RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Hillary in 2008

With Mathews I think it's more of a case of asking if there is anything wrong with it. Granted the way he asks insinuates there is but it's innuendo. I didn't know Mathews was a Dem to be honest.

Edwards is running against Clinton & is behind in the polls. This looks like grasping to me.

And you didn't answer the question yourself G-man. Can I take that as a no, you don't see anything wrong with a fundraising lunch?

Chris Matthews is a politcal animal. He goes where the wind blows. One day he'll be completely taking the Administration to task for one misdeed or another. The next wek he'll be ass kissing and lauding the very same people he was calling liars. Depending on which way the momentum happens to be going that week.

He's not one to be trusted too much by either side of the political aisle.

Fair enough. But, yeah, he is, albeit a conservative one.



I'm not sure my opinion of what Hillary does or doesn't do is particular dispositive. But when she starts earning the ire of guys like Matthews, guys who are pre-disposed to support her, she should worry. Especially given the bad history both she and Bill both have with crooked fundraisers.

I'll guess we're seeing G-man light on this because there really isn't much he can condemn here that couldn't be compared to similar situations with candidates he supports.

NY Daily News:

• Hillary Clinton officially declared she's not a lesbian - not that there's anything wrong with that.
  
  During an interview with The Advocate to be published next week, Sean Kennedy, the gay magazine's news and features editor, asked the presidential candidate, "How do you respond to the occasional rumor that you're a lesbian?"
  
  "People say a lot of things about me, so I really don't pay any attention to it," Sen. Clinton (D-N.Y.) replied.
  
  "It's not true, but it is something that I have no control over. People will say what they want to say."
  
  Kennedy told the Daily News he's convinced. "I 100% believe she's a straight, heterosexual woman," he said.

That's true. She's not a lesbian. She's bi.

That doesn't disqualify her as President, of course. But if more about that comes out it could hurt her attempts to attack Rudy or another GOP candidate on their personal life.

What has actually come out G-man where you feel you can state something like Hillary is bi as if it was factual? Rudy being married 3 times & the little press conference he had announcing his divorce to his second wife while introducing the future third one is a matter of public record. Do you have anything like that to bac up your claims?

I was surprised to see Clinton on FOX today! Equally surprised to see Brit Hume praise her performance. It was a back handed compliment but coming from him that's practically an endorsement. She was immediatley labelled as a hyper-partisan liberal with a nonquestion by the host. Hillary laughed & then took control of the interview & managed to talk about Iraq & health care.

let's say she is bi or lesbian, she doesn't run on a platform opposing gay rights. however if someone does run on a platform of opposing gay rights and turns out to be gay (see: like 50% of the republicans) or runs on "traditional values" (see: non-existent halycon playground where Wally and the Beav are sipping lemonade) and then violates those "traditional values" then they have no right to attack someone else.

Rayfact{TM}: Fifty percent of Republicans are gay.

well from the republicans here:
wonderboy (gay)
g-man (gay)
pariah (bi)
captain sammitch (straight)
wbam (straight)

so 2.5 out of 5
that little research i just did is more accurate than Fox News.

Technically G-man would be bisexual unless his wife is one of the things he's also just made up.

Registered independent. Though I kinda would like to vote in primaries, so you may end up being right about me being at least a registered Republican in the end. Man... I feel kinda nauseous after having to say that last part...

after all these years g-man has said he's a lawyer but failed to really show proof of that (failing to answer direct legal questions). and he's probably the only person here who has never said his real first name or posted a picture. really we have no reason to believe anything he says, i mean why would a married lawyer spend so much time on a messageboard where people make fun of him?

Washington Post
This is kind of a good news/bad news thing for Hillary. It's obviously good to be in the lead but being so far ahead guarentees that all the other political oppenents will focus on knocking her down.

I'll be supporting her when I have no other recourse.

Until then i hope to God she's overtaken by her opponents. Not that I don't like her, but ...Ok, I don't like her.

She's a politician to the letter. She's forever taking the safe option and even when it's beyond safe to do so, she'll still hesitate because her advisers are still working with old data.

I honestly think this country needs someone who is genuine. They don't need another politician, they need inspiration and someone who actually DOES feel their pain, not just pays lip service to it.

Evil is the absence of empathy. Or so I heard the other day. In that case, this Government is the most evil we've ever had. And that goes for ALL of the Government. Not only does this country need inspiration but it also needs people who will work for THEM. Lobbyists and special interests, reelection money or endorsements be damned.

I'd say Obama could provide inspiration just on account of his oratory skills, but I don't like Obama much either.

The Associated Press:

• Hillary Rodham Clinton called Barack Obama naive when he said he'd meet with the leaders of Iran without precondition.
  
  But asked about it Thursday by a voter, the New York senator said twice that she, too, would negotiate with Iran "with no conditions."
  
  "I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions, because we don't really understand how Iran works. We think we do, from the outside, but I think that is misleading," she said at an apple orchard.

That wasn't the original question though. The way it was phrased originally was would she herself meet with these countries. There is a big difference between having a flow of conversation between countries & meeting with the President right away.

whomod is correct!

New York Post

• Half of likely voters nationwide would never vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton in next year's presidential election, a poll released yesterday reveals.
  
  Nearly 50 percent of 10,000 registered voters surveyed ruled out supporting New York's junior senator, according to the Zogby Interactive poll.
  
  That is up from the 46 percent who said in March that they'd refuse to vote for her.
  
  While Clinton's support remains strong within her own party, 83 percent of Republican women said they would not choose her.

This probably explains why Hillary has been going on shows like "the View" over the past couple weeks, playing up her sex and claiming it's important for women to vote for another woman.

Her support in the Dem party has only grown & that's what really counts right now. I'm actually surprised that 83 percent figure for GOP women isn't higher.

I agree with you about her appearence on the View. It's very smart campaigning on her part.

Maybe. Maybe not.

I'm not sure cozying up to noted annoying liberals Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Beher is the way to get Republican women to jump ship to her side.

I didn't see it as an attempt to get that particular vote. I see it as shooting for solidfying her support among Democratic & more moderate women voters. She might be able to draw some support from Republican women voters but not in any significant number. Maybe it would be appealing to have a woman candidate but I would think the GOP issues would trump any of that.

So her calculated milketoast approach to everything is actually producing gains.

Well.. never say it's over until it's over. I seem to recall Howard Dean had all sorts of momentum. Until people actually voted. So i'll hold off jumping on this insane bandwagon until then. Until that day, I'll still be rooting for Edwards.

Talk about "loaded and misleading titles."

The AP's headline conveniently leaves out the fact that the pollster being interviewed works for Hillary and is a "top advisor" and strategist for her campaign.

Have you seen this self-pitying YouTube clip from the Hillary Clinton campaign: "The Politics of Pile On."

It's point is to make Hillary seem a victim because she is the target of criticism from John Edwards, Barack Hussein Obama, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, etc.

Here's a question: If Sen. Clinton finds herself wilting under the pressure of being criticized from as namby-pamby a crowd as four moderate-to-liberal Democratic senators, how in the world does she expect anyone to believe she's tough enough to stand up to the world's bad guys?

Do her handlers really expect them to be more sensitive to her delicate feelings?

It's a campaign, G-man. And right now Hillary is riding that fence of how a female candidate is perceived. I imagine this is to show that she does have a sensitive side to quiet the conservatives who call her a butch robot. Unfortunately now she has conservatives jumping on her for having emotion.

AFP

I found her whole playing the woman card sort of cringe inducing myself.

It's not something that'll fly with anyone if they expect her to lead the United States.

well she's kind of in the corner though. if she's cold then limbaugh comes out with "butch feminazi lesbian." if she's emotive then she's a frail woman.

You have to understand that Limbaugh will come after her regardless.

Of course if MoveOn.org comes after Giluini however, someone here will label it a "hit squad".

Never mind Moveon, firefighters who previously endorsed Bush & ground zero workers are just dismissed as partisan if they're critical of Rudy.

I think the mythology has always been that the nobility of the firefighters and police, soldiers etc. are Republican traits.

When little inconveniences like the fact that most NYFD dislike Rudy, more and more soldiers are coming out against Bush, most of these 1st responders are union men etc., then you have to destroy the men to preserve the myth.

[quote] Fox News airs bizarre claim that Hillary ordered hit on cats
David Edwards and Jason Rhyne
Published: Wednesday November 7, 2007
 del.icio.us

Fox News on Wednesday aired a bizarre accusation that Sen. Hillary Clinton is connected with the murder of two cats.

Sen. Clinton's accuser is Kathleen Willey, the one-time White House aide who in 1993 claimed to have been groped by then-president Bill Clinton in the Oval Office. Willey raised the strange cat-killing allegation -- and a raft of others -- in her new book, Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

The Fox and Friends morning program detailed charges in the book that Willey's cat, Bullseye, was the victim of a targeted hit by a Clinton-hired henchman.

"A man, he was pretending to be a jogger, he came up to me and just asked did I ever find my cat?" Willey told the New York Sun, who also picked up the cat story Wednesday. "He mentioned my cat by name and [said], 'Yeah, that Bullseye was a really nice cat.'" Willey told the Sun the abducted cat was part of an intimidation plan organized by the Clintons after she was called to testify in Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit against the president.

"But it didn't stop there," said Fox News host Brian Kilmeade. "Does the name Fluffy mean anything to you? A year later she bought a cat, named it Fluffy. That cat ended up dead as well underneath the porch. She thinks somehow, and she claims somehow, the person who did this is linked back to Hillary."

Willey appears to found her accusations on the word of conservative talk show host Melanie Morgan, who says she had a conversation in which a private investigator named Jack Palladino all but admitted to being the culprit in the cat business. "The only regret that I had about the whole thing was that Hillary did not pay me in a timely fashion," the P.I. allegedly said, according to Morgan's account.

But the online newspaper WorldNetDaily, which is affiliated with the publisher of Willey's book, reported on Wednesday that Palladino denied those charges outright and is even threatening a libel lawsuit. "It's total fantasy," Palladino said."No, that's too kind; it's a lie."

The cat killings are the least of Willey's accusations against the Clintons, who she suspects -- wholly without evidence -- were involved in the murder of her husband. She also contends the couple orchestrated the attempted theft of an early manuscript of Target. The UK's Daily Mail also published a story on those claims, which the conservative website Drudge Report linked to in a banner reading "Here comes Kathleen."

At the close of their Clinton segment, Fox and Friends offered the disclaimer that the new book's publisher, World Ahead, had "from time to time bashed the Clintons." The company is also behind such titles as I've Always Been A Yankees Fan: Hillary Clinton in Her Own Words and Their Lives:The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine.
...[/b] RAW

Thursday’s Worst Person In the World segment on Countdown was a real hoot. BillO took the Bronze and Silver for his discount Factor merchandise and his refusal to let go of the Rosie/MSNBC story and the Gold went to right wing nut jobs Melanie Morgan and Kathleen Willey on Fox Noise for accusing the Clintons of murdering their cats!! What?

Olbermann: “Do you people do nothing but sit there and smoke dope all day?!”



And welcome to the evisceration!



On Wed when Kathleen Willey went on H&C to promote her new Hillary bashing book I’m sure she expected to be treated with the same kid gloves by the pliant media she had been accustomed to, and for his part Sean Hannity played that role as well as ever, but that all ended when it was Alan Colmes’ turn. He had clearly done his homework and came armed with Linda Tripp’s sworn grand jury testimony that directly contradicted her claims. He then put up Independent Counsel Robert Ray’s report that “Willey’s Jones deposition testimony differed from her grand jury testimony on material aspects of the alleged incident”(p.7 pdf) and pointed out the fact that she had been caught giving “false information to the FBI about her sexual relationship with a former boyfriend.”

This is the same woman who has made allegations that the Clintons had her husband killed, had her cat killed and left its skull on her porch, had her tires slashed, and more recently she claimed they had her home broken into and stole the manuscript to this tall tell-all (no, I won’t link to any of that, but it’s out there). I’d like to think that after this disaster of a book interview she would finally seek the professional help she desperately needs, but I won’t hold my breath. Unfortunately you can bet that lots and lots more of this is what we have to look forward to if Hillary is the nominee.

Clinton Admits Planting Questions

• Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton’s campaign admitted Friday that it planted a global warming question in Newton, Iowa, Tuesday during a town hall meeting to discuss clean energy.
  
  Clinton campaign spokesman Mo Elliethee admitted that the campaign had planted the question and said it would not happen again.
  
  In a state where the caucus is held sacred and the impromptu and candid style of the town hall meeting is held dear, Clinton’s planted question may come as a great offense to Iowans.
  
  The campaign's admission that it planted the question may be another blow to the New York senator's image as a trustworthy politician.
  
  Clinton's critics have accused her of being a double-talker who refuses to answer tough questions specifically. Now her campaign has acknowledged planting at least one question.
  
  Already her rivals have begun to criticize Friday's revelation.

I hardly think this is the worst thing in the world for a politician to do. However, haven't some people (including some of the posters here) been very hard on the White House for planting questions in their news conferences?

If so, how do they justify Hillary doing the same thing?

But what about Hillary killing the cats???!!!

because debates are for the candidates to debate each other and try and push their plans. so hillary didn't violate the spirit of that, she just replaced one dumbass question with another, those debates are always crap anyway.
but a press conference is specifically intended to be someone in authority having a dialogue with a people via the press.

There. Fixed it for you.

Well, I'm not exactly a big fan of Hilary Clinton so I'm not one to defend the bitch... yet

I however can't believe that G-Man is going to let Hillary get away with the murder of innocent right wing cats!