Posted on 12/13/2007 1:23:48 PM PST by rface
You forgot prison...
Yeah but like a jury being told to disregard a remark etc the guy got the news out there
I doubt Hillary is Poed
“THe Toons just can’t grasp that their little tricks don’t work anymore. Now, even the media seems to be tiring of their machinations, calculations, lies, and deceptions. Without the media the Clintons are toast...as they’re coming to realize.”
As Rush says: “They can’t help themselves, they are who they are.”
I wonder what “stunt” Hillary is going to pull tomorrow afternoon?
Nothing happens inside the Clinton Chinese Mafia w/o Harpy’s orders. This is just insulating deniability.
He knows how dangerous those NE roads are...
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
I hope the Democrats (yeah, I know that's like drawing to an inside straight) see this for what it is and vote for Obama in the New Hampshire primary.
Has the Clinton campaign ever published this so-called record? What the heck has she actually done? Nor just talked about, but done?
Brilliant? Genius??? How about just plain evil.
I agree with you but I go further—I believe the Clinton camp planted it from the start, every word of it! I believe they have outlined this strategy from many months back, and will execute it at the right time...
IMO: This is but the first shot in the figurative asassination of Obama by the Clinton camp. He’s getting too much support and fawning now, and is looking like a real threat to the Clinton juggernaut. Great time for them to lean out the window and fire the first shot at the hopeful but woefully unprepared (and unaware) Obama camp.
Other “leaks” like this will occur from “sources other than the Clintons”—probably much of it being fabricated or exaggerated, but based on some truth most likely—nonetheless requiring Obama to duck out early. Then, by default, Hellary obtains a good percentage of those Obama supporters who would never vote for any republican.
Next, they bring in a Ross Perot 3rd party candidate... a “republican” like McCain (who will make a deal with the Clintons, go 3rd party, and trade off their longshot candidacy for the chance at being “loved” by all). This action will drain off more wishy-washy pubbies who also won’t vote the republican ticket, and are willing to burn their vote to stand on their lofty “principles”.
Voila, the Clinton lesson from 1992 and 1996 will very likely put Hellary in the White House with as low a percentage as the Evil Teensy Bent One himself got elected on in 1992—under 44%.
That’s my best guess, much as I hate to think it. But good always triumphs over evil in the long run, and the Clintons are no doubt in my mind very, very evil, so they will receive their just punishment some day...
This isn’t aimed at Obama; it’s aimed at Oprah. This is the Clinton camp’s attempt at a veiled threat to Oprah and her credibility as a “endorser” on the national stage. If there is a hint of drug abuse by Oprah’s candidate, then her image as America’s counselor and healer is thrown out the window. This was meant to shut Oprah up. They’re more afraid of her than Obama.
According to you then, a drug user, a rapist, serial molester, liar marketer of White House bedrooms are all acceptable for the presidency?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This whole sentence is your own imagining, how you got all that out of post 28 is unfathomable to a reasonable person.
Yes, it could be a shot at Oprah as well, but that’s exactly because she is a high visibility/high impact threat as an Obama supporter.
Mucho bang for the Clinton buck indeed.
She was a stoner.. BIG TIME!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oh, let’s not be too gullible, you can hear anything. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone tried to claim that I smoked the wacky weed back in the seventies.........uh, never mind.
If using drugs is acceptable then why shouldn’t sexuall harrassment and rape be acceptable? These are highly anti social and illegalm behavior.
What’s so hard to understand?
I do not think the alleged drug use will hurt Obama. I really don’t. Not after the Clinton presidency.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What is so hard to understand is why you think this sentence says that drug use is okay! What it says is that the author has made a judgement that the Clinton presidency has set such a low standard that it does not seem that this will damage the candidacy of a Democrat. I could name a long list of things I find detestable but the Democrats do all these things and seem to garner more votes by doing so.
If using drugs is acceptable then why shouldn’t sexuall harrassment and rape be acceptable? These are highly anti social and illegalm behavior.
What’s so hard to understand?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Secondly, it is hard to understand how someone can lump drug use and rape together, you may not be aware of this but if every adult who has ever used drugs of any kind disappeared to another world you would either be very, very lonely or you would be looking around wondering where you are. Drug use and rape are not comparable!
They are probably giving each other "high fives" for pulling this whole scenario off.
I think you have it pegged for what it really is.
I don’t give anyone a pass for using drugs. Using them is a felony as is rape. Peoples lives are destroyed in both instances.
Drug use, as you seem to imply is NOT a victimless crime. I contend that drug use destroys families in a wider ranging manner then does rape.
You nailed it! Those scheming, conniving, treacherous slimeballs have been playing this game too long.
“planted it from the start”
Dead right!!!
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.