Posted on 06/09/2006 8:46:47 PM PDT by Mia T
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
Why did she do it?
Ever the cowardly opportunist, missus clinton thought she was risking nothing. She thought she could get a free shot here.
She figured most people would be sympathetic to the 9/11 widows because they wouldn't be able to see beyond Ann Coulter's heavy-handed satire7 to her underlying argument, which is this:
The Left uses victims--exploits them--and the victims themselves often exploit their own victimhood-- for the dual purpose of promoting the Left's untenable policies and silencing all dissenting voices.
This tactic--a subtle form of McCarthyism--is premised on the Left's pet pc theory of victim unassailability, which it has made a self-fulfilling truism with its Cindy Sheehans and "Jersey Girls," among others.
In the end, however, clinton's decision to take on Coulter is yet another example of her sheer incompetence.8
With missus clinton's 30-year history of real abuse of women, what could have possessed her to insert herself here? Unfailing arrogance, stupidity and a belief that all of us are stupid--that's what.
That woman apparently can't see two steps ahead of herself.
Missus clinton stepped in it Wednesday. Bigtime.
Mia T, 5.15.04
Abraham Lincoln
I'LL SEE ANN COULTER'S 'BILL CLINTON RAPE CHARGE'1 AND RAISE HER 'ONE HILLARY CLINTON'2
illary 'LISTENING TOUR'-'KNOWNOTHING-VICTIM' clinton did something Wednesday she rarely does5: Open her mouth and actually take a stand.
By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer
Wed Jun 7, 2:09 PM ET
HEAR ABE LINCOLN/JOHNNY CASH + PBS' NEIL CONAN
by Mia T, 8.31.05
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
"And if you think I won't say bulls**t to the President, I say move on, cause I'll say what's on my mind."--Cindy Sheehan
The dernier cri of seditious and corrupt Leftists everywhere, pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic renders the Left, irrespective of policy, no less dangerous to Western civilization than the terrorists they aid and abet.
pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
WHY THE LEFT IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."
"He was murdered by Bush."--Cindy Sheehan
"You get that evil maniac out here, 'cause a Gold Star Mother, somebody whose blood is on his hands, has some questions for him."--Cindy Sheehan
"The biggest terrorist is George W. Bush."--Cindy Sheehan
"Gettysburg Address"
November 19, 1863
recited by Johnny Cash
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 |
3. Coulter calls 9/11 widows "witches"
7. Coulter has good arguments but undermines her own credibility, obviously, when she resorts to ad hominem. She does even more harm to her credibility when she jumps back and forth between satire and literal rage, which she does almost always. I suspect it is caused by a lack of control. I don't think she even knows she is doing this.
ping
fyi
thanx :)
:)
That would be a good thing! However, I think truth is worth more than lies and deceit.
In her book, Coulter writes that Democrats "choose only messengers whom we're not allowed to reply to. That's why all Democratic spokesmen these days are sobbing, hysterical women. You can't respond to them because that would be questioning the authenticity of their suffering." As an example, she cites the Jersey Girls, four World Trade Center widows who argued for the commission to investigate 9/11. Then she directly questions the authenticity of their suffering, saying they are "reveling in their status as celebrities... I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' death so much." The comments caused an all-too-expected firestorm, even ensnaring Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who should have known better. "Perhaps her book should have been called Heartless," Senator Clinton said. "I know a lot of the widows and family members who lost loved ones on 9/11. They never wanted to be a member of a group that is defined by the tragedy of what happened."Of course they didn't. But Clinton went some way toward confirming the very thing Coulter had alleged: that certain kinds of discourse -- caustic, yes; outrageous, yes; illiberal, certainly -- are not allowed.
Why Ann Coulter Matters
Time.com ^ | Jun. 09, 2006 | John Cloud
Notice that instead of questioning the underlying premise, that hillary clinton is smart, the left always assumes her act of stupidity is an aberration. (The same holds for the stupid acts of the other clinton.)
Ann Coulter, 'Four Witches', One 'Bitch' + The New McCarthyism of the Left
I'LL SEE ANN COULTER'S 'BILL CLINTON RAPE CHARGE' AND RAISE HER 'ONE HILLARY CLINTON'
The best post I've read about the AC vs HC is:
"Tell Hillary she'd better put some ice on that. You know what I'm talking about!!"
You know, you could have avoided this thread and replied on, or even started, one of those insightful screeds about rock stars.
Mia, You are wonderful! I love to read each and every one of your posts. Keep it going. please!
That is so sweet of you. Thanx. :)
If anyone has the right to make strong statements, it is Ann considering the attempts, including physical threats, the left has made to prevent her from expressing her views.
She must be effective in stating her position. Why else would the left be in such as frenzy to stop her? You do not bother to do it to such extreme to someone ineffective.
I agree with you.
I am quibbling with style, not substance. I am actually guilty of the same thing. It's hard to separate satire and literal rage when you are doing it in real time.
I know what you mean.
fyi
;)
The translation:
FIGHT OF THE YEAR, HEAVY WEIGHT HILLARY AGAINST FLYWEIGHT COULTER
fyi
I'm sure they are referring to physical weight, not intellectual.
Physical, for sure. ;)
If they are talking about weight, they are right. If they are talking about truth, character, integrity and smartness - Ann is no flyweight. As we saw with one truthful statement from Ann, hillary was silenced. A flyweight isn't capable of such power, but Ann is.
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.