|
"What the hell is this moribund loser doing in the political arena, anyway?" |
|
|
A subset of the CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme , the clinton "infrastructure" complex-question fallacy scheme is intended to confer legitimacy on an otherwise loony concept: Another clinton--uh--presidency.  The clinton "infrastructure" is operating on the theory that the implicit question ("Why in the world would the zipper-hoisted wife of an impeached utter failure ex-ERSATZprez be qualified to be president anyway?") will be rendered, if not moot, certainly disremembered. Alas. The clinton "infrastructure" complex-question fallacy scheme does not appear to be working. According to last month's Marist Institute poll -- and this month's election -- nary a soul wants hillary (rodham) clinton back in the West Wing. 
"What the hell is this moribund loser doing in the political arena, anyway?" While 70% of the electorate get it, only one pundit, Bill Bennett, has been sharp enough to see through this clinton "infrastructure" complex-question fallacy scheme. When Sean Hannity (Hannity and Colmes, FoxNews) asked Bennett whether "she would run," Bennett first asked Hannity to clarify who the "she" was, and, when told, delivered the coup de grâce, "Run for what?"
|
EW YORK, November 15 -- Employing the "When did you stop beating your wife?" complex-question type of fallacy, the clinton "