Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Victor Davis Hanson :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Clinton Albatross
by Victor Davis Hanson
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


If polls are accurate, Sen. Hillary Clinton’s once-sure bid for the Democratic presidential nomination is now not so sure. Her wide lead vanished without warning in Iowa and New Hampshire — and maybe elsewhere as well.

Was it due to her waffling on issues like the Iraq war and driver’s licenses for illegal aliens? Or was her campaign too smug — like that of similarly sputtering Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani — assuming she should be coronated by the polls and media rather than having to fight for the nomination tooth and nail?

Or is it just that her upbeat, confident rival, Barack Obama — with a little help from Oprah — is surging as he bests her in back-and-forth quips?

Hillary’s campaign is so stalled that her advisers have tried dredging up Obama’s kindergarten essays and his admitted drug use. And now they’re resorting to flying in Bill Clinton to save the day. Some polls and conventional wisdom suggest he may yet restore his wife’s fortunes.

But Bill’s not exactly a fireman. He may instead throw gasoline on the fire.

First, his vote-getting abilities are suspect. He never won 50 percent of the vote in a presidential election. That fact and the embarrassment of his impeachment were why Vice President Al Gore kept him away from his 2000 campaign. True, Bill’s presence is said to resonate with African-American voters, but most may prefer Obama anyway, as polls now show in South Carolina.

Second, Bill Clinton often comes across as a narcissist. He talks the longest and loudest about himself. It is almost impossible for first-person Bill to praise Hillary without adding, “When I was president” or “I had a vision.”

Third, Bill cannot always distinguish truth from fiction. In his rescue mission for Hillary, he has already weighed in on the Iraq war — in which he falsely claimed that he was against it from the very beginning.

Most recently, in a dig at Obama’s lack of experience, Bill claims that he nixed an earlier run for the presidency in 1988 because he saw that he wasn’t yet ready for the job. But the real reason more likely was worry about the less-than-desirable and now well-known aspects of his personal life. That tendency to dwell on — and fudge — his own past earns splashy headlines but takes attention away from his wife.

Fourth, Americans may not be comfortable with a spouse of an ex-president running for commander-in-chief. Alabama’s governor George Wallace once had his wife, Lurleen, run as his replacement when he was no longer eligible. Despite Lurleen’s victory, that staged succession seemed fishy — sort of like the current husband/wife switcheroo of former and current president Mr. and Mrs. Kirchner down in Argentina.

The Clintons need to tread carefully so that Hillary does not appear a mere bridge for Bill’s drive for a third term. When he steps in to talk nonstop in their co-defense, it appears that she’s not quite in full control of her own destiny.

If Hillary is elected president, will Bill likewise butt in when the Congress or foreign leaders are mean to his wife or her rankings tank? The last thing the would-be Democratic nominee wants is more “Bill Clinton Makes the Case for His Wife” headlines like we saw all last week.

Fifth, Hillary’s campaign can’t control Bill. Ex-presidents don’t exactly have small egos, and Clinton, something of a loose cannon, is bound to shoot his mouth off whenever and at whatever he pleases. He now brags that Hillary will send him out with George H.W. Bush to undo the damage of Bush Senior’s son, the current president.

And in a recent interview with talk-show host Charlie Rose, Bill embarrassingly gushed that Hillary “is so good.” Then he went on to trash Obama — while denying he was doing just that. No wonder that Hillary’s frantic campaign handlers were said to have been offstage trying to cut short the Rose interview.

Bill also claims that Hillary has already been “vetted” — hinting that Obama, in contrast, hasn’t been fully investigated and may well have more skeletons that someone may uncover. Yet part of Hillary’s current trouble is the public’s anger over her campaign’s past unsavory use of just that rhetorical trick: digging up dirt on opponents while claiming you’re not.

If Bill keeps this sloppiness up, some might almost wonder whether he really wants his wife to win — and thereby have her overshadow his own presidency by being both the first woman president and the Clinton who did not suffer impeachment due to self-inflicted scandal.

Hillary may yet end up the Democratic nominee. But only if she alone convinces America — and Wild Bill — that she’s running for her first, not his third, term.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.

Be the first to read Victor Davis Hanson's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Some People Just Love Being Lied To...
and let's face it, the hildahag isn't very good at it but the dope from Hope is...

Showing Scorn Its Own Face
The real thing that is going to doom Hillary Clinton is just what Rush Limbaugh was brave emough to say out loud -- Americans, particularly American men, do not want to see a late middle-aged woman grow old in public. Besides which Mrs. Clinton reminds everybody of the school teacher they hated, the one with the shrill voice and the ascerbic way of putting them down, and the way of jerking them around ... the teacher that drained all the air and light out of the classroom and made everyone feel that life was not worth living.

Well, that and the image of her Peter Pan husband once again filling the White House with Chinese arms dealers and nubile bimbos that Hillary would now be too busy to evict and trash.

There are plenty of people in the USA that really do not want their country to turn into a Reality Show. And no matter how much they may hate the current administration, the idea of becoming a laughingstock for the next 4 years gives them pause.

Mrs. Clinton is neither . . .
. . . running for Bill's third term nor her own first. She (they) see(s) 1/20/09 as the beginning of THEIR third term. Thus it has always been in this marriage of convenience, where the only love and lust is for power.

Impeachment is Impeachment
If Hillary is elected, she will in all likelihood still end up being impeached because of Bill's behavior, and I doubt very much that the American people will care whether it was brought on by a self-inflicted scandal or not.

We must always remember that an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives says it is and that as president Hillary will be viewed as responsible for Bill's actions. This in itself may explain why, according to Bill, her number one priority upon taking office would be to send him out of the country, but it still would not remove the risk to her; indeed, it may actually increase the risk, since Bill's ability to behave seems to be directly related to his proximity to Hillary.

Go, Bill, Go!!!!
If Bill is good for dem candidates, he would not have lost Congress in '94. Can anyone inform us who, other than himself, has benefited from Bubba?

In a few weeks we will see Hillary throwing lamps again. Maybe this time she will have better aim.

to justpaul
you are correct in that "high crimes and misdemeanors" can be whatever the house decides it is - however, the House will be majority (D) so it is EXTREMELY unlikely Hillary could do anything wrong enough to bring impeachment.
®

Hillary's Albatross


Hillary is still singing the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" tune (all the Dems, really), not realizing it is her swan song.

The only issue I have ever seen 75-80% of Americans agree on is stopping illegal aliens. Any GOP candidate that is credible (not Rudy, McCain, or Huckabee) on this issue could win in a landslide.

The biggest problem is the RNC has sold it's soul to the cheap labor express. They are determined to nominate an amnesty candidate, even if it means losing the election. Stupid Party, indeed.

Jakota
Unless Nancy Pelosi gets her head out of her a$$ and actually accomplishes something next year, it's quite possible that the House will no longer have a Democratic majority come January 20, 2009. They ran on the promise that they would clean up Washington and all they have done since taking power in January is to make things murkier and worse. Don't count on that majority lasting too much longer with Nancy at the helm.

justpaul
history tells us congress is essentially impotent during the year of any presidential election. But the incompetant red nancy and land deal reid have proven even owrsew leaders of congress than they were when they led the obstructionist minority. Even with the honeymoon period after congress opened session nothing was accomplished and the draining of hte alledged congressional swamp of corruption has only gotten worse. Pelosi's pet monkey, pork barrel spender, murtha runs around out of control. Plus it appears the president has finally learned about the veto and the repubs in congress are not going to give in to easy dim victories over legislation. Why should they. The dims wrote the book on obstruction and the repubs need only borrow that playbook all the while crediting pelosi and reid for developing that policy.

bubba as albatross
even as a president he was both a loose cannon and an ineffective leader. He loved the perks of the office just hated working the long hours and dealing with all the pesky details of actually doing his job. If we are going to hear about a second coming of the clintons, let them run on their historic record and forget the misplaced nostalgia that is illusionary to begin with. But should the clintons get the nomination all the old scandals will again surface as they have never been fully investigated or satisfactorily explained by either clinton. But if the missus clinton is running on her experience as being as equal partner during the previous two terms let's see some paper trail proving her claims. But more impoprtantly the miossus clinton has acted as bubba's chief enabler and attack dog during his many sexual misadventures. She has never stood up to him in the past exactly how is she going to keep him on the sidelines once he realizes his total and easy access to the white house. Who doubts that his ego isn't going to pass up the opportunity to rectify his stained legacy from his years in the white house. The old story of the elephant in the room that people know is there but won't acknowledge will not apply should the clinton's return. He will be the force to be reconded with in any setting and the missus clinton's history proves she wilts and defers in his presense. I am not sure the voters at this point in time are ready to run that risk

wildwest: youre pretty funny...
I was just reading your post and I couldnt stop
laughing because your post is is quite humorous, even though you dont intend it to be..

dude, Bill Clinton kicked repub/con arse for 8
years...he got elected twice and if he had run against Bush#2 he would have won again. and this has got to stick in your craw...Despite all the millions repubs spent investigating him and a failed impeachment trial, CLINTON LEFT OFFICE WITH A 65% JOB APPROVAL RATING...

The Clintons have NEVER been indicted, convicted at trial or jailed for all of your bs scandals
and supposed criminal acts you accuse them of.
They both have become multi millionaires.
They are the most influential Democrats in the U.S. and Senator Clinton is poised to win the
POTUS next year 08.

So sit there and stew...I'll enjoy watching you cook..keep up the hillarious post like above.
lol


Shrinque writes:
Mrs. Clinton is neither . . .
. . . running for Bill's third term nor her own first. She (they) see(s) 1/20/09 as the beginning of THEIR third term. Thus it has always been in this marriage of convenience, where the only love and lust is for power.



"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president".
Hillary Clinton

The biggest problem I see
if Hillary is elected is the difficulty for appointees in knowing exactly who is in charge. Cabinet members will probably discover Bill trying to do their job.

Our republic is not set up for co-presidents.!!!

Hillary has done what?

Hillary has started running ads saying she is a real doer. What has she done? Ok-she had one pudgy faced plump daughter and a philanderer for a husband. I bet that has happened to a lot of Yale law school graduates.

Give me the short list. Things done, not just her carping whines!

left angle
rather than your typical useless blather make your case for supporting the clinton's. Bubba is ancient history. If you chose to defgend him why not illuminate his brilliant career as a leader. That women liked him is not measure of his being an effective leader. Is your side so proud of him that they coninually flaunt of record of little achievment. Approval rating don't make a legacy. A presidential record of accomplishment is how history judges. Your hero will be remembered for be an unfaithful philanderer and for being impeached. The shame for poor pathetic bubba that even with his alledged popularity he never understood that a president is elected to run the country, to make a difference for the people who live here. Bubba was more interested in the perks of the office than in governing. For your infor. Under his watch the dims lost the majorities they had when bubba first enterted office. The repubs forced bubba to sign welfare reform and put the budget under control. Exactly how did bubba have these great victories when all he can fall back on is this mostalgic view that people liked him. Prove your case that he was effective and show how he made a difference for the people of america. We are still stuck with his disaster in bosnis/kosovo, haiti is still a disaster and he was on the job when somolia blew up with our forces there. If you libs can continue to blame bush for 9/11 bubba can take the blame for all the disasters that happened on his watch.

Ray: on Hillary..
you know it really says a lot about the ignorance of people like yourself on Hillary
Clintons background in politics/law...
instead of making yourself look ignorant, do youself a favor and actually do some research before you speak, because reading your post makes me think you dont have the slightest idea of what you are talking about.

Left Angle
Your delusional predictions crack me up!

The more the American people get to know Hillarump, the less they like her!

I hope she gets the nomination -- she'll get creamed by either Mitt or Rudy.

ex wyomingite: If it strikes you
as sad, it's because your opinion is clouded
by your personal feelings of hatred and probably envy of the Clintons...I'm just telling it like it is and you know it..even Bill Clintons worst
critics acknowlege that he is the most brilliant
politician of his time and Hillary is no slouch.

what you dont understand is that dems/libs dont view the Clintons in the negative manner you repubs/consdo..

What we admire about them is that they fight back against repub/con intransigence, use their negativity against them and come out WINNERS practically EVERYTIME...

Question:

When is the last time republicans actually defeated a Clinton in a election?


Bad Andy: get real...
Rudy Guiliani?

this guys own children hate him..
he has been married 3 times
he cross dresses (wait till those pictures come out, especially him dressed up as Marily Monroe
and in heels and fishnet hose dancing with the
rockettes) and every other word that comes out
his mouth is "you know on 9-11-01 I did this"

Mitt Romney?

the Flip flopper, repubs call a fake conservative RINO? even the stauchest
repubs/cons question his Morman religion.

as long as you repubs got the Bush/Iraq albatross around your necks you can forget
about it in 2008.

left angle
your continued reference to clinton victorties is at best totally empty. Bush 1 ran as though he didn't want to get re-elected and the repubs never took bubba seriously. His re-election only proves that incumbants rarely loose re-election and the repubs ran a wak candidatge. That isn't to blame bubba but show both parties resort to a system of seniority rather than chose the strongest candidate. But bubba's succesor alldull running as a third term for bubba and matched with your heroes great popularity still lost to a weak opponent. The missus clinton was in a tough race for the sneate when guliani dropped out for health reasons and was replaced late in the race by a relatively unknown congressman from long island. In her re-election bid she spent $40 million to win against another unknown candidate. So rather than insist the clintons ran great campaign they ran campaigns that as luck would have it turned out against weak or dis-interested camdidates. No one can blame the clinton's because the repubs used poor choices for candidates. But in this go around the missus clinton is finally up against two far more formidable candidates, both who offer something she lacks. Both are likable and offers a change from the policies she champions. These champions of yours are finally facing strong competition. The polls that you libs claimed early on showed her invincible are now showing her vulnerable. At this point the libs now want to discount the same polsters they hailed earlier. Again make your case why she should get electerd. You have to date failed to make any case why people shopuld support her

wildwest: excuses...
the bottom line record is that both clintons won initially and got re-elected...a win is a win.
you dont see any astericks attached to it..

all that other bs you're talking about is excuses for LOSING to them and poor ones at that.

you know it really doesnt matter to me wheter
its hillary, obama or edwards as the dem prez candidate. I just totally believe that a DEMOCRAT IS going to win the POTUS in 2008 and that dems will maintain control of Congress also.
THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE..

Hillary
I've followed these columns for quite some time. The writers have anointed her as the winner for quite a while and have spent great time and effort at blasting away at the Clintons. Now that Obama is ahead I haven't seen a single column against him. Interesting!

left angle
you missed the point. The victor cannot be faulted that the opponents ran weak candidates. But that doesn't translate into making them strong candidates. Perhaps if the msm did their real job and investigated all candidates the public would be better served. That the msm claims to be by some 90% dim and theat they support and vote for dims doesn't assure the puiblic they are impartial, which nis what the media is supposed to be

wildwest...no point missed
again a win is a win is a win.
bottom line the clintons both won initally and
got re-elected. it's in the history books. end of story.

politics is a rough game and not for the feint of heart..in a way i admire anyone that goes thru that process.

blaming the media is more excuses to me and I really wish you repubs/cons would get off that and accept responsibility for your own mistakes and gaffes.

what's interesting is that you think hillary clinton is a weak candidate and unqualified to be potus, but in your mind you KNOW she has a great shot at winning. yes or no? lol

Iowa Polls
Nice to see VDH start his piece with a fabrication (alright, a lie), one that has been obvious since the summer. VDH says:" Her wide lead vanished without warning in Iowa and New Hampshire" when he knows, or could research (he is a renowned historian?) that polls in Iowa have shown the race to be very close at least since the summer.

Here's the WaPo/ABC News poll results for Iowa:
12/17/07 11/18/07 7/31/07
Barack Obama 33 30 27
Hillary Clinton 29 26 26



Similar poll results have been available all over, including PollingReports.com.

On the national front, the latest poll from the site I cited shows HRC with a 22 point lead (WSJ).

Oh that Victor, how much else does he just pull out of thin air?

koohand: the repub/con press
punditry/ echo chamber absolutley detest
Sen. Hillary Clinton..if you have noticed, even here in th there have been a least a half a dozen or more columns all devoted to the same theme:

"Hillary once seen as invincible, in now vulnerable and it's the beggining of the end of her candidacy if she doesnt win in Iowa/NewHampshire"

its a bunch of bs...it's more wishful thinking than anything else...

How about "none of the above"?
"Was it due to her waffling on issues like the Iraq war and driver’s licenses for illegal aliens? Or was her campaign too smug — like that of similarly sputtering Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani — assuming she should be coronated by the polls and media rather than having to fight for the nomination tooth and nail?"

How about the fact that most of the voting public despises her?

How about the fact that most of the voting public knows she is a crooked, vicious, lying, blackmailing, power-monger?

Instead of questioning how a woman who was said to be a "sure-bid" could be trailing in the polls, Hanson and other polemicists should be explaining why her candidacy was ever considered a "sure-bid" when all of the same polls that showed her "leading" also showed that 49-51% of the public said they would NEVER vote for her.

What part of "never" do polemicists not understand?

wiseone
when the msm which is no more than a wing of the dim party took the initial stand they wanted her elected and failed in their job to fully vette any story concerning the clintons. The msm has a long history of being clinton enablers. During the failed heinz/kerry run some 90% plus of the msm are both card carrying dims and actively and publically support dim candidates. They claimed they were responsible for a 15 point ewdge for heinz/kerry. BDS is alive and well in the msm and they are looking for a return on their investment in the clintons. But perhaps a clinton meltdown will change that dynamic to some degree. There was always the chance that heinz/kerry might have still won the election. If it becomes apparent that oblahma is getting the nod, the msm will leave the clintons like rats off a sinking ship

Hillary
is as described earlier...a witch. Every cackle she utters turns people off more. And Bill is a sad caricature from yesterday...an aging lounge lizard and pathological liar who has been found out.

Please please, anybody but these two again.

wiseone: facts and opinions
you said:

"How about the fact that most of the voting public despises her?"

"How about the fact that most of the voting public knows she is a crooked, vicious, lying, blackmailing, power-monger?"

"the same polls that showed her "leading" also showed that 49-51% of the public said they would NEVER vote for her."

Those are REPUB/CON SLANTED OPINIONS, NOT FACTS...

One more thing..I find it really a sick thing that people such as yourself can have such a visceral, personal hatred/opinion of a person THEY NEVER MET...you need to check yourself or seek phychiatric help. you are indeed emotionally unstable..the thought of hillary clinton as POTUS is driving you CRAZY..LMAO

Hey, Left Dangle
Wildwest is right, Bubba was an accident of history. He had no competition for the nomination in his own party, GHWB raised taxes and ran with no platform(or conviction), and Ross Perot syphoned off enough votes to cost Bush a victory. Even Bubba could not screw up that election.

And by the time of the '96 election, the Reagain economy was in such full flower that nothing could harm it, including the largest tax increase in American history. And who does the GOP nominate but Bob Dole. Another lay-up election, but another one that Bubba could not get 50% of the vote.

Some mandates! If you think the Clintoons are such winners, care to place a wager on HRC winning the White House?,or getting the nomination??? I'll cover all that you can handle.

acceptreality: your name says it all
and thats exactly what you need to do about the
clintons...bottom line: a win is a win is a win.
its in the history books, no astericks..end of story..ACCEPT REALITY...

I'll take you up on that bet anyday the wild card being the twin albatross for repubs/cons
PREZ BUSH/IRAQ....there is no way I can lose.


Left Dangle
Talk's cheap; it takes money to buy whiskey.

Let me know how to formalize the bet.

Edwards Love-Child Story
Is this the work of Hillary Clinton with Edwards surging? What should Edwards do?

HP-The National Enquirer has gone political in their most recent issue, alleging that John Edwards has fathered a love-child with a filmmaker who once worked on a series of webisodes for his One America Committee. Rumors of the affair between Edwards and the filmmaker, a 43-year-old divorcee named Rielle Hunter, have been denied by both parties.

Now, as the Enquirer has published photos of a clearly pregnant Hunter, she has gone on the record confirming that she is pregnant but denying that Edwards is the father. She claims that the biological father is Edwards operative Andrew Young, a married man who confirms both his extramarital affair with Hunter and that the baby is his. Hunter, who lived in New York, has recently relocated to a gated community in North Carolina near Young and his family. But, the Enquirer claims that Hunter is privately telling friends that Edwards fathered the baby.

Edwards on infidelity

Watch Video

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/edwards-love-child -story

acceptreality: you may want to rethink..
your bet...

it boils down to:

hatred of hillary clinton

vs

hatred of the iraq war/dead u.s. soldiers
returning home

there is a 50/50 split in the country dem/repub.

which one of the above do you think more concerns the independents?

Tough Video on Hillary!
Watch this video and tell me who the GOP wants to run against in 08?

CLICK HERE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/tough-video-on-hil lary


Left Dangle
I am fully aware of the political demographics, but thanks for illustrating your emotional consideration in placing a wager.

I was gracious enough to point out why, based upon the REALITY of Bubba's victories, HRC cannot win. Still, you accepted a bet for as much as you can afford.

Don't project your doubts on me. Let me know how much and how to make it official.


acceptreality: ACCEPT REALITY..LOL
I'm being gracious enough to point out
why you are going to Lose BIGTIME...

if you are counting on hatred of hillary clinton
to win the election over ending the iraq war..

you are a bigger fool than i thought..

you set the amount..be sure to let you know
where i can pick up my money.


Left Dangle
Enough childishness. How much and how can I formalize it with you?

We shall see who is the fool.

acceptreality: cant you read?
you set the amount and let me know where i can pick up my money.

Left Dangle
I offered you the opportunity to put your money where your (prominent) mouth is. You accepted the terms when you accepted the bet. The ball is in your court. Now go to daddy and have him explain this to you.

Your unwillingness to follow through on this simple transaction speaks volumes about your integrity.

accept reality: like i said once more
set the amount that you are willing to lose
and let me know where to pick up my money.

be man enough to back up the bs youre talking.

Left Angle
The poll I cite is Rasmussen, hardly a "Republican" operation.

As Mrs. Clinton's lead has first risen and then shrunk the one poll number that remained constant throughout was her "negative" rating of 49-51%.

And there is nothing personal or visceral about it, either in my own reaction to her or in that of American public in general.

We have watched this woman lie, cheat, lie, cheat, and lie some more. We know she took graft disguised as a successful investment in cattle futures. We wathed her destroy the careers of the White House Travel Office Staff and charge on of them with embezzlement for purely personal and political reasons. We know she lied through her teeth when she said she didn't know about her husband's philandering because, we know, she was in charge of containing these "bimbo eruptions, which made her his chief enabler. We know she is a phony and a hypocrite when she poses as a self-reliant feminist. We know that she has even less political soul, less moral compass, than her lying, cheating hubby.

To "despise" someone is not to hate them viscerally. It means to have no respect for them. It is not up to you to judge what type of attitude toward Clinton is "sick", but even if it was you would not be qualified since you obviously don't even bother to learn the meaning of the words you interpret when you presume to pass judgment over people.

wildwest
In the same vein as your post;

A poll of the major media outlet reporters covering national politics that was done shortly after the 2000 election showed that 89% of them voted for Clinton twice and Gore once. (Source: "Slander" by Ann Coulter)

What makes this out-of-line with the general public is that only 43% of the public voted for Clinton in 1992. This poll alone would be enough to destroy any attempt at a rational argument that the MSM isn't blatantly biased for the Dems and/or the Clintons.

In 2004 one MSM pundit bragged that the MSM was worth 15 points (meaning percentage points) to Kerry in the election.

Left Dangle
You clearly have not intention of betting or you would honor your acceptance of terms. It is equally clear that you have no intention of paying for your losses, or else you would be as interested in providing for paying me as you are (flip) about collecting.

You have reneged. All talk, no accountability. You are certainly backing the appropriate candidate.

Left Dangle
You clearly have not intention of betting or you would honor your acceptance of terms. It is equally clear that you have no intention of paying for your losses, or else you would be as interested in providing for paying me as you are (flip) about collecting.

You have reneged. All talk, no accountability. You are certainly backing the appropriate candidate.

Hillary clinton
There are by far to many "hidden" true facts about Hillary for any one with common sense to vote for her...she would be a disaster.

She has wanted this job since she was a small girl and that all of her life she has done things that have been far from good or honest...and her Hubby wont release any of it....
Money is power, true, but we have the votes and they cannot be bought no matter how much money you have....NO Hillary....Sorry, not everyone gets what they want.

wiseone: a response..
now that you have had time to calm down, let me say this once more.

the things you quoted above as FACTS are indeed
repub/slanted OPINIONS...

as for the rasmussen poll, how do YOU know WHO
they called? it's darn sure sounds more repub slanted to me...

I keep trying to tell you..dems/libs dont see the Clintons in the same negative light as you repubs/cons do and you keep right on ignoring what I'm saying to you.

as to your so-called clinton scandals and crimes.
all those things have investigated over and over
officially and you dont have NOT ONE indictment,
conviction, or them being in jail to show for it.
it other words: your charges dont amount to a hill of beans...

the bottom line is this:

If you dont like Sen. Hillary Clinton, then DONT VOTE FOR HER...

But thats not your problem...YOU KNOW THIS WOMAN HAS A OUTSTANDING CHANCE TO WIN AND BOTH CLINTONS WILL BE BACK IN THE W.H. AND THATS WHAT IS DRIVING YOU NUTS...

your inability to stop it.

acceptreality: a response...
when you are MAN enought to back up your bs,
let me know..I dont have time for chumps like you. let me know where to pick up my money come
election 2008. end of conversation.

Wiseone
Don't fall for this trap. LA always claims certain things are opinions which are facts (except he capitalizes everything).

The fact is, Slick Willie did only get 43% of the vote in 1992. (I think Perot got 19% and Bush Sr. 38, which is a fact to the best of my recollection...but easy to verify or disprove one way or the other.)

That's why math is so great - if 100M people vote, and 43M people vote for one person, that one person got 43% of the vote. Saying that is an opinion is like saying that the Colts won the last Super Bowl is an opinion. Namely, stupid.

So if you really are a wiseone, you will know not to get sucked into this logic warp. I know from experience.

Accept Reality
You are learning the same lesson I learned yesterday. Some people are, as they say in Texas, all hat and no cattle.

LA
Your girl is going down in flames.

Even she knows it. Not only has she gotten desperate enough to ask hubby to bail her out, she doesn't even care if her "support" comes from people who don't give a hoot about her but want Slick Willie back in the WH.

The fact is I don't see one whit of policy difference between Clinton, Edwards, or Obama. Zero. Nada. Nothing. Zip.

That being the case I sincerely hope Mrs. Clinton gets the Democrat nomination because she will not only be the easiest of the three to beat, but her defeat will be McGoveresque.

You are even less qualified to assess who is "NUTS" than you are to judge who is dealing with visceral hatred. But even someone as incompetent as you are should understand that if Mrs. Clinton actually did inspire "visceral" hatred that's just one more factor that makes it less likely for her to win the Presidency.

This woman is an incompetent politician. She was an incompetent First Lady. She is an incompetent candidate. She is an incompetent Senator. She is even an incompetent attorney, (allegedly) her chosen profession. She flunked her DC bar exam.

That's your girl.

wiseone: oh I KNOW the meaning..
of the words and I know how to use them. It is you that dont.

to wit:

de·spise:
to regard with contempt, distaste, disgust,or disdain; scorn; loathe.

hate: to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest.

visceral: characterized by or dealing with coarse or base crude emotions.




Hillary soon to be forgotten
Even the former Clinton bastions like the New York Times is abandoning the hag. Read the current column by Jake Tapper. Read the piece on the contributors to Bill's museum and their campaign funds. They are telling Hil that they are going to endorse someone else. Will she go peaceful? Hil no! But she will go. She is already tired of the Senate - she has no power and that is what she craves. She will soon realize that she is so yesterday and then watch how old and wrinkled she gets. Watch how all of the Clinton enemies come out for revenge once they have lost their power. It is inevitable and will be delicious.

Clinton
Left Angle

Have you forgotten that the reason Bubba was impeached in the first place is that he was FOUND GUILTY OF PURJURY IN FEDERAL COURT? The subject of his purjury ( Lewinsky) is immaterial. He lied under oath, so you can't really believe he has never been convicted. As I racall, his punishment was a fine of some $90,000. Handed down, by the way, by a former law school student of his.

Had any of the posters on this site been judged guilty of purjury in a Federal Court, we would have been in the Federal Pokey, plus a large fine. Get real, LA

The Old Coot

wiseone: opinions vs facts..
hillary is in flames?

again thats YOUR opinion...and it sounds like
more wishful thinking than anything...lol

if hillary wins the dem nomination she will win the presidency...thats MY opinion...

guliani, romney or thompson....

they are all weak she is gonna stomp either one of them....

again MY opinion..

have a nice evening...I'm outta here.

have a g

Watch This
This Video will serve the Republicans well if that criminal Hillary manages to get the Democrat nomination. I can't wait. Her vitriol will turn off so many independents that she will get buried. At leasr I dope so..

http://www.hillarythemovie.com/trailer.html

wiseone: one last thing..
hillary flunked the dc bar exam initially?
big deal, lots of lawyers have, however:

years later in 88 & 91 she was named by National Law Review as:

ONE OF THE 100 MOST INFLUENTIAL LAWYERS IN THE U.S.

this is too much darn fun..lmao

I'm otta here.

AZPhil: a question...
Is a win a win or is it not...

what do the history books say without astericks
on both clintons?

THEY WERE ELECTED AND GOT REELECTED...LMAO


I'M OUTTA HERE...

AZPhil: an assignment for you
see if you can find one textbook that is used in u.s. schools(universities, colleges,hi-schools etc) that teaches the your hero:

Ronald Raygun Won the Cold War and was responsible for the Breakup of the USSR.

let me know.

Left Nut
Read what I wrote carefully. I never said he didn't win. I said he got 43% of the vote.

That's the third time you're "outta here". I pray that it's true this time.

Left Nut
Well, I was planning on shaving my back tonight, but I will do "your assignment" if I get time.

Are you ever going to bet accept_reality, or are you just all talk?

Left Nut
Well, I was planning on shaving my back tonight, but I will do "your assignment" if I get time.

Are you ever going to bet accept_reality, or are you just all talk?

We Can see it all from here
The problem the Reps have is the problem they have always had: too many BGRs [Big Government Republicans]. These jellyfish are still sticking earmarks on any bill they can and figuring out a way to slip a CIR bill past the slumbering Boobus Americanus, who have fallen asleep again as witness the absolute lack of furor over the FINA [fence in name only].
But if the Boobs really want to figure out who the guilty ones are, they only have to look in the mirror in the morning. I predict that no matter how pissed the voter are with Congress, that over 90% of the incumbents will be back "at work" i.e., screwing the voters in the 111th Congress. Many of the massive problems this country has can be laid at the doors of both Parties.

azphil
i have suggested that l/a is at best 16 years old, somewhat skilled at the computer but totally incapable of truly defending his positions. He never answers any questions, never refutes any points but continues with the same blather week after week. Many of us are waiting for him to give reasons to support or vote for the missus clinton. His lame response is that she is a citizen over 35 years old etc. The legal description for running for pres. probably allows some 150 million of our citizens to run. It has been suggested that a random selection of names culled from the phone book would provide more skillful teachers than many of those that infest universities today. I would suggest that opening a similar phone book and choosing any name at random would produce a name with as many if not in fact better qualifications to be the president than the missus clinton

777
You are exactly right about the ridiculous re-election rate.

Left Angel

Left angel writes and writes and writes and writes and writes and says nothing!

Wildwest
He is a tool, but at least he helped me remember I have to stop by Lowe's on the way home (for tools).

Funny you should mention the phone book. I have suggested for the last five or so years that if we simply picked reps/senators at random, for one term, out of a list of registerd voters, would things be worse than they are now?

Then again, Neal Boortz had a good idea. Let the state representatives (like in Atlanta, Phoenix, Denver, etc) elect the national ones. Before you scoff, my understanding is that it actually was done that way for close to a century following 1776. The rationale then was that the citizens of a state were more likely to know lower officials (state and local) better and thus ride them harder. The current system is like the Miss America pageant, or American Idol.

Ray
LA's keyboard is a WMD.

Hilliary
i just saw her new" Christmas" video and she better not stand near a tree or atop high hills.
I have never seen pandering at a level such as this.
The beauty of it is they think they are slick, clever and subtle. "The Campaign" is really a desperate, soulless grasp for something they feel drifting away.
Perhaps they could begin emphasizing their cherished principles and beliefs. I think I'm gonna gag.

Rect(um) Angle
Ronald Raygun - that's funny. That's also taken from back in 1984. Maybe that's your problem - living in the past. Having some bad acid flashbacks? Man, don't you just love the 60's that spawned Bill and Hil? Down with pigs, huh? All you need is love (and then some penicillin)?

azphil
but a weapon only capable of shooting blanks

Go Hillary!
Go girl! Beat Oprah Hussein Obama so our Republican candidate can clean your Liberal clock in November 2008. Mitt in '08!

Left Angel

Lets try again. Hillary is a law school graduate with a sort of homely dumpy daughter and a philandering sociopathic husband. Nothing new for Yale I bet. Oh- yes she whines and cares and wrings her hands. Kind of like Pelosi. The Whinersisters.

Influential lawyer?
Let's see, wife of the Governor.

100 lawyers, 50 governors.

No coincidence there at all.

This woman is nothing without her lounge lizard hubby. LA knows it. That's why he hits and runs.

"Lots of lawyers" may have flunked the Bar Exam, but how many of them are running for Prez? How many have proudly worn the mantle of "world's smartest woman? I have two sisters that are smarter than this shrew could ever dream of being.

This candidate is going down in flames, and I am enjoying the show.

More for LA
Re: definitions

First, the introduction to your list of definitions should have read "To whit", not "To wit". I mean, since you know the definitions of these words so well you might want to use the correct hominym to introduce them.

Second, nothing in your list of definitions disputes or refutes anything I claimed. Specifically, your long list of synonyms for "despise" did not include the word "hate". Nor did the defintions you listed for "despise" and "hate" have any definitions or synonyms in common.

Thank you for proving my point.

If I have taught you nothing else I at least forced you learn what these words mean by actually looking them up instead of spewing them forth as DNC talking points.

Third, in one post you accuse me of going "nuts" because we can't stop Hillary. In a later post you claim it is my "opinion" that she is going down in flames. The two are not compatible, or even simultaneously possible. So which is it? Am I "viscerally" going "nuts" because she can't be stopped or am I of the erroneous opinion that she is toast? Or are you just like Hillary; changing positions so often no one has time to demonstrate how stupid your current/previous position is/was?

Moron.

AZ Phil
Thanks for the help.

I enjoying toying with this moron. Kind of like a cat torturing his food before he actually kills it. I know it's cruel, but some libs make it too easy and too much fun to resist.

SizzleLean
Re: Ronald Raygun

If I'm not mistaken this slur dates back all the way to the Woodstock Music and Art Festival of 1969, when one of the bands sarcastically dedicated a song to Reagan, who was then the (Democrat) governor of California.

The guy making the intro even added a "zap!" to the name so it came out "Ronald Raygunzzaapp!"

Once a hippie...

ummm, Wiseone
ummm, "To wit" is correct. And the word is "homonym".
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.