GOP Blasts Hillary Clinton for Her President Bush Comments - (finally hitting back!)

NEWSMAX.COM ^ | JULY 11, 2005 | CARL LIMBACHER & Staff

[CHARLITE]

ALBANY, N.Y. – Republicans took aim at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday for comparing President Bush to Mad magazine's freckle-faced "What, me worry?" kid, Alfred E. Neuman.

A Republican National Committee official said the former first lady was "part of today's angry and adrift Democrat Party," while a spokesman for one of her potential 2006 Senate rivals said she was guilty of "insulting the president."

"At a time when President Bush and most elected officials are focused on the security of our nation, Mrs. Clinton seems focused on taking partisan jabs and promoting her presidential campaign," added New York's GOP chairman, Stephen Minarik. "Her priorities are clearly out of whack." Clinton's attack on the president came Sunday during a speech in Colorado.

"I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said during the inaugural Aspen Ideas Festival, organized by the Aspen Institute, a non-partisan think tank.

The former first lady drew a laugh from the crowd when she described Bush's attitude toward tough issues with Neuman's catchphrase, "What, me worry?"

As Clinton gears up for a Senate re-election race in New York next year and a possible White House presidential bid in 2008, her attacks on Bush have become sharper.

In her speech Sunday, she accused the president of damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.

"Hillary Clinton's opportunistic attempt to market herself as a centrist is like a wolf dressing up in sheep's clothing," said RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "Such thinly veiled rhetoric doesn't change the fact she is part of today's angry and adrift Democrat Party."

Thomas Basile, a spokesman for potential Senate challenger Edward Cox, a son-in-law of the late President Nixon, said while Clinton was "busy insulting the president across the country, she is failing to produce the homeland security and transportation funding" the state needs.

Clinton has been accusing the Bush administration of providing inadequate funding for New York's security needs.

While national polls show the former first lady to be leading the pack among potential 2008 Democratic presidential contenders, Clinton has said she is too wrapped up in her Senate work and re-election effort to think about that.

[End_Clintonism_Now]

1,000 FBI files take the teeth from current GOP leadership.

[Alberta's Child]

I'd shout it from the rooftops on a daily basis, but I don't have a roof at my disposal right now.

[Kuehn12]

Hmm, political opposition what a novel invention that is, and I suppose that most would want none to exist. Calling someone the Alfred E. Newman kid, now that is harsh, and very comparable with what that nut Dean said.

I would think that the Republicans would be happy if there was a string in the House and Senate which would have the Democrats raise their hands in favor of every Republican sponsored bill.

Republican should be happy that they are about to capture the third lever of power, the judiciary. Instead they worry about what Hillary has to say as if she is ever going to be within shouting distance of the White House.

We now stand as close as we have ever been to a one party system. I wonder what people will complain about when that happens.

[John Lenin]

We now stand as close as we have ever been to a one party system

We pretty much had one party rule for 30 years when the demoRATS controlled both houses. The only power the GOP really had during that time was the bully pulpit and the veto pen. It's a shame they are acting like such losers now that they have power because it can very easily revert back to the other side for another 30 years. The US Senate needs term limits, it's as close to a dictatorship in the Senate as the old Soviet Union.

[Kuehn12]

Alot of the Reagan's policies got through even with a Democratically controlled Congress, 1986 tax reform, numerous increases in defense spending and so on.

Jimmy Carter was considered ineffectual for most of his term in office. What was the ideological mix in Congress during his administration?

Only during the Johnson/Rosevelt adminstrations was there Xanadu for the liberals, at least in the last century. Six out of eight years of the Clinton administration there were Republican majorities in Congress, so he wasn't running the play book.

What I am saying is that something historic is happening. The Democrats are imploding and the country is becoming more conservative as a reaction to the fruit and nut 60's revolution. This is giving the Republicans a chance to run the table, keep the White House, build super majorities in both houses of Congress, and reverse the trend toward liberal judical activism through out the country. To my knowledge this hasn't happen before.