If Obama wins, it may be because the former president saved his presidency—but what exactly do the Clintons get in return? – Bill & Hillary Forever, by John Heilemann
by Pete Souza
THIS IS really quite extraordinary. In modern American history there is no parallel.
On the foreign crisis policy of the moment, you have Secretary Hillary Clinton taking “responsibility” for Benghazi and stressing an investigation is necessary on what the security team’s choices were and why, while also saying Obama and Biden couldn’t possibly have known the details.
Simultaneously, you have former President Clinton explaining Mitt Romney’s economic flim-flammery.
From Team Obama about the Clinton video above, which is titled “President Clinton Explains,” a take off on the “explainer-in-chief” motif:
President Clinton Explains Mitt Romney’s $5 Trillion Tax Cut
CHICAGO — As Americans learned in the first presidential debate, Mitt Romney will say anything to close the deal, even if it’s not true, just like he did in the corporate boardroom. So in advance of tonight’s debate, President Clinton is taking a couple of minutes to explain how Romney’s $5 trillion tax cut – which Romney claimed didn’t exist in the last debate — gives multimillionaires like him a new $250,000 tax cut, even with closing upper-end loopholes and deductions. He also details how it is mathematically impossible to pay for the $5 trillion tax cut without cutting deductions for the middle class, like the home mortgage, charitable, and state and local taxes deductions. In this new video, President Clinton notes that Romney is now cynically hiding the existence of the tax cut because he knows the only way to pay for it is to raise taxes on the middle class. While Romney continues to deceive Americans about his tax plan, President Clinton reminds them to rely on “arithmetic over illusion.” In other words, facts matter.
John Heilemann’s New York magazine piece couldn’t have landed in a better moment.
“We were all watching on TV, and we thought it was fine, too. But by then, nobody cared that much. We were all just so far past the Clintons.”
Four years later, two words leap to mind: As if. Today, Hillary Clinton is the most popular member of Obama’s Cabinet, and her husband is not only his greatest but most tireless political ally. This past September 11, the Y-chromosome Clinton was in Miami, ripping Mitt Romney a new one over Medicare. Since then, Clinton has campaigned for Obama in New Hampshire and Nevada, raised money for him in Boston and with him in Los Angeles—and there is more to come. A TV ad with Clinton making the case for Obama’s reelection has run 16,000 times in swing states across the country. Another, featuring a clip of Clinton’s address at the Democratic convention, almost gives the impression that he is Obama’s running mate. Then there is that speech itself, which another top Obama adviser tells me flatly is “the most important moment of the campaign so far.”
Heilemann goes on to quote someone describing the relationship between Barack and Bill as “totally transactional—and highly functional.”
Throw in Secretary Clinton’s role in the aftermath of Benghazi, which was solidified with her statement of “responsibility,” and you’d also have to add, absolutely imperative for President Obama, if he is to be reelected.
You simply cannot write the reelection battle story of Barack Obama without including the Clintons’ over-sized role in fortifying the political wall against Romney’s assault, which Barack Obama can’t do on his own, including with the help of Joe Biden.
For those Obama loyalists who have dismissed the Clintons for years, as well as progressives who hate all things Clinton, it’s a crow-eating moment. Try horse radish sauce, I hear it helps with swallowing an unpalatable plateful.
Unless, of course, you’re a progressive who believes neoliberalism is a curse and want both camps gone, or an independent who thinks Democrats and Republicans are the problem.
It’s nice to see the Secretary of State taking responsibility; responsibility for total incompetence.
Ah, but like everyone else you missed what she said.
Secretary Clinton accepts no *blame*. She simply stated the obvious, while pointing to security team.
People need to pay closer attention.
Why is it someone must take “blame” for this?
OH YEAH, the Obamaphobes must have something to scream and gibber about as they snap ineffectually at the ankles of people doing the sorts of things grown ups doing important things have to do. To them stating the obvious or reality somehow translates into “taling the blame”.
Democrats would be looking for blame if the sides were switched.
You’d be leading the chorus, sech, if this happened under a Republican.
Thank you Taylor … how true! I am frankly so sick of the hypocrisy on both sides (REPs and Dems)……………
That is simply not true Ms. Marsh.
It was before Taylor Marsh became my daily stop….actually it was before blogs….but when the Marines were killed by a suicide Bomber in Lebanon I did not “blame” President RR.
When he gave in to the killers and pulled out completely I was vocal in my disagreement of his surrendering to yet another group of terrorists.
But I did not “blame” him.
Who is running for President here? Obama or Clinton? Is there anything Obama can do on his own? The lack of leadership here is incredible. President Clinton Explains?????? Can he explain why Obama’s not explaining? Am I missing something here?
Can he explain why Obama’s not explaining?
OH! That is priceless, Chuckg.
Another blatantly telling example of why Obama has no business in his current job.
100% Agree!!!
He also details how it is mathematically impossible to pay for the $5 trillion tax cut without cutting deductions for the middle class, like the home mortgage, charitable, and state and local taxes deductions.
Hmm,
can’t wait to watch the video to see how he “mathematically” proves it to be impossible.
And I can’t wait for Switch-A-Mitt’s response to see how he “mathematically’ proves it to be possible.
I am waiting….tick…tock….tick….tock….tick….tock….crickets….
I would trust Romney’s math skills over Obama’s math skills any day. Don’t know about Clinton, except that he had some pretty smart people to work with during his administration.
I just finished the Heilemann article. It just made me smile. I loved it. It reforces what I have always thought about both men. I am sick of the two party duopoly and I think neoliberlism has many flaws. But both Clintons despite their flaws are motivated by their love of our country and it’s people and nobody will convince me differently.
The whiners who love Obama just sound small and snarky like Lawrence O’Donnel did last night when Heilemann was on his show.
Let’s hope Obama can be bothered to turn in a good performance tonight. Maybe if he cared a little more about all the people who will be severly affected by his losing instead of his own internal whatever it would help.I am totally sick of his ego and I would a hundred times rather vote for Michelle but he is all we have.
Excellent post LL… I too am so sick of Obama’s ego. It truly knows no bounds. I have stopped watching O’Donnel as I find his rants so completely…. intolerable.
The flagrant flaws of the Duopoly System are, for me, the big picture context and concern. That doesn’t make Obama’s clear dependency on the Clintons any less obvious.
Yep, it requires holding two different thoughts in your head at one time, always a hard ask when the subject is politics.
“But both Clintons despite their flaws are motivated by their love of our country and it’s people and nobody will convince me differently.”
I usually don’t agree with you, but on this, you are dead on.
AND I’m also sick of our Presidents ego…
Hillary: “I can see Israel from under this bus!”
OUCH. Oh, this hurts.
This is just childish. Seriously, how long are you guys going to keep this feud going? Obama and the Clintons are not friends, but they realize they need each other. Bill and Hillary are doing a phenomenal job substantively and politically. And Obama (wisely) swallowed his pride and made Hillary SOS and is making effective use of Bill on the campaign trail.
I just don’t see what the big deal is. Obama needs help, and the Clintons are in a position to provide it. That is a good thing, not a bad thing or a gloating thing. Do you really think that if Hillary goes for it in 2016, Obama and Michelle will not be asked to help out?
You guys need to grow up.
“Do you really think that if Hillary goes for it in 2016, Obama and Michelle will not be asked to help out?”
Did Mr. Mondale ask Mr. Carter for help?
ogenic~ I will bet you a CD of your choice that if and when the time comes the Obama’s give little if anything near what the Clintons have toward Hillary’s election.
You can’t possibly disagree that Obama could give a flip about party building?
You still listen to CDs?!?!?!?
LOL. Actually, I do disagree. I think he and Bill are in EXACTLY the same place. That place being a centrist, pragmatic place where they are happy to D ideas if they are better, but are not averse to coopting R ideas where they make sense. Clinton is to welfare reform as Obama is to HCR.
Ha! give me a break…I’m 63…lucky I didn’t say tape
I’m was not talking about their governing …I’m was talking about party building,WJC was able to do both.
Couldn’t agree more ogenec. It would be an even BIGGER grousing point for the chattering class if the Clintons WEREN’T doing their best to help President Obama and the Demecrats.
I’ll be particularly interested to see where talk of a duopoly and the necessity for a third party goes if Hillary chooses to make a 2016 run.
This is all so ridiculous. Politicians from all sides seem to agree that the “world is a dangerous place” Ad nauseum, then when something dangerous happens, people run around like dumbfounded dipshits looking for blame since we all know Americans are immune to such barbaric behavior…even overseas.
Does anyone stop to think for a moment just how lucky we are that the U.S. has been relatively untouched since 9/11? How hard would it be for Al Qaeda cells or sympathizers to paralyze America with even the smallest attack within the borders? Personally, this is what I was expecting post 9/11, but apparently that tactic is increasingly unnecessary when they can just as well cause a commotion abroad near a presidential election secure in the knowledge that America will react according to their wishes…gear up for Iran.
It’s not the crime, it’s the cover-up.
The administration blamed the video for 3 weeks leading up to Susan Rice’s Sunday show-double down. There was no follow up explanation to the American people.
It is my understanding that Rice gets her directions from the White House not the State Department.
Obama even spent $70 Million on a commercial he starred in, which ran in the Middle East… apologizing for the video.
There were also 2 attacks on the embassy just before the Ambassador was killed which was why he requested additional security…
…Obama missed 60% of his security briefings prior to the Benghazi attack.
Today:
Reporter: “Is Hillary to blame for Benghazi?”
Obama: Silent and walks away.
Save it for the ODSers, there is nobody I would want in office less than a President Obama if I were a terrorist.
- Appeaser
- Missed briefings
- Hillary under bus
- Using taxpayer money to apologize
Just-a-huntin’ for the truth, no partisan wankery there.
I watched the Benghazi attacks via a live stream and knew that night that it was not a spontaneous riot.
I have a problem with the lies.
At least get your lies straight so you don’t look totally incompetent.
And read your missed security briefings before you start spinning.
As far as taxpayer money, our government continues to waste it. No surprise there. The real redistribution of wealth is the continued transfer of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to the Middle East.
and if I were a U.S. Ambassador I would take anybody in office other than a President Obama…
we can respectfully agree to disagree.
“I watched the Benghazi attacks via a live stream and knew that night that it was not a spontaneous riot”.
Knew how?
“At least get your lies straight so you don’t look totally incompetent.
And read your missed security briefings before you start spinning”.
Yes, because as we all know that there could be no way to put this on a secure stream or paper format in the digital age.
“…and if I were a U.S. Ambassador I would take anybody in office other than a President Obama”.
Given Obama’s no nonsense record vs. terrorism, do tell.
Wow! First off, there is no crime, so it’s pretty hard to have a cover-up on no crime. There is nothing to cover-up. They may have been slow to grasp what was going on, they may have been lose with the facts, but that is not a crime. At least when you spew your hatred for all things Obama, try staying in the real world.
oh, I’m sorry, I forgot.
Unlike our previous President’s who have lied when they have…well…
Lied.
…Obama evolves when he lies.
oh come now! they all evolve…into better liars.
Sand,
In Benghazi, the weapons were military grade weapons and it looked like a war zone, not the L.A. riots which I also watched as they occurred.
The reports from the international media immediately following the attack, along with information released during the hearings concluded I was right and it was a terrorist attack.
To clarify my point about the security briefings, if Obama had read the briefs from the missed meetings he would have known about the previous attacks on the embassy and the Ambassador’s request for additional security.
Biden stated that he and Obama did not have this information.
RE:
…and if I were a U.S. Ambassador I would take anybody in office other than a President Obama.
we will just have to agree to disagree.
@jinbaltimore
Ha!
you said it better than I.
At the convention Bill Clinton did a good job explaining the weaknesses in the GOP/Romney fiscal plans but seemed to have the proverbial log in his eye when it came the weaknesses in Obama’s. That still seems to be the case. He’s a good explainer but no less hypocritical than any other politician.
Well, unemployment is under 8%, the deficit is something like 100,000,000 lower and the Auto industry is in pretty good shape. Housing starts are up and foreclosures are down.
So exactly where is this log you baaaaa about?
You’re right. We’re all doing so much better since Obama did Wall St. and Big Pharm’s bidding, put all American citizens under martial law, coddled republican crazies, and spewed forth on Faith-Based initiatives.
Is that Black Helicopters I hear above your house!!!!!!!!!
800,000 jobs created.
8 million left the workforce.
That is 1 created for every 10 worker who quit looking.
Foreclosures are down, however there is the shadow inventory that will be released into the housing market, after the election. No matter who is elected.
And if the sun comes up tomorrow you’ll squeal Obama’s trying to kill us all with heat rays.
I was speaking more of Obama’s budget projections which are no more realistic than Romney’s.
Why is it that since arriving on the National Stage, of all the fights he’s had to wage, Obama exerted the most passion and energy to vanquish one enemy, Hillary Clinton? Compare his performance at any of the debates, rallies etc., since the primary fight against HRC…nothing has come close to that vehemence…prolly the Reagan-lover in him.
These are very difficult economic times with Obama being in a pretty difficult position, so I think it’s a good idea that the Clintons are there to help. They don’t want to see a President Romney. And they’re loyal Democrats, who have emphasized party and country over personal ego. I think we need more of that. Good for them.