"[T]he Clinton campaign in general has a sense of entitlement regarding treatment from the media. I think they're truly shocked by the fact that Russert had the audacity to ask them tough questions," argued Slublog at Ace of Spades in reaction to the Hillary camp's whining about treatment at the hands of NBC's Brian Williams and Tim Russert. Yet as NewsBusters and the MRC can attest, neither Williams nor Russert are even close to being agenda-driven conservatives.
Slublog was reacting to a report at TheHill.com about a Clinton damage control conference call. Reported Sam Youngman in a November 1 article (emphasis mine):
One caller from Oklahoma City said that “the questions … were designed to incite a brawl,” and that Russert’s and Brian Williams’s moderating was “an abdication of journalistic responsibility.”
Of course, we at NewsBusters and the MRC have frequently documented real abdications of journalistic responsibility by both Russert and Williams. For example, Russert, a former Democratic staffer, has a long history of pressing for rolling back the Bush tax cuts (see also here and here).
For his part, we've documented how Williams, as anchor and managing editor for the "NBC Nightly News" conveniently skipped over relatively upbeat assessments about progress in Iraq from a report by the left-leaning Brookings Institution. Noted NewsBusters editor Brent Baker in a July 30 blog post:
NBC Nightly News on Monday ignored a development both ABC and CBS found newsworthy, that after eight days in Iraq, two Brookings Institution scholars who describe themselves has “harshly” critical of Bush's Iraq policy, determined the situation in Iraq is better than they assumed and so the “surge” should continue into next year. Instead of reporting the fresh assessment from Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack, NBC anchor Brian Williams, citing “a draft U.S. report,” aired a full story on how “there are disturbing new details about corruption at the very top of the Iraqi government.” But the NBC Nightly News has hardly been reticent before about running soundbites from O'Hanlon with dire warnings about Iraq.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Magnify the minor
November 1, 2007 - 12:05 ET by KC MulvilleIt's a smokescreen. They "magnify the minor" to claim that their confrontation with it was major. I'm not sure who perfected this rhetorical technique first, politicians or professional wrestling. It's all the same ... make the opponent seem far more terrible than he really is, so that when you confront him, it will appear to be a titanic struggle.
Williams and Russert were delicate, in reality, with She Who Must Not Be President.
I don't know which is more unsettling ... that the Clinton camp is so obvious about this spin, or that they don't care that everyone sees through them, and they do it anyway. Only the media would fall for this ...
The whole point of all this
November 1, 2007 - 13:11 ET by motherbeltThe whole point of all this is to delflect attention away from the questions she didn't answer, and the waffling she did on the ones she did answer. They want the focus to be on the moderators, and on the supposed "attacks" that she was subjected to.
This is a typical Clinton tactic: let's talk about her opponents criticizing her (how dare they!) and accuse the moderator of being unfair, rather than her answers and non-answers to questions. Every time a Clinton gets criticized they turn it back to talk about the "politics of personal destruction" or "attack politics" rather than discuss the substance of the criticism.
Perhaps they would have
November 1, 2007 - 12:03 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsPerhaps they would have been happier with Brit Hume and Bill O'Reilly moderating.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
haha
November 1, 2007 - 12:06 ET by MightyMouthMaybe Hillary will lead the way and accept the Fox invitation to debate. Ya think? Naaaaaaaaaaa!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Star
November 1, 2007 - 14:37 ET by JDWVery good point.
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
If that campaign is already
November 1, 2007 - 12:05 ET by fitzfongIf that campaign is already whining about what they claim are "tough" questions, they're in real danger of imploding when we start playing for keeps. We already know that Hillary is woefully unfit to even be a Presidential candidate. If the Republican nominee doesn't walk all over her next year, no doubt that little Iranian terrorist will in very due course.
Just be glad they're dems like you Hillary.
November 1, 2007 - 12:08 ET by NBFDon't worry, Hillary, after you get the nomination, they will again become the obedient lapdogs that you're used to. The little nip you experienced was just due to the DNC lapdogs not knowing who to bite while other donkeys are still in the race.
And please do not shoot them as your staffer suggested. They are worth millions of dollars of free advertising. Besides, you're not supposed to have any guns.
Death Threats, or Promises?
November 1, 2007 - 15:27 ET by Barker"And please do not shoot them as your staffer suggested"
Given the unusual circumstances surrounding the untimely deaths of more than one Clinton associate, this threat should be taken very, very serious.
Question for Ms. Rodscam:
November 1, 2007 - 12:25 ET by mattmDid you really say the following?
'Where is the G*damn f***ing flag? I want the G-damn f***ing flag up every f***ing morning at f***ing sunrise.' (From the book 'Inside The White House' by Ronald Kessler, p. 244 - Hillary to the staff at the Arkansas Governor's mansion on Labor Day, (1991)
'You sold out, you mother f***er! You sold out!' (From the book 'Inside' by Joseph California, p. 213 -Hillary yelling at a Democrat lawyer.)
'F**k off! It's enough that I have to see you shit kickers every day, I'm not going to talk to you too! Just do your G*damn job and keep your mouth shut.' (From the book 'American Evita' by Christopher Anderson, p. 90 - Hillary to her State Trooper bodyguards after one of them greeted her with 'Good Morning.')
'You f***ing idiot' (From the book 'Crossfire' p. 84 - Hillary to a State Trooper who was driving her to an event.)
'If you want to remain on this detail, get your f***ing ass over here and grab those bags!' (From the book 'The First Partner' p.259 - Hillary to a Secret Service Agent who was reluctant to carry her luggage because he wanted to keep his hands free in case of an incident.)
'Get f***ed! Get the f**k out of my way!!! Get out of my face!!!' (From the book 'Hillary's Scheme' p. 89 - Hillary's various comments to her Secret Service detail agents.)
'Stay the f**k back, stay the f**k away from me! Don't come within ten yards of me, or else! Just f**king do as I say, Okay!!!?' (From the book 'Unlimited Access', by Clinton FBI Agent in Charge, Gary Aldrige, p. 139 - Hillary screaming at her Secret Service detail)
'Where's he miserable c*ck sucker?' (From the book 'The Truth About Hillary' by Edward Klein, p.5 - Hillary shouting at a Secret Service officer)
'Put this on the ground! I left my sunglasses in the limo. I need those sunglasses. We need to go back!' (>From the book 'Dereliction of Duty' p.71-72 - Hillary to Marine One helicopter pilot to turn back while en route to Air Force One.)
'Son of a bitch.' (From the book 'American Evita' by Christopher Anderson, p.259 - Hillary's opinion of President George W. Bush when she found out he secretly visited Iraq just days before her highly publicized trip to Iraq)
'What are you doing inviting these people into my home? These people are our enemies! They are trying to destroy us!' (From the book 'The Survivor' by John Harris, p.99 - Hillary screaming to an aide, when she found out that some Republicans had been invited to the Clinton White House)
'Come on Bill, put your dick up! You can't f**k her here!!' (From the book 'Inside The White House' by Ronald Kessler, p.243 - Hillary to Gov. Clinton when she spots him talking with an attractive female at an Arkansas political rally)
'You know, I'm going to start thanking the woman who cleans the restroom in the building I work in. I'm going to start thinking of her as a human being?' (From the book 'The Case Against Hillary Clinton' by Peggy Noonan, p.55)
'We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices...Government has to make those choices for people' (From the book 'I've Always Been A Yankee Fan' by Thomas D. Kuiper, p.20 - Hillary to Rep. Dennis Hasert in 1993 discussing her expensive, disastrous taxpayer funded health care plan)
'I am a fan of the social policies that you find in Europe' (From the book 'I've Always Been A Yankee Fan' by Thomas D. Kuiper, p.76 - Hillary in 1996)
Follow up question: Is this the kind of attitude we want in a president?
And Who Said This?
November 1, 2007 - 12:43 ET by Del DolemonteA little history lesson: If you don’t know the answer make your best guess.
Answer all the questions before looking at the answers. Who said it?
1) “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the
common good.”
A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above
2) “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the
few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared
responsibility for shared prosperity.”
A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C Idi Amin
D. None of the Above
3) “(We)...can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means
something has to be taken away from some people.”
A. Nikita Khruschev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above
4) “We have to build a political consensus and that requires
people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common
ground.”
A. Mao Zedung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above
5) “I certainly think the free-market has failed.”
A. Karl Marx
B Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above
6) “I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become
the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being
watched.”
A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above
Answers:
(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/29/2004
(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
5/29/2007
(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/4/2007
(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/4/2007
(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
6/4/2007
(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton
9/2/2005
Unfortunately, that stuff
November 1, 2007 - 13:17 ET by motherbeltmatt, unfortunately, that stuff won't work. Mainly because, even if someone dared to ask those questions, the only answer they would get would be a lecture on the "politics of personal destruction" and that the American people want to hear about health care, and Social security, yada yada yada.
Also, the people who love her wouldn't believe any of it. No minds would be changed. I think the questions posed by Del would work better. They are more current, and not subject to charges of irrelevant attack-dog politics like the ones from the books you cite.
You're probably right,
November 1, 2007 - 15:25 ET by mattmYou're probably right, but my point was merely to illustrate the absurdity of anyone trying to portray Hillary as a dainty little well meaning public servant who is being unfairly attacked by mean old men who have the temerity to expect her to explain her positions on the issues in a simple, direct and honest way.
Ah, I see. Yes, that would
November 1, 2007 - 15:31 ET by motherbeltAh, I see. Yes, that would accomplish that. LOL
True colors
November 1, 2007 - 16:30 ET by celatorYep, that's Hillary talk, alright. If she is elected, the true political cockroach called the Clintons will emerge from the disguise they have created. The quotes you cite are common talk around the Clinton house. My uncle was assigned for a short time to the White House during the Clinton years. He later told me you could hear often Hillary screaming at someone. People who worked there learn to stay away from her if they could. There was something crazy about her behavior.
Imagine if they asked about Juanita Broaddrick.
November 1, 2007 - 12:33 ET by NBFWhat would her reaction be then? I know she's been sent the Juanita Broaddrick interview.
If it's OK to ask Sarkozy
November 1, 2007 - 12:43 ET by balboaIf it's OK to ask Sarkozy about his divorce, then it's OK to ask HRC about this.
I agree, bal. In fact, in
November 1, 2007 - 13:24 ET by motherbeltI agree, bal. In fact, in another thread, I took Ann Curry's bullying of Benazir Bhutto, lip pursing, accusatory tone and all, and created a scenario of her pummelling HRC over why she didn't leave her husband in spite of years of his making a sham of their marriage.
But according to HRC, the past isn't prologue; it's irrelevant. What matters is the future: in other words, who is going to promise you the most?
From theHill
November 1, 2007 - 12:37 ET by mvfreemanFrom theHill article:
"The Clinton campaign released a video Wednesday, entitled “The Politics of Pile On,” showing clips of the senator’s rivals going after her by name during the debate."
I guess someone didn't get the memo about only "piling on" Bush or a republican candidate.
The arrogance displayed by Clinton's campaign team is ridiculous. And they still seem to think that all women will be voting for Hillary because of gender.
And how can you vote for somebody to be president when they can't give a cogent answer to a serious question? The attempts at scripting the whole campaign are contemptuous.
Unreflective
November 1, 2007 - 13:16 ET by KC MulvilleYeah, that's the part that gets to me. I looked over the transcript of the October 30 debate, and depending on how you measure the number of responses (some were back-and-forth exchanges), Hillary had the floor perhaps 15-20 times. She managed to work in George Bush's name at least 80% of the answers.
Let's take a look at Hillary's piling on, shall we?
Poor Hillary. They're ganging up on her, aren't they?
See my reply to KC Mulville
November 1, 2007 - 15:33 ET by motherbelt"The Clinton campaign released a video Wednesday, entitled “The
Politics of Pile On,” showing clips of the senator’s rivals going after
her by name during the debate." mvfreeman
See my reply to KC Mulville above: this is a tactic to get people to talk about the "piling on" rather than the questions she didn't answer. As if how the candidates treat each other is more important than the substance of their policies.
official seal of the democrats
November 1, 2007 - 12:38 ET by midnight cowboyTypical dems, wear your campaign button proudly
http://artzthings.com/e-pins/product_info.php?products_id=104
Hillery the Day after
November 1, 2007 - 12:48 ET by VinncyG"Whaaaaa Whaaaaa, they are trying to get me to tell the truth, Whaaaaaa, everybody knows I never tell the truth Whaaaaaa"
Everybody is suppose to elect me then find out I don't care about what they want. Whaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Hillary -- the Victim
November 1, 2007 - 12:52 ET by ThisnThatFrom the NYT:
“Six guys against Hillary,” he (Gerald W. McEntee) said. “I’d call that a fair fight. This is one strong woman.”
“The Politics of Pile-On,” Mrs. Clintons’ Web site announced this morning.
Her campaign sought to stir sympathy of Mrs. Clinton -– in a way that was reminiscent of what happened after she was confronted by Rick Lazio, the Long Island Republican, in their Senate race in 2000 — by suggesting that she was the victim of ganging-up by a stage of presidential opponents and one of the moderators, Tim Russert.
A headline on the Drudge Report... read, “Scorn: As the Men Gang Up.”
Already, tears are welling up in my eyes; there's a lump in my throat; as I weep watching this poor, defenseless woman getting slapped around like this. Doesn't the world care?! STOP IT, in the name of the children, if you care at all about our Village.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
So how the candidates treat
November 1, 2007 - 15:36 ET by motherbeltSo how the candidates treat each other during a debate is now more important than the substance of their policies and proposals? No wonder people vote for the candidate they "like" the best.
As usual the minions of Her Royal Clintoness want it both ways: they want her treated like a delicate little thing, but then claim she is strong enough to be the leader of the free world.
Can't you just see the headlines if she's elected? "Prez snubbed by Sarkozy" (Subhead: pushes through door ahead of her).
At a Euro-summit: "Clinton: EU male leaders "piling on."
Suhead: Says Thatcher never treated with disrespect.
Elect me -- I'm a woman
November 1, 2007 - 20:44 ET by ThisnThatPrior to the debate she was hot to trot out the "I'm a woman; therefore I'm different in a better way" theme. We're all to vote for her because she will change things for the better due to her special insights and woman skills. Besides, isn't it about time?
Yet, when put into a tight spot, she doesn't display those "special vote-for-me" skills at all, does she? Instead, she shows the following qualities:
Can't think on her feet
Is very undecisive
Panders
and then cries because of all the bullies around her.
And she says these are Presidential qualities? What a crock.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
TnT
November 1, 2007 - 20:51 ET by BlondeThe part I found most offensive, was about the "20 million documents".
HRC tried to claim it was the National Archives that was moving at a glacial pace to "release them".
When she was called out on that little lie, that the Slickster had demanded they not be released...she fell back on the lame old (un-liberated woman's) excuse of...."it was my husband's decision".
I think that tells us all we need to know.
Seriously.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
We're on the same wavelength, Blonde
November 1, 2007 - 20:56 ET by RJI wrote, too, about her lying and then hiding behind that pathetic "my husband" excuse. I don't understand how any woman who hears or reads that could vote for her.
Vote for her, RJ?
November 1, 2007 - 21:01 ET by BlondeI'd like to slap the twit silly for that idiot remark.
But you know, she's the smartest woman in the world, and strong.
Spare me. I'm out of sarcasm at the moment.
I despise her. I despise every single thing about her. She's no friend of "women", no matter how hard she tries to position herself as a feminist, champion of women, or whatever you'd care to call it.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Oh, I have no doubt of your position, Blonde
November 1, 2007 - 21:04 ET by RJBut it baffles me that so many women WOULD vote for her.
Don't even get me started, RJ
November 1, 2007 - 21:14 ET by BlondePlease. Dont even get me going on this subject.
Let's leave it for another day. :)
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Ok Blonde. Check your PM
November 1, 2007 - 21:18 ET by RJ:^)
20 million reasons not to vote for her
November 1, 2007 - 21:40 ET by ThisnThatWhat is she hiding in those 20M documents? And, Russert didn't want to get at all of them -- just the ones where she advised Bill.
That whole thing was brought up when she was asked about her experience -- she cited her years as First Lady, so it's natural to ask to see the evidence.
But no, not her-- she just expects everyone to believe her statements, and then she tries to re-inforce those statements with her talking points, to wit: "We have to turn the page on Bush and Cheney -- no, no, we have to get rid of the whole book".
We have all known for a long time that this woman is hollow and power-hungry. Now, maybe, the rest of the country can begin to see the same thing. I think this gaseous windbag may be ready to explode. Hope so.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Hillary Clinton can not handle it
November 1, 2007 - 12:59 ET by Lame CherryIn studying dame Hillary from the Arkansas days certain certains prevail.
First, Hillary is ONLY very good in debate IF SHE AMBUSHES SOME GUY in public and hides behind the courtesy extended to a woman.
Second, as Rush Limbaugh pointed out in the "pretty in pink" press conference, Hillary is adequate at "staged questions" which she has had weeks to prepare for.
Clinton has had nothing but softball questions thrown at her for 6 years as that is a condition of her appearing anywhere along with the threat of her blackmail files going public.
Third, what the public saw in the last debate was the real Hillary Clinton. She gets away with goofy answers all the time, but this time everyone treated her like all Republicans get treated and SHE COULD NOT HANDLE IT.
Now I have read the Clinton groupie whinings about how bad Hillary was treated, but the thing Americans have got to get through their heads is this:
IF HILLARY CLINTON CAN NOT HANDLE,
John Edwards, Barak Obama, Brain Williams........and Tim Russert who does nothing but set up questions using past statements, HOW CAN HILLARY CLINTON HANDLE?????????
Putin, the Chicoms, Kim of North Korea, Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Hezbollah.......or even our allies like Gordon Brown and Macho Sarkozy who are real hard case men.
I ask that point again, if Hillary Clinton can not deal with light weights in mental non capacity, HOW CAN SHE EVER LEAD AMERICA IN THE WORLD?
I will not vote for Democrats, but Democrats have got to get the point that in honesty only Joe Biden, Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd have only about half a tank worth of leadership in being capable of leadership when Hillary is bone dry.
Hillary can not do the job. She showed herself even more inept than Barak Obama and I did not consider that possible. She is more akin to Dennis Kucinich in being a flat world answerer.
One can not set up meetings where Putin only gets to ask approved questions. This is the real world and for once I was pleased that Hillary was not like the New England Patriots in just being allowed by other teams to run around on the field scoring points as the referees turned the other way.
In being a pragmatist, I hope the MSM actually does bring down Hillary in this coup as while Al Gore would be an economic and libertarian disaster for America at least he could pull the trigger and lead.....even if it is was not where I would ever go.
.....and no I have not changed my mind, I will be voting Fred Thompson as all of my family and circle will be.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Star
November 1, 2007 - 14:41 ET by JDWI ask that point again, if Hillary Clinton can not deal with light weights in mental non capacity, HOW CAN SHE EVER LEAD AMERICA IN THE WORLD?
Excellent observation.
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
"Hillary Says Demo Rivals are Ganging Up on Her"
November 1, 2007 - 13:16 ET by vrwc13....article here.
Don't think this is what she meant when she said "It takes a village!"
v
Hillary vs Tough Questions
November 1, 2007 - 13:34 ET by TigerNow we know why she will not debate on Fox News.
I suspect Hillary is more
November 1, 2007 - 13:35 ET by kathleenirishI suspect Hillary is more than a little like Rasputin- that little crafty bastard couldn't be put down for the longest time-almost like he had supernatural strength from evil. She has her co-conspirators working tirelessly for her in the MSM.
She is the epitome of the anti-American, too.
Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar.
WTF ??? This is the same
November 1, 2007 - 14:15 ET by midnight cowboyWTF ??? This is the same woman for over a year has been saying she's the only one tough enough to handle the onslaught of Republican attacks. She's been handling them for over 35 years. Then, when a couple of lightweights from her own party and a couple of liberal journalist just ask her to clarify her statements................bwaaaaaaaaaa they're piling on and being mean to me. What an empty pantsuit.
Am I alone in thinking that
November 1, 2007 - 14:24 ET by JimboAm I alone in thinking that the Clinton Machine probably monitors blogs like this to get the pulse of what conservatives are thinking so they can adjust their strategy accordingly?
They adjust their position with the polls, why not with the blogs?
If I’m right, I feel a little violated for helping the witch.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."
I think you're right on,
November 1, 2007 - 20:04 ET by motherbeltI think you're right on, and I think the MSM helps her out whent they can.
I said before I thought Chris Matthews' question to Mike Huckabee: what's the one-line attack on Hillary? was a recon mission to find out what the nuts and bolts of the attacks were going to be.
Can't change her spots
November 1, 2007 - 20:48 ET by ThisnThatI wouldn't worry about her campaign changing their strategy. The problem is, they need to change the candidate. Hillery simply can't change. She is what she is, and that's why she has been sheltered from tough questions all these years. She was exposed during this debate, and there's nothing she can do about it, no matter what her campaign tries.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
Overlooked in the undressing of Mrs Slick Willie
November 1, 2007 - 14:31 ET by RJWhen asked to release the White House papers that would show her leadership and involvement in policy decisions, this self-described "strong woman" said that decision was up to her husband, Slick Willie.
Drinking Game
November 1, 2007 - 14:37 ET by KillgraveThis would be a great drinking game - take a drink each time, during a debate, that Hildabeast says "Bush".
If she says "President George Bush" you have to finish your beer.
I wonder when it will occur to these morons that George Bush's term is coming to an end, and HE'S NOT RUNNING AGAIN.
Shakespeare
November 1, 2007 - 14:42 ET by Caringwhiteguy"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"
Hamlet-Act III Scene 2
More
November 1, 2007 - 14:50 ET by JDWIs it Hillary Care? Is the tax plan yours? Where does she stand on Iraq? She has opposed the Patriot Act, where does she stand on Iran? Where does she stand on the border? Will she do everything she can to expedite the archives?
JDW
Sen Clinton: Founder of Media Matters
I remember way back when
November 1, 2007 - 14:59 ET by BeanManI remember way back when Her Majesty was running for the Senate in 2000. "The Media" indicated that she would get the 3rd degree from the New York press and have to answer the tough questions. They rolled over for her then and the national media has followed suit. She certainly has an attitude of entitlement. Just the fact that her "handlers" are complaining tells me that Little Timmy Russert was not playing nice tells me that they'll all lay off next time. They don't want to ruin the whole thing after all.
Tim Russert pretends to be objective occasionally. He'll get the behind-the-scenes scolding from Her Majesties minions and toe the line next time.
Since government is coercion, politics is largely the exercise of deception regarding the intended use of coercion - George Orwell
Whine
November 1, 2007 - 15:25 ET by DanDanSorry--- If Hillery wants to run with the
BIG DOGS --- She can't whine and piss with
The PUPPIES ----
Lee
<td hei
America hates a cry baby
November 1, 2007 - 16:18 ET by general companyLet her whine, imagine how much whining she will be doing once the rest of the world starts in on her. I used to think she had the b@lls in that partnership, now I am sure there aint ONE amongst the pair.
Edit: Although she has little to worry about, no doubt the MSM is planning her rebirth as we type.
Oh, boo hoo Hillary. She
November 1, 2007 - 15:43 ET by msh1973Oh, boo hoo Hillary. She had better toughen up if she wants to play with the big boys. She wants the world to take her serious, but now she plays the victim.
That being said, I will bet dollars to donuts that the msm will never ask her tough questions again, if they know what is good for them. I am just saying....