Skip to comments.
The Clinton Albatross - Bill’s not exactly a fireman. He may instead throw gasoline on the fire.
National Review Online ^
| December 20, 2007
| Victor Davis Hanson
Posted on 12/19/2007 11:27:37 PM PST by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
1
posted on
12/19/2007 11:27:41 PM PST
by
neverdem
To: neverdem
2
posted on
12/19/2007 11:29:45 PM PST
by
Christian4Bush
(Driscoll: "Secretary Heller, who's running CTU? You, or me?" Heller: "You are...unless I am.")
To: neverdem
But Bills not exactly a fireman. He may instead throw gasoline on the fire. But in Fahrenheit 451, that's what a good fireman did. And since so much of the Clinton message and legacy is fiction, the irony is, well, ironic.
3
posted on
12/19/2007 11:31:31 PM PST
by
Bernard
(If you always tell the truth, you never have to remember what you said.)
To: Tolik
4
posted on
12/19/2007 11:47:51 PM PST
by
neverdem
(Call talk radio. We need a Constitutional Amendment for Congressional term limits. Let's Roll!)
To: neverdem
Bill claims that he nixed an earlier run for the presidency in 1988 because he saw that he wasnt yet ready for the job. But the real reason more likely was worry about the less-than-desirable and now well-known aspects of his personal life. Clinton didn't run in 1988 because Al Gore jumped into the race first.
5
posted on
12/19/2007 11:49:00 PM PST
by
HAL9000
(Fred Thompson/Mike Huckabee 2008)
To: neverdem
“Bill Clinton often comes across as a narcissist.”
Clinically so.
6
posted on
12/20/2007 12:09:50 AM PST
by
sageb1
(This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
To: HAL9000
Betsy Wright.
To: neverdem
"Most recently, in a dig at Obamas lack of experience, Bill claims that he nixed an earlier run for the presidency in 1988 because he saw that he wasnt yet ready for the job"
ROFLMHO! You weren't ready in '92 or '96 either, Slick Willie!! Yet, with the aid of a groveling MSM, the harmful Roos Perot, and two rather lackluster Republican candidates you were somehow able to weasel your into the Presidency with around 43% of the vote. How you ever got re-elected, Mr. Stainmeister, is a mystery, even if Bob Dole did prove to be one of the weakest national party candidates in a very long time.
The idea that Bill Clinton decided in 1987-88 that he was "not ready" to be President is such a howler - that narcissistic fraud has been running for the Presidency since he was 10 years old. It is well known that he backed off in '88 because (1) no one in the 'Rat party gave him a chance, and (2) the developing Clintonista cabal was afraid that his reckless philandering would make him unable to win. Then the supine MSM, with CBS "60 Minutes" connivance, helped to "launder" the Bill & Hill show for a national audience in '92 and the rest is (tragic) history.
8
posted on
12/20/2007 1:03:10 AM PST
by
Enchante
(Democrat terror-fighting motto: "BLEAT - CHEAT - RETREAT - DEFEAT - REPEAT")
To: Reaganite1984
Betsy Wright supposedly talked him out of running, but it was widely reported at the time that Gore's candidacy was a big problem for Clinton.
Clinton made the right decision not to run in 1988. The Gennifer Flowers scandal could have sunk him back then, but then Gary Hart had his problems, so the Clinton "bimbo eruptions" were less shocking by 1992. Clinton would have gotten away with everything if he hadn't ordered a state trooper to invite Paula Jones up to his hotel room one day.
9
posted on
12/20/2007 1:18:04 AM PST
by
HAL9000
(Fred Thompson/Mike Huckabee 2008)
To: neverdem
Simply put: Regardless of the astounding incompetence of his wife, I don't want Bill Clinton back.
10
posted on
12/20/2007 1:47:36 AM PST
by
Caipirabob
(Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
To: neverdem
It's been fun to see what happens when Bill gets out on the stump for his WINO*, when he can stop talking about himself to even mention her, that is. She'll probably be the dem nominee, all the missteps aside, but hopefully we'll have the guy who can beat her on the GOP side.
*Wife-in-name-only
11
posted on
12/20/2007 2:03:55 AM PST
by
Theresawithanh
(This is my tagline. FRED!!!!!!)
To: neverdem
Whatever venture Bill Clinton gets into is strictly for the benefit of Bill Clinton. Everybody else, including his dearly beloved wife, is strictly subsidiary.
To: neverdem
The Clintons want a Third Term. They will bring with them the baggage of eight previous years, same' ol faces, same 'ol rhetoric the only possible difference is that they will push even harder for Socialism - the reason both are popular with the UN. Both lie with ease, neither has done much for their country, especially Senator Clinton - Laura Bush has done more for children than the Senator has ever done - does that qualify Mrs. Bush to be president? We all know what Senator Clinton has done, she is a champion at bimbo eruptions and that's about it, that and threats when the Senator wants her way. Simply put, the Senator is not honest period
.nor is she a leader
she is a divider. The Senator and her disgraced husband believe in the
(Third Way) and have used it to govern
.they are not pro-America. They are all about Ruth Bader Ginsberg Marxist law.
13
posted on
12/20/2007 2:39:51 AM PST
by
yoe
( NO THIRD TERM FOR THE CLINTON'S!!!)
To: neverdem
Does Hillary share Huma with Bill?
14
posted on
12/20/2007 2:44:11 AM PST
by
ASA Vet
To: neverdem
The true legacy of Bill Clinton:
1) A tanking economy
2) A war that only one side was fighting (not us)
3) 100 dead Americans, incinerated in an armor attack
in Texas
Semper Fi,
15
posted on
12/20/2007 2:54:40 AM PST
by
2nd Bn, 11th Mar
(The "P" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
To: neverdem; All
16
posted on
12/20/2007 3:18:49 AM PST
by
backhoe
(Just a Merry-Hearted Keyboard PirateBoy, plunderin’ his way across the WWW…)
To: neverdem
Vetting can’t even begin to happen until the Clinton archival papers are fully released and publically examined.
That should be the response to any such idiotic comments concerning Hillary—her experience and/or vetting. That the data exist and are being deliberately withheld at the request of the Clintons says all we need to know.
17
posted on
12/20/2007 3:40:14 AM PST
by
rod1
To: backhoe
Rush has been making the point that Hilde wants BJ front and center.
18
posted on
12/20/2007 4:06:02 AM PST
by
CASchack
To: rod1
The Clinton vetting will began in earnest if she becomes the nominee...hopefully we have the brains to get this done right. No personal attacks just the overwhelming facts and those archives must be available.
19
posted on
12/20/2007 4:31:15 AM PST
by
iopscusa
(El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
To: CASchack
Rush has been making the point that Hilde wants BJ front and center.Interesting- a sort of "Return with us now to those golden days of yesteryear!"
( The Lone Ranger TV series )
And I've seen the theory advanced that Little Big Fraud views the election of Hillarrhea! as a reversal of impeachment, and vindication...
Two more good reasons to do everything to make sure it doesn't happen...
20
posted on
12/20/2007 4:46:29 AM PST
by
backhoe
(A Nuke for every Kook- what Clinton "legacy...")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson