Posted on 07/10/2006 5:14:07 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
There could be an additional, unspoken reason behind Sen. Hillary Clinton’s recent declaration that she won’t support Sen. Joe Lieberman if he loses the Democratic primary in Connecticut – payback.
Lieberman, as Hillary well recalls, took her husband Bill to task over the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
As NewsMax reported last week, Clinton said she would support the nominee chosen by Connecticut Democrats in the August 8 primary, even though Lieberman has announced that he plans to run as an independent if he loses.
"I believe we must honor the decisions made by Democratic primary voters,” Hillary said.
But columnist Margaret Carlson, writing for Bloomberg.com, points out: "You can also interpret Clinton’s swipe at Lieberman as an act of lingering resentment against the man who scolded her husband during impeachment proceedings shortly after his admission in August 1998 that he had been lying to the country for seven months.
"Lieberman took to the Senate floor to slam Clinton ‘for having extramarital relations with an employee half his age . . . in the vicinity of the Oval Office. Such behavior is not just inappropriate. It is immoral.’”
Carlson then opines: "Revenge isn’t an admirable emotion but at least it’s evidence of some emotion from a woman who showed none during one of the most public cases of philandering ever . . . She may have been finally getting back at the Democrat who didn’t stand by her man.”
Carlson is a long time Clinton supporter and Time magazine contributor.
Lieberman is facing a strong primary challenge from millionaire businessman Ned Lamont, and many Connecticut Democrats are unhappy about the senator’s support for the Iraq war.
LOL!
(So I wasn't the only one!)
How are the polls looking?
Well... were you the wench?? enquiring minds want to know...
Back about August 1998 when Clinton's ratings were at a low point (whether before or after Clinton's angry non-apology apology on TV, I don't recall), Lieberman made a speech in which he emoted over how upset he was at Clinton's conduct. I think the speech helped guarantee that the Democrats in Congress would never support any serious steps against Clinton, nothing worse than venting hot air or maybe a meaningless censure resolution, because of Lieberman's image as a pillar of rectitude in the Senate.
I have no idea who the third party was.
Check my post at #35
&&
Oh, you poor thing! What a hideous sight to behold. Sounds like, even then, she knew that she was so far above the rest of us that she doesn't have to clean up her own bodily fluids, much less apologize.
That's a question better put to "TNCMAXQ",to whom I was responding in my earlier post.
You're being way too kind. What comes to mind when I think of Hillary, well.....lucky you and the mods can't read my mind :)
Man oh man. This is a first.
I agree with Hillary here. If the voters in the Democrat party choose a candidate, as a member she should support that candidate. That is what representative government is all about.
Politically, she would have been a heck of a lot smarter to just keep her mouth shut if she didn't support Lieberman. Or, perhaps given her current status amount Dem leftists, she is trying to help him out. Who knows.
All I know is that the Democrats (and Republicans for that matter) should elect whoever they please and the party elites need to endorse that person unless there are very unusual circumstances like criminal malfeasance.
Sounds like you've gotta add that story to the other ones on your home page.
It really does read like he broke one of the "three most famous promises"...
"I'm so used to reading lewinsky as a common noun that it makes this headline rather hilarious."
It is hard to keep score. For instance, who is giving the Lewinski's? Who is receiving them? What is a Lewinski? Who is Lewinski? If Hillary gets a Lewinski does that mean she has a new Intern, or does it mean that someone is sucking up to her?
I havent seen another poll since the one showing Lieberman up 55-40, I think. But Lamont seems to have more enthusiasm among his supporterts. Lieberman has just starting running more negative ads, including one that says Lamont voted with Republicans 80% of the time when he was a local town official. Hard to know which lefty is lying more. ;) Bottom line is Lieberman still seems to be favored to win the primary Aug 8 but a lot of observers will not be surprised if Lamont beats him.
"...Pretty sad what the Dems have been reduced to...."
Breaks your heart, doesn't it?
Sir, you have had a very interesting, somewhat offbeat life. Your profile is really fascinating, McNamara's bricks and all.
Have you written a book yet?
Still, this "stand by her man" stuff comes up often enough that there continues to be a place for retelling it.
Which brings up my second story about the "fabulous twosome/threesome/whatever". This is about Billzo.
The Dem Presidential campaign had picked an empty office building down the street for their headquarters. That meant Billzo would have ample opportunities to visit the commercial district stretching from Wilson Bridge to Fort Belvoir.
Recall that the last time I'd seen him, about 18 years earlier, I was told he was going to be President someday? That's the only time I can recall meeting the guy until one day about Noon I was in my van driving back from lunch at a restaurant just South of the Dem Headquarters, and off in the distance I saw Billzo at the Jerry's Pizza. He had one of the streetwalkers on US 1 with him and was grabbing a boob while pressing her up against the open door of the black pickup truck he'd borrowed.
Out of the blue he turned and looked at me (in my van) and waved and smiled like he remembered me.
And I'm sure he did.
Want a brick?
I haven't earned it. I will leave it for the guys who have.
No The DemocRAT Party is the Socialist Party. Harry Truman, Jack Kennedy and FDR need not apply.
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.