My takeaway: Hillary Rodham Clinton is far more likely to relate to middle class voters than Donald Trump, a man who not only has enjoyed incredible wealth but is eager to flaunt every shiny golden bit of it. ..and has the audacity to call himself a "Blue Class Billionaire."
9
The Hillary haters - basically strong women haters - are out in force on this article. HER story is the story of many women made it during this life period. Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton has courage beyond belief and I am grateful and humbled by the hate she is willing to confront to be the FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENT IN THE 240 YEAR HIStory OF AMERICA! SHE has my vote and should have the vote of every voting-age woman - and every man who loves their woman.
18
Being a single mother for several years, and even now being remarried, I understand Hillary Clinton's past decisions. Like her, I am the worrier in my family and even now with a decent salary and modest comfort, I still live with the anxiety of maintaining it all. I remember growing up poor, never having enough. I remember living in a tiny one bedroom in a not great, but not bad neighborhood with my daughter, and being so grateful that I could make the rent on one hand, but working tirelessly towards a better quality of life for the both of us.
We are freelancers, and there are times when my husband has been out of work for several months, and I had to shoulder the majority of the financial burden of our household on an income that is much lower than his. Not being able to sleep worrying about all the bills that had to be paid and trying to stretch every dollar. That kind of anxiety changes a person, and perhaps makes them too concerned about money, but it doesn't make them evil or even greedy.
And given our countries many already wealthy political dynasties, the focus on money Clinton actually earned, rather than inherited is hypocritical.
We are freelancers, and there are times when my husband has been out of work for several months, and I had to shoulder the majority of the financial burden of our household on an income that is much lower than his. Not being able to sleep worrying about all the bills that had to be paid and trying to stretch every dollar. That kind of anxiety changes a person, and perhaps makes them too concerned about money, but it doesn't make them evil or even greedy.
And given our countries many already wealthy political dynasties, the focus on money Clinton actually earned, rather than inherited is hypocritical.
26
Compared to most of our elected officials the money problems and ups and downs of the Clintons are bupkis. Take any of the millionaires presently in the Congress and you can find a biography that is replete with questionable actions and outcomes.
No, the 30 year pursuit of HRC is at bottom a witch hunt against the smartest girl in the room. Ask any person to explain their feeling that they can't trust her and you will find yourself facing someone whose feelings are rooted in 30 years of trash talk and just about nothing else. If HRC had actually been as awful as these know-nothing's claim, she could have and ought to have been tried. But the bottom line is that there is nothing but envy, resentment and misogyny here. HRC doesn't have a scintillating public persona: BFD. This is not a reason to vote for an incompetent, narcissistic bully instead!
No, the 30 year pursuit of HRC is at bottom a witch hunt against the smartest girl in the room. Ask any person to explain their feeling that they can't trust her and you will find yourself facing someone whose feelings are rooted in 30 years of trash talk and just about nothing else. If HRC had actually been as awful as these know-nothing's claim, she could have and ought to have been tried. But the bottom line is that there is nothing but envy, resentment and misogyny here. HRC doesn't have a scintillating public persona: BFD. This is not a reason to vote for an incompetent, narcissistic bully instead!
21
Here's the flaw to this story's beginnings, but a very good example of how Amy Chozick is so beguiled by the Clintons that she won't ask simple questions, i.e, well, how much was Bill making when he lost that job (i.e., replace this 'reporter,' please). Bill Clinton made $5,000 a year as governor of Arkansas. Hillary Rodham (at the time) was the breadwinner. And 55K was an exceptionally good salary back in those years, especially in a very low-cost-of-living state like Arkansas. That she chose a pretentious 112K house in a neighborhood where other very nice houses were going for less than half that, is more the clue to Hillary Clinton's motives for trying to amass the most money as her guiding life's compass. That's why she considered herself broke when leaving the White House. She had already purchased a million-dollar house and wanted another one and millions more in case she wanted another, etc., etc., etc.. She wants the power because in this country, power = more money.
14
How much is enough? The NYT has lowballed the Clinton networth while DT inflates his. The supreme irony will be the First Dude hitting the lecture circuit with HRC's canned pablum speech updated and recycled, but at triple the cost free of expenses.Public service a la Banana Republic. No shame in either of their DNA.
12
I sympathize with Hillary. Financial issues bend character out of shape. It's a shame that she has drawn the sobriquet Beholden Hillary.
5
Hillary is the daughter of a woman whose parents and grandparents abandoned her, who was on her own, working as a live-in maid and nanny at the age of 13.
Did she raise a daughter who valued education and hard-work? Yes. And one who understood how to leverage access to power and wealth to move an agenda - e.g. serving on the board of Walmart, getting support for corporate and wealthy earners to fund educational reform in Arkansas, among the lowest performing school systems at the time? Yes. If you think worrying about how to afford caring for aging parents and educating a young daughter are irrelevant, then you have no clue.
Hillary spoke to dozens of organizations representing business owners, workers, dairy farmers, deli owners, scientists, techies, scrap dealers, etc and got paid the same rate every other speaker did. Colin Powell made $6 million WAY back in his first year out of State on the speaker tour, plus $6 million on a book deal. His wife Alma was paid five figures to talk (who is she?). Laura Bush, W, Cheney and wife, ..... every single person in politics in addition to anyone with the ability to draw a crowd gets paid to open events. Hillary and Bill used most of their early earnings to pay off her $20 million campaign loans.
Did she raise a daughter who valued education and hard-work? Yes. And one who understood how to leverage access to power and wealth to move an agenda - e.g. serving on the board of Walmart, getting support for corporate and wealthy earners to fund educational reform in Arkansas, among the lowest performing school systems at the time? Yes. If you think worrying about how to afford caring for aging parents and educating a young daughter are irrelevant, then you have no clue.
Hillary spoke to dozens of organizations representing business owners, workers, dairy farmers, deli owners, scientists, techies, scrap dealers, etc and got paid the same rate every other speaker did. Colin Powell made $6 million WAY back in his first year out of State on the speaker tour, plus $6 million on a book deal. His wife Alma was paid five figures to talk (who is she?). Laura Bush, W, Cheney and wife, ..... every single person in politics in addition to anyone with the ability to draw a crowd gets paid to open events. Hillary and Bill used most of their early earnings to pay off her $20 million campaign loans.
18
Amy:
I guess it's not in your job description to find out the interesting things. Aren't you just a wee bit curious about how Hillary did so well with cattle futures trading? How ever did they buy that Westchester house and an even costlier one on Embassy Row in D.C? just one year later, when they were broke and in debt? How about mentioning that those debts were paid by others and that they weren't "dead broke" in any real way. Your Hillary writing at the NYT shows how out of touch Hillary is and I'm guessing that's not in your job description either.
I guess it's not in your job description to find out the interesting things. Aren't you just a wee bit curious about how Hillary did so well with cattle futures trading? How ever did they buy that Westchester house and an even costlier one on Embassy Row in D.C? just one year later, when they were broke and in debt? How about mentioning that those debts were paid by others and that they weren't "dead broke" in any real way. Your Hillary writing at the NYT shows how out of touch Hillary is and I'm guessing that's not in your job description either.
16
We have some serious issues in the geopolitical realm, namely China installing radar in the 'islands' they created in the South China Sea. They already have taken over Tibet, the strategic highest plateau on Earth. This is serious stuff that is more important than most of the things the media chooses to focus on in this election . This article humanizes HC and I appreciate it (wish you guys had done the same in 08 re how BO bought his Hyde Park home via the financial help from a person now in jail for federal fraud). But you need to think about the issues outside our domestic problems and China, Pakistan, India, as well as the ME are increasing in urgency, not to mention Russia.
2
I suppose that if Mrs. Clinton were the republican candidate, the GOP would be bragging how her background story was one of hard work and raising oneself by your own bootstraps.
As others have said, I hope see remembers how life was when she did not have money because that is the way it is for working class families, many middle class families, and especially the poor.
I would rather have someone as president who has experienced the anxiety and frustration of making ends meet rather than someone like Trump.
As others have said, I hope see remembers how life was when she did not have money because that is the way it is for working class families, many middle class families, and especially the poor.
I would rather have someone as president who has experienced the anxiety and frustration of making ends meet rather than someone like Trump.
15
John:
Guess you have never really tried to "make ends meet". Just like Hillary.
Guess you have never really tried to "make ends meet". Just like Hillary.
4
What a joke. 51K in '78 was 10 times the average salary.
This article is a slap in the face to the true working class.
Proves how out of touch the Clintons are with the real world...
This article is a slap in the face to the true working class.
Proves how out of touch the Clintons are with the real world...
16
Mean household income in 1978 was $17,730. Still a big difference, but not anywhere near 10X. Accuracy counts when we're trying to get at the truth.
https://www2.census.gov/prod2/popscan/p60-121.pdf
https://www2.census.gov/prod2/popscan/p60-121.pdf
11
Seems a credible account. We are talking about someone who has credibility issues, and I think the story offers some understanding of that. I don't see it as endorsing her money orientation. The real ace in the hole for her has been her ability to cultivate useful friends in the financial and political world, including voters. A nice Methodist girl not noted for bloody claws. Going to fit nicely for those who seek a government as good as its people.
4
APPEARANCES of a conflict of interest may or may not legally represent a conflict of interest. Politicians, like it or not, are entitled to the same legal the rights as the rest of us. Hillary's being on the board of Walmart may have given a voice to those who were being treated unfairly by the corporation. Or maybe not. Accepting a mortgage acquired personally by a top fund raiser? Is that a conflict of interest or not? Were the person a donor, that would clearly be a conflict of interest. About Hilary's speaking fees, nobody bats an eye at the speaking fees of Henry Kissinger or any other former Secretary of State. But Hillary, once again, is a target. Were her speeches to Wall Street challenging of their risky policies? Hillary, especially, is subject interminably to a presumption of guilt. Everything she does is attributed to some nefarious purpose. I ask myself, Why has Hillary repeatedly returned to public service when she could have amassed a far greater fortune by seeking professional employment in the private sector? The obvious answer is that she believes in public service. Nobody schleps nearly 900,000 around the globe for 4 years as Secretary of State for the purpose of piling up personal wealth. Then there's Donald who has never given public service, with a series of business failures that cost employees and taxpayers many millions, while he walked away richer. It's not enough to say, That's just Trump trumping Trump. No He's accused of fraud!
7
Mrs. Clinton is very sharp and knows how to do things when cornered. She knows how to compromise her principle and in a real democracy there is no leader, there is a follower that does what is best and desired by her people!!!
3
What a woman! God bless Hillary Clinton and her perserverance. Why she married and stayed with Bill is still beyond me. I suppose it was love but I would have shucked him after Monica Lewinsky. He's a lucky man. And she deserves to be president of the United States!
9
Is this was supposed to be a story showing Hillary Clinton's tough times or hard scrabble roots? Please. Have you any idea how many women in this country as single parents in far harsher, more challenging situations have put kids through school and held it together, sometimes with spit and glue. It seems like every story lately is a HRC promotion, no matter how subtle. Okay, nobody in his right mind wants Donald Trump but come on this is ridiculous. Bernie Sanders is far more worthy of stories like this but you folks missed the boat. It took the Russians to expose the sabotage within the Democratic party. Where was the media?
10
What happened to saving for bad times? The fact that Hillary only started to worry about money after her husband had lost an election doesn't show much leadership.
9
I think this would have been a lot more useful if their salaries were described in todays money.
Overall, it seemed more like reaching for a narrative than responsible journalism. May well be true, but may well not be.
Overall, it seemed more like reaching for a narrative than responsible journalism. May well be true, but may well not be.
7
Just how do lifelong politicians amass fortunes of $50M?
Hillary is no different than the rest of them. She's lucky she's running against a lunatic.
Hillary is no different than the rest of them. She's lucky she's running against a lunatic.
13
I am appalled at the critical tone directed at Hillary's choice to "generously support her family." This kind of double standard would never be placed on a man. Men are expected to generously support their families and are applauded for that kind of success.
And interestingly, she is criticized not only for supporting her family (because things like electricity and water are such luxuries) but in the same breath her choice of thrift store furniture is noted to be "mismatched." I don't recall reading articles about male politicians' furniture choices from prior decades.
So I guess she can't do anything right? She gets dinged for supporting her family, dinged for using a "couch that jumped out at you," and dinged for having curls and not fitting in at the Rose law firm??? Are you kidding me???? In case you hadn't heard, lawyers are sought for their brains not their hair styles. Clients who win cases don't care if your hair is curly. Trust me.
When is the last time you published an article criticizing a man for supporting his family, having curly hair and an ugly couch?!!! If you were going for poor little Arkansas family makes good, you missed the mark.
Disgusting and barbaric WAPO.
And interestingly, she is criticized not only for supporting her family (because things like electricity and water are such luxuries) but in the same breath her choice of thrift store furniture is noted to be "mismatched." I don't recall reading articles about male politicians' furniture choices from prior decades.
So I guess she can't do anything right? She gets dinged for supporting her family, dinged for using a "couch that jumped out at you," and dinged for having curls and not fitting in at the Rose law firm??? Are you kidding me???? In case you hadn't heard, lawyers are sought for their brains not their hair styles. Clients who win cases don't care if your hair is curly. Trust me.
When is the last time you published an article criticizing a man for supporting his family, having curly hair and an ugly couch?!!! If you were going for poor little Arkansas family makes good, you missed the mark.
Disgusting and barbaric WAPO.
9
This story is a just laughable, just a lot of Clinton campaign spin. Bill and Hillary are both Yale educated lawyers, yet they supposedly worried how they were going to pay Chelsea's way through college? Laughable. And they also had to "struggle" to buy a 112,000 house - on two incomes! And they also were forced to furnish the house with thrift store furniture. They couldn't get credit at Sears for furniture - two Yale educated lawyers? Am I the only reader who noticed how nice the Clinton's starter home was, the reporter seems to have missed this. Is the reporter blind? The Clinton's have never struggled for money since leaving Yale, they just keep saying this to dopey reporters, and they fall for it.
17
This explains why Hillary has turned the federal government into her own cash cow. She wants money and lots of it.
Most people don't aggressively pursue an income on the public's dime. Imagine all the dough she can rake in as president? She gives new meaning to the term, "big government democrat".
Most people don't aggressively pursue an income on the public's dime. Imagine all the dough she can rake in as president? She gives new meaning to the term, "big government democrat".
3
Cry me a river.
5
So this rags to riches article is supposed to make me feel what?
5
Spare us this troll to gain sympathy for Clinton now that more details about her emails have arisen connecting her conflicts between her role and duties at the Dept. of State and the Clinton Foundation.
Ethics rule, not self-need when one has chosen to be a public servant. There are clear lines that are not t be crossed. They are spelled out or be they unwritten an experienced employee knows when you are treading on unethical terms of mixing the personal with the professional. In private life, its your own business. But, it is everyone's business when you are a public servant and enriching yourself or performing favors for others for-- you know it favors in the here and now or in the future.
Not at all surprised by the emails being tied to Clinton's financial indiscretions. Not new. Whitewater. I also can't forget how she and Bill left the WH "broke" but had attempted to take some furniture with them that did not belong to them.
Who is not stressed? Plan B does not mean failure. Why is Clinton supposed to get sympathy that welfare mothers & others involved in the criminal justice system did not/don't get? Some of these actions seem very similar to the asserted "duping" that is alleged of welfare mothers who are really squeezing and stressed out in poverty trying to hold a family together, but are often maligned. Upon deeper investigation, Clinton may be guilty of something criminal here. She should not get a pass because Trump is not an option. The devil is in the details.
Ethics rule, not self-need when one has chosen to be a public servant. There are clear lines that are not t be crossed. They are spelled out or be they unwritten an experienced employee knows when you are treading on unethical terms of mixing the personal with the professional. In private life, its your own business. But, it is everyone's business when you are a public servant and enriching yourself or performing favors for others for-- you know it favors in the here and now or in the future.
Not at all surprised by the emails being tied to Clinton's financial indiscretions. Not new. Whitewater. I also can't forget how she and Bill left the WH "broke" but had attempted to take some furniture with them that did not belong to them.
Who is not stressed? Plan B does not mean failure. Why is Clinton supposed to get sympathy that welfare mothers & others involved in the criminal justice system did not/don't get? Some of these actions seem very similar to the asserted "duping" that is alleged of welfare mothers who are really squeezing and stressed out in poverty trying to hold a family together, but are often maligned. Upon deeper investigation, Clinton may be guilty of something criminal here. She should not get a pass because Trump is not an option. The devil is in the details.
54
This is history about Hillary I didn't know. It's very helpful, and it makes me respect and admire her even more, for her courage, her grit, her stick-to-it-iveness, and her sense of responsiblity. Thank you for this article.
37
You are being sarcastic? Right? LOL.
7
Read Executive Order 12674 of April 12, 1989 "PRINCIPLES OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR GOVERNMENT OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES".
31
Just wondering, who in the Clinton entourage edited this puff piece, and at such a opportune time to be published.
"Let them eat cake" as well as this fable.
"Let them eat cake" as well as this fable.
59
Kudos, JRS, very poignant analysis.
3
Does anyone really care about the houses the Clintons have lived in?
Seems creepy to even think about. What's the difference? A house does not a person make.
Seems creepy to even think about. What's the difference? A house does not a person make.
9
amazing that people have so much scorn for a middle class lady with Bush-league ambitions.
24
Another NYT puff piece for the most dangerous woman on Earth. Deeply disturbing sycophancy. The ruthlessness of HRC shins through. She is far, far more likely to take the USA into a major military conflict than Trump. Trump may be a buffoon, a loud mouthed braggart, gauche etc. etc. and yet despite all these faults I feel he will be the better choice - perhaps in the end a cathartic choice - for US politics. Choosing Hillary is like imagining a boot stamping on the face of middle class America - forever.
43
Hillary has her failings - as do we all - but I'll never fault her for wanting financial security. With an unreliable and impractical husband and expensive career aspirations - she had to get it done. More power to her.
33
Diana:
Funny! Where would Hillary be without that unreliable husband? She knows the answer to that better than you.
Funny! Where would Hillary be without that unreliable husband? She knows the answer to that better than you.
3
Mrs Clinton's cattle futures trading was extremely suspicious, especially for a person who learned how to trade commodities by reading the Wall Street Journal. For example, the majority of her trades, including the very first one, was short sales. Extraordinarily sophisticated activity by a neophyte.
But the most troubling aspect was the fact that when her trades were underwater, she was not required to make a payment on a margin call. If this was because her advisor was James Blair, who also happened to be Tyson Foods counsel, then it was likely an illegal campaign contribution to Governor Clinton.
Not that anyone cares.
But the most troubling aspect was the fact that when her trades were underwater, she was not required to make a payment on a margin call. If this was because her advisor was James Blair, who also happened to be Tyson Foods counsel, then it was likely an illegal campaign contribution to Governor Clinton.
Not that anyone cares.
50
I care. And I suspect the cattle futures trading (if there ever was a trade) was more than an illegal campaign contribution, it was clearly a bribe.
Problem is, when you have gotten away with it for so long, why would you stop now?
Problem is, when you have gotten away with it for so long, why would you stop now?
3
Exactly. Add to that the fact that the Wall Street Journal didn't publish the data needed to make commodities trades-- much less teach the intricacies of trading commodities, and that Clinton made a gain of 100 times her initial investment in under a year.
When Clinton lied in a televised interview by stating that she'd learned to trade commodities by "reading the Wall Street Journal" I lost much of my respect for her. It became clear at that moment that Hillary Clinton could and would lie unashamedly to the American public and that the press would look the other way.
I'll vote for Clinton in preference to Trump, but her loose relationship with the truth and her propensity to skirt the rules continue to trouble me. Yes, Clinton is an accomplished woman, but her achievements are tinged with the stain of wrongdoing.
When Clinton lied in a televised interview by stating that she'd learned to trade commodities by "reading the Wall Street Journal" I lost much of my respect for her. It became clear at that moment that Hillary Clinton could and would lie unashamedly to the American public and that the press would look the other way.
I'll vote for Clinton in preference to Trump, but her loose relationship with the truth and her propensity to skirt the rules continue to trouble me. Yes, Clinton is an accomplished woman, but her achievements are tinged with the stain of wrongdoing.
6
Pettiness abounds in some people. However every one is entitled to earn their living and what they feel about their status is a personal issue. Tax payers did not foot the bill at that time? Govts. paid for their work when they became public servants?
7
Each day I read the front page of the NYT it's the same experience: Get past the gigantic "I'm With Her" ad, scroll down and see negative Trump headlines next, followed by some positive Clinton piece or pieces. Go over to the editorials - same deal. Never mind the heavy bias, it's boring - you folks have essentially become dedicated Clinton campaigners.
69
Reading that the Clintons binge watched "The Good Wife" in their Chappaqua home was a wry touch.
4
When HC was growing up in Park Ridge, it was NOT an upper middle class suburb. Nice, yes. But definitely middle class - adjacent to Chicago and under the roar of OHare jets. why should it be so hard to get things accurate??
21
Just to remind everyone... FD Roosevelt was born rich.
12
The article is informative, but you make it sound as though she shouldn't have tried to make money. Is that because she's a woman and you think it's the man's job to provide for the family? Well, welcome to the 21st century and all the women, both married and single, who are doing the providing.
So she gave speeches on Wall Street. So what? How many male retired politicians have done the same, and no one gives a peep? How many male former Congressmen are now hustling huge salaries as lobbyists?
More power to her.
In the same way, she is thought to be undependable and called a liar over and over again. I suspect it's because she's a mommy, and mommies aren't supposed to lie, but daddies can.
Cut me a break.
So she gave speeches on Wall Street. So what? How many male retired politicians have done the same, and no one gives a peep? How many male former Congressmen are now hustling huge salaries as lobbyists?
More power to her.
In the same way, she is thought to be undependable and called a liar over and over again. I suspect it's because she's a mommy, and mommies aren't supposed to lie, but daddies can.
Cut me a break.
50
"She's gotta feed the monkey, man."
7
th only person in this race who remotely was concerned w th average american was bernie sanders
and he was got rid of licketysplit , thanks to your broken down election system
i wonder , could you make it more complicated ?
i tried to understand it once, but when i came to Th term super delegate, i just started laughing
33
So HRC had an infant and returned to work! Ditto for many other women who were working mothers in that era even though they were married. What this article says to me is that Hillary can land on her feet when she is thrown a fast ball. That is an asset regardless of gender.
As for HRC's speaking fees in recent years, I seem to recall a highly revered Secretary of State named Henry Kissinger that wrote books, gave speeches for money and made celebrity and expert appearances after his term as SOS. Oh but maybe it is different because Hillary is a woman?
Well then she was on Walmart's Board while her husband was Governor of AK but let's compare that to the sitting supreme justice, Clarence Thomas, who sat on the bench when "Obamacare" was "tried" and all the while Thomas' wife was on a healthcare board that paid her $700,000 a year. No problem there but then Justice Thomas is a man. It sounds as if the author has a problem with successful women.
As for HRC's speaking fees in recent years, I seem to recall a highly revered Secretary of State named Henry Kissinger that wrote books, gave speeches for money and made celebrity and expert appearances after his term as SOS. Oh but maybe it is different because Hillary is a woman?
Well then she was on Walmart's Board while her husband was Governor of AK but let's compare that to the sitting supreme justice, Clarence Thomas, who sat on the bench when "Obamacare" was "tried" and all the while Thomas' wife was on a healthcare board that paid her $700,000 a year. No problem there but then Justice Thomas is a man. It sounds as if the author has a problem with successful women.
29
Just when I thought Amy Chozick and her ridiculous Clinton propaganda pieces were over, the NYT publishes this. Apparently Chozick is still in the business of campaigning for Clinton, and drinking a whole lot of Clinton Koolaid while she's at it. Can't help but wonder how much Chozick is getting paid by the campaign to run this attempt to humanize, find trusting, sympathetic?!?! I especially like this quote "Hillary had a couple years of the taste of what it means to be a working mother, without any help, to have to take care of a small baby and care for your job" - her biggest upset was "loosing help" in the governor's mansion, Hillary Clinton has no idea "what it means to be a working mother..." With a law degree from Yale, she had options most people only get to dream of. It is bad enough voters have been backed into a corner by the DNC, but to have to put up with this kind of drivvle is truly insulting. How about some real coverage NYT?? Like the latest email leaks documenting the relationship between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department, or what about the murder of the DNC's Seth Rich?
52
Personally, I wasn't surprised by what Hillary did as most of us would when you are the primary provider, although it does appear that she crossed the line a few times.
What I want to know is why was Rubio crucified for his wanting to get rich in the same pages (he wasn't any more guilty than Hillary is) and no I am not talking about his policies or affiliations, which I don't support by the way.
What I want to know is why was Rubio crucified for his wanting to get rich in the same pages (he wasn't any more guilty than Hillary is) and no I am not talking about his policies or affiliations, which I don't support by the way.
13
As per article, Clinton reflected frugality. As what I have read from Rubio, his mentality is keep up with the joneses - very Miami way of thinking.
2
Wow, I was expecting much more of a shack than the photo of the Hillcrest house shows.
As someone who really HAS worked in the public interest her entire life (except for 4 years that didn't go well since I did not have the motivation to work for money, money, money), I would really like to have a house like that.
HOWEVER, when you look at high-level political figures she and Bill have been competing with, and what you need to raise, and who you need to raise it from, I'm not at all surprised. You know, Newt Gingrich has often run for President. I'd like to see what HE has made from making speeches. Or, one of her worst critics, Rudy Giuliani ... who also just happened into a private equity firm, for which the equity he put up was what? A noun, a verb, and 9/11?
She is TOTALLY been held to a different standard than male politicians of both parties, and I admire that she has taken that burden on herself and carried it.
As someone who really HAS worked in the public interest her entire life (except for 4 years that didn't go well since I did not have the motivation to work for money, money, money), I would really like to have a house like that.
HOWEVER, when you look at high-level political figures she and Bill have been competing with, and what you need to raise, and who you need to raise it from, I'm not at all surprised. You know, Newt Gingrich has often run for President. I'd like to see what HE has made from making speeches. Or, one of her worst critics, Rudy Giuliani ... who also just happened into a private equity firm, for which the equity he put up was what? A noun, a verb, and 9/11?
She is TOTALLY been held to a different standard than male politicians of both parties, and I admire that she has taken that burden on herself and carried it.
33
So Bill had to pay $5 Million legal cost for his sexual misbehavior while in the White House; Hillary then claimed that they were flat broke; Bill then wrote a quick story about his Presidential work and was paid $10 million in advance; Hillary about the same. These articles here are on-and-on cry-for-me-Arkansas events but then solved in less than a week. Something rotten in the State of Denmark.
51
republicans should be the last to complain about someone else - and given the chance the vast vast majority of people would do the same - she is running for political office not sainthood. considering what she is running against - an imbecile that was sued to pay workers 4 dollars an hour - among an endless other degenerate circumstances.
18
When your daughter's wedding shows up on the list of the top ten most costly of all time...
42
How many times in the past has the NY Times written an article about the history of home ownership among male candidates for president?
25
I am not a Hillary Clinton fan. But I can't fault anything she has done that's detailed in this article or say that I would do anything different than she would have. I would also not trust the motivations or sincerity of anyone who says otherwise about themselves.
28
The "Thrift Store Decor" section just shows you how out of touch the author of this article (and Hillary) is with the general population. Okay, so their furniture was mismatched and was a "a jarring departure from the governor’s mansion." Does this affect anything but ego and pride? No! It doesn't affect how Chelsea was being raised and taken care of, their marriage, putting food on the table, etc. It's just....furniture. Something you sit on, eat on, and sleep on. At least they had furniture! My dad just went a couple years without a bed frame or proper mattress. Should I worry that the furniture in my house is mismatched and taken from all over the place (inherited from family members, yard sales, etc.)? This article sure makes it sounds like you should be embarrassed and only the poor of the poor live like this. Thanks NY times for judging me and many people I know.
43
Another thing: The cattle futures was a sham. Cattle futures are among the most volatile of all markets and retail customers do not make money--they donate it to the pros. She was given that winning trade as payback for something or for her influence.
I also laugh at having money problems, being dead broke and buying a $1.7 million house in Westchester County.
I also laugh at having money problems, being dead broke and buying a $1.7 million house in Westchester County.
51
Ar you kidding? A 3000 word article saying she was worried about finances. What were you doing when the rest of us were and are worried about finances? So the clintons are now worth hundreds of millions - how about you, me and 99.99% of the american public? The nyt is now trying to promote hillary to sainthood What a croc.
56
The Clintons reported assets between $11.3 million and as much as $52.7 million. The couple listed no liabilities.
Add in $9 million for the value of the Clintons’ two homes in New York and Washington, and the net worth estimate reaches a high of about $62 million.
... know what ur complaining about before u get all butt hurt, I know facts r tough to swallow for the GOP's tho sooooo...
Add in $9 million for the value of the Clintons’ two homes in New York and Washington, and the net worth estimate reaches a high of about $62 million.
... know what ur complaining about before u get all butt hurt, I know facts r tough to swallow for the GOP's tho sooooo...
1
If this is the Clinton's (and the NYT's) idea of lean years , then they (and your paper) are *truly* out of touch.
45
Nice story. She's still a fraud, a liar, a con artists, and a criminal, but it's a nice story nonetheless. It will provide a great backstory to match her orange outfit one day.
37
She's none of that and it will be the orange one wearing a suit complementing his skin tone, for inciting assassination and riots. A true rabble rouser, that one.
10
This puff piece basically justifies Hillary's unquenchable thirst for money no matter the source. The hubris she shows with this issue is no different than that of her personal server and emails. She incorrectly recounts what James Comey said with amazing ease. The conflicts with her position as Swcretary of State and the Clinton foundation is another subject that comes up often but never seems to erupt as it should.
She is the better choice over Trump. That is not very comforting. We point at the ridiculous succession of Argentina's Cristina Kirchener after her husband's career ended. What's the difference, other than Barack Obama's eight years in office before her, assuming she wins.
She is the better choice over Trump. That is not very comforting. We point at the ridiculous succession of Argentina's Cristina Kirchener after her husband's career ended. What's the difference, other than Barack Obama's eight years in office before her, assuming she wins.
18
This article could sadly signal the beginning of the end of The New York Times as the "paper of record" for the United States. It is one thing to have a liberal or partisan editorial slant -- all newspapers have an editorial perspective. However, the number of puff pieces that the NY Times has published on Hillary Clinton since she launched her current campaign is shocking. This is an Ivy League graduate (from the go-go Boomer years) who was able to call "rich friends" after her husband temporarily lost the Governorship of Arkansas. Following her tenure as First Lady, she was gifted another house in one of America's most exclusive and tony neighborhoods. To wrap this narrative of "stark choices" around the candidate--and to refer to Mrs. Clinton has being on the "edges of power" -- is beyond ridiculous. I don't blame anyone for wanting financial security, or even financial comfort. Yet I also do not see the point, particularly in a paper that used to be the best in the world, to generate these absurd narratives about someone who is a flawed Presidential candidate and a long-time and highly successful political operative. If the NY Times wants to become the in-house newspaper of the Clinton campaign, it should openly re-brand itself as such, so that readers know where they stand. (It may be relevant to note that I write here as an American citizen, who lives abroad). Thank you for your time and for the opportunity to share my views.
55
Your comments about the New York Times are dead on. The paper is so biased and has become so as time goes on in this election cycle. Every article tries to portray Mrs. Clinton as a saint. Give us a break. It used to be a good paper reporting the news accurately, but no more . I want to cancel my subscription because the paper becomes too irritating to read these days.
9
Life Style, Geography and Year are all contributors to everyone's economic story. Sorry, but if you are reading "Oh My, Poor Hilary" into this article, you are launching from the wrong platform. This is a well written history that capsulizes the Clinton's financial movement through the past 40+ years. It has been presented without qualification or judgement. It is what it is. It is information and nothing more.
6
Yep it's a tough call... But at the end of the day... who amongst us is so perfect and has worked their tail off like this women... ? Tell me. Like so many women who have been cast aside in life and had to get up and do it again... I'll have No trouble pulling the lever for her on Nov. 7th.
32
Imagine the mortification of having to ask for the Daily Special at The Rainbow Room! My stars!
29
You know if this were a story about a male candidate who went to work 'to support his family' he would be given cheers and medals. Hillary's drive to succeed was supercharged with the birth of their child and the desire to provide for her and their family. Because that happened outside instead of inside the home people feel entitled to deliver every pot shot going. These reactions are sexism in full bloom, pure and simple.
21
Once again, I see the Hillary haters compulsive need to poo-poo an article which is not meant to garner sympathy, although critics here state otherwise, but simply to flesh out and paint a more clearer portrait of our first female president.
Alas, to little avail. Before writing this I went to the comments to see how many would I have to read before reaching a negative one. No problem there, it was the very first one. The author wasn't buying it. He said it was just another in a long line of NYTimes propaganda pieces designed to soften the hard shell of Fortress Hillary.
Any writer of substance would know that would be an impossibility. With Hillary's history so ingrained in most people's psyche they are indeed a rare breed who would be willing to read or listen to another side of this iconic political figure.
Well, you better get used to it Hillary haters. You've got four to eight more years of her annoying you. You can live with that hate and let it eat you alive from the insides or you can relax and maybe begin to realize you've been bamboozled for so long about the dastardly Hillary by Right Wing Radio and FOX "News", you may, if you decide to open your mind just a tad, that perhaps she's not really all that bad. At the very least, that she's not the devil incarnate. For many a Hillary hater, that alone would be a cataclysmic improvement.
DD
Manhattan
Alas, to little avail. Before writing this I went to the comments to see how many would I have to read before reaching a negative one. No problem there, it was the very first one. The author wasn't buying it. He said it was just another in a long line of NYTimes propaganda pieces designed to soften the hard shell of Fortress Hillary.
Any writer of substance would know that would be an impossibility. With Hillary's history so ingrained in most people's psyche they are indeed a rare breed who would be willing to read or listen to another side of this iconic political figure.
Well, you better get used to it Hillary haters. You've got four to eight more years of her annoying you. You can live with that hate and let it eat you alive from the insides or you can relax and maybe begin to realize you've been bamboozled for so long about the dastardly Hillary by Right Wing Radio and FOX "News", you may, if you decide to open your mind just a tad, that perhaps she's not really all that bad. At the very least, that she's not the devil incarnate. For many a Hillary hater, that alone would be a cataclysmic improvement.
DD
Manhattan
20
Clinton's been on the take since she was a governor's wife. She's just gotten bigger and bolder.
34
A rags to riches miracle story of Ivy League law school graduates.
The Clitons have made their fortune by getting government paycheck while cutting welfare for the needy, they avoided paying plenty of taxes by using a facetious address of a well known tax heaven in the US - the same address used by Donald Trump to hide his billions.
They accumulated wealth also by making us poor (and contribution for The Saudis and other oppressive regimes). Clinton's financial deregulation created the great recession, made them wealthy, serving the new 'too-big-to-fail' institutions but pushed millions out of their homes and their jobs.
The Clinton's with new Manhattan home, need not worry of eviction, while their policies sent millions of our jobs away with NAFTA, their jobs are secured.
It is amusing to remember what President Clinton (the 1st) said when signing NAFTA:"...It (the accord) means greater productivity, lower unemployment, greater worker efficiency, and higher wages and greater security for our people. We have to do that." NAFTA according to Clinton's promise"..will promote more growth, more equality, better preservation of the environment, and a greater possibility of world peace."
It seems like only for the Clintons and the Trumps of this world those promises materialized.
The Clitons have made their fortune by getting government paycheck while cutting welfare for the needy, they avoided paying plenty of taxes by using a facetious address of a well known tax heaven in the US - the same address used by Donald Trump to hide his billions.
They accumulated wealth also by making us poor (and contribution for The Saudis and other oppressive regimes). Clinton's financial deregulation created the great recession, made them wealthy, serving the new 'too-big-to-fail' institutions but pushed millions out of their homes and their jobs.
The Clinton's with new Manhattan home, need not worry of eviction, while their policies sent millions of our jobs away with NAFTA, their jobs are secured.
It is amusing to remember what President Clinton (the 1st) said when signing NAFTA:"...It (the accord) means greater productivity, lower unemployment, greater worker efficiency, and higher wages and greater security for our people. We have to do that." NAFTA according to Clinton's promise"..will promote more growth, more equality, better preservation of the environment, and a greater possibility of world peace."
It seems like only for the Clintons and the Trumps of this world those promises materialized.
31
...I wonder if the NYT is going to spend as much time on Hillary's pay to play schemes uncovered in the latest emails as they did covering Trump's non-story of encouraging 2nd Amendment people to vote. Think? Nah.....I guess we aren't sophisticated enough to understand.
Hillary claims she turned over all work related emails. Oops! Another lie! Donors to her foundation were given preferential treatment and favors at the State Department when she was Secretary of State. Will she come clean? Or will she just short circuit again?
When McCain was running, his past skin cancer was made out to be a huge concern. Why do we never hear why Hillary requires assistance to go up even a few stairs? Or follow up on the blood clots she had in 2012?
For all those who scream about Trump's tax return, why can't we see Hillary's health records? People slammed Mitt Romney because Mrs. Romney has MS. Detractors claimed her illness would have made Mitt Romney unable to devote adequate time to the Presidency.
It is beyond obvious that Hillary suffers from poor health. Why the double standard? Come on, NYT, we know you're in the tank for Hillary, but let's have a real story and not another one of these stupid fluff pieces.
Hillary claims she turned over all work related emails. Oops! Another lie! Donors to her foundation were given preferential treatment and favors at the State Department when she was Secretary of State. Will she come clean? Or will she just short circuit again?
When McCain was running, his past skin cancer was made out to be a huge concern. Why do we never hear why Hillary requires assistance to go up even a few stairs? Or follow up on the blood clots she had in 2012?
For all those who scream about Trump's tax return, why can't we see Hillary's health records? People slammed Mitt Romney because Mrs. Romney has MS. Detractors claimed her illness would have made Mitt Romney unable to devote adequate time to the Presidency.
It is beyond obvious that Hillary suffers from poor health. Why the double standard? Come on, NYT, we know you're in the tank for Hillary, but let's have a real story and not another one of these stupid fluff pieces.
35
Intriguing to read through the top selections on the "readers' picks" list and see how evenly divided they are between those who are sympathetic to what Hillary went through in her young married life and those who scoff at the idea that she actually had financial difficulties. It just goes to show you how split our thinking can be about this candidate. The one topic that none of the top commenters addressed at all is what a slacker Bill has been throughout the marriage, and how often Hillary was forced to clean up messes he created or ignored.
16
And yet, Martha, she stands by her man. Wonder why?
2
NYTimes is trying too hard to put a spin on Hillary's unpopular traits by painting a humane background to all her 'is-she-with-us ?' traits/characteristics.
37
Hilary is not afraid of being poor - she is terrified of being middle class.
33
Can't change the stripes on a selfish person. She is without remorse and principles. Sorry but a 30 minute presentation for a quarter of a million smells.
32
Hillary Clinton did what she had to do. It is the system,speaking
circuit with huge pay-$21 mil- and circle of wealthy friends. Obama
will do the same after leaving white House. He will collect large
speaking fees and book advance. It is a corrupt system and politicians
benefit and may be they enter politics for money and not so much
to serve the public. If they are lousy speakers they become lobbyists.
Bureaucrats go to private companies at salaries in millions. Pentagon
employees particularly in procurement join those defense contractors.
people are still convinced it is the government of the people and
for the people. What can one say about the belief system?
circuit with huge pay-$21 mil- and circle of wealthy friends. Obama
will do the same after leaving white House. He will collect large
speaking fees and book advance. It is a corrupt system and politicians
benefit and may be they enter politics for money and not so much
to serve the public. If they are lousy speakers they become lobbyists.
Bureaucrats go to private companies at salaries in millions. Pentagon
employees particularly in procurement join those defense contractors.
people are still convinced it is the government of the people and
for the people. What can one say about the belief system?
9
This apologia by Ms. Chozick about Mrs. Clinton and her finances seems strained, at best, and at worst in very questionable taste. Perhaps she could write about the latest data dump, showing some highly questionable decision making at the Clinton Foundation, instead.
As for me, I preferred the candidate who really never had any money, and still doesn't have much, Bernie Sanders. He never enriched himself through government service, unlike so many, for whom it is the usual practice.
As for me, I preferred the candidate who really never had any money, and still doesn't have much, Bernie Sanders. He never enriched himself through government service, unlike so many, for whom it is the usual practice.
39
I think a look at his wife's employment history, from the years she was his girlfriend with a government job to the recent college president, might be informative here.
1
That's a nice history and all, and I'm sure some will be taken in by the "struggling Mom trying to keep the family in the black" sentiment, but this history most certainly does not justify the travesties of justice that have been carried out by the Clinton family that amount to organized crime and treason.
32
treason ?
could you be more .. specific ?
3
The article printed below this one ( proof of her propensity to "mixing" federal obligations with personal favors to wealthy donors) destroys any shred of compassion I may have had for Clinton's "stress" over financial hardship in her early years.
I know what it means to be a professional working mother with financial stress, and don't hold her at higher standards than men.
But please NYT, can you write articles with more substance and less "poor Hillary, she had it sooooo tough"? You are insulting the intelligence of your readers
I know what it means to be a professional working mother with financial stress, and don't hold her at higher standards than men.
But please NYT, can you write articles with more substance and less "poor Hillary, she had it sooooo tough"? You are insulting the intelligence of your readers
35
Is anyone else tired? Does everything look crazy? I’ve done without food, clothing, a safe home. I’ve seen the bodies of people blown up and smeared over their buddies face. People frozen to death behind the welfare building. Girls raped, over and over, by their own father. Great minds seeing this craziness so clear only to commit suicide knowing there is no cure to be found. I’ve been on the razors edge of nuclear war. A woman holding her child as it takes its last breath. There are people with the abilities to forward changes to all of this only to instead fuel and fan these flames of crazy. Trump is the east wind, our country has many flames. He fans the heat to the point all will burn. He removes all hope or decency. I am tired. I will vote for Hillary not because she is the perfect cure to all disease, but the only hope, in today’s time of America and its interactions with the world, that could lead to decency.
9
Why is this a story? The only difference between Hillary Clinton and the rest of us is- She made a lot of money. I don't like Hillary Clinton. I do [however] recognize the love-hated society typically reserves for high-achieving rich women. NYT has never run a story about any number of former male politicians raking in the dough- why not? Making gazillions after leaving the pittance of Public Service is the standard. I do (also) fault this article in trying to offer a revision of just how "poor" the Clinton's were in 1978. Compared to most living in Arkansas at the time- they were living high-on-the-hog: What was the minimum wage in 1978?
16
Since when has "do[ing] good for others" categorically meant not taking care of oneself, even if financially? I understand the questions; they're legitimate. But to use the question of her personal finances to negate the years and decades of 'doing' precisely the good she has always espoused as her credo, seems self-serving for those who are looking for a reason to dislike her. Add to that how so many ex- and retired politicians have done precisely what she's done without scrutiny (for even more Wall St money) and it just reinforces the sense that there's a double standard at work here. She worked her butt off, like any mother would, to make sure her family and daughter would not have to suffer the indignities of impoverishment. Are we really going to blame this Mom for leveraging her education and her talent to provide for an adequate life for her family? This just seems like yet another manufactured controversy about Clinton that has no real purpose other than to cast doubt on a career that otherwise has all the characteristics of a decent mother, and an exemplary public servant, if not a Perfect one. But then, who among really IS perfect, and is it right to hold especially politicians to a standard none of us could keep, even as private citizens outside of the public eye? I find these attempts by some to do so to be absurd and self-defeating, by encouraging unrealistic expectations by the public, and an incentive to lie and obfuscate by our imperfect representatives.
13
What a heartwarming tale of pluck and grit.
I don't know, should Oprah have Meryl or Sandra play the part? Wait, Sandra does the early years on the Arkansas Frontier, and fast forward, Meryl comes in as Senator Hill on the ascent.
It'll be a blockbuster for sure!
I don't know, should Oprah have Meryl or Sandra play the part? Wait, Sandra does the early years on the Arkansas Frontier, and fast forward, Meryl comes in as Senator Hill on the ascent.
It'll be a blockbuster for sure!
14
She worked hard for what she earned to support her family which included a young child. She also gave a lot to charity to help others less fortunate than herself. I admire her grit. Donald Trump inherited $1 million dollars from daddy yet folks admire his business acumen and accumulation of wealth at the expense of others to include stiffing his staff, contractors, small businesses and six bankruptcies. I truly believe it is sexist how the GOP and yes the press has hounded Hillary all of these years. She sounds like an honest, decent, hard working American trying to make ends meet. Sometimes that effort isn't pretty but she didn't cheat anyone in the process unlike Donald Trump.
23
There's nothing complicated about greed over-running ethical conduct.
36
I will be happy to vote for Hillary. I live in Alabama so it will not make a difference, but she has succeeded in all the areas she tried and should make a very good president.
14
And now for something completely different.
There isn't anything general in Amy's piece about Mrs. Clinton's life that I didn't already know. I've not only never held it against her but I always thought her admirable for the fortitude with which she confronted lean times and a Rose Law Firm managing partner's smelly bare feet, propped up in front of her on his desk during a meeting. She's a formidable woman and a formidable human being along MULTIPLE axes.
Now, what's recently come out in newly released emails about the astonishing access donors to her foundation had to both her and the State Dept. that she ran, the ease of favors granted such people -- that's another matter, and I suspect we haven't heard the last of it.
Amy seeks to weave a halo around Hillary's head, but the truth is that she set out to survive when young as almost EVERY American does at that age who isn't born to wealth.
To me, a formidable woman doesn't need a halo to command respect.
There isn't anything general in Amy's piece about Mrs. Clinton's life that I didn't already know. I've not only never held it against her but I always thought her admirable for the fortitude with which she confronted lean times and a Rose Law Firm managing partner's smelly bare feet, propped up in front of her on his desk during a meeting. She's a formidable woman and a formidable human being along MULTIPLE axes.
Now, what's recently come out in newly released emails about the astonishing access donors to her foundation had to both her and the State Dept. that she ran, the ease of favors granted such people -- that's another matter, and I suspect we haven't heard the last of it.
Amy seeks to weave a halo around Hillary's head, but the truth is that she set out to survive when young as almost EVERY American does at that age who isn't born to wealth.
To me, a formidable woman doesn't need a halo to command respect.
14
By the by, Richard, you felt insulted a few days back, when I generalized in a comment; I apologize for that, and wish you to know it was unintentional.
I seek to be objective in all my comments, nevertheless my humanity sometimes deceives me.
My apologies, to you, and whomever else I insulted.
I seek to be objective in all my comments, nevertheless my humanity sometimes deceives me.
My apologies, to you, and whomever else I insulted.
4
Mel:
Accepted. I'm insulted so regularly in this forum that it usually just washes off my back. But suggestions that my opinions don't seek what's best for America and Americans can be particularly galling.
Accepted. I'm insulted so regularly in this forum that it usually just washes off my back. But suggestions that my opinions don't seek what's best for America and Americans can be particularly galling.
3
The foray into cattle futures trading is most interesting. The two most plausible explanations for her success are 1) incredible naivete or 2) corruption.
Not that I think she's a worse candidate than Trump.
I'll leave out details and just say that in a futures trade there is a winner and a loser. It is a zero sum game. The question is whether Tyson Foods was somehow taking the opposite side of her bets in cattle futures in order to give her money. That's the accusation anyway.
The article certainly provides a back story that suggests she likes being rich.
Having said all that, she offers stability, while Trump is a collection of wild gambles who can well be accused of unethical behavior himself.
So vote for Clinton with a clear conscience.
But, I'm not sure she's not 'crooked'.
Not that I think she's a worse candidate than Trump.
I'll leave out details and just say that in a futures trade there is a winner and a loser. It is a zero sum game. The question is whether Tyson Foods was somehow taking the opposite side of her bets in cattle futures in order to give her money. That's the accusation anyway.
The article certainly provides a back story that suggests she likes being rich.
Having said all that, she offers stability, while Trump is a collection of wild gambles who can well be accused of unethical behavior himself.
So vote for Clinton with a clear conscience.
But, I'm not sure she's not 'crooked'.
4
the online version of this story begins:
"In an aspirational life on the edges of power, Mrs. Clinton shouldered her family’s financial burdens. But she has been accused of going against her principles"
My question:
Exactly which of her principles is Hillary going against? At this point in her career does anyone have any evidence that she is about about something other than power and money?
"In an aspirational life on the edges of power, Mrs. Clinton shouldered her family’s financial burdens. But she has been accused of going against her principles"
My question:
Exactly which of her principles is Hillary going against? At this point in her career does anyone have any evidence that she is about about something other than power and money?
30
"any evidence that she is about about something other than power and money?" which makes her equal to thousands of fellow politicos with precisely and solely the same bent and intent
2
Hundreds of millions of people live their lives in poverty, and want, fretful and fearful for the wellbeing and welfare of their families, and loved ones.
By and large, most, worldwide, never make it to a place of contentment, a place where fear of lost employment, lost housing, lost medical care, are not constant companions, driving them to distraction, and hard as it is to fathom, these fears are more prevalent in the United States, the once but no longer, bastion of Liberty and Justice.
Mrs. Clinton, because of her early exposure to deprivation, went into survival mode, with a vengeance, casting aside anything, and anyone, who might stymie her, vowing never again.
And, therein, is why she will never be the people's President, since she sincerely believes she is owed the allegiance of the people, and one way or another, she will do her darndest to get there.
Not a Trump supporter; he is little different from Hillary; both epitomize Narcissus, gazing in adoration at their vision of their reflection, reflections only they can see.
We the eternally stupid people, are only beginning to see who they really are.
By and large, most, worldwide, never make it to a place of contentment, a place where fear of lost employment, lost housing, lost medical care, are not constant companions, driving them to distraction, and hard as it is to fathom, these fears are more prevalent in the United States, the once but no longer, bastion of Liberty and Justice.
Mrs. Clinton, because of her early exposure to deprivation, went into survival mode, with a vengeance, casting aside anything, and anyone, who might stymie her, vowing never again.
And, therein, is why she will never be the people's President, since she sincerely believes she is owed the allegiance of the people, and one way or another, she will do her darndest to get there.
Not a Trump supporter; he is little different from Hillary; both epitomize Narcissus, gazing in adoration at their vision of their reflection, reflections only they can see.
We the eternally stupid people, are only beginning to see who they really are.
21
I don't see much of a point here. This article represents the state of American inequality, since it is apparently impossible to both make money and be a good person. I wonder how much good the Clintons have brought to the world because of that money, through the Clinton Foundation. The Clintons' passion for helping people is, in fact, quite compatible with monetary aspirations.
I also wonder if this article would have existed at all if Hillary were male. Could a man ever be faulted for striking out into the corporate world to "provide" for his family during a rough patch? Of course not. Mrs. Clinton is expected to fulfill the feminine stereotype of helping people by being caring and nurturing, not through philanthropy or any other hands-off way. Surely she wouldn't be able to handle the corporate world, and couldn't manage the money correctly!
Just because Hillary isn't as interesting to cover as The Donald doesn't mean the Times has to make stories out of thin air (with a pinch of the 1950s) about her.
I also wonder if this article would have existed at all if Hillary were male. Could a man ever be faulted for striking out into the corporate world to "provide" for his family during a rough patch? Of course not. Mrs. Clinton is expected to fulfill the feminine stereotype of helping people by being caring and nurturing, not through philanthropy or any other hands-off way. Surely she wouldn't be able to handle the corporate world, and couldn't manage the money correctly!
Just because Hillary isn't as interesting to cover as The Donald doesn't mean the Times has to make stories out of thin air (with a pinch of the 1950s) about her.
5
She did not strike out into the corporate world.
Selling government favors is not striking out into the corporate world.
Selling government favors is not striking out into the corporate world.
16
I guess I don't understand why people are so concerned with HRC's wealth or how quickly she made money. These same traits are Trump's only qualifications for president. She clearly has a proven record of doing things for the underprivileged, volunteering her time, and giving to charity, but he doesn't. Why is he a "job creator" and she's a callous faker only concerned with her own enrichment?
13
It's the fact that she used the government like her personal corporation to enrich herself. Americans dislike this aspect of politics the most.
9
It's the American way to earn money and take care of your family! My husband and I are nearing the end of our working years (we're in our 50's). I have always striven to make as much money as I can, and so has he. Shocking, isn't it? I wonder how many of the nasty, critical comments here are from people who are so pious they would turn away raises, bonuses, or new job opportunities. Yeah, right.
19
Wow. It's not necessarily the money people are commenting on (though I think the total smacks of avarice). It's how they made it. Essentially selling access.
16
"The morning after the election, Hillary Clinton worked the phones from the mansion, calling wealthy friends and asking for help. 'The world changed. There was a tectonic shift,' said Thomas F. McLarty III, a friend of Mr. Clinton’s who served as his White House chief of staff."
Surprise! While Trump build his real estate business from the ground up with a little help from his father, Fred Trump, the Clintons were begging their rich friends for money down in Arkansas because neither one of them haven't had any personal experience working in the private sector. Trump never asked for constant begging from wealthy friends when he was in a bind with finances. Why can't the Times even report on that angle when it comes to any profiles of the Clintons? Both Bill and Hillary were addicted to be part of the one percent crowd from the moment they got married, left law school, and winding up working as crooked career politicians in poor man's land Arkansas where the bottom 99 percent income bracket demographics were living in mobile home trailer parks and collecting medicaid.
Does it strikes anybody that no matter how the media like the NY Times keeps spinning for the Clintons, the two most controversial members of American political class have been on the taxpayer's dime too long and still being brought and paid for by corporate donors while getting caught with scandals?
Surprise! While Trump build his real estate business from the ground up with a little help from his father, Fred Trump, the Clintons were begging their rich friends for money down in Arkansas because neither one of them haven't had any personal experience working in the private sector. Trump never asked for constant begging from wealthy friends when he was in a bind with finances. Why can't the Times even report on that angle when it comes to any profiles of the Clintons? Both Bill and Hillary were addicted to be part of the one percent crowd from the moment they got married, left law school, and winding up working as crooked career politicians in poor man's land Arkansas where the bottom 99 percent income bracket demographics were living in mobile home trailer parks and collecting medicaid.
Does it strikes anybody that no matter how the media like the NY Times keeps spinning for the Clintons, the two most controversial members of American political class have been on the taxpayer's dime too long and still being brought and paid for by corporate donors while getting caught with scandals?
22
What makes you think Trump "built his business from the ground up"?,
Most of his wealth came from his father and his wealth increased after that because of a business savvy wife. Now it appears his daughter runs his business. Seems he isn't such a great businessman after all.
Most of his wealth came from his father and his wealth increased after that because of a business savvy wife. Now it appears his daughter runs his business. Seems he isn't such a great businessman after all.
5
I could sure use a "little help" in the way of $1M. And his way of dealing with financial hardship was to stiff workers and declare bankruptcy. Nice.
8
Pardon? Trump built his real estate business up from the ground with a little help from his father? A million dollars is a little help? Trump is the devil incarnate and now with a wink and a nod suggesting a little ping might put Hillary out of business. Really? Hillary at worse may be God's brat angel, but i will take that over utter evil anytime.
3
“When we moved into the White House, we had the lowest net worth of any family since Harry Truman,” Mr. Clinton has said. I'm not sure I should assume that the author fact-checked this before including it, but if she did, this puts the article and in perspective for me. I agree with those who point out that Mrs. Clinton is often criticized unfairly.
10
The statistical probability of making a 1,000% profit in 10 months of cattle futures bets is less likely than getting struck by lightning. But scared Hillary got out fast because having a grand at risk was just too nerve-wracking for her.
Leave it to the NYT to make this look like a much needed shot in the arm for the beleaguered Clintons. That extra $99,000 that year sure helped with Chelsea's diaper costs. Hillary probably had a little extra time to do all that charity work she's been hankering for.
Leave it to the NYT to make this look like a much needed shot in the arm for the beleaguered Clintons. That extra $99,000 that year sure helped with Chelsea's diaper costs. Hillary probably had a little extra time to do all that charity work she's been hankering for.
21
Oh my goodness, the Clintons had to face the same life as most of their constituents. No domestic help. Oh the horror.
31
Yes, Hillary is Friend with the 1%. Yes She gave Paid Speeches to Wall St. But unlike Trump whose Economic Team is made of Billionaires, Hillary wants to raise Taxes on the 1% .
It takes Courage to take Money from People she hangs out with to help less fortunate Americans go to College Tuition free.
It takes Courage to take Money from People she hangs out with to help less fortunate Americans go to College Tuition free.
8
That's never going to happen! When Hillary talks about things like that there are so many strings attached it's just a gigantic ball of unfashionable ball of strin!
12
No sarcasm here, -Thank you, Amy Chozick, for a very well written article (I know this because it kept my mental "pay attention" meter pegged at the max, right to the end). Personal wealth equals personal security, and it's easy to understand that when someone who's had to worry about money in the past may be loath to pass up any opportunity to make as much of it as possible when opportunities present themselves. And although I realize that the appearance would have to exist that someone who's benefited from the market would then be likely to favor looser regulations over it, I also know that a person like Clinton can still have strong principals and a strong love for her country and everyone living in it.
10
There is a problem with this interpretation. The Clinton's were broke after Bill left the Oval Office, Hillary said so herself. She has been in government ever since, first in the Senate, then as Sec of State. So the headline that puts her in the Corporate world is pretty misleading, no? Hillary was never "in" the Corporate world, she was "in" the Federal Government, and she and Bill made their money selling her influence to the highest bidders in the Corporate world. See the difference? If not, then I can tell you that one important difference is that what Ms. Clinton did is illegal. The idea that she is being unfairly targeted as a woman when a man could get away with it is a flat out lie. You need only look at the prison population statistics to dispel the ludicrous notion that laws are enforced only against women.
21
My supervisor lives in a suburb just north of Houston, and goes to hear Larry Gatlin perform every six or so months as small venues in Houston are on his tour schedule throughout the year. From what I've been told, Gatlin is VERY conservative and refers to the Times as "The Communist Manifesto." So, it comes as little surprise that such an article stressing hardship when Hillary's book sales, senate run, and Bill's guaranteed Presidential income [for life] plus investments would comport with the "life of destitution" the public was to infer because of the legal fees when they said they were "dead broke" when they left the White House.
10
Me thinks the men in this comment section protest to much. It seems most the women comments "good for her".
13
The "overlapping circles of the politically and economically powerful". which can be found in every state and city, especially Washington, DC and environs, are the source of the problems our democracy and economy now face. Once in one of those "circles," you play by their rules to stay in the club. You scratch each other's backs for financial or political gain. Government becomes a means to help and reward those who have helped you, not the vehicle to serve those unwashed millions outside your "circle." They are courted at election time and then it's business as usual. This is called "the establishment." Hillary and Bill got into the circle by way of Wellesley and Yale and worked it. This is not to say they have not done some good for the rest of us. They have, probably more than most politicians who got rich from "public service." Still, I long for the kind of democracy that would give us that President Hillary who gave that idealistic commencement speech, not the President Hillary who sat on the Walmart board and gave those million-dollar Wall Street speeches. Can we ever have such a president?
9
How imaginative. Greed dresses up in the clothes of a concerned mother and daughter.
Habitual readers of the NYTimes know which side of the fence the editorial board sits on, but this effort to paint Mrs. Clinton as other than a person who loves money, the power that comes with it and the high life is silly.
The throw away statement that deserves your scrutiny is: *certainly many presidential candidates and public servants acquire vast personal wealth*. This is the ugly truth about public service today....it is a treasure chest. (even low level government workers make more than they might in the private sector).
I don't fault Secty Clinton and Pres Clinton for cashing in. Its the thing to do today. President Obama certainly has and will continue to.
It confuses me that making money is so looked down upon. Why explain away the Clinton's love of it? They may not have created anything, built anything, or improved anyone's life in the process of acquiring 50 million dollars, but money is power and all the Clintons, daughter included, know it.
Few who can live a life with money will chose to forego it, and if you don't have to work for it, all the better.
Habitual readers of the NYTimes know which side of the fence the editorial board sits on, but this effort to paint Mrs. Clinton as other than a person who loves money, the power that comes with it and the high life is silly.
The throw away statement that deserves your scrutiny is: *certainly many presidential candidates and public servants acquire vast personal wealth*. This is the ugly truth about public service today....it is a treasure chest. (even low level government workers make more than they might in the private sector).
I don't fault Secty Clinton and Pres Clinton for cashing in. Its the thing to do today. President Obama certainly has and will continue to.
It confuses me that making money is so looked down upon. Why explain away the Clinton's love of it? They may not have created anything, built anything, or improved anyone's life in the process of acquiring 50 million dollars, but money is power and all the Clintons, daughter included, know it.
Few who can live a life with money will chose to forego it, and if you don't have to work for it, all the better.
4
The yuppie Nuremberg defense. What a display of grit!
12
There is nothing to apologize for being a mama bear. Women are made to apologize too much too often. What this shows me is her ability, practicality and now with decades behind her, her experience which she can bring to the highest office.
This past means she was never born with a silver spoon unlike TRUMP.
This past means she was never born with a silver spoon unlike TRUMP.
10
Wow, this article had the opposite of its intented effect on me.
26
Didn't it? Wonder if the author/editors are surprised by that.
8
In the accompanying pictorial, it's noted that Hillary put $60K down on a house in Arkansas in 1980, when that was about the median price on an entire house in the US. The median income was about $16K; the cost of a years' tuition at Yale was about $6K. And yet I'm to believe, like Scarlet O'Hara at Tara eating roots after the War, the indignity of having mismatched furniture after their stay at the Governor's mansion, and the worry that they might not be able to pay for tuition of their one child, somehow explains the $100K cattle futures deal, or 53 million in speaking fees.
Look, I dislike the Republican candidate as much as the next guy, but this article just shows how out of touch the NYT, and Hillary Clinton and her ilk, are with the travails of the typical American. No wonder she can't fully get behind the $15 per hour minimum wage.
Look, I dislike the Republican candidate as much as the next guy, but this article just shows how out of touch the NYT, and Hillary Clinton and her ilk, are with the travails of the typical American. No wonder she can't fully get behind the $15 per hour minimum wage.
33
Trump is a loose-cannon, Hillary is a money-grubber because she wants to feel financially secure while pursuing her public policy ideals. We get it.
Now how about sending a couple of your younger and less blase reporters to follow the campaigns of Gary Johnson/William Weldt of the Libertarian party and Dr. Jill Stein of the Green party.
You know fair-minded and equal time reporting - aka journalism, instead of this non-stop barrage of vomit-inducing sensationalism. We have seen this trainwreck in detail for some time now, how about telling us about the other options out there - before it is too late.
Now how about sending a couple of your younger and less blase reporters to follow the campaigns of Gary Johnson/William Weldt of the Libertarian party and Dr. Jill Stein of the Green party.
You know fair-minded and equal time reporting - aka journalism, instead of this non-stop barrage of vomit-inducing sensationalism. We have seen this trainwreck in detail for some time now, how about telling us about the other options out there - before it is too late.
20
Bill Clinton's salary of around $55,000 in 1980 would be equivalent to over $160,000 today. Not bad at all in Arkansas. And how could the Times uncritically accept Mrs. Clinton's great fortune in cattle trading when she had no experience? How she managed to turn $1,000 into nearly $100,000 in only ten months deserves its own article (and, don't worry, the statutes of limitations have run, so your preferred candidate won't face criminal prosecution for what you uncover).
36
"...the difficult two-year period in Arkansas when she and her husband found themselves cast out of office, financially strained and deeply uncertain about the future."
It's hard to feel pity when another Times article on this very day says she put $60,000 down on a house right after leaving the governor's mansion. In 1980.
Where is the financial strain in that?
It's hard to feel pity when another Times article on this very day says she put $60,000 down on a house right after leaving the governor's mansion. In 1980.
Where is the financial strain in that?
29
Well, that's understandable - we all got to feed our families. I am just wondering, how untold millions of other financially stressed americans manage to resist being "pushed into corporate world"? It seems to be such an easy solution.
13
This is a fine piece, giving three dimensional reality to the too often cartoonish picture of a woman vilified for being what she is: smart, ambitious, anxious about the future, but willing to do what needs doing to answer the call of her character, her family and -- as I hope she will be able to demonstrate by being elected president -- the call of her country.
14
It's the old rag to riches story- make a few phone calls and a few promises and $21 million rolls in. Who can't relate to that?
44
I've lived in Little Rock since 1967 and remember not only Bill's run for atty gen, but his run before that for the House from the NW Ark district, very Rep, which he lost. Not sure, but I think the gov salary when he first won was only $10G. He lost his first re-election bid because he tried to drag this backward state into the 20thC. And Hillary was not an asset at first. This uppity Yankee liberal who didn't stay home and bake cookies? And kept her maiden name at first! The motto of most pols in this state was keep wives barefoot and pregnant. There was plenty of nasty sniping. All her improvement efforts were criticized. How can it be a surprise that she's not open and trusting?
26
Clinton rakes in tens of millions selling 'speeches' to banksters and such, yet the people appear confident that their interests will be served by these rich crooks. America is a farce...
67
Trump rakes in tens of millions bilking fools with his scam university and taking money from gambling addicts. He's far more of a rich crook. I'd prefer Clinton, hands down.
7
It's good to know that Hillary has had 2 years experience with true fear of not being able to support her family. But when she expects the same people who have been living that life for 6 years now (like I have) to be satisfied with half measures that manage to most benefit the other half in the name of practicality, I can't help but feel, well insulted, belittled, and supposed to accept the tacit judgment that I don't matter.
That this comes after 30 years of wage stagnation marked also by huge productivity gains that I and most like me had no share in the wealth generated, insult grows to fury. I am right to be angry and it is anger, not resentment or jealousy or whatever else those doing ok want to label it so they can dismiss us.
Considering how easily and frequently those doing ok gripe, moan and fret about everything, the real thing to imagine is what these same people with so few coping skills would be like having lived in financial distress for 6-8 years, all the while more or less bullied, defamed, and put dead last for everything simply for it having been 6-8 years of misery.
Then and only then would I be willing liken her experience to mine. At it is, she is a universe away from my experience although many years I lived only a few New York city blocks from her UWS home. No comparison.
That this comes after 30 years of wage stagnation marked also by huge productivity gains that I and most like me had no share in the wealth generated, insult grows to fury. I am right to be angry and it is anger, not resentment or jealousy or whatever else those doing ok want to label it so they can dismiss us.
Considering how easily and frequently those doing ok gripe, moan and fret about everything, the real thing to imagine is what these same people with so few coping skills would be like having lived in financial distress for 6-8 years, all the while more or less bullied, defamed, and put dead last for everything simply for it having been 6-8 years of misery.
Then and only then would I be willing liken her experience to mine. At it is, she is a universe away from my experience although many years I lived only a few New York city blocks from her UWS home. No comparison.
47
Isn't it disingenuous to evaluate Ms. Clinton by standards that different from standards that would be used to judge Mr. Clinton or Mr. Trump...if their roles were reversed? Pursuing income while her husband was in public office may have exceeded the customs of prudence and decency, but, if appears, Ms. Clinton wasn't prosecuted for violating any laws. She has been persecuted in the court of public opinion for stretching the bounds of propriety. A continuing distraction from more important issues that should be addressed in the POTUS political campaign.
For Trump to disparage Ms. Clinton as a captive of any special interest is hypocrisy personified. To paraphrase Ann Richards' remark about Bush, Trump was born on third base and thought he had hit a triple. He has been a captive his entire adult life.
Until Trump halts his vapid and emotional personal attacks on Ms. Clinton and uses rational, calm, and fact-based conversation to address the critical issues and choices that our nation is facing and must deal with in the future, he is reinforcing his lack of preparation, scant knowledge of Constitutional law, and ignorance of the political give and take necessary for any CEO.
He insults the decency of the registered voters, US citizens, both major political parties and their membership, and the cumulative history, customs, and practices of our great nation.
America has, is, and will continue to be great...in spite of Trump's efforts to do otherwise.
For Trump to disparage Ms. Clinton as a captive of any special interest is hypocrisy personified. To paraphrase Ann Richards' remark about Bush, Trump was born on third base and thought he had hit a triple. He has been a captive his entire adult life.
Until Trump halts his vapid and emotional personal attacks on Ms. Clinton and uses rational, calm, and fact-based conversation to address the critical issues and choices that our nation is facing and must deal with in the future, he is reinforcing his lack of preparation, scant knowledge of Constitutional law, and ignorance of the political give and take necessary for any CEO.
He insults the decency of the registered voters, US citizens, both major political parties and their membership, and the cumulative history, customs, and practices of our great nation.
America has, is, and will continue to be great...in spite of Trump's efforts to do otherwise.
25
Oh my God!!! Can't you just lay off her??? Enough already with the dredging up of anything negative the media can find. You should be concentrating on the passion and commitment she demonstrates on a daily basis for all of us. I know it is your job but this is really stretching it!!!
25
What do want want this, us to worship the ground Hillary walks on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUOROLyD1d8
This is what a human god looks like, and thsi si what Clinton wants us to do for her.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUOROLyD1d8
This is what a human god looks like, and thsi si what Clinton wants us to do for her.
18
This story illustrates why average citizen is angry with the career politicians. Sadly this is the story of two politicians using their government service to enrich themselves while preaching the little people about sacrifice. The only commodity the Clintons had to make money was their connections to the government. They exploited them from the beginning , like the commodity trades Wallmart board till now the speech money and trading State Department favors for contributions. The worst part is that they are typical of the political class in our country.
66
What do you want, a former president who lives in a shack? Even if you hate them, have some dignity for our country.
Something that goes unnoticed is the period during which Hillary was doing all this. Women were just beginning to enter the work force in numbers, and there certainly was a great deal of discrimination against working women.
Not that she was the first woman to pick her family up and get going. Thousands upon thousands of women have done that since time immemorial. But she should get credit for being such a stabilizing force.
It always amazes me is that no one ever seems to give credit to Bill Clinton for rising from poverty in childhood to President of the United States. Politicians love to talk about their humble origins ... but many of them are rewriting history.
Bill Clinton knows what it's like to be poor, and I daresay that's something one never forgets, nor can one ever truly escape its psychological grip.
They may both be lawyers who attended Ivy League schools, but I'm guessing they must have had financial assistance of some kind, or at least he must have. I know plenty of Ivy League graduates who don't make much money. One of my friends, an incredibly smart woman, struggles to make ends meet as an administrative assistant. Intelligence is no guarantee of success, financial or otherwise.
The more I read about Hillary, the more I respect her. I know what it's like to have a father like hers allegedly was. God bless her.
Something that goes unnoticed is the period during which Hillary was doing all this. Women were just beginning to enter the work force in numbers, and there certainly was a great deal of discrimination against working women.
Not that she was the first woman to pick her family up and get going. Thousands upon thousands of women have done that since time immemorial. But she should get credit for being such a stabilizing force.
It always amazes me is that no one ever seems to give credit to Bill Clinton for rising from poverty in childhood to President of the United States. Politicians love to talk about their humble origins ... but many of them are rewriting history.
Bill Clinton knows what it's like to be poor, and I daresay that's something one never forgets, nor can one ever truly escape its psychological grip.
They may both be lawyers who attended Ivy League schools, but I'm guessing they must have had financial assistance of some kind, or at least he must have. I know plenty of Ivy League graduates who don't make much money. One of my friends, an incredibly smart woman, struggles to make ends meet as an administrative assistant. Intelligence is no guarantee of success, financial or otherwise.
The more I read about Hillary, the more I respect her. I know what it's like to have a father like hers allegedly was. God bless her.
37
Dignity for our country would be elected officials who did not gouge at the paid speech trough after leaving office.
24
Hillary is clearly a warmonger in the pay the the military industrial complex former President Eisenhower warned about in his final presidential speech. Just look at Libya and Iraq. She pushed Obama to destroy Libya and spread ISIS bases.
49
Too bad Imelda Marcos did not have access to the abundance of Clinton apologists here when it came to defending her 5000 pairs of shoes. To do any less would be sexist.
39
The question that I would rather see the media ask Hillary, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerberg, etc. is: How much money is enough for you?
39
Gates and Buffet have made a commitment to give it away. I don't know about Zuckerberg. The question is what will Clinton do -- eventually? I don't see great charity in their future (and please don't cite The Foundation -- too many unanswered questions)
3
I'd like the media to ask the Koch Brothers how much money is enough.
5
Their answer would be to ask you to define "enough", which definition is "as much, or as many, as required", so with that definition at hand, any one of them can, and would answer, "since my avarice is ever present, all consuming, and innate, there can never be the expectation that "enough", has any relevance for me.
The present historic worldwide inequality tells us, that this is precisely how the 1%ters believe things should be, consequently only they have the right to use the planet, including its people and resources, as they see fit, considering it, all of it, to be a capital resource, to be consumed entirely during their lifetimes.
The present historic worldwide inequality tells us, that this is precisely how the 1%ters believe things should be, consequently only they have the right to use the planet, including its people and resources, as they see fit, considering it, all of it, to be a capital resource, to be consumed entirely during their lifetimes.
5
That's all Hillary is worried about................her own wealth and increasing it. Oh, I forgot: she has one other worry and that is how to become the first female president.
The public? Democracy? She could care less about either of those.
Jill Stein here I come.
The public? Democracy? She could care less about either of those.
Jill Stein here I come.
51
What it should say is if she was a man, her hard work and dedication would be applauded, not derided.
37
If she were a man, we would wonder how such a corrupt politician became the Democrat candidate for President.
17
Would she even be the candidate if she were a man?
7
Ms. Clinton is a survivor. She has done the best she could, with circumstances that presented themselves to her. I'm not apologizing or excusing her for her choices and she's not asking any of us to do so. If any of us were in her situation, would any of us have done anything differently?
Ms. Clinton and her husband are highly motivated people with gargantuan goals, and they seem to have successfully met those goals, working together. If your spouse had just lost his/her job, the only source of income your family had, and you had a new baby, for whom your wish was that she have a better life, with bigger and better opportunities than what you had, would anyone honestly say they would give up any offers of help or employment from affluent friends?
I don't particularly like Hillary or Bill, or some of their decisions or associations. However, I am able to consider the achievements they have made, as a team and as individuals, and recognize that they've accomplished a great deal, which is in many ways admirable.
Perhaps the one single thing that Bill and Hillary have done, which may be the most admirable, is this - they seemingly raised a child, their daughter Chelsea, who from all outward appearances is an intelligent, highly functioning and highly functional adult.
Ms. Clinton and her husband are highly motivated people with gargantuan goals, and they seem to have successfully met those goals, working together. If your spouse had just lost his/her job, the only source of income your family had, and you had a new baby, for whom your wish was that she have a better life, with bigger and better opportunities than what you had, would anyone honestly say they would give up any offers of help or employment from affluent friends?
I don't particularly like Hillary or Bill, or some of their decisions or associations. However, I am able to consider the achievements they have made, as a team and as individuals, and recognize that they've accomplished a great deal, which is in many ways admirable.
Perhaps the one single thing that Bill and Hillary have done, which may be the most admirable, is this - they seemingly raised a child, their daughter Chelsea, who from all outward appearances is an intelligent, highly functioning and highly functional adult.
24
Yes, I would have done things very differently.
And the Trump children possess, from all outwards appearances, the same traits you suggest Chelsea possesses. Not sure that makes Trump presidential material, and so the same shouldn't be said to make her presidential material.
And the Trump children possess, from all outwards appearances, the same traits you suggest Chelsea possesses. Not sure that makes Trump presidential material, and so the same shouldn't be said to make her presidential material.
12
I have no doubt that Hilary is a hardworking and intelligent person. But if the Clintons owed several millions dollars when they left the White House (and that seems like someone wasn’t watching their finances) and they are now worth over $50 million, all this done in 16 years with time spent as a US Senator, Secretary of State and a run for President, well there should be questions raised. And these questions should be asked of a man or a woman.
And all this happening when the Clinton Foundation was a startup 20, or so, years ago and is now worth like $2 billion. Well, something just smells fishy here.
Oh, and Chelsea working in the family business, lives in a $10 million apartment in Manhattan … well, wouldn’t that put her in the 1% bracket that her Mother talks negatively about? For that matter, I would think Bill & Hilary’s $50 million value must put them in that bracket also.
However, with Trump’s numbers dropping, if she can survive the debates, she will be the next President.
And all this happening when the Clinton Foundation was a startup 20, or so, years ago and is now worth like $2 billion. Well, something just smells fishy here.
Oh, and Chelsea working in the family business, lives in a $10 million apartment in Manhattan … well, wouldn’t that put her in the 1% bracket that her Mother talks negatively about? For that matter, I would think Bill & Hilary’s $50 million value must put them in that bracket also.
However, with Trump’s numbers dropping, if she can survive the debates, she will be the next President.
38
“Hillary had a couple years of the taste of what it means to be a working mother, without any help, to have to take care of a small baby and care for your job,” said James B. Blair.....
Let's paraphrase: Hillary had a couple years of the taste of what it meant to be a normal American, and didn't like it.
Let's paraphrase: Hillary had a couple years of the taste of what it meant to be a normal American, and didn't like it.
64
Why do ordinary Americans not trust Hillary Clinton, even though she has made so many contributions to help the middle class, like children's health insurance? It's evident from this article that both Clintons were middle class when they started out but over many years in politics, both became multi-millionaires. In order to understand why they are suspect, you can scrutinize the life of Franklin D. Roosevelt. I was very young during his administration but what I noticed the most was that the general population, although impoverished, had great trust in him, even though he was a patrician who came from a wealthy family and probably never had to work to support himself. We can conclude that ordinary people trusted him because when he came into politics, he did and said things that resonated with the poor people who would vote for him. He talked the talk and walked the walk. The fact that he had money did not diminish people's admiration and trust for him. However, in Hillary's situation, she acquired great wealth, along with her husband, that many suspect came as a result of their association with wealthy people during her political career. It is a suspicion that she gained her wealth through her political associations, that turned off the average citizen.
The Supreme Court's irrational decision that money does not corrupt does not resonate with the average American voter.
The Supreme Court's irrational decision that money does not corrupt does not resonate with the average American voter.
18
The NY Times writes, Hillary was propelled into the corporate world.' Yes, many of us call that 'needing a job.' It's pretty common, actually...outside the rare world of the NYTimes.
40
An unreleased Clinton "personal" email:
"Russia's glorious but defunct czarist tradition is now alive and well in the
USA. You're toast Vladmir!" - signed czarina Hillary (cackle cackle) OK, a joke but not really.
"Russia's glorious but defunct czarist tradition is now alive and well in the
USA. You're toast Vladmir!" - signed czarina Hillary (cackle cackle) OK, a joke but not really.
13
Wow:
For the New York Times to run an article attempting to excuse the Clinton's wealth machine. . .with the idea that she was the savior of her family after Bill's defeat for re-election as governor by performing noble deeds like calling up their rich "friends" to help them through what they claim were trying times. . .is a new low in mainstream media left wing bias in America.
Whatever became of the journalism creed i. e. to "afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted?"
Unless there is an "October Surprise" of mammoth proportions this election (as Chick Hearn used to say) is in the refrigerator. Why then does the NYT allow the writers of this article to insult readers' intelligence with this tale of woe about a couple whose obscene personal riches are a hypocritical slap in the face to the poor people in this country they claim to represent?
For the New York Times to run an article attempting to excuse the Clinton's wealth machine. . .with the idea that she was the savior of her family after Bill's defeat for re-election as governor by performing noble deeds like calling up their rich "friends" to help them through what they claim were trying times. . .is a new low in mainstream media left wing bias in America.
Whatever became of the journalism creed i. e. to "afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted?"
Unless there is an "October Surprise" of mammoth proportions this election (as Chick Hearn used to say) is in the refrigerator. Why then does the NYT allow the writers of this article to insult readers' intelligence with this tale of woe about a couple whose obscene personal riches are a hypocritical slap in the face to the poor people in this country they claim to represent?
70
Principles!??!?!
27
Clearly hers are wealth accumulation and personal gain. Not what most think of when they hear "public service."
3
What a lovely "rags to riches" story chock full of rainbows, unicorns and pots of gold to be found. Never mind the personal, professional and financial losses many, many others have sustained as a result of all the well documented philanthropic endeavors of Mr. and Mrs. Clinton, no do so may cast an unflattering shadow on the image being photoshopped.
Just as the Pope has his faults in the eyes of some Catholics; when all was said and done, Judas had his good points to some Christians.
Just as the Pope has his faults in the eyes of some Catholics; when all was said and done, Judas had his good points to some Christians.
22
Tries to explain why the two of them will say or do anything for wealth and power, including orchestrating the downfall of Bernie Sanders, a man with principles.
45
Yes, I think her pursuit of wealth has its roots in her financial insecurity as a young woman, and that's understandable -- rather like the Depression era families who never again felt "safe." The problem is that her insecurity distorted her values. She didn't know when to quit or where to draw the line. The Wall Street speeches, for example, were wholly unnecessary as is much of her present corporate fundraising. It seems that from an insecure young woman she evolved into someone with the tycoon mentality that she can never have enough. And that's a shame.
34
Sounds like she could use some therapy to get over it.
6
As Ralph Nader would say, she is #UNFIT for any job.
Some people with connections do get away with "murder', it would seem.
Some people with connections do get away with "murder', it would seem.
34
So the "lean" years were when they bought a new house in a good-but-not-the-best part of town, her husband earned a salary of more than $100k in present dollars, and she was working as a corporate lawyer no doubt making at least the same amount?
Seriously?
90% of America would love to live on the "lean" income of about $200k a year.
Seriously?
90% of America would love to live on the "lean" income of about $200k a year.
65
Funny, it was the best part of town, it just wasn't the best house in the nabe.
10
Hillary Clinton can be said to be well versed in the realm of politics at the State, Congressional, Presidential, and International levels. She is the most experienced politician running in the presidential race. She has more political experience than any previous presidential forerunner. As far as her husband, she is no more her husband than your mate is all about you unless you’re a narcissist. I would believe that it would be a healthy thing for a wife and husband discuss the issues around them but with that said it doesn’t mean that a woman, any woman, must take the advice or direction from such a conversation. To gain the advice from previous experience would be the intelligent approach. Hillary and Bill are just unique because of the positions they hold. Bill Clinton, while being human with his obvious human problems was still considered to be one of the most successful presidents in history. I would vote for Hillary Clinton before I would vote for any and I do mean any GOP(Government Operatives for Pay) running for president, for in reality any GOP are nothing more than a puppet for people like the Koch Brothers and the ALEC. Of course, if the people of this country don’t get out and vote in a supporting federal congress as well as all political positions at the State levels, we will have the exact same problems we have now with President Obama except the racism won’t be over a half-black president, it will be over a woman as a president.
8
Very interesting and informative story about "ordinary" Americans and the problems we all face. More power to them for being able to rise above everyone's usual ups and downs. We've all been there. What we do about alleviating our pain has a bearing on how successfully we pull ourselves up from the occasional setbacks.
This story could be written about almost any couple. The Clintons are real people with real joys and real heartbreaks through scary times.
This story could be written about almost any couple. The Clintons are real people with real joys and real heartbreaks through scary times.
11
Yeah, except they're in public service.
3
Correction: this story could not have been written about any couple. It could not have enough written about Trump and Ivanka, or Trump and Marla, or Trump and Melania, nor any of the Donald's children from various baby mamas. None of the aforementioned have had to earn a living.
Bill Clinton was grew up poor. Hillary was middle class. Trump was given a one million dollar gift from his father in about 1970. Anybody who faults HRC in this race against Trump for financial decisions ought to be ashamed of the hypocrisy.
Bill Clinton was grew up poor. Hillary was middle class. Trump was given a one million dollar gift from his father in about 1970. Anybody who faults HRC in this race against Trump for financial decisions ought to be ashamed of the hypocrisy.
4
The Clintons have always been about money and amassing as much of it as possible, in whatever way they could. That is why Hillary can not be trusted. She could not help herself but to take millions from foreign governments to her "foundation" when she was secretary of state doing favors for those same countries making her wealthy. This is what the FBI is now investigating. If they put sleazy Dean Skelos and Shelly Silver in jail over a couple of pennies, the Clintons have amassed 100's of millions, most of it corrupt.
46
In the first place one has to have principles to go against, to go against one's principles.
Second, all it takes is one good look at the list of countries and Wall Sfreet banks from whom she raked-in millions for what I'm sure were scintillating speeches, to get an idea of how close to influence peddling she has come. That money that was paid wasn't because it's so much fun to listen to her. As Charles Krauthammer said, "Bill could get away with it. He has charisma. She has none."
Second, all it takes is one good look at the list of countries and Wall Sfreet banks from whom she raked-in millions for what I'm sure were scintillating speeches, to get an idea of how close to influence peddling she has come. That money that was paid wasn't because it's so much fun to listen to her. As Charles Krauthammer said, "Bill could get away with it. He has charisma. She has none."
28
The public's insouciance with respect to blatant political corruption and flagrant abuses of power is interesting and not auspicious...
16
Hillary is about the most unsympathetic figure in modern history. Yet the NYT bends over backward to try to humanize her. We get this puff piece as though no one has ever had to struggle. Two Yale law school grads sponging off rich friends. And Hillary denouncing materialism in her 1969 commencement speech? Hah! My how things change!
54
Having worked with a fair amount of Non-Profit Organizations (NGO), many of them 100% financed by the US Federal Government, both domestic and international (USAID), two things always hit me: (1) the real workers (highly educated) get very low wages and very low benefits, and 12 hours a day and 6 days a week of expected work and (2) the top executives rake in some 0ne million/year, first class travel any time any where, the finest in hotels and restaurants. This Clinton goodie-goodie NGO fits right in and obviously will do just fine for the next 9 years.
23
I suspect that the unspoken story here is that Bill was spending whatever money they made faster than it came in.
She bought their first house. She bought their second house. She worked full time with an infant at home while he was driving around Arkansas trying to resurrect his career. He left their family with a $5,000,000 legal bill at the end of his presidency. See the pattern?
No wonder she made those speeches. She never knows when Bill is going to blow it all, again.
She bought their first house. She bought their second house. She worked full time with an infant at home while he was driving around Arkansas trying to resurrect his career. He left their family with a $5,000,000 legal bill at the end of his presidency. See the pattern?
No wonder she made those speeches. She never knows when Bill is going to blow it all, again.
10
Clintons and money; a controversial topic.
From Hill moaning about financial hardships after leaving the White House to her exorbitant fees creeating huge conflicts of interest with Wall Street power brokers.
From Hill moaning about financial hardships after leaving the White House to her exorbitant fees creeating huge conflicts of interest with Wall Street power brokers.
20
Clinton is clearly devoid of any talents that the private sector would value. The only way she could make money is to take bribes ('speaking fees") for access to her government cronies.. Does anyone with a scintilla of intelligence really believe that her private speeches provide any value let alone $21 million? Has anyone listened to her public speeches? This woman can barely read the teleprompter. Clinton is by far the most deceitful, corrupt and dishonest person to run for any public office in this country's history.
29
You know, you might have point if Hillary had been in office when she took those fees. Maybe.
But she wasn't, so "income" might be a more apt description. "Bribe" is overstating it.
But she wasn't, so "income" might be a more apt description. "Bribe" is overstating it.
5
Because of course none of the banks, hedge funds , corporations etc she got roughly $250,000 a pop to speak to had any reason to suspect she might one day in a position of power except the entire world knew she planned to run for President. Let's call it a down payment bribe.
7
So now the NYT does a piece getting us ready for the salacious details that were in the Clinton emails which were wiped clean. The Clinton Foundation is a little more than a clearinghouse for Bill and Hill to build wealth. Is this really who is going to lead the United States of America the next 4 years?
37
8
2
Whether they be Bill & Hillary or Scott Walker ... and all of their ilk, they figured out early that 'public service' is also extremely well-compensated in all the quality of life areas: housing, child care, food/dining, health insurance.
I guess someone has to run the city/county/state/nation ... and only wish I had been smarter, and smart enough to figure this out early in my own life. Dealing with 'the public' would have been annoying as all get out, but the perks? They can be pretty worth it!
I guess someone has to run the city/county/state/nation ... and only wish I had been smarter, and smart enough to figure this out early in my own life. Dealing with 'the public' would have been annoying as all get out, but the perks? They can be pretty worth it!
11
Plus, when you serve in Congress, trading stocks or trading in real estate using your inside information about what is happening in Congress is perfectly legal. Just ask a California Democrat! Ask Harry Reid!
15
I think we should all take turns at being Senators and Representatives. I will vote for you, if you will vote for me. (I couldn't do any worse by the people!)
5
Aw shucks, she's just like us! The NYT is packaging a political fable that seems intended to resonate with all us middle class voters... are we to consider this justification for her pay-to-play political operation, patronage, gross conflicts of interests involving the clinton foundation, and the Clinton's taking $140 million plus in corporate payola for no actual work, and huge "speaking fees" from Wall Street? I am sure tjhat Bill, jetting overhead in Ron Berkle's G-5, will get a kick out of it. Why not do some real reporting for a change?
37
All I know is that the Republicans have been constantly trying to bring her down since 1992 at least. They're like Javert in "Les Mis" or Captain Ahab in "Moby Dick," obsessed. I was around when Goldwater got blown out in 1964 and pray it happens again. Isn't it interesting that Goldwater's ideas were the first time most Americans had heard about "conservative principles' and the "greatest generation" rejected those ideas en masse.
14
Wall Street no doubt paid millions to hear Hillary's dulcet voice and relive the adventure of her dodging sniper bullets in Bosnia.
As Michael Bloomberg said:
"I'm a New Yorker, and New Yorkers know a con when we see one."
As Michael Bloomberg said:
"I'm a New Yorker, and New Yorkers know a con when we see one."
25
Really bad choice. Bloomberg supports her. I don't think he would support a "con". Or is T rump that bad.
2
Events once again overtake NYT reporting. The story of the day is on CNN:
"CNN's story today buries its lead: The FBI went to Justice Department earlier this year asking for its to open a case into the Foundation, but the public integrity unit declined. The Justice Departent had looked into whether it should open a case on the foundation and found it didn't have sufficient evidence to do so."
Quelle surprise (sic).
"CNN's story today buries its lead: The FBI went to Justice Department earlier this year asking for its to open a case into the Foundation, but the public integrity unit declined. The Justice Departent had looked into whether it should open a case on the foundation and found it didn't have sufficient evidence to do so."
Quelle surprise (sic).
28
"public integrity"
Words you will never see associated with Hillary Clinton.
Words you will never see associated with Hillary Clinton.
21
Umm, didn't they teach you school to use the FULL quote?. This from the CNN website:
"The FBI went to Justice Department earlier this year asking for it to open a case into the foundation, but the public integrity unit declined. The Justice Department had looked into whether it should open a case on the foundation a year prior and found it didn't have sufficient evidence to do so. "
"The FBI went to Justice Department earlier this year asking for it to open a case into the foundation, but the public integrity unit declined. The Justice Department had looked into whether it should open a case on the foundation a year prior and found it didn't have sufficient evidence to do so. "
5
There always comes a moment in old "B" movies when the bad guy has a gun aimed at the good guy, say, Boston Blackie, and Blackie suddenly says in an alarmed voice: "Behind you! The cops!" and he diverts the bad guy long enough to escape.
That's what comes to my mind when I see all the comments here howling TRUMP!!! BERNIE!!!!! TRUMP!!!
Shout all you want, but your flawed candidate will not escape scrutiny.
Stop changing the subject. Face the situation. As is obvious to everyone but you, feeble worn out diversionary tricks are not working.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
That's what comes to my mind when I see all the comments here howling TRUMP!!! BERNIE!!!!! TRUMP!!!
Shout all you want, but your flawed candidate will not escape scrutiny.
Stop changing the subject. Face the situation. As is obvious to everyone but you, feeble worn out diversionary tricks are not working.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
17
And your candidate is squeaky clean, eh "reverend"?
3
Lean years, we only had one house and had to make do with a few $100,000 a year!
Contrast this puff piece with Trump coverage.
Contrast this puff piece with Trump coverage.
31
contrast their hard earned 100K with the 40 million Donald got from Daddy.
1
I am sad to read this no-news article because it brings up aspects of both Clintons' characters that I now try to overlook. I choose to focus on Hillary's preparation to serve as POTUS. Although I don't understand the intricate workings (hustling?) by such financially ambitious people as Hillary, she has my vote.
So Hillary is happily living the life of the 1%, richer than most Americans. So she has sold out to the corporate Wall Street plutocracy. So what if Hillary has enriched herself in the service of WalMart and Goldman Sachs. So Hillary has combined her smarts and political connections with a lack of ethics and a massive amount of hypocrisy to amass a small fortune. What difference, at this point, does it make?
17
PM Modi lived in a small house almost in poverty. That's what HRC needed to do, so as not to be attacked. She has 100 million for god's sake !!
3
Judging by these comments, it makes a lot of difference.
3
Stress over family finance caused Bill and Hillary to create the most
in- your-face "pay to play" schemes in the history of the world. The E-mails are now starting to surface. The blending of where The Secretary of State started and Clinton foundation stopped is a totally a gray area. Millions of dollars donated by foreign governments to the Clintons knowing that only 10 cents on the dollar would go towards a cause. Are you kidding me?
in- your-face "pay to play" schemes in the history of the world. The E-mails are now starting to surface. The blending of where The Secretary of State started and Clinton foundation stopped is a totally a gray area. Millions of dollars donated by foreign governments to the Clintons knowing that only 10 cents on the dollar would go towards a cause. Are you kidding me?
33
And if we ever get to see Trump's tax returns we might have more to compare the 2 candidates personal finances.
14
RE: Mrs. Clinton to begin trading, too. With an initial investment of just $1,000, she made nearly $100,000 trading cattle futures in a 10-month period, which helped pay for the down payment on the Midland Street home. But the move later haunted her when the investment became the subject of scrutiny in the early years of the Clinton presidency.
Pray tell NYT what was the scrutiny???? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories...
Hillary Rodham Clinton was allowed to order 10 cattle futures contracts, normally a $12,000 investment, in her first commodity trade in 1978 although she had only $1,000 in her account at the time, according to trade records the White House released yesterday.....
The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits -- as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account, Leo Melamed, a former chairman of the Merc who reviewed the records for the White House, said in an interview. He said the discrepancies in Clinton's records also could have been caused by human error.....
Pray tell NYT what was the scrutiny???? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories...
Hillary Rodham Clinton was allowed to order 10 cattle futures contracts, normally a $12,000 investment, in her first commodity trade in 1978 although she had only $1,000 in her account at the time, according to trade records the White House released yesterday.....
The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits -- as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account, Leo Melamed, a former chairman of the Merc who reviewed the records for the White House, said in an interview. He said the discrepancies in Clinton's records also could have been caused by human error.....
23
The Clinton's have lived very well off the government teat for most of their lives. The average person out there struggling to pay a mortgage and put food on the table will like find this story silly at best, fawning by alleged journalists at worst. Gimme a break, and I'll take one of those Goldman Sachs lucrative speaking fees on the side.
32
As did Paul Ryan through childhood right in to the only job he has had as an adult. But he's a man and a GOP member so that's okay.
7
Seriously, one thing 2 young and healthy Yale Law School graduates would not have to worry about is a being financially disadvantaged in any significant long term fashion. My conservative friends are always bashing the NYT for stuff like this, and this time I have to admit, they are right.This should have never made it off the editor's desk.
47
Thanks for changing the headline on this article. This is a more nuanced approach. The first headline this morning made it look like Hillary was a single Mom with five kids and no job skills.
7
What could be said that is worth so much money other than knowing the cure for cancer.
13
You'd resent paying that much and would refuse even then.
1
Hillary's entry into the corporate world was corporate. She hit away with. Now, we have the spectacle of her, as Secretary of State, selling US uranium to a Russian businessman connected with Mark Rich, pardoned by Bill. Emails show her selling, SELLING, access, positions, business, in exchange for money and $500,000 speeches in Scotland by her husband . The worst spectacle, though, is day in and out, looking for any kind if report on this in the New York Times. Here you have the single most corrupt government official ever, much worse than Spiro Angew, and the enter MSM goes silent on it. Trump is subject to a daily diatribe, usually fabricated, and his grubby opponent gets away with murder (likely, literally).
14
If as you say there exists such irrefutable proof of Hillary SELLING (sic!) access, positions, business in exchange for money, why don't you bring that proof to the authorities? Oh right, there isn't.
1
I'm willing to let her try to do it for all of us! $1,000 into 50 million? Hot dawg! Money CAN HEAL injustice.
10
Is this article a joke?????
So Bill Clinton lost reelection. He and Hillary both have law degrees from Yale. Hardly any danger of them starving.
What really was the concern when Bill lost reelection was the prospect of paying their own way. No more taxpayer provided housing, cooks, maids, gardeners, drivers, aides, nanny, etc.... Hillary is all about the money and trappings of office. No spin to the contrary will change that.
So Bill Clinton lost reelection. He and Hillary both have law degrees from Yale. Hardly any danger of them starving.
What really was the concern when Bill lost reelection was the prospect of paying their own way. No more taxpayer provided housing, cooks, maids, gardeners, drivers, aides, nanny, etc.... Hillary is all about the money and trappings of office. No spin to the contrary will change that.
36
The government does not pay for all that you think it does but it does pay for a lot. Look it up.
The key here is the "pay for play" scenario that ensues.
The key here is the "pay for play" scenario that ensues.
4
This is the opening salvo to rehabilitate Ms Clinton from the plague of out of touch plutocrat
I suggest, that she is in a hole and as the advice goes, when you are in a hole, first thing is . stop digging
Only Donald Trump can defeat Donald trump; only Hillary Clinton can defeat Hillary Clinton
The first portion of this article, is how Ms Clinton was the mainstay of the troubles times and dysfunctional Make Half of the marriage
Thus under the bus with Bill, who deserves it, even as he has brought her this far
Trump does not dump his allies and loyalists, whatever HIS faults are
thus round two of the self-destruction wars
I predict Trump as president, 538/0
I suggest, that she is in a hole and as the advice goes, when you are in a hole, first thing is . stop digging
Only Donald Trump can defeat Donald trump; only Hillary Clinton can defeat Hillary Clinton
The first portion of this article, is how Ms Clinton was the mainstay of the troubles times and dysfunctional Make Half of the marriage
Thus under the bus with Bill, who deserves it, even as he has brought her this far
Trump does not dump his allies and loyalists, whatever HIS faults are
thus round two of the self-destruction wars
I predict Trump as president, 538/0
9
"Trump does not dump his allies and loyalists" Have you read nothing about the hundreds of people he has formed alliances and contracts with, and then stiffed by declaring bankruptcy? I doubt if there is anyone in his life he hasn't dumped.
3
I grew up in central Arkansas in the 70s/80s. I can't feel sorry for the Clintons struggling to pay for a $118K home in the Hillcrest neighborhood in 1980. The house I grew up in across the river, in the Indian Hills subdivision of North Little Rock, cost $42,000 brand new in 1974 when my parents bought it. It was 1750 square feet with a large yard.
The home I currently reside in -- a nice tri-level in west Little Rock, off Cantrell road, several miles west of Hillcrest, cost us $142,500 in 2002, for 2214 square feet.
The Clintons chose the Hillcrest neighborhood so they could be near the movers and shakers. No one forced them to buy in a ritzy location. That "hardship" was of their own making.
The home I currently reside in -- a nice tri-level in west Little Rock, off Cantrell road, several miles west of Hillcrest, cost us $142,500 in 2002, for 2214 square feet.
The Clintons chose the Hillcrest neighborhood so they could be near the movers and shakers. No one forced them to buy in a ritzy location. That "hardship" was of their own making.
31
What principles? They have been stealing,lying.cheating and lying about
every crime from the beginning.Hillary Clinton was asked to leave the Gold-
water campaign for offering to do illegal things.
every crime from the beginning.Hillary Clinton was asked to leave the Gold-
water campaign for offering to do illegal things.
17
When her husband lost his job she "called her wealthy friends asking for help"
A lot of Americans have found themselves in this position but I doubt if her reaction I'll resonate iwith many voters.
Nice try Amy, but not many of us ar getting out the Kleenex
A lot of Americans have found themselves in this position but I doubt if her reaction I'll resonate iwith many voters.
Nice try Amy, but not many of us ar getting out the Kleenex
28
I never had a problem with Hillary's Wall Street speaking fees, although as a longtime (former) Republican, I am not a big fan of hers.
It always struck me that the firms were more the fool in this case for paying so much just to hear a former official whose expertise was not even in finance.
It is more a reflection of the obscene amount of money available on Wall street for such frivolity. And good for her in getting some of it for herself.
So why couldn't she just come out and say so when it became an issue?
It always struck me that the firms were more the fool in this case for paying so much just to hear a former official whose expertise was not even in finance.
It is more a reflection of the obscene amount of money available on Wall street for such frivolity. And good for her in getting some of it for herself.
So why couldn't she just come out and say so when it became an issue?
3
Seems most common reaction to this report is that of distaste and condescension to Hillary because she took opportunities to smooth her family's finances to carve out the political career she has. For all her political enemies' efforts to smear and discredit her, there's no evidence that she had done anything illegal or quid pro quo for the speaking fees she had received. On examination of her life work to this moment as a woman who came of modest background and rose to prominence mostly by talent and hard work, I can feel nothing but admiration for her superb intellect, generosity of spirit, kindness of heart and determination to achieve goals far beyond herself for our country.
I suspect that she may not have to endure all this petty finger pointing had she born into money like the Bushes, Kennedys or marry into money like John Kerry. Notice I won't deign to mention Trump as he's beneath contempt for how he get to where he is today.
I suspect that she may not have to endure all this petty finger pointing had she born into money like the Bushes, Kennedys or marry into money like John Kerry. Notice I won't deign to mention Trump as he's beneath contempt for how he get to where he is today.
13
It's very considerate of the NY Times to clue us voters in of how money has played a role in Hillary Clinton's life. However, I find it very disturbing that the NY Times decided not to also inform voters with an article that HRC stopped by yesterday in Davie, FL to support Debbie Wasserman Shultz at her re-election campaign event. So HRC continues to back Wasserman Shultz despite the DNCs effort to dismiss Bernie Sanders. Bernie...the D Party does not deserve your support.
34
Debbie is even backed by Obama, go figure. It's politics.
13
Indeed Mrs. Clinton is just a folksy small town USA blue color worker who in response to hardship went to make hundreds of millions of dollars working for the most corrupting, greedy and economically and socially harmful corporations "alive".
From Wall Mart to Wall Street, Clintons' working class background did not make her stand for working class people in the least. When on the board of Wall Mart she stood silent in the face of union oppression, exploitation of millions of women and cheating workers out of their pay, many of which are poor African Americans and immigrants.
Indeed she represents the working men and women of America, the poor and African Americans almost as genuinely as Mr. Trump represents Blue Collar Rust Belt workers and the unemployed.
The NYT whitewash of Clinton corporate connection is done in an amateurish way, though it forgot to mention that Mrs. Clinton received all this ill-gotten Wall Street money because of the 9/11 attack as she put it.
Naturally in comparison to billionaire Trump, multi-millionaire Clinton can be presented as a working class hero.
But some people can not be fooled; deep pocket Republican donor already moving toward Clinton seeing her as the true Republican in this race. They know that she would represent the Oligarchs just as well, but without the insanity and incoherence of Trump.
From Wall Mart to Wall Street, Clintons' working class background did not make her stand for working class people in the least. When on the board of Wall Mart she stood silent in the face of union oppression, exploitation of millions of women and cheating workers out of their pay, many of which are poor African Americans and immigrants.
Indeed she represents the working men and women of America, the poor and African Americans almost as genuinely as Mr. Trump represents Blue Collar Rust Belt workers and the unemployed.
The NYT whitewash of Clinton corporate connection is done in an amateurish way, though it forgot to mention that Mrs. Clinton received all this ill-gotten Wall Street money because of the 9/11 attack as she put it.
Naturally in comparison to billionaire Trump, multi-millionaire Clinton can be presented as a working class hero.
But some people can not be fooled; deep pocket Republican donor already moving toward Clinton seeing her as the true Republican in this race. They know that she would represent the Oligarchs just as well, but without the insanity and incoherence of Trump.
19
How dare she use her education, experience, and skills to put food on the table! I wonder about those people thinking she "sold out"--how exactly are they earning a living? As off-the-grid subsistence organic vegan farmers? I'm pretty sure that combination gives you the smallest environmental and corporate footprint, but is it actually realistic to expect people to make a decent living, but never sully their hands by earning a paycheck from someone everyone doesn't see as squeaky clean.
9
Rose Law Firm does not figure in her biography, huh? She probably thinks that if she does not mention it, nobody will know that she worked there. She was heavily involved in Castle Grande Land deal, and is perhaps more shady than Trump in terms of his business ethics or lack thereof and practices.
She may be, for most liberals, the lesser of the two evils but she is evil nonetheless.
She may be, for most liberals, the lesser of the two evils but she is evil nonetheless.
26
She worked for Monsanto, Wal-Mart, Madison Savings and Loan fraud, to name a few.
If she omits her 15 years of service in one place - Rose Law - on her resume, she is UNFIT to even apply for the job of CEO, leave alone get it.
Clinton Foundation seems like a Potemkin Castle too.
Once shady, always shady, this lady.
If she omits her 15 years of service in one place - Rose Law - on her resume, she is UNFIT to even apply for the job of CEO, leave alone get it.
Clinton Foundation seems like a Potemkin Castle too.
Once shady, always shady, this lady.
12
If I could make that much from making speeches, I would. I would be all the more delighted to take the money from Wall Street. They have plenty of it.
11
I think you should look at the tens of millions that she has received from the sauds. That should make an interesting connection, especially since she is suppose to stand for women's rights and those women are some of the most oppressed in the world.
11
And if you planned to remain a private citizen and weren't selling yourself as someone with no conflicts of interest or loyalties to big money donors, you'd probably face a lot less scrutiny.
11
Hillary bought the first house with "her" money?
It is so incredibly sad that Hillary was forced to undergo almost two whole years of actually living like a normal American without taxpayers picking up the tab for her. You do know how to engender sympathy.
It is so incredibly sad that Hillary was forced to undergo almost two whole years of actually living like a normal American without taxpayers picking up the tab for her. You do know how to engender sympathy.
46
Everyone has anxiety over money, but this article is a lame excuse for the wealth that the Clintons have amassed. No normal American can manage to put away $50 M for a rainy day. Here in lies the horrible truth about this elections. Both candidates have only self serving interest. Bill's term showed how much he would bend to placate the right and punt on his core beliefs (if he ever had them). I don't expect much from Hillary either but will hold my nose when I cast my reluctant ballot for her.
24
To quote MR. Clinton (1n 2008 about then-senator Obama): "Give Me a Break!"
11
That's actually quoting a a Kit-Kat jingle. And do you mean, you don't trust any news about Ms. Clinton because you're a Trump supporter? If so, then no break for you.
2
While Mrs. Clinton deserves a lot of sympathy for finding herself in the position to provide for her family since her husband was not ready or willing, we need to be honest with ourselves and recognize that she actually had a lot of better choices every step of the way.
While the occasional misstep is understandable, the repeated excesses are clearly signaling a pattern. Bear in mind there are millions of folks out there who are struggling with similar issues and most of them make the tough decisions and make it through. It is a reach to expect them to be accepting of Mrs. Clinton's boorish choices and attitudes.
While the occasional misstep is understandable, the repeated excesses are clearly signaling a pattern. Bear in mind there are millions of folks out there who are struggling with similar issues and most of them make the tough decisions and make it through. It is a reach to expect them to be accepting of Mrs. Clinton's boorish choices and attitudes.
14
it's articles like this that validate the charge that the times is the voice of clueless, entitled, insular, eastern elites. Read the section where the reporter describes how "financially strained" the clintons were in 1980, but keep in mind that bill and hillary were both graduates of arguably the greatest law school in the world (bill was a rhodes scholar) and bill had just served four years as governor of arkansas...i can't imagine how they would be able to make ends meet!
34
Spot on, except for one minor detail - Bill had been governor for 2 years. Until the mid-80s, governorships were 2-year terms.
Wow. Judging from many of the comments Hillary (as usual) can't win with some of you.
She wasn't POOR ENOUGH. She should have been MORE POOR. She shouldn't have worked so hard. She shouldn't have succeeded!
Good lord y'all.
She wasn't POOR ENOUGH. She should have been MORE POOR. She shouldn't have worked so hard. She shouldn't have succeeded!
Good lord y'all.
20
In reply to Sophia:
People are not dumping on Hillary because she wasn't poor enough. They're dumping on her for this "sob story". Fortunately she had "the connections" to be able to receive loans. Imagine an average unemployed American trying to get loans as she did.
She's making speeches to the "average American" for their votes, but she herself is no "average American"!
People are not dumping on Hillary because she wasn't poor enough. They're dumping on her for this "sob story". Fortunately she had "the connections" to be able to receive loans. Imagine an average unemployed American trying to get loans as she did.
She's making speeches to the "average American" for their votes, but she herself is no "average American"!
10
She wasn't poor at all, ever. So the approach and tone of the article are ridiculous. That is the point of many of the comments on here.
17
You missed the point of all the criticism. She didn't work hard for any of the money. She sold access and for that she was given the cattle futures windfall and the paid speeches just for fun. We know Wallstreet likes to spend money expecting to get nothing in return. One has to work real hard to be so partisan as to not recognize her flagrant corruption.
10
Its hard for Trump supporters to relate to hard work of a self made family. After all, the typical Trump voter is a mid 40s white male on disability, who hates the very government that provides their welfare, and woefully ignorant of the causality of their economic status. Oh, let me translate for the Trumpsters: your are poor because you are stupid and lazy
5
but are not many of Hillary's supporters inner city blacks, many of whom are unemployed (i.e., too stupid and lazy)?
4
First in my lower-income family to go to college. My dad was the super of our apartments. My mom worked at Sears.
Ivy League graduate (Brown University). Six-figure salary. Trump supporter.
You really want to blame the blight of the poor who support Trump as being "stupid and lazy?" What does that make the poor who support Clinton?
The Left does not hold a monopoly on virtue.
Ivy League graduate (Brown University). Six-figure salary. Trump supporter.
You really want to blame the blight of the poor who support Trump as being "stupid and lazy?" What does that make the poor who support Clinton?
The Left does not hold a monopoly on virtue.
6
Now, I'm a Republican who has never been fond of Clinton. But also I have never been fond of the notion that those who amass a personal fortune cannot possibly be interested in combating income inequality. If Clinton is able to make reasonable and just decisions for the ordinary American, then her personal wealth is absolutely irrelevant.
14
Not really. It indicates that she is peddling access and influence.
7
Big 'if' you got there...
5
My mother was placed in an orphanage from age 7 until 14, after her father was killed in the war, and her mother was destitute and worked as a maid. When my mother had to leave the orphanage, she lied about her age (said she was 16) to get a job as a secretary. She was on her own, very poor, and scared.
Her entire life, she had a strange relationship with money. That's what happens. So if Hillary takes money for speaking fees, and has had to struggle to pay the bills because her husband is clueless---don't look for inconsistencies here. Hillary's difficulties and poverty shaped her view of the world's unfairness, and money. Feel sorry for her, don't demonize her.
Her entire life, she had a strange relationship with money. That's what happens. So if Hillary takes money for speaking fees, and has had to struggle to pay the bills because her husband is clueless---don't look for inconsistencies here. Hillary's difficulties and poverty shaped her view of the world's unfairness, and money. Feel sorry for her, don't demonize her.
10
Poverty? Give me a break!
7
Jane---Thanks for disrespecting my post, and my mother's story. I rarely tell anyone about it, since she was embarrassed about being raised in an orphanage.
What type of insensitive person writes such a post in response?
What type of insensitive person writes such a post in response?
4
Ocean Blue
I don't think Jane was disrespecting your post, or your mother. Rather, I think she was drawing the comparison between someone who really had it rough, like your mother, and Hillary, who goes to sleep every night on a big pile of money "earned" by selling influence & access to the highest bidder.
I don't think Jane was disrespecting your post, or your mother. Rather, I think she was drawing the comparison between someone who really had it rough, like your mother, and Hillary, who goes to sleep every night on a big pile of money "earned" by selling influence & access to the highest bidder.
5
This just reinforces the point that the Clintons are quintessential political mercenaries. America has suffered far too long from this class of "politicians-for-hire."
22
Try Plato. He had the best idea.
2
Mrs. Clinton had the pressure of taking care of the family financialy, She came form nothing and unlike Bill worried about tomorrow, Most of the time we take our hat off to people like that. The woman has been kicked down for years and still gets up dusts herself and moves on. Has she made mistakes yes. Many sing praises to Ronald Regan and skip over his mitakes while in office. As a Man I will admit alot the knocks she gets is due to being a strong woman and powerful man don't like strong woman. Senator Warren said it best Donald is upset he's going to lose to a girl.
14
She came from Park Ridge, IL, a very tony suburb of Chicago, and went to a fancy private college and a fancy private law school. She never struggled.
12
Willie Sutton came from nothing. Should we forgive his crookedness also?
2
She did not come from nothing. She came from Park Ridge, IL. Try Googling it.
9
It irks me when politicians refer to their careers as doing "service," even as most of them are making connections that they will leverage into big bucks. Okay, go ahead and choose politics and make lots of money, but please don't call it "service."
30
A man has dog-whistled for the assassination of a Presidential candidate as the latest in a series of outrages.
A woman made multiple sacrifices to feed her child...and her wandering-eyed husband.
For shame NY Times, for shame in trying to tarnish the one woman who can save America from an unstable man not fit for office.
A woman made multiple sacrifices to feed her child...and her wandering-eyed husband.
For shame NY Times, for shame in trying to tarnish the one woman who can save America from an unstable man not fit for office.
9
Multiple sacrifices to feed her child? Sure, being a Walmart Board of Director was a huge sacrifice. Gambling $1,000 to make $100,000 when nobody else could was a huge sacrifice. Getting a partnership at the Rose Law Firm just because your husband was the governor was a huge sacrifice.
She sacrificed nothing. And even when times were "tough," she was much better off than the vast majority of Arkansans.
She sacrificed nothing. And even when times were "tough," she was much better off than the vast majority of Arkansans.
14
"A woman made multiple sacrifices to feed her child"
her husband made over $50,000 as governor. Back then, especially in AK, that was a fortune. That does not sound like a family trying to live off of two min wage jobs.
her husband made over $50,000 as governor. Back then, especially in AK, that was a fortune. That does not sound like a family trying to live off of two min wage jobs.
14
Again, when a question comes up about Clinton, the reply is LOOK!!! TRUMP!!!!
Why?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
Why?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
7
So she has deep psychological issues for why she's willing to sacrifice any appearance of integrity in pursuit of the almighty dollar?
30
I am a firm supporter of Hillary Clinton. But in 1978 the family income was "only" $51,000? In Arkansas? Give me a break. In 1978 my husband and I were also newly minted lawyers in NY, and our combined income was $42,000. And we were thrilled We thought we had made it.
!
I like to make money too, and as a woman, it's a powerful feeling. I get that. So good for Hillary, but don't make it sound like they were going to wind up on food stamps if she didn't make millions of dollars.
!
I like to make money too, and as a woman, it's a powerful feeling. I get that. So good for Hillary, but don't make it sound like they were going to wind up on food stamps if she didn't make millions of dollars.
27
As the leaked emails of the last month show, it is not that Hillary participated in money. It is that she sold offices to donors and allowed donors to influence policy.
All before bemoaning how corrupting money is! And presumably smart people are falling for it!
We know she is corrupt and anyone who votes for her votes for our doom.
All before bemoaning how corrupting money is! And presumably smart people are falling for it!
We know she is corrupt and anyone who votes for her votes for our doom.
20
This is as bad as Romney's wife tuna fish story.
"We got married and moved into a basement apartment ... shared the housekeeping, and ate a lot of pasta and tuna fish."
Oh, you poor poor things.
"We got married and moved into a basement apartment ... shared the housekeeping, and ate a lot of pasta and tuna fish."
Oh, you poor poor things.
30
Nobody can seriously write about Mrs. Clinton's "motivations" in life without reference to her oft-told tale of child abuse: when her mother threw her out of the house as a four year-old for being "a coward."
How that must have traumatized her! Now, 65 years later, she compulsively re-lives this event at every campaign stop, casting it as something good and positive, which is typical of untreated adult victims of abuse. She is convincing herself. This brings to mind the words of Christopher Hitchens in 2008:
“As for Mrs. Clinton, as for all she’s done for us and after all she’s suffered on our behalf, she feels she’s owed the presidency and who could possibly disagree? Her life is meaningless if she doesn’t get at least a shot and one can only sympathize. Unless you think, as I do, that people should be distrusted, who are running for therapeutic reasons. Because the Presidency doesn't calm those demons, as her husband has already proved."
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
How that must have traumatized her! Now, 65 years later, she compulsively re-lives this event at every campaign stop, casting it as something good and positive, which is typical of untreated adult victims of abuse. She is convincing herself. This brings to mind the words of Christopher Hitchens in 2008:
“As for Mrs. Clinton, as for all she’s done for us and after all she’s suffered on our behalf, she feels she’s owed the presidency and who could possibly disagree? Her life is meaningless if she doesn’t get at least a shot and one can only sympathize. Unless you think, as I do, that people should be distrusted, who are running for therapeutic reasons. Because the Presidency doesn't calm those demons, as her husband has already proved."
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
12
"But she has been accused of going against her principles."
THAT'S the problem: What principles?
THAT'S the problem: What principles?
17
I feel so sorry for criticizing Hillary. Had I known that she had come so close to hitting rock bottom and living on the streets with a young child. How could I ever accuse her of having her policies she supports being dictated by the amount donated to her foundation. And it makes so much more sense why something like 60% of out of every dollar goes directly into administration salary of her foundation. This article also explains that she has never been able to understand whats its like to teally struggle. I dont fault Hillary for anything she has done. But that dosnt give her or anyone else the right to force their beliefs and to do as I say and not as I do. Lastly, Hillary , Barrack, Feinstein, I wish you would stop trying to fix mental illness by claiming that we need common sense gun control. They know that there is no such thing. They along with others who believe in the same beliefs. They knowingly mislead people who put their trust in them. They know how to manipulate the facts to get people believing in a lie to where they are blimd to the truth. Agree with me or not on issues is find. But disagree yourself and not what someone tells you. Thanks for allowing me to voice my opinion.
3
Thank you, Amy, Chozick, for a well researched article. It seems that given the current financial needs of Bill and Hillary Clinton, i.e., purchase and maintenance of homes suitable for their decent and ambitious goals, and the probability of still more politically inspired lawsuits, it would make sense to earn money while they could. I think they they have put the money to good use, as it has freed her to run for the presidency.
3
I found this piece very helpful in filling in details on why/how Hillary became focused on financial stability.
It would be interesting to read more about her youth in Chicago. I suspect her upbringing had a lot to do with both her privacy with regard to her personal life as well as her loyalty to a philandering husband. As I understand it, her mother did not have an easy early life nor an easy marital life. Likely Hillary learned at home to keep certain problems private and to persevere despite her times of marital stress.
It would be interesting to read more about her youth in Chicago. I suspect her upbringing had a lot to do with both her privacy with regard to her personal life as well as her loyalty to a philandering husband. As I understand it, her mother did not have an easy early life nor an easy marital life. Likely Hillary learned at home to keep certain problems private and to persevere despite her times of marital stress.
7
I am sure you will be equally understanding about this lust for wealth the next time a wealthy Republican runs for higher office.
But at least Donald Trump never got obviously guilty rapists of 12-year-old girls in Arkansas off scot-free and then laughed about it to friends.
But at least Donald Trump never got obviously guilty rapists of 12-year-old girls in Arkansas off scot-free and then laughed about it to friends.
8
I had to laugh at the "mismatched furniture ". It's really much more
interesting than hotel matched furniture.the British have made an art form
of it.In fact i wouldn't have it any other way .
interesting than hotel matched furniture.the British have made an art form
of it.In fact i wouldn't have it any other way .
5
'How did two people spending their lives working in public service, 'for the people', end up with a net worth over 200 million?'
20
They wrote many best-selling books and they received speaking fees from those who thought they had interesting resumes and things to say. Lots of people who have achieved much in life do the same.
2
Ya, right!
3
Why aren't we reading an article about Mr. trump's gold, gilded apartments, yachts, etc? Why aren't we (and the press) relentlessly demanding to see his tax returns??
5
Because is about Mrs. Clinton. Ever consider that?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
6
I read the article and I am having difficulty finding fault with Hillary Clinton's actions.
If Wall Street wants to pay her a princess-like fee for a speech, good for Hillary. If it can be shown that she traded fee for favor then bad for her but I have yet to see that proved, anywhere.
She had a strict but sound upbringing and she took seriously the responsibility of earning a living. I bet her mom and dad were proud of her.
Oh, the shame of it all!
If Wall Street wants to pay her a princess-like fee for a speech, good for Hillary. If it can be shown that she traded fee for favor then bad for her but I have yet to see that proved, anywhere.
She had a strict but sound upbringing and she took seriously the responsibility of earning a living. I bet her mom and dad were proud of her.
Oh, the shame of it all!
5
Given her upbringing: being raised to be frugal - "conservative" - and having a father who was "self made", gives ample insight to her Republican-lite philosophy. Too bad she didn't fall farther, without wealthy friends to bail her and Bill out, perhaps then she would actually understand the plight of the working and middle class. Failing that, perhaps she could "solve" our ever-growing wealth disparity by hooking us all up with her own benefactors, as she was.
One would think that given her apparent terror at becoming destitute, she would be able to identify with the millions of Americans who live one paycheck, or less, from that same destitution, but instead, she seems to have the attitude of < "I got mine. Devil take the hindmost". A true Republican by any other name.
I supported Sanders, and still support him, but it's obvious that Hillary is likely to win, and so my only dwindling hope for America and her working and middle class, is that she remember back to those Little Rock days in the "wilderness", and realize, "There but for the grace of God go I".
One would think that given her apparent terror at becoming destitute, she would be able to identify with the millions of Americans who live one paycheck, or less, from that same destitution, but instead, she seems to have the attitude of < "I got mine. Devil take the hindmost". A true Republican by any other name.
I supported Sanders, and still support him, but it's obvious that Hillary is likely to win, and so my only dwindling hope for America and her working and middle class, is that she remember back to those Little Rock days in the "wilderness", and realize, "There but for the grace of God go I".
9
This article is self-defeating. It is supposed to make us feel good about take-charge and overcome-adversity Hillary Clinton. But it doesn't. When they were broke after Mr. Clinton lost the race for governor of Arkansas, she took charge alright. Out with the principles, she phone up all her rich wall-street friends who were so eager to help. She did not join corporate America to work her (and their) way out of trouble. Oh no, that would be hard..., just had to tap the mega rich making machine on wall street. That's what the elite does. Where is Bernie? If it weren't for that dangerous clown that needs to be kept out of the White House.... Bernie where have you gone! :-)
12
I can't help but think there wouldn't be nearly the to-do over her finances if she were a man. I think she should be congratulated for doing what was necessary to secure her family's financial well-being. People are just uncomfortable with the idea that a woman can be so competent and successful. If the worst thing that can be dredged up is the speeches at Goldman, she's probably behaved better than anyone else who is worth $50 million (or whatever the amount). Her speech-making wasn't kept secret. As far as I'm concerned it's only Goldman's shareholders who should be upset by how much the firm paid out to to have her speak.
9
Unless she releases all of the speeches she made to Wall Street for a fee- not just Goldman, by the way, I cannot consider voting for her.
Just for perspective, each one of those speeches paid more than a US Senator or Cabinet Officer makes in a year. For a private speech of less than one hour. This is something she has done- repeatedly.
She also controls the records of her speeches- something most people do not do. Only Hillary Clinton can release the transcript and she refuses to do so. She promised to release them when all the other candidates who made speeches for money did and she is the only candidate who has, so where are the transcripts, Ms Clinton?
Maybe there is nothing to see, but from the cheap seats it looks like a conflict of interest at minimum and a form of legalized bribery at worst. Given the Clinton's history, she needs to come clean if she wants our vote.
Just for perspective, each one of those speeches paid more than a US Senator or Cabinet Officer makes in a year. For a private speech of less than one hour. This is something she has done- repeatedly.
She also controls the records of her speeches- something most people do not do. Only Hillary Clinton can release the transcript and she refuses to do so. She promised to release them when all the other candidates who made speeches for money did and she is the only candidate who has, so where are the transcripts, Ms Clinton?
Maybe there is nothing to see, but from the cheap seats it looks like a conflict of interest at minimum and a form of legalized bribery at worst. Given the Clinton's history, she needs to come clean if she wants our vote.
17
Good grief... this puff piece on two of the greediest amoral individuals in US public life makes me want to profusely vomit. Trump is horrible but he sure got one thing right - Hillary is as crooked as they come and will sell or do anything to make a shady buck. I sure don't know anybody that's had a 10,000% return on any investment of commodity speculation in a 10 month period. And these recently released emails that she claims were supposedly about yoga and Chelsea's wedding aren't helping her case any. What a horrible role model for young women.
25
Well for me, this election is about the "first woman", and I refuse to have one placed on a pedestal that enslaved another woman in caring for her children. Afford the caretaker all the luxuries of Hillary, and I will be more than happy to place Hillary on a pedestal.
9
I am not a Trump supporter and have been horrified by many of his statements. I know that he puts himself into positions which beg for negative reporting to the point where he creates his own headlines.
But I am not looking for reporting which enforces my own beliefs. I am looking for reporting which objectively and factually informs me equally about both candidates. Unfortunately, I have abandoned all hope of that happening.
Hillary Clinton's relationship with financial particularly corpoarate and Wall Street backers should be exhaustively investigated. A series should be done on the Clinton Foundation. Instead, all I see is an article which seems to be a lukewarm apology and defense of her financial relationships. Readers should demand far far more in depth and critical analysis of those finances.
I also noted the glaring absence of a prominent article on the suit against her by Benghazi parents. Yes, that suit might be politically motivated. So what. It is happening and is an important story. It deserves prominence.
Please. I know a lot about Trump and expect much more reporting about his behavior. But i want to know much more about Mrs. Clinton's problematic situations. Please help your readers get this information.
But I am not looking for reporting which enforces my own beliefs. I am looking for reporting which objectively and factually informs me equally about both candidates. Unfortunately, I have abandoned all hope of that happening.
Hillary Clinton's relationship with financial particularly corpoarate and Wall Street backers should be exhaustively investigated. A series should be done on the Clinton Foundation. Instead, all I see is an article which seems to be a lukewarm apology and defense of her financial relationships. Readers should demand far far more in depth and critical analysis of those finances.
I also noted the glaring absence of a prominent article on the suit against her by Benghazi parents. Yes, that suit might be politically motivated. So what. It is happening and is an important story. It deserves prominence.
Please. I know a lot about Trump and expect much more reporting about his behavior. But i want to know much more about Mrs. Clinton's problematic situations. Please help your readers get this information.
19
If you want to know why the lawsuit isn't being given much credence, simply Google "Larry Klayman", the lawyer behind the lawsuit and Judicial Watch. He has made a career of spuriously suing the Clintons and others, and his cases never hold water.
1
Pauvre Hillary who rose from a humble log cabin that she built herself. Left alone in the cruel world with nothing but degrees from Wellesley and Yale Law School. Having to live on the meager salary of a law professor in a humble state university. Gimme a break
33
As a former NY State Senator representing all constituents of the state of New York & spending a lot of time in the state's most populous city, home to the world's most important financial center, I don't find anything unseemly about Mrs. Clinton giving paid speeches to Wall Street financial firms in her post Secretary of State private life. To say Wall Street, like any other gargantuan U.S. corporation, deserves to be monitored & regulated is an understatement but it's folly to think Wall St. is going away, or the global flow of money will suddenly be diverted through small indiependent community banks. I really don't care what the text of Mrs. Clinton's speeches say, either. I ONLY care about what she will do as POTUS. Bashing Wall St and not engaging with them altogether isn't helpful, either. Throughout my professional life with various corporate employers, I have told them all, or at least have given the appearance that I held the company & its executive team in the highest regard, in return for my paycheck &benefits for my loyal service. In reality, I have often despised many of the executives, along with several fellow employees. And I continue to believe most corporations put profits & executive bonuses above all else, not caring one lick about their employees or society overall. Since I don't share most corporate values but readily take their payment, I must be a shady, untrustworthy individual unsuitable for an elected public office.
I am SO with HER!
I am SO with HER!
7
I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton, for reasons I won't bother getting into (mostly because it's pointless). However, when I read this article, my thought was, "Good for her!" Why shouldn't she want to take care of her family? If she wants to make money, all the power to her. I think her ties to Wall Street are worth looking at in the context of this election, no question. But to shame her for wanting to amass wealth? That's a joke. This is America--she's hardly alone here.
17
Eh. Can we please stop sneering at Mrs. Clinton's desire for a nest egg and funds enough to put her child through college?
If only other people could be far-sighted and responsible enough to think about their kids' education and not just the fleeting pleasure of making babies.
And Mrs. Clinton isn't the only one to try to invest her money. Some investments brought in returns, and others, like Whitewater, didn't.
Now, if only I could get my bank to give me more than .03% on my CD.
As for her being wealthy now, why not do an expose on the Bushes' money and where it came from? Or our friend LBJ, who brought us the Great Society?
If only other people could be far-sighted and responsible enough to think about their kids' education and not just the fleeting pleasure of making babies.
And Mrs. Clinton isn't the only one to try to invest her money. Some investments brought in returns, and others, like Whitewater, didn't.
Now, if only I could get my bank to give me more than .03% on my CD.
As for her being wealthy now, why not do an expose on the Bushes' money and where it came from? Or our friend LBJ, who brought us the Great Society?
14
Inspiring article on the struggles of a couple trying to rise from the 1% to the .001%
38
"Even some of Mrs. Clinton’s allies privately say they are mystified by her choice to make the Wall Street speeches, given the likelihood that they would become an issue in a presidential campaign."
What to make of a person with presidential aspirations who completely disregards appearances of impropriety? She certainly wasn't financially desperate during that time period (and really, as described here, there was never a time in her life when she should have felt financial "desperation" - nothing close to the desperation that a significant portion of the working class feels, anyway).
Does she simply not care about appearances? Does she feel that people should know that she's "above" that sort of impropriety (that's a hard one to swallow, given her negatives and the general mood of the public)?
There is something very unsettling about Clinton. Too bad that, of her opponent it can be said, "there is something very terrifying about him".
The country deserves a better choice than these two flawed candidates.
What to make of a person with presidential aspirations who completely disregards appearances of impropriety? She certainly wasn't financially desperate during that time period (and really, as described here, there was never a time in her life when she should have felt financial "desperation" - nothing close to the desperation that a significant portion of the working class feels, anyway).
Does she simply not care about appearances? Does she feel that people should know that she's "above" that sort of impropriety (that's a hard one to swallow, given her negatives and the general mood of the public)?
There is something very unsettling about Clinton. Too bad that, of her opponent it can be said, "there is something very terrifying about him".
The country deserves a better choice than these two flawed candidates.
22
This explains the Clintons perfectly.
"What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?"
Lady Macbeth, Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 1
"What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?"
Lady Macbeth, Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 1
8
For the constant babble this paper puts out day after day I today questioned my subscription....asking who are these readers? Then I read the comments on this article and found there are others who have tolerated this spew. Poor, poor Clinton. Poor readers of the NYT.
17
It should be an institutional requirement that any story mentioning a dollar figure from more than 20 years ago also provide the inflation adjusted present-day equivalent. I have a feeling the story might have come out differently if the author was forced to confront the fact that the Clintons' "hard times" years started with Bill making $55k, roughly equivalent to $160k today (according to the bureau of labor statistics) and almost exactly half what they paid for their charming house. I bet most young couples in Little Rock would feel quite secure with that kind of salary. I admire Hillary for being a hardworking successful woman at that time and in that place (and will happily vote for her in November), but I'm not really buying the armchair psychologizing.
11
It was the NY Times that spun the Clinton's Whitewater investment into a "scandal" and started much of the "crooked Hillary" nonsense. (I suspect Howell Raines was the instigator; Maureen Dowd was just following the party line.) People in Arkansas try to nurture anyone who looks like they have promise to star on a national level, and that used to be without partisan consideration. Bill Clinton was recognized as a coming star, and neither he nor Hillary came from money, so people tried to help. Sadly, one of the people they got in a deal with was James McDougal who suffered from severe bipolar disorder and lost their money. Beyond that, the Whitewater story was a crock. What people seem to neglect is that despite being financially stressed until after Bill left the White House, neither Clinton has ever been credibly accused of dipping into the public trough. Don't complain about their making some money out of office; that's the American way of compensating public servants.
4
Wait, Chozick claims they have a net worth of $50 million when their adjusted gross income from last year alone was $28 million. Either they spend a LOT, or Chozick has underestimated the net worth by a country mile.
13
I like this piece. It makes Hilary Clinton seem more like an ordinary person who has burdens to share. It definitely strikes a cord with me as a working woman and a mother. I think she can relate to the common man's monetary burdens and pressures far more than Mr. Trump can. She has seen dark financial days and if I were voting, I would definitely trust her more than someone who was born rich and never had to bother about being poor.
4
People are outraged that Hillary received high speaking fees from Wall Street, but Donald, according to an article in today's Washington Post, received $400,000 in 2005 in speaking fees. Where is outrage at Donald for taking money from an educational institution? At least to Wall Streeters, what they paid Hillary was "chump change."
According to Wash Post article:
Donald testified in a deposition:
“I was paid more than a million dollars,” Trump said when Ceresney (attorney for defendant reporter in the case) asked how much Trump had been paid for a speech in 2005 at New York City’s Learning Annex, a continuing-education center.
Ceresney: “But how much of the payments were cash?”
“Approximately $400,000,” Trump said.
According to Wash Post article:
Donald testified in a deposition:
“I was paid more than a million dollars,” Trump said when Ceresney (attorney for defendant reporter in the case) asked how much Trump had been paid for a speech in 2005 at New York City’s Learning Annex, a continuing-education center.
Ceresney: “But how much of the payments were cash?”
“Approximately $400,000,” Trump said.
5
Um, you do know Hillary took money from educational institutions as well?
6
Donald isn't supposed to be the spokesperson for the down trodden.
4
People disparaging the Clintons for working hard and being ambitious need to take a good, hard look at themselves. Since when has it been a crime to work hard in school -- hard enough to get into prestigious Ivy League schools without assistance from Daddy's financial backing amd connections? When did we start criticizing working mothers -- regardless of their professions -- for trying to earn more money to support their families? Bill Clinton also wanted to serve the state of Arkansas by becoming its governor. Everyone knows that a political campaign on that level requires a lot of money and legwork. The Clintons did not start out wealthy, and so they had to figure out how to finance Bill's desire to serve in public office. So Hillary went to work and earned as much as she could. There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of this! All you have to do is take a look at her opponent's background: inherited wealth, mediocre educational record, real estate wheeling and dealing left and right. At least the Clintons worked hard for their money and really did pull themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps. Isn't that something we Americans admire? Or has political partisanship blinded us so much that we're no longer able to judge people by reasonable standards?
26
why is this (and the same page 'clinton's homes') even NEWS.
All politicians are wealthier than typical Americans. Donald Trump and before him, Mitt Romney, demonstrate that Americans of all stripes do not really care if their politicians are rich.
It is really a matter of if they are rich, really rich or obscenely rich.
All politicians are wealthier than typical Americans. Donald Trump and before him, Mitt Romney, demonstrate that Americans of all stripes do not really care if their politicians are rich.
It is really a matter of if they are rich, really rich or obscenely rich.
9
Or, rich and female.
1
This story sheds new light on Hillary Clinton's money-seeking behavior and it makes me more inclined to view her excesses sympathetically. Thanks for the insight.
7
I'm a Republican who could never vote for Trump. I was actually considering voting for Hillary until I read this puff piece. It made me sick. Reading all the many cogent comments reminded me of why I distrusted Hillary in the first place. Maybe it's a throwaway, but Gary Johnson will be getting my vote.
21
So you don't care about the issues, you view the election as a personality contest?
4
It's OK, DR, more power to republicans planning to vote for Gary Johnson!
1
What exactly is the point of this article? So what is it a crime to want to do better as we get older and progress in our careers ? And to make a better living? They were never charged with doing anything illegal.......let it go people.......it's gotten really old.
11
Getting off on cattle futures is a technicality. Anyone else would have been prosecuted (just like the e-mails).
11
Like it or not, well-connected merchant bankers grease the wheels that make our modern world. And they deal in wholly astonishing, unimaginable amounts of money, placing bets on events in an unpredictable world. For any of them, the insights of a Hillary Clinton on world affairs and economies are easily worth what they paid her.
She was able to command top dollar. Her clients gladly paid her. There's no suggestion of any pro quid quo. What's the problem here, other than our discomfort with our own capitalist system and values?
She was able to command top dollar. Her clients gladly paid her. There's no suggestion of any pro quid quo. What's the problem here, other than our discomfort with our own capitalist system and values?
14
Those speeches are the thing I distrust most about the Clintons, and as the article states, they seem clueless about the public perception - and this from one of the most politically astute couples ever.
After reading this, I'm thinking, OK, $5 million in legal fees from defending themselves against bogus lawsuits and impeachment and such - those were a direct result of his being president and the Republican Congress wanting to destroy him (this is what Republican Congresses do with Democratic presidents - instead of helping to govern). And so I'm willing to grant her some leeway in getting those debts paid.
But $21 million far exceeds what they needed, and Bill was making just as much or more. And making nice with Wall Street? This kind of thing is a constant issue with Washington politicians - the connections they make, the people who have access to them, encourage avarice. And it's what the public distrusts the most about all politicians. The Clintons just were more greedy than most.
I can understand having financial worries - it's part of life for at least 90% of the population. I can't understand the personal ethics - or lack of - that allows a politician to trade off their public service and fame and connections to enrich themselves beyond all reason.
That's the bottom line.
After reading this, I'm thinking, OK, $5 million in legal fees from defending themselves against bogus lawsuits and impeachment and such - those were a direct result of his being president and the Republican Congress wanting to destroy him (this is what Republican Congresses do with Democratic presidents - instead of helping to govern). And so I'm willing to grant her some leeway in getting those debts paid.
But $21 million far exceeds what they needed, and Bill was making just as much or more. And making nice with Wall Street? This kind of thing is a constant issue with Washington politicians - the connections they make, the people who have access to them, encourage avarice. And it's what the public distrusts the most about all politicians. The Clintons just were more greedy than most.
I can understand having financial worries - it's part of life for at least 90% of the population. I can't understand the personal ethics - or lack of - that allows a politician to trade off their public service and fame and connections to enrich themselves beyond all reason.
That's the bottom line.
23
And yet, what is $21 million compared to the alleged $billions of Trump's? And, unless and until he releases his tax returns (years' worth, comparable to the Clintons' release), we can only assume his billions come from quid-pro-quo'ing and selling his own soul to corporate interests and even perhaps foreign interests to a degree that would make the Clintons' pale.
What this article also shows is that it's Hillary Clinton, perhaps more than any President in decades, who has lived and known what it's like to truly scramble to make ends meet – and to do so as an adult taking up financial responsibility for a young family and their future, scraping and thrift-shopping in ways that would seem to mirror the lives of all the voters Trump rallies on the grounds that he is the one who can understand and champion them?
It's echoes again — where is the new Ann Richards when we need her? – of the 1988 election where she encapsulated Bush 41 with "He can't help it! He was born with a silver foot in his mouth." Could truer words be applied to Donald Trump as well? He has been spoiled all his life and basked in nouveau riche gaudiness run amok – and he has the foot in mouth syndrome (inadvertent or otherwise) on steroids.
Where is all the comparable insistence into Trump's finances and dealings? Why the lopsided media focus on the candidate who's actually been financially transparent compared to her opponent? Not to excuse her Wall St. side but where's the scrutiny on him?
What this article also shows is that it's Hillary Clinton, perhaps more than any President in decades, who has lived and known what it's like to truly scramble to make ends meet – and to do so as an adult taking up financial responsibility for a young family and their future, scraping and thrift-shopping in ways that would seem to mirror the lives of all the voters Trump rallies on the grounds that he is the one who can understand and champion them?
It's echoes again — where is the new Ann Richards when we need her? – of the 1988 election where she encapsulated Bush 41 with "He can't help it! He was born with a silver foot in his mouth." Could truer words be applied to Donald Trump as well? He has been spoiled all his life and basked in nouveau riche gaudiness run amok – and he has the foot in mouth syndrome (inadvertent or otherwise) on steroids.
Where is all the comparable insistence into Trump's finances and dealings? Why the lopsided media focus on the candidate who's actually been financially transparent compared to her opponent? Not to excuse her Wall St. side but where's the scrutiny on him?
2
How come no mention of the fact that the Clintons actually charge the federal government rent on the Secret Service guard shack at the entrance of their Chappaqua property? The same guard house that was built with U.S. taxpayer funds to protect the Clintons, and that is manned full time also at taxpayer expense even thought the Clintons are rarely in residence there.
21
To me, this story raises serious doubts that Hillary has gone into politics for the primary reason to serve the public or to promote social causes. It seems she sees public office as her best opportunity to maximize her financial position. I don't resent that, but it makes me uneasy because its something she refuses to acknowledge and it casts a shadow over her future official decisions. On the other side there haven't been any allegations of self dealing during her term of senator. But NY politics is so notoriously corrupt that lack of allegations isn't strong evidence that there's nothing to allege.
17
I'm so shocked at some of these mean comments. I can understand HC worrying about money and feeling that it's going to be up to her to provide security for her family; a lot of us have been there. Also, I can't understand why she shouldn't have been handsomely paid for her speeches, after all, a man in a comparable position would have been. Lighten up on her; you are lucky to have her wanting to make your lives better. Give her a break. She's a tall poppy; so what.
12
I guess that's true if you think "Clinton good" = "public good"
5
It's not about the speeches - it's about her ongoing pattern of criminal behavior and the fact that she never acknowledges or changes it.
3
Financial stress turned Hillary into a corporatist? Thanks, NY Times, for promoting this newest in the eternal parade of Clinton Excuses For Everything. I sure wonder what it feels like to have financial stress...
Gee, financial stress must be unbearable!
So glad it NEVER happens to me or to anyone I know.
The Clinton Saga of Excuses is sounding more and more like Gee, Officer Krupke.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
Gee, financial stress must be unbearable!
So glad it NEVER happens to me or to anyone I know.
The Clinton Saga of Excuses is sounding more and more like Gee, Officer Krupke.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
30
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY could possibly have made $100,000 with a 10 month, $1000 investment in cattle futures. Nobody, no way, no how. Why doesn't The Times investigate this? After all, that would be real journalism, wouldn't it? Or is this below the fold fluff piece which makes Hillary out to be the sole bread winner in her family the best you can do?
41
The story told here is classic, really. A woman seeks to secure a better future for herself and her child in the face of a feckless husband. It's just a less drunk, more upscale version of Angela's Ashes. But instead of being celebrated, HRC is vilified.
12
I don't care that Hillary has received lots of money from corporations, but I do care if she cannot get small donations from voters.
2
Another example of uncritical fake reporting on Hillary. The case of her cattle futures trading alone should be enough to disqualify her from any public office. Her $1000 margin was illegally used to make $100,000, but not before she actually was $100,000 in the red on her account (her annual income at that time was $25,000). This is as per her publicly available trading records. Hillary was a lawyer knew very well that her broker Refco violated the law relating to margin requirements. There is also the inference (but unfortunately no direct proof) that the Refco created the winning trades for Hillary through improper allocation. A new type of pay-to-play it appears. Refco was later fined for their activity relating to improper margin regulation. See the Washington Post article of 5/27/94.
To believe that Clinton's commodity trading was indeed partly legitimate (ignoring the illegitimacy of the margin issue), one would have to rate her trading prowess ahead of the best commodity traders of all time. One also must look at Clinton's own attempt to suppress the investigation into the trading while claiming that her newfound wealth was the result of a gift from her parents - until her tax returns became public and the truth came out. Does this sound like the behavior of an innocent person?
Most people would brag about the best trading record known to man (or woman). Lying about her lies is second nature to Hillary.
To believe that Clinton's commodity trading was indeed partly legitimate (ignoring the illegitimacy of the margin issue), one would have to rate her trading prowess ahead of the best commodity traders of all time. One also must look at Clinton's own attempt to suppress the investigation into the trading while claiming that her newfound wealth was the result of a gift from her parents - until her tax returns became public and the truth came out. Does this sound like the behavior of an innocent person?
Most people would brag about the best trading record known to man (or woman). Lying about her lies is second nature to Hillary.
31
She's one of the 1%. And her crony capitalist friends will make sure you vote her into the White House. And the NYT clearly wants her there.
Hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy.
36
I also want her to be President.
2
Do you think that it is realistic for a person who is *not* a member of the 1% to be a viable candidate for president?
Apparently Hillary Clinton is the first candidate who has ever a) received a speaking fee or b) been rich. What? Why is this scandalous?
Apparently Hillary Clinton is the first candidate who has ever a) received a speaking fee or b) been rich. What? Why is this scandalous?
3
Corruption is corruption no matter how you frame it.
Terry McAuliffe is a great example. He raised millions of dollars for both Clintons and personally guaranteed their mortgage for their New York mansion after leaving the White House. Given that he is a huge supporter of trade deals, don't expect her oppose any of those deals. Money talks.
While working 15 years for one of the largest corporate law firms in the South (now conveniently missing from her resume) she was frighteningly cozy working with Tyson foods, the worst polluter in the state, while her husband was appointing environmental regulators.
There is so much old material (Cattle futures, Web Hubbel hush money etc.), but as Dick Morris has pointed out, Mrs.Clinton is the gift that keeps on giving (Wall Street speeches, Clinton Foundation collusion with State Department etc.).
This entire article by Mrs.Chozick reeks of whitewashing a very troubled past of money grabbing, greed, and suspicions of pay to play politics. It seems more like something out of the Clinton playbook to get ahead of problems that will resurface or new ones to come up this fall, rather than a genuine investigative piece of journalism.
Nobody buys the notion that Mrs.Clintons was ever that poor that she had to prostitute her supposed Methodist ethics to corporate power and influence.
Harry Truman, when he left the White House, moved back into his old family home, didn't give paid speeches, and didn't set up a foundation to enrich himself.
Terry McAuliffe is a great example. He raised millions of dollars for both Clintons and personally guaranteed their mortgage for their New York mansion after leaving the White House. Given that he is a huge supporter of trade deals, don't expect her oppose any of those deals. Money talks.
While working 15 years for one of the largest corporate law firms in the South (now conveniently missing from her resume) she was frighteningly cozy working with Tyson foods, the worst polluter in the state, while her husband was appointing environmental regulators.
There is so much old material (Cattle futures, Web Hubbel hush money etc.), but as Dick Morris has pointed out, Mrs.Clinton is the gift that keeps on giving (Wall Street speeches, Clinton Foundation collusion with State Department etc.).
This entire article by Mrs.Chozick reeks of whitewashing a very troubled past of money grabbing, greed, and suspicions of pay to play politics. It seems more like something out of the Clinton playbook to get ahead of problems that will resurface or new ones to come up this fall, rather than a genuine investigative piece of journalism.
Nobody buys the notion that Mrs.Clintons was ever that poor that she had to prostitute her supposed Methodist ethics to corporate power and influence.
Harry Truman, when he left the White House, moved back into his old family home, didn't give paid speeches, and didn't set up a foundation to enrich himself.
55
Terry McAuliffe has already publicly suggested she will flip on TPP.
15
quod erat demonstrandum. Afraid I'll be saying that a lot in the future...
2
Once again, I wonder whether many people commenting on this article actually read it. I hear so much fixation on the high-income years, ignoring the ups and downs, and coming away with the usual blind impression that the Clintons have always been members of the rich elite and unable to understand the middle class/poor because they've never shared the experience. Losing work in 2008 forever changed my outlook on security. I can totally relate to how Hillary must have felt with a young child and carefree husband to support when there were sudden drops in income and sudden debt.
5
Get real- you seriously think two Yale trained lawyers ( one a Rhodes scholar) have the same issues as any middle class family? Hardly.
She just chose the elevator over the stairs!
She just chose the elevator over the stairs!
4
"Despite choosing a life in government, she has appeared eager to make money, driven to provide for her family and helping amass a fortune of more than $50 million with her husband."
A quick Google search states that the Clinton's have a net worth of $111 million, so right away I question the author's credibility.
And yes, this is a puff piece. Poor Hillary had to sell her soul for the sake of Chelsea. Not buying it.
And you "forgot" to mention her stint as a Board of Director at minimum wage Walmart.
A quick Google search states that the Clinton's have a net worth of $111 million, so right away I question the author's credibility.
And yes, this is a puff piece. Poor Hillary had to sell her soul for the sake of Chelsea. Not buying it.
And you "forgot" to mention her stint as a Board of Director at minimum wage Walmart.
40
So the woman has a degree from Wellesley, and when the chips are down, her first instinct is not to go find a good paying job, but to "work the phones from the mansion, calling wealthy friends and asking for help"?
It must be nice to have the contacts to be able to do that. Most of the rest of us put our 9 month old children into exhorbitantly priced daycare and head off to be wage slaves. No wonder Hillary seems so self absorbed and detached from the masses. The usual rules really don't apply to her.
Citizens of formerly middle class families are now unable to get any college degree without taking on crippling amounts of debt. They are struggling with housing, child care and healthcare expenses. We cannot afford any more global wage arbitrage that both parties have been instrumental in enabling. The political class is ignoring the growing signs of stress, and the end result will not be pretty for anyone. The outsider campaigns of this election season are only the very tip of the iceberg. Trust me when I tell you there is a huge amount of anger brewing. This is exactly the type of situation that a more intelligent, well spoken, and charismatic despot than Donald Trump will someday exploit.
It must be nice to have the contacts to be able to do that. Most of the rest of us put our 9 month old children into exhorbitantly priced daycare and head off to be wage slaves. No wonder Hillary seems so self absorbed and detached from the masses. The usual rules really don't apply to her.
Citizens of formerly middle class families are now unable to get any college degree without taking on crippling amounts of debt. They are struggling with housing, child care and healthcare expenses. We cannot afford any more global wage arbitrage that both parties have been instrumental in enabling. The political class is ignoring the growing signs of stress, and the end result will not be pretty for anyone. The outsider campaigns of this election season are only the very tip of the iceberg. Trust me when I tell you there is a huge amount of anger brewing. This is exactly the type of situation that a more intelligent, well spoken, and charismatic despot than Donald Trump will someday exploit.
26
All his talk about Wall Street - what exactly did Hillary do for Wall Street aside from making speeches? Did she promise them something; did she seek legislation to advance their goals; did she do anything that would benefit Wall Street?
I would like to know the truth instead of hearing "Hillary and Wall Street".
I would like to know the truth instead of hearing "Hillary and Wall Street".
5
Well, she won't release the transcripts. So that hinders our ability to know the truth.
9
as a free-market capitalist, I have no problem with anything whatsoever that Mrs. Clinton has done to make money - nor do I question her motives... her dilemma comes in trying to persuade partisans of Bernie the Millionaires and Billionaires Hater to support her despite her wealth, however justified she was in obtaining it and however great the barriers she had to overcome... if she weren't running against the unacceptable goofball of the other party, she would be in much more "trouble" for achieving the financial success she's had
2
Check the latest reports. Bernie is out of the equation.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
2
Seriously? We're supposed to feel sorry for the Clintons because they were "only" making $51k in 1978? That was a hell of a lot of money back then. It seems to me that they weren't so much broke as irritated about not being as rich as their friends. Here it is 2016 and a lot of families survive on $51k so I'm struggling to feel sorry for the Clintons financial struggles in the 70's & 80's. This article is disgusting & completely tone deaf to the circumstances of average Americans struggling to pay bills in 2016 because they make $51k or less.
39
And remember, that is 51K in Arkansas, one of the lowest cost-of-living states. 51K, at worst, put them in the top 5%.
18
Earlier in the day, the headline of this article read "When Her Family Needed Money, Hillary Clinton Faced Stark Choices" - promising, but not delivering, a pitiful tale.
Now the headline is "Stress Over Family Finances Propelled Hillary Clinton Into Corporate World" - less pitiful, and less interesting.
But no matter what the headline, the article is tone-deaf; and seems pointless, at best - and the attempt to evoke sympathy fails.
Trump's name appears on front pages for a myriad of bad reasons, crowding out Hillary Clinton. Please, New York Times, if you wish for the Clinton name to appear more, surely you can find more valuable stories than this one?
Now the headline is "Stress Over Family Finances Propelled Hillary Clinton Into Corporate World" - less pitiful, and less interesting.
But no matter what the headline, the article is tone-deaf; and seems pointless, at best - and the attempt to evoke sympathy fails.
Trump's name appears on front pages for a myriad of bad reasons, crowding out Hillary Clinton. Please, New York Times, if you wish for the Clinton name to appear more, surely you can find more valuable stories than this one?
17
I find it simply amazing that Hillary's life is scrutinized in such detail. It certainly appears to me that she's analyzed in a way that no male candidate has *ever* been. We know more about the minute details of her life, dating back 40 years or more, yet people say they don't "know" her.
Here's the thing: she's a woman who supported her family before that was acceptable. She's the quintessential example of "behind every successful man there's a woman." Anyone who thinks Bill would ever have made it to the White House without her just doesn't understand how much of a life force Hillary is.
It's interesting that even when information about male candidates comes out, the details never get poured over like they do with Hillary. How many people remember, 20 years later, details about Gerald Ford or Ronald Reagan's finances? But just about everyone remembers Hillary's failed Whitewater real estate investment and her lucrative cattle futures investments. And I'm convinced the reason it's so unnerving she was paid to speak to Wall Street bankers is because...*she* was paid.
How is giving a speech any different than accepting lobbying, as just about all Congress men and women do? In fact, giving a speech does not explicitly imply a quid pro quo, as does the lobbying relationship that exists between Congress and K-Street. But somehow Hillary is a villain here. It's ludicrous.
Here's the thing: she's a woman who supported her family before that was acceptable. She's the quintessential example of "behind every successful man there's a woman." Anyone who thinks Bill would ever have made it to the White House without her just doesn't understand how much of a life force Hillary is.
It's interesting that even when information about male candidates comes out, the details never get poured over like they do with Hillary. How many people remember, 20 years later, details about Gerald Ford or Ronald Reagan's finances? But just about everyone remembers Hillary's failed Whitewater real estate investment and her lucrative cattle futures investments. And I'm convinced the reason it's so unnerving she was paid to speak to Wall Street bankers is because...*she* was paid.
How is giving a speech any different than accepting lobbying, as just about all Congress men and women do? In fact, giving a speech does not explicitly imply a quid pro quo, as does the lobbying relationship that exists between Congress and K-Street. But somehow Hillary is a villain here. It's ludicrous.
28
Lobbying is regulated. Speech making is not. So it's different.
And I would submit that we would know details about Gerald Ford or Ronald Reagan's finances from 20 years ago if they were still public figures today.
And I would submit that we would know details about Gerald Ford or Ronald Reagan's finances from 20 years ago if they were still public figures today.
4
Just because other politicians do it, does not make it right. That is the usual default position which considering the considerable number of strings attached that comes with that money usually at the expense of the rest of the citizens. There is also the little matter that she wants to be President. How little you expect of your leaders in America.
6
Come on, yes, she is scrutinized endlessly. The question is why. Is it that every thing she is involved in ends up in questions, investigations, hearings and litigation or all of the above. In a career of almost 40 years, she seems to have attracted attention for her many poor choices, bad decisions, lack of solid judgement.
While you may see this as happenstance, I see a pattern. This is not the legacy of a wise, well seasoned, cognitive politician , sitting comfortably in the White - it's one that frankly worries the American public quite a lot as seen in the many polls in the last couple of years.
Her behavior doesn't inspire confidence.
While you may see this as happenstance, I see a pattern. This is not the legacy of a wise, well seasoned, cognitive politician , sitting comfortably in the White - it's one that frankly worries the American public quite a lot as seen in the many polls in the last couple of years.
Her behavior doesn't inspire confidence.
1
Making money these days presents a lot of arguments. Where does security for the family end and giving back to the community begin? Most people would prefer to have enough money that they could enjoy life comfortably, giving back to their family and community. One house is probably enough, I assume Donald Trump has a few. Do we need a house or a mansion? Should we eat out every night at expensive restaurants after a nice day on the yacht when so many people are in poverty. Do we need a Bentley or will a BMW or toyota do? I assume Hillary lives comfortably but not as excessively as some of the Donald Trumps of the world. I mean even Mike Bloomberg flies to Bermuda in his private jet and he doesn't seem like a bad guy. I don't want to be like Mike but some kind of security and pleasant life would be nice.
3
There is nothing wrong with having money as long as you don't harm anyone to get it or assume that having it gives you the right to harm other people.
2
This is a very interesting and revealing article. We are all concerned and anxious about finances. This humanizes Hillary and explains a lot of her actions. Unfortunately, we don't all have rich friends willing to help with thousands of dollars when we need it.
3
it's a relief to know that Hillary will continue in Obama's footsteps as a vassal of Wall St. and the Commander in Chief of unending war.
18
In reply to the poster who asked when the retirements of stay-at-home mothers would be covered by women like Hillary and other wage earners: The retirements of people who stay at home (presumably because they have partners with good incomes) are subsidized through spousal Social Security benefits and Medicare coverage. And married people get this regardless of whether they have kids. These benefits (based on the wage-earning spouse's income) frequently grant more to affluent white women who never paid into the system than to mothers of color who had to work outside the home and who paid at least 7.65 percent of every dime they earned into these programs.
1
All presidents are vassals of Wall Street, but it took a Republican president to start the unending war -- and against the wrong enemy/country to boot. There were better military ways to solve that problem.
When do women like Hillary (and men) honor and cover the retirement of the women who stayed with the children like Chelsea, making it all possible?
5
Perhaps you don't realize that Hillary has been fighting on behalf of women and children for decades. She campaigns on affordable childcare, paid maternity leave, equal pay, and how Social Security needs to be fixed so that women who have spent years out of the formal economy raising children get fair retirement benefits.
1
She says she does but there seems to be little proof of any effect of her hard work. Also, she is open to dismantling SS so that's just not correct!
3
My takeaway from this article is that Mrs. Clinton's anxiety about money, or perhaps some more basic, unresolved concern, has distorted her judgment irreparably, as can be seen from the bad decisions she has made since then, and continues to make during this campaign. Today's article regarding the interactions between the Clinton foundation during her tenure as SoS presents egregious misjudgments. Her mistakes today in dealing with her emails as SoS continue.
As frightening as Trump can appear, to my mind, from entirely different psychological tendencies, Clinton can appear equally frightening.
As frightening as Trump can appear, to my mind, from entirely different psychological tendencies, Clinton can appear equally frightening.
18
"Sugar coating" would be an understatement for this article. We can rationalize why people have financial insecurity, but that Wall Street speaking arrangements seems more about greed, unless you tell me that they really "need" $21M. If financial concerns can mud her judgment then, they could do the same when she becomes the president.
With less than 100 days to go, people are really trying hard to paint a better image for Mrs. Clinton. Not sure that it helps much. Might be easier to just tell the truth: Trump is a lying lunatic who is encouraging the Russians to hack our government computers.
With less than 100 days to go, people are really trying hard to paint a better image for Mrs. Clinton. Not sure that it helps much. Might be easier to just tell the truth: Trump is a lying lunatic who is encouraging the Russians to hack our government computers.
12
I think Hillary has a message to get out and being paid to deliver it is one of the benefits of someone in power.
I think this article treats her commodities trading "profits" much too naively.
Some contemporary commentators including the Times William Safire noted that the firm where she "traded" had had problems with regulators. He also noted the $100g profit was suspiciously close to the round number of bribe.
If the trading house was willing to act as a go-between for a bribe it would not have been difficult to switch already-closed profitable deals (perhaps made in a house's name) to her account.
One fact that raised my suspicions: her very first trade was bearish; she bet a commodity would decrease in price. Anyone with a fundamental understanding of markets knows that in betting against a price increase the trader reverses the arithmetic of a bet on a price increase; her profit potential is limited (prices can't go below zero) but her loss exposure is unlimited. In making that initial trade Hillary put her family's entire net worth at risk.
Unless the trading was just a illicit scheme to hide a $100g bribe in which case Hillary risked nothing.
Perhaps a reporter from the business section would explain.
Some contemporary commentators including the Times William Safire noted that the firm where she "traded" had had problems with regulators. He also noted the $100g profit was suspiciously close to the round number of bribe.
If the trading house was willing to act as a go-between for a bribe it would not have been difficult to switch already-closed profitable deals (perhaps made in a house's name) to her account.
One fact that raised my suspicions: her very first trade was bearish; she bet a commodity would decrease in price. Anyone with a fundamental understanding of markets knows that in betting against a price increase the trader reverses the arithmetic of a bet on a price increase; her profit potential is limited (prices can't go below zero) but her loss exposure is unlimited. In making that initial trade Hillary put her family's entire net worth at risk.
Unless the trading was just a illicit scheme to hide a $100g bribe in which case Hillary risked nothing.
Perhaps a reporter from the business section would explain.
15
But Safire was proven wrong and never retracted it which does not make him a reliable source does it?
3
As the joke goes in finance, motivations may not be too different from guys who say, “Stick ‘em up!” for a living.
3
I find it the epitome of hypocrisy that making a lot of money is seen as a virtue for Mr. Trump, but for Secretary Clinton a symbol of vice.
20
There's a big difference between developing real estate, golf courses and clubs, and turning $1,000 into $100,000, being on the board of minimum wage Walmart for many years, and going from dead broke to over $100 million by giving speeches to anyone who would pay your fee. And don't get me started with the Clinton Slushfund Foundation.
12
And let's not forget her leadership pushing healthcare while he was President. Now why didn't that succeed...
4
They were both naive about DC. That is why Governors of small states and businessmen are poor choices.
2
It wasn't her job to do it. She wasn't elected. The job should have been handed over to Orin Hatch and Ted Kennedy who knew how to work together to get health care laws passed. She could have been working with them behind the scenes but she was jumping the gun and playing at being an elected official.
5
Obama said it best a few years ago:
"At some point I do think you've made enough money"
I guess Hillary has yet to reach that point.
"At some point I do think you've made enough money"
I guess Hillary has yet to reach that point.
15
I would love to have had Hillary Clinton's money problems when first married and end up as a multimillionaire. How did you do it Mrs. Clinton? Of course, through expensive speaking engagements on Wall Street, borrowing from friends to purchase homes and other devious means. Many of us would never even conceive of behaving in this manner even if given the opportunity. She obviously does not know right from wrong nor neither cares. This is the kind of woman who wants to be president of the the US and hold the most important office in the world? We really have stooped low in our expectations and we deserve whatever we get if she wins the election. I will never vote for this dishonest and unscrupulous woman.
9
Neither Bill's nor Hillary's family had money to lend. That is how many of us afforded our first homes. I think other commenters are correct, that it is ok when men or Republicans leave public office and make big bucks from lobbying firms but for Hillary Clinton, somehow, that isn't OK. I'm sure Carly Fiornia and Meg Whitman would take whatever Wall STreet or other companies would pay for speaking fees.
4
Really? You wouldn't speak to bunch of people for money given the chance? And all people who borrow money from friends or get loan guarantees are crooked? Stuff and nonsense.
3
The Washington Post today has an article about a deposition Donald gave in litigation he brought against a reporter. In that article, Donald refers to a $400,000 in speaking fees in 2005 from an educational entity (which Donald inflated to be that he received $1,000,000 because of free publicity for his name). Why isn't he criticized for taking such large amount from an educational institution, presumably nonprofit, instead of Hillary whose speaking fees represent small change to Wall Streeters. Everyone forget about Wall Streeters bonuses and golden parachutes. Her fees - while admittedly a lot to the general public - is nothing to Wall Street..
2
Why are so many people obsessed with the amount of money they have? Isn't this the American Dream? Aren't we supposed to study, work hard, and , ultimately, do better than our parents?
She has done exactly what we have all been taught.
In no other country could her story be possible. That, my friends, is the real story.
She has done exactly what we have all been taught.
In no other country could her story be possible. That, my friends, is the real story.
5
Giving speeches to Wall Street banks for several hundred thousand a pop, and then pretending to hate them to fend of a wily socialist from Vermont, is the "American Dream?"
6
It's fine for Republican men like Trump to have a billion or two. It's fine for him to put his businesses into bankruptcy at the expense of his creditors and unpaid contractors, but not himself. George W. Bush has made over $20 million in speaking fees. Not a peep of indignancy from the right.
But the Clintons? HOW DARE THEY!!!
But the Clintons? HOW DARE THEY!!!
1
Bill Clinton made mistakes. For sure. He made a lot of mistakes -- and his most significant one was with Monica. But, when they left the White House, the Clintons had a lot of debt and not a lot of dough. I'm happy that Mrs. Clinton went out and made a bunch of cash after serving as a senator and the secretary of state.
And yet, in our sexist society, Hillary is criticized for having made money that George Bush, Colin Powell, and many other men who have served in government.
And yet, in our sexist society, Hillary is criticized for having made money that George Bush, Colin Powell, and many other men who have served in government.
12
Excellent point. No Republicans seem to fault Eric Cantor, for example, for going for big bucks now that he is out of Congress. And people forget about the enormous debt they had (legal fees) upon leaving the White House.
4
The debt was a result of defending lawsuits. Whatever the president's income was for four years, minus ZERO expenses, would have made them very comfortable without the lawsuits.
3
Someone who can pay for almost half the purchase price of a house in the downpayment, as Mrs. Clinton did when they left the governor's mansion, is not struggling. Most people feel they are fortunate if they can save 10 to 15% as a downpayment. She might have perceived that she and they were struggling based on the life she had lived growing up in her family, but that is a far different matter. Real struggling involves moving into a rental property because you can't afford a downpayment or don't have the job history to qualify for a mortgage. As for saving for her daughter's college, could she really have been concerned about that with a one year old child? Yes, she could have been, if she was totally unaccustomed to living with uncertainty, but, again, most people live with some doubts about their future every single day of their lives.
13
First of all, 5 million in debt is a major deal. If you can't see that, then all your other statements are nonsense. And a former president can't just go live in a tiny rental unit since they need significant space for security, and much more privacy than the average person. Again if you don't understand that, you don't get reality.
This line of argument is like saying American poor aren't really poor since they don't live on a dollar a day like they do in developed countries, or that some of those poor people aren't really poor because they have tin shack homes and don't live on the street.
5 million in debt and you could easily need to declare bankruptcy to overcome it.
And yes, with a 1 year old, you are worried about paying for college because that is when you need to start figuring it out in order to pay for it. Hard, financial facts. So you start realizing you need a plan or it will never happen. Kids changes your perspective.
This line of argument is like saying American poor aren't really poor since they don't live on a dollar a day like they do in developed countries, or that some of those poor people aren't really poor because they have tin shack homes and don't live on the street.
5 million in debt and you could easily need to declare bankruptcy to overcome it.
And yes, with a 1 year old, you are worried about paying for college because that is when you need to start figuring it out in order to pay for it. Hard, financial facts. So you start realizing you need a plan or it will never happen. Kids changes your perspective.
3
Um, he was talking about their time in Arkansas. They didn't have 5 million in debt until they left the White House. Try reading his comment more carefully, NSH.
6
$5 million in debt???? They bought a $1M dollar house.
Bill had multi million dollar book contract. They never struggled during or after the White House.
Bill had multi million dollar book contract. They never struggled during or after the White House.
4
There are two common themes in the comments here:
1. Many rcommenters feel that Mrs. Clinton is being unfairly criticized for being financially savvy and trying to secure her family's financial future. They believe that similar criticism would not be leveled at a man.
2. Many commenters find that the article's characterization of the Clinton family's "financial struggles" is bordering hyperbole. They are correctly pointing out that the combined income of the Clinton household in 1980 was equivalent to $170,000 today, and considering that the according to the census bureau the median household income in Little Rock in 2014 was $53,482, it is at best disingenuous, if not absurd, to suggest that they were on the brink of destitution.
Yes, Mrs. Clinton has been focused on securing financial freedom for her family. Yes, she has been criticized for things for which men would be celebrated. Yes, it is ridiculous to try to paint her or her family as "financially destitute." Yes, there is a degree of greed at the root of her financial decisions and pursuits. Whether this greed is a good thing or a bad thing - that's an entirely different debate.
We can't have it both ways - greed is the cornerstone of capitalism, so either we have to embrace it as part of our proud capitalist tradition, or we have to reject it and find something different/better. We can't have a double standard - a greedy woman is no better or worse than a greedy man. Period.
1. Many rcommenters feel that Mrs. Clinton is being unfairly criticized for being financially savvy and trying to secure her family's financial future. They believe that similar criticism would not be leveled at a man.
2. Many commenters find that the article's characterization of the Clinton family's "financial struggles" is bordering hyperbole. They are correctly pointing out that the combined income of the Clinton household in 1980 was equivalent to $170,000 today, and considering that the according to the census bureau the median household income in Little Rock in 2014 was $53,482, it is at best disingenuous, if not absurd, to suggest that they were on the brink of destitution.
Yes, Mrs. Clinton has been focused on securing financial freedom for her family. Yes, she has been criticized for things for which men would be celebrated. Yes, it is ridiculous to try to paint her or her family as "financially destitute." Yes, there is a degree of greed at the root of her financial decisions and pursuits. Whether this greed is a good thing or a bad thing - that's an entirely different debate.
We can't have it both ways - greed is the cornerstone of capitalism, so either we have to embrace it as part of our proud capitalist tradition, or we have to reject it and find something different/better. We can't have a double standard - a greedy woman is no better or worse than a greedy man. Period.
16
But she is now sounding like Bernie Sanders, blasting the rich and blasting income inequality (her income from the past 10 years, of course, does not count).
3
Crooked Hillary is such a corrupt woman. Did you see her latest emails where she found government jobs for people who donated to her private foundation?
That's incredibly corrupt. Probably yet another illegal act.
It gets worse. The largest donors are countries like Saudi Arabia, Algeria, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Brunei etc. Saudi Arabia alone donated over $25M.
Crooked Hillary's cover is that those donations were for charitable efforts. For example, Algeria alleged donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to help Haiti. Does anybody seriously believe that Algeria gives a hoot about Haiti? Of course not. Algeria invested its money to buy off Clinton influence in the State Department. They are not idiots throwing away money. They invested it, knowing Crooked Hillary is a money puppet.
That's incredibly corrupt. Probably yet another illegal act.
It gets worse. The largest donors are countries like Saudi Arabia, Algeria, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Brunei etc. Saudi Arabia alone donated over $25M.
Crooked Hillary's cover is that those donations were for charitable efforts. For example, Algeria alleged donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to help Haiti. Does anybody seriously believe that Algeria gives a hoot about Haiti? Of course not. Algeria invested its money to buy off Clinton influence in the State Department. They are not idiots throwing away money. They invested it, knowing Crooked Hillary is a money puppet.
9
Hillary Clinton came to do good and stayed to do well (for themselves). What a choice we have this time. Gary Johnson is looking better and better. At least, I will have clear conscience voting for him.
6
Just remember that momentary gratification at the election booth on Nov 8 - by that I mean voting third party -- is tantamount to a vote for Trump and a Supreme Court that will set back a progressive agenda for a generation or more. I'm taking the long view and voting for Hillary for, regardless of her faults, she will make good nominations for the Supreme Court current vacancy and likely more to come. Please think about it.
1
Don't worry about your individual conscience, worry about who will do the best job for the greatest number of people in our country and the world. Whose vision of the USA do you hope to see?
You may be right. But on the other hand Hillary is more likely to get USA get bogged down in a mano a mano fight with Russia in Syria , middle East, Ukraine and all sort of places in the world. Her track record in foreign adventurism (Iraq, Libya ) is not very encouraging
3
Obama was a community organizer. Big difference in values. Those who try to justify HRC's choices on grounds of necessity might consider the obstacles faced by a black man with an Islamic-sounding name. Yet he didn't compromise his principles on the way up, did he?
Truth is, nobody "pushed" HRC into corporate dealings. She chose it, and it reflects her values. So get ready for 4 years of struggle against these proclivities, the only thing worse being a madman. Some choices!
Truth is, nobody "pushed" HRC into corporate dealings. She chose it, and it reflects her values. So get ready for 4 years of struggle against these proclivities, the only thing worse being a madman. Some choices!
13
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't/isn't Obama a millionaire? He had quite the spread in Chicago prior to moving to the White House. You're also implying that Hillary's work in her earlier life championing children and family causes, which she still championed while in the Senate and beyond, was nothing of "value". I'm betting Obama would say her work in these areas was at least as "valuable" as his was as a community organizer.
2
As of 2008, Obama's net worth came mainly from sales of his books, not the "pay-to-play" corporate and Wall Street ties that taint the Clintons. HRC's main quality is that, unlike her GOP opponent, she probably doesn't have a 666 on her forehead.
1
Your example doesn't hold up. Obama was a community organizer for about 2-3 years before he went to law school. After he left law school he worked at a corporate firm for about a year (where he met Michelle) and as he lectured as a professor and worked in state government Michelle was a head attorney for a hospital chain, earning a decent sum of money. These are good people. You judge them for trying to both give their kids the best they can (given their high earning potential) and serve their communities.
Those who can earn a lot of money feel the pull of what they "could be" or "should be" doing for their families. If two parents earn $30,000 each all their careers instead of the $100,000+ that they could be earning in corporate jobs and then when it comes time to pay for college (around $250,000 these days) they can't make the bill (imagine the same example with some big medical bill), would you say that they succeeded in serving their community or failed at protecting their family and loved ones? I do think you (and other voters) are being a bit harsh.
Those who can earn a lot of money feel the pull of what they "could be" or "should be" doing for their families. If two parents earn $30,000 each all their careers instead of the $100,000+ that they could be earning in corporate jobs and then when it comes time to pay for college (around $250,000 these days) they can't make the bill (imagine the same example with some big medical bill), would you say that they succeeded in serving their community or failed at protecting their family and loved ones? I do think you (and other voters) are being a bit harsh.
A major underlying premise of this article is that the onus of financial support for the family falls on the man and when Bill failed to meet his obligation, Hillary rose up to the challenge. Much ado is being made of sexism in this campaign and this article reeks of it.
4
Can not resist. So much ado ain't nothing?
Hillary will be our next president. And if we pressure her in the right way, she will be our next great president! Having said that, I still believe that Bill and Hillary are together, not because they truly love each other, but because they both helped each other politically to pursue power. Their daughter was added in as a way of projecting family.
3
On the one hand we applaud women that are the main breadwinners on the other we judge them by different standards from men. Just imagine if this article headlined " Stress Over family Finances Propelled Husband into Corporate World" - no one would even think it was worth reading let alone judge it for anything other than "good for him."
10
If HRC were a man, he would be lauded for pulling himself and his family out of tough financial times through hard work, ingenuity, and perseverance.
More power to her, I say. Starting in January?
More power to her, I say. Starting in January?
18
Sorry. If Hillary were the governor, Bill were the financial guy, Hillary had already served as president and Bill were running now, we would be saying the exact same thing about Bill. Please stop bringing gender into everything.
9
An honest assessment of a woman being the breadwinner in a political family, where the man of the house was politically savy, but absolutely hopeless on the financial side.
Mrs. Clinton's struggle to succeed despite all odds against her in both the political and working world should be an inspiration for all American females. Her devotion to family, despite some self inflicted wounds, caused by careless Bill, no doubt hurt her, but she did "Stand By Her Man", who did good for our economy during his terms in office.
Her life story stands in stark contradiction to her male opponent in our current election, who was born with a golden foot in his mouth, and never had to struggle like Ms. Clinton. Quite the opposite he made others struggle financially by taking advantage of their weaker position in all his "Deals", be they students at Trump University, workers at his various bankrupt adventures, or suppliers and contractors that got paid less and later than expected. Rather dumb in the latter as in such business word gets around and these businessmen surely learned to highball their estimates knowing that when Trump paid them later and less, they still got more than it had cost them. They were the ones who "Made The Deal" with The (unsuspecting) Donald, who thought he had won.
Mrs. Clinton's struggle to succeed despite all odds against her in both the political and working world should be an inspiration for all American females. Her devotion to family, despite some self inflicted wounds, caused by careless Bill, no doubt hurt her, but she did "Stand By Her Man", who did good for our economy during his terms in office.
Her life story stands in stark contradiction to her male opponent in our current election, who was born with a golden foot in his mouth, and never had to struggle like Ms. Clinton. Quite the opposite he made others struggle financially by taking advantage of their weaker position in all his "Deals", be they students at Trump University, workers at his various bankrupt adventures, or suppliers and contractors that got paid less and later than expected. Rather dumb in the latter as in such business word gets around and these businessmen surely learned to highball their estimates knowing that when Trump paid them later and less, they still got more than it had cost them. They were the ones who "Made The Deal" with The (unsuspecting) Donald, who thought he had won.
4
Don't make Bill the bad guy --- it takes two to tango!
4
As I recall, Bill was the one who was married.
2
Hillary exhibits the full playbook of crooked politicians (short of outright bribes). Favored trades in her investments, personal loans guaranteed by backers, play for pay foundation and speaking fees. Given the number of people who view her as dishonest she could only become a candidate due to the rigged nominating process of the Democratic party. If the super delegates wouldn't do it the DNC but its thumb on the scale of Bernie's campaign.
29
Yes, she makes Nixon look like a saint.
16
And I forgot to add working for a law firm whose primary business was lobbying the State of Arkansas while her husband was governor.
6
Dishonest is assuming that any candidate is so manifestly perfect that his loss could be due only to cheating by his opponent.
Dishonest is assuming that your candidate's wins are honest expressions of the people's will, while the opponent's wins must be the result of fraud.
As a philosopher is once reputed to have said: Remove the log from your own eye before attending to the speck in your brother's.
Dishonest is assuming that your candidate's wins are honest expressions of the people's will, while the opponent's wins must be the result of fraud.
As a philosopher is once reputed to have said: Remove the log from your own eye before attending to the speck in your brother's.
How have we as a nation come to this: two unpopular candidates, one of whom is irresponsible at best? The role of money in politics -- and that's what matters here, not just the Clintons' financial struggles -- is so overwhelming that nobody can become a candidate for president without being involved in pandering and corruption.
When this particular campaign is over, we need a national conversation about this. Maybe about how some countries avoid this, about public financing of campaigns, about limits on how long campaigning is. And maybe a tax system that doesn't make the rich stay rich and society's infrastructure crumble away.
When this particular campaign is over, we need a national conversation about this. Maybe about how some countries avoid this, about public financing of campaigns, about limits on how long campaigning is. And maybe a tax system that doesn't make the rich stay rich and society's infrastructure crumble away.
17
She gets elected, that will not happen. She is already preparing Chelsea to continue the dynasty.
16
Dream on Howard, and good on he who could find the politico to say Hold,Enough.
1
Why is the Times recycling a tired and empty message Maureen Dowd started pushing back in 1992? Is this newspaper anti-corporation? Is the point that a person who works in the corporate sector lacks a moral compass? Based on what fundamental truth do we find that to seek social justice precludes getting rich? I find the premise of this piece extremely flimsy and dubious.
36
Of course, an article written by a female, it would always come down to, it's all about THE MONEY! Let's give Hillary the credit she deserves! She rose above that yearning of her cohort generation, despite that You've Come A Long Way Baby, nonsense! Hillary certainly has, and look at the easy rival, they've given her!!!
5
They're as shady Gatsby; with that same greed fueled by the desire to fit in with powerful elites. Funny, Bill really is an Oxford Man (well, sort of).
18
What absurd apologist clap-trap. She had to worry about money during a few, short periods of her life? And, that gives her a pass on everything? So, even after she had raked in $20 million in speaking fees and she was still angling for that next $1 million? Come on. Be real.
58
They weren't truly struggling. $51k in 1978 translates to over $100k in 2016. If they couldn't as a family of 3 live comfortably off of that kind of $...then they have a budgeting problem...not an income problem.
8
One can certainly see how getting a real job could violate the principles of a liberal.
16
Tell that to Warren Buffett or George Soros.
3
Sorry but that thought is equally applicable to conservatives. Just depends on the person in question.
1
Bob,
Buffet and Soros are financiers and here I agree with BJ. They do not have "a real job". I think he is relating to the 9-5ers, mostly working for someone else or are small business proprietors, which, not surprisingly, is most of us.
Buffet and Soros are financiers and here I agree with BJ. They do not have "a real job". I think he is relating to the 9-5ers, mostly working for someone else or are small business proprietors, which, not surprisingly, is most of us.
1
With the intention of being sympathetic toward the Clinton's financial situation in Arkansas, some distortions have entered the portrayal offered in the article.
The degree of concern, indeed panic, about one's financial standing is a highly individualized matter. The Clintons were not hurting or in serious trouble when Bill Clinton was kicked out as governor. Maybe they felt that way. 55K per year in her job translates into about $147,000. in today's dollars and that's a very good income in a state like Arkansas. The amount they reported in 1992 on their tax returns amounts of $500,000. in current dollars. Hey, almost anyone considers that a comfortable level and one sufficient to pay college tuition and other future expenses.
Does this early experience with a kind of genteel poverty, the paycheck to paycheck existence lived by most Americans, justify the idea that, in the post-presidential period, Hillary wanted to make megabucks? The answer is NO. It could reasonably be offered as an excuse for money grubbing and paid speech making, but it isn't the whole story.
The Clinton's became personally aware while Bill was president that there were many in our country who essentially have all the money they can use for any purpose and who have no worries at all about the future and they wanted to join that economic class. When a means came available for them to do so, they did so, with gusto.
The money gives them and their daughter a future no matter what the voters say.
39
And what Bill Clinton did was tear apart some of the safety net, gave banks a free ride, entered NAFTA and made it much easier to replace Americans with freeign workers. All by kick backs to the Clinton Foundation, as "contributions".
21
No, your comment above is not quite correct. Clinton made those decisions before the contributions were made to the foundation and I seriously doubt he was thinking, "Oh, in six or seven years, these people are going to be giving me money for important causes." Because he was paling around with the wealthy, of course, there could have been some influence and some changes in his thinking. There were a lot of actions taken during his presidency which did not ultimately make it better for millions of citizens, but they were not done with outright bribes, unless you consider our campaign contribution system one that involves bribes.
2
And enabled them to enter the political arena with the power to fight for the future of their fellow Americans who were not so fortunate, capable and driven as the Clintons were. I respect it when people want to give back to the society that enabled their success. That is not something I have seen from her opponent in this race.
3
A couple of points: 1) Nothing that surprising about a two-income household, often now with the female member earning the most; 2) This article was aided by the fact the author had access to the Clintons' tax filings. Writing a similar article about the Trump's would prove more difficult.
22
" Writing a similar article about the Trump's would prove more difficult."
You mean impossible.
You mean impossible.
1
Why does any - even the slightest - critique of Mrs. Clinton invariably elicit cries of "But... TRUMP!!!"?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
8
This is clearly a piece to justify the Clinton's ties with special interests, the wealthy, and their warm embrace of corporate money. There is no nuance, no gray zone, and no justifications of money in politics. In the area of corporate greed and influence, the world really is black and white. The wealthy give money with conditions, and politicians do their best to deliver. It's a transactional relationship. Some may read this and think
"How triumphant!" while many will also ponder "Is she a sell out?"
We don't need journalism like this that "humanizes" and individualizes the most prominent problems in our society today. This is not Hilary's feminist manifesto; it's about the corruption of politics through money and wealthy influence.
As the NYTimes pushes this narrative forward, we have to consider the truth and the facts. And that is that the Supreme Court voted and gave the right of "freedom" of speech to corporations to influence and give unlimited amounts of money and support of politicians. Now that's the main story line.
"How triumphant!" while many will also ponder "Is she a sell out?"
We don't need journalism like this that "humanizes" and individualizes the most prominent problems in our society today. This is not Hilary's feminist manifesto; it's about the corruption of politics through money and wealthy influence.
As the NYTimes pushes this narrative forward, we have to consider the truth and the facts. And that is that the Supreme Court voted and gave the right of "freedom" of speech to corporations to influence and give unlimited amounts of money and support of politicians. Now that's the main story line.
60
Not to mention that this article tries to make $51k sound like it wasn't enough for a family of 3 to survive off of in 1978. That's hilarious. A Governor & an attorney couldn't survive off of $51k in 1978...how on earth does she think people who don't make $51k survive in 2016?
11
So...are you voting for Trump? A vote for anyone other than Hillary is a vote for Trump and a Supreme Court that will oppose everything you wrote about.
Humanize your favorite - demonize your foe...
The true hallmark of a free and objective press...
Said another way: first amendment fanatics have done incalculably more damage to this country, than second amendment fanatics...
The true hallmark of a free and objective press...
Said another way: first amendment fanatics have done incalculably more damage to this country, than second amendment fanatics...
18
Looks like the Pravda did things; doesn't it?
2
Sadly, "Congress hall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" has been as badly neglected as the "well regulated militia" clause in the second amendment that empowers the unarmed to vet would-be volunteer police officers and soldiers for the sake of their own lives, liberty, and property.
That's just silly, unless you're talking about the religion part.
So Sad! Perhaps we should set up a jar where we can all put our spare change into to help the Clintons!
45
Think of it as a jar for spare change to save the U.S. from a fascist, ignorant, homicidal madman.
35
It looks like we're going to get saved after all; by the man's own mouth.
2
@Dan Stackhouse: What is ur source of information for saying that Mr. TRUMP, w/o naming him, is a "homicidal, fascist, ignorant madman? Have u ever met the candidate, much less interviewed him in depth in order to come up with such emotionally driven nonsense? Fascism was a product of the Great War in which my father and uncle fought because they believed in the Empire.What has the "Guerre de Quatorze" and its aftermath got to do with Trump?Knew fascists in the OAS and have a grasp of this system of ideas."Homicidal?" How so? Unlike Clinton,DT has no blood on his hands, was not in Congress in 2003 to vote for the war as was Clinton. "Ignorant?"DT is a graduate of Wharton, U. of Pennsylvania, one of the best schools in the US, and is recognized even by his enemies as one of the finest readers of contracts in the business."Madman?"DT has proven to be an adept politician who defeated 16 other GOP contenders, and raised the political consciousness of millions of Americans who see him as their "vox populi."If u believe in defending those who r at the bottom of the hill, marginalized by O's support of offshoring and open borders, who,heretofore, had no voice, then u should cast ur vote for Mr. TRUMP. Do u really want a third term of Obama?Finally, listened to Chris Cuomo, CNN's "fattorino,"interview Sen. Collins. Not once did Cuomo ask her why she voted also for the war in Iraq in 2003 that has caused so much suffering, so much violence and death.
2
Oh my gosh! Hillary is flawed, unlike the rest of us who are perfect. If anything, maybe her drive, ambition and ability to "bail things out" is just what we need in a president. That's a better skill set than possessed by her opponent. When you start out with an inheritance of about $250 million, you're coming from an entirely different perspective.
24
Yes we all need a good role model that lies, cheats, has not morals or ethics.
12
I am not sure of whom you have in mind, but we most certainly have had more than enough of those.
Nick, Trump definitely lies, cheats, and has no morals nor ethics, but I don't think we should look to him as a role model. People may have been impressed by the pack of lies in "The Art of the Deal", but Trump had no part in writing that.
1
Oh no, my heart bleeds. She needed money, don't everyone else deal with their financial needs without selling their souls to the .01% to get ahead.
25
Right, and if I get a job or shop at Walmart, am I selling my soul to advance the interests of the Walton family, among the richest in the world?
Yes. And no. The world and our moral choices are complicated and sometimes contradictory -- at every income level. Your oversimplification may make you feel good at someone else's expense, but it is a poor guide to navigating the real world of human ethics in our complex society.
Yes. And no. The world and our moral choices are complicated and sometimes contradictory -- at every income level. Your oversimplification may make you feel good at someone else's expense, but it is a poor guide to navigating the real world of human ethics in our complex society.
Apologia redux - and redux, and redux...,
16
Imagine how different this election year could have been if the Clintons had translated what for them were economic hard times into policies that work to equal the playing field in American life, rather than practices aimed almost exclusively at enriching themselves and their associates.
A look at yesterday's Times article, "Emails Renew Questions About Clinton Foundation and State Dept. Overlap," offers examples of the obfuscation Clinton and her team typically employ when facing any manner of questions, in this case, "the overlapping interests between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department when Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state."
If the media did its job and treated Hillary Clinton like any other candidate running for the highest office, maybe we would have answers.
A look at yesterday's Times article, "Emails Renew Questions About Clinton Foundation and State Dept. Overlap," offers examples of the obfuscation Clinton and her team typically employ when facing any manner of questions, in this case, "the overlapping interests between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department when Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state."
If the media did its job and treated Hillary Clinton like any other candidate running for the highest office, maybe we would have answers.
39
And maybe Donald Trump's tax returns....?
This story is very misleading (surprise: a misleading story in the NYT about Hillary) because it does not account for inflation and show what the incomes would be today.
But then it would be a lot harder to pretend that the Clintons were "struggling".
They were only ever "struggling" in the NYT sense of not being millionaires.
It may come as a surprise to the NYT that not many struggling housewives get to be on the Walmart board.
But then it would be a lot harder to pretend that the Clintons were "struggling".
They were only ever "struggling" in the NYT sense of not being millionaires.
It may come as a surprise to the NYT that not many struggling housewives get to be on the Walmart board.
68
I remember having less than $20 to feed my family for a week in the '80's. I bought a turkey and what trimmings I could and fixed it too many ways to mention. Hillary could have did the same.
4
Not many struggling housewives went to law school and managed their husband's successful gubernatorial campaigns either. Nor would every person serving on the Walmart board use that position as a lever to improve the treatment of employees, as Clinton did.
Do you disapprove of people who were not born to wealth but achieved it through striving, education and hard work? A lot of people can do the same and still not succeed, but that doesn't refute the fact that the Clintons achieved what they did without the aid of inherited wealth, and never failed to be generous in helping others along the way.
Do you disapprove of people who were not born to wealth but achieved it through striving, education and hard work? A lot of people can do the same and still not succeed, but that doesn't refute the fact that the Clintons achieved what they did without the aid of inherited wealth, and never failed to be generous in helping others along the way.
Every now and then an election occurs that raises the possibility of serious positive transformation, only the be shortcircuited by some fatal flaw re-steering us toward the safer, Stabler status quo, postponing the promise revealed in the campaign.
We are in such a moment. Sanders captured the economic disparity issue, the intractably escalating "Matthew principle" (rich get richer, poor get poorer) factor of our economy, our seemingly inexorable slide deeper into raw oligarchy. But his wife's university presidency related finances that probably accounts for the undisclosed finances seems to have ruined his leverage to press Hillary on the Wall Street transcripts, while others, especially the Hillary-leaning media, lacked the motivation and persistence to press hard enough. Those would have revealed what this article suggests: a basically middle class social-climber venality too easily seduced into accomadtion with big money.
Trump is Trump, so he's no real electoral threat in the end. Bernie was disqualified as messenger because there was a bit too much of the self-indulgent 60s antibourgeois whiner to him, as if arrested in the stage fully expressed in Hillary's Wellesley speech: "don't be greedy and materialistic," expressed in his relationship/marriage history. He was mostly sloganeer, not the multidimensional intellectual candidate the cause needed at this moment.
Hillary will give us slightly leftward status quo, deferring major change till at least 2020.
We are in such a moment. Sanders captured the economic disparity issue, the intractably escalating "Matthew principle" (rich get richer, poor get poorer) factor of our economy, our seemingly inexorable slide deeper into raw oligarchy. But his wife's university presidency related finances that probably accounts for the undisclosed finances seems to have ruined his leverage to press Hillary on the Wall Street transcripts, while others, especially the Hillary-leaning media, lacked the motivation and persistence to press hard enough. Those would have revealed what this article suggests: a basically middle class social-climber venality too easily seduced into accomadtion with big money.
Trump is Trump, so he's no real electoral threat in the end. Bernie was disqualified as messenger because there was a bit too much of the self-indulgent 60s antibourgeois whiner to him, as if arrested in the stage fully expressed in Hillary's Wellesley speech: "don't be greedy and materialistic," expressed in his relationship/marriage history. He was mostly sloganeer, not the multidimensional intellectual candidate the cause needed at this moment.
Hillary will give us slightly leftward status quo, deferring major change till at least 2020.
7
We don't have until 2020...which subsequent events will no doubt demonstrate, for those to whom it is not already abundantly apparent.
5
But if we can swing a Democratic Senate and push the House and local races farther D, maybe we'll get more of the transformation we want. Politics is a mechanism with many moving parts beside the Presidency!
2
Two Ivy-League lawyers living in 1970s Arkansas cannot be compared to truly struggling average American's living far from the shadows of "the sprawling estate of Winthrop Rockefeller."
50
And before they were Ivy League lawyers, they were from struggling average American families living far from the shadows of a Rockefeller estate. Do we disqualify them because they rose above the economic level they were born into?
I don't think they are intrinsically better than anyone else, but neither are they worse. My father and his father were intensely ethical people who came from a family deeply scarred by poverty, and economic and political hazard. Both felt the same compulsion that drove Mrs. Clinton -- to provide for their families and build a layer of security against future misfortunes like the ones they'd experienced. They used lawful means and cheated no one, and recognized their debt to society. They mentored and aided others following them. Even after my father was well into dementia, when he could no longer dial a phone or fully remember who I was, he never forgot to ask who had initiated the call -- he still wanted to make sure he was the one covering the charges.
That is what I see in Clinton --that mix of deep generosity and compulsion to find financial independence and security.
I don't think they are intrinsically better than anyone else, but neither are they worse. My father and his father were intensely ethical people who came from a family deeply scarred by poverty, and economic and political hazard. Both felt the same compulsion that drove Mrs. Clinton -- to provide for their families and build a layer of security against future misfortunes like the ones they'd experienced. They used lawful means and cheated no one, and recognized their debt to society. They mentored and aided others following them. Even after my father was well into dementia, when he could no longer dial a phone or fully remember who I was, he never forgot to ask who had initiated the call -- he still wanted to make sure he was the one covering the charges.
That is what I see in Clinton --that mix of deep generosity and compulsion to find financial independence and security.
singing,
"If you ever go down Little Rock way
Or move to Westchester to stay
There you'll find both mother and daughter
Working for the Yankee dollar."
"If you ever go down Little Rock way
Or move to Westchester to stay
There you'll find both mother and daughter
Working for the Yankee dollar."
8
He wasn't working. He was only earning $55000 a year in 1980. It was a harrowing time. That $100k capital gain they'd cleared from cattle futures the year before was beginning to wane. I like HRC and all, but articles like this make me wanna puke. Aren't the democrats the party of the working person?
50
Oh dear me, no. They jawbone a little better about caring for the poor but it's the same oligarchy just with different colors and slogans.
30
They used to be.
6
Yes, JTK -- that's why FDR and JFK had to renounce every penny of their inherited wealth and support their families as underpaid laborers before being allowed to run as Democratic Party candidates and represent the working man.
That was the requirement back then, right? But you know, now we have to lower our high standards because a self-made woman is running, and unlike every previous male Democratic candidate, she just didn't have the fortitude to live her entire political life strughling from paycheck to paycheck. Makes me wanna puke, such selfishness and greed in a candidate.
That was the requirement back then, right? But you know, now we have to lower our high standards because a self-made woman is running, and unlike every previous male Democratic candidate, she just didn't have the fortitude to live her entire political life strughling from paycheck to paycheck. Makes me wanna puke, such selfishness and greed in a candidate.
I'm sympathetic to Clinton and prefer her over our alternative but this article does little in the way of making her seem more relatable or humble. Another interpretation is that she was and is a white, ivy league-educated woman, privileged by her early exposure of being at the epicenter of U.S. political affairs; there is also the accompanying standard of living and face to be maintained after such exposure.
I don't begrudge her; on the contrary, I find her career ascension highly laudable. But I can't stomach another variation on the same narrative of the humble, apple pie politician tailored for a Claire Underwood-esque backstory.
I don't begrudge her; on the contrary, I find her career ascension highly laudable. But I can't stomach another variation on the same narrative of the humble, apple pie politician tailored for a Claire Underwood-esque backstory.
6
And just look at what poor Bill Clinton has to do now just to pay the bills!! My heart goes out to them.
20
Why are we supposed to have sympathy that in 1980 she had to stretch to afford a $112,000 house that "was the smallest in the neighborhood?"
That would be the smallest house in Hillcrest, which happened to be best, most prominent, historic neighborhood in Little Rock. Was there no other place she could have lived?
The median home price in Little Rock today, 36 years later, is only $195,000. What do you suppose the median home price for Little Rock was in 1980? When the median sale price of houses in the South in 1979 was only around 50k? (U.S. Census data--so useful..you know...)
You would have thought that all the above would have struck this article's author, and it might have, were The Times not so committed to its "poor Hillary" narrative
That would be the smallest house in Hillcrest, which happened to be best, most prominent, historic neighborhood in Little Rock. Was there no other place she could have lived?
The median home price in Little Rock today, 36 years later, is only $195,000. What do you suppose the median home price for Little Rock was in 1980? When the median sale price of houses in the South in 1979 was only around 50k? (U.S. Census data--so useful..you know...)
You would have thought that all the above would have struck this article's author, and it might have, were The Times not so committed to its "poor Hillary" narrative
52
Yeah, according to this, the house would be $312,000 right now:
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=112000&year1=1979&y...
If it were cash and not under water thanks to Bill Clinton creating teh Great Recession by repealing Glass-Steagall and making it easier for "investors" to crash the housing market.
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=112000&year1=1979&y...
If it were cash and not under water thanks to Bill Clinton creating teh Great Recession by repealing Glass-Steagall and making it easier for "investors" to crash the housing market.
6
some how this article is trying to suggest Hillary did something wrong.
She did nothing so but now compoare that to what Trump has been doing all his life. NYT, Give us a break
She did nothing so but now compoare that to what Trump has been doing all his life. NYT, Give us a break
5
No this article is an attempt to WHITEWASH what most of these commenters clearly see as greed and hypocrisy.
3
A very informative article. It gives valuable insight into HRC's point of view and motivations. The question that comes to mind is why this article from the overwhelmingly pro-HRC NYT took so long to appear after the long controversy over those $225,000 speeches.
11
I have to hold my nose and vote for this person, but this article really takes the cake. I am a lawyer who started practicing at the same time as the Clintons. I made even less than them. I didn't feel any panic. That was just life. This attempt to paint Hillary as some heroic figure who was forced to overcome extreme financial hardship by Herculean efforts and self-denial is just too much. What it really describes is a couple beset by dissatisfaction with the normal station in life typical of young lawyers not otherwise blessed with inherited wealth. They just couldn't stand not being as rich as a lot of the people they found themselves bumping into in political and social life. I despise Donald Trump. I don't think Hillary Clinton is the devil. But this attempt to conjure sympathy for her supposed overcoming of hardship is disgusting.
62
Yes, if this was North Korea, it would be another story praising how Kim Il-Song rose from poverty to be a God.All that was missing with this article were the crying mobs trying to touch or see the "Great Leader".
5
Hillary is a limousine liberal. She tries to play to her Scranton, Pennsylvania roots but she left that socioeconomic world a long time ago. Wall Street will do well under her Administration. Main Street, not so much.
36
I would love to see her pull that pandering in Moosic or Old Forge (just south west of Scranton), where my depression era born father came from. The so called "white trash" that won't vote for her. Clinton wuill be at home at a Poconos resort, not among the ravel of the old coal mining districts below.
4
Joe Biden is from Scranton, PA, not HRC.
I don't think it has to be one or another. The best boss I ever had was a bank executive. He treated all of his employees with respect and paid us well.
All of us were loyal and worked hard. That made him look good and he became even more successful
We need to push for an environment where everyone wins.
All of us were loyal and worked hard. That made him look good and he became even more successful
We need to push for an environment where everyone wins.
1
Another stupid headline. Most of us work in the corporate world to earn our money, this is the world we live in now and all of us helped build it.
I buy U.S. made goods when I can, bank at a credit union, support public broadcasting instead of cable etc. but most of my fellow citizens don't do these things and I can understand that.
Anyone who is paying for cable, shopping at Walmart etc. has no business complaining about politicians being in bed with corporations. No politician can change the behavior of the entire country.
As with all things, there are good and bad corporations. A good business person knows that a healthy, well educated populace that earns enough to put money into their local economy is good for business. I'm not a big HRC fan, but I think she's a good enough businessperson to see this and to do something about it.
I buy U.S. made goods when I can, bank at a credit union, support public broadcasting instead of cable etc. but most of my fellow citizens don't do these things and I can understand that.
Anyone who is paying for cable, shopping at Walmart etc. has no business complaining about politicians being in bed with corporations. No politician can change the behavior of the entire country.
As with all things, there are good and bad corporations. A good business person knows that a healthy, well educated populace that earns enough to put money into their local economy is good for business. I'm not a big HRC fan, but I think she's a good enough businessperson to see this and to do something about it.
12
There is a completely different way to view the Clinton's headlong dive into making money.
Most people who come from modest backgrounds and little prospect of big money are financially happy if they can pay their bills, have a large, comfortable house, save for the future and hold onto some modest thoughts about having a bit more, like a vacation house or something along those lines. Those in the solidly upper middle class don't obsess about the future or what they don't have, being busy and modestly content with the arrangements around them.
When the Arkansas Clintons got to DC and the White House, they saw, probably for the first time, what true wealth could be and what it could buy. They began to hang out with the super rich and they liked what they saw. For the first time in their lives, they had a walk-in closet in the White House but, more importantly, they ran off to Martha's vineyard every year where the mega rich love to live and love to play.
The presidency brought them, and Hillary, a new vision of what the world was and what it could be. They associated like pals with people who never had to be seriously concerned about money (except preserving it) for the rest of their lives. This became an aspiration, the idea of vaulting over the humdrum worries of the middle class and becoming "set". Once they started on that road, however, there is no turning back and there is no fixed amount of money where someone says, "Okay, that's enough." 50 million is a good start
Most people who come from modest backgrounds and little prospect of big money are financially happy if they can pay their bills, have a large, comfortable house, save for the future and hold onto some modest thoughts about having a bit more, like a vacation house or something along those lines. Those in the solidly upper middle class don't obsess about the future or what they don't have, being busy and modestly content with the arrangements around them.
When the Arkansas Clintons got to DC and the White House, they saw, probably for the first time, what true wealth could be and what it could buy. They began to hang out with the super rich and they liked what they saw. For the first time in their lives, they had a walk-in closet in the White House but, more importantly, they ran off to Martha's vineyard every year where the mega rich love to live and love to play.
The presidency brought them, and Hillary, a new vision of what the world was and what it could be. They associated like pals with people who never had to be seriously concerned about money (except preserving it) for the rest of their lives. This became an aspiration, the idea of vaulting over the humdrum worries of the middle class and becoming "set". Once they started on that road, however, there is no turning back and there is no fixed amount of money where someone says, "Okay, that's enough." 50 million is a good start
23
You nailed it!
3
I'm confused. The article states that both Clintons made $18,000 as professors in 1975, and in 1978 Bill made $33K as governor and combined they made $51K. So Hillary made $18K at the Rose Law firm one year before she made partner? And she'd gone there to make more money than as an academic?
6
I do not understand why speaking to a group and getting paid is tantamount to them owning you for the rest of your life. I have worked for many employers over the last 45 years and don't feel obligated to any of them. I am assuming that all of these people writing that she "sold out" would do unethical things if asked to by their employers. It seems like there is a double standard. If you are going to try to do good things for the country then you can't also be successful. If that is going to be the case then I don't think anyone is going to try to do good things. I think people need to quit being so self-righteous.
19
I'll quit being so "self-righteous" when the Clintons start demonstrating a little more righteousness.
2
Its not simply the speaking that creates a obligating transaction. Its the $200,000(and expenses) given to speak. By what possible stretch of the imagination can simply making a speech be worth $200,000?
4
Peyton Manning gets paid as much as $150,000 to speak as does Condoleezza Rice. Speakers expenses are also normally paid for. This must seem like a lot of money to you, but it isn't out of the ordinary.
1
As usual the commentary on an article looking at just some of Clinton's shady dealings is met with one of two responses. It's either "but-but-but Trump is worse" or "if she were a man it would be ok."
The deeply corrupt and gifted power monger that is Hillary Clinton can do no wrong in the eyes of the her adoring zealots.
The deeply corrupt and gifted power monger that is Hillary Clinton can do no wrong in the eyes of the her adoring zealots.
52
Please define corrupt as it applies to Hillary...and please do so without using any right wing talking points which have all proven to be lies after millions of our tax dollars were spent trying to prove something...anything smelling of corruption.
3
Frank L, too true. Good observation.
6
I don't expect perfection from any human. The only question in politics is: which alternative is better? It has nothing to with seeing no wrong. And I know from my family history that a corrupt leader with stability and good will is far safer than an unstable narcissistic bigot or rigid idealogue, regardless of their pristine dealings (usually a false front!)
I learned a lot about Hilary Clinton at the convention. I learned that she was the daughter of woman who was an abused and neglected child. It seems that from a young age Hilary Clinton devoted her life to making sure that no child suffered what her mother went through.
Working for social justice doesn't make you rich. It probably didn't matter to Hilary that her family wasn't rich when she was young and doing what she loved. Meeting Bill Clinton changed her life. Apparently he's always been a star. He chased after her for years and when they finally married they settled down the make the world a better place.
Who knows when Hilary first learned that she couldn't count on her husband? That he would betray her at every opportunity? It must have been heartbreaking. To suffer through humiliation after humiliation in the public eye. I have no idea why she stayed married to him. Maybe it has something to do with what she learned from the abused child who raised her.
I have a feeling that Hilary Clinton decided that she was going to take care of herself and her daughter and not rely on Bill. She might even have thought she was entitled to certain things after all she's been through.
It's hard to like Hilary Clinton. She's compromised herself so many times. I believe her heart is in the right place but if you sell your soul to the devil, can you get a refund? One thing is certain: on her worst day she's better than Trump on his best. She'll be a good President
Working for social justice doesn't make you rich. It probably didn't matter to Hilary that her family wasn't rich when she was young and doing what she loved. Meeting Bill Clinton changed her life. Apparently he's always been a star. He chased after her for years and when they finally married they settled down the make the world a better place.
Who knows when Hilary first learned that she couldn't count on her husband? That he would betray her at every opportunity? It must have been heartbreaking. To suffer through humiliation after humiliation in the public eye. I have no idea why she stayed married to him. Maybe it has something to do with what she learned from the abused child who raised her.
I have a feeling that Hilary Clinton decided that she was going to take care of herself and her daughter and not rely on Bill. She might even have thought she was entitled to certain things after all she's been through.
It's hard to like Hilary Clinton. She's compromised herself so many times. I believe her heart is in the right place but if you sell your soul to the devil, can you get a refund? One thing is certain: on her worst day she's better than Trump on his best. She'll be a good President
21
She will be if you value this toxic status quo...which leaves out 90% of us.
5
Love is a strange thing. I say from experience: no one knows how unconditional their love actually is, until they are face to face with the reality. There is no blueprint, no single right answer for everyone. Not all marriages are based on fidelity or earnings. I agree that Hillary decided not to count on Bill, but I can also easily imagine why she stayed.
Bill speaks with enormous respect for Hillary's mind and abilities, and judges them as superior to his own without feeling sullen or threatened. There seems to exist a fierce love, loyalty and devotion between them, at least in the aspects of their lives that matter most to them. How many men could deal comfortably with a woman as strong and driven as HRC, match her intellgence, share her passion for using policy and politics to better the lives of people? He is the fire to her steel, and she the steel to his fire. It is a rare and extraordinary partnership -- hard to find and likely impossible to duplicate. No one gets perfection in a spouse or candidate; we all choose our trade-offs.
Bill speaks with enormous respect for Hillary's mind and abilities, and judges them as superior to his own without feeling sullen or threatened. There seems to exist a fierce love, loyalty and devotion between them, at least in the aspects of their lives that matter most to them. How many men could deal comfortably with a woman as strong and driven as HRC, match her intellgence, share her passion for using policy and politics to better the lives of people? He is the fire to her steel, and she the steel to his fire. It is a rare and extraordinary partnership -- hard to find and likely impossible to duplicate. No one gets perfection in a spouse or candidate; we all choose our trade-offs.
Not buying it. Partners in law firms are not broke. The wolf was never at the door. They just wanted to keep up with a very affluent set of Joneses.
I don't begrudge her the speaking fees; they all do that. It's how public servants cash in at the end. But spare me the hypocrisy.
I don't begrudge her the speaking fees; they all do that. It's how public servants cash in at the end. But spare me the hypocrisy.
72
Trump is pretty straightforward in his lumbering vulgarity. Nothing matters but money--the be all and end all of life on earth. Any way you can make more of it is good. Cheating and lying are admirable qualities if they further one's business interests.
Hillary, on the other hand, blathers on about helping children, after consigning tens of thousands of them to lives of horror and crippling injuries, thanks to her Iraq vote. She's helping the middle class by being a pay-for-play political puppet in the back pocket of Wall Street. She's devoted to the plight of women--that's why she signed on with the misogynist slave owners of Walmart. It isn't the wealth and ambition for power that annoys her detractors. It's the stratospheric hypocrisy.
Hillary, on the other hand, blathers on about helping children, after consigning tens of thousands of them to lives of horror and crippling injuries, thanks to her Iraq vote. She's helping the middle class by being a pay-for-play political puppet in the back pocket of Wall Street. She's devoted to the plight of women--that's why she signed on with the misogynist slave owners of Walmart. It isn't the wealth and ambition for power that annoys her detractors. It's the stratospheric hypocrisy.
59
You sell Trump short. He's not one dimensional, nor even merely two-dinensional. There are 3 dimensions, precisely. In no particular order:
1) narcissistic public self-aggrandizement
2) serially trading in trophy wives for newest "models" (literally) and the sexual satisfaction they purport to offer
3) money, more and more
Trump is by the way the ultimate relic of the human capital age (ushered in with Reagan and the heyday of University of Chicago "neoclassical" economics, Friedman, Becker, Posner et al., when you could get a 'Nobel', actually fake 'Nobel' as there isn't one in economics, for bankers engineered it to glorify this phony shtick, by attaching arcane mathematics few understand to Gordon Gecko "greed is good" shtick). The economic aggrandizement-hedonism religion he hawked had its temples in his casinos. For those 80s and 90s money-hedonists he is the nostalgia candidate, just as he is the xenophobe candidate for xenophobe-racists. Fortunately not enough of a coalition to win, but an interesting emblem of a significant sleaze component still quite robust in America today.
1) narcissistic public self-aggrandizement
2) serially trading in trophy wives for newest "models" (literally) and the sexual satisfaction they purport to offer
3) money, more and more
Trump is by the way the ultimate relic of the human capital age (ushered in with Reagan and the heyday of University of Chicago "neoclassical" economics, Friedman, Becker, Posner et al., when you could get a 'Nobel', actually fake 'Nobel' as there isn't one in economics, for bankers engineered it to glorify this phony shtick, by attaching arcane mathematics few understand to Gordon Gecko "greed is good" shtick). The economic aggrandizement-hedonism religion he hawked had its temples in his casinos. For those 80s and 90s money-hedonists he is the nostalgia candidate, just as he is the xenophobe candidate for xenophobe-racists. Fortunately not enough of a coalition to win, but an interesting emblem of a significant sleaze component still quite robust in America today.
3
Stratospheric is right!
5
Stratospheric hypocrisy? That's takes ng the actions of one person completely out of historical context and balance. That's blaming Clinton for the casualties of Iraq, while letting Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld off the hook, as well as dozens of other Senators -- like Kerry and Biden -- who believed they were voting not for war but for increased leverage to continue diplomacy, just as Clinton believed...because Bush swore that was his intention.
Hypocrisy is ignoring her work on the Walmart board to help IMPROVE thr lot of Walmart workers. You want those boards to be filled only with sociopathic libertarians and theocrats? No liberals allowed to weigh in?
Hypocrisy is pretending that Trump's history of inherited wealth and money made by bilking others is equivalent to Clinton's history of earning money and helping others. Hypocrisy is asking so little of other candidates while continally demanding more of Clinton than of any other candidate in our history.
Hypocrisy is ignoring her work on the Walmart board to help IMPROVE thr lot of Walmart workers. You want those boards to be filled only with sociopathic libertarians and theocrats? No liberals allowed to weigh in?
Hypocrisy is pretending that Trump's history of inherited wealth and money made by bilking others is equivalent to Clinton's history of earning money and helping others. Hypocrisy is asking so little of other candidates while continally demanding more of Clinton than of any other candidate in our history.
It's interesting that the takeaway for many commenters was either that Hillary's wealth is nothing compared to Trump's, or that the scrutiny she has faced proves there's a double standard for women. I saw it as a story about a woman who had to man up when her husband was too busy feeling sorry for himself and dreaming about his political future to bother with something as pedestrian as household finances. And for the first time ever, I could relate to HRC.
55
Well said! Not only that, while she's supporting this selfish jerk, he's cheating on her every chance he can.
4
The tone of this article made me cringe. I hardly think Hillary was a fretful little wife, despairing over the family's financial future. If anything, she was a pragmatic action-oriented person with a marketable skill set who did what needed to be done. If you begrudge her skills, or work ethic or drive, that's about you, not her. The most cringe-inducing moment for me was when the author implied that Clinton had been successful at the Rose Law firm because of her role as the governor's wife, and not because of her own qualifications. Did her name help? Of course. Was she eminently qualified? Of course!
I honestly couldn't tell if Ms. Chozick's piece was a hatchet job or full of admiration for a spunky little gal.
I honestly couldn't tell if Ms. Chozick's piece was a hatchet job or full of admiration for a spunky little gal.
21
When Andrew Carnegie, one of the most reviled robber barons of his time, was ask how did he achieve immense wealth he said "I seen my opportunities and I took 'em". It would be refreshing to hear Hillary simply say the same thing rather than maintain the fiction that her ambition is money and status and holding public office is her best means to achieve that.
Since you cite Carnegie, I call to your attention Carnegie-Mellon University, Carnegie Hall, The New York Public Library. There is more, but they do not immediately come to mind. Hid did something with his vast wealth ( and yes, I believe he was the richest man in the world at one point). Do you think the Clinton's will make any donations like that? I surely do not.
3
You can't be serious. The Clintons' pursuit of power and money has been nothing short of vulgar. They have earned their money by selling their influence in the guise of helping others. Ask the Haitians. If you want to give readers insight into Hillary's character, what has she learned from her failures, i.e. Haiti (Foundation), Libya(SoS), Honduras(SoS), etc...? How does she rationalize their Foundation's acceptance of foreign donations when she was Secretary of State? Why does she refuse to release transcripts of Wall Street speeches? There is a lot I would like to understand better about Secretary Clinton's psychology and motivations. But this piece reads like People magazine and ultimately tells me nothing.
53
Being moderately successful and highly intelligent does not make one inherently evil. It's always the intellectual that the fundamentalist target first. I can see you now in the very crowd cheering the life imprisonment of Galileo. If Galileo was a women she would have been burned a the stake.
2
Well said, though I disagree with your characterization of their modus operandi. It is not "their influence" that they are selling.That influence and access should rightfully belong to the people they are sworn to serve, AKA us. It goes without saying that they are supposed to do this without enriching themselves and their cronies; much less becoming billionaires two times over, if you count (and you certainly should) their foundation.
3
@j24
You insult Galileo, not to mention true intellectuals, reformers and social activists living today, risking their lives, under oppressive regimes -- the likes of which "donate" to the Clinton Foundation.
You insult Galileo, not to mention true intellectuals, reformers and social activists living today, risking their lives, under oppressive regimes -- the likes of which "donate" to the Clinton Foundation.
1
Oh please, knock it off. Young Hillary took $1000 from the family cookie jar and amazingly turned it into $100,000 trading futures on the type of an account someone with her financials could never have been approved. Then the Clintons lived in the Governor's mansion for years with all almost all expenses paid at the same Bill was receiving a salary for being Governor and she was well paid as a partner in Arkansas' largest law firm. Let's face it: the cost of living in Arkansas isn't that high. And she worried about being able to pay for for one child in college?
58
Cattle futures? The whole thing makes sense to me.
Hillary got lucky and made a windfall in commodities. Then she disliked the anxiety of margin calls, and got out while she was ahead. I think that's how it goes with a lot of investors.
Mrs. Clinton has done a ton of good for the less fortunate. But her elite Ivy law school pedigree gave her a leg up and an air of condescension (Tammy Wynette). What Mrs. Clinton lacks is a keen emotional intelligence as a counterbalance to her great intellect. This is a quality that Barack Obama has in spades.
Her Wall Street speeches for large fees sent the wrong message, especially under the unforeseen spectre of Bernie Sanders. Worse than that, the Wall Street speeches were done in the wake of the repeal of Glass-Steagall and delivered to colleagues of Robert Rubin who thought up derivatives of mortgage bonds. Memo to Hillary: the patient had a coronary and you're feeding him marbled red meat.
I will give Hillary Clinton credit, and I am voting for her. I think Hillary has made a real attempt to grow as a person and evolve through life. Few of us have done that. Most often, a leopard does not change its spots.
Hillary got lucky and made a windfall in commodities. Then she disliked the anxiety of margin calls, and got out while she was ahead. I think that's how it goes with a lot of investors.
Mrs. Clinton has done a ton of good for the less fortunate. But her elite Ivy law school pedigree gave her a leg up and an air of condescension (Tammy Wynette). What Mrs. Clinton lacks is a keen emotional intelligence as a counterbalance to her great intellect. This is a quality that Barack Obama has in spades.
Her Wall Street speeches for large fees sent the wrong message, especially under the unforeseen spectre of Bernie Sanders. Worse than that, the Wall Street speeches were done in the wake of the repeal of Glass-Steagall and delivered to colleagues of Robert Rubin who thought up derivatives of mortgage bonds. Memo to Hillary: the patient had a coronary and you're feeding him marbled red meat.
I will give Hillary Clinton credit, and I am voting for her. I think Hillary has made a real attempt to grow as a person and evolve through life. Few of us have done that. Most often, a leopard does not change its spots.
27
What one is paid for one's words will be often be taken as a measure of their value, particularly when one's words are incomprehensible or uncomprehended.
4
During Clinton's presidency was 200k plus a 50K expense account. 250 x 8 is 2 million dollars. Their legal bills, according to this article were 5 million. Even if they had spent none of that salary, they would have been 3 million dollars in debt. When Hillary said they were dead broke, she was actually understating the case. It's not surprising that she feels a need to make money, even in the best of times.
8
Exactly what were those legal bills?
Was that Bill's doing?
Was that Bill's doing?
12
If Bill had kept it in his pants, there would have been no legal bills. Hillary chose to remain with Bill post-Monica (and everyone else) and assume his legal fees, why should we cry for her? All we ever hear is how smart Hillary is but if that is the case, why did she marry and continue to remain married to a man who appears not to care for her?
5
Except she was also getting a Senator's salary. And even under your analysis, why speeches to the tune of $150 million plus? That debt was probably paid in his first year out of office. Why speeches after that?
3
Mr Clinton is far from the first husband to be "let go" or fired from a job and have a wife step up and hold things together. (Ask me!) In fact this story of thier marriage, financial and career struggles and aspirations is so typical and middle class. They seem like two bright, educated middle class folks from different backgrounds that developed ambitions and skills over time and recognized opportunities as they appeared. If anything they make great leaders for thier generation and we're all better for that.
32
The nagging question is why Bill? If I understood that better, I think that I would better understand Mrs. Clinton.
9
OMG, because life is complicated. If you're questioning faithfulness, then reflect on the entirely common occurrence of infidelity - a good possibility that's affected your relationship, too, RWF. But easier to be a puritan and point to others as somehow flawed, right? And of course you're not considering that this is THEIR business and not ours. Very likely they have negotiated their own path through all of this, and it seems to work for them. Not everyone places a premium on sex and faithfulness as having the same meaning or importance. Speculating on "why" is or no importance beyond the 2 of them.
5
it was certainly easy for Hillary herself to dis other women living with unfaithful husbands, to whit, "I'm not a Tammy Wynette, standing by my man!" When she absolutely knew he was cheating on her. So if she put herself up as "unflawed" in that respect, why shouldn't it be pointed out that isn't the case? And as for it being between her and Bill, really? She and he absolutely made it our business, over and over again. As much as we didn't want it to be.
3
Um, no, lksf, it was republicans that tried to make it our business. The rest of your comment doesn't even make sense,
2
"Mr. Trump, whose own finances have drawn extensive scrutiny, "... WHAT? scrutiny that he has BLOCKED! This article is so misleading, in so many ways, that I am surprised it was published.
We have a candidate who lies, covers up his dealings, won't release his taxes, but you chose to criticize the other candidate.
We have a candidate who lies, covers up his dealings, won't release his taxes, but you chose to criticize the other candidate.
12
This is fascinating stuff. Now I know what I always felt -- that Hillary Clinton really knows firsthand what it's like to worry about house payments, hiring plumbers, and saving money for college while not knowing where the money will come from.
If this led her to pursue many different avenues to earn money for her family, I don't blame her one bit. It's been shown, over and over, through vindictive right wing "investigations", that she never did anything wrong to feed her family.
And perhaps surprisingly (and in contrast to many Republicans who "make it big") her hard-earned financial success hasn't stopped her from fighting for those who are still broke, still facing tough times.
She'll make a great president.
If this led her to pursue many different avenues to earn money for her family, I don't blame her one bit. It's been shown, over and over, through vindictive right wing "investigations", that she never did anything wrong to feed her family.
And perhaps surprisingly (and in contrast to many Republicans who "make it big") her hard-earned financial success hasn't stopped her from fighting for those who are still broke, still facing tough times.
She'll make a great president.
14
One question. How much money did Trump's bankruptcies cost his creditors? How much did his non-payments for work cost his contractors? None of this cost Trump a penny personally. Perspective please.
12
Trump owed $850 million in personal guarantees to banks at one point, so much that he was too big to be allowed to fail.
4
If you look at the both Trump's & the Clinton's finances, neither have much in common with the average American. However, Clinton hasn't outright intentionally screwed them over through bankruptcies & failure to pay them She hasn't lied about charitable contributions, & she got where she is without a million dollar check from Daddy. More than most of us will see in our lifetimes. And if you think Trump isn't going to suck up to corporate interests & the elite, I've got an island to sell you. Just take a look at some of his golfing buddies.
14
This piece could do with a bit more context. First of all, as others have noted, you should adjust the dollar amounts for inflation. It would be nice to know their salaries in current dollars. For example, you give their combined wages in 1978 as $51,173. That would be $187,410 in 2016 dollars. Not bad. Or the price of their home, which you gave as $112,000... That would be $325,000 today. Pretty fancy.
Stating that the house was almost in the shadow of a mansion owned by a Rockefeller doesn't really tell us anything.
Second, it doesn't help to compare the Clintons' income to that of their rich friends. Who cares if their friends were making more money and faster? You should have compared their income to median wages in Arkansas, or Little Rock or even nationally.
Now, to be clear, I don't fault her for worrying about money when her husband was sulking. And I'll definitely be voting for her. I've never liked the "Clinton's a liar!" thing. It's lazy and ugly.
I just don't think your report is likely to generate much sympathy. Sorry.
Stating that the house was almost in the shadow of a mansion owned by a Rockefeller doesn't really tell us anything.
Second, it doesn't help to compare the Clintons' income to that of their rich friends. Who cares if their friends were making more money and faster? You should have compared their income to median wages in Arkansas, or Little Rock or even nationally.
Now, to be clear, I don't fault her for worrying about money when her husband was sulking. And I'll definitely be voting for her. I've never liked the "Clinton's a liar!" thing. It's lazy and ugly.
I just don't think your report is likely to generate much sympathy. Sorry.
81
So he doesn't care about money, or share in the burden of worry, and meanwhile he can't keep his hands off other women. Suddenly we begin to see much deeper into Ms. Clinton's reluctance to talk about herself. It's simple: she's embarrassed by her husband, on so many levels, and, no doubt deeply resentful of his actions. But she loves him! He's a charmer and he makes her laugh! And if the DNC speech is any indication, he has at last begun to appreciate her for who she is, and what she can do.
5
What a wonderful and touch somewhat fabricated puff piece for Hillary.
When are you going to do the same for Trump?
When are you going to do the same for Trump?
15
The Clintons got rich by selling government access. This is corruption, a criminal act, even by low US standards of what is an acceptable business model.
31
Only in third world countries this is considered corruption. IN the US, this is how politicians do business, the wealthy lobby them and finance their re-elections. As soon as politicians are elected to office, they start fundraising for re-election.
1
Arkansas is not Manhattan when it comes to cost of living. If Bill was making $55K a year as a lawyer back in 1979, while Hillary was a law firm partner, then the times couldn't possiplby have been as lean for the 1979 Clinton family as this writer would have us believe.
"It's typical of Secretaries of State to share their views ins speeches after leaving office" -- what a totally illogical, inane, self-serving excuse for collecting $21 million in speaking fees. I doubt Colin Powell has earned anything approaching that figure, but her excuse ignores the key point: Powell wasn't merely leaving the Sec of State position, he was leaving public life -- there was no conflict of interest or influence peddling. Everyone knew that Hillary was about to formally announce her run for president. She gave Wall Street speeches when she was, apart from a technicality that eases campaign finance rules when a candidate hasn't made a formal candidacy announcement yet, already a candidate for president.
I will hold my nose and vote for Clinton, because Trump would be an utter disaster, but I feel quite bitter about having to choose between the lesser of two truly evils. Greed and tone-deaf corruption vs awful temperament, no background, and suspect sanity. What a choice!
"It's typical of Secretaries of State to share their views ins speeches after leaving office" -- what a totally illogical, inane, self-serving excuse for collecting $21 million in speaking fees. I doubt Colin Powell has earned anything approaching that figure, but her excuse ignores the key point: Powell wasn't merely leaving the Sec of State position, he was leaving public life -- there was no conflict of interest or influence peddling. Everyone knew that Hillary was about to formally announce her run for president. She gave Wall Street speeches when she was, apart from a technicality that eases campaign finance rules when a candidate hasn't made a formal candidacy announcement yet, already a candidate for president.
I will hold my nose and vote for Clinton, because Trump would be an utter disaster, but I feel quite bitter about having to choose between the lesser of two truly evils. Greed and tone-deaf corruption vs awful temperament, no background, and suspect sanity. What a choice!
135
We should not have an either or presidential election--the lesser of two evils, etc. A good biography of Clinton is the one written by Carl Bernstein: A Woman in Charge. The book gives a pretty good narrative about the Clintons Arkansas experiences when Hillary began investing in futures and they got mixed up in the Whitewater land development--just a loss not a crime. It was a question of financial security on her part--he just was not interested. But what is troublesome now is the financial baggage she is bringing to her campaign that she will be beholden to big money after the election.
1
1
Chris, you miss the point. She did it when she knew -- and everyone who paid her knew -- that she was running for office.
2
Stressed over money? BWAHAHAHAHA The Clintons went from being 'broke' to running a billion dollar 'charitable' foundation, 94% of which is not accountable, and living in million dollar homes. As Don King said, "Only in America"
24
The Clinton Foundation was given an A by the Philanthropy Institute for its good work and accountability. It has an extremely low overhead rate of 11%, with the remainder going to programs in health, poverty and good governance. The Foundation is an operating foundation, not a grant-making one, though it does give some grants. By obtaining HIV drugs at low cost and distributing them for free, the Clinton Foundation has saved the lives of 8 million people. Don't call me a shill. I'm someone who has worked with foundations and non-profits for 30 years, and I know what I'm talking about.
7
Nat W. is correct. John Reynolds is merely another Trump supporter using lies to try to make a case for him. It's understandable, as the only way to make Trump look good is with lies.
1
I find it very hard to believe that a couple with law degrees from Yale, living in Arkansas with one child, was ever in a dire or stressful financial situation. Stress over family finances does not propel someone to the level of achievement and financial gain they have.
15
I don’t know what makes the Clintons such a litmus test for our feelings about political and financial ambition, but the diverse reader reactions here – widely split between admiration and accusation – are telling.
For me, there’s no better illustration of how much scrutiny comes with being a Clinton than the media attention given to the philanthropies of two former presidents. The Carter Center received $385M in donations in FY 2014-15; the Clinton Foundation took in donations of $218M and $114M in grants for FY 2015 (including miscellaneous revenue, the total was $338M).
Both philanthropies do a wide range of good works around the world. The Carter Center promotes fair elections, eradication of diseases like Guinea Worm and River Blindness, and human rights initiatives. The Clinton Foundation sponsors low cost treatments for HIV and malaria, education for girls, and slowing climate change.
Yet only one of these foundations is a lightning rod for accusations of corruption, wealthy connections and personal gain. Why is that so?
For me, there’s no better illustration of how much scrutiny comes with being a Clinton than the media attention given to the philanthropies of two former presidents. The Carter Center received $385M in donations in FY 2014-15; the Clinton Foundation took in donations of $218M and $114M in grants for FY 2015 (including miscellaneous revenue, the total was $338M).
Both philanthropies do a wide range of good works around the world. The Carter Center promotes fair elections, eradication of diseases like Guinea Worm and River Blindness, and human rights initiatives. The Clinton Foundation sponsors low cost treatments for HIV and malaria, education for girls, and slowing climate change.
Yet only one of these foundations is a lightning rod for accusations of corruption, wealthy connections and personal gain. Why is that so?
12
Carter is not running for anything. After leaving the White House he didn't serve in any other government capacity. Is that really so hard for you to grasp? Doesn't seem interested in peddling whatever influence he might have. There is also evidence of the Carter Foundation in my own city with homes built by Habitat and a Thrift Shop that augments their work.
Carter has shown by his own travels in the world as an election observer and champion for human rights and better health treatment for all, the kind of tangible results a retired president can effect. I have not checked Carter's income or wealth but he does not seem to have blatantly feathered his own nest through his foundation. I am hoping that the Obamas emulate the Cárters after they leave the White House more than the Clintons.
Carter has shown by his own travels in the world as an election observer and champion for human rights and better health treatment for all, the kind of tangible results a retired president can effect. I have not checked Carter's income or wealth but he does not seem to have blatantly feathered his own nest through his foundation. I am hoping that the Obamas emulate the Cárters after they leave the White House more than the Clintons.
4
Maybe look to Carter's behavior versus the Clinton behavior?
5
...and so the NYT neatly explains away Clinton's million-dollar audiences with the big Corporations and the siphoning of money into the Clinton Foundation. She needed the money. Poor little Mrs. Clinton. Oldest excuse in the book.
Show us the speeches and investigate the Clinton Foundation. That's what I want to see.
Show us the speeches and investigate the Clinton Foundation. That's what I want to see.
21
Geez, what a puff piece. Was expecting a link to the theme to the Walton's TV show of the 70's. Those poverty stricken Clintons, living in squalor in a $112K house (which was a lot of money in 1980, especially in ARK).
I LOVE the NYTimes...but sometimes you are way out of touch:) Here's the theme song, should you wish to re-read the article with the music in the b.g.!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpmRcP8S7Bo
I LOVE the NYTimes...but sometimes you are way out of touch:) Here's the theme song, should you wish to re-read the article with the music in the b.g.!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpmRcP8S7Bo
16
There is indeed a very sinister sexist undercurrent in this piece: Hillary Clinton, a woman, deigned to be the breadwinner instead of her husband and because of her actions to support her family financially, she is suspect. This is extremely disappointing. For a woman to become a partner at a law firm, raise a child and run a household is difficult today and arguably more so in the late 70's and early 80's. Mrs, Clinton used her talents and resources to take care of her immediate and extended family and, more importantly, secure a future for her daughter. What, if anything, is suspect about that? If a man had made the choices Mrs. Clinton did, he would not be subjected to this kind of examination and scrutiny. Believe me.
268
James-
AMEN to that!!
AMEN to that!!
1
I really don't see that undercurrent at all. I think that's a nice crutch to deflect attention from the real concerns about Hillary's ethics, judgment and honesty.
3
Nope. I'd call the man out for claiming to financially struggle with a combined income of $51k in 1978 too.
$112k house was definitely not a shack in 1978. The average cost of a house in 1978 was only $55k. The average income was only $17k...these two were pulling in $51k combined.
They definitely weren't struggling financially...with the exception of keeping up with their rich friends.
So while I think it is admirable that she was the main breadwinner...it's disgusting to claim they struggled financially given their income was more than double the average income & the ability to buy a house that cost double the average.
Also, anyone who earns $100k off of a trade isn't struggling. That's nearly 5x the average income for that time period. A family of 3 that pulled in $151k in the late 70's/early 80's wasn't "struggling".
This piece is creating dishonest narrative.
$112k house was definitely not a shack in 1978. The average cost of a house in 1978 was only $55k. The average income was only $17k...these two were pulling in $51k combined.
They definitely weren't struggling financially...with the exception of keeping up with their rich friends.
So while I think it is admirable that she was the main breadwinner...it's disgusting to claim they struggled financially given their income was more than double the average income & the ability to buy a house that cost double the average.
Also, anyone who earns $100k off of a trade isn't struggling. That's nearly 5x the average income for that time period. A family of 3 that pulled in $151k in the late 70's/early 80's wasn't "struggling".
This piece is creating dishonest narrative.
2
Since Trump has already self-destructed, this piece seems more like a 'fluff' piece, half gossip column.-'one of the smallest houses on the street' ... but just down the hill from the Rockefeller estate- tough life! And describing her years as a partner at one of the most prominent law firms in Arkansas as 'the lean years'... If this was to have been taken as a serious background piece , it is inexplicable as to why it wasn't done and printed during the Democratic primary season when it might have provided some useful information to those voting in the Democratic primaries.For better or worse, how many of those voters knew that her longest job was for 15 years as a corporate lawyer-nothing to ashamed of there, or does Clinton find it dissonant with the image she is trying to project? In any case, this was news and information that surely should have been presented to NYT readers long before today.
4
Why are so many of the negative comments here from men?
4
"Why are so many of the negative comments here from men?"
Maybe it's because her haters are primarily men?
Misogyny, anyone? Anyone?
Maybe it's because her haters are primarily men?
Misogyny, anyone? Anyone?
4
Oak Parker, and why so many victim cards played by women?
13
Hardly a "victim card" - just an observation that the negative comments seemed to come predominantly from men. I recognize that there are women who don't like Ms. Clinton, there are men who do, there are men who don't like Mr. Trump, and women who do. I just wonder if some people's -- men or women, though in this thread, it seems more applicable to men - objections to Ms. Clinton arise from a discomfort in potentially having a female president. I do not consider Hillary a victim, nor do I consider myself one, simply by pointing out the potential for prejudice.
1
Whether Trump or Clinton, I don't begrudge anyone their legally earned money.
If Trump knows how to build towers and Goldman Sachs finds Clinton interesting enough to pay her to speak, so what? Who wouldn't take that gig?
If Trump knows how to build towers and Goldman Sachs finds Clinton interesting enough to pay her to speak, so what? Who wouldn't take that gig?
3
Her background is just as phony as Michelle Obama's. Both were academic grinds who married strivers and rode their husband's coattails to far more money and fame than they would have ever acquired on their own.
14
What is phony about Mrs. Obama's background?
She was the hardworking, responsible daughter of hardworking, responsible black parents. She didn't need racial quotas to get into college.
As for Mrs. Clinton, she too got into college with nobody's help. I see no phoniness there or in her need to provide for her family.
Most famous men are given the free time to pursue fame by virtue of the wives' managing everything else in their lives -- money, homes, and that marvelous political or corporate prop known as family. "Riding coattails"? Please.
She was the hardworking, responsible daughter of hardworking, responsible black parents. She didn't need racial quotas to get into college.
As for Mrs. Clinton, she too got into college with nobody's help. I see no phoniness there or in her need to provide for her family.
Most famous men are given the free time to pursue fame by virtue of the wives' managing everything else in their lives -- money, homes, and that marvelous political or corporate prop known as family. "Riding coattails"? Please.
6
Cliff notes: Awkward nerd marries an alpha Lothario destined for greatness.
9
In the interest of fairness, when will you publish a similar story about the value of Donald Trump's homes, marital challenges and the raising of his children?
12
Worked as a corporate lawyer for 15 years. Board member at Walmart. Speeches to Goldman Sachs. No wonder a lot of Republicans prefer her to Trump.
30
The average net wealth of each of the top 20 wealthiest US Congresspersons is over $20 million, with the highest at $350 million (Issa Rep. CA.). It has ever been thus in American politics. There are 3 women in that top 20 now, but 15-20 years ago there were none. No one expects anyone in political office in this country to live in penury and not use opportunity to make financial gains, except for Hillary Clinton. The response to her financial success is clearly misogyny and it is terrifying and depressing to many of us educated women in jobs that we think will help the culture to stop differentiating between the abilities and proper roles of men and women. The paper of record tells us that the woman had mismatched furniture! When the Romneys talked about "struggling" and having to sell some stock, when they were newlyweds, I don't remember discussions about their decor or generalized criticism of a man born to wealth truly pretending to have struggled. Clearly, Hillary should have stayed home and baked cookies. God help us all - the world never changes.
203
What a rags to riches story Darrell Issa is. He sure came a long way from hot-wiring cars to joy-ride.
1
What "financial success " did Hillary ever have. She used her political stature to give grossly overpaid speeches to the financial industry. It's not like she ever started a business or created a job.
7
They all know how to milk the system because the system exists for milking.
5
Well we all remember how the Clintons used the presidency to enrich themselves and how Hillary used the State Department to further the Clinton's foundation's interests. Why not speak about corruption> Yes the good old corruption where people use public office to unduly acquire wealth? Because that is what we are seeing. It is all over the news, even in the Washington Post, except in this newspaper, because they have decided to turn a blind eye on that important issue. Another example of corruption I guess.
18
People run for Congress for the 100% legal inside trading on privileged information and the opportunities to multiply values of landholdings by building highways past them.
1
I would trust her, more than any Republican candidate, to do what is right to help the American Middle Class and aspiring classes, despite her ties to Wall Street. Those who believe the myths proposed by Republicans (and many Democrats as well), should be aware of how they got to where they are today as a result of the fallacious ideas about economics first proposed during Lord Reagan's reign.
10
@RLW That's right. She is by no means a progressive visionary (like me!) with grand and creative ideas on how to transform the country for justice and truth. But, quite frankly, she'll have to do. What is remarkable is, considering how hard it is historically for the same party to hold the White House for more than 8 years, Dem.'s are going to do it!
1
This is hilarious! What a blatant piece of p.r.! had me laughing out loud. Poor 'heroic' Hillary Clinton, having to call roto-rooter, having to sell herself to the highest bidders!
(Reporter describes a simple frugal house with mismatched furniture and then comes a photo of a gorgeous, hardly tiny, home for two adults and a baby in a lovely part of town next to a Rockefeller's.)
(Reporter describes a simple frugal house with mismatched furniture and then comes a photo of a gorgeous, hardly tiny, home for two adults and a baby in a lovely part of town next to a Rockefeller's.)
29
Yes, I'm a vile social climber who stands for nothing and will sell my services to vultures like Walmart but hey...I had money concerns.
19
Two glaring omissions: She only reconnected with Bill after she failed the DC bar and was fired from her Watergate job.
17
And of course none of what you say is true.
1
The Clintons are such modest liberals as they jet-set on the Clinton Foundation private jet, relax in Hamptons and Westchester mansions, and don't have a single friend worth less than $100M, liquid.
25
This article is helpful in putting SOME of HRC's actions into a context. As a true skeptic of her motives and ethical decisions, at least there is some alternate narrative to evaluate now.
At the same time, it continues a pattern of other people trying to vouch for Clinton's character. Endorsements from friends are only going to be able to do so much in the face of her own words and actions. The desire to make money and provide for one's family is 100% understandable to most people. It's also understandable that people have professional ambitions. What IRKS Clinton's skeptics (even those, such as myself, who are resigned to voting in her favor), is duplicity and secrecy. Making speeches to Wall Street entities for massive amounts of money doesn't look good, but she's not the first. Things only started to get out of hand when she acted as if it was unreasonable for people to be asking what, exactly, she said to warrant $200k+ worth of gratitude. Ditto for the email servers. She's not the first to be careless. Yet, the FBI AND the NY Times have detailed the many misleading public statements she made to people in an attempt to shield herself from criticism. Why did Clinton hire Schultz immediately after benefitting from Schultz's unethical behavior? Why cling to Super PACs and big money donors when Sanders demonstrated that ordinary people can and will support a worthwhile cause? Only Clinton herself can set some things right, but she refuses to do so.
At the same time, it continues a pattern of other people trying to vouch for Clinton's character. Endorsements from friends are only going to be able to do so much in the face of her own words and actions. The desire to make money and provide for one's family is 100% understandable to most people. It's also understandable that people have professional ambitions. What IRKS Clinton's skeptics (even those, such as myself, who are resigned to voting in her favor), is duplicity and secrecy. Making speeches to Wall Street entities for massive amounts of money doesn't look good, but she's not the first. Things only started to get out of hand when she acted as if it was unreasonable for people to be asking what, exactly, she said to warrant $200k+ worth of gratitude. Ditto for the email servers. She's not the first to be careless. Yet, the FBI AND the NY Times have detailed the many misleading public statements she made to people in an attempt to shield herself from criticism. Why did Clinton hire Schultz immediately after benefitting from Schultz's unethical behavior? Why cling to Super PACs and big money donors when Sanders demonstrated that ordinary people can and will support a worthwhile cause? Only Clinton herself can set some things right, but she refuses to do so.
87
The reason Clinton will not release her Wall Street speeches is that she has learned that no matter what is in them, her enemies will spin the contents to make them look scandalous. The DNC leak is the most recent example--personal expressions of dislike for Sanders by Wasserman-Schultz in private communications get spun as "a thumb on the scales", without any concrete evidence of actual wrong-doing. If there is a single courteous compliment to the investment industry anywhere in those speeches, the headlines will scream "Hillary declares fealty to Wall street!!" It's hard to say whether those headlines would be worse for the campaign than her current secrecy, but at least she doesn't have to endure one more tirade of unjustified abuse.
2
My surmise is that the duplicity and secrecy may stem from the fact that she doesn't trust the public will assume the best of her.
@Teed Rockwell, one interesting thing about your explanation is that HRC herself has never brought it forward (although I have heard other people raise it). In any case, while Clinton certainly has the right to refuse questions, it does not follow that people have some duty to resolve all ambiguities in her favor. She received the benefits of her speeches, Super PACs, etc. and now there is a bit of a tradeoff. Her campaign speaks very often of "compromise" not just politically, but ethically. Well, HRC seems to want all the benefits of a Sanders or Warren ethical reputation while simultaneously reaping the benefits of some questionable (not necessarily illegal, but perhaps distasteful) practices. But despite endorsements from Obama, Michelle, Bernie, Warren, etc. Clinton's campaign is going to have to continue (hopefully, successfully) to rely on Clinton's policy knowledge and skill because trust isn't something that can be easily transferred from one person to another.
The good news is, this trick doesn't work for Trump either. He has a small army of surrogates, family members and spokespeople trying to convince us that he's really a nice guy behind closed doors, but he can't run away from his choices. His margin of error is so small in this election that Clinton is managing to edge him out DESPITE a very large blind spot.
The good news is, this trick doesn't work for Trump either. He has a small army of surrogates, family members and spokespeople trying to convince us that he's really a nice guy behind closed doors, but he can't run away from his choices. His margin of error is so small in this election that Clinton is managing to edge him out DESPITE a very large blind spot.
Used her law degree to aid and abet the most vile criminal enterprise in North America: Walmart, sworn enemy of women, poor people and organized labor.
Went on to green light Bush's genocide in Iraq and helped destroy Libya through similarly perverted foreign policy.
But she's really a swell gal.
Get lost, Hillary. Take your Walmart baboons with you.
Went on to green light Bush's genocide in Iraq and helped destroy Libya through similarly perverted foreign policy.
But she's really a swell gal.
Get lost, Hillary. Take your Walmart baboons with you.
26
The article begins with the Clintons being in 'financially dire straits'? Cut me a break. Do you know what it means to be middle or in the lower class and not possibly have a roof over your head or food on the table or not being able to go to a doctor when you are sick?????????????????????
I found the farcical article pathetic.
The Clintons have over a 100 million and are very greedy and have gamed the system to acquire nothing but power and wealth.
I found the farcical article pathetic.
The Clintons have over a 100 million and are very greedy and have gamed the system to acquire nothing but power and wealth.
26
I look at Hilary Clinton and contrast her to say Harry Truman or even Dwight Eisenhower -- and it is hard to be sympathetic. She took her political standing and perceived influence and SOLD it, directly or implied, to corporations and others. This among other issues is why people find her so distasteful. If she wanted to be a public servant -great-- but selling it all out at the end just seems wrong. Hard to picture Truman or Eisenhower doing this. Were it not for the GOP nominating a guy who is "bat guano crazy" it is unlikely she would be elected.
Now she looks like Snow White in comparison....she may have sold out but she "ain't crazy" . A very sad standard we are now using to pick a President.
Now she looks like Snow White in comparison....she may have sold out but she "ain't crazy" . A very sad standard we are now using to pick a President.
17
Two Yale Law School swots say and do anything for power and money. The end.
33
Oh the humanity! Poor Hillary's travails make Tess D'Urberville's life seem akin to Kim Kardashian's. My God, there were times she didn't have nannies for her child. Say it ain't so!
33
don't forget her sitting on the board of Walmart where she voted against raising the pay of min wage associates. Or her use of her office as Senator or Foreign Secretary to obtain "grants" to the Clinton foundation. Or how she talks about paying women equal pay for equal work and providing child care services but her Clinton foundation doing neither (apparently she wants it but only if it applies to someone else or someone else bears the burden).
18
Bill ascended the political ranks; Hillary hauled in a fortune and cleaned up the messes from his countless trysts. Real heartwarming "marriage".
25
Politics is not a game for the poor. It is not even a game for the middle class, nor the upper middle class. Politics is a game for the wealthy. Essentially, if you are not born wealthy, if you want a long political career, you must become so. There may be exceptions, but those are the facts. One can question decisions politicians make to attain the means to their ends, but it is quite a leap to assume that all are motivated by anything as simple as personal greed.
72
While in general I agree with you, I don't see politics as being either a game or for the rich. Unquestionably, a public servant running for office has to attract huge amounts of money, simply to run a campaign. My own congressman is not wealthy, nor are my two senators. But donations of all sizes (mine hover in the $35 range) have to be generated for campaign expenses, and additionally and maybe more subtly, to demonstrate a candidate's viability and support for her policies and values. While I deplore Citizens United and the lousy equivalence of money with votes, I'm seeing hopeful signs that huge corporate wealth may not necessarily be successful in buying votes and politicians. But then I'm an impossible optimist. (The part of me that isn't is worried about Koch money pouring into Senate races.)
How well I know this! My son, an attorney, has wanted to run for office since he was about eight years old. But we have no money. So there goes that dream! He has resigned himself to the fact that he will never, as he once wanted to, "become a U.S. Senator from Massachusetts."
"Politics is not a game for the poor. It is not even a game for the middle class, nor the upper middle class. "
Unless, of course, you're Bernie Sanders.
Unless, of course, you're Bernie Sanders.
What a touching story. I didn't realize she was living in dire poverty, with no skills and no choices. And apparently living with Bill's boom and bust led her to amass millions of dollars for security.
It's laughable and insulting at the same time. We all know the Clintons have taken dollar gluttony to a new level for US politicians. Don't try to sell us some rags to riches story. Especially for people who never produced anything in life outside of politics and lawsuits.
It's laughable and insulting at the same time. We all know the Clintons have taken dollar gluttony to a new level for US politicians. Don't try to sell us some rags to riches story. Especially for people who never produced anything in life outside of politics and lawsuits.
62
This story of Mrs. Hillary Clinton's life so clearly contrasts he middle class experience with the affluent fife of Mr. Donald Trump. This clearly shows that his appeal to the Republican base consisting of undereducated lower middle class is a fraud. How a man like him relate to the experience of his supporters, is a mystery to me. I think it's his ability of branding is the key to his success as a presidential. None the less, it's a deception and bound to be exposed sooner or later.
7
Though my path in life has been vastly different, I can identify with Hillary's way of dealing with what was going on in her life at different stages. It is not that different than others in public service situations or public lives. I think she is trustworthy because she has been in many situations starting with a good education but little money but taking care of her family. She never declared bankruptcy and worked hard...Many people in public life and service make money from speeches. She's a hard worker. She will be a good president
10
When a candidate for President can collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in PERSONAL income for "speeches" that are really selling access to political power should she win , the system is corrupt.
As is the candidate.
As is the candidate.
35
"No one earns $100 Million.
You steal $100 Million.
People earn $10 an hour.
People earn $40,000 a year.
"Earn" means work. Okay?"
- Fran Lebowitz
You steal $100 Million.
People earn $10 an hour.
People earn $40,000 a year.
"Earn" means work. Okay?"
- Fran Lebowitz
39
If you include the sketchy Clinton Foundation assets—which you know they do when 'keeping score'—they're BILLIONAIRES.
17
They hob nob with billionaires. It can be an expensive hobby.
4
Well,if you're going to assert this then you ought to have actual facts to back it up. But of course you can't. It's much more fun to just toss stuff out there and hope folks pass it on as "truth", right?
1
Yep, the only way to support Trump is by constant lying.
Translation: It's taboo for a woman to desire to become rich and powerful, so we have to place her ambitions in a somewhat sentimental context of economic struggles. Why can't we just acknowledge without apology that Hillary is unrelentingly ambitious and desires power and money, just like her male counterparts? There's an underlying appeasement of misogyny in this article - our need to see Hillary apologize for transgressing feminine norms - and if she refuses to do it, we will do it for her.
17
There you go. Bill Clinton is so much dirtier than his wife, yet he always seems to be forgiven. Hilary is held responsible for every horrible thing that her husband has done. She's even been blamed for her husband's serial cheating, instead of getting sympathy for being publicly humiliated by a man who didn't have the self-discipline to behave himself in the Oval Office. That is one of the ugliest things her enemies have done.
If Hilary Clinton was a man, none of this would be an issue. She'd be admired for being smart at politics AND smart at business.
George W. Bush sold himself while he was still President. What deal did he make with the Saudi Arabians to hush up their participation in 9/11? How much blood is on his hands for his phony war? Yet George W. Bush will NEVER be demonized the way Hilary Clinton is.
If Hilary Clinton was a man, none of this would be an issue. She'd be admired for being smart at politics AND smart at business.
George W. Bush sold himself while he was still President. What deal did he make with the Saudi Arabians to hush up their participation in 9/11? How much blood is on his hands for his phony war? Yet George W. Bush will NEVER be demonized the way Hilary Clinton is.
1
Hillary Clinton has always wanted money and lots of its. This is the tale of a women who would do anything to get money.
When Harry Truman left the Presidency he returned to his home and want on with life as if he had never been president.
With the Clinton all you see is people who would do anything to get money - no matter how much they have it is never enough. If she gets elected they will be selling the Lincoln Bedroom again and selling access to people in the White House. This is a dangerous woman.
Remember she won't even release the speeches she made to Goldman Sachs for which she was paid more that a half a million. How about the press demanding their release -- we'd like to know what sort of promises she made to get their support..There are plenty of things that the Clintons have done that are less than honest -- how about the press doing some digging there.
When Harry Truman left the Presidency he returned to his home and want on with life as if he had never been president.
With the Clinton all you see is people who would do anything to get money - no matter how much they have it is never enough. If she gets elected they will be selling the Lincoln Bedroom again and selling access to people in the White House. This is a dangerous woman.
Remember she won't even release the speeches she made to Goldman Sachs for which she was paid more that a half a million. How about the press demanding their release -- we'd like to know what sort of promises she made to get their support..There are plenty of things that the Clintons have done that are less than honest -- how about the press doing some digging there.
29
Politicians typically run patronage networks with the money, and often spend it all, leaving themselves broke in old age.
1
The Clinton's are what i would call low rent.
18
My favorite summation of the family Clinton: small town grifters who hit the lottery.
7
$100,000 per hour to talk looks high-rent to me. There must be overwhelming demand.
4
Folks like Trump gave the whole US Lotto mentality.
Nick, You put this article about Hillary's efforts to earn money after Bill lost his bid to be reelected as governor in perspective. The reporter does not elaborate on her continuing interest in making big bucks. Hillary has portrayed her family to be dirt poor and emphasizes her commitment to do good works crediting her Methodist faith. Hillary's contradictions are difficult to understand and support. Trump has made this easier for some of us, without feeling comfortable about her dishonesty and failures of her Mideast positions.
6
We see it's easy not to worry about how Wall St speeches and quid pro quo through your Foundation looks leading up to your run for president when the DNC and mainstream media is in your pocket.
18
Oh, cry me a bowl of upper-middle class tears!
Just show us the transcripts of your $250,000 Wall Street speeches already!
Just show us the transcripts of your $250,000 Wall Street speeches already!
24
Greed pure and simple drives Hillary always has always will, even to the detriment of this country.
18
Boo Hoo! She had to deal with a job and a child for two years with no help. Well, millions of women do that every day, welcome to the real world, and they don't have rich friends and influential contacts to help them. This article makes Bill sound like a real loser, and but not for Hillary's influence, he'd be a nobody. Perhaps that is true. One thing is undeniable. The Clintons are for sale to the highest bidder. She sold herself when she was Secretary of State, lots of money for access and favors, and she will surely do the same if God forbid she is elected President. Just put a for sale sign over the stars and stripes, because with her as President, she will be richer beyond her wildest dreams. The rest of us, not so much.
25
I am interested that so many defend her. Shouldn't we be tired of people entering public office who are not wealthy, but then years later miraculously have millions. Think of LBJ, who was totally corrupt, and so many others of the political class who leave office with great wealth because of contacts and favors done for those who purchase our government. I think it is all disgusting.
17
Clinton went into the private sector because she wanted more money, which bespeaks neither struggle nor scandal. "Stress over family finances" is a nice spin on wanting more money -- everyone but the uber-wealthy experiences some "stress over family finances" but it makes her neither hero nor villain. Not really sure why this is Times-worthy.
21
Bill could have painted houses or did roofing and Hillary could have become an industrious housewife like the rest of us. Give me a break! But she wanted it all!
16
Origin story, huh? A video vignette would have been a nice touch. Maybe they exist and I just missed them. Not for nothing but $55,000 a year is not exactly chump change. This coming after a free ride in the governor's mansion with the added salary to boot. I imagine the household savings rate was sizable. College graduates today are only so fortunate to buy a $112,00 starter home with or without a family to support. That's in today's dollars and we're talking about 1980. Give me a break.
15
Why the extreme responses to this balanced description of her financial worries? She's neither saint nor sinner in this article. Just a woman taking responsibility for the family finances, struggling for long-term security and comfort, and combining legal work with service. It's astounding how this not very unusual story polarizes people.
226
"She is neither a sinner nor a saint"
Absolutely wrong. She using your terminology is a sinner. She fraudulently engaged in commodities "trading" to turn $1000 into $100,000 in the 70s -- the killer being, that notwithstanding her appetite for money, she never traded again. (See more details in my 11:58 comment) See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy
JD
Absolutely wrong. She using your terminology is a sinner. She fraudulently engaged in commodities "trading" to turn $1000 into $100,000 in the 70s -- the killer being, that notwithstanding her appetite for money, she never traded again. (See more details in my 11:58 comment) See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy
JD
3
OK I get it, Hillary's a crook because she needs the money.
24
When do women, like Hillary, provide for the women who take care of their children? These woman are due more than the Hillary's of the world can ever earn. Many don't have retirement plans. And, shouldn't a mother, who has cared for her own children be afforded her own Social Security? Her role has been much more vital in keeping SS alive than the role the feminists of yesteryear dreamed up. If it takes a village Hillary, you forgot me!
5
"stark choices". Yeah, no. Stark choices are when the cupboard is bare and your children are crying from hunger. Or when it's the end of the month and you don't know how you will pay your rent or mortgage. Not when you neurotically worry about your infant daughter's college fund or your "aging parents" you're not yet 30.
She and Bill were both highly educated lawyers. Privileged in the true sense of the word. For the sake of politics, her supporters condemn as "privileged" white working class people who do not wish to have her as President. The Clintons are actually privileged, though, and her brief period of uncertainty 1980 is not sufficient to excuse her greed and the way she and her husband have sold out the American voting public.
She and Bill were both highly educated lawyers. Privileged in the true sense of the word. For the sake of politics, her supporters condemn as "privileged" white working class people who do not wish to have her as President. The Clintons are actually privileged, though, and her brief period of uncertainty 1980 is not sufficient to excuse her greed and the way she and her husband have sold out the American voting public.
8
Goldwater Girl does OK, no good, no great, no Golden.
We all go back to our roots sooner or later.
She just never left so the trip back was rather short.
We all go back to our roots sooner or later.
She just never left so the trip back was rather short.
5
Why is it such a crime for a woman to earn money? Since I graduated from law school in 1981 I have been the breadwinner for myself the whole time and twice carried husbands and their toys with my paycheck. I bet Hillary lost business once Bill was no longer the governor -- the boys with the money to hire big law firms want boys to do their work I know I have been there. Now I have my own practice in a small town and sometimes at the end of the month I don't know whether I'll make it another week, and still male members at Rotary comment about how much money I make. They have no idea how I run my business.
11
Life can be hard for two Yalies.
26
You know, why is pursuing "The American Dream" only a crime if Hillary Clinton does it?
Envy much, anyone? Get over it. She wasn't born rich, and when you get into Yale Law School, tell me about it! This is PURE, UNADULTERATED misogyny. Period, end of discussion.
Envy much, anyone? Get over it. She wasn't born rich, and when you get into Yale Law School, tell me about it! This is PURE, UNADULTERATED misogyny. Period, end of discussion.
14
There are serious differences about Hillary's character and factual reasons that support the mistrust of her. That you are shouting so loud and making accusations about people that differ from you is unattractive and so Trump.
5
What do you have to say about the women posting comments that are critical of Hillary? Are they misogynists too?
5
Stress ?
Greed Over Money Pushed Clinton Into Corporate World
Greed Over Money Pushed Clinton Into Corporate World
22
Will the Times ever stop its justifications for Hillary Clinton? I'm sorry, but there's just not much financial pathos to be extracted here. Certainly, everyone's life, including the rich and those in the middle class, has its real struggles. But to paint the Clintons into this diorama of economic hardship is revolting and offensive.
37
NYT's attempt to explain Hillary's accepting corporate money will not help her. Making her a desperate housewife for money to support her husband, daughter and her own ambition is not selling well. Millions more Americans had it worse and survived without a former president's pension package. Hillary has to show us her leadership for her vote. She is never like one of us, just like Trump. Please write more about how she can lead the nation and lead us better than Trump.
14
Yes, Secretary Clinton does know what it's like to worry about where she's going to spend the night, who's going to pay the bills, who's going to make the money to support a family. Can Donald Trump say the same thing?
8
"Yes, Secretary Clinton does know what it's like to worry about where she's going to spend the night, who's going to pay the bills, who's going to make the money to support a family. Can Donald Trump say the same thing?"
I don't wish misfortune on anyone, but in The Donald's case, I have to make an exception.
I don't wish misfortune on anyone, but in The Donald's case, I have to make an exception.
2
Mrs. Clinton seems to have needed to worry more about where her husband was going to spend the night.
3
Ask SW Chicago working class ghetto moms how their families survive mass murder every day in the neighborhoods- now that is a story about survival with no education or white privilege.
6
Maybe Hillary can tell us all how to make 100 grand in cattle futures in 10 months and all our problems will be solved.
16
Oh, cut me a break. I've been behind the eight ball many times in life, paying for my children's' college; a mortgage; you name it.
I still didn't sell my soul to the man with the tail reeking of sulphor.
Call it what it is: she sold out. She's a shill. She could've worked for a law firm making huge $; instead she is an influence peddler.
There are those who can be bought and those who cannot be. Her Goldwater Girl is showing.
I still didn't sell my soul to the man with the tail reeking of sulphor.
Call it what it is: she sold out. She's a shill. She could've worked for a law firm making huge $; instead she is an influence peddler.
There are those who can be bought and those who cannot be. Her Goldwater Girl is showing.
18
I have the same concerns that a lot of others have. However, I am voting for Ms Clinton, not because of Mr. Trump. I would vote for her if any other republican was her opponent. She might not have done any worse financially if she had stuck to legal practice. At any rate, that she means well and is genuinely committed to the public good shine through in spite of the choices she has made. I am yet to find any allegation of embezzlement of public funds. Even as she worked hard to help others avoid the live of poverty, she did not want to live in poverty herself. I don't think that puts her in a league with Mr. Trump. While I don't see her as a saint, I believe she is as prepared to be the president of the United States as anybody else who has occupied the office. Mr. Trump is in a league by himself. I cannot compare him with anyone else, let alone Ms Clinton. The one thing I take comfort in is the feeling of complete relieve that Mr. Trump will never be president of the United States even though he is a genuine representative of the republican party.
8
This piece is borderline comedy. Poor Hillary had concerns when her husband lost his job - welcome to the club! Luckily they were Yale Law grads with rich friends. Incredibly the loss of his job made her think of divorce and assert it was mostly "her money" that was used to buy a home despite her secondary breadwinner status (his political career was their future, but not so much for "their" money!)
Is this piece actually meant to portray Secy Clinton as a hardscrabble case of tenacity? If so, it is much more an example of her detachment, entitlement and narcissism.
Is this piece actually meant to portray Secy Clinton as a hardscrabble case of tenacity? If so, it is much more an example of her detachment, entitlement and narcissism.
20
The Clintons were already worth over $100 million when she took the millions of special-interest speech money. And no, no male candidates do it; nobody else does it right before an election. The Clinton Foundation had already taken in billions when it came under investigation, and despite the billions and the investigations, Hillary said that Bill would continue fundraising from the White House. The only money problem the Clintons have, is that they can't resist it.
16
By hook or by crook Hillary will finance her campaign and like in 2008 will over spend and spend on negative ads and fall short of money when the party is over.
2
Who gets to eat their words when the Clinton Foundation emails and the subsequent RICO case ensues?
12
Only the aides will be indicted, if at all. The Clintons (like the Bushes) are untouchables. If heads were to roll, it will be the aides.
4
Her quest for money at any cost or any means may be her undoing in the end. The recent batch of emails released by Judicial watch show that she is still the exemplar of PAY TO PLAY POLITICS, doing State Department favors to Clinton Foundation donors.
To think that a Wall Street bank or any group for that matter will give you close to $300,000 for a mundane speech and not expect access or favors in return is to be punch-drunk on koolaid.
She famously said that 'Clintons' were BROKE when they left the WH. With a few million dollars in networth, if she thought she was broke, then it shows her greed knows no bounds.
To think that a Wall Street bank or any group for that matter will give you close to $300,000 for a mundane speech and not expect access or favors in return is to be punch-drunk on koolaid.
She famously said that 'Clintons' were BROKE when they left the WH. With a few million dollars in networth, if she thought she was broke, then it shows her greed knows no bounds.
11
When they will pay you $300,000 because they want you to hear what they have to say, they must think you matter.
2
Typical of a strong woman, Hillary took charge of the situation; instead of crying about it. She didn't wait around for her husband to see the light. I've seen this sort of thing first hand happen over and over again. I've worked for these sorts of women on and off for 30 years. If I owned my own business; this is exactly the sort of woman I would want in charge.
8
If I had a new baby daughter, and my husband lost his job, and I needed to get a job, I'd go out and get one too. And I would call everyone I knew to ask for help. Hillary just has a more robust Rolodex than I do.
14
Does anyone remember the gift registry Mrs Clinton set up when leaving the White House? Being "dead broke", she thus offered her friends a way to beautify the new mansion she was moving into in DC.
9
They did owe $millions in legal fees to match what the public spent on shysters like Ken Starr.
1
Initially the Clintons, especially Bill, had admirable progressive intentions when he received his funding primarily from unions and working people. The problem is, he lost and in order to resurrect his political future, he chose to turn his attention towards the corporate world for funding where he ultimately won.
When it comes to the Clintons, the rest we can say, is history.
When it comes to the Clintons, the rest we can say, is history.
What do people who lack empathy act like? “Someone who lacks empathy does not vicariously feel the experiences of another. It does not mean they are predatory. It does not mean they are irresponsible. It does not mean they are sadistic. Do not be persuaded into demonizing such people. Contrary to being immoral, their social blind spot empowers them to avoid many moral pitfalls...” Source: https://goo.gl/yCgy2a
Excellent insight into the very "American" and universal struggle of anyone in this country with ambitions, dreams, and ideals (which we are taught to embrace as our inalienable right) and the oft bumpy road to a life that resembles "security" (a remarkable illusion) and "successful" (a multi-prong, often and sadly awarded to those with the most dollars and bravado (example A: Donald Trump). I, like so many Americans, have become afraid to trust any candidate, especially those peddling emotional trinkets like "hope" and "Make America Great Again." People will feel hopeful and "great" when they feel like they are: included, educated, have opportunities. After reading this article, I am at peace with selecting Hillary Clinton as my representative, as my leader, as my President, because I believe that she has a unique and important vantage point to understand the needs of the greatest number of our citizens (both have and have nots) and she recognizes that the key to our future is working together to solve tough problems (local and global) that will ensure the greatest chance of peace and prosperity for all, not putting our military boots on the faces of others until they acquiesce.
What is the point of this article? Everyone, besides the Clintons, has the same experiences. Why is HRC so special?
4
It's as a result of these early privations -- having to raise one child on a combined salary of over $50,000 a year in 1980! -- that Hillary developed her remarkable commitment to universal affordable health care, free college tuition, a Wall Street that works for the lower and middle classes, and ... oh, it was actually a challenge from Bernie Sanders that tugged her to the left, and scratch that bit about Wall Street working for the lower and middle classes.
Check out the "houses over the years" article. The Clintons were so poor they lived in a two-bedroom-two-bathroom house when they were still a couple without a child. A simply shocking level of poverty. No wonder Hillary went down to Wall Street and told the casino bankers to "Cut it out!" when they were endangering the mortgages on hundred of thousands of homes of ordinary Americans. Hillary, who now divides her time among three homes and is hoping to move into a fourth one, understands how the other 99% lives.
Check out the "houses over the years" article. The Clintons were so poor they lived in a two-bedroom-two-bathroom house when they were still a couple without a child. A simply shocking level of poverty. No wonder Hillary went down to Wall Street and told the casino bankers to "Cut it out!" when they were endangering the mortgages on hundred of thousands of homes of ordinary Americans. Hillary, who now divides her time among three homes and is hoping to move into a fourth one, understands how the other 99% lives.
6
Boomers are lucky if they didn't spend their retirement nest eggs having children who can't find jobs.
2
This article is almost laughable. as it tries to justify Hillary's behavior.
9
Your comment is almost laughable, in that it implies Ms. Clinton's behavior is unjustifiable, without saying anything about it or why it can't be justified.
Unfounded implications and blatant lies, the only way to support Trump.
Unfounded implications and blatant lies, the only way to support Trump.
Where to begin?
"The corporate world" implies Hillary was a successful lawyer or executive. In fact, she and Bill became rich peddling access to the single likeliest person to be the next president of the U.S. Absent that status do you really think anyone would pay have paid $225, much less $225,000, to hear conventional wisdom delivered in a monotone?
If you read the Times you probably know someone in the securities business. Ask them what the odds are that a first-time futures trader would make anything, much less $100,000, trading cattle futures from a $1,000 stake. Then ask them to explain how brokers can allocate trades to reward favored customers, such as the wife of a governor with regulatory authority over the industry her 'friend' worked in.
http://www.newsweek.com/hillarys-adventures-cattle-futures-land-187048
http://tinyurl.com/zvevbax
Her "financial moves clash with the selfless Methodist credo to do good for others that she so often says guided her toward a life of public service." Then perhaps we should watch what she does, not what she says. Hillary thinks she deserves both the presidency and a huge fortune for having endured the private grief and public humiliation of her unfaithful husband while working for the betterment of the American people. That she feels she needs a $50 million fortune to insulate her descendants from her disastrous policies, particularly unfettered illegal immigration, suggests Americans should closely monitor their betterment.
"The corporate world" implies Hillary was a successful lawyer or executive. In fact, she and Bill became rich peddling access to the single likeliest person to be the next president of the U.S. Absent that status do you really think anyone would pay have paid $225, much less $225,000, to hear conventional wisdom delivered in a monotone?
If you read the Times you probably know someone in the securities business. Ask them what the odds are that a first-time futures trader would make anything, much less $100,000, trading cattle futures from a $1,000 stake. Then ask them to explain how brokers can allocate trades to reward favored customers, such as the wife of a governor with regulatory authority over the industry her 'friend' worked in.
http://www.newsweek.com/hillarys-adventures-cattle-futures-land-187048
http://tinyurl.com/zvevbax
Her "financial moves clash with the selfless Methodist credo to do good for others that she so often says guided her toward a life of public service." Then perhaps we should watch what she does, not what she says. Hillary thinks she deserves both the presidency and a huge fortune for having endured the private grief and public humiliation of her unfaithful husband while working for the betterment of the American people. That she feels she needs a $50 million fortune to insulate her descendants from her disastrous policies, particularly unfettered illegal immigration, suggests Americans should closely monitor their betterment.
10
She must have smelled a rat, because she quit while she was ahead.
1
After reading this, I can't help but think that all men should be so lucky to have a smart wife like Hillary!
5
Yet they let their eyes stray...after young interns.
2
Are you kidding me? Am I Supposed to feel sorry for her and her families "struggles"? Are kidding me? I couldn't even finish this article. Unbelievable. My wife and I are raising two kids on less then what Bill as making out of th governors office and I'm supposed to think that Hillary was mixing and matching furniture in some upper class neighborhood in a house I can't even imagine being able to afford? Im 1980 my father was reaching in NY public schools for $30k a year while supporting my mom, sister and myself...please....wah! Wah! My husband lost the election and I lost all my man-servants to help wih the baby. Please.
10
It looks like Hillary Clinton will become President of the United States. We had better get used to a renewal of the constant stream of scandalous gossip, some of it true and some unfounded, from the White House. How we will miss the class, intelligence, grace and service to others of the Obama family.
While we shall miss the elegance of today's White House, hipefully we can take solace in having avoided a catastrophe far worse than mere words can express.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
While we shall miss the elegance of today's White House, hipefully we can take solace in having avoided a catastrophe far worse than mere words can express.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
2
And hopefully the Obamas don't go the paid speech route and shame themselves (and our country) like the Clintons have done.
1
JJ don't worry, the Obamas will follow the Clintons, who they consider good friends. They are even planning on renting a house owned by Clintons' friend. The Obamas seem destined to become faithful Clinton followers.
3
unbridled greed. even when conflicts of interest arise, she accepts fees from folks around the world. It kinda looks bad.
6
It's pure capitalism and its in line with western materialism, to accumulate fame, power and wealth. Just because you can. Sky being the limit.
1
This is the first article I have read that has made Mrs. Clinton seem human, with human foibles and challenges. Well done!
5
I'm sorry. Exactly WHAT is the point of this "article"? And writing that Clinton "was impeached by the House of Representatives" without explaining that tiny other part that it's actually THE SENATE who has to confirm that recommendation is MISLEADING and irresponsible. Because we all know how educated and knowledgeable Americans are. There are actually people who think he WAS impeached . This just continues all the misinformation that abounds surrounding the Clinton's. Shall we just cancel the election this year? Unbelievable!
4
Thanks for this piece about HRC finances over the years.
I find what she did admirable; she was a working mother and made money to support her family. She was highly educated and got a good paying job as well as playing the stock market- which, by the way, anyone with a 401K does as well.
Bill and Hillary- as well as the Obamas did not come from wealth. They made it through sheer will, grit, determination and hard work. They are to be admired. That is the very stark difference between Trump, Bush, Romney- all who were born into wealth and extreme privilege.
Trump who doesn't pay his bills and stiffs people has the gall to call Hillary crooked. Trump will go down in the dustbin of history as the best liar, fraud and con artist this country has ever seen.
What worries me are the gullible people who believe and support him. They're not going anywhere. How can so many people be so stupid? The same question was asked when we re-elected Bush Jr- and it looks like many have gotten even more stupid since then.
The GOP pols that endorse Trump know he would be a disaster but they don't care a whit about this country- only care about their own power. They are truly evil people- there is no other word to describe them.
I find what she did admirable; she was a working mother and made money to support her family. She was highly educated and got a good paying job as well as playing the stock market- which, by the way, anyone with a 401K does as well.
Bill and Hillary- as well as the Obamas did not come from wealth. They made it through sheer will, grit, determination and hard work. They are to be admired. That is the very stark difference between Trump, Bush, Romney- all who were born into wealth and extreme privilege.
Trump who doesn't pay his bills and stiffs people has the gall to call Hillary crooked. Trump will go down in the dustbin of history as the best liar, fraud and con artist this country has ever seen.
What worries me are the gullible people who believe and support him. They're not going anywhere. How can so many people be so stupid? The same question was asked when we re-elected Bush Jr- and it looks like many have gotten even more stupid since then.
The GOP pols that endorse Trump know he would be a disaster but they don't care a whit about this country- only care about their own power. They are truly evil people- there is no other word to describe them.
14
President Obama had already made nearly $4-5 million before he became President in 2008-9. Definitely more well off than the Clintons when Bill began his Presidency. Although President Obama is worth way more now, 8 years later, the Obamas are no where near as wealthy as the Clintons who made all their wealth and more, since Bill left office.
2
You missed my point. The Clintons and the Obamas were not born into wealth. Whatever wealth they now have or have made in their careers, it is due to their hard work. They were not handed anything on a silver platter- far from it.
1
Obama made a bit of his money through sales of his book Dreams from My Father which was well reviewed in this paper as I recall when it was first printed. Nobody had ever heard of him at that time and I don't think the book sold that any copies. After he made his speech at the Democratic Convention to he was a rising star and sales took off.
1
Why does Mrs Clinton-Hillary- need an excuse?-why should she be raked over the coals and have her pockets emptied for the delectation of the local political police? Had any male pol jumped ship to go play major league money games: , Democrat, Liberal or Conservative-no one would have blinked.
But because she is a"Mrs", Hillary needs to justify having and making money. How about Steve Jobs or puppet master, Bill Gates? No one questions their money making activities? While I admit to often being the worst, most offensive racist and sexist on Manhattan's Upper East Side, I will have no truck with damfools who feel that Mrs Clinton needs to somehow maintain a position of sterile , femininity, as if on the pedestal created for American women in the 1940's. Always untouchable yet forever the secret superwomen we expect, all behind closed doors and scenes. If she were Bill, no one would comment on her hats or who she played cards or golf with-she could even smoke cigars and all it would do is increase her "masculine attraction". Will we expect her to go duck hunting in the early morning, too?
Too much of our media's and our ignorant bluestocking's concerns are about none of their business and merely pile more insult onto all the injury women suffer in American politics.
What will the backbiters say if she chooses to endow numerous students or give her money away constructively, like Carnegie and, even Rockefeller tried to?
But because she is a"Mrs", Hillary needs to justify having and making money. How about Steve Jobs or puppet master, Bill Gates? No one questions their money making activities? While I admit to often being the worst, most offensive racist and sexist on Manhattan's Upper East Side, I will have no truck with damfools who feel that Mrs Clinton needs to somehow maintain a position of sterile , femininity, as if on the pedestal created for American women in the 1940's. Always untouchable yet forever the secret superwomen we expect, all behind closed doors and scenes. If she were Bill, no one would comment on her hats or who she played cards or golf with-she could even smoke cigars and all it would do is increase her "masculine attraction". Will we expect her to go duck hunting in the early morning, too?
Too much of our media's and our ignorant bluestocking's concerns are about none of their business and merely pile more insult onto all the injury women suffer in American politics.
What will the backbiters say if she chooses to endow numerous students or give her money away constructively, like Carnegie and, even Rockefeller tried to?
8
Hillary still hasn't told us what she said in those speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs and when she made those speeches she knew she was going to run for President.
There's nothing baffling about Hillary's decision to take that money from Goldman Sachs, nor is there anything baffling about Goldman Sach's decision to hand over that money to Hillary.
There's nothing baffling about Hillary's decision to take that money from Goldman Sachs, nor is there anything baffling about Goldman Sach's decision to hand over that money to Hillary.
7
Democrats seem more concerned with the struggles of people in foreign lands than with those off people here at home but Republicans only care about the wealthy. Talk about voters being between a rock and a hard place.
5
Many fascinating details here about the financial and career twists and turns between loss of the Arkansas governor's mansion and eventual residency at the White House, but the one that leapt out at me was that after the governorship the Clintons moved to, and raised the baby Chelsea on, a street called "Midland"; Midland, of course, was George Bush's hometown in Texas, and those indeed are the only Midlands I ever heard of. That really strikes me as a quite a coincidence.
Dow Chemical (NYSE: DOW) is headquartered in Midland, Michigan.
2
I guess you are not familiar with Yonkers.
Everyone wants enough money to live on, but "enough" depends on the person.
Right now, Trump dominates the media and works his audiences like a talk show host again with more hate. There is a vacuum in this election cycle. What people need is what Bernie has left for her. Can Hillary deliver?
Right now, Trump dominates the media and works his audiences like a talk show host again with more hate. There is a vacuum in this election cycle. What people need is what Bernie has left for her. Can Hillary deliver?
1
Nice to see the NY Times softening the blow as revelations of Hillary's conflicts of interest while Secretary of State start coming out. I doubt the Times will be so critical of her sale of public office as they are of Trump's private business dealings.
8
don't you know that all of her corruption was for the little people?
4
Most of those making the same oft-repeated gripes against Clinton's moves inside the corporate world have no clue, much less insight, into the reasons why she chose to do so.
Morever, relatively few would probably have the intelligence or capacity to do the same, if faced with the similar situation.
It's a safe bet to assume that it's more about jealousy than anything else.
Not exactly a demonstration for Women's Lib, is it?
Morever, relatively few would probably have the intelligence or capacity to do the same, if faced with the similar situation.
It's a safe bet to assume that it's more about jealousy than anything else.
Not exactly a demonstration for Women's Lib, is it?
2
Once one amasses some number of millions... isn't the "bust" of boom/bust over?
2
It's hard to reconcile the notion of a "for the people" Democrat being so consumed by wealth and privilege. Hillary has used Republican principals to amass her wealth and virtually left the mass of her Democratic proletariat behind.
7
It's hard to sympathize with their "meager" finances when you look what the buying power of $55,000 in 1979 translates to in 2016...$192,000! Or what a $100,000 investment in 1978 inflates to in 2016...$350,000!
This sounds more like Amy Chozick is skewing the "struggles" of an upper class family navigate the wealthy world of politics.
This sounds more like Amy Chozick is skewing the "struggles" of an upper class family navigate the wealthy world of politics.
11
This is pretty much what I would have thought: Hillary is a planner and doer. She had to hold the family and finances together. Every mother, or sometimes a sister, knows that you don't just get to speechify about caring for others; you have to get it done.
10
I rather wish this story had been publicized earlier in the election cycle -- or indeed in the '90s, when its basic humanity and realness might have served as a better counterweight to Mrs Clinton's demonization by the right,
3
Bill Clinton's presidency ended in 2001 not 2000
What principles? Success at any cost? Ensuring those coattails don't fray too badly?
I*ve never needed any right-wing *conspiracy* to inform my feelings about Hillary. Her own words and actions have done that just fine for me. I*ve watched her lie in real time. I*ve listened to her talk louder and faster, which is her time-honored technique for attempting to drown out the points an opponent is making.
Is she responsible for the wretched behavior of her spouse? She*s certainly responsible for her own response to it--to enable its continuance and to attempt to destroy the lives and reputations of any woman unfortunate enough to have drawn Bill*s--uh--interest.
We saw Chelsea sent out to lie--miserably uncomfortably--about Sanders* health-care proposals--while stumping for her mother. Co-opting one*s child is pretty awful in my book. But that*s Clinton family values hard at work.
Sorry. There is no least worst choice here. The candidates are equally wretched, but each in their own way.
I*ve never needed any right-wing *conspiracy* to inform my feelings about Hillary. Her own words and actions have done that just fine for me. I*ve watched her lie in real time. I*ve listened to her talk louder and faster, which is her time-honored technique for attempting to drown out the points an opponent is making.
Is she responsible for the wretched behavior of her spouse? She*s certainly responsible for her own response to it--to enable its continuance and to attempt to destroy the lives and reputations of any woman unfortunate enough to have drawn Bill*s--uh--interest.
We saw Chelsea sent out to lie--miserably uncomfortably--about Sanders* health-care proposals--while stumping for her mother. Co-opting one*s child is pretty awful in my book. But that*s Clinton family values hard at work.
Sorry. There is no least worst choice here. The candidates are equally wretched, but each in their own way.
12
I always thought that her tale about dodging sniper fire in Sarajevo or wherever it was, when her own daughter was along on the trip and had to know her mother was lying, was just awful. Ordinary kids have caring parents who at least attempt to teach them to tell the truth. Didn't support her in 2008 but that completely lost me. Whatever comes out of her mouth is just words.
Unfortunately what comes out of Trump's mouth is bile and poison. I won't holding my nose to vote for Clinton. I will be wearing a gas mask.
Unfortunately what comes out of Trump's mouth is bile and poison. I won't holding my nose to vote for Clinton. I will be wearing a gas mask.
1
Well, Bash, that's what she*s counting on. If enough of us say--enough--and vote for Johnson, who has more of a chance than Stein, perhaps we can make a difference.
But voters tend to be chicken. Just remember--Nader didn't bring us Bush. Gore and the DNC did.
But voters tend to be chicken. Just remember--Nader didn't bring us Bush. Gore and the DNC did.
1
Look everyone! You see, Hillary is just like us!
4
We must, as good liberals, demand equal time for Donald Trump. How about an article about how his "concern" for his family finances led him to take jobs that violated his ethical values? Also, it would be so fascinating to learn how he demonstrated love for his family, his children, by working long days and extra hours to support them. And to be sure, we'd love an inside look at how he purchased his first home and decorated it too! Don't forget to include excerpts from his "friends" about their bewilderment over his choice to play on Wall Street.
4
Hillary deserves great credit for something else during that period.
As the article notes, Bill was so upset about losing his re-election bid that he shut down and was contemplating a non-political career (to the extent he was contemplating at all -- this article suggests he probably wasn't). Hillary basically repeated the inimitable words of Sarah Conner in Terminator 2: "On your feet, soldier!" She whipped him into shape soon enough and well enough for him to retake the governorship in 1984, which not only kept his political career alive but eventually led to two terms in the White House.
This article might suggest that Hillary did even that for pecuniary reasons, but I give her more credit than that. Nearly all human beings take a while to get over rejection, but many of us take far too long. Bill appeared to be in that category; Hillary did not. She seemed to realize what perhaps should have seemed obvious but did not: "Life goes on. You have to pick yourself up, put one foot in front of the other, and get on with it."
Hillary may have needed to do that in 1980, but my impression is that she did it even better than was necessary, and that Bill Clinton would never have got to where he got without her. I find faults with her, but I also recognize the great strength she exhibited then -- and could in the future.
As the article notes, Bill was so upset about losing his re-election bid that he shut down and was contemplating a non-political career (to the extent he was contemplating at all -- this article suggests he probably wasn't). Hillary basically repeated the inimitable words of Sarah Conner in Terminator 2: "On your feet, soldier!" She whipped him into shape soon enough and well enough for him to retake the governorship in 1984, which not only kept his political career alive but eventually led to two terms in the White House.
This article might suggest that Hillary did even that for pecuniary reasons, but I give her more credit than that. Nearly all human beings take a while to get over rejection, but many of us take far too long. Bill appeared to be in that category; Hillary did not. She seemed to realize what perhaps should have seemed obvious but did not: "Life goes on. You have to pick yourself up, put one foot in front of the other, and get on with it."
Hillary may have needed to do that in 1980, but my impression is that she did it even better than was necessary, and that Bill Clinton would never have got to where he got without her. I find faults with her, but I also recognize the great strength she exhibited then -- and could in the future.
318
Stop making excuses for her actions.
1
I certainly want someone who knows how to do that in the White House.
Greed and hubris propelled Mr. and Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton on their life long loving quest for money and power converting their elective and selective "service" into a gold-filled palace.
Two lawyers who pathologically ignore the fundamental ethical obligation of every lawyer to avoid even the appearance of impropriety by dishonoring the truth and transparency.
The Clinton Global Initiative is an organized crime syndicate for the Clinton family interest schemes.
Two lawyers who pathologically ignore the fundamental ethical obligation of every lawyer to avoid even the appearance of impropriety by dishonoring the truth and transparency.
The Clinton Global Initiative is an organized crime syndicate for the Clinton family interest schemes.
15
Yet another installment in the Times's yearlong pro-Clinton narrative.
If Hillary's speeches at Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks were so harmless, why doesn't she release the transcripts to us, the voting public?
If Hillary's speeches at Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks were so harmless, why doesn't she release the transcripts to us, the voting public?
12
"She increased her hours to bring in work for the firm, with business not as easy to come by now that she was no longer the governor’s wife."
A fine encapsulation of Hillary's lifetime of trading on her political connections.
Life is really tough when it's 1980, you have made partner in a law firm, your husband makes $55,000 per year, you've used your 9,900% profit from a shady cattle futures investment to buy a house as close as you can get to the truly rich people in town, and you have persuaded your friends and neighbors to provide babysitting for free. My heart bleeds for you. Gosh, not quite so easy to attract customers now that you are no longer the governor's wife? So sad.
It wasn't the political rejection in 1980 that made Hillary give up her youthful ideals and start thinking about money. The cattle futures episode, before the Clintons moved into the governor's mansion, was a good example of her using advice and services from friends to make a pile of money in conjuction with her husband preparing to run for governor. Just a coincidence. And their house at that time was small -- much less grand than befitted the attorney general of Arkansas.
A fine encapsulation of Hillary's lifetime of trading on her political connections.
Life is really tough when it's 1980, you have made partner in a law firm, your husband makes $55,000 per year, you've used your 9,900% profit from a shady cattle futures investment to buy a house as close as you can get to the truly rich people in town, and you have persuaded your friends and neighbors to provide babysitting for free. My heart bleeds for you. Gosh, not quite so easy to attract customers now that you are no longer the governor's wife? So sad.
It wasn't the political rejection in 1980 that made Hillary give up her youthful ideals and start thinking about money. The cattle futures episode, before the Clintons moved into the governor's mansion, was a good example of her using advice and services from friends to make a pile of money in conjuction with her husband preparing to run for governor. Just a coincidence. And their house at that time was small -- much less grand than befitted the attorney general of Arkansas.
10
This article inspires me. I respect Mrs. Clinton and her resilience. I have worked very, very hard over the years only to see my savings and job disappear in 2008. I went back to work in 2009, but my industry was the hardest hit, construction and real estate development. I saw this happen in the early 1990s also. Both due to fraud by the financial sector.
Mrs. Clinton seems like a good person who just wants to ensure that her family's finances are secure. I find her resilience inspiring as I'm still hurting from 2008!
Mrs. Clinton seems like a good person who just wants to ensure that her family's finances are secure. I find her resilience inspiring as I'm still hurting from 2008!
16
Well, it's great to congratulate Mrs. Clinton. But she and her husband repealed the legislation that de-regulated Wall Street and introduced the Grahm-Leach Bill that brought about the Great Recession. They also de-regulated financial derivatives. So maybe, you should rethink your high esteem for her????? She went on to make a 100 million while your bank account is almost empty.
4
The key point of this interesting article is that Bill Clinton in the Arkansas days was not interested in making money, a fine but frustrating quality in a husband and father. He was highly motivated to be a leader, but his wife had to be the realist about the necessity of gaining financial stability. I find it admirable that she was so capable of taking on this stress-inducing task. I had read about the cattle futures venture in Carl Bernstein's excellent book, A Woman in Charge, and it was clear that the money she made was not some overnight magic trick, but a result of reinvesting over a period of months. Those who use this as one of many, many attack lines against her never note that she was no gambler, but wisely got out with her earnings intact. They can never point to another instance of questionable investing, so they beat this one to death.
17
Yesterday I almost had a nervous breakdown trying to juggle a 2-year-old, two client projects with imminent deadlines and pressure from my husband to appear at his firm’s baseball game. A working mother with a demanding job, Master’s from an Ivy-league school, and no family nearby to help with a small child, it gives me hope another woman made it through to follow her dreams. That she didn’t have to “choose.” And that she had to call upon the kindness of friends and neighbors. Mind you, most of my friends and classmates at grad school are terrified of having children because we’ve been told all of our adult lives that children will ruin our lives and careers. And there’s loads of research to prove mothers are discriminated against at work. We are also seeing companies like Google and Facebook encouraging women to freeze their eggs so they can “focus on their careers” during key child rearing years. So examples like Hillary Clinton are so important to people like me: women can raise a family, have a career, support their husband and make a solid living.
We have to wonder why Hillary Clinton has been so dissected, detested and dismissed throughout her time in the public eye. We aren’t used to seeing strong women. Thank goodness she persevered.
We have to wonder why Hillary Clinton has been so dissected, detested and dismissed throughout her time in the public eye. We aren’t used to seeing strong women. Thank goodness she persevered.
487
It seems that with both of your salaries, you could easily afford sitters. I didn't make a lot of money but always used sitters when called for.
3
So examples like Hillary Clinton are so important to people like me: women can raise a family, have a career, support their husband and make a solid living.
she has also had nannys and maids a good of her life. This is not available to most upper middle class women, never mind peons on the lower ranks.
she has also had nannys and maids a good of her life. This is not available to most upper middle class women, never mind peons on the lower ranks.
3
And when all elections are publicly funded, Yoda, you'll have a point. In the meantime, only people with money -- self-made like Clinton or business heirs like Trump - will be running for office.
This gives great meaning to the saying, "behind every great man, there is a greater woman." Without Hillary, we would not have 8 years period of President Bill Clinton where US hardware engineering and technology manufacturing at its finest; the rise, realization, and adoption of the internet, CISC & RISC CPU/GPU, Wireless infrastructures and devices, and other great electronic hardware inventions.
People are nitpicking on the history of the candidates and the parties, which is like driving forward by looking at the rear mirror. What were the real positive national changes and advancements that were bring forth through the candidates and the parties will tell me what I can expect from their teams the coming years.
People are nitpicking on the history of the candidates and the parties, which is like driving forward by looking at the rear mirror. What were the real positive national changes and advancements that were bring forth through the candidates and the parties will tell me what I can expect from their teams the coming years.
6
"we would not have 8 years period of President Bill Clinton where US hardware engineering and technology manufacturing at its finest; the rise, realization, and adoption of the internet, CISC & RISC CPU/GPU, Wireless infrastructures and devices, and other great electronic hardware inventions"
having lived in CA at the time, with my clients consisting of companies like this, I can confidently tell you Clinton had nothing to do with it.
having lived in CA at the time, with my clients consisting of companies like this, I can confidently tell you Clinton had nothing to do with it.
2
Bill Clinton had about as much to do with advancements in technology as Al Gore did in inventing the internet.
4
Well, at least I now have some understanding as to the psychology that led her to make paid speeches to bankers even as she was about to run for president again. But they didn't need the money at that point. Where were her advisors telling her, "Hell no!" It still seems just incredibly stupid.
7
She didn't need to worry "how it looked" because the DNC and media were in her pocket.
5
My sentiments exactly. The judgment displayed by this was appalling.
3
Although it will take hours again before my comment is visible (is this because I am in Europe or is nytimes slow in general?), I hope you will still read my appreciation of your comment. I am grateful that you wrote it. I was appalled as well when I read the 'article' this morning and now the changed title makes it even worse. The prevailing sexism in the coverage of Hillary Clinton is truly unbelievable. You already gave all the necessary arguments.
The low point is indeed quoting Trump referring to Clinton's financial gains, when he has just suggested the 2A solution, which is discussed on the front page as well. The lack of style in this 'article' is intolerable. Apart from the fact that it doesn't even give a sentence of new information, it judges Clinton for the same thing any man would have been praised for. This is 2016 and we still have to read this kind of nonsense. I hope the younger women who seem to think that becoming president of the United States is no big deal, rethink that stance. Obviously in the United States it still is a big deal and women like Hillary Clinton had to work that much harder and put up with that much more nonsense to get that far.
The low point is indeed quoting Trump referring to Clinton's financial gains, when he has just suggested the 2A solution, which is discussed on the front page as well. The lack of style in this 'article' is intolerable. Apart from the fact that it doesn't even give a sentence of new information, it judges Clinton for the same thing any man would have been praised for. This is 2016 and we still have to read this kind of nonsense. I hope the younger women who seem to think that becoming president of the United States is no big deal, rethink that stance. Obviously in the United States it still is a big deal and women like Hillary Clinton had to work that much harder and put up with that much more nonsense to get that far.
1
Yet another editorial commentary against Hillary Clinton embedded in an ostensible "news" piece by Amy Chozick, and yet again, on the front page of the NY Times.
As a Democrat and a long-term subscriber to this newspaper, I have become so disillusioned by the negative coverage of Secretary Clinto, now born out in recent media studies (Harvard).
Frankly, why is this a story of duplicity, just because a woman has worked to be sure her family is secure. Why is Hillary's income always cited as evidence of hypocrisy in her politics, when in fact, no quid pro quo is evident here.
In fact, her political life has been dedicated to the health and welfare of women and children and protecting the lives of American workers?
Why would "Hillary Clinton's relationship with money" "puzzle "even some of her closest supporters?
Why shouldn't she make money in speaking fees?
She supports Dodd Frank and other reforms to the banking industry.
What you've done here, is to validate alleged "voters' anger" by printing yet another piece on Hillary's ostensible avarice, using Donald J. Trump and the Republican Party to validate what you have written?
That your "article" appears on the same page as coverage of Trump's most grotesque suggestion that a future President Clinton could be done in by 2nd Amendment crazies, is so disturbing.
Frankly, this writing is sexist, and to be sure classist. It belongs in the National Enquirer, not the NY Times.
As a Democrat and a long-term subscriber to this newspaper, I have become so disillusioned by the negative coverage of Secretary Clinto, now born out in recent media studies (Harvard).
Frankly, why is this a story of duplicity, just because a woman has worked to be sure her family is secure. Why is Hillary's income always cited as evidence of hypocrisy in her politics, when in fact, no quid pro quo is evident here.
In fact, her political life has been dedicated to the health and welfare of women and children and protecting the lives of American workers?
Why would "Hillary Clinton's relationship with money" "puzzle "even some of her closest supporters?
Why shouldn't she make money in speaking fees?
She supports Dodd Frank and other reforms to the banking industry.
What you've done here, is to validate alleged "voters' anger" by printing yet another piece on Hillary's ostensible avarice, using Donald J. Trump and the Republican Party to validate what you have written?
That your "article" appears on the same page as coverage of Trump's most grotesque suggestion that a future President Clinton could be done in by 2nd Amendment crazies, is so disturbing.
Frankly, this writing is sexist, and to be sure classist. It belongs in the National Enquirer, not the NY Times.
13
I do seem to remember that Clinton also mentioned assassination in her campaign in 2008. She reminded voters that she was still in the race because after all, RFK had been assassinated in California so who knows what can happen. It wasn't any prettier or better when she brought it up in 2008 then it is now,
1
how could you see this as negative? this is the biggest puff piece in the history of puff pieces.
3
Thoughts and beliefs of Hillary about middle east will lead US an Europe to a catastrophe. The consequences of what she has done in favor of Libya destruction is just a sample.
6
she has not met a war she was opposed to yet, whether in Iraq, Syria or Libya. Who says a neo-conservative needs to come to office for a continuation of this type of foreign policy.
3
I am Hillary without the politics. My husband is a public servent and makes a fraction of what I make. Without my relentless focus on my corporate job, we would not be as comfortable as we are. So, yes, I give her a pass on this stuff. She did what she believed she needed to do to make her family was taken care of. We don't see anything wrong with a man taking risks with money (if he wins, he's a genius, if a woman wins, she's crooked), taking well paying jobs to support a family. That we condemn Clinton for same means sexixm is alive and well....
35
Got it. Mrs. Clinton faced a tumultuous chapter of her life during which she opted for lucrative pursuits over more image-friendly paths like community engagement or nonprofit work. It's understandable. Yet where I find this article absurd is the assertion that Mrs. Clinton's financial struggles explain the total depth of her friendliness with big business and Wall Street, and for two reasons:
1. Her darkest hour of financial trouble in Arkansas was, by any reasonable standard, far from lower class. Bemoaning the hardships of moving into a $112k house in 1980, surrounded by politically connected friends from time in the Governor's Mansion sounds so Marie Antoinette aloof it's ridiculous. Millions of Americans would kill for these "struggles."
2. It is not like she made a small, or even reasonable, amount of money in those paid speeches to Wall Street firms. She made an amount of money that most people cannot even comprehend. And now she is running on a platform of Wall Street reform? But won't tell us what wisdom she left Goldman Sachs with? Attributing her paychecks to a desire to live free of financial hardships is like excusing someone starting a forest fire because they were a cold and needed some heat. It is just way too out of proportion to make any sense.
1. Her darkest hour of financial trouble in Arkansas was, by any reasonable standard, far from lower class. Bemoaning the hardships of moving into a $112k house in 1980, surrounded by politically connected friends from time in the Governor's Mansion sounds so Marie Antoinette aloof it's ridiculous. Millions of Americans would kill for these "struggles."
2. It is not like she made a small, or even reasonable, amount of money in those paid speeches to Wall Street firms. She made an amount of money that most people cannot even comprehend. And now she is running on a platform of Wall Street reform? But won't tell us what wisdom she left Goldman Sachs with? Attributing her paychecks to a desire to live free of financial hardships is like excusing someone starting a forest fire because they were a cold and needed some heat. It is just way too out of proportion to make any sense.
12
Yes, she wasn't just the "nice little lady" she was supposed to be was she, Solaris. Those days are gone forever for most women - thank heavens and thanks for their courage to change the world.
Most successful people are so because of the network of people you build up over the years. Many Ivy league graduates for example are successful in business and politics because of the relationship made at school. The average person's circle of connections are typically much smaller.
2
Ugh, more questions of conflict today due to her overlapping work on Clinton Foundation matters while she was SOS. Maybe they feel compelled to amass so much wealth, through the paid speeches, so that they can pay future legal bills.
8
You guys remember "that kid" in high school who was especially fake and obnoxious and ran for student government every year? The Clintons are "that kid" times 1,000 ... on human growth hormones and steroids. They've been obsessed with acquiring power and millions since middle school, but like clever lawyers, they've carefully cultivated a phony aww shucks public image.
11
"Friends said she would have focused on public service and charitable work and not gone to work at the firm...had it not been for her concern about her family’s finances."
Perhaps the most ridiculous sentence I've ever read in the NYT. Poor Hillary. She had to deal with the normal exigencies of life, just like every one else. Welcome to the real world - sadly a world she has seen very little of since.
Perhaps the most ridiculous sentence I've ever read in the NYT. Poor Hillary. She had to deal with the normal exigencies of life, just like every one else. Welcome to the real world - sadly a world she has seen very little of since.
7
Roosevelt, Rockefeller, Kennedy, Bush and Clinton.
A history of violence, corruption and wealth. It is the history of the US. It is the history of Capitalism. It is the real world.
The alternative is to Be Content and Be Compassionate.
A history of violence, corruption and wealth. It is the history of the US. It is the history of Capitalism. It is the real world.
The alternative is to Be Content and Be Compassionate.
5
Striving, always, to attain security from economic ruin was a common, widespread attitude of those who lived through the Depression of the 1930's, including, no doubt, Hillary's parents. They surely inculcated this worry in their daughter, and it has remained as an obvious part of her character.
I sense this in her because a similar attitude has dominated my life, as well as my siblings, who learned from our Depression-era parents that no matter how secure we became, we always needed to be taking steps to never run out of money and face economic ruin.
I sense this in her because a similar attitude has dominated my life, as well as my siblings, who learned from our Depression-era parents that no matter how secure we became, we always needed to be taking steps to never run out of money and face economic ruin.
16
As some commenters pointed out, this is the classic response to a smart, courageous woman who has the nerve to "make it" in a man's world. It is time to close this chapter of HIStory. Every voting age woman in America must vote for themselves, their daughters, their granddaughters, their nieces and other women to change it to OUR story. Women are doing the heavy social lifting and must step up and take one-half the power positions in America - and the world - so we have a more balanced society. HIStory is one of destruction and chaos and it is time to end it. Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton and other qualified, socially conscious women are first in line for my vote for the foreseeable future.
19
The choices Hillary Clinton had to make are familiar to a majority of women walking the earth today. They certainly humanize her. But Amy Chozick chose not to ask the really hard questions about the way HRC handled those choices. None of the explanations offered in this article engage with why it would be acceptable within this universe of tough choices to make $100,000/speech. An unfettered capitalist view might hold that it is what the market value of the HRC brand is. But we are also talking about someone who describes herself as a good Methodist. If HRC wanted to brand herself as a 'girl like any other boy' and a ruthless capitalist, I would shrug her attitude to being like all the other Meg Whitmans of corporate America. But she holds herself up as better than that. Well, you just can't have it both ways.
77
Hillary Clinton does not "hold herself up" as better than anyone. She is her own person and who are you to judge which choices would be ok for her at any given time in her life? Are you so without fault that you would welcome this kind of scrutiny and judgment every, single day?
3
If you look at the 'speaking fees' for men, Clinton's earnings are middling. Trump got $1.5 mil each time he spoke at 'The Learning Annex" Real estate speeches 2007-2008. George W. Bush $15000+. Bob Bernneke $200,000-$400,000.
Deep down inside, this country's gut, the attitude is that while women can make money, they can't make TOO MUCH or it's unfeminine. I discovered this when I sold my child's clothes & gear after she had outgrown them. Since everything looked new. I set the price middle to high levels. I made money which I reinvested into her needs. Europeans were eager buyers. In 2011, at Bonn Flea Market, I earned 1200 euros in a single day.
I was proud & happy that it wouldn't suck away from tight finances to fill my child's future needs.
Friends & acquaintances online & IRL condemned me for it. I "shouldn't have made a profit. Why? I'm not sure. There was something shameful I should have felt either selling child's clothing & gear or making money in the first place.
Look at the two candidates.
Trump & corrupt business practices are aligned. It's acceptable to be super wealthy by declaring bankruptcy 4x, licensing his name for millions, refusing to pay debts, & swindling American workers. He revels & claims innocence despite overwhelming proof.
re: Clinton: she must have done something illegal/ unethical to get where she is today + become wealthy. No evidence despite 30 years of constant investigations.
It's certainly a double standard.
Deep down inside, this country's gut, the attitude is that while women can make money, they can't make TOO MUCH or it's unfeminine. I discovered this when I sold my child's clothes & gear after she had outgrown them. Since everything looked new. I set the price middle to high levels. I made money which I reinvested into her needs. Europeans were eager buyers. In 2011, at Bonn Flea Market, I earned 1200 euros in a single day.
I was proud & happy that it wouldn't suck away from tight finances to fill my child's future needs.
Friends & acquaintances online & IRL condemned me for it. I "shouldn't have made a profit. Why? I'm not sure. There was something shameful I should have felt either selling child's clothing & gear or making money in the first place.
Look at the two candidates.
Trump & corrupt business practices are aligned. It's acceptable to be super wealthy by declaring bankruptcy 4x, licensing his name for millions, refusing to pay debts, & swindling American workers. He revels & claims innocence despite overwhelming proof.
re: Clinton: she must have done something illegal/ unethical to get where she is today + become wealthy. No evidence despite 30 years of constant investigations.
It's certainly a double standard.
2
That argument falls flat. Mitt Romney was / is a good Mormon and that *never* stood in the way of him making money. Furthermore, no one ever suggested it *should* stand in the way of him making money. Being a member of an organized religion does not disallow a person from being paid money for goods sold and services performed - and yes, at the rate the market will bear. The only place a person's religion holds with respect to their financial life, IMO, is in how much of their earnings they give to charity.
So your argument, Maria, should really be about what percentage of HRC's Wallstreet earnings did she, as a "good Methodist" give to charity. Other than that, you have no argument. Mrs. Clinton, even by your own admission, is allowed to be like any other "unfettered capitalist." (And why not?)
So your argument, Maria, should really be about what percentage of HRC's Wallstreet earnings did she, as a "good Methodist" give to charity. Other than that, you have no argument. Mrs. Clinton, even by your own admission, is allowed to be like any other "unfettered capitalist." (And why not?)
2
So this is today's Clinton critique, mean to "balance" the glaring news about Trump inciting his followers to violence against his political opponent (Clinton)?
Sorry, these two stories don't "equate," in the way they seem intended to. Trump's (latest) outrage should stand alone in the light of scrutiny! This is not a question of "who's worse," as the media keeps trying to package the news.
Sorry, these two stories don't "equate," in the way they seem intended to. Trump's (latest) outrage should stand alone in the light of scrutiny! This is not a question of "who's worse," as the media keeps trying to package the news.
11
I enjoyed reading this Dickensian chronology.....one might assume that Chelsea would be able to attend college. How did Hillary manage Wellesley and Yale?
5
So, Bill and Hillary had pretty much no money after Bill was not reelected as Governor. What happened to all the money Bill made as governor, and the money Hillary made on the board of Wall Mart?
When you make a decent living (like they did) you can afford to save money. That's not a luxury afforded to the working poor of America.
Sorry, if anything, this makes me dislike Hillary more.
When you make a decent living (like they did) you can afford to save money. That's not a luxury afforded to the working poor of America.
Sorry, if anything, this makes me dislike Hillary more.
9
Don't let jealousy ruin your life. Some folks who "make a decent living" still struggle to make ends meet. What is your definition of decent? For some, it would involve being able to afford a penthouse on Fifth Avenue, a fleet of aircraft, and a chauffeured limo.
1
While there were some insights into HRC in this article, I was left wondering if anything resembling this would be written about a man ...
13
I'll vote for her, but cry me a river! I raised 3 kids working as a hospital RN, to work at 7am, working every other weekend, and Holidays. My husband a traveling linemen, often gone the whole week. I would get up at 3:30 am, get myself ready, make lunches, get the kids up , deliver them to different babysitters, get myself to work by 6:50, work like a dog for 8 hours, pick them all up, give them a snack, make dinner, then bath time, then homework time, then book time, fall into bed. We never made that kind of money. Again I'll vote for her, but sick of this spin. Chelsea living in a penthouse, with 2 maids, a nanny, and a driver. Hope we have better choices next election. HRC and Trump both clueless how most Americans live.
219
I don't think Hillary is clueless about your situation. Trump though for sure
4
And do not forget they all get secret service for the remainder of their lives. Boy, I would love to have one of those guys with me when I go for my morning jog, but instead I will have to keep looking over my shoulder and hope I do not get raped and beaten to death.
2
Both candidates demand loyality to them rather than party or country
2
She has had a very successful life and it seems to me very qualified to be president. Her ability to earn a great living hopefully will translate into running this country.
The idea that she is obligated to donors overlooks her character. She is not owned by anyone particularly some bankers. Once in the presidency she is in control.
The idea that she is obligated to donors overlooks her character. She is not owned by anyone particularly some bankers. Once in the presidency she is in control.
16
Yeah, sure she is.
1
"Her ability to earn a great living hopefully will translate into running this country."
considering the fact the other presidential candidate can say this too, this does not inspire much confidence in one's ability to govern.
considering the fact the other presidential candidate can say this too, this does not inspire much confidence in one's ability to govern.
I'm voting for Hillary, but the poverty-pleading side of her has always rankled...
Bill's $55K in 1980 equates to about $160,000 today. I know a lot of people (including my family and me) who'd have been happy to scrape by on that amount. I'm also struck by the offhanded comment that after losing the election Hillary contacted their wealthy friends for help; good for her, but most of us haven't got any wealthy friends.
Bill's $55K in 1980 equates to about $160,000 today. I know a lot of people (including my family and me) who'd have been happy to scrape by on that amount. I'm also struck by the offhanded comment that after losing the election Hillary contacted their wealthy friends for help; good for her, but most of us haven't got any wealthy friends.
13
Man, life must have been hard having to leave the governor's mansion. How on Earth did the Clintons ever survive!
16
The governors mansion in AK was under construction while he was governor. They actually (for real) had a double wide for the governors family most of the time he was governor...
1
and she complained about the mansion not having a swimming pool!! This was a necessity to her, despite the fact AK had (and still has) one of highest poverty rates in nation.
1
The governor's job didn't pay what you would think. It was Arkansas. She didn't have a job - it would not have been politically expedient, as was demonstrated in his second term. They had no money. Do you, Jonathan Krause, own a home? Where did you get your down payment?
Public service pays pretty well. These two are worth more than $200 million, that we know of.
8
Most Americans would consider this "poverty" a step up.
$55,000 a year in 1980 is equivalent to at least $150,000 today. That goes a long way in Little Rock, and that was only one of their two incomes. You're not supposed to get rich in public life. If you are honest, you won't.
$55,000 a year in 1980 is equivalent to at least $150,000 today. That goes a long way in Little Rock, and that was only one of their two incomes. You're not supposed to get rich in public life. If you are honest, you won't.
16
Most people get rich in public life....Look at all the Republicans in Congress they are not poor
150,000 could go a long way in Manhattan . . .
1
The fact that Clinton was so concerned about finances proves that her commodity trading "profits" of $100,000 in the 1970s were fraudulent. If you believe her story, she was a genius who turned $1,000 into $100,000 on her first try-- and then quit cold turkey. You would have to believe in the tooth fairy to believe that someone so financially motivated would quit trading after making so much moneBy on the first try. Rather, she used her influence to get someone who needed Bill's help to allocate profitable trades to her and the unprofitable trades to others.
JD
JD
16
One of the better essays I have read about HRC. Smart reporting. Nice balance between facts and unstated implications. Thank you.
10
As expected, Hillary Clinton is as greedy as her opponent Donald Trump. She wraps her avarice in the cloak of respectability, Clinton Foundatin and Liberal politics, but here it is. Thank you for printing this article it explains a whole lot about her motivation and determination.
7
This story while a fluff piece, isn't actually wrong and is actually inspiring. My parents, immigrants from the Dominican Republic toiled and worked menial jobs in the US so my brother and I could lead a comfortable and prosperous life. I'm 25 years old, if I were to follow the same route of HRC and use hard work, education, and connections to make a life for myself and my family I would be honored in galas and nominated for awards.
When HRC does exactly what every successful man does she's vilified for it. Double standards that would make you think women's suffrage never occurred.
When HRC does exactly what every successful man does she's vilified for it. Double standards that would make you think women's suffrage never occurred.
17
My family came from nothing financially and succeeded in becoming millionaires...worked hard....made some good business decisions and paid union wages...
"As God is my witness, I'll never be hungry again . . ." HRC
9
They were both class presidents in middle school, both perfect GPA Rhodes/Fulbright Scholars, and then attended the #1 law school in the world. There is little doubt in my mind they've been obsessed with the pursuit of power & money & living a decadent life since they were young teenagers.
12
I would think that would make them more able to lead and govern responsibly. Or would you prefer a buffoon like Donald "Chump"?
1
Living a decadent life....what planet do you inhabit
I was referring to the Clintons' education. And I suppose you think that Donald J. Trump aspired to live a penurious life that was free of corruption. There is a difference here of orders of magnitude.
That first house on Midland Street in Little Rock looks absolutely lovely.
6
If you think a pair of Yale Law School grinds moved to Arkansas because they loved the charm of the South I have a bridge to sell you. This clever duo moved to the South because it was fertile ground for two aggressive sharks to quickly rise the political ranks and haul in millions off the influence.
18
Gideon – you are aware, are you not, that Bill Clinton was born and raised in Arkansas?
1
Excuse me, what credentials do you have? Bill C came from Arkansas and was a Rhodes Scholar...and YOU?????
3
A lot of my relatives were born in Altoona, where Trump is speaking on Friday night to a sell out crowd. When they got a college education, they left.
Kudos to the Times for running this series of articles trying to make the female changeling from the Dominion look more human. So, her greed is rooted in her mother's poverty and her own anxieties, worries, and paranoias (thinking of her daughter being able to afford college at the time of her daughter's birth...). But those worries are very similar to the worries of almost every higher educated woman in this country! So, we can identify with her. Unlike her political opponent, she was not given a million dollars check by her dad to start investing. She had to hustle for her millions. She has middle-class credentials - which may be obscured by her current riches (after decades of high-level work and public service). Her worrywart personality and money anxiety reminds me of my wife. And I think, I am not the only one. Articles like this may bring votes for her in November...
8
This is an offensive article to those of us who are truly struggling - and I rarely get offended. I'll try not to be pedantic here: In the course of struggling to make ends meet there is pain - and it somehow helps people in pain to identify with others in pain. This type of article from the NYT helps create the division between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots' in this country and has the unintended consequence of helping any candidate other than Hillary Clinton. I also try not to be a proud person. But articles like these make me feel pride in belonging to the big pool of "have-nots" in this country (and even some other countries) - and carefully prepared snippets of crude Trump supporters won't change this.
12
Can't help but wondering if the big bucks has changed her. Is she really concerned about poverty, the middle class being squeezed when living the fat cat life. With Sanders you just knew his passion was real. Not so sure with her. She has exposed herself to the brutal forces of public life, perhaps at a high cost namely losing her soul.
4
Thank you Ms. Chozick for sharing HRCs history - grit & grace. HRC really is an amazing woman. Was she perfect, no. Are any of us? What we see is a woman determined to provide for her family, to make certain they had food & a roof over their heads. She lived the American dream - no one handed her a law degree, worked those long hard hours in a man's world, sacrificed precious time with her child. And she didn't try to cheat anyone along the way, didn't walk away from debts, didn't abandon her husband even when others would've quit on him. And when she was finally able to breathe a little, she worked for free to write a book that would help children & gave the proceeds to charity. And now, she is still giving her time for this great country.
And yet the snarky continue to dig at her... look how successful she is... let's hate her for it. And those same people can't wait to vote for Donald Trump. Go figure...
And yet the snarky continue to dig at her... look how successful she is... let's hate her for it. And those same people can't wait to vote for Donald Trump. Go figure...
11
The older the Clintons get, the more crooked they have become.
11
This is just another Times marketing piece for Hillary. The Clintons had a wealth of connections that they could exploit for income - connections the average person doesn't have. And, where I come from 55K in 1980 would have been very comfortable. This is pathetic. The Times forgot to mention another Hillary claim about how poor she was: her supposed need to apply for relief for her student loans at Yale. But it turns out that the program she says she applied for didn't exist at the time she was at Yale. The only thing poor about Hillary is her honesty.
12
Jealousy is really not a good quality
Follow the money. Every decision the Clintons have made in the last 50 years has been to position themselves to live a more decadent life. Politics made them more dough than being a corporate lawyer ever would.
15
Financial stress is not an excuse for greed if public service is the goal in life as described in Clinton’s bio. Clintons have never forgotten his penury and clean existence in Arkansas by selling and betraying all those who voted for him to the rich and foreign governments for their insatiable appetite for material wealth.
12
What principles?
14
Oh give me a break from people whose entire world view is through a sexism prism. The issue here is not Hillary Clinton's hustling for dollars after Bill lost the Governor's race. (Although the fact that an unsophisticated Hillary turned $1,000 into over $100,000 by trading high risk commodity options does raise some suspicions.) The issue is what she did after Bill's presidency when he had a $200,000 a year pension plus substantial expense coverage, she had a senator's salary, and both had unlimited earning potential. They had numerous options to supplement their income and Hillary chose to focus on enormous speaking fees from banks so that they could now be worth over $50 million. At a minimum, that exposes her to criticism that has nothing to do with sexism.
21
She charged $225,000 per engagement; not close to enormous at that level. As far as options trading, you don't know what you're talking about.
I too don't understand the sexism cries here.
2
More "lipstick on a pig" from the NY Times regarding HRC. There would be no need for dishonest puff pieces if Bernie Sanders was the nominee.
19
This is a shameful comment, lzolatrov. Shameful.
8
Why is it shameful? Because you disagree? Everyone is entitled to their opinion whether it aligns with yours or not.
Other than your disagreement, what's shameful? If you're going to indulge in name-calling, at least support your accusations.
Readers troubled by Hillary's 21 million dollars might peruse the salaries of top basketball stars. Kevin Love, for example signed a five year contract for $110 million, or $22 mill per year. These outsized-seeming salaries are supported by billionaire team owners who are confident they can recoup their investments and make a profit--owners who belong to the same socioeconomic class as the Wall Street bankers who paid Hillary Clinton for her speeches. Doubtless, they paid other politicians similar cash amounts for other speeches. The prices paid at the top are absurdly disproportionate to prices paid below, and yet they are subject to the same market forces. It may be a sign of the collapse of Western Civilization that a small percentage of people have extraordinary wealth while millions of other people go hungry, but to get apoplectic over Hillary's virtue because she was able to exact a fair price for her work seems like an overreaction based on a prejudice against wealth, itself. And the fact that the Dumpster decried Hillary for being "totally owned by Wall Street" should convince any reasonable person that the opposite is probably true.
10
" billionaire team owners who are confident they can recoup their investments and make a profit"
These are the same type of people who bought Hillary's influence to make a profit. And she and Bill have delivered their influence peddling to the highest bidder time and time again.
These are the same type of people who bought Hillary's influence to make a profit. And she and Bill have delivered their influence peddling to the highest bidder time and time again.
2
Sorry, but this is exactly the wrong interpretation, Heddy. Wall Street bankers show their respect by paying top dollar for speakers. They make ostentatious payments as a form of self-aggrandizement. Hillary delivered exactly what she was paid for--a speech.
Let's say you were a great criminal defense lawyer, and you were hired to defend a rich man accused of committing a crime. Whether you won an acquittal or not, your obligation to him ended with the disposition of the case, regardless of how much money he paid. You wouldn't be expected to praise him in public or give him additional legal advice or, if you got to be a criminal court judge, rule in his favor or influence the judgement of a fellow judge on any subsequent occasion he might find himself once again before the bench. To suggest that by taking money from a suspected criminal you forfeited your good reputation would be wrong.
Hillary's obligation ended with her speech. You are free to suspect otherwise, but the argument that Hillary must owe Wall Street bankers something because of those speeches, makes an unwarranted assumption--one I believe grounded in a resentment of wealth. I grant that there are plenty of venal politicians, and Hillary Clinton might be one (I strongly disbelieve it); but receiving a relatively paltry $21 M from Wall Street Bankers for a bunch of speeches only speaks to her unique stature as a former first lady, the wife of Bill Clinton, NY senator and secretary of state.
Let's say you were a great criminal defense lawyer, and you were hired to defend a rich man accused of committing a crime. Whether you won an acquittal or not, your obligation to him ended with the disposition of the case, regardless of how much money he paid. You wouldn't be expected to praise him in public or give him additional legal advice or, if you got to be a criminal court judge, rule in his favor or influence the judgement of a fellow judge on any subsequent occasion he might find himself once again before the bench. To suggest that by taking money from a suspected criminal you forfeited your good reputation would be wrong.
Hillary's obligation ended with her speech. You are free to suspect otherwise, but the argument that Hillary must owe Wall Street bankers something because of those speeches, makes an unwarranted assumption--one I believe grounded in a resentment of wealth. I grant that there are plenty of venal politicians, and Hillary Clinton might be one (I strongly disbelieve it); but receiving a relatively paltry $21 M from Wall Street Bankers for a bunch of speeches only speaks to her unique stature as a former first lady, the wife of Bill Clinton, NY senator and secretary of state.
19
The underlying story is about public servants, privilege and wealth - who has it and who doesn't. Today offers a complementary news item from our cousins in the UK on a special estate matter:
The 6th Duke of Westminister died today in England. His 25 year-old son inherited over US $10 Billion of his family fortune. Dad (#6) had three daughters and one son. The son gets the inheritance while the daughters are "taken care of". You may know this family by what it owns? Their wealth originates from the 16th century when the then Duke of Westminister married a rich woman that inherited her wealth that happened to include London's Mayfair and Belgravia districts - two posh areas of London that register home and rent prices that top Manhattan.
The Fiddler on the Roof's song and dance refrain, "money, money, money..." sums up the dilemma that most face when considering public life. The Russians, Chinese and too many developing countries (Nigeria) solve these problems by permitting their politicians to steal as much off the state as possible.
In America it is different. Public servants need to have well connected business friends or independent wealth. Very few can pull-off an Al Gore post 2000 presidential loss that allowed him to become one of the wealthiest political losers in American history.
Public service should not exclude those that have the misfortune of not being connected (beholden?) to wealthy friends (Citizens United) or members of the lucky sperm club.
The 6th Duke of Westminister died today in England. His 25 year-old son inherited over US $10 Billion of his family fortune. Dad (#6) had three daughters and one son. The son gets the inheritance while the daughters are "taken care of". You may know this family by what it owns? Their wealth originates from the 16th century when the then Duke of Westminister married a rich woman that inherited her wealth that happened to include London's Mayfair and Belgravia districts - two posh areas of London that register home and rent prices that top Manhattan.
The Fiddler on the Roof's song and dance refrain, "money, money, money..." sums up the dilemma that most face when considering public life. The Russians, Chinese and too many developing countries (Nigeria) solve these problems by permitting their politicians to steal as much off the state as possible.
In America it is different. Public servants need to have well connected business friends or independent wealth. Very few can pull-off an Al Gore post 2000 presidential loss that allowed him to become one of the wealthiest political losers in American history.
Public service should not exclude those that have the misfortune of not being connected (beholden?) to wealthy friends (Citizens United) or members of the lucky sperm club.
5
I know of no poor politicians except Sanders and Biden.
Each and everyone uses their connections to enrich themselves: The public be damned!
Each and everyone uses their connections to enrich themselves: The public be damned!
Sanders and Biden are not poor at all, although they have less than many of their colleagues. Another (former) politician in this category would be Dennis Kucinich. I don't think it would be possible today for Sanders or Kucinich to reach the offices they have held.
Chelsea Clinton, as the daughter of a former President and doubtlessly an intelligent woman, could have married anyone from any field, but chose to marry an ex-Goldman Sachs hedge fund boy. Guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree after all.
10
I see no reason whatsoever to drag Chelsea's marriage into this. Why don't you turn on Trump's spoiled brats instead, how they love to rip off the middle class, hunt endangered animals in Africa, and all that?
Because everyone knows the Trumps are complete jerks - the media has been relentless in beating that dead horse - but the Clintons still maintain the pretense they are just common folk, with little media scrutiny. Having Chelsea serve as Hillary's liaison to young women is just as preposterous as Ivanka Trump doing so. Those two have more in common with each other, including rarified NYC social circles, than they do with any struggling mothers they might ever encounter.
2
This is a very useful summary, thank you Amy Chozick. I am currently listening to the Hillary Clinton biography, "Living History, Hillary Rodham Clinton," read by Kathe Mazur. What a magnificent woman. I feel sorry for the Hillary haters cutting her down in these comments. They would not be hyper critical of any man, who went about methodically earning money to allow for the sacrifice of foregoing private sector jobs for the public office.
I learned from this Chozick piece, that Hillary donated the profits of her first book to charity.
Over the centuries, many societies put down successful women by accusing them of witchcraft, and burning them at the stake. That is who the Hillary haters appear to be associated with. From "Living History," I learned that when Hillary made it to Yale Law School, she spent her first year two years focusing on the law to protect children and children's rights. Her focus on championing the weak and underrepresented goes back to her first year in law school, and activities before that in high school and college.
The story that she is a chronic liar, and crooked politician, is all part of a long, smear campaign by Fox News and right wing talk radio, that just proves that if you say a lie often enough, some people will be dumb enough to believe you.
The crooked liars are the folk who smear and tear down one of America's great, female, public servants and Christian soldiers fighting for the less fortunate, the environment and for good works.
I learned from this Chozick piece, that Hillary donated the profits of her first book to charity.
Over the centuries, many societies put down successful women by accusing them of witchcraft, and burning them at the stake. That is who the Hillary haters appear to be associated with. From "Living History," I learned that when Hillary made it to Yale Law School, she spent her first year two years focusing on the law to protect children and children's rights. Her focus on championing the weak and underrepresented goes back to her first year in law school, and activities before that in high school and college.
The story that she is a chronic liar, and crooked politician, is all part of a long, smear campaign by Fox News and right wing talk radio, that just proves that if you say a lie often enough, some people will be dumb enough to believe you.
The crooked liars are the folk who smear and tear down one of America's great, female, public servants and Christian soldiers fighting for the less fortunate, the environment and for good works.
12
this one was a knee slapper
The Empress has no clothes.... because the Empire has no tailors.
The Empress has no clothes.... because the Empire has no tailors.
1
Oh please! Christians soldiers? Are you now proposing sainthood?
4
Wrong.
And I'm voting for HRC.
But there are many men who, too, are influence peddlers and it just short of illegal use of power to gain favor. They are no better Don't stoop to use the feminist card here. She is no worse and no better than men here.
And I'm voting for HRC.
But there are many men who, too, are influence peddlers and it just short of illegal use of power to gain favor. They are no better Don't stoop to use the feminist card here. She is no worse and no better than men here.
Donald Trump baits gun owners to violence. Hillary Clinton talks to Wall Street firms.
Donald Trump stiffs contractors and walks away with millions. Hillary Clinton careless with email (no evidence of any sensitive material that became public - impact = zero) and a little cronyism.
For me the choice is clear.
Donald Trump stiffs contractors and walks away with millions. Hillary Clinton careless with email (no evidence of any sensitive material that became public - impact = zero) and a little cronyism.
For me the choice is clear.
6
Yes--especially if you leave out her support of the wars in the Middle East which created the opening for ISIS, her support for international trade pacts that have devastated working people, and her sucking up to Wall Street....
I agree. I will vote for her.
But she was a Yale law graduate and could've gotten a serious law job making so much money it would have made her head spin; more than enough to keep Chelsea in pablum and Bill in Kleenex over his gubernatorial loss.
No, she was and remains ethically challenged. Give it a rest.
But she was a Yale law graduate and could've gotten a serious law job making so much money it would have made her head spin; more than enough to keep Chelsea in pablum and Bill in Kleenex over his gubernatorial loss.
No, she was and remains ethically challenged. Give it a rest.
1
I have also lived in constrained circumstance, while raising two kids. Instead of appealing to rich friends, or playing the market, I made do with what I had, and worked harder.
This patent sob story won't wash--one doesn't need 50 million dollars to ensure a child's survival or college education! Hillary is clearly obsessed with money...but don't paint it as a natural reaction to lean times.
It is a PATHOLOGICAL reaction to the kind of circumstances that most of us "ordinary people" manage to live through without sacrificing our values, and succumbing to greed.
This patent sob story won't wash--one doesn't need 50 million dollars to ensure a child's survival or college education! Hillary is clearly obsessed with money...but don't paint it as a natural reaction to lean times.
It is a PATHOLOGICAL reaction to the kind of circumstances that most of us "ordinary people" manage to live through without sacrificing our values, and succumbing to greed.
17
I agree. My thought on reading this and considering their 150 million in paid speeches is that she's either extremely greedy or has some type of mental issue which compels her to amass money beyond any reasonable scale.
2
This article cements my belief that Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton is one smart, hard-working woman and giver me more reasona to vote for her as our next President of the United States.
All the hullabaloo about her not being trust-worthy, about "cattle futures" about speeches about her great jobs about criminal behavior is made-up propaganda. She did what was necessary to support her family and make a good life for them. That is what all of us do and any one of us would buy cattle futures to make a nice profit if we had the courage, skill and trusted our advisers. Any one of us would give a speech if we were lucky and smart enough to be paid to do it. The American people need to shut off the right-wing hate machines and help restore democracy in America. President Rodham-Clinton is the woman to lead the way.
All the hullabaloo about her not being trust-worthy, about "cattle futures" about speeches about her great jobs about criminal behavior is made-up propaganda. She did what was necessary to support her family and make a good life for them. That is what all of us do and any one of us would buy cattle futures to make a nice profit if we had the courage, skill and trusted our advisers. Any one of us would give a speech if we were lucky and smart enough to be paid to do it. The American people need to shut off the right-wing hate machines and help restore democracy in America. President Rodham-Clinton is the woman to lead the way.
14
How was collecting $21 million in paid speeches necessary to support her family? By the time Hillary gave her speeches, Chelsea was gone and grown and living in a multi-million dollar NYC apartment, collecting $600k a year when working for NBC and married to a hedge fund manager. Likewise, Bill had already amassed significant wealth giving his paid speeches by the time she stepped down as SOS. So, please, enlighten me. How were her paid speeches post-SOS "necessary to support her family and make a good life for them"?
5
[[So, please, enlighten me. How were her paid speeches post-SOS "necessary to support her family and make a good life for them"?]]
Also…doesn't the present get a pension?
Also…doesn't the present get a pension?
1
And denial ain't just a river in Egypt!
2
Life makes some people smarter- and richer . That's the long and short of it. JGAIA
2
"Life....." and, circumstance.
A fascinating story. We don't all have rich fathers to hand out a few $million and politics is indeed a hard game. The current system, replete with lobbyists, off-shore accounts and tax wizards to help out the 1% makes it very easy to add to the existing pile of money but much more difficult to get to this level unless you have the good luck to be born into the Trump family.
3
She is not clean and fare in her works. She is beyond sanity. Once she did not believe in her party`s ideology (Democrat`s). She is just doing power politics. She used power as a tool to make money any how. She is not possessing a rational mind. She can do what ever she likes rather than Trumph. She is not above question in making IS in the middle east. IS and Militants will be the real threat for American people one day.
3
When I hear about the comments about Hillary Clinton, I, a single mother understands what motivates her.
Although, I would never in my lifetime have the type of connections she has managed to get, I can understand that when it comes to doing what one has to do to get by, although hers is at a much higher level than mine, I get it.
I worked like a dog to make sure my family at least got by.
No one can say that she did anything illegal in accumulating her wealth.
Many seem to be concentrating more on the fact that she accumulated it.
That she got to know big money people, I wish I did also.
And coupled with the fact that her mother, who was abandoned, it has been reported, in a very, very young age, I'm sure that Clinton, who probably saw the pains of her mother up close and personal, was determined to make sure that didn't happen to her ever.
As far as her cozy relationship with Wall Street, I'm sure she is wise enough to be able to separate her business affairs from her professional affairs. There is a difference.
Although, I would never in my lifetime have the type of connections she has managed to get, I can understand that when it comes to doing what one has to do to get by, although hers is at a much higher level than mine, I get it.
I worked like a dog to make sure my family at least got by.
No one can say that she did anything illegal in accumulating her wealth.
Many seem to be concentrating more on the fact that she accumulated it.
That she got to know big money people, I wish I did also.
And coupled with the fact that her mother, who was abandoned, it has been reported, in a very, very young age, I'm sure that Clinton, who probably saw the pains of her mother up close and personal, was determined to make sure that didn't happen to her ever.
As far as her cozy relationship with Wall Street, I'm sure she is wise enough to be able to separate her business affairs from her professional affairs. There is a difference.
8
If a man does this, he's a true leader, captain of industry and a go-getter.
If a woman does this, she's Hillary Clinton.
I chalk it all up to sour grapes, unresolved Mommy Issues, and lots and lots of missed therapy.
If a woman does this, she's Hillary Clinton.
I chalk it all up to sour grapes, unresolved Mommy Issues, and lots and lots of missed therapy.
Taking advantage of her position as Secretary of State to promote the Clinton Foundation is one of the worst ethical lapses I can imagine for a public official. The recent email releases concerning the State Dept. employees providing favors for Clinton Foundation donors indicate Ms. Clinton did not separate her involvement in the family foundation while she was Secretary of State, as she promised to do. I truly hope some journalist, somewhere (if there are any left) will try to untangle the web of interconnection between the US Dept of State and the Clinton Foundation.
1
I agree she is wise enough to separate her business affairs from her professional affairs. It's just that she never does so. The main reason I will not vote for her is because of her involvement with the Uranium One deal. $500k to Bill for a speech in Russia (first time he ever gave a paid talk in Russia), more than $40M to Clinton Foundation from the eventual owners / investors of Uranium One, and then approval of a series of deals that allowed Russia to take 100% control of 20% of US Uranium mining rights. This is an obvious pay to play AND one that puts the security of the US at risk.
1
Two things:
1. Once Trump releases his tax returns he can say something about Hillary's financial situation. Not before.
2. Bernie Sanders originally rejected the idea proposed by his staff to go after her Wall Street speeches saying, "She's allowed to make money." Then, I guess, he changed his mind.
Actually, there are three things.
3. There's almost no way to get the truth in America during the run-up to a war or a presidential election. Only once they're over can we hope to have a chance know what's real and what was just put out there to confuse us.
1. Once Trump releases his tax returns he can say something about Hillary's financial situation. Not before.
2. Bernie Sanders originally rejected the idea proposed by his staff to go after her Wall Street speeches saying, "She's allowed to make money." Then, I guess, he changed his mind.
Actually, there are three things.
3. There's almost no way to get the truth in America during the run-up to a war or a presidential election. Only once they're over can we hope to have a chance know what's real and what was just put out there to confuse us.
7
In other news, Julian Assange has hinted that Seth Rich, the Clinton staffer mysteriously murdered in D.C. not long ago, was the source of the Wikileaks revealing the Clinton campaign and the DNC's attempts to make sure Bernie Sanders did not get the nomination. It's odd how so many people connected to Clinton with intimate knowledge of her dealings have a habit of being murdered or dying suddenly.
5
I wonder why the mainstream media never even reported this event about the staffers murder?
1
Source?
It looks to me like Bill and Hillary Clinton have always had friends, associates and hangers-on who have been funneling money and opportunities to them since the 1970's. When have those two operators ever had to truly worry about money?
Hanging around the political scene forever (since JImmy Carter was President) and good ol' influence peddling (Hillary's closed-door Wall Street speeches) can make you stinking, stinking rich. Just ask the Clintons.
Hanging around the political scene forever (since JImmy Carter was President) and good ol' influence peddling (Hillary's closed-door Wall Street speeches) can make you stinking, stinking rich. Just ask the Clintons.
8
Well, Bill left the white house with enormous debts from the Starr investigations that neither he nor Hillary could pay. So she did everything she could to raise money to pay them, including accepting speaking engagements from anybody who would hire her, and for whatever they would pay her.
When she started planning her next steps in her political life shortly after, she still had to raise a lot more money for her campaign.
And when she started planning her presidential run 10 years ago, she had to raise huge stinking piles of money, because that's what it takes to run a national campaign and god knows nobody was going to give it to her initially.
Anybody who says this is somehow bad is either a hypocrite or a fool.
When she started planning her next steps in her political life shortly after, she still had to raise a lot more money for her campaign.
And when she started planning her presidential run 10 years ago, she had to raise huge stinking piles of money, because that's what it takes to run a national campaign and god knows nobody was going to give it to her initially.
Anybody who says this is somehow bad is either a hypocrite or a fool.
"Well, Bill left the white house with enormous debts from the Starr investigations that neither he nor Hillary could pay. So she did everything she could to raise money to pay them, including accepting speaking engagements from anybody who would hire her, and for whatever they would pay her."
Odd that you would say that, because Hillary ran and was elected Senator in 2000 while Bill was still President. She started making big money speeches after she left the Senate.
Bill and Hillary have been peddling themselves for so many decades, all of the dates seem to run together, don't they?
Odd that you would say that, because Hillary ran and was elected Senator in 2000 while Bill was still President. She started making big money speeches after she left the Senate.
Bill and Hillary have been peddling themselves for so many decades, all of the dates seem to run together, don't they?
1
Yes, Hillary began her campaign while Bill was in office. You don't say why this was bad, so please do explain. As much as you try to discredit me, what you don't say is that Hillary was also engaged to give talks for which she as paid right after she and Bill left the White house. I remember this as I was just getting out of grad school at the time. She was speaking anywhere she that would pay her post-WH, just like Bill was. Again, please explain why this is bad, other than that you don't like it.
The Starr investigations began before Bill left office, and Bill had to pay for his own defense. And you don't deny that they needed the money, or that the Starr investigation left them deeply in debt. To any reasonable person, this was a very good reason for the two of them to go out and make as much money as they could.
OK, so you don't like Hillary, or the money she has made. Your personal aversion is entirely your own affair, and you are welcome to it. But that's all it is, so don't try to pass it off as some kind of reasoned argument because it's not!
And frankly, if she had man-parts you'd be cheering her on, and saying how resourceful and responsible she was.
The Starr investigations began before Bill left office, and Bill had to pay for his own defense. And you don't deny that they needed the money, or that the Starr investigation left them deeply in debt. To any reasonable person, this was a very good reason for the two of them to go out and make as much money as they could.
OK, so you don't like Hillary, or the money she has made. Your personal aversion is entirely your own affair, and you are welcome to it. But that's all it is, so don't try to pass it off as some kind of reasoned argument because it's not!
And frankly, if she had man-parts you'd be cheering her on, and saying how resourceful and responsible she was.
Good for her.
I support Hillary Clinton for president. And I applaud her for caring about her family's financial welfare. As far as I'm concerned, the Clintons have paid their dues.
If this were a story about a man, he would be lauded for being so smart.
The double standard continues. Congratulations to Hillary for bucking it. You go girl!
I support Hillary Clinton for president. And I applaud her for caring about her family's financial welfare. As far as I'm concerned, the Clintons have paid their dues.
If this were a story about a man, he would be lauded for being so smart.
The double standard continues. Congratulations to Hillary for bucking it. You go girl!
17
Hillary's resume is as an unindited felon, period. Psychologically she is a congenital liar. Other than those characteristics she is a great person - just hold onto your wallet.
9
Who is the liar, JohnS? Look in the mirror.
4
That is nothing but white straight male privilege talking
felon: a person who has been convicted – CONVICTED – of a felony.
Ergo, there's no such thing as an 'unindi[c]ted felon.' Period.
Time to turn off the propaganda machine.
Ergo, there's no such thing as an 'unindi[c]ted felon.' Period.
Time to turn off the propaganda machine.
1
An interesting article by Amy Chozick. It does border a little on an apology, but it is insight into some of Hillary Clinton's life. But what the Clintons went through is no more than what *everyone* in my family went through, sans connections to wealth and power. The women were the breadwinners of their households for years as the men sought work. They didn't end up quite as wealthy as the Clintons did. And some were even in Little Rock the same time Bill and Hillary were.
Right, Hillary Clinton is not Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. She's the wealthy Democrat. There are wealthy Republicans and wealthy Democrats, and as the bottom 99%, we get to chose what policies benefit us that each offers.
The only empathy I gain from reading Amy Chozick's article that enlightens us more about the woman who won't give press conferences and is an enigma to many of us, is the comparison with other households that go through the same thing. Given Amy's explanation, it's highly curious why Clinton can't build her life into a vision for her presidency. Instead it is Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders, and now Amy Chozick, who write this story for Hillary Clinton.
Maybe it's the ascendancy to great wealth that douses the fire in HIllary's story. If included, the success makes it sound like the Republican story where a political candidate who was impoverished in childhood rises in politics and the country club set in capitalist America. The story could be that of Marco Rubio.
Right, Hillary Clinton is not Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. She's the wealthy Democrat. There are wealthy Republicans and wealthy Democrats, and as the bottom 99%, we get to chose what policies benefit us that each offers.
The only empathy I gain from reading Amy Chozick's article that enlightens us more about the woman who won't give press conferences and is an enigma to many of us, is the comparison with other households that go through the same thing. Given Amy's explanation, it's highly curious why Clinton can't build her life into a vision for her presidency. Instead it is Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders, and now Amy Chozick, who write this story for Hillary Clinton.
Maybe it's the ascendancy to great wealth that douses the fire in HIllary's story. If included, the success makes it sound like the Republican story where a political candidate who was impoverished in childhood rises in politics and the country club set in capitalist America. The story could be that of Marco Rubio.
2
"it's highly curious why Clinton can't build her life into a vision for her presidency."
I don't believe that is true at all. And it has been my impression that Hillary has ALWAYS had a vision for her public service, and her goals for higher office.
What is truly curious, and even overtly aberrant, is that you and people like you don't see it at all, even though it's right there in front of you. Which tells me that you only like that message when it comes from an older white gentleman, who has been saying pretty much the same thing as her for the last 20+ years. And you'll forgive him for being Jewish, but you won't forgive Hillary for being a woman, which is starkly, incredibly privileged of you.
I don't believe that is true at all. And it has been my impression that Hillary has ALWAYS had a vision for her public service, and her goals for higher office.
What is truly curious, and even overtly aberrant, is that you and people like you don't see it at all, even though it's right there in front of you. Which tells me that you only like that message when it comes from an older white gentleman, who has been saying pretty much the same thing as her for the last 20+ years. And you'll forgive him for being Jewish, but you won't forgive Hillary for being a woman, which is starkly, incredibly privileged of you.
1
@Laguna, you are using a generality to characterize me. You are exactly like what you accuse me of being. You just don't know that.
Look, Hillary's opinion and trust ratings are nearly as low as Trump's. She has some work to do. Are you saying that she has *high* opinion numbers? Evidently, her "vision for her public service, and her goals for higher office" haven't produced high opinion ratings. This has nothing to do with sexism. It has everything to do with polls of public opinion. Are you saying that anyone who is concerned about Hillary's low opinion and trust ratings is a sexist?
Isn't it *you* who are the sexist here, accusing me of the very bizarre act of not "forgiving Hillary for being a woman." Just exactly what does that mean, other than you are upset at something?
Look, Hillary's opinion and trust ratings are nearly as low as Trump's. She has some work to do. Are you saying that she has *high* opinion numbers? Evidently, her "vision for her public service, and her goals for higher office" haven't produced high opinion ratings. This has nothing to do with sexism. It has everything to do with polls of public opinion. Are you saying that anyone who is concerned about Hillary's low opinion and trust ratings is a sexist?
Isn't it *you* who are the sexist here, accusing me of the very bizarre act of not "forgiving Hillary for being a woman." Just exactly what does that mean, other than you are upset at something?
1
A piece to try to make Ms. Clinton look more humane and more likeable. To portray her as a struggling mother, to make ends meet.
I mean I know what a single income, mother has to do to make ends meet. And, she had to do it during a time when divorce was a taboo. This was done waiting tables, as a non high school graduate, in the early 1970s.
Clinton, a struggling woman. Heck, she went to Yale. Certainly no a place of poverty enhanced college students.
My parents, had three incomes, my father worked two jobs, my mother worked a job. They were raising 5 kids, in 1960s. Their biggest strain? Money. Even, in the 1960s, living on Long island was not cheap. That si stress over family finances.
Oh, my parents separated, and I went to live with my mother for two years, so I know what struggle was waiting on tables.
I mean really. Two people with Yale law degrees is portrayed as family financial struggle? No even close.
I mean I know what a single income, mother has to do to make ends meet. And, she had to do it during a time when divorce was a taboo. This was done waiting tables, as a non high school graduate, in the early 1970s.
Clinton, a struggling woman. Heck, she went to Yale. Certainly no a place of poverty enhanced college students.
My parents, had three incomes, my father worked two jobs, my mother worked a job. They were raising 5 kids, in 1960s. Their biggest strain? Money. Even, in the 1960s, living on Long island was not cheap. That si stress over family finances.
Oh, my parents separated, and I went to live with my mother for two years, so I know what struggle was waiting on tables.
I mean really. Two people with Yale law degrees is portrayed as family financial struggle? No even close.
63
The last time I heard of Yale Law School graduates being given the keys to a mansion and a map to some buried treasure was in the rant of Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck, or Donal Trump, I forget which. At least I didn't hear the tiresome cliche, "give me a break" - perhaps it's time to give Hillary Clinton a break.
2
Why even compare HRC to yourself or your parents? Why shouldn't she be more successful? She is clearly more driven and ambition than most people. And she partnered with another wildly ambitious guy. I'm a regular person with regular accomplishments. I don't compare to them.
Comparing yourself or your parents to someone this driven is like saying, I swim the butterfly, why don't I have 21 Olympic gold medals like Michael Phelps? Because he's better than you, that's why. He has more physical gifts, more talent, he worked specifically for it all his life, and you likely didn't. That's life.
HRC has, during a long career, put in a lot of effort to get rich. She's also been a successful politician. Many politicians have made a lot of money before, during and after their political careers. So? She released all her tax returns -- lets see Trump's.
Comparing yourself or your parents to someone this driven is like saying, I swim the butterfly, why don't I have 21 Olympic gold medals like Michael Phelps? Because he's better than you, that's why. He has more physical gifts, more talent, he worked specifically for it all his life, and you likely didn't. That's life.
HRC has, during a long career, put in a lot of effort to get rich. She's also been a successful politician. Many politicians have made a lot of money before, during and after their political careers. So? She released all her tax returns -- lets see Trump's.
122
Who paid for Yale?
1
So there are reasons that Hillary uses to justify her behavior, trading power and access to power for money, and her drive with Bill to become centi-millionaires based on exploiting their 'public service' is due to deprivation and insecurity of a Wellesley/Yale lawyer? Their mansions and wealth are somehow tied to gender inequality? I can only imagine the efforts that the Clinton campaign and the Clinton Initiative took to get this spin into the NYT to prepare the way for their defense against the charges of self serving behavior.
22
Are we supposed to feel sorry for the Clintons and actually think they have struggled or experienced economic hardship? At a very young age the Clintons were upper-middle class, yale-law graduates, that were friends with the rich and powerful. Their main hardship is losing an election and being forced to move into an upper-middle class house. The Clintons being "dead broke" allowed them to live in a 1.7 million dollar house. Is this really economic hardship, if so sign me up.
Also what 70 yr. old doesnt have parents that lived through the great depression? Acting as if this gives her certain unique insights is a bit ridiculous.
Also what 70 yr. old doesnt have parents that lived through the great depression? Acting as if this gives her certain unique insights is a bit ridiculous.
47
You just sound jealous.
If you fast forward to the end of Bill's presidency, the family was saddled with tens of millions of dollars in debts for Bill's defense from the Starr investigations. They had exhausted every resource available to them and were borrowing money left and right to keep their doors open. And then all that had to be paid off, so they both took every thing they could get to help them to do that.
Have you ever been that deeply in debt because you were the object of a public witch hunt? No, of course not. You have never given one day of your life to public service in government. You have never taken those kinds of risks, nor have you ever had the jackals and hyenas the GOP put together come after you to destroy you.
If you want to live in the $1.7 million public house, that's what you have to put up with. And frankly, I don't think you have that kind of courage.
If you fast forward to the end of Bill's presidency, the family was saddled with tens of millions of dollars in debts for Bill's defense from the Starr investigations. They had exhausted every resource available to them and were borrowing money left and right to keep their doors open. And then all that had to be paid off, so they both took every thing they could get to help them to do that.
Have you ever been that deeply in debt because you were the object of a public witch hunt? No, of course not. You have never given one day of your life to public service in government. You have never taken those kinds of risks, nor have you ever had the jackals and hyenas the GOP put together come after you to destroy you.
If you want to live in the $1.7 million public house, that's what you have to put up with. And frankly, I don't think you have that kind of courage.
Few people in the world of US politics come close to the trials of HRC and I am Proud to call her a personal heroine! She has been the backbone of the marriage and the rise to the top so I applaud that she should be getting her turn at the gold ring. She got it the old fashioned way, she earned every penny with blood, sweat and too many tears in her soul.
She earned some money legally and reported it for Uncle Sam to tax. She has never been sued by people who felt she bilked them, has never been in a bankruptcy but she has weathered every stick that the Koch brothers and GOTP could toss at her and she can still stand tall and proud, the first woman or man to have the best qualifications to reign in the White House.
Go Hillary and Team Clinton, 2016
She earned some money legally and reported it for Uncle Sam to tax. She has never been sued by people who felt she bilked them, has never been in a bankruptcy but she has weathered every stick that the Koch brothers and GOTP could toss at her and she can still stand tall and proud, the first woman or man to have the best qualifications to reign in the White House.
Go Hillary and Team Clinton, 2016
15
I can accept the Clintons getting rich.
What I can't accept is Bill Clinton ending Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and turning it into the Republican-style Temporary Aid to Needy Families, which threw millions of poor women and children into greater poverty.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1997/03/the-worst-thing-bill...
What I can't accept is Bill Clinton ending Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and turning it into the Republican-style Temporary Aid to Needy Families, which threw millions of poor women and children into greater poverty.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1997/03/the-worst-thing-bill...
21
It doesn't matter how you start out. It doesn't matter what kind of experiences you have.
It does matter what kind of conclusions you draw and what kind of habits you acquire.
The Hillary we know still courts money even if she doesn't need it.
Money is just as addictive as success. There is such a thing as being hooked on it.
It does matter what kind of conclusions you draw and what kind of habits you acquire.
The Hillary we know still courts money even if she doesn't need it.
Money is just as addictive as success. There is such a thing as being hooked on it.
17
Another deep dive into HRC's past and the accompanying comments that show how we as a culture still have a difficult time accepting women who step out of their traditional roles at home and work. I greatly enjoyed reading this and I disagree with those who think it is intended to make us sympathetic to Hillary. I think it is a fair recap of her early married life as a young working mom. Some commenters read it as affirmation of her privilege, that she really didn't have to work that hard, things were given to her or she benefited from rich men around her. Others read it as affirmation that she has always had to push into an uncomfortable room and was never afraid to, that she weighed her options and moved forward as any of us would in life...what is best for us, our families, our future. It seems many are uncomfortable with a woman who got rich through a combo of private jobs and public service, who decided to run for office after she'd already 'made it.' Neither the media or the public really know how to handle a presidential candidate that once had to scramble for childcare but also has immense personal wealth. 200 years of male crafted policies haven't been so kind to the working women of the USA. I believe this century things will change as she works to "unleash the power of women and girls," one of my fave Hillary-isms.
29
This makes me like Hillary Clinton all the more. Now I understand why she wanted to make sure she had enough money to be able to do the work she wanted to do.
What is interesting is the lack of any corruption in this article. She was highly paid for speeches (as were Colin Powell and other former Secretaries of State) but there is no evidence that she then used her office to enrich her buddies. And I have no concern that she wants to be President to enrich them either. That's what so many Republicans are really about. Hillary wants to make the country better. I'm with her, especially after reading this.
What is interesting is the lack of any corruption in this article. She was highly paid for speeches (as were Colin Powell and other former Secretaries of State) but there is no evidence that she then used her office to enrich her buddies. And I have no concern that she wants to be President to enrich them either. That's what so many Republicans are really about. Hillary wants to make the country better. I'm with her, especially after reading this.
31
Clintons are the best at hitting evidence. That's what you must learn at Yale law.
Wait a minute.
Are you implying that it is normal for a $1000 investment to become $100,000 return in 10 months time?
While Hillary is a better choice than donald, I hope the Press gives her the proper scrutiny over the next 4 years. No free pass. she needs to answer questions.
Right now, Donald is such an outlier that Hillary's past and current actions and lies are being ignored. Trump is the greatest gift that the Clintons ever received.
Are you implying that it is normal for a $1000 investment to become $100,000 return in 10 months time?
While Hillary is a better choice than donald, I hope the Press gives her the proper scrutiny over the next 4 years. No free pass. she needs to answer questions.
Right now, Donald is such an outlier that Hillary's past and current actions and lies are being ignored. Trump is the greatest gift that the Clintons ever received.
42
I'm sure they will, as that is what sells newspapers after all.
But really, if the last 20+ years of congressional investigations conducted by witch hunters who hated the woman and would have done absolutely anything they could have to destroy her, have not yet turned anything up, it is almost a biblical certainty that there will be nothing to turn up this time either.
But really, if the last 20+ years of congressional investigations conducted by witch hunters who hated the woman and would have done absolutely anything they could have to destroy her, have not yet turned anything up, it is almost a biblical certainty that there will be nothing to turn up this time either.
He is indeed the greatest gift...and...yet..she's still struggling to beat him. These two are running against the only candidates they could possibly beat...and...yet...are struggling to do so. And...yet...HRC & the Dems still don't seem to get it. This election should be in the bag for her. She has the establishment & the MSM on her side. It's the pesky voters who might stop her coronation.
1
Without having someone occasionally thinking about the struggles of the 99%, what we end up with are situations like Flint MI, where our children and families even perhaps are drinking poisoned water.