Why is Bill so Angry? - Poll Added

I was listening to a talk radio show late Friday night - I usually do not pay much attention to these shows but sometimes in the middle of the night, with miles ahead of you, its the only thing on the radio.  In this case it was the Rusty Humphries show but there was a guest host. I don't recall his name and I apologize for that...Ok..to the point.  The commentator on the show was asking the question "Why is Bill Clinton so angry?".  This question intrigued me so I continued to listen...

The point was being made by the host of the show of how important it is to follow the money in relation to the Clintons just reporting their $109 million in income.  But he went further.

The commentator continued that although this money had been analyzed, examined, etc. to highlight issues that might be relevent in the campaign (with no apparent RED FLAGS), he suggested that what was really of interest was the amount of funds raised by Bill for his Foundation and Library.  "Who are these donors and how do they fit into this campaign?" he asked.

The commentator developed his question by saying "Bill has raised an unbelieveable amount of money (over $600 million) for both of these projects.  Promises have obviously been made, quid pro quo, and NOW he is realizing that he cannot deliver."  Answering his own question he concluded that "this is why he is so angry, so red-faced, so panicked."  He has made promises to others in return for donations, assuming he would be in the White House again.  When a lot of this money was raised, he had every reason to think that was the case - that it would happen.  Now that it isn't playing out, he is panicked and obviously behaving in a way that most do not recogize.

I think this discussion is not only relevant but very important as people make their decision about this race.  Who are these donors?  Is there a list?  Isn't a nonprofit organization's records considered public?  Is there a place to see these donors?

Don't get me wrong...I personally believe that the Clinton Foundation does some great work.  HOWEVER, this angle needs to be discussed.  As someone mentioned on MSNBC yesterday, the idea of Bill Clinton in the White House, with no direct (official) oversight, with no official duties yet free to do and act as he wants, quid pro quo deals made...this is something that we should ALL be concerned about.

Maybe I'm the only one with questions about this?  I however doubt it. I'm sure there is a link to this discusson on the site for verification however I'm not sure how to access it. http://talktorusty.com/

UPDATE:  Link to William J. Clinton Foundation.  http://www.clintonfoundation.org/...

I have added a poll.  What do you think?

•  Tip jar

  by Kyman on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:50:42 AM PDT

  •  A very relevant question, who are these donors

    and why are their identities still shrouded in secrecy. All legitimate, non-profit, charitable organizations work transparently, since few, if any, have anything to hide. The reluctance of the Clintons to reveal their sources of funding does raise serious questions, especially if someone like HRC occupied the Oval Office.

    by mobiusein on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:30:22 AM PDT

    •  Exactly my point. Why are these donors

      being kept a secret?  If I was running a foundation for charity I would be promoting my donors. Usually donors like for their names to be associated with charity.

      by Kyman on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:38:59 AM PDT

•  Nice angle, maybe one of many reasons

  Others: his own legacy, his inability to help HRC get elected, his love for his wife, his love of power....now maybe I'll add this to list of things Bill's pissed about.

  by ksh01 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:54:46 AM PDT

  •  Yes, I believe this is

    one part of the puzzle.  He seems to be acting in a way that just doesn't fit his past behavior.  Maybe it is all becoming too much and moreover, too apparent?

    by Kyman on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:58:42 AM PDT

    •  yeah, I remember his having a more

      affable reputation.  That's sure out the window.

      by ksh01 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:06:08 AM PDT

      •  Actually

        Affable in public, but in private (if the stories that have been written are anything to go by) He was capable of blowing his stack at people

        by Jank2112 on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 12:52:25 PM PDT

    •  Interesting suggestion, worth investigating.

      by LanceBoyle on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:51:19 AM PDT

•  Do you think he's going to be able to earn

  such high fees for speaking engagements once it becomes apparent that his wife isn't going to be president?

  Uh oh.

  by elmo on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:55:32 AM PDT

•  How dare a commoner stake a claim to...

  the Bush-Clinton Throne?  That's what is going through Bill Clinton's mind. The sense of entitlement among people named Bush and people named Clinton is truly astounding.  

  Out of 100 million families, we chose these two families as our royalty?

  by George Gould on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:00:23 AM PDT

•  I don't know if it's promises made, quid pro quo

  as much as it is seeing the possibility of living in the White House and being "relevant" in politics again going down the drain. Or a combination of the 2.

  by DJShay on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:00:43 AM PDT

  •  I was a Bill Clinton supporter

    during his presidency.  I have, however, been so disappointed to see how he has conducted himself during this campaign.  I have been searching for reasons why...I think everyone on here has made good points.  It is a combination of many factors and he is in a place that is completely foreign to him...losing with no hope of success.

    I guess there is a first time for everything.  Sadly, this behavior has and will continue to reflect on him.

    by Kyman on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:04:32 AM PDT

    •  I was a HUGE Bill Clinton fan

      until South Carolina. I never cared much for Hillary. Even during the Clinton years. It's really sad to see his behavior recently.

      by DJShay on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:32:25 AM PDT

•  I am not convinced

  This year has been an eye-opener for me. I was sad to see the Clintons leave the WH and have been supporting Bill as he has gone on to a new career. It seems he has done some good things, if not Jimmy Carter class things. But that is ok.

  Now, I have given up much of that good will. I think the analysis of just how harmful Bill has been to the campaign is still to be analyzed. It seems whenever he has been active, the numbers for Hillary have fallen. If so, is it more than coincidence?

  But I am not ready to say Bill has incurred any debts from his donors. He is too smart to bet on what hasn't been delivered yet, especially for his own Presidential library. I think his motives for his anger are still to be revealed. Anything right now is pure speculation. To suggest that he is contemplating some sort of First Spousal graft operation or influence peddling scam is not valid.

  by shermandem on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:07:46 AM PDT

•  another element--his heart surgery

  Remember he had quadruple (?) bypass surgery some time ago--this procedure is known to affect a person's personality, temper, short-term memory, and other side effects. No doubt he is currently taking medications as part of that heart therapy, which also affect temperament.

  To me he does not seem like the same person he was before that surgery. Amiable, witty, clever, not much interested in money, forward-thinking; now irritable, angry, clumsy verbally and mentally, money-grubbing, bitter. I agree with what you are suggesting in this diary--it's a possible explanation of what's going on--but I don't think the previous Bill Clinton would have gotten himself boxed in like this.

  by sillia on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:13:53 AM PDT

  •  I'm only suggesting that this might

    be yet another reason for his behavior.  Without having the information about the donors, this is hard to develop as a real reason.  I was hoping someone would be able to provide a link or info about the donors.  Isn't that suppose to be public?

    It may in fact show absolutely no connection to anything...but without the info it leaves some questions for me.

    by Kyman on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:16:23 AM PDT

  •  Bill's not rational when it comes to his wife

    There's nothing sinister about it.  Lots of people are that way when it comes to their spouse.

    by other72384 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:31:22 AM PDT

  •  He's had a 'change of heart'? n/t

    by drbloodaxe on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:52:41 AM PDT

  •  Regaining the White House: on Bill's bucket list?

    by LanceBoyle on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:53:10 AM PDT

•  Promises have obviously been made, quid pro quo?

  Oh, they have? Is it really utterly completely impossible that the donors might want to, oh, I don't know, do some good somewhere?

  Given Bill's ego, all it takes to explain his anger for me is that he is seeing his future as First Husband and queenmaker evaporating like dry ice in July. I don't think anything more nefarious than his outraged sense of entitlement is operating.

  by Wee Mama on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:15:20 AM PDT

•  HRC's Loss Diminishes His Legacy

  This is probably the biggest reason.  This is why he is so desperate to find some "angle" to "turn this thing around".

  Bill Clinton is used to being trapped in tight corners and magically escaping from them, a la Houdini.  But this time, the magic seems to be gone.

  by bincbom on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:17:19 AM PDT

•  Ponzi scheme is unraveling

  For those that don't know, a Ponzi scheme is a deal where a financial guru promises say a 36% annual return on your money.  Great deal and lots of people pour their money into that particular "financial guru".  A few people ask for their money and that is easily paid and their satisfaction is advertised.  At some point, the fund gets really large and someone asks where the money is invested.  The financial guru has the latest Bentley and takes his investors to the best restaurants.  When everyone asks for their money, there is a cash flow problem before everyone discovers that they have been had.  Ask Greta Van Sustern who lost 6 figures to Reed Slatkin.  Slatkin embezzled $200 million.

  Back to the point, there are a lot of lobbyists, foreign governments and Friends of Bill that will want their money back if there isn't a second Clinton presidency.

  by jan0080 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:17:28 AM PDT

•  Another reason

  Bill Clinton is so angry is because they provided so much of their own money to charity to impress the public and it is all wasted.

  by ajleiker on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:21:33 AM PDT

•  Displaced anger

  My theory (which belongs to me):

  Hillary is probably dumping on Bill, who can't fight back directly (would you?), so he displaces his anger to the people who can't fight back, e.g., us.

  (Mind you, this is just a pat diagnosis made without fully consulting his full medical history! -- Monty Python)

  by Caelian on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:38:48 AM PDT

•  It's 'Billy Beer' time again if he gets in. n/t

  by drbloodaxe on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 08:50:59 AM PDT

•  Because "They" are Losing . . .

  I suspect there is some truth to Bill being angry about not being able to fulfill promises made for donations, BUT I believe the real reason Bill is so angry is that Hillary (meaning he) is losing.  This race has been all about him and a loss for Hillary is also a loss for him since he has, no doubt, called in all favors, threatened, cajoled, and/or begged anyone in power to support Hillary.  And, yet, they are still losing.  

  He, and she, are angry that a junior Senator, an inexperienced youngster in their eyes, has "stolen" the election away from "them."  She was to be "coronated," a term she recently used in referring to a possible Obama win.  This is most definitely projection on her part, a defense mechanism with which she and Bill are all too familiar.  It involves attributing one's unwanted or unacceptable thoughts or emotions onto another. (Wikipedia definition, essentially the concept.)

  For the Clintons, it is all about winning . . . at all costs, using any means possible.  It is not about the party, not about the country, it is about them.  

  As a disclaimer, I used to respect both Clintons and have defended them for years.  I see them differently now and I don't believe anything that either of them says.  I apologize to the Hillary folks for this assessment, but it's the way I feel.

  by warriorpoet on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 09:00:53 AM PDT

•  Bill is angry because his "people",

  the media and the left, no longer eat up all the shit he and Hillary shovel out.  In the past when they made a misstep or had their veracity questioned, they successfully blamed it on a "vast right-wing conspiracy."  The only people they really have to blame are themselves.    

  by browneyes on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 10:22:11 AM PDT

•  To his own foundation no less!!! n/t

  by Diggla on Tue Apr 08, 2008 at 01:01:34 PM PDT