Posted on 12/14/2005 9:02:27 PM PST by ncountylee
Last month Justice Antonin Scalia was politely quizzed by Norman Pearlstine, the outgoing Time Inc. editor in chief. The event, held in Time Warner's New York headquarters, was supposedly off the record, but so much of it has already been reported that it will not hurt to add Scalia's views on flag burning. He explained why it was constitutionally protected speech. It's a pity Hillary Clinton was not there to hear him.
The argument that this famously conservative member of the Supreme Court advanced -- actually, reiterated -- was that while he may or may not approve of flag burning, it was clear to him that it was a form of speech, a way of making a political statement, and that the First Amendment protected it. I could not agree more.
Clinton, apparently, could not agree less. Along with Sen. Robert Bennett, a Utah Republican, she has introduced a bill that would make flag burning illegal. It is probably important to note that this is not a proposed constitutional amendment, and it is written in a cutesy way that does not explicitly outlaw all flag burnings -- just those intended to "intimidate any person or group of persons." That's a distinction without a difference to your average police officer. Not many cops belong to the ACLU.
The ubiquitous Larry Sabato, the University of Virginia quotemeister -- need a quote/do not tarry/call U-Va. and ask for Larry -- opines that Clinton is readying herself for a presidential run by adjusting her tint, toning down the blue and heightening the red. He fancies that Virginia Gov. Mark Warner's incipient presidential campaign is already pushing Clinton to the center. A New York Times editorial reached a similar conclusion. It suggested that she was "pandering" to the 70 percent of Americans
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Hillary is obviously not as brilliant as those who love her would like. She does not understand the conservatives' wish for a true and originalist interpretation of the Constitution. I agree with Scalia. Every time she opens her mouth, she proves how stupid she is.
Perhaps I should add the word "pathetic" to describe Hillary.
Once again, Scalia is right.
Beware of the Trojan horse. An article beginning with a criticism of Hillary which turns into a PR piece singing her praises by the 4th paragraph.
"But the real Hillary Clinton may be someone unmentioned in those books. "She is one of the most conservative friends I have," one of her pals told me. Bear in mind I was talking to a Democrat, so we are not talking Phyllis Schlafly here, but still, Hillary Clinton is hardly anyone's stereotype of a liberal. For one thing, she is religious and not merely in a church-on-Sunday sort of way. She relied on her faith in the darkest days of her husband's impeachment and the revelations of his sexual shenanigans. This is a lady who prays.
She has also articulated a moderate, somewhat ruminative position on abortion. It is rueful, insistent on "choice" but regretful about abortion in general. The same holds for the war in Iraq. Clinton voted to authorize it, and she has yet to call for a pullout of U.S. troops. If she is uncertain, hesitant -- not sure if a withdrawal would do a lot more harm than good -- then I welcome her to the club of Iraq agnostics."
It doesn't matter. We all know Hillary Clinton for what she is - a liar who will do and say anything to become President.
You called it. This article is a sand bag job par excellence.
Regards
As completely stupid as this passage is, it is interesting to note that the writer acknowledges that a person of faith does not fit the liberal mold. With Hillary, of course, there is a lot of mold. I wonder to what she prays?
She has also articulated a moderate, somewhat ruminative position on abortion. It is rueful, insistent on "choice" but regretful about abortion in general.
So, her moderate position includes voting in favor of partial-birth abortion, voting against any restrictions of any kind (including parental notification), and fully supporting and taking money from the largest and most powerful pro-abortion groups in the country. That's moderate according to the Washington Post. I wonder what they would view as the liberal extremist view on the subject?
I understand she's said she could be talked into running for president.
The Clintonistas are getting more sophisticated.
Yup.
"She is one of the most conservative friends I have," one of her pals told me.
And, Rule #1 of media interpretation is not to believe statements made by unspecified "pals." Particularly when that "pal" is a democrat.
Just in time for this Holiday Season:
The Hillary Clinton talking doll. Turn the switch to the left to hear the Senator talk about global warming. Turn the switch to the right to hear her talk about supporting the troops in Iraq. Or leave the switch in the middle to hear her answers to the prosecuting attourney about White Water.
Get the "Constitutional" wrapping paper to package her in. Then when you're done put the Constitution where every other liberal wants it: the garbage.
So get the Hillary Clinton doll this holiday.
Season's Greetings. :)
He misses the point. The reason Hillary came up with this legislation is to make her look patriotic, but not really outlaw flagburning (Surely, the smartest woman in America should know that only a constitutional amendment, not legislation, will ban it.)
Praying, Ha.... She is still making pacs with the devil.
If you write an article about the beast, and fail to mention her deep abiding love of socialism, then you are whitewashing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.