Posted on 06/07/2006 8:38:43 PM PDT by Mia T
I'll SEE ANN COULTER'S 'BILL CLINTON RAPE CHARGE' 1 AND RAISE HER 'ONE HILLARY CLINTON' 2
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton lashed out at Ann Coulter for a "vicious, mean-spirited attack" on a group of outspoken 9/11 widows.... Perhaps her book should have been called 'Heartless.'" the senator said....
The New York Democrat and former first lady said she found it "unimaginable that anyone in the public eye could launch a vicious, mean-spirited attack....
The senator spoke after delivering a speech on protecting children from exposure to sex- and violence-saturated media.
Hillary lashes out at Ann Coulter
Ann Coulter
By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer
Wed Jun 7, 2:09 PM ET
CLINTONS' DOCUMENTED ABUSE OF WOMEN
[FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU! FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME!]
After Juanita Broaddrick made the accusation in 1999, [Clinton]'s attorney, David Kendall, alone answered, saying any such charges were "absolutely false."
Of course, attorney Robert Bennett believed... Clinton when he said he hadn't had sex with Monica Lewinsky and defended the president then on no toss sturdy grounds.
Thus while lawyers can spare Mr. Clinton awkward moments at the podium in which he has to say, "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky" or "I did not fondle that woman, Kathleen Wlley" or "I did not rape that woman, Mrs. Broaddrick," their comments are, in effect, non-denial denials.
Given the silence from the West Wing, Mrs. Broaddrick this week sought answers from Hillary Clinton, whose telescopic feminism apparently sees injustice to women everywhere except the kind which occurs closer to home.
In a letter to Mrs. Clinton recalling their meeting shortly after the reported assault occurred, she wondered about the significance of Mrs. Clinton's words to her at that time. Thank you, Mrs. Broaddrick says Mrs. Clinton told her, for "everything you do for Bill."
"What did you mean, Hillary?" her letter continued. "Were you referring to my keeping quiet about the assault I had suffered at the hands of your husband only two weeks before? Were you warning me to keep quiet?"
The not-so-subtle implication of the letter is that Mrs. Clinton is, in fact, her husband's enabler. Dealing with her husband's promiscuity and worse might keep her from dealing with the important issues facing the people of New York, namely her candidacy. One might call it a Faustian bargain except that even Mephistopheles might not lower himself to sign such a deal....
AN OPEN LETTER TO HILLARY CLINTON
SUNDAY OCT 15, 2000
As I watched Rick Lazio's interview on Fox News this morning, I felt compelled to write this open letter to you, Mrs. Clinton. Brit Hume asked Mr. Lazio's views regarding you as a person and how he perceived you as a candidate. Rick Lazio did not answer the question, but I know that I can. You know it, too.
I have no doubt that you are the same conniving, self-serving person you were twenty-two years ago when I had the misfortune to meet you. When I see you on television, campaigning for the New York senate race, I can see the same hypocrisy in your face that you displayed to me one evening in 1978. You have not changed.
I remember it as though it was yesterday. I only wish that it were yesterday and maybe there would still be time to do something about what your husband, Bill Clinton, did to me. There was a political rally for Mr. Clinton's bid for governor of Arkansas. I had obligated myself to be at this rally prior to my being assaulted by your husband in April, 1978. I had made up my mind to make an appearance and then leave as soon as the two of you arrived. This was a big mistake, but I was still in a state of shock and denial. You had questioned the gentleman who drove you and Mr. Clinton from the airport. You asked him about me and if I would be at the gathering. Do you remember? You told the driver, "Bill has talked so much about Juanita", and that you were so anxious to meet me. Well, you wasted no time. As soon as you entered the room, you came directly to me and grabbed my hand. Do you remember how you thanked me, saying "we want to thank you for everything that you do for Bill". At that point, I was pretty shaken and started to walk off. Remember how you kept a tight grip on my hand and drew closer to me? You repeated your statement, but this time with a coldness and look that I have seen many times on television in the last eight years. You said, "Everything you do for Bill". You then released your grip and I said nothing and left the gathering.
What did you mean, Hillary? Were you referring to my keeping quiet about the assault I had suffered at the hands of your husband only two weeks before? Were you warning me to continue to keep quiet? We both know the answer to that question.
Yes, I can answer Brit Hume's question. You are the same Hillary that you were twenty years ago. You are cold, calculating and self-serving. You cannot tolerate the thought that you will soon be without the power you have wielded for the last eight years. Your effort to stay in power will be at the expense of the state of New York. I only hope the voters of New York will wake up in time and realize that Hillary Clinton is not an honorable or an honest person.
I will end by asking if you believe the statements I made on NBC Dateline when Lisa Myers asked if I had been assaulted and raped by your husband? Or perhaps, you are like Vice-President Gore and did not see the interview.
|
|
Talk-show host Tom Scott of Clear Channel Broadcasting, New Haven (WELI 960) asked Shays about the mysterious impeachment "evidence room," prompting the GOP moderate to say that Broaddrick "disclosed that she had been raped, not once, but twice" to Judiciary Committee investigators.
Shays, who is often hailed by the New York Times for his independent judgment and good sense, found the evidence compelling:
"I believed that he had done it. I believed her that she had been raped 20 years ago. And it was vicious rapes, it was twice at the same event." Asked point blank if the president is a rapist, Shays said, "I would like not to say that it way. But the bottom line is that I believe that he did rape Broaddrick."
HEAR CHRISTOPHER SHAYS
The rape took place while Bill was running for governor. Hillary came bursting into the room to talk to two people, one of whom I personally know.
She said "You won't believe what this [expletive] did now. He tried to rape some b*tch."
doug from upland to Sean Hannity,
"Who is Juanita Broaddrick? I've never heard of her!" cried Betty Friedan, the founder of modern feminism. Friedan's outburst came at last Friday's conference, entitled "The Legacy and Future of Hillary Rodham Clinton." Held at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. D.C., the event offered a chilling microcosm of an angry, divided America.
Was Friedan telling the truth? Maybe. And maybe all those millions of Germans who professed ignorance of the death camps were telling the truth too. The problem is, having admitted her ignorance, Friedan showed no interest in exploring the matter further. And that was the problem with the Germans too.
Totalitarian impulses flourished at the conference. Taking a page from Soviet psychiatry, some Clintonites suggested that Hillary hating might be a mental illness.
Richard Poe
Given the silence from the West Wing, Mrs. Broaddrick this week sought answers from Hillary Clinton, whose telescopic feminism apparently sees injustice to women everywhere except the kind which occurs closer to home.
In a letter to Mrs. Clinton recalling their meeting shortly after the reported assault occurred, she wondered about the significance of Mrs. Clinton's words to her at that time. Thank you, Mrs. Broaddrick says Mrs. Clinton told her, for "everything you do for Bill."
"What did you mean, Hillary?" her letter continued. "Were you referring to my keeping quiet about the assault I had suffered at the hands of your husband only two weeks before? Were you warning me to keep quiet?"
The not-so-subtle implication of the letter is that Mrs. Clinton is, in fact, her husband's enabler. Dealing with her husband's promiscuity and worse might keep her from dealing with the important issues facing the people of New York, namely her candidacy. One might call it a Faustian bargain except that even Mephistopheles might not lower himself to sign such a deal....
What did you mean, Hillary? Were you referring to my keeping quiet about the assault I had suffered at the hands of your husband only two weeks before? Were you warning me to continue to keep quiet? We both know the answer to that question.
Yes, I can answer Brit Hume's question. You are the same Hillary that you were twenty years ago. You are cold, calculating and self-serving. You cannot tolerate the thought that you will soon be without the power you have wielded for the last eight years. Your effort to stay in power will be at the expense of the state of New York. I only hope the voters of New York will wake up in time and realize that Hillary Clinton is not an honorable or an honest person.
|
|
SUSAN ESTRICH ON "DREDGING UP" THE RAPE OF JUANITA BROADDRICK + "ALL THAT OLD CLINTON STUFF"
|
Unfortunately for the clintons, all this old-news "old news" serves only to remind us that the clintons and their transparent schemes are, themselves, old news.2
QUINTESSENTIAL CLINTON ILLOGIC
When Estrich argues that missus clinton will benefit from an electorate increasingly ignorant of the clintons' sorry legacy, she has it exactly backwards.
With 100% name recognition and at most 10% corruption-failure recognition, missus clinton has only one way to go.
And it ain't up.3
Estrich's error is rooted in the assumption that for certain segments of the population, ignorance is immutable. (The perpetual welfare state, contradictorily, is the fallacious and yet self-fulfilling endpoint of such thinking.)
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 election of 2004 confirmed missus clinton's worst fears:
The white woman, the only real swing voter, the demographic the Democrats MUST get in order to win the White House, has turned red.
The clintons' triple rape of Juanita Broaddrick4 and their willful, self-serving utter failure to confront terrorism are the one-two punch that has the potential to knock the clintons off the public stage.... For good.... And for The Good.
|
December 7, 1941+64
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton
Hillary Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding, 'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It is in that light that I make this not-so-modest proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
The context of our concern today--regardless of political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on Terror, but the larger fear is that our democracy may not survive.
We have the requisite machines, power and know-how to defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do we have the will?
In particular, do we have the will to identify and defeat the enemy in our midst?
Answerable to no one, heir apparent in her own mind, self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton incarnates this insidious new threat to our survival.
What we decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times.
COMPLETE LETTER |
bump!
mathematical model ping
Zarqawi-hillary-mathematical model ping
Its fascinating that even conservatives are shy, for the most part, of embracing Ann Coulter's clear headed assessment of the so called "Jersey Girls".
Most provacatively, Coulter wrote to the effect that never had she seen four women enjoying their husband's deaths more, emphasizing her argument that the press and a compliant governments elevation/transformation of the women's grief to the level of moral infallibility as policy analysts and heroic whistle blowers in the matter of U.S. responses to terrorism pre and post 9/11.
As Dorthy Rabinowitz has pointed out, the whole specticle was offensive, "The 9/11 Widows - Americans are beginning to tire of them" quoting Monica Gabrielle saying, stupidly, "I watched my husband murdered live on TV. . . . At any point in time the casualties could have been lessened, and it seems to me there wasn't even an attempt made." [http://www.opinionjournal.com/medialog/?id=110004950
].
Coulter merely presents America and especially conservatives with a threshold question. "Does Truth Matter?".
The answer of many is no truth does not matter. The special pleading (an express form of logical fallacy) of the bereaved, their alignment with the jurassic media conspiracy, and cultural standards set by daytime television shows, have brought us to the place where the truth does not matter and speaking it can be dangerous.
Hillary Clinton, predictably spoke to the victim-media-cultural alliance in the dull cadence of cross walk monitor - how terrible to mock these victims, how hateful toward women.
Coulter's response vividly demonstrates the reason that the question of whether truth matters should be answered yes, and why that view is long overdue in political discussion. Her between the eyes, direct, clear challenge to Clinton's hypocracy, available on Drudge for hours, for the world to read, is representative of the only kind of political discussion capable of restoring authentic American values and integrity to our political discourse.
At some point, after the first interviews, after the features, and after the follow ups. And before they began making Kerry commercials and denying Rebpublicans use of real footage of Presidents Bushes remarks at "gournd zero". These women gave up the right to insulated from critiscm and the nature of that criticsm is justified by the degree of intellectual and factual distortion they themselves had introduced to the subject of 9/11 and national security.
By merely speaking a simple and obvious, but politically incorrect truth, Coutler has demolished the media pretense that the Jersy Girls have any claim to insight, knowledge, or understanding of the events and forces that killed their husbands, as well as revealed the characterological and political essence of Hillary Clinton and the Left so that their power-lust, ruthlessness, and deceit can not be ignored, and valuable time nor attention are wasted carring out a ritual pretense that the Left actually cares about America, that the media is objective, or that the Left has any values to be shared.
She stays hidden/cowers like a sleazy dog. But then again,
there are so many answers that she has always needed to provide -
- she intuitively must hide from any and all queries.
Mrs William Jefferson Blythe Cli'ton:
Dangerously-dullard, psychopathic, recidivist, treasonous, lying, looting, thieving, mass-murdering, co-serial-raping [Any ol'] gangsters' moll.
And wannabe "president."
Dream on, Mrs Cli'ton.
Dream on.
clear challenge to Clinton's hypocrisy
Missus clinton's role in the clinton rapes and predations puts the Coulter charge beyond the realm of simple hypocrisy. It was a challenge to clinton's ruthlessness and depravity.
bump
THE POLITICS OF DUMPING HILLARY (see post 53)
grotesquerie
zarqawi-hillary fyi
& bump back to ya
<< Excellent!
clear challenge to Clinton's hypocrisy
Missus clinton's role in the clinton rapes and predations puts the Coulter charge beyond the realm of simple hypocrisy. It was a challenge to clinton's ruthlessness and depravity. >>
Absolutely.
Interestingly about 8-10 years ago I wrote pretty much the same stuff of the left as that covered in Ms Coulter's latest -- and a bunch more. About its propensity for parading its unpopular pushes for power behind the 'political correctness' protected -- poofters and others -- for example. And, from first hand observations and the aggregation of the experiences of several decades and several hundred Earth circumnavigations, about CNN's and various other's virulent un-and-anti-Americanism abroad and cynical paid promulgation of the propaganda of their various client states', for example, And even, around the time of her split from FR, sent an outline to 'Trixie,' who turned it down. So I am pleased to see Miss Coulter at last calling the Left on that particular manifestation of its insidious cunning.
And craven cowardidice.
G-d bless your passion, your persistence, your perveverance and your work, Ms Mia!
You were ahead of the curve. ;)
The foisting of hillary clinton by hillary clinton is an ugly sight. I suspect the Ds will eventually succeed in dumping her. For good... and for The Good.
<< You were ahead of the curve. ;) >>
What's this, "were" stuff, Pale Face??
You and I are surveying the swamps and ordering the bulldozers and drafting and engineering the next century's roads and bridges, that most folks can't yet even fantasize and won't in their lifetimes.
And isn't Hillary's public degeneration an awful sight?
And sick fun?
Better in a way than had she gone to prison for the 250 years or so she earned and so richly deserves.
So Orenthal James Simpsonesque.
She is choosing this fate. She and that other rapist would have been much wiser to just go away.
thanx again :)
<< She is choosing this fate. She and that other rapist would have been much wiser to just go away. >>
Any Rodham?
Any Clinton?
Wise?
Surely, Dear Lady, you jest?
[And time enough for her to know, too late, she missed her cue to exit left]
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.