WHY HILLARY MUST NOT WIN. WHY HILLARY CANNOT WIN.

With the BILLIONS we have given to global charity, Senator Santorum (RINO-PA) indicated that he wants to devote an even large % of US GDP to global charity.

Clearly, Santorum is saying that no matter we we give now, that is not enough in his view. There is no other reason to state what he said unless he feels we are not giving enough. Additionally, his idea matches what the UN is saying, and that is tying global charity to GDP.

Your chart of global charity is meaningless. There are many sources of charity the US gives and that chart may have pulled from one category and not taken onto account the others. If there is a source for that data, it is not legible.

Example, I am sure foreign debt forgiven is not in there, and that is global charity the second the debt is forgiven (and usually, the second the original loan was made, for that matter).

Also, some global charity is buried in, e.g., the Defense budget. Tsunami charity, e.g., was buried in the defense budget. Regardless of the weak data chosen in that chart, domestic and global charity is at an all time high.

Heck, I would vote for you, jla.

Flattering me, (and using a quaint, endearing colloquialism like "heck" to boot!), will not make me change my stubborn, principled mind. :^)

Harold Ickes, too. Assume he continues to fund raise for the beast and blackmail any threat the Clintonistas fear.

Ickes seem to have had a falling out with the Clintons after his debacle of a run for chairman of the DNC.

Not sure what happened, but he wound up dropping out, then endorsing Dean, and made some critical comments.

Either way, unless they patch and make up, he is done with the Clintons now.

I still say when push comes to shove, you will not place that de facto vote for missus clinton by either voting for a third party or sitting out the election.

You talk a good game for a Jewish gal who can't even bake honey cakes. :^)

Thanks for your hard work in compiling all this, Mia T. That was the first time I was able to see the Estrich clip from the O'Reilly Factor. Good grief. Obviously Susan Sychofant would be an excellent choice for Hilary's VP. Unbelievable.

;)

thanx. It was an amazing interview.

;)

Actually, I'm not sure Ickes is in missus clinton's 'semi-inner circle' anymore....

"I'm one of the few in the semi-inner circle who [doesn't] think she can win" [the White House].

Harold Ickes
Time, January 2005

GEFFEN UNLOADS ON HILLARY: 'SHE CAN'T WIN'

DRUDGE REPORT
Thu Feb 17 2005 23:13:00 ET

Sen. Hillary Clinton should not count on help from Hollywood mogul David Geffen in her possible run for the White House.

Geffen, who was a generous supporter and pal of Bill Clinton when he was president, trashed Hillary's prospects last night during a Q&A at the 92nd St. Y in New York City.

"She can't win, and she's an incredibly polarizing figure," the billionaire Democrat told his audience. "And ambition is just not a good enough reason."

Lloyd Grove reports in fresh editions of the NY DAILY NEWS the audience broke with "hearty applause" over Geffen's comments.

Developing...

Don't be surprised to see Joe Lieberman run.....I think enough time will have passed since the Gore fiasco, and I think he'll have a good shot at capturing the Democrat nomination.....he'll capture many swing voters.

....if I were the Democrats, I would run him. I think he's the only one I see with a chance of winning the Presidency for the Dems.

Hillary is nothing more than an ultra-liberal marxist, fit for the voters stupid enough to elect her. Perhaps she may want to try running for the Chinese Communist Party chairmanship.

Never underestimate either of the Clintons ability to mount a political campaign. Bill won twice in spite of the obvious scandals and Hill did easily win in NY.

I agree. We must not underestimate their ruthlessness... or their machine.

However, without their machine, (the clinton 'infrastructure'), they are, taken one at a time, or even as the 'twofer,' (one could argue, especially as the 'twofer'), insufferable mediocrities, not half as smart as their PR would have us believe....

(When clinton promised us 'two for the price of one,' did he understand at the time that one was not enough?)

^{"I have no infrastructure to deal with this."
bill clinton
One of the unintended consequences of America's rejection of mandated political correctness is that legends crumble.
The classic case is that of Bill Clinton. The conventional wisdom has been (even from his critics) that notwithstanding policy and philosophy disagreements Bill Clinton was/is a smart, charming, even brilliant man.
The reality that is becoming increasingly clear to those willing to see is that "The President Clinton Package" and his team of advisers, managers, and spin doctors, were smart, charming and at times brilliant. However, left to his own devices and without the support, advice, counsel and coercive powers of office, Bill is (for the second time in two months) emphatically demonstrating he ain't all that smart.
Bill's big yap:
Geoff Metcalf slams Clinton's foot-in-mouth sophistry}

Missus clinton, in particular, is maintained daily by all manner of device, including, but not limited to: the zipper-hoist, the throne, the complex question and other sleights of hand, and, of course, the jackboot.

^{hillary clinton, "Coverup Genius"}

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

We must identify and attack their vulnerabilities. (I believe the white-women demographic is key... and an easy target for us. Will expand in future posts.)
We must defend against their reflexive vote fraud.
We must remember that nationally, a clinton has never achieved a majority... and we must, therefore, anticipate a Perot plurality ploy, via a third candidate or a divisive issue...
WE MUST NOT FALL FOR IT.
WE WILL BE DIVIDED BY THE CLINTONS ONLY IF WE DIVIDE.

We must remain united. We, all of us, must put aside our pet problems and personal preferences, however critical, and vote en masse for whichever candidate the GOP serves up.

What we decide to do about missus clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times.

What we decide to do about missus clinton will tell us much about ourselves.

It is no accident--and the Sheehy hagiography notwithstanding, it is certainly not because of any patriarchal society--that this reflexive kleptocrat never sought office. She never ran simply because she is a perfectionist and an incompetent who cannot tolerate personal (as opposed to bill-related) criticism, witness the prescreened, heavily controlled, sycophantic crowds, her pre-programmed, totally scripted appearances (or, alternatively, her totally mute "listening tour"), her unavailability to the press, indeed, her "bluebird."
Mia T, 8.16.05
HILLARY IN AVIARY
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
ARTICLE
Clinton Administration Veteran:
"Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life."

My two cents' worth--and I think it is the two cents' worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994--is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn't smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly.... there is no reason to think that she would be anything but an abysmal president.

J. Bradford DeLong
professor of economics, Berkeley
clinton Administration veteran
The clintons, as is their wont, are now taking this proxy scheme to even more outrageous extremes. The latest: an actual hillary clinton proxy presidency, populated on both sides of the camera by assorted rodham and clinton ex-staffers, sycophants and should-be felons, witness the latest hire.
'Commander-in-Chief,' a show that sets out to crown a 'queen,' instead exposes the kitschy simplemindedness of Hollywood fantasy and the special sway and shortsightedness of the pathologic ego.
Mia T, 10.27.05
THE DANGER OF RUNNING VICARIOUSLY
Bill O'Reilly chews up and spits out the hillary clinton candidacy
(clip included)

Having failed to snare the Nobel Peace Prize by ignoring terrorism, clinton has apparently decided to intensify his America-bashing on foreign soil, the method employed by Jimmy Carter to great (if somewhat belated) effect. (The Nobel committee, sufficiently mollified only after 24 years of the peanut president's America-bashing, awarded Carter his 1978 Peace Prize finally in 2002.)
Meanwhile, back in the Senate, the missus, the other half of the clinton construct, maintains her hawkish pose (though not without bird problems of another sort).
Yet another example of the clinton conflation ploy, (see SCHEMA PINOCCHIO: how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor), this variant allows "clinton, the construct" to hold two mutually exclusive positions simultaneously, thereby enabling the missus to avoid in '08 the trap that repeatedly ensnared the ever 'nuanced' Kerry in '04.
Do you now understand how stupid the clintons think you are?
A CALL TO IMPEACH CLINTON IN ABSENTIA
Mia T, 11.17.05

REINVENTING HILLARY... AGAIN
(clinton machine dumps Geena Davis for Margaret Thatcher)
how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor₂
Mia T, 11.23.05

It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem.

G. K. Chesterton

Reviews of "Commander-in-Chief" mislead; they suggest that this new ABC offering, this electuary of suds and psychologizing, is optional for missus clinton, that Rod Lurie's latest clinton agitprop is nothing more than the icing on missus clinton's inaugural cake.

The reviews miss the point of the show, (i.e., the show is not optional but necessary (though hardly sufficient) if clinton is to prevail), because the reviews fail to identify missus clinton's problem in the first place. And circular reasoning compounds the error.

THE PROBLEM
While America appears not to be ready for a female president under any circumstances, the post-9/11 realities pose special problems for a female presidential candidate. Add to these the problems unique to missus clinton. The reviews make the mistake of focusing on the problems of the generic female presidential candidate running during ordinary times.
These are not ordinary times. America is waging the global War on Terror; the uncharted territory of asymmetric netherworlds is the battlefield; the enemy is brutal, subhuman; the threat of global conflagration is real.
Defeating the enemy on the battlefield isn't sufficient. For America to prevail, she must also defeat a retrograde, misogynous, troglodyte mindset. To successfully prosecute the War on Terror, it is essential that the collective patriarchal islamic culture perceives America as politically and militarily strong. Condi Rice excepted, this requirement presents an insurmountable hurdle for any female presidential candidate, and especially missus clinton, historically antimilitary, forever the pitiful victim, and, according to Dick Morris, "the biggest dove in the clinton administration."
It is ironic that had the clintons not failed utterly to fight terrorism... not failed to take bin Laden from Sudan... not failed repeatedly to decapitate a nascent, still stoppable al Qaeda... the generic female president as a construct would still be viable... missus clinton's obstacles would be limited largely to standard-issue clintonisms: corruption, abuse, malpractice, malfeasance, megalomania, rape and treason... and, in spite of Juanita Broaddrick, or perhaps because of her, Rod Lurie would be reduced to perversely hawking the "First Gentleman" instead of the "Commander-in-Chief."
Mia T, 10.02.05
HILLARY'S COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF PROBLEM
COMPLETE ARTICLE
see descriptor morphs

Mia T, 11.23.05
REINVENTING HILLARY... AGAIN
(clinton machine dumps Geena Davis for Margaret Thatcher)
how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor₂

Dont slight her , she is dangerous. She will have the media %100 on her side.She will have the majority of women voting for her , she will have massive funds behind her .

She will have the majority of women voting for her

Not true. Especially when we get done with her.

As I argue above, the white women demographic, the only real swing vote, has turned red because of the threat of terrorism. We will reinforce and expand that political realignment with additional information on the clintons.

bump

ping

bump

Clinton Administration Veteran:"Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life."

Clinton Administration Veteran:
"Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life."