MSNBC begs Hillary to run

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Tuesday, September 30, 2003

[JohnHuang2]

MSNBC didn't help itself overcome accusations it is politically biased when the No. 2 Internet newssite in the world led its virtual "news" front page with a "glowing, first-person, editorial column by BusinessWeek Online's Washington bureau chief calling for Hillary Clinton to enter the presidential race.

"Who are the Democrats kidding?" the oddly positioned editorial by Douglas Harbrecht began. "They have somebody who could beat George W. Bush next year. Her name is Hillary Rodham Clinton. The only question, really, is how badly she wants to return to the White House."

The piece continued: "This much is certain: She's foolish to think she can bide her time, strolling effortlessly to the Democratic nomination five years from now. If she wants to make history as the first woman in the Oval Office, her time has arrived."

The story ran under a banner headline that read: "Why Hillary Clinton should run." It was not a question. It was a statement.

On the site's news front, the headline was posed as a question: "Should Hillary run?" But the answer was obvious in the subhead: "If Sen. Clinton wants to be president, now's the time."

"Oh, I've read Hillary's unambiguous denials, and I've heard the analysts and pundits who say a leap in the breach now by the junior senator from New York would be catastrophic for her party and her ambitions," Harbrecht wrote. "She's too inexperienced, they say. She'd so anger the field of declared Democratic presidential candidates that party unity would be splintered, they fret. And in a general election, she'd be a polarizing national figure. It would be like 1968 all over again. Then, another unseasoned, junior senator from New York, Robert Kennedy, brazenly stole the fire from Eugene 'Clean Gene' McCarthy, who with early primary victories had shown just how weak the sitting president, Lyndon B. Johnson, was."

This was no news analysis. This was raw opinion – placed in the top news spot on MSNBC's front page. Harbrecht went on to draw a parallel with another presidential race involving another carpet-bagging senator from New York.

"What the political savants forget is that, had he not been assassinated by a deranged Sirhan Sirhan after victory in the June 1968 California primary, there wasn't a doubt in the world that Bobby Kennedy, an intensely polarizing figure in his day, would have won that November," he continued. "The parallels are striking: Kennedy was the brother of a charismatic president despised, but also feared, by Republicans because he presided over what Americans regarded nostalgically as a golden era. Hillary is married to a charismatic president intensely disliked by Republicans but feared... well, you get the picture."

It's all about timing, MSNBC's top "news story" contended. And the timing for Hillary is now.

"The real lesson from 1968 is just how crucial timing is in politics," the piece continued. "Successful candidates move when the magic strikes. Just ask Bill Clinton – he declared flat out that he wouldn't run for president in 1992 if Arkansans reelected him to a fifth term as governor of the Razorback State in 1990. Did that Clinton's fib matter? Not a wit. Bubba saw his opportunity, and he took it."

MSNBC did not return e-mail messages questioning the position of the column as its lead story.

[theDentist]

You actually think this nation would survive another term of the Clinton's? I'll have two of whatever it is you're taking then.

I think we'll need two of whatever it is.

[an amused spectator]

Her husband had TWO terms, TWO, eight year long nightmares and no one, not a soul, not one person, let alone those here, who posted that same sort of garbage, you just did, took up arms, of any sort, and there was NO " war " of any kind.

This premier site didn't really heat up any organized opposition to the Clinton criminocracy until late 1998 - hardly "eight years". I'd make it maybe two years, and that was BEFORE the Democrats tried their best to steal the 2000 election.

We know that they stole Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and others in 2000. What makes you think we'll sit still for more of the same if the Ankle's operatives pull the necessary vote fraud strings?

[an amused spectator]

I must agree with nopardons here. This is the kind of thinking that plagues the fringe Left and drives them mad. I listened to several callers on Medved yesterday sharing their desires to see something unfortunate happen to the president and his supporters. I had an associate this week tell me that its time to wage war on the Christian Right. The ELF/ALF is stepping up its own brand of domestice terrorism. And , as we see on this post, the Mainstream media is so desperate as to blatantly flaunt a bias and distribute agitprop. The Fringe Left has already started a Civil War here and when Bush gets elected in 04 and the Republicans take more seats in Congress, they will go foaming-at-the-mouth off the deep edge mad.

I've never really worried about a bunch of mouthy Lefties who believe & practice their own gun-control nonsense...

[Blue Scourge]

That my friend is the quote of the day.

[Blue Scourge]

Correction from my previous post in this thread....

You now have the quote of the day....I owe my college a new keyboard....

[GOPJ]

Hillary carries Clinton flaws, but lacks his sociopathic charm. As a symbol of hatred for Republicans in the abstract, she clicks. Flesh her out, open her mouth, she fails.

[metalboy]

MSNBC begs Hillary to run...Yeah, how about into a freggin` tree

[johnb838]

When she was rumored to be running for Senator from New York, conducting her infamous "listening tour", bumper stickers which said "Run, Hillary, Run" sold like silver dollars. Democrats were putting them on the back bumpers of the cars and Republicans were putting them on the front bumpers of theirs

I formally bump THIS statement for quote of the day.

[Tall_Texan]

Imagine what we can accomplish if the only two effective parties in the US were Republicans and Libertarians?

Such a great sense of humor! The Libertarians, an effective party??? BWAHAHAHAHA! Heck, even the Republicans aren't very effective. If they were, they would get their judges confirmed in the Senate.

[Mr.Atos]

Point taken in terms of politics. But, in terms of ideology, at least we would be beginning the debate on a rational level with the primacy of free markets/Capitalism, property rights, Individual Rights (Not Basic nor so-called Civil rights) Constitutional Democracy, and the rule of law understood as fundamental and objective principles... again. It is something the Democrats understood once.

[Porterville]

Media, MSNBC, and Hillary.

[paul51]

Hillary to MSNBC: Thanks for the BJ

[MegaSilver]

Can we find just another Democrat to tell us that TV has a conservative bias? Please?

I'm bored and I feel like laughing in someone's face.

[MegaSilver]

So true...