Letters to the Editor
-
Hillary is toast
I agree with parts of this article. Hillary has a huge negative poll riding her tail. She will never be president of the United States. Not only will she lose to McCain, but huge blocks of people who support Obama will either sit out the GE or vote for a third party. Hillary has so alienated Democrats that even those who voted for her, now have buyer's remorse. This is anecdotal, but all my friends and colleagues who voted for her, now regret that they did so, bar none.
Reason: Dirty campaign tactics, Lying about her experience, McCain overtures, Iraq war, win at any cost tactics.
-
After Her Bosinia Lie, Salon Has the Guts to Ignore That Story and Run This Nonsense, Like the Week Is Business as Usual?
She's over. She lied. Directly. No "misspeaking." She wasn't unclear. She gave specific, dramatic details that were thoroughly false. And, as she claimed to be a First Lady under enemy fire, that means she was lying about an issue of national security. There is no way for her to live this down. Politically she's a dead duck.
-
@ Christopher 1988
I agree, but the far more damning point comes if we concede her point: let's say she actually did evade sniper fire.
The simple question then becomes, so what?
This is germane to "experience" how, exactly?
Any Clinton supporters or anyone else with a plausible answer to this question, I'm all ears.
I simply fail to see how that anecdote about sniper fire, true or false, is relevant to the argument she's adducing it to.
If Sinbad was with her, running for cover, would that likewise qualify him to be commander-in-chief?
Or Chelsea?
Really, I just don't get why the premise of the anecdote hasn't been examined in the first place.
-
@ Christopher1988
"She's over. She lied. Directly. No "misspeaking." She wasn't unclear. She gave specific, dramatic details that were thoroughly false. And, as she claimed to be a First Lady under enemy fire, that means she was lying about an issue of national security. There is no way for her to live this down. Politically she's a dead duck."
A First Lady visiting a country during a US Military action and embellishing her story is an issue of 'National Security'? Oh man...you have got to be joking. I think the 'embellishing' here is on your part Mr. Christopher1988. National Security? You mean like when Bush went to Iraq at Thanksgiving with the fake turkey? 'Hey Man...that's a fake turkey. That's lying about an issue of national...er um...fake turkeys"
See media kool-aid. Drink media kool-aid. They're playing games with your mind and you're letting them.
-
Ahh, here it is..
Madden apparently phoned this one in... I can name a few things the Repugs could use against a potential Clinton nominee. They were easy to find, really..
Here's a few peeks at what her "good friend" John and his Repub cohorts have in store for Mrs. Clinton:
•Hillary can't be a feminist because she didn't leave Bill after the Monica affair. She is obviously so power hungry that she'll ignore her own husband's infidelity to get elected. Extrapolate any personality flaws you care to from that.
•Hillary is a closet lesbian. Just what is personal aide Huma Abedin's job anyway? Stress relief specialist? Extrapolate any personality flaws you care to from that.
•Peter Paul vs. Clinton: nothing like trying to run a general election campaign while being sued for wrongfully taking $1.5 million in campaign donations. Extrapolate any professional flaws you care to from that.
•Mehmet Celebi, one of her "HillRaisers" produced a film called "Valley of the Wolves: Iraq" - a 2006 movie that depicted a Jewish doctor removing the vital organs of civilian prisoners to sell to wealthy transplant patients overseas. Why does Hillary hate the Jews? Extrapolate any professional flaws you care to from that while remembering that we're looking at a 10,000 vote Florida margin of error in the general.
•Whitewater, Travelgate, Paula Jones, Lewinsky, Mark Rich et al. Progressives may think these "scandals" are water under the bridge, but a majority of Repubs believe they are not and will be using them anew in the Fall.
•The Vince Foster "Murder", selling secrets to the Chinese, what Sandy Berger was shoving down his pants in the National Archives: Progressives may know these as distortions or outright lies, but a majority of Repubs believe they are true and will use them to turn out the base come November.
•Crying won't help. Calling the attacks "below the belt" or other "poor me" defenses will no longer work, because Repubs don't care and, honestly, they WANT to make her cry.
•There will be a 527 that will run a non-stop ad with Hillary comparing herself favorably to McCain this fall. That will be all it takes to reassure the soft 20%ers in the middle that a McCain presidency wouldn't be too bad.
Thats' what she's up against this fall. Most of these points have no credibility and might be believed by 5% of the electorate. But when you're starting at a rock-solid 49% unfavorable and an even worse trustworthy %, you don't have 5% to give.
Now was that hard?
-
She's Given them all the Bullets and They're Loaded For Bear
The Republican establishment (which has learned not to trust me but can't help trying to take me down with them) has very carefully calculated the odds with Clinton vs. Obama and know very, very well which one they can take down with greater ease. She's already provided all the ammunition and she keeps on doing it. She is, unfortunately, so simultaneously desperate and arrogant that only One Big Screwup (which probably just recently happened) is all it will take to break loose the dammed-up "forgotten stuff" from those eight years we lived with the Clintons under seige.
There is a huge payback to be had here, something that Obama cannot possibly compete with (nor should he want to), and so the Republican mainstream has effectively backed off Hillary so that she will continue to stroke her presumptive (if delusional) opponent in November with comments like her "Commander in Chief" Tourette's Moment Number...what... 78? She just keeps on saying things that are being collected and integrated with the existing Clintonia database. You know, that stuff they all "forgot"?
This is not a criticism of Hillary Clinton as a person (although it certainly is an observation on her political acumen or lack of it): it is a statement of fact about the Republican Party in its present incarnation. This is what will happen. She will get beaten within an inch of her political life. Obama has been incredibly slick up til now, even when one counts the "Crazy Uncle" crap, which is essentially unusable to the opposition. Yeah, I know, but really, it is unuseable. Hide and watch.
This time I'm not simply promoting my chosen candidate, I am pointing out that the alternative would spell disaster for all of us, Democrat and Republican, who care more about country than party or ideology. Hillary Clinton is busy driving the nails into her own coffin lid. This is not a good way to run a campaign. Crazy Uncles can't even come close to doing the kind of damage the hubris-driven Clinton campaign has (and will), and if she does win, while I will vote for her, I will do it with that feeling one gets when the elevator stops between floors.