In fact, in 2003, the flyspecking got so nit-picky that the Carters elected to run a majority of their routine Pres Office expenses through the Carter Center than have feds pick up the tab.

There’s a good reference for the gross 2007/2008 numbers at

http://www.gsa.gov/graphics/staffoffices/former-presidents.htm

It may not answer your specific question because the feds won’t close the books on 2007 until late October 2008… but the reference does help provide some sunshine.

Frankly, I don’t think we ought to be spending a single federal dime beyond moving expenses after these guys leave office. They’re a virtual small business enterprise within themselves… long gone are the days when Harry Truman had to worry about paying the light bill in Independence, MO.

PS> did you read about HarryTruman’s daughter dying today?

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/01/29/ap4587471.html

The entire “former presidents’ office budgets” only amounts to $2.8m and that includes travel expenses.

There is also a reason that the Democrats are the party that opposes any means of vote counting other than paper ballots — which are the easiest to forge.

Regards,
Peter H.

I am confident that if Hillary Clinton is nominated that the Democrats will fall in line behind her, regardless of protestations to the contrary. Hillary Clinton is without credibility, humility, or substance. She returns nothing but her gender and a history of slime and corruption back to her husband’s Oval Office.

I hope the Republicans can overcome her pandering campaign and the onslaught of dead, illegal and alzheimer votes that the Democrats round up in their “get out the vote” drives. If your party were a cleaner operation, I would be more comfortable. But with Jessie Jackson, Rahm Emmanuel, Al Sharpton, George Soros, Tom Cruise, Charlie Trie, and a world of other ‘ethically challenged” thugs and clowns on the Board of Directors, I am forced to realize that many vote for circuses over common sense. I suspect that you might be among them.

Will this great Democrat disgust for the Clintons mean a landslide for McCain or Romney because of the huge Democrat crossover vote?

I am not asking about Obama. Just the hated Clintons. What’s the answer?

Americans United is a 501(c)4 organization under Internal Revenue Service regulations. That means it can raise money in unlimited amounts and because its target is Bush, not a candidate for federal office, it is not governed by the Federal Election Commission.

The Republicans have exactly the same tool at their disposal. While the Democrats can make Bush look dumb and dumber, the Republicans can remind the world that Bill Clinton is slimy and slimier.

Democrats hate “swiftboating.” That is the process of telling the truth about a skunk who says he is a lion. You can slime Bush and keep the pitchforks and torches rabble stirred up, but when you “swiftboat” Bill Clinton you remind everyone that the two of them are liars, opportunists and shameless.

The mud thrown at Bush may tarnish the party, but the truth thrown at Bill Clinton sticks to Hillary like glue.

But trust me – at the end of the day, we will know who they voted for.

And it ain’t Obama.

Regards,
Peter H.

That’s pretty a pretty friggin’ hysterical response considering the original post contained a link to the New York Times and the article itself refers to other investigations by the Washington Post. In fact, the entire piece by Frank Rich is extremely critical of the Clintons. Guess I can’t keep up…is The New York Times no longer part of the ever-evil MSM?

The Clintons are famous for their (conveniently) faulty memories. Does anyone remember how many times Hillary testified that she couldn’t remember anything about anything during the Whitewater hearings?

MSM: “Nothing here folks. Move along.”

Regards,
Peter H.

Maybe Jessie Jackson showed them how to do it without any source of income.