Posted on 02/17/2006 8:01:45 PM PST by Mia T
That's why every episode starts with someone going into convulsions and falling over unconscious: it's the only way to get them in. Then that great spooky theme song kicks in with the quick flash image of House staring down at them through the microscope, and I know it's time for another hour of biting, hilarious, incredibly non-PC dialogue. That and "24" are the only things left on broadcast TV that I actually look forward to anymore. I tried watching "C.I.C." twice ("House" was on hiatus), but it struck me as less politically partisan than just braindead idiotic.
I agree with your thoughts in this post entirely. If Kerry & Allah Gore could almost win it.....The one thing only a FEW on FR are thinking about...is...(Jaws Theme here) The Serial Molester. There are STILL many idiots & fools in this country that think he was a 'moderate' dem, when his leftist PC administration screwed this country up for years to come. They practiced the politics of emotion, hysteria, & division-just like Hitler did. Think about it-when did this country become so divided? Under the Klintons. It's continued to this day. And the entire democRATic party sold its soul, and became clintonized. That's why I left it. Yes, In my youth, I was a democrat. But that was the democratic party of old. When the moonbats began taking it over in the 70's, I began voting for more independents, and a few republicans. I'm going to admit something to you here-I was fooled, and voted for the Clintons-the first time. Six months later, I knew I'd made the worst election mistake of my life. A weird assortment of mutant -like freak-show candidates became their cabinet-Midgets, dwarves, lesbians,etc. Then they started a war on smokers, gun owners, you name it. I chafed at the bit for a year until I walked into the voting booth in '94,and did something I'd never done before-I voted straight republican, other than 3 independents. I felt, as did many, they had to be stopped, at all costs. I have voted for exactly ONE Crat since '94(locally-he's more conservative than most here-old-school dem).
It took the crats and the media six months to come out of shock-and during that time, many good things were accomplished. But then, they got their act together-drove Gingrich out after turning him into a lightening rod, started the 'catch-phrase' bit- How many times did you hear the mantra "Jack-Booted Thugs". for example? Or "Mean-Spirited"? They must have a meeting every day and decide what the words of the day are-and this line is then repeated ad infinitum by everyone in the party. It's a form of subtle brainwashing. And-this is the Clinton's true legacy-and specialty. Lest anyone forget...neither has ever been convicted of any crime, although they've commited many throughout the years. They're made of Teflon. There are MANY out there (some conservatives, too) who would pull the lever for the name Clinton again in a heartbeat-thinking to themselves all the while, "Well, we KNOW who'll REALLY be President." (wink-wink) And that's the real danger. The Slickster. The end run around the Constitution. It's what they've always planned ("With us, you get two for the price of one.")On their own-they're just so-so. Put them together....And, make no mistake-he will be EVERYWHERE with her on the campaign trail. Daily. You'll see them so much, you'll think they're already back in the White House again. Add the media boost to: war fatigue, doubts about the economy, dissatisfaction with RHINOS, the feeling we're adrift without a paddle (something I've felt since Bush got shot down on his S.S. reform), open border policy, etc; and...the women who'll vote for her because she's a woman , plus they'd get down on their knees for him...I don't believe Maher. I wish I could, but I don't. I'm still scared, the same as Mia is. And.....Bush's conservative credentials are, with me & many others, shaky at best-what if we get a RHINO as the Repub candidate? If that happens...it's over. Just one man's opinion. Ask yourself this question, though....why have they stayed married...even though they don't even live together? Hmmm?? I'm telling you all-they're coming back again, just like Jason, Dracula, Freddy Krueger, & Pinhead, and it will take a hell of a lot of effort to stop the sequel.
Why is Rudy "excellent"?
Miat T. Bump.
The election of '04 told the story.
The following is an excerpt from: (ICKES + ESTRICH PROVIDE ROADMAP--oops!--FOR HILLARY DEFEAT) The venue is Washington Journal (C-SPAN). Enter Harold Ickes, looking weirder, more Ichabod-Crane-on-crank, than usual. Looking weirder still when one remembers that Harold Ickes is a strictly behind-the-scenes sort of guy. Only something very important could have coaxed Harold Ickes onto center stage....21 Forgoing the standard niceties, Ickes launches into his planned tirade. He accuses Bush of terrorizing white women to get their vote.22 (The way he carried on, you would think he was accusing the president of rape or something.)23 By contrast, Bush won only 45% of white women in 2000, so he upped is percentages by 10 points. In 1996, bill clinton won 48% of white women compared to Bob Dole's 43%. That is a huge, huge difference. I don't think you can lay all that at the doorstep of moral values. I think that this president unabashedly and abjectly took the issue of terror and used it to terrorize... white women." HEAR HAROLD ICKES Now fast forward to October 11, 2005. Susan Estrich, alignments adjusted upward--ALL alignments--is on Hannity and Colmes. She is there to huckster The Case for Hillary Clinton, 24 both the book and candidate. Estrich's spiel turns her recent dire warning to the Democrats ("The clintons are sucking up all the air. Get them off the stage!" )25 on its literal head.26 (Air? Who needs air when you have a clinton?) ICKES + ESTRICH PROVIDE ROADMAP FOR HILLARY DEFEAT (oops!) She argues that hillary clinton is the best chance, probably the only chance, for a woman president in our lifetime. The false and demeaning argument and offensive gender bias aside, someone ought to clue in Susan Estrich. Gender feminism requires as its token a functional female. So why is Susan Estrich making such a transparently spurious and insulting argument? She isn't that dumb. For the same reason Harold Ickes is fulminating on C-SPAN. The white woman, the only real swing voter, the demographic the Democrats MUST get in order to win the White House, has turned red. In the immediate aftermath of the 2004 presidential election, a journalistic consensus emerged to explain George W. Bush's victory. Despite the sluggish economy and deteriorating situation in Iraq, voters supported Bush primarily because of his values. One prominently featured exit poll question showed "moral values" to be the most important issue for voters, ahead of terrorism, Iraq, and the economy. Backlash against the Massachusetts court ruling allowing gay marriage and attraction of Bush's appeals to Christian faith helped bring out socially conservative voters and cement Bush's second term. This explains why Bush won Ohio, for example, where an anti-gay marriage proposal was on the ballot. However compelling this story might be, it is wrong. Instead, Bush won because married and white women increased their support for the Republican ticket.... In this article I briefly account for the factors behind Bush's rise in the state-by-state popular vote between 2000 and 2004. This is not the same as identifying who elected Bush. That sort of analysis would put responsibility on white men since they voted 61-38 for Bush and comprise almost half of the active electorate. Instead, I focus on what changed between 2000 and 2004. In this view, it is white women who are responsible because they showed more aggregate change. Identifying a cause for this shift looks for an explanation also in things that changed in the past four years. For example, John Kerry was not exactly Al Gore, so differences between Bush's two opponents could be a factor. But I suggest that such differences are dwarfed by a much larger intervention: the attacks of September 11. Turnout was up in 2004 because the perceived heightening of the stakes after 9-11 and because of intense competition between the candidates in a small number of battleground states. Higher turnout also appears to have helped Bush slightly. But it was the shift of married white women from the Democratic camp to the Republican camp that gave him the edge in 2004. Post Election 2004: An Alternative Account of the 2004 Presidential Election
(ICKES + ESTRICH PROVIDE ROADMAP--oops!--FOR HILLARY DEFEAT) (viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
WHY HILLARY MUST NOT WIN. WHY HILLARY CANNOT WIN.
Mia T, 12.10.05
To better understand why this move is fatal for missus clinton, we must go back to November 8, 2004, which is exactly six days after the re-election of George W. Bush.
"If you look at white women, and I think that was the key to this election, Kerry won 45% based on the exit polls--but they're generally in agreement--Kerry won 45%, Bush won 55% of white women.
Washington Journal
Nov. 8, 2004
C-SPAN
Susan Estrich attempts to tie the fate of all women to the fate of the hillary clinton candidacy in a cynical attempt to get the women's vote.
The election of 2004 confirmed missus clinton's worst fears:
9/11 and the clintons' willful, utter failure for eight years to confront terrorism) were transformative. They caused a political realignment--for all practical purposes permanent--that is not good news for clinton, or for the Democrats, generally.
Next installment...
THE ROADMAP FOR DEFEATING HILLARY
BarryC.Burden
Harvard University
The Forum, Volume2, Issue 42004 Article2
burden@fas.harvard.eduIMPERIOUS HILLARY
(THE REPORTS OF HER DEATH ARE GREATLY UNDERSTATED)
Mia T, 12.05.05
WHY HILLARY MUST NOT WIN. WHY HILLARY CANNOT WIN.
Mia T, 12.10.05
by Mia T, 11.14.05
"I can't recall" Clinton and "little Blue Dress" Clinton need the constant and clear shine of daylight forever and then some!
While the biased "MSM" has lost much of its power, they still need to be pro-actively ridiculed and minimized at every step ... crying "double standards" is not good enough - it does nothing - now in 2006, next in 2008, and even beyond!
post #15 fyi
thx :)
fyi
I'm willing to let Hillery be the Harold Stassen of the 21st Century.
thx :)
I was going to give the standard reply that I didn't want a Congresscritter in the White House like Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford and wanted a leader/manager like a Governor; maybe Jeb. Then my old brain remembered Jimmy and candidates like Stevenson, Romney, Ducockup,etc.
So there is no occupational formula.
Senator Hillary Clinton hasn't seen anything yet until the weblogs start doing their digging and uncover all the skeletons in her closet over her very sordid past. It could get very ugly very fast, to say the least
What gains? It's still 5.1/2-3.1/2 against the Constitution.
... at the risk of letting her be the bill clinton of the 21 century? "You know... the job which we should have done 1... which should have been our primary focus, to find [you know] bin Laden and eliminate al Qaeda." hillary clinton
"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91 and he went to the Sudan. We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden]. At the time, '96, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan." bill clinton
"I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, 'My God, a second plane has hit the tower.' And I said, 'Bin Laden did this.' that's the first thing I said. He said, 'How can you be sure?' I said 'Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.' I thought that my virtual obsession 2 with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him." bill clinton
Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006
Chitchat with Jane Pauley
San Francisco, CA
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live
Stassen ran six times for the nomination and never made it. He ran for PA Senator and didn't make it. Boy Gov of Mid-west is all he did.
Well,we should trust ol' tomato nose's political acumen.After all, he is a comedian and a celebrity(!?)
Yeah, well, all that stuff is well and good-but I hope to hell you're right & I'm wrong. I know a lot can happen between now & then-and will-but-none of us know what those things will be. And they won't necessarily work for us. I still say it hinges (the way things are now, which,again, can & will probably change) on who is on the Republican ticket.
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.