Yeah sure, Hillary always put the nation's needs above her own. As in these instances:
No place on the globe is untouched by the Clintons' monstrous greed.
Posted on 03/26/2018 6:18:30 AM PDT by pabianice
Had I never left the Obama White House to be part of the campaign, I am sure I would have asked the same question. I probably would have printed out the transcript of her remarks, and pored over them, trying to isolate the essence of what she had said that made this speech so much more appealing than anything she had said during the campaign. And I wouldn’t have found it. Because I needed to have the experience of working for a female presidential candidate to understand that why we liked “this Hillary” so much better than “candidate Hillary.” Fundamentally it wasn’t about the words she used in her concession speech but what she represented. She was no longer a woman pushing to be president. She was a gracious loser putting the needs of her country above her own. It was the role of Hillary as an ambitious candidate that troubled us.
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
sīˈkōsəs/
noun
noun: psychosis; plural noun: psychoses
a severe mental disorder in which thought and emotions are so impaired that contact is lost with external reality.
Reality is that which remains after your belief is revealed to be objectively wrong. -- Philip K. Dick
It was probably similar to the last days of the Hitler regime in the Reichstag bunker...
“She was a gracious loser putting the needs of her country above her own.”
Gracious? Surely you jest.
And how is it somehow noble that she put the country’s needs above her own? She lost. Jeez.
“She was a gracious loser putting the needs of her country above her own.”
That’s rich. You crack me up.
This obsequious loser jerk Palmieri managed the billion dollar "sure-thing" candidate Hillary who lost an election she had bought and paid for.
So we find the losers----far from examining the reasons why-----but manipulating public opinion, using the loss as a platform to advance their putrid agenda.
"You lost, you idiot, go home and shut up."
She’s not jesting.
And don’t call her Shirley.
The last days? Lemme guess....lots of Jack Daniels,lots of ashtrays and many sturdy men helping her up staircases.
“She was a gracious loser putting the needs of her country above her own.”
The key word in that sentence is “was”.
“She was a gracious loser”
Lol!!
Palmieri has some facts wrong.
She says Huma’s “then-husband” Weiner...
No, Huma IS STILL MARRIED TO WEINER.
They are doing the Clinton thing — so they can’t testify against each other.
That’s when I stopped reading.
These people are full-on delusional.
Show me the MONEY !
WOW!, you talk about delusional.
“She was a gracious loser putting the needs of her country above her own.”
When l read this l burst out laughing. I literally lost the coffee in my mouth because l could not keep the laughter at bay.
I read this article. The author lives in a very different parallel universe where Hillary Clinton is just another respectable, altruistic woman everyone can actually like, and she lost simply because she was up against a lot of mean misogynists.
Logic, apparently, is not their strong suit.
Hate to clue in Palmieri as she should know this.
No matter how you read it, or read into it, Hillary’s concession speech was actually a modification of what was to be her acceptance speech.
Yeah sure, Hillary always put the nation's needs above her own. As in these instances:
No place on the globe is untouched by the Clintons' monstrous greed.
It’s like something out of Atlas Shrugged
“GRACIOUS LOSER”???
HilLIARY is certainly a loser, but hardly gracious!
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.