Before Hillary ran, there was a strong rumor that JFK jr was going to run, and long ago RFK thought about running as a NY senator.
This state does not care where your from, they are as partisian as you can get.
What a surprise. The NY Times carrying the water for Hillary. They should charge her for being her publicity machine.
> New Yorkers tend not to worry much about voting for
> politicians viewed as having grander national ambitions.
Pirro's
"Why vote for someone who doesn't really want the job?"
... would seem to have great resonance, and the Clinton
mob is scrambling to find ways to handle it. Billy a
couple of days ago, and now the present bit of NYT
contemptuous condescension.
Too bad Brando is dead. They could have him reprise
Marc Antony on Hillary's "ambition":
But Pirro says she is ambitious;
And Pirro is an honourable woman.
She hath brought much pork home to New York
and did the general coffers fill:
Did this in Hillary seem ambitious?
When that the poor have cried, Hillary hath wept:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
I know it's not new, and I know it was leveled against RFK, but as a Southerner, I still get a little chuckle out of Yankees calling newcomers "carpetbaggers."
Why do we need more crooks, liars and thieves in government. I thought we were trying to clean that up?
Hillary Clinton we know is all of those things; but why should Pirro get the nod? Doesn't she have the wrong kind of baggage too?