Posted on 08/26/2007 11:38:02 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
It was just too easy to pass up.
It is impossible to predict, with any confidence, what the political landscape will look like 14 1/2 months from now, when the general election is held. But Hillary's negatives are enormous--in some polls, over 50 percent of respondents say that they would not vote for Hillary under any circumstances--that she has a built-in problem, should she manage to secure the Democratic nomination.
Probably her only real hope would be to encourage the registration of many first-time, young women voters of limited education. (I do not say this to be mean. But the fact is that Hillary polls best among young, poorly educated women.)
But first, of course, she has to get the nomination. And that may not be easy. Whereas Hillary may poll well among the overall Democratic electorate, it is not this vague group that will ultimately select the party's nominee. Rather, it is party activists--those who are willing (even eager!) to step forth in the snows of New Hampshire and the cold of Iowa in January, in order to make their preferences known. And the party's progressive base--the Daily Kos and MoveOn.org types--despises Hillary with an intensity that is difficult for most folks to imagine.
Hillary has tried to make some inroads here lately--for instance, by sending an emissary to Bill O'Reilley's The Factor in order to condemn the talk-show host for his labelling the Daily Kos a hate site--but it has met with no more than modest success, according to the polls I have seen.
Personally, I almost hope Hillary is the Democrats' candidate. I think she is much more transparently cynical than John Edwards, who has just about perfected the (Bill) Clintonesque "aw, shucks" charm--in a way that may convince those who do not pay close attention that he is just one of the guys.
The toons’ have a well oiled machine in place including fraud and lots of cheating to put this lesbo in the WH. It’ll not work and she’ll lose in spite of it.
The job won't be easy, but it is easily described.
For Hillary to win, she needs to pick up a large state that Gore and Kerry couldn't, without losing a single big state that they won.
Clearly, she'll have to pick up Ohio (or a less likely state such as Florida), without losing Pennsylvania (or less likely state such as New Jersey.)
If the GOP holds Ohio and picks up Pennsylvania, the show's over for Hillary. Reverse that, and she's president.
There's no question in my mind that she (and her minions) hates me, everything I believe in, want or care about.
Hate is such a polarizing word.....and I would have to care (one way or the other) about the Beast to hate. And I could care less.
Scared spitless, OTOH, I am.
IF - a big if at this point - she does get elected, I wonder where the migration will head?
With the evolution of the “truth” in forcing an agenda on us, and the new understanding of how it is done through the MSM and the internet, Hillary will be the most “attackable”, given Whitewater, Vincent Foster case, her generally evil disposition, and the other unhideables....and I agree, I cannot support any of her crap, most notably repealing the Bush tax cuts
“For Hillary to win, she needs to pick up a large state that Gore and Kerry couldn’t, without losing a single big state that they won.”
Agreed and that’s not going to happen, IMO. I will say it again, and I may be proven wrong, 40 states R if she is the nominee. The Republican nominee, no matter who it is, would have to be caught, on tape, smoking crack while molesting a goat in church to lose this election. Just my opinion.
Someone needs to throw a bucket of water on her and get it over with.
from your lips to God’s ear my friend! I can only hope and pray that you are right!
Unfortunately, unless we do something about it, Hillary will have 5 million young women voters who would not have otherwise bothered to vote.
Knowing their almost perfect record (using real money and not faked polls), this scares me - even at this early stage.
Hillary's negatives are being too highly touted, IMHO. She has a well oiled, utterly ruthless and highly experienced political machine and she will have the nearly unanimous backing of the MSM and other visible culture-makers and tons of money. She will never be called to task for her shady past and socialist views prior to the '08 elections. Instead, the move to stampede adulation for her will gather steam as we get close to the election. Before we're done, we will think we are electing Princess Di instead of Hillary.
She left out the last part of the article on her original story. The additional material is on the website now with a title that was different from yesterday. Today's SEATTLE TIMES used yesterday's article, not the one now on the Trib site.
From my response post:
[Here is the end of the first story that was on the Chicago Tribune website yesterday]
But politics is his passion, and he's proud that his mother was the first woman to serve on the Dallas City Council and that his uncle was once a member of Congress. His grandfather, he said, was a "kingmaker" when it came to Texas politics, and his great-grandfather was once a member of the state Senate.
His hoped-for contribution? Stopping Clinton.
- - -[end of yesterday's story]
[This has been added to the website --- and the new title is Vast army of 'Hillary haters' has claws out]
The anti-Clinton cadre
Several individuals and groups are organized in vocal opposition to Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential aspirations, including:
*StopHerNow.com: This is both a Web site and an independent expenditure group dedicated to "rescuing America from the radical ideas of Hillary Clinton." It includes cartoons called "The Hillary Show," a "Jetsons"-like satire that portrays Clinton as a mean talk show host. The group is run and funded by Richard Collins in Dallas. Republican consultant Arthur Finkelstein founded the site and now is an adviser.
*Citizens United: This conservative organization is releasing a film this fall about Clinton that "aims to expose the truth about her conflicts in the past and her liberal plot for the future." The chairman and president is David Bossie, who was the chief investigator for the House committee looking into the Clinton-era Whitewater scandal before he was fired. Dick Morris, the Clintons' fired former consultant, is involved in the film.
*Robert Morrow: A self-employed securities trader who works from home in Austin, Texas, he describes himself as one of the nation's premier experts on Hillary and Bill Clinton. Morrow regularly e-mails journalists and political activists with allegations of criminal activity by the couple.
*HillCAP, The Hillary Clinton Accountability Project: This project is run by the United States Justice Foundation, a conservative legal group representing Peter Paul, who has filed a civil lawsuit against Hillary and Bill Clinton accusing them of fraud. Doug Cogan, a commercial real estate broker in Upland, Calif., serves as a researcher for Paul, a former Clinton fundraiser. (Published in the Chicagoland Early Edition)
----------
jzuckman@tribune.com
========================================================================
OKAY, LET'S FIX THE STORY.
I've done more than research. Actually I've done a great deal of writing for the first version of the film. Peter has hired a liberal screenwriter and producer for the theatrical version. It is not going to be able to be tagged with a VRWC label. Liberals were deliberately chosen to help tell the story. The research has included attending hearings and confronting David Kendall, one of which is on film, and literally hundreds and hundreds of calls to journalists. Journalists like Jill Zuckman, who apparently chose to leave out of the story the basis of Peter's lawsuit -- the Clintons' role in the collapse of Stan Lee Media.
Jill was given the names of the websites: http://hillcap.org and http://www.ejfa.org She had seemed impressed that Jim Nesfield's foundation, the Equal Justice Foundation of America, has backed the effort. Nesfield is the mother of all Wall Street Whistleblowers, who had been featured on 60 MINUTES and worked with Elliot Spitzer of New York to expose the hedge funds timing scandal.
Jill apparently did not think it was important to let her readers know that David Kendall will be appearing before a 3-judge panel of the California Appellate Court in Los Angeles on Sept. 7. He will be trying to convince them that his client is not a felon and should remain protected from the Paul v Clinton lawsuit under the anti-SLAPP law.
Jill was provided with info about four false FEC reports, Stan Lee admitting to a crime on tape regarding the "switching" of $100,000 checks, Chelsea being set up for perjury, and the "Smoking Gun Video." She is well aware that Peter was not a "fundraiser." He gave her campaign over $1.6 mil of his own money, was discredited in public, and had his company destroyed in the bargain.
She quoted the lying weasel Howard Wolfson but would not give his quote from the WASHPOST in which he vowed that the campaign would take no money from Peter Paul.
She knows all about Kelly Craighead, a White House employee and agent for Hillary, participating in the July 11, 2000 conference call and directly soliciting Peter to pay for the Hollywood Gala. That set it up for Hillary's involvement, which is documented in the July 17 conference call on tape.
Jill spent quite a lot of time speaking with me and was brought up to speed. Giving the URL for the two websites, mentioning the Smoking Gun Video, giving a link so people could see the trailer, at least briefly mentioning the basis of Peter's lawsuit, and many other items we discussed would have made for a story that she could not tell. She had to tell the story that made it look like a well-funded right wing machine is out to get poor Hillary. I wish we had a well-funded machine. We would have had the film completed a long time ago.
I had no expectation that her piece was going to be anything but a defend Hillary piece. It was expected, however, that at least she would have mentioned the website URLs, the Sept. 7 hearing, that the case is going to trial, and that Hillary is going soon be under oath.
Jill Zuckman has indeed revealed herself as an agenda journalist. She is not alone. Jill, that is why people are increasingly looking to other sources to get the real news. We don't want your agenda, bias, partisanship, and water-carrying, kneepad-wearing performance for the Clintons. We want who, what, when, where, and why. WHAT IN THE HELL DID THEY TEACH YOU IN JOURNALISM SCHOOL?
LOL!
Would that be your ex-wife?
That’s why this article was reprinted on the front page of newspapers across the country, because they want to motivate their own base, by painting Hillary as a victim of rightwing hate.
The problem is that right wingers just don’t have the same level of hate that lefties do. They never have and never will.
I’m reading a Russian novel that was written in 1861 and the main lefty character states that conservatives just don’t have the same level of anger as liberals, that they tend to be mildly critical of situations, but never reach the level of outrage that liberals attain. He said that liberals want to smash people and that was why they were going to win. This was 1860! Oh, also, the early liberals had no more respect for the peasants then, than they do now. They thought them incapable of managing their own lives and unworthy of liberty. It sounds a lot like what they say about the Iraqis.
I don’t hate Hillary, I just feel that if the time has come for a woman President, that woman should be Ann Coulter.
When I saw the first word: “Vast” my first thought was that the DNC Ministry of Truth aka: American Media, is at it again.
If we had an appropriate level of outrage, we would have set up conservative or at least balanced newspapers to replace the liberal rags we have now.
The Clinton Presidency resulted in domestic scandals, failed socialist agendas, a lame world posture, and a "loose cannon diplomacy" that netted the disrespect of one certain Osama bin Laden. You'd think it would have been enough of a scare to wake up the conservative base permanently for the next 20 years.
Its obviously not true, or Hillary wouldn't think she's got any chance of getting Billy another WH pass.
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.