Power in politics is as much a matter of perception as it is of office, hence the moniker "lame duck" for a sitting president.  The more we give importance to what the Clintons do or think, the more they appear relevant.  It is possible that they still are, but they are diminished, considerably, and it does no one any good to compare the position of an ex-President and a Senator to that of a vindictive power-mad President who had the cooperation of the apparatus of the State to go after and punish his enemies.

The Age of Clinton is passed.  RIP.  Let it go, please; let them go and move on to more important things.  Please.

The state of Iowa huh- is she wisely going to change her (and almost all poliiticians, certainly all presidential candidates, do it) pander to corn ethanol?

It seems to me that most of the folks on any such list are probably as likely to wear such inclusion as a badge of honor as anything else.  I mean, I don't see Keith Olbermann or David Axelrod or most of these folks asking the Clintons for a favor anytime soon.

cspence -- they want to think that they're still relevant. One of the ways to do that is to have an enemies list.

I wanted to pull out a few of the more comical elements in that Times piece Noam linked to on the burgeoning

Wow Mike - that's terrible.  Those Nixonian Clintons.  Actually returning favors to those who supported them, and witholding them from those who didn't.  What evil will they do next - trim their Christmas card list - as I recall, that was the subject of at least one House hearing during the Clinton Administration.  .  I'm sure you and the NY Times will be right on top of it.

The Clintons have long memories and short tempers, Michael. This is yet another sad reminder of thos truths.

"...and the caucus system in general."

Man, if I were the caucus system, I'd be fucking terrified, man.

“The Clintons get hundreds of requests for favors every week,” said Terry McAuliffe - Gee, I wonder what kind of requests those might be?  Certainly not for Bill to do a favor for someone's daughter.

Seriously Crowley, this gratuitous vilification of the Clintons accomplishes nothing useful. It's useless as the VF article. Also, it looks like NY Times has removed itself from the list they have uncovered.

Sadly, I am happy I came to my senses(I started out as a pretty serious Hillary supporter). But people who refer to my senator, John Kerry--not a perfect guy, but not a bad one either--our former Democratic Presidential Nominee, as "dead to us," are sort of "dead to me."

I thought this story said much more about the general lame-ness of the New York Times  than anything else.  

What is this, high school?  I try to imagine somene like Ben Bradley, circa 1975 greenlighting something at the maturity and level of that article - impossible. The chilidhishness of the Clinton team is just sad.

More evidence of the decline of a great paper.

And the continued evaporation of whatever dignity Bill Clinton had left, which is clearly none.  

Lest y'all think that williamyard is all fun and games, be aware that I keep my own enemies list. And it's growing. Some examples:

No. 422: Bobby Torkoyle (childhood neighbor). Stole my Roberto Clemente card, wouldn't give it back, then called me a weenie in front of Susie Kreemcheeze, who until then would let me see her panties for a nickel but subsequently went up to a dime.

Bobby, the last time I visited the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall in Washington, I chiseled your name on it just so I could make an imprint of it on tissue paper to hang above my mantel.

No. 871: Mrs. Wartlicker (fifth grade teacher). Never missed an opportunity to remind the class that I wasn't as smart as my older sister, whom she had taught a few years before me.

Bitch, you're either dead or 157, and either way it's a beautiful day.

No. 166: Tony DeGrungio (slumlord). You extorted exorbitant rents from hard-working folks like me, then blew the money on hookers.

Just for that, when I owned a four-unit building a few years back I extorted exorbitant rents from my hard-working tenants, then blew the money on hookers.

No. 666: Satan (scourge of humankind; Dark Angel; Dick Cheney's pool cleaner). Think making life miserable for all of humanity makes you some kind of a tough guy, huh? Huh?

Answer me, you....you weenie.

No. 319: Carole Clinginclam ('90s-era, um, friend). You used me for your bizarre sexual thrills, then dumped me faster than a toxic-shock-laden spermicidal sponge.

C-could I get your new cell number?

No. 48: Tad Tadson III (professional colleague). You beat me out last month for that corner office by kissing up to the Big Dog.

Buddy, you might wanna think twice again about leaving your door open for lunch without a screensaver password unless you want the Big Dog to get some more, er, special emails from you.

No. 512: williamyard (williamyard). I am my own worst enemy.

But, fortunately, I can also be quite forgiving in some circumstances.

HotShot and DubyaD, did you even read the article? The entire state of Iowa is on the list! How can anyone not find that a little unhinged?

It's amazing how most of our opinions about a Hillary presidency have shifted since last summer. It's gone from "Bill Clinton without the bad times" to "Bill Clinton without the sex scandals but still with some annoying triangulation and spinning" to "Below Bill Clinton but above Lyndon Johnson" to "A cross between the liberal Nixon and the liberal George W. Bush." Ye gods, what a difference a year makes...

whoopdeedoo. This certainly doesn't surprise me.

If this in fact true, it helps explain why people were so glad to get off the wagon (or is it train?, not sure of the correct idiom here) and get behind Obama when it became clear he was going to be the nominee.  But it also explains why so many waited until the last minute, especially after Richardson had the guts to endorse Obama. They must be so relieved to have been delivered from the drama and anxiety of the Clinton world.

Their power is gone.  Especially if Obama becomes the next president. Does anybody think Clyburn gives a patootie whether he's their enemy or not? Or David Axelrod?

ps -- Williamyard: love that enemy list.

Big deal.  Aren't most people more likely to do favors for those who have done favors for them in the past.  I know I am.

That said, the value of connections to the Clintons probably has gone down a lot.  So, apparently, has the intelligence of the staff at the New York Times.

The story sort of buried the good parts.

Even though I am a stauch Obama supporter, after the first few paragraphs I was thinking, "this is stupid."  Of course the Clinton's remember who helped them.

Then I thought, "well some are on this list unfairly."  Anyone with a good list has to understand when a supporter needs to make his or her own political calculations, e.g., Clyburn.

Then, as I read further, I have to say that I had the feeling that the list was way too inclusive.  Iowa?

There is a line between being good at playing the favors game and being narcisstic and self-important.

I'm sure the who list thing is a little over-hyped.  But still.

williamyard, I hate lists, so consider yourself on MY enemies list...no wait, I don't have a list because I hate lists so I must.....damn you williamyard, damn you to hell! (where you can cuddle up to Cheneys pool boy)

The level of inanity of the majority of posts here is simply mind-numbing.

Read something by someone intelligent , it'll be a refreshing change from Crowley and his cohorts and you'll be very pleased to see yourselves mentioned.

www.dailyhowler.com/index.shtml