Comments on: Hillary Clinton, Fratricidal Maniac
The New Republic: Hillary Clinton's Continued Run Is Damaging The Democrats' Chances
Add a Comment See all 1394 Comments
- Have you read the article about Hilary''''s campaign? It turns out she runs it and did run it like Bush--replete with crazy loyalty, insularity and secrets--just like him. Maybe they are soul mates and don''''t know it--or maybe they do--which is why she seldom cast a vote against most devious things he wanted. She probably thought "yeah. That will come in pr-e-t-t-y handy...when I am Emperor...er...King, er queen...er [fvck me], I mean -- President."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by b-easy63 at 12:13 PM : Mar 10, 2008
Been fixing lunch.
No,I haven''t.Is it on here?bBefore I look at it though,I want to know if it''s something that''s going to sicken me.I''m in a fairly good mood today,and I don''t want to flock it up.LOL - Reply to this comment
- Such is life, I''''m currently anticipating voting for McCain given the fact Obama is ineffective at responding to HRC''''s continual trashing of the Dem party and her continual whining and sniveling about how hard it is being a woman.
Posted by tuckerndfw at 11:45 AM : Mar 10, 2008
Now. I have to admit to considering he is too passive to be President. Americans don''t mind a good, decent person, but we would mind, if that person is only these things because they are too weak to stand up effectively to anyone.
Obama better get tough fast. Because though I deplore her tactics--I can''t help admiring her tenacity and chutzpah. If Obama does not want to lose ground or get floated that he is indeed a pretty boy lightweight with bs dream talk--he better show some grit and the ability to put Hilary in her place. He walks a fine line due to voter back lash though. FAce it, any way is a gamble--But Obama: by and large, most women LOATHE a passive man. No matter how idealistic. It takes a special woman to want or accept a weak man. Sort of the mommy or I need a project for life, type.
So get busy acting strong or get picked off. I''m starting to lose patience too. - Reply to this comment
- Let''s take off the gloves Hillary. Obama wisely won''t do it because people love a woman who is a victim, even if it''s politically fabricated on her part as a strategy to get to the White House. People are sympathetic and sensitive toward her after her political-surrogate husband "didn''t have ***" with Monica and psychologically and emotionally abused her. Anyone who goes after her too hard, touches the fabricated, political victim hot-button and will get burned. Hillary suffers from post-traumatic-stress syndrome.
Her "I''m a survivor at all costs", victimize-me-once shame-on-you; twice-shame-on-me attitude has driven her to become a thuggish, muggish personality and a ruthless, brutal politician. She''s angry and wants retribution by defeating a man, any man for the highest office in the U.S. That feeds right into her self-righteous, give-me-justice-because-I-deserve-it belief. And it shows up in her dominant, "always kick their *** and let them know who''s boss" angry persona. She''s a political hit-woman and would have done well working for Al Capone.
Do you think for a minute she''s going to bludgeon and torture the Republican''s into submission by constantly cutting off their - limbs - with her iron, egoic will - like she''s trying to do with Obama, McCain and all perceived "enemies" of Clinton? Not! - Reply to this comment
- Have you read the article about Hilary''s campaign? It turns out she runs it and did run it like Bush--replete with crazy loyalty, insularity and secrets--just like him. Maybe they are soul mates and don''t know it--or maybe they do--which is why she seldom cast a vote against most devious things he wanted. She probably thought "yeah. That will come in pr-e-t-t-y handy...when I am Emperor...er...King, er queen...er [fvck me], I mean -- President."
- Reply to this comment
- You know B,that almost sounds better than him winning the nomination.You know they''''re going to twist his arm to put Medusa on the ticket as veep.
Posted by jesterbelle at 12:05 PM : Mar 10, 2008
Yep. They might as well just turn around and plunge the knife in his back now, than wait for Hilary to do it. At least they''d do one clean stroke instead of death by a thousands of microscopic, untraceable back to Hilary and Bill--cuts.
Hilary was a Republican you know. Her entire family was/is? She was a Goldwater girl. She retains a certain streak not only for ruthlessness, but for having no respect for any behavior nice or not--that does not net a win. You win--and how is left up to the whiners and goody two shoes--to her and Bill--it''s not about integrity or anything so lofty (who cares about that stuff) it is not about honesty (they don''t have it and their marriage is rock solid) it is about having a goal--and come hell or high water--achieving it--and morality and conscience be damned. - Reply to this comment
- THE PRESS: That was Senator Obama, folks, former Democrat Presidential nominee, now running mate of GOP hopeful John McCAin. God Bless America and Goodnight.
LOL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by b-easy63 at 11:52 AM : Mar 10, 2008
You know B,that almost sounds better than him winning the nomination.You know they''re going to twist his arm to put Medusa on the ticket as veep. - Reply to this comment
- THE PRESS: That was Senator Obama, folks, former Democrat Presidential nominee, now running mate of GOP hopeful John McCAin. God Bless America and Goodnight.
LOL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by b-easy63 at 11:52 AM : Mar 10, 2008
You know B,that almost sounds better than him winning the nomination.You know they''re going to twist his arm to put Medusa on the ticket as veep. - Reply to this comment
- It would serve her right,the way her campaign blew his comments about Reagan all out of proportion.
Posted by jesterbelle at 11:49 AM : Mar 10, 2008
That is not all he was doing. He was stating a truth. Rightly or wrongly, Reagan put forth a paradigm as did the GOP in 1994. Not saying they were good but they did beat the Dem platforms: Prior to 1994, the dems had only one platform--we will take care of everyone and spend lots of money.
After 1994, realizing they could be beaten, they were scared to be or stand for anything--instead trying to be little Republicans then switching to liberals, then switching to chicken hawks--which ever way the wind blew. IN trying to be all things and nothing and being willing to not take a stand until the polls said overwhelmingly what Americans wanted. They rendered themselves weak and not credible. They failed to extend a new idea--a new paradigm. A change.
The first step of any change is not action. It is the idea, the second step is vision, the 3rd step is inspiration and the 4th step is the will/determination to roll up our sleeves and achieve it--but it is the last that is the clincher: to hold onto the vision and persevere. Will is the gas for the engine (inspiration) of will.
It doesn''t take the place of driving a car somewhere--but you can''t get anywhere without gas. And you won''t have a destination without vision.
All components are needed to bring about change--and none are unworthy or deserve ridicule. - Reply to this comment
- OBAMA: Well...(chuckle) You know I don''t subscribe to that "enemy" nonsense but remember Pat, I''m a Harvard man--I always try to seek out and go to the best school when it comes to my education. Senator Clinton repeatedly made it clear that the person with the most experience was more Presidential--so I picked the most Presidential of the two. I mean, Hilary is likeable enough...but face it, decades in the Arms Services and on the various Congressional committees sort of trumps the Children Defense Fund and trips with Sinbad--though I hasten to add--I love children and appreciate the causes and love comedians too--but if one must go back to school--if it can be done, you try to go with the best.
THE PRESS: Wow. Well, that certainly will give Senator Clinton something to reflect on. Thank you for coming on Senator Obama
OBAMA: Yes, Pat. I believe it will. thank you for having me.
THE PRESS: That was Senator Obama, folks, former Democrat Presidential nominee, now running mate of GOP hopeful John McCAin. God Bless America and Goodnight.
LOL - Reply to this comment
- What if.....
THE PRESS: Senator Obama, why did you defect from your own party and decide to be the running mate of the GOP candidate?
Obama: Well, Pat...besides my sincere belief in bipartisanship, I reflected on Senator''s Clinton''s comments about my lack of experience and need to learn in a junior position to President, then I considered that McCain''s experience was far more substantiative and Executive in scope and years than Hilary''s. so I decided that if I must seek a mentor, why not achieve several objectives like bringing the country and voters together and continuing my political education all at the same time.
THE PRESS: Very interesting position Senator, but you know, many are saying you did this out of pique to spite the party for sort of --you know, stealing the nomination from you.
OBAMA: Not at all Pat. I considered that my party gave the nomination to who they thought the stronger candidate was and that my lack of experience was my most negative factor.
THE PRESS: So why not Hilary? Why John McCain, a member of the GOP the sworn enemy of the Dems?
see next post - Reply to this comment
Author Thomas Friedman on Obama's Afghanistan plan and the war on terror.
