Hilary, 08'

[thelovelyrose]

That freaked me out so much, I just registered to vote!

[Anne Doyle]

I don't care that Hilary is a woman or that Barak is a black man, that has zero baring on my opinion on either of them. I can't vote yet, but they wouldn't get my vote because I disagree with them in pretty much every area of their political beliefs.

[Evil Chick]

My dad just sent me this article, for whatever it's worth. I thought it was pretty good.

CONSERVATIVE TRUTH 01/22/07
Start With a Lie
By Tom Barrett
[email protected]

People wondering how to deal with a challenge or a difficult situation in life are often given the advice, “Start with the truth.” Hillary Clinton is apparently confused over this advice. She started her presidential bid with a lie.

This should not be surprising to even casual observers of the political scene in this country. Hillary’s political mentor, her husband “Slick Willy” Clinton spent his career lying. In fact, he often lied when it would have been easier to tell the truth.

Hillary was asked a legitimate question when she ran for re-election a few months ago to her position as New York’s Junior Senator. There was much speculation that she would not serve out her term because of her plans to run for the presidency. The people of New York were concerned (properly so, it appears) that she just wanted to use them in order to enhance her chances of becoming president. So she was asked if she would serve out her term.

She lied, saying that she had no plans to run for the White House, and that she would not allow anything to interfere with performing her senatorial duties. Now, just two months after being re-elected, she has announced that she will run for president.

Hillary has known for many years that she would run for president. In fact, I am convinced (although obviously I cannot prove it), that Hillary is in a position today to run for president because of a deal she made with Bill when his serial promiscuity became public knowledge.

I believe the conversation went something like this: “Bill, you are the lowest of the low. It’s bad enough that you have been tom-catting around since we’ve been married. You know I’ve only stuck with you because we both wanted to get into the White House. But now you’ve been so stupid that everyone knows what a pig you are. I should go on TV and tell everyone who you really are. BUT…

“You know I am destined to be the first Woman President. You know I am better than any of the men who have run this country. Here’s the deal. You will do everything possible to set me up to run for president. If you do, I will get you out of this hole you’ve dug for yourself.” Of course, Bill couldn’t do anything but to agree.

So Hillary went on TV and did her “Stand by your man” routine – more than once. She shamelessly lied when she said she didn’t believe Bill would do anything like that. She said they had a solid marriage. And she said that she loved him. Any woman who says that she loves a husband who has repeatedly committed adultery and showed no remorse for it is lying. Whether she was lying to herself or whether she was consciously lying to the public, only Hillary knows.

But the most ridiculous part of her defense of Bill was when she said that those who claimed he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky were part of a “Vast right-Wing conspiracy.”

In return, Bill placed her in the limelight whenever possible. While most First Ladies are content to fill a traditional role, Hilly wanted to run things. Bill put her in charge of national health care. Her promise of Canada-style socialist health care crashed and burned because of her inept management of the commission Bill gave her. In violation of sunshine laws, she held numerous secret meetings. And she bullied her staff and the commission members to the point where no one wanted to work with her. Fortunately for the nation, her efforts met with a disastrous end.

Hillary had unprecedented power in the eight years of the Clinton Administration. No First Lady has ever had as much power as she (at least publicly). I am reminded of a bumper sticker that was visible during Bill’s re-election campaign: “Support President Clinton (and her husband, too).”

She misused that power. She obstructed justice by claiming that she could not find records relating to the Clintons’ Whitewater scandal, records which were later discovered in her possession. She illegally used the FBI to investigate political rivals. And (in her most famous abuse of power) she fired the entire White House Travel staff to make it possible for a friend’s travel agency to take over. (See LINK below.) The Director had over 30 years of faithful service in that office. When he appealed his firing, she had the FBI persecute him and had him brought up on criminal charges. A retired FBI agent proved convincingly that Hillary had lied. The Director was reinstated and allowed to retire honorably after Hillary had destroyed his life.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, Hillary seems to be as incapable of telling the truth as is her husband. For instance, when she met Sir Edmund Hillary, the famous mountain climber, she lied to him, saying that she had been named after him. Snopes.com (one of the best web resources for discovering the truth) totally debunks that lie. (See LINK below.)

Another example is when Hillary told a group of soccer players that she knew where they were coming from because she played soccer in high school. Investigators found that her high school never had a girl’s soccer team while Hillary was a student.

And then there’s Hillary’s famous claim that her daughter Chelsea was jogging close to the Twin Towers when they were brought down on 9-11, and that Chelsea’s life was in danger. Unfortunately for Hillary, Chelsea did not know about her mother’s lies, and she revealed to a magazine columnist that she had been at home when a friend called her with news of the Attacks on America.

One might say of the three examples above (there are dozens that I could have used) that they were “innocent, white lies.” My question to you is this: Do you want a woman who lies at the drop of a hat (whether the lies are white, black or green) to once again inhabit the White House?

As I close, a warning: Hillary has begun the process of trying to re-invent herself for 2008. The National Review (see LINK below) reports on an interview she gave to “Light the Lamp!”, the monthly newsletter of the Holy Flame Pentecostal Church of Little Rock, Arkansas.

”I'm here spending time at my husband's library," she told the Lamp when we caught up with her after a Sunday camp meeting, "and of course, I always take time to worship God in as evangelical a way as is feasible, given time and location constraints. As you know, I consider myself an evangelical Christian, really a Christian conservative, if you want to know the truth, so it's nice to be 'home' again in the South, which I really consider my quote-unquote home even though I live in New York most of the time. Well, Washington, D.C., most of the time, actually, but if I'm not there I'm in New York, of course, but always thinking about being here, in the South, my spiritual home, where I shared so many wonderful evangelical moments and events. Can you read that back to me?"

I count three times where she used the word “evangelical” in one paragraph. Do you think she’s trying to tell those good Southern folks something? (She sure doesn’t talk that way in New York.) Unfortunately for her, she hasn’t been around evangelical Christians very much, or she would know that they would never use a phrase like, “I shared so many wonderful evangelical moments and events.” I’ve been an evangelical Christian since I was 13, and I’ve never heard anyone talk about an “evangelical moment”!

It might sound as if I do not want Hillary to run for president. Not true! I pray fervently that the Democrats will nominate her. Most of America can’t stand her. Her approval ratings (even among Democrats) are abysmally low. “Then how could she be nominated?” you might reasonably ask. Simply because the Democratic conventions are run by their Lunatic Left fringe.

If she is nominated, the Republicans could run practically anyone against her and be assured of victory. Let’s just hope the Republicans choose well, because if Hillary is nominated, the Republican nominee will become the next president.


INTERNET RESEARCH:

Hillary’s Lies (Reed Irvine article on the Accuracy in Media Website)
http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A326_0_2_0_C/

Hillary’s Lie About Being Named After Sir Edmund Hillary
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/hillary.asp

Hillary Interview in a Church Newsletter
http://www.nationalreview.com/issue/lon ... 160825.asp

Hillary’s Book of Lies – “TravelGate”
http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/2003/14.html

New Dick Morris Book Corrects the Lies of Hillary's Biography
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/ireland/040514

Hillary Clinton's Many Lies
http://www.thebluesite.com/archives/000527.html

VISIT OUR WEBSITE at www.ConservativeTruth.org for daily updates of Conservative news, great commentary published weekly, and to view our archives.

[MDB17]

i would vote Obama before i would vote for Giuliani

[Kairi]

That article was great, EC.

[Jennifer Doyle]

Yes, good article. I won't vote for Hilary or Barak but I'm not thrilled about the pro-abortion candidates on the Republican side.

[Oba-rai]

Any woman who says that she loves a husband who has repeatedly committed adultery and showed no remorse for it is lying.

Oversweeping generalization, it's not completely true. However, the rest of the article was good.

Hilary does have supporters. I've seen them. It's frightening that someone like her can be supported, but it's true... and I'm not particularly informed about Obama, so I probably have nothing to say on him.
McCain, in my opinion, is a RINO - Republican In Name Only. He's done enough damage in his own way. Giuliani I haven't really researched.

[Evil Chick]

Any woman who says that she loves a husband who has repeatedly committed adultery and showed no remorse for it is lying.

Oversweeping generalization, it's not completely true. However, the rest of the article was good.

Yeah, that's what I thought when I read the article, too.

[Clodius Albinus]

i would vote Obama before i would vote for Giuliani

What exactly is it about the junior senator from Illinois that you prefer to Giuliani, if I may ask?

[Lord_Kappa]

I agree with Zedekiah that the number of people who wouldn't vote for her solely because she is a woman is greatly insignificant. I disagree, however, with his generalization that they are members of the opposite side of the political spectrum already.

(Refering to an older post, end of page 1.)

I don't know what everyone is so afraid of Hillary for, it's not as if she's the worste politician we've seen in this country, far from it.
I don't hold to her views, which is why I plan to register as a Republican.
However, she doesn't seem any worse to me than any other democrat. I dislike her socialist views and tax views, but come on, she's a human.
http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/

[MDB17]

i would vote Obama before i would vote for Giuliani

What exactly is it about the junior senator from Illinois that you prefer to Giuliani, if I may ask?

I like the fact the hes young and new and i dont care for Giuliani i feel that he just got his fame from 911

[Clodius Albinus]

Hillary Clinton sparks an especially visceral response, and it's never been altogether clear to me why that is. Some people were uncomfortable with her participation in putting together a health care plan during the early part of her husband's administration, but while I disliked many of the proposals and considered the entire plan, which ran way too long, a bureaucratic nightmare, I never really had the "how dare the First Lady be on the commission?" reaction some had. Why not, if she's qualified?

Hillary is a polarizing figure in many ways, but that doesn't mean she's at the far left of her party. Far from it. She's actually to the right of most of her Democratic colleagues in the Senate. Now, perhaps that's not saying much, but still, she's almost certainly the most conservative of the Democrats who have currently announced or are likely to do so, save the second-tier Gov. Richardson.

Regarding Obama and Giuliani, I guess I just don't grasp the salience of what you said, MDB17. Youth and inexperience may at times be worth overlooking (though arguably not when seeking out a president), but they're hardly traits to be desired in the leader of the free world. Rudy Giuliani, an effective prosecutor, a highly successful mayor of New York City (an office more than a few have argued is second only to the presidency in terms of power and prestige), the Senate candidate who may well have beaten Hillary back in 2000 had it not been for his bout with cancer, which forced him to drop out of the race, and the resolute leader who responded brilliantly to the gravest attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor (and in a state since the War of 1812), on the other hand, you view as inexperienced, a sort of media creation who hopes to ride one event into office?

Of course September 11th changed Rudy's political fortunes. It remains the case, though, that the man has far more experience than does Obama, and, more than any other candidate on either side of the aisle, exudes a no-nonsense executive temperament. He's not my top choice, but I'm at a loss to even comprehend why the fact that Obama is comparatively "young and new" makes him more attractive as a candidate.

[MDB17]

Hillary Clinton sparks an especially visceral response, and it's never been altogether clear to me why that is. Some people were uncomfortable with her participation in putting together a health care plan during the early part of her husband's administration, but while I disliked many of the proposals and considered the entire plan, which ran way too long, a bureaucratic nightmare, I never really had the "how dare the First Lady be on the commission?" reaction some had. Why not, if she's qualified?

Hillary is a polarizing figure in many ways, but that doesn't mean she's at the far left of her party. Far from it. She's actually to the right of most of her Democratic colleagues in the Senate. Now, perhaps that's not saying much, but still, she's almost certainly the most conservative of the Democrats who have currently announced or are likely to do so, save the second-tier Gov. Richardson.

Regarding Obama and Giuliani, I guess I just don't grasp the salience of what you said, MDB17. Youth and inexperience may at times be worth overlooking (though arguably not when seeking out a president), but they're hardly traits to be desired in the leader of the free world. Rudy Giuliani, an effective prosecutor, a highly successful mayor of New York City (an office more than a few have argued is second only to the presidency in terms of power and prestige), the Senate candidate who may well have beaten Hillary back in 2000 had it not been for his bout with cancer, which forced him to drop out of the race, and the resolute leader who responded brilliantly to the gravest attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor (and in a state since the War of 1812), on the other hand, you view as inexperienced, a sort of media creation who hopes to ride one event into office?

Of course September 11th changed Rudy's political fortunes. It remains the case, though, that the man has far more experience than does Obama, and, more than any other candidate on either side of the aisle, exudes a no-nonsense executive temperament. He's not my top choice, but I'm at a loss to even comprehend why the fact that Obama is comparatively "young and new" makes him more attractive as a candidate.

in my opion i am tried of the same old politiecand barack can come in with new fresh ideas and polices that the old baby boomers of yesteryear wont consider. But i really wish Condi rice would win

[Dr. Watson]

Hillary Clinton sparks an especially visceral response, and it's never been altogether clear to me why that is. Some people were uncomfortable with her participation in putting together a health care plan during the early part of her husband's administration, but while I disliked many of the proposals and considered the entire plan, which ran way too long, a bureaucratic nightmare, I never really had the "how dare the First Lady be on the commission?" reaction some had. Why not, if she's qualified?

Hillary is a polarizing figure in many ways, but that doesn't mean she's at the far left of her party. Far from it. She's actually to the right of most of her Democratic colleagues in the Senate. Now, perhaps that's not saying much, but still, she's almost certainly the most conservative of the Democrats who have currently announced or are likely to do so, save the second-tier Gov. Richardson.

Regarding Obama and Giuliani, I guess I just don't grasp the salience of what you said, MDB17. Youth and inexperience may at times be worth overlooking (though arguably not when seeking out a president), but they're hardly traits to be desired in the leader of the free world. Rudy Giuliani, an effective prosecutor, a highly successful mayor of New York City (an office more than a few have argued is second only to the presidency in terms of power and prestige), the Senate candidate who may well have beaten Hillary back in 2000 had it not been for his bout with cancer, which forced him to drop out of the race, and the resolute leader who responded brilliantly to the gravest attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor (and in a state since the War of 1812), on the other hand, you view as inexperienced, a sort of media creation who hopes to ride one event into office?

Of course September 11th changed Rudy's political fortunes. It remains the case, though, that the man has far more experience than does Obama, and, more than any other candidate on either side of the aisle, exudes a no-nonsense executive temperament. He's not my top choice, but I'm at a loss to even comprehend why the fact that Obama is comparatively "young and new" makes him more attractive as a candidate.

in my opion i am tried of the same old politiecand barack can come in with new fresh ideas and polices that the old baby boomers of yesteryear wont consider. But i really wish Condi rice would win

But both Obama and Condi Rice are both pro-"choice".

[MDB17]

Hillary Clinton sparks an especially visceral response, and it's never been altogether clear to me why that is. Some people were uncomfortable with her participation in putting together a health care plan during the early part of her husband's administration, but while I disliked many of the proposals and considered the entire plan, which ran way too long, a bureaucratic nightmare, I never really had the "how dare the First Lady be on the commission?" reaction some had. Why not, if she's qualified?

Hillary is a polarizing figure in many ways, but that doesn't mean she's at the far left of her party. Far from it. She's actually to the right of most of her Democratic colleagues in the Senate. Now, perhaps that's not saying much, but still, she's almost certainly the most conservative of the Democrats who have currently announced or are likely to do so, save the second-tier Gov. Richardson.

Regarding Obama and Giuliani, I guess I just don't grasp the salience of what you said, MDB17. Youth and inexperience may at times be worth overlooking (though arguably not when seeking out a president), but they're hardly traits to be desired in the leader of the free world. Rudy Giuliani, an effective prosecutor, a highly successful mayor of New York City (an office more than a few have argued is second only to the presidency in terms of power and prestige), the Senate candidate who may well have beaten Hillary back in 2000 had it not been for his bout with cancer, which forced him to drop out of the race, and the resolute leader who responded brilliantly to the gravest attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor (and in a state since the War of 1812), on the other hand, you view as inexperienced, a sort of media creation who hopes to ride one event into office?

Of course September 11th changed Rudy's political fortunes. It remains the case, though, that the man has far more experience than does Obama, and, more than any other candidate on either side of the aisle, exudes a no-nonsense executive temperament. He's not my top choice, but I'm at a loss to even comprehend why the fact that Obama is comparatively "young and new" makes him more attractive as a candidate.

in my opion i am tried of the same old politiecand barack can come in with new fresh ideas and polices that the old baby boomers of yesteryear wont consider. But i really wish Condi rice would win

But both Obama and Condi Rice are both pro-"choice".

i know but the only person i would support a hundred percent on all the isuses would be me so...

[Raskolnikov]

in my opion i am tried of the same old politiecand barack can come in with new fresh ideas and polices that the old baby boomers of yesteryear wont consider...

Such as?

[Aram]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01103.html


Heheh.. Drudge posted this a few hours ago. I think you'll all enjoy it.

The article was written by Liz Cheney, the daughter of Dick.

As to Obama and Giuliani, Rudy has proven that he's a leader. Trouble or not, NYC was a better place because of him. He'll also be pulling the sympathy/emotional vote.

McCain? No way, he's too much of an anomaly to be worth voting for.

[Jennifer Doyle]

Barak is being touted as their golden boy, that's what annoys me. He's very well spoken, I'll admit it. I watched his speech at the DNC in 2004 and he's good. Do we want a slick orator though?

Maybe Kerry was a better debator than President Bush, but he was literally spineless. So debates and speeches don't make or break candidates for me.

I'm really just excited to see the Democrats start ripping each other down. That's better than Repubs and Dems bashing each other all the time in my opinion. And I want some better candidates on the Conservative side.

[Lord_Kappa]

And I want some better candidates on the Conservative side.

Strongly echoed.

[Dr. Watson]

Sam Brownback. Unfortunately, he's probably not as well known as some other more liberal Repubs like Guliani etc. I don't think he'll win the primaries, but it would great if it did, IMO.