FROM CARL BERNSTEIN TO THE BROADDRICK RAPE: Connecting the Dots
Hillary calls new books 'cash for rehash.' (Not so fast, missus clinton.)

by Mia T, 6.04.07

"There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women." (Carl Bernstein)

Howard Wolfson doth protest too little.

Yawn in tow--or is it a smirk?--the clinton flack is making the rounds trying to convince us that the two new hillary books about to hit the stores, "A Woman in Charge," by Carl Bernstein of 'Woodward and'/Watergate fame, and "Her Way," by former New York Times reporter Jeff Gerth and current one Don Van Natta Jr., are nothing new.

But Wolfson's claim--and his yawn--are belied by his tactic: That is, if these books are simply warmed over calumny, why the redundancy of clinton schemes trying to kill them, (and kill them preemptively, no less)?

Listen to clinton operatives Wolfson, Philippe Reines et al. Their oh-so-carefully-crafted sound bites--"rehash for cash" and "Is it possible to be quoted yawning?'--reveal real concern in the clinton camp about the books.

'OLD NEWS'

The clinton machine wants us to think the books are about the clinton marriage and so-called adultery and, as such, are 'old news.'

What is 'old news' is that tired clinton turn of phrase. Concocted to cause us to dismiss clinton crimes, abuses and failures, it is a non sequitur that insults us all. In clinton-machine scandal-mitigation parlance, the implied premise of 'old news' is that there is a statute of limitations on 'venal' and 'inept.' (ASIDE: 9/11 shot that one down, didn't it?)

'ADULTERY'

Falsely portraying the clinton marital deal as 'adultery' has enabled missus clinton for decades to play the victim, which in turn enabled the clintons to win elections and avoid the slammer (though not always in that order). (HEAR SUSAN ESTRICH: hillary plays 'the victim' for votes)

But the marital 'arrangement' detailed by these two books vitiates the 'adultery' charge.

Worse, it supports the Juanita Broaddrick allegations of rape by bill clinton and threat by hillary clinton two weeks after the rape.

As Carl Bernstein himself put it last week ('Today'): "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women."

Don't fall for the clintons' own rehash for cash and power. The clinton story is no soap opera. It is a horror story about abuse of women, abuse of power and willful utter failure to confront terrorism.

The clinton story is about the clintons' fundamental unfitness to be out kids' babysitters, much less senator or--heaven forbid--president... again.

As missus clinton cynically targets us, abuses us, yet one more time, we women, especially, must open our eyes. We will not survive another clinton. (We may yet not survive the first.)

"The power of the harasser, the abuser, the rapist depends above all on the silence of women." (Ursula K. LeGuin)

VOTE SMART: A WARNING TO ALL WOMEN ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON (on YouTube)

Sorry about the duplicate posts. (The comments weren't appearing.)

Listen to Howard Wolfson, Philippe Reines and the rest of the clinton operatives. Their carefully crafted sound bites describing the Bernstein and Gerth/Van Natta books--"rehash for cash" and "Is it possible to be quoted yawning?'--reveal a real concern in camp clinton.

The clinton machine is trying to make us think the two new hillary books are about the clinton marriage and so-called adultery and, as such, are 'old news.' (That tired clinton turn of phrase engineered to turn us away from clinton crimes, abuses and failures is what is 'old news.' It is a non sequitur that insults us all.)

Portraying the marital deal as 'adultery' has enabled missus clinton to play the victim for decades in order to win elections and avoid the slammer. (Google: 'HEAR SUSAN ESTRICH: hillary plays 'the victim' for votes.")

But the marital 'arrangement' detailed by these two books vitiates the 'adultery' charge.

As Carl Bernstein, himself, put it this past week (Today): "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women that he was with."

Don't fall for clintons' own 'rehash for cash' and power. The clinton story is no soap opera. It is a horror story.

It is about is the clintons' abuse of women, abuse of power and willful utter failure to confront terrorism.

It is about the clintons' fundamental unfitness to be out kids' babysitters, much less senator or--heaven forbid--president redux.

test

test

Carl Bernstein on "Today": "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women that he was with."

re my post, above:

Carl Bernstein on "Today": "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women that he was with."

Do not miscontrue the Bernstein and Gerth/Van Atta books as being about hillary clinton's marriage. They are about hillary clinton's fatal defects.--Mia T (for context, see above)

Carl Bernstein on "Today": "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women that he was with."

Read Carl Bernstein and Gerth/Van Atta on this. They support by way of analogy Juanita Broaddrick's allegation that hillary clinton threatened her two weeks after bill clinton raped her. Do not miscontrue the Bernstein and Gerth/Van Atta books as being about hillary clinton's marriage. They are about hillary clinton's fatal defects.--Mia T

Carl Bernstein on "Today": "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women that he was with."

Read Carl Bernstein and Gerth/Van Atta on this. They support by way of analogy Juanita Broaddrick's allegation that hillary clinton threatened her two weeks after bill clinton raped her. Do not miscontrue the Bernstein and Gerth/Van Atta books as being about hillary clinton's marriage. They are about hillary clinton's fatal defects. (You can see the Broaddrick interviews--the Dateline NBC clinton rape interview by Lisa Myers and the interview in which Broaddrick details the threat by hillary clinton 2 weeks after the rape--at deletehillary, rape page.)--Mia T

Carl Bernstein on "Today": "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women that he was with."

isafakir:

As for relative intelligence, I happen to think the professional pol is a self-selected subgroup of Homo sapiens that is mediocre, power-hungry and corrupt or corruptible by definition.

That said, Bush's SATs were higher than Kerry's, Bush earned an MBA from Harvard while Gore flunked out of divinity school, dropped out of law school and hillary clinton flunked the DC Bar, which had a 60% pass rate. (She did, however, manage to pass the Arkansas Bar, with a ~90% pass rate... and the rest is history--albeit revisionist.)

"Gore's undergraduate transcript from Harvard is riddled with C's, including a C-minus in introductory economics, a D in one science course, and a C-plus in another. 'In his sophomore year at Harvard,' the Post reported, 'Gore's grades were lower than any semester recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale.'

Moreover, Gore's graduate school record - consistently glossed over by the press - is nothing short of shameful. In 1971, Gore enrolled in Vanderbilt Divinity School where, according to Bill Turque, author of 'Inventing Al Gore,' he received F's in five of the eight classes he took over the course of three semesters. Not surprisingly, Gore did not receive a degree from the divinity school. Nor did Gore graduate from Vanderbilt Law School, where he enrolled for a brief time and received his fair share of C's."

All while Bush went on to earn an MBA from Harvard....

You really must try to think critically, resist the clinton agitprop and goto original sources.

It is a mystery why any woman would vote for hillary clinton. She is not simply married to an abuser of women. She is an abuser of women in her own right.
 
Read Carl Bernstein and Gerth/Van Atta on this. They support by way of analogy Juanita Broaddrick's allegation that hillary clinton threatened her two weeks after bill clinton raped her. Do not miscontrue the Bernstein and Gerth/Van Atta books as being about hillary clinton's marriage. They are about hillary clinton's fatal defects. (You can see the Broaddrick interviews--the Dateline NBC clinton rape interview by Lisa Myers and the interview in which Broaddrick details the threat by hillary clinton 2 weeks after the rape--at deletehillary, rape page.)
 
hillary clinton is also an abuser of power.

See 'The Barrett report,' Jan. 31, 2007, by Mark Goodman, a registered Democrat and avowed liberal. Note, especially, Goodman's warning in the final paragraph:
"Now that the senator from New York has announced 'I'm in to win,' voters should demand that their representatives release the mystery pages so that they may examine Mrs. Clinton red in tooth. Otherwise, Americans run the risk of going to the polls in 2008 seeking the rebirth of a nation only to discover that they have merely traded the devil for a witch."

(The Barrett report documents the clintons' massive abuse of power, which includes the routine siccing of the IRS--Soviet-style--on the clinton critics. And do not miss the irony here: the evidence documenting this massive clinton abuse of power was redacted by massive clinton abuse of power.)
 
Also read Democrat Jerry Zeifman, who was her boss during the Nixon impeachment proceedings; he alerts us to hillary rodham's fundamental lack of ethics, why he could never recommend her for 'any position of public or private trust.'
 
And hillary clinton is inept.

clinton administration veteran and Berkeley economist Brad Delong warns:
"My 2 cents' worth and I think it is the 2 cents' worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994 is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she has ever tried to do + she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn't smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly. There is no reason to think she would be anything but an abysmal president "
 
Also note that this self-described brilliant woman flunked the DC Bar, which had a 60% pass rate. (See the Bernstein book on this. Indeed, see her own turgid tome. (Not the audio version, however. Perhaps the clinton-machine thinking is that literacy and gullibility are inversely related.)) She did, however, pass the Arkansas Bar, (80-90% pass rate) and the rest is history, albeit revisionist.
 
If 9/11 taught us anything, it is that presidential character and moral authority count, and count most.(bill clinton, who, for self-serving reasons ignored terrorism for his entire tenure, (see YouTube, 'Virtual Kill,' see deletehillary, terrorism page), was rated by 90 historians and presidential scholars in the C-SPAN poll dead last in moral authority--lower than Nixon. If the variables are properly weighted, bill clinton will always come out dead last. That is, unless Americans are dumb enough to make the same mistake twice.
 
"The power of the harasser, the abuser, the rapist depends above all on the silence of women." (Ursula K. LeGuin)
 
See my YouTube video, 'VOTE SMART: A WARNING TO ALL WOMEN ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON,' which was mentioned by this paper. ('A Brave New World of Political Skulduggery? Anti-Clinton Video Shows Ease of Attack In the Computer Age,' By Howard Kurtz and Jose Antonio Vargas.)

US President Tim Kalemkarian, US Senate Tim Kalemkarian, US House Tim Kalemkarian: best major candidate.

i can't think of a single Dem candidate who would not make a dynamite president and Hillary, Clinton, Mrs Clinton and Senator Clinton are all among the best of them. Gore, Richardson, Obama, even Kucinich, all of them, are people of integrity, honor, decency, and American in all the best sense of that word. It is amazing to see so many good people in the same party, and as amazing to see just how sadly the other parties rank in comparison. I wouldn't vote for any of them for the school board, much less president. Can you imagine another 4 years of people who don't know enough science to do a high school biology for shop students experiment.

I think that one of Hillary's best aspects is that she is cold and calculating. Nice people were NOT meant for politics, and the only people who can get anything done are those that are opportunistic and calculating. This is why Hillary could take on the job.

Rita! Saw you at the Condi lovefest with Tina. Will you be at Nina's "CondiRama" on Saturday? Because Lisa and Corita and Sabrina and I are all going. We all LOOOOVE Condi, and hope she can overcome her spotty record at State - or else, get people to forget about it because she's so awesome hee hee - and run for president. Oh - I have a phone call, it must be Nissa at 'Fond-i-of-Condi,' so I better take it.

Wait - we're all the same person, aren't we?

Time for more meds.

Broadly many more supporters and voters would vote for Condoleeza Rice. They like her politics and her qualifications and her seriousness without attitude first of all.

Not as many entirely like Hillary's politics,nor believe being the wife of a president should qualify her to be president, regardless how ambitious and ideological, and over-confident she has always been. Being pickle faced is not a qualification either, and does not necessarily indicate gravitas or real seriousness.

Hillary is eaten with ambition alone. Period.

Kara has mentioned the best ticket for our country [first] and for the Democratic party [second], which is RICHARDSON--OBAMA!

There are millions of us voters who are AOK with the idea of a female president, but NOT with Hillary. Let New York keep her as their Senator, if those living in the state are so happy with her.

And let everyone argue--and vote--with their brains, and not with their genitals, skin, or spleen.

The women I have talked to single, married and widowed support Hillary. They like her position on issues like health care and education. One of them who has met her found she was likeable, as well. Two of them have daughters and believe things will be better for them if Hillary becomes President. None of them believe there is another woman in the wings who could make a similar bid for our nations highest office in the forseeable future, although a couple could be vice presidential candidates in the next few years, but they felt that was a step back. Obviously, there were no hard core Hillary Haters in my sampling, nor strong supporters for the other candidates whose view would differ. If I may add a personal thought to all this, I hope the electorate is smart enough this time around to not get too carried away with this likeability thing, because that is what got us into the mess we are now in to begin with. We elected a drinking buddy, not a qualified candidate, and the results in all areas speak for themselves. Thanks for listening.

Kyu: I see the "Hillary Haters" jumped on you right off, that is to be expected. I was alone for a time as a Hillary supporter and know full well how vicious these "Haters" can be. I kinda enjoy getting them a tad riled from time to time.

My twenty nine year old daughter said that the very thought of Hillary Clinton being President of the United States makes her ill.

It's Hillary's politics of opportunism on one hand and her standing by her philandering husband on the other.

If Hillary had confidence in herself she would never have stayed with a man who betrayed her at every turn.

I am hopelessly distressed at the field of democratic contenders. I am finding it extremely difficult to support either one of the Democrats currently enjoing this two top spots.

I don't trust Hillary. As someone mentioned above, I think she's a shark swimming to a pool of goldfish. She's constantly changing her slant on things and seems to flutter on the fickle winds of public opinion. She doesn't fill me with a warm fuzzy feeling and I can't see myself supporting her at all.

Obama is a different story. I can't run with him either. From what I have seen he is a little man stomper seemily willing to stomp the stuffings out of anyone he wants if it suites his goals at the time. He strikes me as a GOP-lite contender.

To my dismay, the only canidate I find myself comfortable of supporting is John Edwards. But his position in the early polls is not encouraging.

Moreover, if we wind up with either Clinton or Obama at the helm after the primaries, I am going to be in a bad way. For the first time in my life I may have to seriously look at the GOP contender if he is centrist enough, and press all of my hopes into filling the House and Senate with Democratic seats.

The future of the '08 hope is looking glum indeed.

Dear Kyu,

Please dear, by all means support and vote for the Hillary Clinton that you hold so near and dear to your heart, but don't come crying to those of us who've tried to tell you that Hillary Clinton's a crass, lying, grasping politician who'll do anything to get elected. You see, Hillary's reason for living is to have POWER. Hillary will lie, cheat and steal (and literally climb over the dead bodies of Barak Obama, John Edwards and any other presidential candidate who gets in her way) to get back into the White House.

The closer we get the primaries in 2008, the gloves will come off and Hillary will go on the offensive as the "Clinton Machine" shifts into high gear. If there's any dirt that can be found to sling at Obama, Edwards, et al, the Clinton Machine and Hillary's attack dogs will find it and they'll sling it with ease.

Oh, how I wish that I could remove the scales from you blind eyes and unstop your deaf ears so that you would see and hear the truth about your beloved Hillary.

Someone who has known Hillary up close and personally for over twenty years is a man named Dick Morris. In 1977, Dick Morris was Bill Clintons first consultant. He's written a book titled "REWRITING HISTORY". I highly recommend that you read his book "REWRITING HISTORY" so that you may gain insight and understanding into Hillary's true, unvarnished character.

Hillary Clinton is irresponsible with power. She really has some serious ethical problems. She plays fast and loose with the truth and she's not worthy of becoming the next president of the USA.

HILL NO! SHE'S GOT TO GO! TM

www.hillnoshesgottogo.com

Every candidate has some good side, but Hillary has many great sides. Are you going to have the president who is qualified only half? There's no reason to have inexperienced president, if you do we will have the same situation like now. I read Hillary's book "Living History" four times, all of her books and several books which were wrote by others. Hillary is grown up as a leader of children(boys and girls), Church, College, Lawyers and Women. she helped people anywhere she was. Anti-Hillary women and men, wake up, your narrow mind and jealousy can't stop Hillary's supporters who were highly educated and erudite. I am a female Asian American, I have voted our President 5 times, my 6th vote will be Hillary Clinton,
our next President of United States of America. I love America, The Clintons and HILLARY CLINTON. She will lead our Country
wisely, respectfully, strongly and peacefully. America will be back to the Top of the World when Hillary Clinton moves to the White House.

Lyle, looks like "The Hidden Vote" is lying low this evening, huh?

I have to tell you, no offense, but I REALLY don't want her to win. Let's get some new blood in there - we haven't been doing so well with the older stuff thus far.

Let's face facts folks. East is East and West is West. I'm doing all that I can to spread the word that Senator Hillary Clinton just has to go because she's not worthy of becoming the next president of the USA and either you agree with me or you don't.

It's my hope that we can agree to disagree ... agreeably.

HILL NO! SHE'S GOT TO GO! TM

www.hillnoshesgottogo.com

I often wonder how the comments are put together in almost the same way when "The Hillary Haters" crawl out from under their rocks. I can go to any of the "Nut or Wacko" cites and find the same thing, although they use different names, it is easy to see the source is the same.

I am a 70-year old female who will not vote for Hillary. Reasons: She is a female version of Joe Lieberman, representing the DLC in all its corporate glory. She will never take a stand on any issue, and will constantly blur her positions so voters will never know what she really thinks about any issue (the Iraq war is an apt example). She will cave to the Reps anytime she thinks it advantageous to be viewed as a centrist. My thoughts would be somewhat different if she was a female Governor with an actual record, but she is not. The Presidency is an executive job - what has she ever governed? Far as I am concerned, she is just another one-term Senator, still wet behind the ears.

I wish I could vote for a woman, but I will not vote for Hillary. I am looking for a president who is not driven by testosterone, not one who is trying to show that she has as much testosterone as any man. I was ready to forgive her for her pro-war vote until she answered "retaliate" in the first debate. My vote is going to an anti-war, get 'em out of Iraq candidate. I would like that to be a woman, but maybe next time.

Hillary is your classic "weak woman." Strong women don't have profanity laced tirades with Secret Service, state troopers, White House staff and Bill who Hillary makes a sport of ridiculing.

A strong woman would not wrap her arms around the ankles of a rapist and sexual predator for 36 years.

A strong woman would not go to war on Bill's sex victims and girlfriends with a secret police, criminal intimidation tactics and slander campaigns.

A strong woman would tell the truth like saying she actually fired the White House Travel office, not blame others. A strong woman would say that she hired Craig Livingstone and not lie and say she did not know him or anything about the 900 FBI files she ordered up.

I'm a woman who won't vote for Hillary -- and I'm a feminist and generally Dem-leaning. I think it's repugnant to vote for someone because of their sex -- and I'm not going to let the fact that she's a woman force me to vote for a candidate I dislike. I'm endlessly irritated by the assumption that women would support her just because she's a woman -- it's insulting to imply we can't look beyond that. (As a side note, I would rather our first woman president be someone who won the office on her own merits, not because of who her husband is. That's not driving my opposition to Hillary but is something I wonder why no one talks about.)

I'm a woman who won't vote for Hillary -- and I'm a feminist and generally Dem-leaning. I think it's repugnant to vote for someone because of their sex -- and I'm not going to let the fact that she's a woman force me to vote for a candidate I dislike. I'm endlessly irritated by the assumption that women would support her just because she's a woman -- it's insulting to imply we can't look beyond that. (As a side note, I would rather our first woman president be someone who won the office on her own merits, not because of who her husband. That's not driving my opposition to Hillary but is something I wonder why no one talks about.)

As an Australian, I am obviously not a potential voter, but there have always been a few things about Hillary that have worried me.
My main problem centres around the nature of her marriage. Perhaps this is a cultural thing, but why on earth did she stay married? If it was because she is a forgiving woman, then maybe we missed that over here in Oz. I appreciate that political ambition was probably the motivator, and acknowledge that such ambition is a necessary prerequisite for the job, but I thought these days that women could stand up for themselves a little better and, more importantly ,stand alone.

As an Australian, I am obviously not a potential voter, but there have always been a few things about Hillary that have worried me.
My main problem centres around the nature of her marriage. Perhaps this is a cultural thing, but why on earth did she stay married? If it was because she is a forgiving woman, then maybe we missed that over here in Oz. I appreciate that political ambition was probably the motivator, and acknowledge that such ambition is a necessary prerequisite for the job, but I thought these days that women could stand up for themselves a little better and, more importantly ,stand alone.

As an Australian, I am obviously not a potential voter, but there have always been a few things about Hillary that have worried me.
My main problem centres around the nature of her marriage. Perhaps this is a cultural thing, but why on earth did she stay married? If it was because she is a forgiving woman, then maybe we missed that over here in Oz. I appreciate that political ambition was probably the motivator, and acknowledge that such ambition is a necessary prerequisite for the job, but I thought these days that women could stand up for themselves a little better and, more importantly ,stand alone.

who is this Zook person, he is mental defective?

I'm sorry, "actual convictions," I was daydreaming about the days when we were paying down the national debt and still producing world-leading medical and other scientific research; also when 3300 American soldiers now dead were still alive, and the US was treated with respect in more than 2 or 3 foreign capitals. It seems so long ago now...

There I go again. I'm sorry, what were you saying? Was it something about Mark Foley? or the Vice President shooting people in the face? Wait, I know... was it the glaciers melting? Help em out here.

Criminals: All these people have served prison sentences for illegal activity in a Clinton scandal. They either were convicted or pled guilty. There are over 15 convictions/guilty pleas from Starr's investigation plus several others from other scandal investigations.

Whitewater:
AK Gov. Jim Guy Tucker - fraud felony convictions - 3 counts (Tucker resigned facing impeachment)
Jim McDougal - fraud and conspiracy felony convictions - 18 counts
Susan McDougal - felony - 4 counts (pardoned during Clinton's last minute pardongate payoffs)
William J. Marks Sr - conspiracy
Stephen Smith - conspiracy
Larry Kuca - Fraud
Neal Ainley - 2 misdemeanors for embezzlement
David Hale - guilty plea - conspiracy
Chris Wade - felony - Whitewater real-estate investor
John Haley - recent! 1998 on fraud
Robert Palmer - felony for conspiracy
Charles Matthews - guilty plea for bribery
Eugene Fitzhugh - Whitewater - bribery
Webster Hubbell - #2 ranking Justice Dept. Official - felony for embezzlement and fraud
John Latham - CEO of Madison Bank - bank fraud
Campaign Finance:
Johnny Chung - Clinton cronie - felony guilty plea - funneling money from China
Gene Lum - convicted - felony for money laundering for the DNC
Nora Lum - convicted - felony for money laundering for the DNC
Howard Glicken - guilty plea - 2 midemeanors - funneling foreign donations
Yah Lin "Charlie" Trie - guilty plea - illegal Clinton campaign donations
John Huang - Clinton cronie - felony guilty plea - funneling money from China
Paula Jonesgate:
William Jefferson Clinton - found guilty - civil contempt of court - lying under oath about material facts. The Office of the Independent Council further presented Clinton with an agreement that had him disbarred from practicing law for 5 years and made him signed statement admitting to his deception

Sandy Burgler - hiding clinton terror weakness by destroying documents

compare this to partisan allegations and policy differences and consider a vote for Hillary in that context. you Soviets used to be good at rewriting history, but the Internet never forgets.

In other words, anything - a policy, an idea, an argument, that disagrees with your extremely narrow world view is considered a scandal. Any criminal activity conducted by Democrats is to be ignored. you see Dems have two sets of standards, one for Repubs and none for themselves. Just look at the covering for Murtha last night.

honest people can disagree on policy and other actions. Very few will honestly defend the clinton scandels which resulted in so many convictions in an actual court of law, not in some flaky Liberals twisted mind.

I would guess that if Hillary does not get the nomination, there would be a lot of interest in a female VP - my guess would be Governor Katherine Sibelius of Kansas.

One dark horse might be Congressman Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania - he is a retired three star admiral. He commanded Navy battle groups in support of both the Iraq and Afghanistan conficts. He is also telegenic and articulate.

Well, "actual scandals," if you can't see the difference between the Enquirer-esque garbage you list (which include rumors and accusations never proven, as well as some embarrassing but relatively unimportant episodes inflated by the GOP) and the national / international emergencies I listed, I guess I can't make you see it.

To all readers still on the Planet Earth, I should add:

-the loss of prestige, goodwill, and influence around the world due to short-sighted, ham-handed "diplomacy"
-the failure to do ANYTHING to stop a North Korean nuclear weapons test
-the willful disregard of advice coming from the 09.11 commission, the Baker/Hamilton commission, Colin Powell, Richard Nixon, HIS OWN FATHER, and others
-the depletion of National Guard reserves at home, now fighting in Iraq (some for the 2nd or 3rd time)
-the inadequate supply of body armor, Arabic translators, and some medicines to soldiers on the ground
-the "re-assignment" (dismissal) of the 1st general to tell him honestly that he did not have sufficient troops to achieve stability
-Haditha
-excusing the slaughter of Iraqi civilians in a recent raid
-"The Bush administration's two top appointees in charge of the Endangered Species Act have asserted that 1) there is no extinction crisis, 2) species should be allowed to go extinct, 3) most species facing extinction should not be put on the endangered species list, 4) placing species on the endangered list is not an administration priority, and 5) the 260 imperiled species on the current federal waiting list do not need to be put on the endangered list"
-culturally deaf enough (initially) to refer to invasion of Iraq as a "crusade"

And I've still got more, but my fingers are getting tired. I feel sorry for you, "actual scandals" (zouk), if your critical thinking skills are really such that you don't see how much more important these are.

these are not the "fake, Dem" variety as listed above in bokonon

Whitewater
Cattlegate
Nannygate
Helicoptergate
Travelgate
Gennifer Flowersgate
Filegate
Vince Fostergate
I wonder where those Whitewater billing records came fromgate
Paula Jonesgate
Federal Building campaign phone callgate
Lincoln bedroomgate
White House coffeegate
Donations from convicted drug and weapons dealersgate
Buddhist Templegate
Web Hubbell hush moneygate
Lippogate
Chinese commiegate - Clinton was practically endorsed by red China Update!
Let's blame Kenneth Starrgate
Zippergate/interngate - the Lewinsky affair itself
Perjury and jobs for Lewinskygate - the aftermath
Willeygate
Web Hubbell prison phone callgate
Selling Military Technology to the Chinese Commiesgate
Coverup for our Russian Comrades as Wellgate
Wag-the-Dog-gate
Jaunita Broaddrick gate
PBS-gate
Email-gate
Vandalgate
Lootergate
Pardongate

http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/clinton-scandals.html

JimD, who else do you see on the short list for VP (for the Democrats)? I would guess Mark Warner, Bill Richardson (if he's not nominated), Evan Bayh.... who else?

Information about Hillary's support by women's votes can't be true. How could majority of women, mothers, wifes and sweethearts, of senselessly killed in Iraq soldiers vote for her. She, as the former first lady, PERFECTLY knew the situation, and she still voted PRO Iraqi war. That alone is enough for women to support and to vote for someone else.

Jennifer:

in re: "Do we really want all that trouble and scandal again in our lives, please!"

In no particular order:

-U.S. attorneys fired for partisan reasons
-Abu Ghraib
-Gonzales visiting Ascroft in the hospital to make it possible for the White House to tap your phone
-multi-billion $$ no-bid contract awarded to Halliburton (Cheney's former employer); same company pulls out of Iraq a year later with the job still undone
-HURRICANE KATRINA hits while Bush is playing guitar in California. He remains in California for an additional 2 days. Serious federal help still "on its way." (as of 2007!)
-invades Iraq on shifting pretexts, with a new one adopted when the old one(s) are proven exaggerated, irrelevant, and/or just plain wrong. 3300 American lives and 1/2 TRILLION dollars later, Iraq is a mess, Iran is gaining influence, and Al Qaeda recruiting is at an all-time high.
-July 2001 president's daily brief reads "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." - and mentions airplanes - no reaction from the White House
-December 2001 - Osama bin Laden has been cornered in the mountains of Afghanistan, but is allowed to escape. 5 1/2 years later, he is still at large and his movement is once again gaining strength.
-Bush "sees into Putin's soul" in 2001 and decides to trust him; Putin currently busy reconstituting Soviet power and influence
-Bush pulls out of Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in order to test "Star Wars" missile defense; it still doesn't work, and several more countries have or are on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons
-Expresses skepticism of Darwin as several states consider rejecting science, or, at the least, giving superstition an equal hearing in the name of "fair play."
-Bush shrugs at global warming, even as UN, EU, and several US states and corporations attempt to address it. (including California's "Terminator")
-Bush attempts to pack the Supreme Court with righty justices, who obediently call habeas corpus (only a founding US legal principle) into question
-Lies to the nation - repeatedly - about supposed "connection" beteen 09.11 and Iraq, even after being told that no such connection existed

Oh, and
-cuts the taxes of those who least need cuts and slashes social services for those who most need social services. 6 years later, the cuts have NOT "paid for themselves" and the deficit is at record levels.

So, what were you saying about Clinton again? I forget... was it the peace? the budget surpluses? Remind me...

There is no need to resort to personal attacks on Ms. Clinton. It is quite enough o say that she would continue the same foreign policy mistakes, the same economic fiasco, the same policial scorched earth policies as her predicessor. She is "Bush in drag" and you'd have to be an idiot to vote for her. There are, evidently, a lot of female idiots out there.

Harvey Cogswell, I'm with you man! I'm doing everything that I can to spread the word that Hillary Clinton just has to go!

HILL NO! SHE'S GOT TO GO! TM - HILL NO!'s web site: www.hillnoshesgottogo.com

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's a snake-in-the- grass chameleon who speaks with forked tongue.

Hillary's irresponsible with power, she's unethical and please, people, look at her resume` before you make your decision to support and/or vote for her. What has she really done? She had her gig as First Lady where she was Bill's UNELECTED co-president where she constantly had to cover for her sex addicted, women abusing, rapist husband! She's hired PI's and has a private police force to keep Bill's "bimbos" under control and out of the news (well, except for a few...Gennifer, Monica and the sexually abused women Paula and Juanita...most of us remember the tabloid headline news about all of them.) But there are hundreds more... .

And what about the Clinton's abuse of power? Has anyone read Barbara Olson's book "THE FINAL DAYS -- The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House"? Do you really want common thieves living in the White House again? The Clintons stole china and furniture belonging to the White House and the citizens of the USA when they moved out of the White House!

And what about CHARACTER? Doesn't a persons character count anymore? Qualities like honesty, truth, fairness, trustworthiness, committment to honoring ones' word, you know, old fashioned virtures that used to mean something to the citizen's of the USA.

Our elementary school kids know a phony when they see one. Senator Hillary Clinton is about as phony as they come. The author, R Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., has dubbed her "Madame Hillary". I think that I'd be more inclined to associate "Madame Hillary" with Comrade Lenin than I would with freedom loving Americans! I personally don't want to participate in Hillary's Liberal Left Democrat hidden agenda or with her social engineering plans for the USA!

With Hillary serving as President and "Commanderess-in-Chief" of the USA, I'm sure that I'd feel safer (tongue-in-cheek) knowing that Hillary's Democrat agenda will be to tax me to the hilt and quite possibly dispense with the military. She'd probably host a summit of all the terrorist loving Islamic Jihadist leaders and offer them Heartland America in exchange for peace! I have a sneaking suspicion that Hillary would follow her mentor Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" ideology to the "L"! After all, Hillary's background as a radical Liberal Left Democrat is well documented from her Wellesely College and Yale Law School days. Does a leopard change its spots?

Please read Gary Aldrich's book "UNLIMITED ACCESS -- AN FBI AGENT INSIDE THE CLINTON WHITE HOUSE" for the facts on Hillary the radical.

I'm a "single-again" woman, I'm a nurse and I work full time, I'm a mother and a grandmother and I'm here to tell you that Hillary Clinton does not represent me in any way, shape or form!

For most of us, being married to a man like Bill Clinton would give us enough ammo to sink her ship! You'd have to be a codependent pathological sociopath to stay married to that guy! Hillary's life-long lust for power is what's kept her hitched to Bill the sex addict, rapist. Knowing what I know about Bill Clinton and his sexual addiction and abuse of women...YIKES!...he makes my skin crawl! In my opinion, Hill and Bill Clinton are both misogynists and they both belong in prison!

If I could shout it from the housetops so that every man, woman and child in America could hear me, I'd tell everybody to vote for anybody but Hillary!

HILL NO! SHE'S GOT TO GO! TM

Dayna Meserve, Naples, FL

I am supporting Hillary Clinton 100%.I am also listening to those people who say "I can't stand her!" And as calmly as possible, I ask them to explain what they find so offensive. Other than mouthing what they have heard from the "Talking Heads" they have no real understanding of who she is and why we need her in the White House. I then explain as quickly and clearly as possible the following points:
- She is brilliant-some say more so than her husband
- She is the one candidate who not only knows where the "bodies are buried",she will be the only one able to withstand the "Slash & Burn" tactics of the republican operatives who have hounded her since her husband was a candidate. No mean trick and yet she won the overwhelming support of upstate New Yorkers as well as the city people in her re-election as Senator.
- She is acquainted with and respected by heads of state all over the world.
- We do not have time at this moment in the history of our country to have a President who needs to learn on the job. She can get to work on the first day without being shown where the Family Quarters are and meeting the staff.
-I am in the 65 plus group of women & am a member of the Majority Council of EMILY'S LIST. I will, of course, vote for any Democratic who is nominated. That is crucial.

Amy,
"The name "Clinton" is now synonymous with "Peace and Prosperity." Really? To me it's synonymous with liar, adulterer, FOB, sleaze, scandal, Rich pardon and of course, cigar.

HRC, to her credit, is a great politician as is her husband. She has used the same triangulation theory based on polling data that Bill used and was so successful with. That said, Bill has the better personality. The women in my life would not vote for Clinton, for a variety of reasons - none of which is because she is a woman. My wife won't vote for her because she is cold and does not trust her. My Mother, sisters-in-law won't vote for her because of her politics (HRC is too liberal for them) or they have had enough of Clintons in general. These opinions are similar for the males in my family. Now granted, most of my family leans towards conservatives, but the liberals support Obama. I won't vote for her because of her politics and because i couldn't count on her to bake me any cookies. Plus i can't reconcile in my brain the "I'm not no Tammy Wynette stand by your man..." with the staying with Bill. I think that that says a lot about the type of person she is.

Jennifer - I was in a hurry, I am sorry for mispelling your name - I do not know why it double posted.

"Do we really want all that trouble and scandal again in our lives, please! If Democrats take over the White House our country will be lost!"

That is actually a very ironic statement considering all the scandals that we are dealing with right now with this administration. The current scandals in the papers are only the tip of the iceberg with Bush and his cronies. A travel office scandal or some hanky panky in the Oval Office would be welcomed right now. At least no one would be dying, losing their jobs, or being tortured. When are Rs gonna learn that war, corruption, cronyism, etc. etc. are far worse than personal travails. Ask God, I am sure he'd agree.

Jeffifer,

In view of your opinion on the Clintons, how do you feel about Giuliani? For whom would you vote in a Giuliani-Clinton contest?

Jeffifer,

In view of your opinion on the Clintons, how do you feel about Giuliani? For whom would you vote in a Giuliani-Clinton contest?

I think it is disgraceful that a woman is running for Presidency, nonetheless, Hillary Clinton. I would think that people learned their lesson when her cheating husband was in the White House. Do we really want all that trouble and scandal again in our lives, please! If Democrats take over the White House our country will be lost!

CC (the Fix) said "What explains Clinton's strong standing among young women and comparative struggles among women her own age?"

Well, early polls are mostly about name recognition. Young people tend to be particularly underinformed about politics. Isn't there a pretty good chance that Hillary Clinton's strong performance with young people is explained by the fact that everyone has heard of her, whereas fewer people -- especially young people -- have heard of Barack Obama, John Edwards, or the rest of the crew?

That's a pretty obvious explanation.

One more thing - I was really thinking of places like the North Carolina, Colorado, New Hampshire, and suburban Pennsylvania districts that switched from Republican to Democrat in 2006. Some districts, like Delay's and Mark Foley's, are probably going back to Republican no matter what but that would become a certainty with Senator Clinton at the head of the ticket.

Personally, I was hoping that Wes Clark would have entered the race. I am sure he will be on all the Dems short list for VP.

Mark,

I wonder what the women who are so incensed about the Clintons' marriage think about Giuliani? Or Fred T, I understand he has a 30 or so years younger second wife.

I just finished lunch over my laptop and am fascinated by the posts since this morning.

I appreciate the response to my "coattails" post - and I can see the Rs wrapping any local D candidate's neck with Sen. Clinton as the albatross in Texas. However, we generally have "safe" districts, here, thanks to DeLay, so I suspect the result would be more skewed in FL than here, Jim D. I also see that you ranked the Dems in the same order I did...and if I had not been making a point about gratuitous invidious comparisons, I would have placed Sen. Clinton exactly where you did.

BSimon, I wonder how close we are to becoming the color and gender blind nation all four of my adult children actually believe in.

And I am surprised that the tabloid state of a woman's marriage seems to mean more than the state of a man's - according to many women who posted. "Who woulda thunk it?"

Clinton's strong support in the 18 to 39 population is probably still in large part a result of name recognition. My generation (I'm 27.) is relatively disinterested in politics, and therefore still know very little about Obama. Hopefully, this will change as the generation ages. Regardless, I expect that, as the primaries near and younger voters learn about other candidates (eventually), they will increasingly support Obama, Edwards, and any so-called "2nd-tier candidates" that are still in the running. BILL RICHARDSON IN '08!

By reading the comments carefully, I find the "Envy/Jealous" factor in quite a few of them. A "Strong" woman is poisen to these folks. Any time a reference is given as "Fact" to support your way of thinking is where I draw the line. I should hope anyone that is not up to making an informed decision on their own will get much attention on this site.

I am 47 years old, and so I know a lot of women in my age group. Those who are Republicans are more traditional and generally hate Hillary with a passion that I personally find puzzling. The women I know who aren't crazy about Hillary but fall in the Independent or Democratic camp, are less venomous and thus are not strongly supportive. Their reasons are usually banal -- she stayed with Bill, she's opportunistic (what politician isn't?), she's too ambitious (geez!), "something about her..."

Those of us in our 40s who love Hillary tend to relate to her -- she's smart, she has successfully juggled career and childrearing, her marriage is clearly an equal partnership which is why it can withstand the storms -- to name a few. From our point of view, as a first lady, she represented the generations of women who would have their own careers rather than just relying on their husbands. And her husband obviously thought she was his equal or he wouldn't have made the "two for one" statement. While many had a problem with this, to those of us who are now staunch supporters, the Clintons represented modern-day couples who genuinely have an equal relationship.

Those still hanging on to the notion of electability are, in my opinion, simply thinking on an emotional level. The only other Democratic candidates equally qualified are Joe Biden and Bill Richardson. But in my mind, while I like both men, given that neither is perfect, I'm supporting Hillary. She is, right now, the only hope that a woman can end up in the White House during my lifetime. And that I want to see.

I think that for the best broad-stroke polling to look at when considering Sen. Clinton's "electability" in 2008, you can't ask who people will vote for right now. There's too much time between now and the primary season for minds to be changed.

What I look at is favorable/unfavorable polling.

Four major favorable/unfavorable polls show Sen. Clinton's unfavorables either outpacing her favorables, or at least tied within the margin. There is one outlier, the Diageo/Hotline Poll, which seems to waver back and forth a little.

Most importantly, though, is the fact that most of these polls have few undecideds. The general consensus of these polls is that the vast majority has made its mind up about her.

Her chief rival, Sen. Obama, has favorables at or approaching 50%, with large numbers of undecideds. He still has room to make an impression.

I think these numbers are more of a concern for the general election rather than the primaries, but electability will play a role in many people's decisions. Sen. Clinton has much less of a chance to pull moderate Republicans into her camp than Sen. Obama, especially if Michael Bloomberg launches a third-party bid.

Here are 2 good links on Bill's LONG history of rape and sexual assault:
http://chblue.com/Feb1999/022599/clintonwomen022599.htm

www.papillonsartpalace.com/janedoe.htm

and Hillary rapes them again with her goon squads if they are about to go public (Juanita Broaddrick - raped 1978, Liz Ward Gracen - raped 1982; Kathleen Willey groped 1993, Paula Jones humiliated 1991): Hillary's harassment goons on ALL of them (except maybe Paula, although Carville did call her trailer trash)
... many other examples [I left out Eileen Wellstone, raped by Bill at Oxford in 1969 while Eileen Wellstone was a 19 year old coed]

Would you want Nurse Ratched, aka Hillary, as your mother, sister or daughter? I would not. That woman is severely morally compromised as well as mean and nasty. Bill rapes and sexually assaults; Hillary hires the secret police. Hillary treats people like dirt for 36 years and she wonders why she is "controversial."

Check out my anti-Hillary web page:
www.1984ArkansasMotherOfTheYear.com

Sheldon - perhaps if you want to hawk your new book, you might go to a different blog and leave the politcal commentary for those of us with something to say, not to sell.

Your salacious views are somewhat suspect, imo, seeing as how you took up photography of the female figure in the aftermath of 9/11, while living in New York City.

"The attack on the World Trade Center was a singularly ugly manifestation," Filger explained. "My response to the ugliness of 9/11 was to immerse myself in beauty, by creating photographic art inspired by the unique beauty of the bodies of women," .

Hillary Clinton's mixed support among women reflect the suspicion of her motives and expedient politcal behavior. Skepticism as to what a second Clinton presidency would means transcends genedr solidarity, as explored in the nuew book on Hillary Clinton, fond at the website
http://www.hillary-clinton-nude.com. Also, it is clear that the Clinton name remains imperative to Hillary's campaign plans.

Hillary Clinton's mixed support among women reflect the suspicion of her motives and expedient politcal behavior. Skepticism as to what a second Clinton presidency would means transcends genedr solidarity, as explored in the nuew book on Hillary Clinton, fond at the website
http://www.hillary-clinton-nude.com. Also, it is clear that the Clinton name remains imperative to Hillary's campaign plans.

Hillary Clinton's mixed support among women reflect the suspicion of her motives and expedient politcal behavior. Skepticism as to what a second Clonton presidency would means transcends genedr solidarity, as explored in the nuew book on Hillary Clinton, fond at the website
http://www.hillary-clinton-nude.com. Also, it is clear that the Clinton name remains imperative to Hillary's campaign plans.

Yes, because of an orchestrated campaign by Hillary and her supporters to discredit Klein--not because it's not true.

I would support Elizabeth Edwards as president. I would be thrilled to see Michele Obama up there after a decade if her husband captures it; or even try her hand if he falls short.

I'm thrilled we are at the point where Hillary Clinton has an honest to goodness shot at the Presidency.

But I won't vote for her unless she becomes the democratic nominee. Hillary Clinton simply grates me. She feels phoney and she doesn't have that it factor that made me really like her husband. I agree with most of her polocies and her polotics and the centrist Clinton ideal. But I don't want her to be president of the united States.

I'm voting for Obama and if not him would love Richardson. I think they'd make a great ticket.

I'm a 27 year old woman if that makes a difference.

All you Dems out there who say you won't vote for Hilary because of her Iraq War vote in support, I ask you - are you saying you won't vote for her in the D primary or in the general election?

Because if given the choice between Rudy, McCain or any of the Rs (who all wholeheartedly support Bush's idiotic war) or Hilary, who is now critical of the war to some degree, I will surely choose Hilary because of ALL THE OTHER ISSUES out there. Saying your vote depends on the Iraq war alone is idiotic at best. How is that any different than single issue voters who only vote based on a candidate being pro-life. Use some common sense here folks.

I agree with many of the other females posting on this blog--I'm 24, I consider myself to be a Democrat, and I am not voting for Hillary. It's not that she is too cold or calculating, or because she is seen as "steely." It's not because I didn't like her husband--I did--and it's not because of the dynastic element to her candidacy.

I'm not voting for Hillary because I don't like her politics. I think she is too entrenched in the Washington elite to be effective, and I disagree with her support of big business and the wealthy class. I mean, come on, she used to be on the board of Wal-Mart!

I think Obama is the answer, because he has the heart of a reformer, and because he has focused on running a pragmatic, people-centered campaign.

Your answer to Janet begs a response. Richardson, Clinton, Dodd, and Biden ARE part of the globalization/free trade crowd that will likely wreck this country before the upcoming election. I know, there are all sorts of posters who blather on and on about free trade being inevitable, u that is simply their parroting the nonsense that corporations have brainwashed them with. The U.S. dollar is at a historic low and is still falling. The consequence that the international bond market has been pegged to the Euro and their is a move to peg the price of oil and other raw materials to the Euro. What do you think the result of this is going to be? Foreign money, investments and government and private bonds that support our national debt and private credit is exiting! The result is going to be a credit crash, unemployment and inflation like this country has never witnessed before. The resulting politcial and social instability, coinciding with the lunacy of legalizing 12 million or so illegals, adding them to the above ground workforce, is going to cripple wages, leave millions of workers without medical benefits, and result in a wave of loan defaults that will ripple through the economy for years. We have exported every bit of our most critical technologies. Intel is building their latest wafer plants in China and India, Apple, Dell, IBM, and other computer manufacturers have moved their R&D and manufacturing offshore, GM is essentially bankrupt and only awaits being looted, it's bones picked clean, by the corporate raders who just acquired it, and our best and brightest college students are/have been avoiding engineering and science majors at our universities becasue they have witnessed their fathers jobs being outsourced or their being replaced by a H1B guest worker. We have lost the tools to recover from the looming disater. And the Clinton's were the original authors of this free trade train wreck' Biden, Richardson, and Dodd and Rangel and Reid and Kennedy and Bush and the whole of the Republican Party have been it's chearleaders. Ms. Clinton would preside over the extinction of this country and our culture becasue, in her own way, she is as trapped in the self destructive necon ideology as is George Bush and Dick Cheney. There are a very few candidates that see this looming disaster and are willing to remove themselves from the corporate provided slop trough of money and privilege. John Edwards is one of them. Mr. Obama appears to be waking up to that fact, too. So does Ms. Poloski. Free Trade and it's evil twins globalization and multinational corporations are the worst threat this country has ever faced and the people are our leaders are just now waking up to that fact. I think, however, it is too late.

I am 63 years of age and female. I came of age during the civil rights era after an upbringing during the gender-stratified 1950s. I might well have gone the route of many of my peers and lived a conventional gender-defined life, but I was able, as the feminist movement gathered momentum in the 1960s, to shed the expectations that had governed my life and aspire on my own terms.

Many American women (and men) could not do that. For them, any powerful woman with significant status and/or accomplishments is a threat, and they react by recoiling one way or another. They tend to vote against strong women politicians.

My daughter's generation has been lucky enough to grow up with far less limited expectations and fewer gender barriers, although the barriers they do face differ from those of my generation and are something of a throwback in unexpected ways, puzzling many of the older generation. Nevertheless, when push comes to shove, younger Americans demonstrate that their much longer exposure to women in power and the removal of gender-based barriers has freed them to vote more for the politician per se than for any politician's gender, a long-overdue and refreshing change.

I would say the GOP must be shivering in their respective boots about now, at the thought of Hillary as President.

Shiver away!!

We've had enough Republican "rule" to last a lifetime. Go get 'em Hillary.

CC says "Clinton must [try to] reintroduce herself as a mother, wife and daughter.."

No wonder; her record as a Senator is so weak she has nothing else to stand on but these absurd generalizations.

In five years as the most influential Democrat in the Senate, Hillary has managed to get the following laws and resolutions enacted:

• Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site

• Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month

• Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor

• Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall

• Name courthouse after James L. Watson

• Name post office after John A. O'Shea

• Designate August 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day

• Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day

• Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of his death

• Congratulate the Syracuse University Orange Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship.

• Congratulate the Le Moyne College Dolphins Men's Lacrosse Team on winning the championship

• Establish the 225th Anniversary of the American Revolution Commemorative Program

• Name post office after Sergeant Riayan A. Tejeda

• Honor Shirley Chisholm for her service to the nation and express condolences on her death

• Honor John J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, firefighters who lost their lives on duty.

Only five of Clinton's bills are substantive:

• Extend period of unemployment assistance to victims of 9/11

• Pay for city projects in response to 9/11

• Assist landmine victims in other countries

• Assist family caregivers in accessing affordable respite care

• Designate part of the National Forest System in Puerto Rico as protected in the Wilderness Preservation System

Combined this with her legacy as the "2-for-the-price-of-one" First Lady where she was tasked with two things in her husband's administration - the selection of the nation's first female Attorney General and the design and adoption of a comprehensive program of health care reform, and was successful at neither.

Her efforts to designate an Attorney General hamstrung the new Administration for months as two nominees, in succession, had to withdraw their names from consideration. Finally, at the eleventh hour, she urged her husband to appoint Florida's Janet Reno, a selection Bill Clinton would come to describe as "my worst mistake."

In the bargain, she suggested the appointment of Lani Guanier as head of the civil rights division, a job she was shortly forced to relinquish when her radical views became known, another embarrassment for the new Administration.

Her other selections for the Justice Department, the White House staff and the Treasury were her three law partners: Web Hubbell, Vince Foster, and William Kennedy, appointments which culminated in one imprisonment, one suicide, and one forced resignation.

Her other assignment, health care reform, collapsed in such a debacle that it cost her party control of both houses of Congress, a fate from which it took twelve years to recover.

And, contrary to what lylepink says, the Clintons are now trying to distance themselves from the 2-for-the-price-of-1 image.

Ed Klein's book about Hillary has been scoffed at, laughed at and denounced by 90 percent of those who have read it.

In fact, it was a joke that actually ended up causing Klein a great deal of embarrassment.

The Kleins of the world cannot hurt Hillary Clinton.

22 year old male with a college degree here. Hillary's my only choice. This country and the world will benefit with an extremely bright and gifted woman as President of the U.S.

A huge step forward for women everywhere - a tremendous opportunity to fix all the damage caused by G.W. Bush and his administration.

Go Hillary!

Have any of you read The Truth About Hillary by Ed Klein? He paints a picture of a woman who would do anything (including staying with her skirt-chasing husband) in order to get elected. And once elected to the Senate, she threw some of her supporters (including a group advocating children's issues) under the bus. This is written by the editor of New York Times magazine, not some right-wing nut job, by the way.

I am 42 and my mom is 71 and we are both planning to vote for Hillary Clinton. We have studied her background, her list of accomplishments and we see a level of confidence in her campaign that only comes from solid experience.

We do love that she may be America's first female President, of course, but that is not our reason for supporting her. Her work on behalf of women the world over, however, is very much a reason we are supporting her.

She has also done so much to help our war veterans, more than any other Senator has done.

If we aren't allowed to surrender to Al queda, we will be forced to accept a capitulation to bush. At least we got to surrender to someone.

Love Generalissimo Pelosi

janet,

I would not put Obama and Edwards anywhere near the same class as Richardson, Dodd, Biden and Clinton on experience and credentials.

Tuesday night House Democrats refused to reprimand Rep. John Murtha (D.-Pa.) for threatening a Republican colleague in a manner that violates newly installed, Democrat-crafted ethics rules.

Speaker Pelosi defended Murtha on the May 20 edition of ABC's This Week. "Congressman Murtha enjoys an excellent reputation in the Congress on both sides of the aisle," she said.

no mention of the bribe.

Mark in Austin,
thanks for listing the remarkable experiences and qualifications of Gov. Richardson, Senators Biden, Obama, and John Edwards. I am disgusted that the media and others always talk of H. Clinton's experience and qualifications, but rarely mention the resumes of the other candidates. I think both Richardson and Biden are vastly more experienced and talented than Hillary Clinton, but sadly neither Richardson or Biden will likely be nominated. Its a shame that this country no longer seems to prefer the most qualified and intellegent presidential candidates.

Mark in Austin,
thanks for listing the remarkable experiences and qualifications of Gov. Richardson, Senators Biden, Obama, and John Edwards. I am disgusted that the media and others always talk of H. Clinton's experience and qualifications, but rarely mention the resumes of the other candidates. I think both Richardson and Biden are vastly more experienced and talented than Hillary Clinton, but sadly neither Richardson or Biden will likely be nominated. Its a shame that this country no longer seems to prefer the most qualified and intellegent presidential candidates.

I am a sixty-eight-year-old woman, a life=long Democrat, and I will not vote for Senator Clinton in the primaries. I don't give a hoot about gender, race or ethnicity of the candidates; I care about their stances on issues and their policy formations. Although I respect Senator Clinton's work on behalf of children, I do not agree with her foreign or economic policies. I also distrust her motives for running, and I don't appreciate her assumption that she will be the Democratic candidate. Let the Republicans suffer from the consequences of their arrogance -- I don't want to see that arrogance in a Democratic candidate, and Hillary Clinton is just plain arrogant.

I am a sixty-eight-year-old woman, a life=long Democrat, and I will not vote for Senator Clinton in the primaries. I don't give a hoot about gender, race or ethnicity of the candidates; I care about their stances on issues and their policy formations. Although I respect Senator Clinton's work on behalf of children, I do not agree with her foreign or economic policies. I also distrust her motives for running, and I don't appreciate her assumption that she will be the Democratic candidate. Let the Republicans suffer from the consequences of their arrogance -- I don't want to see that arrogance in a Democratic candidate, and Hillary Clinton is just plain arrogant.

Carter: Interest rate, 21%. Inflation, 13.5%. Unemployment, 7%. The so-called "Misery Index," which Carter used to great effect in his 1976 campaign to win election, 20.5%.

• Reagan's last year: Interest rate, 9%. Inflation, 4.1%. Unemployment, 5.5%. Misery Index, 9.6%.

• Bush today: Interest rate, 8%. Inflation, 2.6%. Unemployment, 4.5%. Misery Index, 7.1%.

Gary Masters - Hillary supported Bush in his rush to go to war with Iraq... for various different reasons, justified by various pieces of intelligence which have since been proven to be wrong. Are you saying he may actually have been right to do so? Wake up, son, and smell the 2007.

Sorry - the computer continued to tell me that my message failed.

Cilizza - Duh - maybe it's harder to fool older women than young ones. So Clinton polls poorly among more experienced women...

"and apologized to America for her vote,"

What if her vote were right? Can you vote for anyone who does not agree with you on every issue? Do they have to be perfect? You could be wrong, you know.

"and apologized to America for her vote,"

What if her vote were right? Can you vote for anyone who does not agree with you on every issue? Do they have to be perfect? You could be wrong, you know.

It's noontime. Be on the lookout for a lurking Zouk.

"and apologized to America for her vote,"

What if her vote were right? Can you vote for anyone who does not agree with you on every issue? Do they have to be perfect? You could be wrong, you know.

"and apologized to America for her vote,"

What if her vote were right? Can you vote for anyone who does not agree with you on every issue? Do they have to be perfect? You could be wrong, you know.

I'm sorry, Sue, but as voters who are trying to make an informed decision, it is not only our right but our RESPONSIBILITY to criticize Senator Clinton for her vote. Many of us have spoken out and written to newspapers (and to our representatives in Congress) regarding our opposition to US policy in Iraq for several years now. I was not in a position (obviously) to affect the outcome of that vote (and neither were you! or ANYONE other than our elected representatives), but disagreed with it at the time, and was skeptical of the case for war made by the Administration. As more facts have come out, the skepticism has hardened into cynicism and disgust.
Granted, much of what we know now was kept from us in the early days of the invasion, in order to build public support. However, Sen. Clinton had access to more intelligence information and to more policy experts than did the average citizen, and given her precise phrasing - "NOT a vote to go to war, but..." - you have to suspect that she had some idea that Bush wasn't entirely on the level. Yet she still OK'd it, for reasons of ambition, PR, I don't know. It does not say great things about the judgment of someone who would be president.

OPEN NOTE:

Chris:

I really thought this was a serious discussion and not a propaganda work. However, you say "But, it does not appear as though President Bush has any plans to alter his course in Iraq."

The President seems to think the "surge" is a change and the Post sees another change on the way:
New Strategy for War Stresses Iraqi Politics
U.S. Aims to Oust Sectarians From Key Roles

By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 23, 2007; Page A01

And you do not see any changes. I guess it is your opinion, but what are your facts to support it?

I cannot wait to get the Clintons back in the WH.

This country has gone completely downhill since they left office.

~

pertaining to war vote: If one does his best to vote with the information given to him-Why should that person appoligize?
I for one admire Hillary for taking responsibility for her vote. At least she was there doing her job. Anyone who wasnt there to vote has no right to critisize.

Lylepink, thank you for your response. I have visited the site and agree with you when you say "The position Hillary takes on issues ... does not differ to any great extent with the other dems." I suspect that as the campaign progresses, and people - hopefully! - begin to discuss policy proposals (i.e. get away from the 'popularity contest'), some differences will emerge, particularly on health care and energy. You're right, though - at this point they are within the same ballpark.
I have to tell you, that does not give me a reason to support Hillary over the others, and being Bill's wife is not enough. Whether or not he is offered a position by any winning Democrat (which I'm sure he would accept), I have no doubt that his will be a voice that is listened to. That brings the difference back to the candidate him or herself, and I think at the moment, the candidates who have impressed me the most are Obama and Richardson. I'll keep listening, though.

very simply, because she has not backed away from her vote for the war and apologized to America for her vote, she very well may not get my vote. It has nothing to do with being a woman or what kind of a woman or Bill or Monica. It has to do with the IRAQ VOTE.

Mark

The "coattails" effect is largely due to the turnout over and above normal turnout based on how excited certain groups get over a given candidate (either positively or negatively). It is reasonable to assume that some percentage of Republicans who generally but not always vote might be inclined to sit on their hands in 2008. I say this because none of the candidates seem to really excite most Republicans and the travails of the Bush administration are discouraging to many Republicans. However, Hillary Clinton is so despised by so many Republicans that she will inspire a huge turnout from the base. These people are certainly going to vote for other Republicans. Also, given Hillary's unpopularity among certain swing voters in more conservative areas where Democrats made some inroads in 2006, you can be sure the airwaves wil be innundated with attack ads tying the local Democratic candidates to her. There were a number of ads in the Florida gubenatorial campaign last year showing Senator Clinton attending a fundraiser for the Democratic candidate.

If Hillary is the Dem nominee, unless the GOP nominates someone like Rudy G (doubtful, of course), she will lose very few votes because of her name or sex, because the gap in politics will be too great.

Anyone who claims "I'm a Dem and I'd vote for [Huckabee or other rightwingnut] before voting for Hillary" is a liar.

bsimon, there is a qualitative difference between the ethnic backgrounds of Obama and Richardson and Romney's religious faith. Only in Romney's case it is a voluntary association. Bear in mind that although his church is not mine (at all), I respect his right under our vaunted freedom of religion to worship as he sees fit. Having said that, some of what I do know about Mormonism makes me uneasy to think that a practitioner aspires to the Oval Office. From the much-discussed "special underwear," mandatory tithing and missionary work, and somewhat nutty beliefs (although nutty beliefs, to one extent or another, are characteristic of every organized religion) - God appears in upstate New York in the 19th Century to mandate polygamy, the Native Americans are a lost tribe of Israel, and so on - to more sinister ties between the church and almost EVERY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION IN UTAH (and a great many private businesses), I do not feel that this is a man to be trusted with the reins of power.

Bokonon: The position Hillary takes on issues can be found at HillaryClinton.com and HillaryHub among others and I would suggest you take a quick look yourself, for I would not like to make a mistake on something that important. Hillary does not differ to any great extent with the other dems, and to re-state and try to figure out differences would not serve any useful purpose. Your other question about her following GW gives me more reason to support her in that she has the knowledge and support of Bubba, who was one of the best POTUS in our history to advise her.

Hillary has had my vote since before she announced her candidacy. Most of my friends feel the same way because they see her as well educated, gutsy, and highly moral. My friends and I are between 50 and 70.
The ones who don't like Hillary, in general, have never listened to her platforms very carefully and have never seen her in person.
Hillary is warm and has a terrific sense of humor. To say she is conniving, could be translated to she thinks hard about her goals and how to get them. Being strongly goal oriented is just what we want in a president. As the campaign goes on, my friends are coming more and more to Hillary.
Yes, I would vote for Al Gore in a heartbeat, but he isn't running. And I think he isn't running because there is something fragile in him, that was deeply hurt in the last election.
Hillary has no such problem. She is tough enough to walk through the political fires and come out the other end, proud and ready to move on. What could be more important in a president?
I actually like most of the Democratic candidates and could vote for any of them, but if I get a chance, my vote will go to Hillary, one cool woman.

I am a woman and a Democrat who will not be voting for Hilary under any circumstance. Not because of her last name or her personality, but because she is still an Iraq war supporter. She has stated repeatedly that she will not withdraw all the troops from Iraq EVER. She is also a corporatist who cares only for the working class votes, not their issues.

Hopefully women are not one issue voters- with the new pill to stop periods- women shouldn't need abortions so that should rule out that issue. She is a hypocrite- when her husband was for going into Iraq because Saddam was a threat, so was she- she changes with the polls- she has no true convictions other than socialism- and having the state spend your money since she knows better than you do what you need and want. I sometimes am ashamed to be a woman when I see how women think- or should I say- don't think!

Oh yeah, and Romney's church. Throw that in there too.

Voting for a candidate based on their gender is equally irrational as voting based on the color of their skin, or the name of their church. The media continues to do a disservice to the American people by focusing on Hillary's gender, Obama's skin color and Richardson's heritage. What are their positions on the issues? There ARE issues that people care about, aren't there?

Why keep calling Hillary staying with Bill 'political opportunism'?

Confronted with a spouse's infidelity, she chose to stay & try to work on saving the marriage. It might not be a popular choice, but numerous men & women around the globe make the same choice everyday.

If Hillary really is that cold & calculating, she could have divorced Bill, and still run as senator, capitalising on the groundswell of sympathy.

Hillary's 'savaged' for staying with Bill (& you can bet the Right would still have savaged her for leaving him)

Bill & Hillary have been together almost 35 yrs, they appear to understand & respect each other's abilities, they've raised a smart capable daughter, they've weathered storms; emotional, political etc

Saying it would be difficult to vote for her because of the 'state of her marriage' is sheer nonsense. No-one looking in from the outside really knows what the state of anyone's marriage is.

I'm a 33 y.o. woman and I would vote for Obama first, then McCain if Hillary unfortunately wins the primary, and Hillary only if she is up against Guiliani or one of the other ones.

The most important quality to me is DECENCY and I see Obama and McCain as having way more DECENCY than Hillary. Plus she is seriously irritating and not a good face of America to the world.