Replies

Thanx + done, pinz. :)

I originally posted the report of the Greenfield interview of missus clinton on January 22, 2002. The interview likely took place a few days or weeks earlier....

You can find the transcript at the following link:
THE COMPLETE ANNOTATED_('_{you know}_') INTERVIEW

As for hillary clinton making a fool of herself, note that even her own handlers don't trust her not to in an unscripted, (even friendly) venue.

As for hillary clinton making a fool of herself, note that even her own handlers don't trust her not to in an unscripted, (even friendly) venue.--me

And with good cause:

Hillary in Aviary

: by Mia T, November 2000, sometime before "the first Tuesday after the first Monday"

"Bird of paradise" would have been a brilliant wrong answer for the New-York-state-bird question; in one fell swoop it would have flattered the necessary constituency, rendered hillary's cheating marginally believable and suggested a quick, secure, creative mind.

But the obsessively perfectionistic dodo wasn't able to fake even one wrong answer in the Letterman phony "pop quiz," a nostalgic electuary of "Twenty-One" fraud and (Groucho) Marxist left-wing crow.

Instead, this documented incompetent with no apparent creative or analytic (not to mention thespian) skills gushed forth with a lame--"It's the bluebird--I know that" --globally exposing herself to be the corrupt clown that the sentient among us already know she is.

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."

Thus, the question begging to be asked is this:

Why would this compulsively perfectionistic grotesquerie allow herself to be unambiguously exposed as the utter incompetent and fraud and fool and horror that she is?

And why would this self-proclaimed protector of "the children" prolong her own child's profound trauma by forcing her own bottom-heavy self, soiled in its own right, onto the political stage?

The answer, I believe, resides more in liberty loss than in power gain.

Simply put, she is not running for office; she is running from indictment.

And I fear Starr successor, Robert Ray, is unable to catch her...
Or catch on. (On second thought, maybe the problem is that he does....)

Ray's recent statement , " I have been charged with responsibly conducting the work of this office. Some of my responsibility is to ensure that there is no untoward effect on the political process," both confirms and encourages this latest round of clinton raping, pillaging, despoiling, destroying.

You know, I, uh, really, you know, appreciate your, uh, response, and, uh, do seem, you know, to uh, recall, you know, that, uh, interview, you know, in my, uh, far away, you know, uh, memory.