Replies

The election of '92 will remain one of the great mysteries of the 20th century. Bush 41 tanked. He gave up. He ran a sloppy, lackluster campaign. He refused to use specific ammunition he had about Bill Clinton. After all, Mia, the guy had been head of the CIA! Clinton left bloody fingerprints all over Arkansas, and Bush 41 didn't even challenge him on crime.

The question is always going to be, "What did Clinton have on him?" If this theory is not sustainable, what the heck theory is?!

But that's history. Here's what counts now. I think we had better not count on the common sense of the voters in knowing just what evil charlatans the Clintons are. They have heard it too long. They have heard too much. Plus, the MSM has always been able to make it look like the worst episodes in the Clintons' record are the wild ravings of right-wing fanatics. The truth about these people is so bad, no one believes it!

The visceral hatred the NYC intelligentsia has for the Republican Party is extreme. I believe it descends in a direct line from the 1930's Communist Party of their parents and grandparents. The fact, for example, that Hillary is a demonstrable anti-semite means nothing to them. What matters is that she is ideologically in tune and attuned to their extreme left-wing views. Politically correct means more than personally reprehensible.

So, I fear that even if Pirro has the guts to go for Hillary's jugular, she will serve the GOP well, but might not win the election.

The election of '92 will remain one of the great mysteries of the 20th century. Bush 41 tanked. He gave up. He ran a sloppy, lackluster campaign. He refused to use specific ammunition he had about Bill Clinton. After all, Mia, the guy had been head of the CIA! Clinton left bloody fingerprints all over Arkansas, and Bush 41 didn't even challenge him on crime.
The question is always going to be, "What did Clinton have on him?" If this theory is not sustainable, what the heck theory is?!
Kenny Bunk

Note Bush 41's allusion, during the presidential debate, to clinton corruption. Note also that Bush understood well the clinton threat to the security of our nation.

But that wasn't enough, apparently, for Bush to end clinton's career once and for all. And we all know the sorry result of that failure.

The way I see it, the possibilities for Bush failure are, in descending order of probability, the following:

Whereas the clintons failed because they put corrupt, cowardly, megalomaniacal self-interest above loyalty to country, the Bushes failed because they put their refined aesthetic sensibilities, family loyalty and misplaced honor above loyalty to country.
stupidity
blackmail

THE CLINTONS--AMERICA'S BIGGEST BLUNDER
Hear Bush 41 Warn Us--October 19, 1992 *

*Thanx to Cloud William for text and audio

LEHRER: President Bush, your closing statement, sir.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Three weeks from now--two weeks from tomorrow, America goes to the polls and you're going to have to decide who you want to lead this country ...

On foreign affairs, some think it's irrelevant. I believe it's not. We're living in an interconnected world...And if a crisis comes up, ask who has the judgment and the experience and, yes, the character to make the right decision?

And, lastly, the other night on character Governor Clinton said it's not the character of the president but the character of the presidency. I couldn't disagree more. Horace Greeley said the only thing that endures is character. And I think it was Justice Black who talked about great nations, like great men, must keep their word.

And so the question is, who will safeguard this nation, who will safeguard our people and our children? I need your support, I ask for your support. And may God bless the United States of America.

(Applause)

FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU! FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME!