Posted on 11/17/2007 12:49:59 PM PST by FocusNexus
This country has so much to lose right now that these types of scams and shams are a dis-service to the American people.
I htink this question was meant to help “humanize” Hillary, but it backfired, as these revelations came out.
It meant to help Hillary attract more women voters.
But what everyone sees now is how conniving she is — her campaign warned CNN to be nice to her, CNN followed her order to the extent of picking the people asking the questions and the questions.
If she can’t handle questions from the audience, how will she stand up to our enemies?
Why are we suprised at these antics? These dispicable media whores and their “step over thier dead grandmother to get a vote, liberals” all sleep in the same bed. Does this not bother anyone? They are deliberatley spitting in our faces and calling us idiots. Open your eyes America these people are dangerous and are not true Americans!
What makes you think Hillary, the Democrats and the MSM care about the country and the American people? :/ Clearly they don't, unfortunately the American people still don't realize this.
Clinton News Network back in full swing!
I think this is all a ploy to make this kind of stuff “old news” and unworthy of comment when it happens next year.
Notice no one is talking about the money/fund raising scandles? It’s such old news that the Clintons are taking shady money that no one cares anymore.
I thought Bush was “the liar, the faker, the fraud and the cheat”.
Just look at these phonies!
Well, if most voters think this sort of telecast is honest fair and impartial, they deserve whatever they get.
Us sane ones will just go along for the ride until the inevitable train wreck.
When the majority of voters have an IQ under 80, and an IQ2 (Informed Quotient) under 20, that telecast would be deemed significant. Me? you couldn't pay me enough or torture me enough to watch that crap -- even if it weren't exposed for the sham that it is.
It's in the article:
"At last night's Democratic presidential debate, the candidates faced questions on Pakistan, trade policy, and merit pay for teachers. So how did it come to pass that, at the close of the debate, Senator Hillary Clinton was asked what sort of jewelry she liked?
"Do you prefer diamonds or pearls?" Maria Luisa Parra-Sandoval, one of several audience members who posed questions, asked her.
"I want both," Mrs. Clinton replied to laughter."
They always eat their own.
Despite CNN’s stacking the debate questions, their coverage post debate ran like a Clinton campaign. While they billed Hillary as once again unassailable having weather the one storm, they trashed her main rivals (all missed their one chance to ever dent Hillary) and also boosted the lesser rans as distinguished VP candidates for her ticket. Crowley and the Anderson Cooper sub (Soledad?) were horrid. Its little wonder the polls are so stacked to Hillary with little regard as to the fact the did 180 degree reversal on Spitzer’s DL plan. With that kind of ridiculous force-fed “reporting”. They failed to even point out she changed her position within a 1.5 week period giving no explanation and not even being asked about it.
I love how the “person” that asked the question was almost a Truman Scholar. Education is such a joke these days with the worthless generation of cowards and their self congratulatory nonsense.
You know what gets me....it's the 'Rats and their myrmidons in the MSM thinking they won't get caught. If only all the nation's enemies were this dang dim.
It's in the article:
OOops.
New York Times. I stopped going to their link because you have to sign up to read articles there, and I refuse to do that.
Since the posted article was entirely about a specific question, logically that question, if nothing else, should be part of the excerpt.
Just saying...
Useful idiots beget useful fools who beget useful tools!
The country survived the useful idiots, survived the useful fools, and perhaps can survive the useful tools...but we don’t have to like them, employ them, or swim with them!
Some of the comments posted on the link are worth reading—esp. #26 by Ruth Canon, about the Clintons’ ties to the infamous Singer of Princeton University.
She should have asked, “Leather or lace”?
I just went to the link and read the article (and comments) without signing up—I don’t know if they have dropped that requirement or if this is a different category item.
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.