http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100231113/the-new-york-times-takes-down-the-clinton-foundation-this-could-be-devastating-for-bill-and-hillary/
****

** **
The New York Times takes down the Clinton Foundation. This could be
devastating for Bill and Hillary ****

By Tim Stanley <http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/timstanley/>****

August 14th, 2013****

[image: 
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files/2013/08/hillbill.jpg]<http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100231113/the-new-york-times-takes-down-the-clinton-foundation-this-could-be-devastating-for-bill-and-hillary/hillbill/>
****

An internal review of the Clinton Foundations' workings has proved troubling
****

Is the New York Times being guest edited by Rush Limbaugh? Today it runs
with a fascinating takedown of the Clinton
Foundation<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/14/us/politics/unease-at-clinton-foundation-over-finances-and-ambitions.html?hp&_r=0>–
that vast vanity project that conservatives are wary of criticising
for
being seen to attack a body that tries to do good. But the liberal NYT has
no such scruples. The killer quote is this:****

For all of its successes, the Clinton Foundation had become a sprawling
concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to
distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest. It ran
multimillion-dollar deficits for several years, despite vast amounts of
money flowing in.****

Over a year ago Bill Clinton met with some aides and lawyers to review the
Foundation's progress and concluded that it was a mess. Well, many
political start-ups can be, especially when their sole selling point is the
big name of their founder (the queues are short at the Dan Quayle Vice
Presidential Learning Center). But what complicated this review – what made
its findings more politically devastating – is that the Clinton Foundation
has become about more than just Bill. Now both daughter Chelsea and wife,
and likely presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton have taken on major
roles and, in the words of the NYT "efforts to insulate the foundation from
potential conflicts have highlighted just how difficult it can be to
disentangle the Clintons’ charity work from Mr Clinton’s moneymaking
ventures and Mrs Clinton’s political future." Oh, they're entangled alright.
****

The NYT runs the scoop in its usual balanced, inoffensive way – but the
problem jumps right off the page. The Clintons have never been able to
separate the impulses to help others and to help themselves, turning noble
philanthropic ventures into glitzy, costly promos for some future campaign
(can you remember a time in human history when a Clinton wasn't running for
office?). And their "Ain't I Great?!" ethos attracts the rich and powerful
with such naked abandon that it ends up compromising whatever moral crusade
they happen to have endorsed that month. That the Clinton Global Initiative
is alleged to have bought Natalie Portman a first-class ticket for her and
her dog to attend an event in 2009 is the tip of the iceberg. More
troubling is that businessmen have been able to expand the profile of their
companies by working generously alongside the Clinton Foundation. From the
NYT:****

Last year, Coca-Cola’s chief executive, Muhtar Kent, won a coveted spot on
the dais with Mr. Clinton, discussing the company’s partnership with
another nonprofit to use its distributors to deliver medical goods to
patients in Africa. (A Coca-Cola spokesman said that the company’s
sponsorship of foundation initiatives long predated Teneo and that the firm
plays no role in Coca-Cola’s foundation work.)****

In March 2012, David Crane, the chief executive of NRG, an energy company,
led a widely publicized trip with Mr. Clinton to Haiti, where they toured
green energy and solar power projects that NRG finances through a $1
million commitment to the Clinton Global Initiative.****

This is typical Clinton stuff. The second thing I ever wrote for this
website was about how corporations invest in politicians as a way of
building their brand and raising their stock
price<http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100083989/the-bill-clinton-bargain-how-corporations-invest-in-us-politicians-to-enhance-their-image-and-boost-their-stocks/>.
It can lead to some funny partnerships. This, from 2011:****

Just this month, bedding manufacturer Serta announced that it will be
sponsoring Bill Clinton’s keynote address to an industry conference in
August. "To us,"’ said the head of the company, "Clinton represents
leadership. This appearance shows Serta is a leader and is taking a
leadership position. This singles us out." Some might say that it is
beneath a former president to basically endorse Serta’s new "Perfect
Sleeper" line, even with its "revolutionary gel foam mattress".****

The cynical might infer from the NYT piece that the Clintons are willing to
sell themselves, their image, and even their Foundation's reputation in
exchange for money to finance their personal projects. In Bill's case,
saving the world. In Hillary's case, maybe, running for president.****

It's nothing new to report that there's an unhealthy relationship in
America between money and politics, but it's there all the same. While the
little people are getting hit with Obamacare, high taxes and joblessness, a
class of businessmen enjoys ready access to politicians of both Left and
Right that poses troubling questions for how the republic can continue to
call itself a democracy so long as it functions as an aristocracy of the
monied. Part of the reason why America's elites get away with it is becuase
they employ such fantastic salesmen. For too long now, Bill Clinton has
pitched himself, almost without question, as a homespun populist: the Boy
from Hope. The reality is that this is a man who – in May 1993 – prevented
other planes from landing at LAX for 90 minues while he got a haircut from
a Beverley Hills hairdresser aboard Air Force One. The Clintons are
populists in the same way that Barack Obama is a Nobel prize winner.







__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

<<image001.jpg>>

Reply via email to