Posted on 04/20/2015 4:52:52 PM PDT by jazusamo
Painful as it is to realize that both the Democrats and the Republicans will still be holding their primaries a year from now, that is one of the high prices we pay for democracy.
Seldom does the initial "front-runner" in either party's primaries end up being the actual candidate when election day rolls around. However, even if we cannot predict the outcomes of the primaries this far in advance, we can at least start trying to understand the candidates, the almost candidates and the people who are running just for the publicity.
One of the curious things this early in the process is that, while the Republicans' three freshmen Senators — Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul — have all had interviews on various television talk shows, veteran politician Hillary Clinton has been hiding out from real interviews by hard news reporters, as if she is afraid to be cross-examined.
This is by no means an irrational fear on Mrs. Clinton's part. There are all sorts of questions that she would find hard to answer. They range from questions about recent events like the e-mails from her days as Secretary of State that she destroyed illegally, after Congress called for her to produce them, to the still unsolved mystery as to what she and Barack Obama were doing during the hours when four Americans, including our ambassador to Libya, were under attack by terrorists in Benghazi.
Then there are the bald-faced lies, such as Mrs. Clinton's claim to have been shot at in a war zone, her claim that she and her husband were "poor" at the end of his terms as president, and her claim that charges of sexual misconduct against Bill Clinton in the White House were fictions invented by a "vast right-wing conspiracy."
(Excerpt) Read more at creators.com ...
I have to wonder if the current lack of opposition to Hillary, in spite of the obvious lack of enthusiasm for her, isn’t part of a “payoff” for taking a dive in 08 against Obie.
With all that was/is suspect about Obie, the Clinton dirt machine should have made hamburger out of him early on had they afforded him equal treatment to what they dished out to all other opposition. I’ve never believed that the Clinton’s kid glove treatment of Obozo was due to squeamishness on their part. There’s more to that story that we’ll never hear.
Here’s where Sowell lets us know he’s against Cruz:
“Among the many Republicans’ announced and unannounced candidates, three of the most prominent are freshmen Senators with no tangible accomplishments to go with their rhetoric. Whatever their potential, which seems especially striking in the case of Senator Marco Rubio, the White House is not the place for on-the-job training, in an age of international terrorism and nuclear bombs.”
No surprise at all. Sowell is establishment.
Several FReepers have postulated that the Chicago Mob had a trump card on the Clintons: Arkancides.
That lead to the mutually assured destruction pact.
But you’re correct, without that, the Clintons would have used their legendary private detective squad (Palladino & Sutherland) to blow Baraq’s bogus life story up completely.
Gosh — I don’t see Cruz’s name or Senator Paul. I sure agree with Dr. Sowell on Marco ,the Schumer butt buddy. That Amnesty loving boy ain’t gonna make it.
Why do you not want it to get out that Sowell is against Cruz?
Sowell stabbed Ted Cruz in the back when he should’ve supported him. He went establishment. When push comes to shove he’ll go establishment again.
What’s the contradiction?
In the end, Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) understand that while their people may grumble and grouse about their particular nominee, they will all turn out to vote for whomever it is in November. Some of them multiple times.
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.