton Presidency the haters criticized the Clintons for not having thier own home- always living in government housing.
Look at Bill out there working the crowds. Look at passionate he gets on the campaign trail. All this shows is they don’t need to do this.
Now let’s look at Obama’s finances. How did he purchase that house?

Posted by: geevill | April 5, 2008, 9:06 am 9:06 am

That’s the answer to all the questions surrounding them….They don’t “need” to do this.
Some people get a hunger for power fame and money, the Clintons already have it!!!
Hillary loves America and she has “ALL OF HER ADULT LIFE.”
Obama scares me to death..I have never cast a repub vote in my life, but for Americas safety I will vote Mccain if Hillary doesn’t get the nod.
All of you Obama followers need to read his books and look deeply.

Posted by: lmay | April 5, 2008, 9:11 am 9:11 am

yeah, let’s have a couple of wealthy attorney’s running the country. great idea.

Posted by: eggie08 | April 5, 2008, 9:14 am 9:14 am

The Clintons, with their penchant for wealth and power, are just as corrupt as Bush, and they would prove to be just as destructive with that power as Bush has been. We do not need these Clinton despots anywhere near the White House.

Posted by: Bastanow | April 5, 2008, 9:17 am 9:17 am

I think there will be alot of foreign names that we will be shocked to know who our former President gets his Money from. More coming I’m sure

Posted by: Nando | April 5, 2008, 9:22 am 9:22 am

$109 and yet they want more! The Clintons are megalomaniacs and their desperation to get into the WH makes me wonder what types of favors they owe to those who “contributed” to BC’s library.
From the New York Times:
During that time, the Clintons paid $33.8 million in federal taxes and claimed deductions for $10.2 million in charitable contributions. The contributions went to a family foundation run by the Clintons that has given away only about half of the money they put into it, and most of that was last year, after Mrs. Clinton declared her candidacy

Posted by: mz maria | April 5, 2008, 9:27 am 9:27 am

Now, now. I am not the one attacking people who donated over $10 Million to charity.

Posted by: geevill | April 5, 2008, 9:29 am 9:29 am

What is important to me and probably most of american public is that whether the Clintons were somehow involve in monetary governmment corruptions and bribe as the media are hoping and trying very hard to find as theyre flipping through their tax returns
It must be a big dissapointment from the media and reporters for not finding the “bombshell” that they were salivating and desparately hoping for. It is obvious to me by now that they have not find anything of that nature.
The Clintons were in debt when they left the WH. They have earned their living like everyone else. They did not steal.
The media and among other networks are simply pathetic. Trying to desparately spin any issue about Hillary Clinton as negative as posibble and at any cost just to get a “great headline”.
I applaud the Clintons by releasing the tax returns. So ABC and other media networks, please give it a rest! What does it take for the Clintons proved themselves as decent people. Leave them alone. BTW I still think she still win…Kudos for Hillary

Posted by: rick | April 5, 2008, 9:39 am 9:39 am

i’m surprised at how many people think the clinton’s donation’s to charity are so extraordinary. this is what people with money do, republicans, democrats,independants, etc. People love to lambaste bill gates for instance, but his donations to charity are stunning!

Posted by: eggie08 | April 5, 2008, 9:45 am 9:45 am

This country was prosperous during the Clinton years. All of you that are jealous of the Clintons have every opportunity to make your lives just as comforable as their’s. They are smart, well educated and love this country. The don’t have to run for public office, they could retire and enjoy their millions. They do it to try to make your life better. I won’t slam Obama, I just won’t vote for him, not in the primary or the general election. The Clintons don’t deserve the rudeness that is evident on these boards. I blame the party for this mess, first FL and MI, then the Obama surrogates for opening their mouths when they should keep them shut. This needs to be decided by the voters and not surrogates. I’ve been a democrat all my life and I’m not happy with the way this has been handled. I am leaving the party and registering Indepenant after the primary.

Posted by: j | April 5, 2008, 9:46 am 9:46 am

That is right, DMK.
And don’t forget they were the only people who actually made an attempt to pass health care reform, even though Republicans killed it. The fact that people are willing to pay 51 million dollars to hear speeches from Bill Clinton says alot. Hillary is out there speaking 12 hours a day 7 days a week, and those who choice to attack can only find how may discrepiencies. three or four that they use over and over to rip her apart.

Posted by: Tom NYC | April 5, 2008, 9:50 am 9:50 am

Good For Them. They personify the American Dream. They work hard, they pay their share of taxes (lots of them), and they give back.
I would rather these two run the economy as they can get us back to a surplus. They obviously know how to make money.
We do not need someone who is not proven. Hillary has demonstrated there is nothing to hide here.
What is upsetting is the ABCNEWS’ choice of art for the their home page. Which depicts that the Clinton’s and a wad of cash is a bad thing. We should all work so hard and pay the taxes that are coming to us.

Posted by: Joanna Pena-Bickley | April 5, 2008, 9:50 am 9:50 am

Sounds like speech envy to me. No one is paying Obama to hear his plagarized nonsense.

Posted by: geevill | April 5, 2008, 9:53 am 9:53 am

Obama supporters: What has Obama done in his career for someone other than himself? The Clinton’s are always out there helping victims of aids, Katrina, poverty and you never hear anything that Obama does. The Clinton’s gave over 10 million to charity, the most Obama gave to charity was $220,000 to his racist church.
People are quick to criticize the Clintons, but they are the ones out there taking up the cause and helping the unfortunate or victims of disaster-no matter what race, income, age, etc. It is a shame that so many people are lost in the empty rhetoric of Obama to see he is only in this race for himself and will DO NOTHING to help anyone else other than his cronies. Obama=Bush

Posted by: Debbie | April 5, 2008, 9:59 am 9:59 am

There are those who fear Hillary and who go to extraordinary extremes to kill her campaign. They are conservative republicans that is why Obama wins in the red states. And it is republicans that make sure that only Obama supporters show up at the caucuses that is why he wins them. wait and see, if he wins the nomination all those people in those states will be gone.

Posted by: Tom NYC | April 5, 2008, 10:02 am 10:02 am

I am glad to see that Sen. Clinton can really relate to all of the blue collar workers who support her. Maybe she will help them out when all of jobs are sent out of the county

Posted by: mcollins56 | April 5, 2008, 10:03 am 10:03 am

Demo Rules,
Those same idiots that voted for Bush twice are the same type of people putting their trust in man they know NOTHING about. What has come out about him so far has not been good.
When Bill Clinton left office gas prices and food prices were no where near where they are now. Remember we had a surplus, he created jobs and the economy was doing well. Show me proof that he can turn this country around. What has he done that makes you believe that.

Posted by: J | April 5, 2008, 10:09 am 10:09 am

Obama supporters believe in magic and miracles. it is sweet, but I see no evidence that Obama can perform these miracles. The closest thing I can see is the 8 years that this country was led by Bill clinton. That is why I support Hillary. I know they can get things done. And that is why republicans fear and hate her so much.

Posted by: Tom NYC | April 5, 2008, 10:13 am 10:13 am

judging by the tax returns more likely her books are sold out, while many copies of Obama’s lie untouched on the shelves. Author envy too.

Posted by: geevill | April 5, 2008, 10:19 am 10:19 am

I fully expected the Clintons to make a lot of money after he left office, that is not surprising nowadays. What I can’t believe is Hilary talking about knowing how the poor, uninsured, unemployed etc feel when she has 10s of millions of dollars in the bank. And if you look at her website there are “CONTRIBUTE” buttons everywhere asking these same, average, working class people to finance her campaign. Why not pay with some of her own money, and I dont mean a loan to her campaign.

Posted by: John R | April 5, 2008, 10:25 am 10:25 am

109 millions, isnt that a bit too much?,for someone on pension? american working class should keep on supporting them,so that they can make more money,while evrbody should seat and watch the AMERICAN MONARCHY

Posted by: bill | April 5, 2008, 10:30 am 10:30 am

Let’s see Obama gave 1% and Clintons gave 10% to charity! How embarrassing is that? Obama is so cheap he squeaks when he walks! I guess that he did not have enough money to make down to Memphis! All those Obama fat cat liberals giving him all that money and he is just giving it all to Rev. Wright’s fund to build his new mansion!

Posted by: russell | April 5, 2008, 10:35 am 10:35 am

Obama supporters: Again I asked what has Obama done to help the little man out there?…Nothing!! He will be doing the same as President—helping the Wrights, Rezkos, Ayers, i.e. donors
The Clintons are always out there leading the efforts to help in times of need…Katrina, Aids, Poverty, etc. Raising and giving millions of dollars to all causes.
Obama has not support any major cause, has not even supported the causes of his main supporters (blacks) by attending the Black Caucus event last month and the Martin Luther King events yesterday.
He says he is too busy campaigning, but Hillary always manages to make the time to attend/help.
Obama is for Obama..Not the American People. This should show a lot about the person people want to make our President!

Posted by: Deb | April 5, 2008, 10:36 am 10:36 am

So What !! Oprah Winfrey Made 150 Million !!! For What !!!! Talking.
The Clintons Are Successful People.
Get Over It. Now You Know.

Posted by: Kurt | April 5, 2008, 10:36 am 10:36 am

So I guess the next problem for Obama supporters will be McCain’s wife, she is by no means in dire straits.
She is a very wealthy woman from a wealthy family, Hensley & Co. is an Anheuser-Busch beer wholesaler and distributor, with annual revenue of over $200 million.
Since having money is a crime now, or making a successful living in America is a bad thing, then it looks like poor, hungry down and out Obama should be president.

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 10:38 am 10:38 am

Maybe Obama can start a reality show like his big sister Oparh’s Big Give! But his will be called Little Give!

Posted by: russell | April 5, 2008, 10:39 am 10:39 am

Kurt I think you are on to something there Oprah is one of the richest women in the world no one seems to have a problem with her making money, they are so proud that a black woman is making it big in America.
I guess once you are a Clinton or white you are supposed to be at the bottom of the barrel then you can relate to poor people especially if you are so rude to even think of running for President.

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 10:44 am 10:44 am

Drew, how can you say you were proud of HRCs speech on MLK? That was the worst performance I have ever seen. She had to READ her heartfelt “story” so apparently it was not heartfelt enough to even remember it! No Academy Award here – ever! It was so phoney – or can’t you see that when someone has to READ her rememberances, they are not rememberances! Get a grip, pluuueeese!

Posted by: Disparaged | April 5, 2008, 10:45 am 10:45 am

O. When he reaches that magicial number on his own let us know! All that money he has taken from left wing liberals,who apparently talk about helping the poor but dont give any money to them,he is still not able to force Hillary out! Keep on spending! Except for charity of course!

Posted by: russell | April 5, 2008, 10:45 am 10:45 am

All that hounding the Clinton’s to release their tax returns. What did Obama find out? That they are capitalist and not Socialist and they like to donate to others! Well what rock do you want to look under now!

Posted by: russell | April 5, 2008, 10:50 am 10:50 am

I don’t begrude the Clinton’s their money, but WOW I never expected it to be that high. Do they have more money than McCain? Donating 10% to charity is nice, but considering it was their own charity I’d like to know what the charity gave money towards. I don’t expect anything nefarious, but it would be nice to know who is on the board and where the money went.

Posted by: MIguy | April 5, 2008, 10:53 am 10:53 am

By the way, I wish we could all stop expecting our candidates to be saints – they are not. And this year it seems that we not only expect the candidates to be saints, but all of their acquaintances to be saints as well. It’s a bit ridiculous…
The problem with this storyline is that it only fuels the fire. If you don’t trust the Clintons, you’ll trust them less. If you do trust them, then you’ll you’ll credit them for being capitalistic and charitable. So why the anger?

Posted by: MIguy | April 5, 2008, 11:00 am 11:00 am

Who did Obama donate to a racist anti American church and some of you applaud that??
Are you people serious? The main charity for Obama was Wright and we all know what this man gives, to give money to a organization whose pastor is spewing hate from the pulpit and then telling everyone that you did not agree with what he said does not add up.
You did not agree with what he was saying but you were happy to fund him to keep him going, right I must be missing something here

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 11:02 am 11:02 am

New Rasmussen Poll which has always leaned toward Clinton more than the other polls. Obama 51% Cinton 41%.
Lets see Obama has more delegates, more of the popular vote, raised more money and since super Tuesday the shift of Super Delegates has been dramatic towards Obama.
So when Clinton or her supporters say that only Hil can beat McCain what are they really saying.Perhaps a little of South Carolina all over again. How did that work for you last time?

Posted by: jim | April 5, 2008, 11:06 am 11:06 am

@SJ:
I understand your point, but my assumption is that money donated to church went for good works in the community. I think many of us donate to our churches and most of us don’t know exactly how that money is used. Again, I appreciate your view but the argument against a man who gave money to his church is not convincing.

Posted by: MIguy | April 5, 2008, 11:06 am 11:06 am

I agree Cosmo, her success in private and public life esp in business can become handy when she becomes our President.
Right now, we are in an economic downturn and we need somebody who will pull us out of the hole.
Having a Poverty Czar when she becomes a President is one of the best idea of any candidate I have heard so far.
And MSNBC hardly mentioned Sen Clinton speech. Instead Mathews and Olbereilly nitpicked on Clinton’s tax return.
So biased.
MAY “KARMA” BEFALL THOSE IN THE MEDIA WHO PROMOTE INJUSTICE !!

Posted by: politicsIsdirty | April 5, 2008, 11:08 am 11:08 am

With due respect, what will a “Poverty Czar” actually do? What did the “Drug Czar” do? These “Czar” positions are campaign rhetoric and you don’t think that the timing of her release of her tax returns and announcing this position were coincidence? She should just say, rightly, that they made a lot of money, paid a lot of taxes, and donated a lot of money. There is no reason to hide behind a populist “Poverty Czar” idea that doesn’t really solve anything.

Posted by: MIguy | April 5, 2008, 11:12 am 11:12 am

NOTHING TO REPORT… now what will Obama maniacs blog on about????
Go Hillary.. now let’s show them how to win in the big states like PA…. you’re ahead in IN, KY, OR, WV…thats why they are all calling to end the race! What will happen if you come back strong…….
Stay Strong! HRC 2008

Posted by: Chipo1965 | April 5, 2008, 11:14 am 11:14 am

@SJ:
Maybe not at the churches you and I go to, but there is a lot of activism in churches across the country.
Again, before we judge others or cast the first (or thousandth) stone, think about what our lives could look like if someone took selected sound bites (not of our choosing) over the last 20 years of our lives. We’d all look like monsters. It seems to me that you rightly judge Senator Clinton on what she says and does rather than what her associates and acquaintances say and do. You seem to give her the benefit of the doubt – nothing wrong with that. So, the Obama supporters do the same thing for him. Neither are saints. One, or both, will get nominated and life moves on.

Posted by: MIguy | April 5, 2008, 11:22 am 11:22 am

Facts??? “Obama: 1% to charity on 2007 and <1% for past" TOTALLY WRONG!
From 2000 through 2004, the senator and his wife never gave more than $3,500 a year in charitable donations –about 1 percent of their annual earnings. However, during that period they were new parents who were paying off their large student loans. In 2005 they gave 4.7 percent and in 2006 6.1 percent.
In 2002, the Clinton's AGI was $9,466,632 yet they gave only 1.2% to charity. According to your standards, the Clintons are NOT true Christians either.
In 2206, the Obamas earned less than 1 (ONE) million dollars and donated 6.1%. Yet when the Clintons earned almost 16 (SIXTEEN) million in 2001, they only donated 5.1%. Even though the Clintons had 15 million dollars more, they donated less. Wonder God would still "bless" them…

Posted by: ADJ | April 5, 2008, 11:23 am 11:23 am

Why is it ‘us versus them’ with so many of you? Clinton v. Obama, Democrat v. Republican, Poor v. Rich.
We are all Americans and the competition is healthy to flush out the important issues, but so many seem to invest themselves into ‘winning’ that they seem to lose sight of what winning actually is.

Posted by: MIguy | April 5, 2008, 11:26 am 11:26 am

Bill and Hillary Clintons have a distinguished record of service to this nation and the world; they are both respected and well loved national and international figures. They have done their work in the midst of highly hostile media’s cheap and attacks and hit jobs. But people in this country know better. I think Hillary Clinton would make a wonderful president; besides she’ll be the first woman president. In terms of service to our nation it is obvious no one can hold a candle to Clintons–that includes Sen. Barak Obama.

Posted by: charleychaplin | April 5, 2008, 11:29 am 11:29 am

geevill: Yeah, I am NOT black. I am a 65 year old Latino female and I never voted for Dean or Kucinich. And I support Obama
I see you got the talking points. What college do you attend liberal white rich kid who was too young to have voted for Dean/Kucinich?

Posted by: geevill | April 5, 2008, 11:32 am 11:32 am

By the way, Wright is not the worse that Obama has, what about his relationship with Rezko and his involvement to purchase his $1 million dollar home? Also how about his connection with Ayers the domestic terrorist. Obama attended a church that clearly supported black supremacy and Africa… this is America not Africa!!!

Posted by: Fran | April 5, 2008, 11:34 am 11:34 am

MIguy yes one of them will be nominated and life goes on, but the wrong one may end up being president and life may not be as grand as it is now for many.
I don’t believe that Obama is the new messiah as some feel, I don’t buy into this he will come and fix America with all her faults, where racial unity will be a thing of the past we will all live as one from the day of his possible crowning.
I still am weary of his muslim connection and I honestly don’t buy into the fact that he is not in tune to some of it even if he professes to now be close to Jesus.
I am very concerned about his associates I have never seen one person that has so many odd people attached to him, he must be rather unfortunate to only attract people that has some kind of skeleton in their closets.
He also does not keep a story straight, he seems to dance a jig once his back is against the wall and changes his tune to suit his audience.
So until I can find out a valid explanation or until Obama can at least erase some of these doubts I will have to hold the view that he is just not ready for the presidency.

Posted by: SJ | April 5, 2008, 11:34 am 11:34 am

Bill Clinton was paid over $50 million to make speeches since the year 2000. This includes Hillary’s term in the U.S. Senate. More than $50 million ends up in Hillary’s tax returns. Who else in this country gets $50 million or more for making speeches?

Posted by: ariescounselor | April 5, 2008, 11:40 am 11:40 am

Bill Clinton was paid over $50 million to make speeches since the year 2000. This includes Hillary’s term in the U.S. Senate. More than $50 million ends up in Hillary’s tax returns. Who else in this country gets $50 million or more for making speeches?

Posted by: ariescounselor | April 5, 2008, 11:40 am 11:40 am

By the way, Obama wants to raise taxes, supports partial abortions (which means in the 3rd trimester when the baby is almost born), wants to take away your rights to carry conceled wepons… etc. Not to mention that at first he wanted to grant illegal immigrants drives license… OMG!!!

Posted by: Fran | April 5, 2008, 11:52 am 11:52 am

she is already making some deal with the Colombians….Here is the family who vows to fight for the poors.

Posted by: dirtymoney | April 5, 2008, 11:56 am 11:56 am

she voted for the war to enrich the family, they want to get back to sign more lucrative deals…the goal is to become billionaire even if the country goes to hell.

Posted by: dirtymoney | April 5, 2008, 11:58 am 11:58 am

They get money from Arabs in Dubai, they received 50 millions for only speeches, the campaign is ran by an Ivy league lobbyist…They lie and cheat just for money. They always play and earn dirty. Shame on you Clintons.

Posted by: dirtymoney | April 5, 2008, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm

51M – President Bill Clinton is still a most popular former president globally. Good for him! More he makes, more tax dollars for America. What’s wrong with that!!? Proud of him.
10M for charities. Proud of them to be so generous. Obamas donated less than 1% of their income. Shame on them.

Posted by: V,CA | April 5, 2008, 12:05 pm 12:05 pm

I completely agree with “count the MI & FL votes and seat their delagates”!!!

Posted by: Fran | April 5, 2008, 12:06 pm 12:06 pm

they should be stripped of their wealth and hung on the white house lawn along with all of their colleagues.

Posted by: tgreen | April 5, 2008, 12:07 pm 12:07 pm

Demo Rules/Obama Supporters
Yes Obama did give 1% of his earnings to his church last year. A church that in turn has paid 1.5 million toward a 10,000 sq. ft house for his racist Wright friend/preacher and a church who has put 10 million in an escrow account for Wright. Is this the charity that Obama is supporting? Rev. Wrights’ Retirement house and fund?

Posted by: Deb | April 5, 2008, 12:08 pm 12:08 pm

For so long Camp Obama supporters were at arms because the Clinton’s did NOT disclose their tax returns. Many rumors went around they suggested that the Clinton’s had something to hide from the public. It NOW appears both Hillary and Bill had nothing to hide. In fact, their joint tax returns indicate what TRUE American people they are. Giving 10 percent (over 10 million dollars) of your income to charity shows how much they truly care about the less fortunate. My hats off to you both Hillary and Bill. If no Hillary in November, then vote for McCain.

Posted by: SteelBlueEyes | April 5, 2008, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm

o. Still here writing over and over again the same nonsense since yesterday? How much is Obama paying you? Please get out of the racism whining excuse. Obama does not have the minimum requirements or experience to be President, it does not matter if he is yellow, green, white, black. Race is not the issue. Discuss his achievements and experience; at least for once try intelligent reasoning.

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 5, 2008, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm

Michelle Obama works for University of Chicago hospital in Chicago. As soon as Obama became senator she got a promotion and a 300% raise. In 2006 Obama requested one million dollars as earmark for the hospital to build a pavilion. Is this kosher?

Posted by: satish | April 5, 2008, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm

ariescounselor: What is the problem? Many people. Why are you jealous? Maybe it would be because he gets more than Obama for his speeches, because they make sense? Obama is reaping his supporters to pay his campaign just to make hollow speeches of purported hope and change to sell himself for a job. The Clintons get money for speeches and donate money and time for charities. How much does the Obama’s donate? He is expending 4:1 in advertising himself like the next “American Idol” but many people really see that he is not more than a manufactured product. No background to support his calling for hope and change.

Posted by: Definitely Common Sense | April 5, 2008, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm

I’ll vote for Hillary too. The documented fact that she tried to enlist in that Marines was only surpassed by her heroic ducking of sniper fire. The wisdom demonstrated by her proposal to provide medical care for illegal aliens making up to $60,000 per year, possibly before giving aid to Americans below the poverty level, was paled by her dedication to the construction of a museum for the Woodstock ‘Dope-fest”. Her staunch support of American Sovereignty by giving citizenship to 20 million illegal aliens and supporting Nancy Pelosi’s proposal to allow each of them to bring in 40 relatives is overshadowed by the fact that her husband violated the First, Second and Fourth Amendments and Hillary’s attempts to circumvent the Second. Ever see the list of the dead left in the wake of the Clinton’s rise to power? A man would be a fool to say anything bad about one of the Clintons. I’ll be Hillary’s biggest supporter, til election day.

Posted by: jijalagi | April 5, 2008, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm

Tsnow, i appreciate your concern, but i do not need or take blood pressure medicine, but I am very concern that the American people are choosing as leader of our country by the words that he says instead of his actions. Obama has done nothing to deserve a vote for the presidency. As a matter of fact, his connections with dirty people really should make people think about his lack of judgement. AND, that he has the nerver to lie and lie and lie should make you wonder about how full of himself he really is. This man really, really scares me.

Posted by: Fran | April 5, 2008, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm

Cha Ching, cha ching!!!
CHANGE YOU CAN’T BELIEVE IN!!!
Ask Micro Mark … and the Colombian ambassador.

Posted by: Lance D. | April 5, 2008, 12:51 pm 12:51 pm

I guess you people forgot how many innocent lives were lost on 911 and don’t remember the people who jumped out of the windows in desperation from the flames. I guess you don’t imagine yourself in a plane taken over by terrorist and knowing that not only you and your love one next to you is going to die, but also that you are going to be used as a weapon to kill others. 911 was no cheering matter and we New Yorkers will never forget it. We should not forgive Wright ahd his church for making those comments and we should not allow this country to be lead by someone who attended a church that cleary holds hate for this country.

Posted by: Fran | April 5, 2008, 1:14 pm 1:14 pm

LOL… if she needed a passport… LOL… Very well written “Definately common sense”!
I don’t think Latinos attended his church and therefore we were of no benefit to him :-)
No al racismo y dios vendiga a los Estados Unidos!!!

Posted by: Fran | April 5, 2008, 1:34 pm 1:34 pm

o, you rock! You go girl! I am also a Latino 65 year old female living in Virginia and I am not voting for HRC because I don’t vote with my vagina like her female supporters. I use my head like you, and again, not ALL Latinos are voting for HRC as you and I know. Some of these bloggers think they should lump a nationality into one giant group, when in fact, we are all individuals. Thanks “o” – glad to hear you are in TX where Obama won and you know what is happening!

Posted by: Disparaged | April 5, 2008, 1:47 pm 1:47 pm

To the Obambi’s who are “tired” of the unRev. Wright story. I will quit referencing it the minute I see anything to indicate to me that Obama didn’t and/or doesn’t buy into the whole racist, un-American hate mongering rantings. Until that time I have every right, and so does any other American, to condemn Wright for saying that rot and for Obama to sit listening to it. Soooo GET OVER IT!

Posted by: Barb | April 5, 2008, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm

To the Obambi’s who are “tired” of the unRev. Wright story. I will quit referencing it the minute I see anything to indicate to me that Obama didn’t and/or doesn’t buy into the whole racist, un-American hate mongering rantings. Until that time I have every right, and so does any other American, to condemn Wright for saying that rot and for Obama to sit listening to it. Soooo GET OVER IT!

Posted by: Barb | April 5, 2008, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm

Okay, everyone … I’d just like to insert a couple of thoughts here….
Paris Hilton has more than once received $1 million to show up at a parade and wave to the people. Go figure.
Bill Clinton is not only a former president, but he is a Rhodes Scholar … if you don’t know what that is, you might want to look it up. Maybe those of you who are skeptical about the value of his speeches ought to go look them up and read them … at least then you would have an opinion based on something factual with respect to the value of his speeches.
The “prices” of his speeches, according to several sources, is well-within the standard range for men of his stature and experience.
With respect to giving money to their own NON-PROFIT foundation,it makes perfect sense … if you don’t believe in your own nonprofit’s mission enough to support it financially, who will?
As a director of a non-profit corporation, I know that most of my money is plowed right back into our organization … until a non-profit has a large donation base, it’s pretty much up to the founders to provide the cash to keep it up and running. I don’t know how old the Clinton Foundation is, but it looks fairly new.
And before you start judging, why not try visiting the website for the Clinton Foundation and see what kinds of services it provides? I haven’t looked at it, but a quick google shows they have a website.
Okay, that’s my two-cents’ worth. Hope somebody finds it helpful.
Please people, try to be reasonable and not just knee-jerk reactionaries to the “other” candidate.

Posted by: SM White, Irvine, CA | April 5, 2008, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm

Hello, who care about their tax returns?? I’m not rich and I don’t want people to look at my taxes. So she made 109million, don’t be jealous… I care more about what she is going to do for her people. Hillary is not perpect and she lies, but look at her opponent: unknown, in the senate for only 3 years, attends for over 20 year a racist church, have very close relationship with racist pastor, his church gave a lifetime achievment award to Farrakan, bought his house through dirty dealings with Rezko, only gave 1% of charity (but to his church), lied about Rezko, lied about Farrakan, lied about Wright, lied about Nafta, lied about not voting for the war (when he was not even there to vote), used the race card for his advantage (remember he called for Imus’s resignation) lied about his family. And last but not least, protected his pastor and threw his grandmother (the woman you raised him) under the bus… just like the “typical white people”.

Posted by: Fran | April 5, 2008, 1:53 pm 1:53 pm

i definitely feel the clintons is hiding something on there tax , they have not report it all. and far as obama he young just starting out the clintons are from the old school they are old people that have been around done that and this and know how to cheat they cry to amercia people to give money which i think is shame she running out buying a new suit everytime u see her on tv she has new suit on they have already been in white house ran away with the furnture now they want back in white house so they can do more dirt. some money they have i bet is not being report i bet its in cash right at there home or in saving box if they have so much money way cry to amercia people for help the clintons feed on poor people. wake up people clintons getting richer off of u america poor people wake up .

Posted by: dogs | April 5, 2008, 2:04 pm 2:04 pm

Amen, affirmative action has to go!!!!!

Posted by: Ron | April 5, 2008, 2:11 pm 2:11 pm

I’m assuming that none of the soak the rich, redistribute income liberal crowd is going to vote for Hillary, now.

Posted by: dribbendude | April 5, 2008, 2:17 pm 2:17 pm

I am startled that people wonder if Hillary can relate to the middleclass and the poor.
You guys need to find out what the Clinton charities are. Tsunami relief. Katrina rebuilding efforts to name just two.
And yes, thank G-d for Bill Gates who with his wife donate millions of their dollars to the poor.
Just because someone has money does NOT mean they can’t understand the plight of the poor.
I would direct folks to a recent article in the Rolling Stone about rapper/music producer Jay-Z who admits to being a drug dealer before his success as a music mogul.
He has a private art collection and a fleet of cars.
I think this is a perfect time to shine the light on millionaire AAmericans who have yet to donate a portion of their wealth to charities that could be of great assistance in the neighborhoods they came from.

Posted by: OhioNative | April 5, 2008, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm

Are you Hillary people stiil going to give her more money after all this?
Why can’t she pay her campaign bills does anyone know? Why is her campaign broke all the time? I do not understand why her campaign has struggled with money?
They do will with there own money why can”t they do better with there own campaign funds?
I do not understand whats going on? Some thing is not right here i very confused about her campaign funds. Why the short fall and paying her bills?

Posted by: smash | April 5, 2008, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm

Amen, the Clintons have been front and center supporting the Katrina rebuilding. Where is Obama? Apparently he has time to spend with Oprah and his racist pastor, but no time to support Katrina rebuilding.

Posted by: luisa | April 5, 2008, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm

Are you Hillary people stiil going to give her more money after all this?
Why can’t she pay her campaign bills does anyone know? Why is her campaign broke all the time? I do not understand why her campaign has struggled with money?
They do really well with there own money why can’t they do better with there own campaign funds?
I do not understand whats going on? Some thing is not right here I am very confused about her campaign funds. Why the short fall and paying her bills?

Posted by: smash | April 5, 2008, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm

YES, COUNT THE MI and FL votes …
N0 50/50 split …
Hillary won both MI and FL … and since Obama and his people and the DNC will not help with the re-vote, then accept the election results as is ..
And Hillary did not campaign in MI and FL either …
And Hillary was willing to go with a revote ..
Silencing your opponents is Russian politics, not American politics.

Posted by: CountMIandFL | April 5, 2008, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm

another rich elite trying to rule America. Rich people don’t represent my broke struggling ass.

Posted by: RJII | April 5, 2008, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm

Rich people run America. And we wonder why the middle class worker gets poorer while the top 1% get richer.
wake up and make a change.

Posted by: Wake up | April 5, 2008, 3:40 pm 3:40 pm

I would much rather have a wealthy person run the country, because if they can manage their own money, chances are they will know how to run the country as a business. Just look at what the current president did to this country because he was not wealthy and a peoples person… choose a leader not a buddy!

Posted by: Fromafrica | April 5, 2008, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm

FromAfrica,
“I would much rather have a wealthy person run the country, because if they can manage their own money, chances are they will know how to run the country as a business. Just look at what the current president did to this country because he was not wealthy and a peoples person… choose a leader not a buddy!”
According to the Washington Post, “Bushes’ Assets May Top $20 Million” in 2006. Jeez! You really think that not wealthy?

Posted by: adj | April 5, 2008, 4:46 pm 4:46 pm

adj
“According to the Washington Post, “Bushes’ Assets May Top $20 Million” in 2006. Jeez! You really think that not wealthy?”
Hehe… Bush is not a self made man. It’s a common fact that he made his money by what is called “crony capitalism”. After Harvard Business School, wealthy family friends and others invested millions with him, but with poor results. Investors got 45c to the dollar. Thank goodness billionaire Mr. Rainwater bailed him out. I really don’t think it’s wise of you to defend Bush on this issue… really!

Posted by: Fromafrica | April 5, 2008, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm

From including itemizing deductions for Bill’s used underwear in the eighties to $109 million now. Is this country great or what?

Posted by: LongT | April 5, 2008, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm

A few points:
1. The Clinton donations went to their own foundation.
2. High income/net worth people usually file for extensions. The Clintons’ 2007 return is due 9/15/08. Their 2007 taxes are still due 4/15/08. An extension applies ONLY to the tax return.
3. The same crowd now abandoning the Clintons for Obama is the same crowd that enabled the Clintons to earn those millions since 2000.

Posted by: Marc | April 5, 2008, 9:26 pm 9:26 pm

Graham…compensated speeches in foreign countries are taxable there AND here. But US tax laws and/or tax treaties allow credit for taxes paid overseas. Basically a taxpayer ends up paying the higher tax of the two countries, but not double the tax.

Posted by: Marc | April 5, 2008, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm

Troy: “Republicans are always for people making money… unless the people making money don’t agree with Republican politics. REAL American, huh? Agree with them, or you aren’t free and American.”
DEMOCRATS are always AGAINST people making money… unless the people making money … agree with DEMOCRATIC politics. REAL American, huh? Agree with them, or you aren’t free and American.
Goes both ways.

Posted by: Marc | April 5, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm

Democrats are really good at taking other people’s money through taxes. To all the people whining about gasoline prices, you need to pump the brakes and consider how much of those prices are tax dollars clamped on by Teddy Kennedy and his ilk

Posted by: dribbendude | April 5, 2008, 9:53 pm 9:53 pm

FromAfrica
The last thing in the world that I would do is defend Bush. He will most likely go down in history as the worse President ever.
I’m just pointing out that the comment of “Just look at what the current president did to this country because he was not wealthy …” is incorrect because he is wealthy. Managing his money is another story.

Posted by: adj | April 5, 2008, 11:18 pm 11:18 pm

If we want our President and other elected officials to truly represent us, there should be an personal income limit on who can run… meaning, no millionares! Raise money for your campaign and collect all you want for that, but if your personal net worth is higher than the average employed American, you have no hope of understanding what my needs are nor will you serve my best interests.

Posted by: Lee | April 6, 2008, 10:34 am 10:34 am

they did not release the tax returns that counted…the ones they were specifically asked for …LAST YEARS!
This is deception at it’s finest. Oh I am disgusted once again that you all have been fooled.
————————-
No one asked you. Obama hasn’t released his 2007 returns yet either, he didn’t even release his other returns until last week despite clamoring for Hilary to release hers. The Clinton’s have not yet filed their returns, I am sure when they do, they will release them. BTW, I haven’t filed mine yet either. The Clinton’s gave an overview of their 2007 returns, Obama hasn’t even done that.

Posted by: Danielle | April 6, 2008, 7:42 pm 7:42 pm

they did not release the tax returns that counted…the ones they were specifically asked for …LAST YEARS!
This is deception at it’s finest. Oh I am disgusted once again that you all have been fooled.
————————-
No one asked you. Obama hasn’t released his 2007 returns yet either, he didn’t even release his other returns until last week despite clamoring for Hilary to release hers. The Clinton’s have not yet filed their returns, I am sure when they do, they will release them. BTW, I haven’t filed mine yet either. The Clinton’s gave an overview of their 2007 returns, Obama hasn’t even done that.
Did you want them to file their returns with erroneous information before they have all the necessary information just because you want to see it? How unreasonable and ridiculous can you OBama supporters be?

Posted by: Danielle | April 6, 2008, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm

it takes a certain amount of audacity for a Clinton supporter to challenge the intergrity of Obama, knowing that the Clinton are congenital liars. -Kevin
———————————
Shall we discuss Obama’s stories about him being a professor; my parents met at Selma who cares it was four years after his birth; I didn’t know green meant yes red meant no when it came to voting buttons; I won’t be running for President in 2008, I promise my constituents I will serve out my whole six year term; no, let’s talk about the Kennedy’s supposedly flying his father over here; no there is a better one, Rezko, he gave me only thousands, I didn’t know him well, I did know him well, he gave me a hundred thousand, no what a bonehead thing, he gave me a few hundred thousand, but I didn’t know he bought the strip of land next to my house that I got $300k less than the asking price at the height of the seller market and closed on it the same day as me, that same piece of land I bought 10 feet of; wait even better, I did hear, I didn’t hear, it did matter it didn’t matter, he was retiring, I put him on my camping in a leadership position despite commenting on his comments one year before, Rev, Wright. There is more, I can go on.

Posted by: Danielle | April 6, 2008, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

We live in a sick sick world.The elections are purely entertainment.
We are guilty for what is wrong as we sit back and let it continue.
Blame yourselves and stop crying.
Who will do something about it!
Our forefathers fought the power!
Wake up people!

Posted by: NOTRICKDICK | April 7, 2008, 9:47 am 9:47 am

One more thing.Forget about Oprahs earnings,she is one of the few humans who is in a power position that is trying to enlighten and empower the rest of us. Kudos to Oprah for everything she does!

Posted by: NOTRICKDICK | April 7, 2008, 10:33 am 10:33 am

You want to waste your critical thought processes on which one has more ghosts in the closet? Not me, I want to see it like it is. You want my prediction for this illusion..er I mean election,here it is Obama and Clinton cancel each other out when they tie score in the bowl-off. McCain wins the election but gets assassinated by a retarded man from Iraq who is immediateley killed by the CIA. Bush and Chaney get a special stay from Congress and remain in office
to wage war on Iraq.

Posted by: NOTRICKDICK | April 7, 2008, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm

Whoops I meant IRAN !!!

Posted by: NOTRICKDICK | April 7, 2008, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm

Clinton Tax returns show $15,406,527 from
Yucaipa Global Opportunities Fund 1, LLC.
2003 $1,000,000
2004 $4,000,000
2005 $5,000,000
2006 $2,656,527
2007 $2,750,000
Bill Clinton’s affiliation with billionaire Ron Burkle’s Yucaipa Companies .
Mrs. Clinton’s Senate financial-disclosure form, which includes spousal income, reveals her husband in 2005 received “guaranteed” partnership payments from Yucaipa Global Opportunities Fund I LLC of “over $1,000.”

Posted by: Cisco | April 7, 2008, 2:02 pm 2:02 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.