Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Hillary strategy (and one of Bill's worst ideas)
Pittsburgh Tribune Review ^ | Sunday, May 25, 2003 | British journalist

Posted on 05/25/2003 4:27:49 AM PDT by Liz

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:03:00 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last
To: 300winmag
I think it was Geraldine

I was just being snotty.

I agree with the J Bush and Condi ticket. It's a natural AND a good stepping stone for Condi to move up.

41 posted on 05/25/2003 11:19:35 AM PDT by zip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Liz
"...too many stale Clinton worshippers embedded in the Bush administration -- who stand out like easy, mini-skirted sluts at a convention of virgins -- and who must be removed, pronto." Amen to that!

The Clintons had EIGHT years to take care of America first - they took care of Bill and Hillary first and FOB's as long as those people could provide for the Clintons otherwise, they went MIA like Vernon Jordan and dozens of others.

The tackiest couple ever to live in the White House will have most Americans reminding them of their lies, their deceptions, their caviler attitude towards security while in the White House and the sale of American Security to foreign agents for money for the DNC. Hillary’s continued flaunting of her huge office and homes all at the taxpayer’s expense. Her continued marriage to a known rapist and continued philander and crook of a husband. Her criticisms of the FBI when she commandeered dozens of files from them, will fall flat as will her belated interest in airport security when it was Al Gore along with Linda Daschle let that issue die for special interests. If she can ever be made to answer hard questions from someone with the hard facts of truth, the Vixen Clinton will find herself at last in a whole lot of trouble.

The only way Hillary could win the election is through fraud; we all know she will try that avenue as she could never win any other way.

42 posted on 05/25/2003 11:20:27 AM PDT by yoe (Hillary is not a Centrist - never was; never will be.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
Someone needs to ask Hillary about her "Royal Children" Who are they and why are they and where are they?
43 posted on 05/25/2003 11:27:39 AM PDT by freekitty (W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bart99
I've asked many times, only cause I'm ignorant and REALLY don't know...... but......... what is her position on illegal (and legal - the bad ones) immigrants

She made her position clear in the run-up to her Presidential re-election campaign in 1996: illegal immigrants are welcome, as long as they know for whom to vote.

By the way, the Constitution restricts one to serve no more than two terms as POTUSA. She's had her run (remember "We are the President", "two for one", ad nauseum).

44 posted on 05/25/2003 11:42:41 AM PDT by UpNAtEm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin; martin_fierro
The real fight is against a complicit media who has
covered up every Clinton crime that they possibly could.

Jayson Blair is just the tip of the NYT fraud iceberg.

45 posted on 05/25/2003 12:46:08 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: UpNAtEm; bart99
.....what is (Hillary's) position on (immigration)....

Everybody wonders when, how and why the floodgates were thrown open.

The calculating Clintons had it all figured out when they were candidates for prez. The conniving Clintons actually used a formula....they figured for every 100,000 or so that were let in, that meant so many votes for them.

It's an old Dumbocratic trick as when the party bosses would register immigrants as they walked off the boats at Ellis Island. That's why for a long, long time European-Americans were strongly Democratic .....until the party went left.

Dumbocrats are still the Party of Hyphenates.

46 posted on 05/25/2003 12:56:46 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: yoe
To the conniving Clintons, public service is self-service.
47 posted on 05/25/2003 1:02:41 PM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: zip
Thanks for looking!
48 posted on 05/25/2003 2:04:28 PM PDT by backhoe (The 1990's ? "The Decade of Fraud(s)..."( Oslo, dot-bombs, clintons...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Liz
there are sufficient numbers of her husband's old staff in executive positions with President Bush to, at best, delay his responses and, at worst, tell him these are isolated instances that don't deserve his attention.

It generally takes about two years for a new Administration to fully purge itself of the leftover scum of the old one. Those two years have passed.

The only Clintonistas in the Executive Branch that Bush has to worry about are in the State Department, and as the bitchslapping into line of Colin Powell shows, they have been completely marginalized ... which explains why they've been reduced to putting up nasty Bush-hate editorial cartoons on the walls of Foggy Bottom. (And personally, I think a White House staffer should simply walk the halls of State, note every office with such "artwork," and hand a list of those staffers back to the WH staff to be directly fired by President Bush.)

49 posted on 05/26/2003 9:34:35 AM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Also depends on what federal job classifications the Clinton scum latched onto while they were defacing our gov't. Some of them could be in there forever. Supposedly incorporatng several agencies into Homeland Security was gonna purge sub-human Clinton Dumbocrats. Remains to be seen.
50 posted on 05/26/2003 9:56:45 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
"The thought of her being Commander In Chief is frightening and something I would work very hard against. "

I just have a funny feeling 90% of the ladies won't vote for a female for president regardless of party.

Ladies?

yitbos

51 posted on 05/28/2003 8:00:30 PM PDT by bruinbirdman (Veritas vos liberabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson