Woof!
Posted on 02/14/2015 5:31:46 PM PST by Second Amendment First
I’LL pay for this column.
The Rottweilers will be unleashed.
Once the Clintons had a War Room. Now they have a Slime Room.
Once they had the sly James Carville, fondly known as “serpenthead.” Now they have the slippery David Brock, accurately known as a snake.
Brock fits into the Clinton tradition of opportunistic knife-fighters like Dick Morris and Mark Penn.
The silver-haired 52-year-old, who sports colorful designer suits and once wore a monocle, brawled his way into a Times article about the uneasy marriage between Hillary Clinton’s veteran attack dogs and the group of advisers who are moving over from Obamaland.
Hillary hasn’t announced a 2016 campaign yet. She’s busy polling more than 200 policy experts on how to show that she really cares about the poor while courting the banks. Yet her shadow campaign is already in a déjà-vu-all-over-again shark fight over control of the candidate and her money. It’s the same old story: The killer organization that, even with all its ruthless hired guns, can’t quite shoot straight.
Squabbling competing factions helped Hillary squander a quarter-of-a-billion dollars in 2008.
As Nicholas Confessore and Amy Chozick chronicled, the nasty dispute spilled into public and Brock resigned last week from the board of a pro-Clinton “super-PAC” called Priorities USA Action — whose co-chairman is Jim Messina, Obama’s 2012 campaign manager — accusing the political action committee of “an orchestrated political hit job” and “the kind of dirty trick I’ve witnessed in the right-wing and would not tolerate then.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Why weren’t you so bold in describing obama’s power apparatus?
Amusing. It is going to be interesting to see how the Hitlery Mob gets all the Clinton historical filth off of her. I doubt if there is enough “political soap” to make that happen. Just too much history, too many lies, too many skeletons. There are those that don’t care (mindless Rats) but their numbers are dwindling. Obamacare, the economy, and the jobs market are helping with that....just for openers.
She is a perfect political target for any FIGHTING CONSERVATIVE (Walker, Cruz).....
Interesting but really, I thought all was fair in political election warfare; what’s Dowd so upset about?? That’s how it’s done forgoshsakes!
Woof!
I assume Dowdy is going to ooze onto the Warren bandwagon.
Meow!
Right now, it’s going to be about the money slugfest. She’s all turtled up right now limiting her exposure to speculative hit pieces — correct or not. But believe you me, think of Hitler at the podium at his Eagles Nest retreat. That’s how wound up they’re getting.
Ha ha. They’re finally remembering they hated Brock when he was working for Bob Tyrrell and going after Anita Hill.
Mo, you (and your colleagues) knew he was a snake when you met him.
The left begins the greasing of the skids for Fauxchohauntas
CZJ
owooooooooo!!
Nice Biceps. LOL
Generally I have about as much use for anything emanating from Maureen Dowd as I do for a nice relaxing case of shingles. But this article was actually rather enlightening on a number of levels. If nothing else it confirms that there are people on the left who can’t stand the Clintons and who are unlikely to willingly serve as loyal retainers in the cause of the Restoration.
That’s a start.
Yes, all MoDo threads require CZJ pix.
Thank you for following the rules.
Catherine Zeta-Jones is so beautiful in a world otherwise gone mad.
That pic is a shrine of the divine & proof that only a God could create such a creature.
:^)
I agree. :-)
And look at the scumdog millionaire who entrapped her!
Don’t you just love how these liberal quiches use words like “knife-fight” and “brawled” and “attack dog” to make it sound like there’s some semblance of manhood in their adherents?
When any one of them would just pee their pants if someone so much as said “Boo!” to them!
Here we go again. The left learns nothing and forgets nothing. My copy of "The Real Anita Hill" is 438 pages long, including 36 pages of notes and a 14 page index. Ms. Dowd here reprises all that American leftists know about a book they never read: David Brock said that Anita Hill was “a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty.”
Brock may have coined that catchy phrase, but it has almost nothing to do with the book. "The Real Anita Hill" makes a well researched, compelling case against Anita Hill as a credible witness against Clarence Thomas. Either the information in the book is true or it is not true. If portions of the book are not true, where is Brocks's detailed list of retractions? (And where's my refund?) To my knowledge, after he switched teams, Brock was happy to provide vague Republican-bashing mea culpas, but never listed the specific lies or errors in the book. I think he didn't do it because the book was basically accurate. The leftist critiques of the book that I read disparaged the book, but did not specify significant errors.
The impression of Anita Hill that I acquired from reading Brock's book was not that she was either nutty or slutty, but that she was a back-stabbing politically motivated liar and wannabe-victim. That was at odds with the Little Miss Innocence image that the MSM peddled hard during the Hill-Thomas hearings. Until I see good evidence to the contrary, I will continue to believe that the MSM deliberately lied and that Brock's book mostly told the truth.
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.