Jay Leno on Warren vs. Hillary: I Don’t See Hillary’s ‘Fire’ Anymore

[RiverLover]

In case anyone missed this~

Jay Leno on Warren vs. Hillary: I Don’t See Hillary’s ‘Fire’ Anymore
1/10/15

Jay Leno has his own opinions on the potential, hoped-for fight between Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Hillary Clinton (D-Who Knows Anymore) for the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee.

While he said he liked Clinton, Leno had one worry: “I just don’t see the fire,” he said during an appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher last night.

“Her and Elizabeth Warren are almost the same age. And I see Elizabeth Warren coming out — boom, throwing punches! — and I like her,” Leno said to cheers. But Hillary? “She seems slow, she seems deliberate. But I don’t see that fire, the fire I used to see [from her] — the fire I see in Elizabeth Warren.”

Observing that everyone thinks Warren is probably 15-ish years younger than Clinton — “No, 18 months!” Leno noted — Leno, along with the rest of the panel, thought that Warren should run — if at least to give a voice to the “populist left” sentiment growing in the party, as Paul Begala put it.

[JoePhilly]

1. Jay lost his fire years ago.

[LiberalFighter]

2. Jay does not have credibility.

[MADem]

64. Seeing as he has been a GOP asskisser for many, many years, now, I have to agree with you.

He never met a Bush he didn't adore.

I'd trust Jay Leno for political advice about as far as I could throw him.

His wife is another story--she's the brains in that house.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. Did you have anything to say

About what he said? Or just attacking a messenger?

[JoePhilly]

25. I don't look to Jay for his political insights.

But you should feel free to ... using whichever personas you prefer.

[still_one]

27. If memory serves me jay Leno backed Arnold for governor in our state. So much

For his assessment of things

[JoePhilly]

39. Argggghhhhh!!!

[MADem]

65. He didn't just "back" Ahhh-nuld...he gave his show over as a platform for Ahhh-nee to announce his

run...and he knew the announcement was going to happen before it happened.

He aided and abetted, and in essence, provided Ahhh-nuld with an unfair advantage by giving him free air time on a national stage.

Ick.

[Autumn]

3. He's right on the difference between Hillary and Liz. In fact I haven't even heard much from Hillary

and that may be because she is enjoying private life and just giving speeches while Liz is working and rocking the Senate.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Or she's totally flummoxed

The most expensive minds in America are cogitating 24/7 over how Hillary can out-Warren Warren.

[Autumn]

8. The most expensive minds in America are shit out of luck if that's their plan

What is seen cannot be unseen.

[pa28]

5. It seems the most boring candidate always loses presidential elections.

That will be Hillary if she's nominated.

[JDPriestly]

22. Which is why we need Elizabeth Warren to run. She would be a more interesting, more

compelling candidate than anyone who could conceivably run at this time.

[Thinkingabout]

7. Wouldn't you think it strange if Hillary was going to congress on regular basis and giving fiery

Speeches?

[Autumn]

9. I would imagine if Hillary wanted to get her views out there it would be very easy for

her to get out there and push her ideas. Strange how she isn't doing that.

[Thinkingabout]

12. Why?

[Autumn]

18. You are right. She shouldn't say anything.

[MannyGoldstein]

10. There's no shortage of places where The Inevitable One can give fiery speeches

Problem is, whenever she tries to decry income inequality or anything else that her posse has visited upon the 99%, she looks confused, lost.

[Thinkingabout]

13. Oh, I forgot, she gets paid big bucks for her speeches, now who is smart, do you get big bucks for

Speaking?

[MannyGoldstein]

14. I will not sell my soul

for some pieces of silver.

[Thinkingabout]

16. Ok, then

[JDPriestly]

23. Big bucks for speeches. Does that = corruption.

The big bucks for speeches, are they a sort of pay-off in advance for favors to be given once Hillary is in the White House?

That is one of the questions about Hillary that troubles me and many others.

The kinds of people who are giving Hillary big bucks for speeches are the kinds of people who, when they invest their money, hope for and expect a return.

So what kind of return do these big-buck sugar-daddies expect from Hillary when they pay her for her speeches.

Very frankly, Hillary is a decent speaker, but she is not good enough or entertaining or brilliant enough to be worth what she gets for her speeches.

That Elizabeth Warren is not (yet) receiving the big bucks for her speeches commends Warren's honesty and integrity. Hillary's big bucks raises huge questions about hers.

[Thinkingabout]

28. Well, she doesn't have a job and as we have discussed I think something is better than nothing.

She is using her talents and reinvented herself. Now in all honesty. would you turn down the speaking fees? I don't think attorneys are worth the money they get per hour either, but I have paid the fees. I don't think professional athletes are worth the money they get either but they still get big bucks. I expect athletes to perform flawlessly on every play but they don't.

If Warren lives long enough she will be out getting big bucks for her speeches, I would not expect any less.

[Autumn]

34. I don't object to her speaking fees, I don't object to her book income. I own her books,

all of them. I object to the core of my being to her views like this one,

Attacking financial reform is risky and wrong. Better for Congress to focus on jobs and wages for middle class families.

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) January 16, 2015

[Thinkingabout]

35. Okay, you are an intelligent, how many people do you think is going to be helped by indicting every

one who might be connected to financial world or helping the 90% getting jobs and making a better salary?

[Autumn]

36. I don't give a fuck about indicting every one who might be connected to financial world.

Let the fucking thieves go free but throw the fuckers out of their high positions in the government. Obama brought them in you think Hill will throw them out? I object to politicians who think that the financial world is who they need to represent at the expense of the young burdened with low paying jobs, high prices and crushing debt, the elderly, the poor and the working class.
Minimum wage is sure as fuck not a living wage. The status quo must be changed and those who want to continue it need to be thrown out of office and certainly should not be elected on the silly pretense that they will change things.
You convince me, it should be easy, I was a strong Hillary supporter back in the last primary, I have had a few phone conversations with her, I've met her, I like her. What will Hillary do to change things?

[Thinkingabout]

38. Which side are you on, either you want to see the working people helped or you are interested in

attacking the financial world? This was Hillary's tweet then she is saying she wants to focus on helping the working people.

[RiverLover]

43. Did you help her compose that fiery tweet or something?

You're being extraordinarily sensitive to criticism here.

[Thinkingabout]

44. No I did not help her write the tweet but am trying to point out more working people needs help

In getting jobs and increases in wages than spending the time which will spent on attacking financial companies. Middle class working people needs effort placed towards getting jobs. Now if this is offensive to you it is still my opinion.

[RiverLover]

46. What is offensive is Hillary taking millions from banks and then talking about caring about the

middle class. Her working on behalf of multinational corps as Secr of State and pimping their continued reach over foreign countries' citizens, and pushing off-shoring of American jobs. Its been linked a million times, but here it is again~

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-10/hillary-clintons-business-legacy-at-the-state-department

Although Clinton’s corporate cheerleading has won praise from business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, “there’s been a certain amount of resistance” within the Commerce Department, says Edward Alden, a trade specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations. “There are concerns about why the State Department is doing this.” Jake Sullivan, Clinton’s director of policy planning, says he hasn’t heard any complaints from CEOs. “None of these business leaders are saying, ‘Wait! You’re not the Commerce Secretary. What are you doing here?’?”

And then there's~
Hilary's Biggest Challenge Isn't Just Bill's Outsourcing Record, It's Hers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-white/hilarys-biggest-challenge_b_6175008.html

Hillary Clinton's Goldman Sachs Problem
She talks populism, but hobnobs with Wall Street.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/hillary-clintons-goldman-sachs-problem

Backing Hillary in 2016: Bad for Progressives and Bad Politics, Too
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/11/29/backing-hillary-2016-bad-progressives-and-bad-politics-too

Hillary Clinton’s Corporatist Party
https://consortiumnews.com/2014/07/14/hillary-clintons-corporatist-party/


Its insulting that she thinks we're that gullible. Never again, especially when we KNOW this time.

[Thinkingabout]

48. Yes you seem to be falling in line with attacking the finanical companies just letting the

Working people just suffer longer. What do you have against working people, this is where more people will get help and you are more interested in wasting efforts on something which not bring one dollar more to the working class.

[RiverLover]

50. I'm sorry, but to me the middle class is the working class. This trying to divide them up doesn't

fly with me. There's lower-middle class & upper-middle class & there's the poor.

I care about the 99%, which is pretty much every one but the Elite, who are crushing our country & for that matter, the planet.

Hillary is the puppet of those Elite, while trying to sound progressive/populist, and its sickening.

[Thinkingabout]

54. You are entitled to your opinion, I am going to hope somebody tries to help the 90%.

[RiverLover]

57. Sorry, tell Hillary that Elizabeth Warren already used the 90% figure. I know imitation is the

sincerest form of flattery, but its still insulting to the intelligence of the informed Democrat.

Senator Warren's Remarks at AFL-CIO National Summit on Raising Wages

...Coming out of the Great Depression, America built a middle class unlike anything seen on earth. From the 1930s to the late 1970s, as GDP went up, wages went up pretty much across the board. In fact, 90% of all workers-everyone outside the top 10%-got about 70% of all the new income growth.(v) Sure, the richest 10% gobbled up more than their share-they got 30%. But overall, as the economic pie got bigger, pretty much everyone was getting a little more. In other words, as our country got richer, our families got richer. And as our families got richer, our country got richer. That was how this country built a great middle class.

But then things changed.

By 1980, wages had flattened out, while expenses kept going up. The squeeze was terrible. In the early 2000s, families were spending twice as much, adjusted for inflation, on mortgages as they had a generation earlier. They spent more on health insurance, and more to send their kids to college. Mom and dad both went to work, but that meant new expenses like childcare, higher taxes, and the costs of a second car. All over the country, people tightened their belts where they could, but it still hasn't been enough to save them. Families have gone deep into debt to pay for college, to cover serious medical problems, or just to stay afloat a while longer.(vi) And today's young adults may be the first generation in American history to end up, as a group, with less than their parents.(vii)

Remember how up until 1980, 90% of all people-middle class, working people, poor people-got about 70% of all the new income that was created in the economy and the top 10% took the rest? Since 1980, guess how much of the growth in income the 90% got? Nothing. None. Zero. In fact, it's worse than that. The average family not in the top 10% makes less money than a generation ago.(viii) So who got the increase in income over the last 32 years? 100% of it went to the top ten percent. All of the new money earned in this economy over the past generation-all that growth in the GDP-went to the top.(ix) All of it.

That is a huge structural change...

http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=696

[Thinkingabout]

60. I was involved in the union struggles of the 80's, brought on by the trickle down economics of

Reagan which I did not vote for either time. He busted the air traffic controllers union and crap like this continued. Yes, I know about the struggles.

[Autumn]

45. You ignore the first part. The middle class people I know are doing fine.

Bit of a difference between the middle class and the working people. The working poor fall further below that. Where's the concern for the working poor and the working people? By the way, nice try but Hillary said nothing about focusing on working people, her concerns are the middle class and of course the first part, the financial world.

Attacking financial reform is risky and wrong. Better for Congress to focus on jobs and wages for middle class families.

[Thinkingabout]

47. Let me tell you this, i am a part of the working poor, I did not see an exclusion,

I think it is attempt to assist the 90% people, get all the wages increased which has been an issue with Hillary for a long time. She has lived surviving on low income also, she knows our pain.

[Autumn]

49. The exclusion is there. Hillary is an educated woman, she knows the difference between

working class and the middles class. She did not say get ALL the wages increased. We Liberals listen to what is said so please don't switch and play games with words and try to say she said something she didn't. We are smart enough to know when a poster or a politician switches a word. An old saying goes "Don't piss in my ear and tell me it's raining." We can tell the difference rain is cool and refreshing. Piss is warm, yellow and it smells.

If you are a member of the working poor as you say you are. Why are you not yet tired of being overlooked and screwed over so the middle class and the wealthy can have more? What marvelous bone has been tossed to you that you think they are on your side? You won't even get a mention at the SOTU speech.

[Thinkingabout]

53. So if Hillary should get wages up and get some programs which jobs are created are you going to

Refuse the jobs and raises?

[Autumn]

56. OFFS. You really scraped the bottom of your shoe for that question.

I see no reason to even reply to that. You have a nice day. Let me know when Hillary gets wages for the working poor up.

[JDPriestly]

42. "She is using her talents."

That is a generous assumption.

What talents is she using?

And to what extent is she hired for her talent, and to what extent is she hired for her influence or the hope that she has influence. She is paid to speak to wealthy people who want special favors from the government and from Democrats in the government.

She may be doing nothing wrong. But the appearance of corruption is there whether she is or not.

Attorneys often are not worth the money you pay them. But among the things you pay for are a guarantee of confidentiality. An attorney faces ethical review if he or she talks to third parties about your confidences in the attorney. You also pay the attorney to act in your interest and to avoid taking cases or otherwise representations that would conflict with your interests. In other words, when an attorney accepts a fee to represent you, that attorney agrees to limit his work for others who have interests in the matter that oppose yours or that would harm yours.

So when you pay attorney's fees, you pay for a certain degree of loyalty. The problem is that Hillary Clinton wants to be president. She wants to represent us. But she has accepted fees that can be interpreted as intended to hire her to represent the interests of others who may be opposed to us.

Granted this is a problem for all politicians who accept donations and fees from people and interests who oppose the interests of the average American voter or who oppose the interests of the politician's voters.

So Hillary's accepting large speaking fees from corporate interests including Wall Street leaders presents a problem of conflict of interest and of betraying her voters.

Who is she planning to represent? Those who pay her the big bucks or the rest of us?

An attorney represents his client, whether the case is pro bono (no bucks at all) or big bucks. That's the deal.

[RiverLover]

11. No, but she's delivering "fiery" tweets!

Attacking financial reform is risky and wrong. Better for Congress to focus on jobs and wages for middle class families.

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) January 16, 2015

Wow, just makes you tingly all over.

[Thinkingabout]

15. Now this should make you happy.

[RiverLover]

20. Empty rhetoric always does!

[CrispyQ]

30. She has no credibility. Too many dems don't.

It’s time for a revolution: Bankrupt policies, historic losses call for new generation of leaders

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/18/its_time_for_a_revolution_bankrupt_policies_historic_losses_call_for_new_generation_of_leaders/

snip...

It’s a lesson Democrats never learn: Elections turn more on how you govern than on how you campaign. In 2012, pundits wanted Obama to run, Harry Truman-like, against a do-nothing Congress. He couldn’t because Harry Reid ran a do-nothing Senate, blocking any vote he feared might embarrass his caucus. Democrats who never governed as populists ran as populists in 2014 and lost because running on policies you don’t support makes you look like a hypocrite, not a populist.

Clinton has never been a populist. Why should I believe she is one now? She will tweet populist shit for 2 years & then drop the facade & take up with corporate again when elected.

[Autumn]

19. Any democrat who is considering running for the party's nomination for President and

says something like that has no business expecting Democrats to vote for them.

[Jackpine Radical]

24. Congress prolly can't afford her speaking fee.

[onecaliberal]

17. Jay Leno is a republican

[earthside]

29. Undoubtedly a misogynst, too.

And an ageist.

And ... probably not just a republican (sic), but a follower of the Tea Party.







That's how the Hillary 'charm' campaign usually works around here.

[onecaliberal]

32. Not a fan of Hilary but thanks for your false assumption.

He donated to Romney in the 12 election. Have fun in the dust bin.

[earthside]

37. The point is ...

... that the supporters of Hillary almost immediately resort to ad hominem attacks directed towards anyone who questions Hill's inevitability.

It doesn't seem to make any difference who is doing the challenging.

[JoePhilly]

40. And the Hillary haters ...

... will latch on to, and amplify, any criticism ... even if its from a Republican like Leno.

[BillZBubb]

33. Your sarcasm is misplaced. Leno has supported a lot of republicans.

But not the tea party.

[Mike Nelson]

21. I was thinking Jay Leno would like...

...to vote against Warren, rather than vote against Clinton in the general election.

[TheNutcracker]

26. It's true, even here at DU. Hillary threads are just so so, while Liz and Bernie light up the board.

[Man from Pickens]

31. Hillary Clinton is totally fired up

to avoid the issue of obscene tuition hikes at public universities she charges 6 figures for a speech

[RiverLover]

41. Jay is a rethug, so OF COURSE he's wrong.

Here's proof. Check out how "fiery" she is here, just a few months ago~

[JoePhilly]

51. You should write an OP claiming that YOU think Hillary has no "fire".

Stop hiding behind Jay "the Republican" Leno.

Jay is just holding you back.

[Autumn]

52. You should write an OP telling us all about Hillary's fire. I'm sure YOU must see some fire in her.

Somewhere.

[JoePhilly]

58. Why? I did not write an OP claiming she had fire.

You however, wrote an OP about how Hillary had NO FIRE, and you now COWER behind the very serious political expert, Jay Leno.

[Autumn]

61. You have no reading comprehension. Please post the name of the person who wrote the OP.

As always you go off on a tangent before reading the OP. This is a message board, where people who are members here find interesting articles from the media and post them. It would be plagiarism for me to CLAIM I had written the article and no such claim was made, other than by you. Again, I or no one else in this thread wrote the article.

[RiverLover]

62. Wow. wow....

Thanks for responding / dealing with this poster so well, Autumn!

[Autumn]

63. I don't believe any supporter of Liz's would go into the Hillary group and behave in

such a crass manner to her supporters as her supporters have been doing in our group.

[libdem4life]

55. Not a Hillary fan, but think she had to work to get rid of that "fire" to become Sec of State.

Think she's rightfully tired and should retire. Even her daughter worried about her (unappreciated by many Dems) Elizabeth doesn't have that baggage and Bernie's starting to get press. There is some will she/won't she and Independent/Democrat conversation. They are definitely getting attention. Count me on the Warren/Sanders team.

[abakan]

59. Jay Leno never had any "fire"

So it would be hard for him to recognize in others. Besides he's looking at her through GOP colored glasses and we know how accurate those are.