Mitch McConnell's Statement About Hillary

I'm not inferring anything about Warrren as a person or an officeholder. I am only talking about the average voter and what they might perceive.

What you feel about Cheney's credentials don't really matter since I was only talking about how he was promoted at the time. Many voters saw him as filling the hole in Bush's foreign policy experience. I understand you would vote for Warren. I would most likely vote for Warren but that doesn't relate to what might drive many moderate voters. Sexism exists and affects voters even if they don't admit it to others or themselves. Warren would be seen as a weak liberal woman by many and the right would promote that viewpoint which would make it hard for her to win. That is all I am saying.

Moment-in-Time wrote:
Also, Hillary has a stubborn streak in her and her overpowering political ambition will not allow her to sit on the sideline.




I was able to catch up on some current news and you might be right, Frank, regarding the "toxic climate" with respect to Hillary Clinton. Just today I read the GOP has a "smoking gun" email about Benghazi and a role the WH played informing the American people. Of course as the Republicans are prone to do this will be liken to Sarah Palin's "Death Panels," and of course, Darrell Issa is furiously masturbating full time at this newly released email. Boehner is supposed to be appointing a committee to investigate.

Yet, the point I wish to stress is this appear to be the only thing the Republicans have to run on, their obsession with Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi! The GOP's daily repetitiousness is enough to make one want to puke! The GOP has commenced this tediousness which is supposed to last until the 2016 presidential election. Even a strong candidate like Hillary Clinton might experience second thoughts and I must admit you have a point that the atmosphere might be too perniciously hateful for anyone to endure.....I, too, hope she will not change her mind to run for the US presidency.

As you may know by now, the so-called "smoking gun" email is general advice about how to talk about the uprisings throughout the Arab world. It does not advise lying about what transpired in Benghazi.

I think, and hope, the general public will learn the truth about the email, and serve as an embarrassment to the GOP.

Ah, how reassuring! That sounds just about right and we do know how the Republicans like to misrepresent reality. Thanks for your post.....the GOP do depress me so.

I read about that smoking gun as well. I am going to google it later and find the context Advocate was talking about. These certain types of republicans never cease to use false cheap tricks that unfortunately leave false first impressions which are hard to eradicate with the fact checking since they don't believe in "fact checks".

Media's Revisionist History Of The Sunday Shows After Benghazi Attacks

The emails can be found here:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1919_production-4-17-14.pdf#page=14

When you read the email it becomes clear they are talking about protests around the Arab world. It is page 14-18.

The email lists the promos for each of the Sunday shows and all talk about continued protest in the Arab world in some form or another.

Thanks for the memo. It is hardly a smoking gun re the murders in Benghazi.

Thank you for the link Revelette2. I had already started to google to find out what I had missed....come to find out it was just as Advocated had pointed out....Of course I had my suspicions but then all over the media was "this smoking gun from the WH memo"? I'm at ease now that I've gotten over the Republican lies and embellishments associated with their daily rhetorical propaganda.

I don't have too much time to post now, but do try and check my favorite thread, Bridgegate, and a quick perusal on some others. BTW, I admire and respect your questions and responses very much.....You are refreshing.

The fact that you are seeing women different to men is clear proof that you are in fact, sexist!
I think you'll find that other candidates such as John McCain have been too old to run for office. The difference is, he took it like a man.

I don't know what you are talking about. Moreover, I don't think it is worth my time to try to figure it out.

Don't be ridiculous, women are different from men, not only physically, but emotionally and intellectually too. Men and women's brains are different, that's not being sexist it's being realistic.

We've not evolved much from hunter gatherers, when men went out hunting and women organised the village. Male strengths are spacial awareness, female strengths are communication. Together we survived the stoneage.

Btw, John McCain showed he wasn't fit to be president, and was possibly suffering from the first stages of dementia when he thought Sarah Palin would make a good running mate.

I agree with most of your post.

John McCain, in my opinion, was not fit to be president, not because of Sarah Palin (the senator did not select, Palin, his staff's top strategist did) but because he was not intellectually up to it. I don't know about the onset of early dementia....he's certainly made some boo-boos in his opposition to Obama's agenda, his refusal to accept reality that he lost to Obama in '08, plus he's too warlike. I have never known one so persistently eager to go to war as McCain. At 72, then, and running for president almost 6 years ago, McCain was content to sit back and let his political strategists think for him; they strategized bringing in a woman, who for all outward appearances, a successful governor, would counterbalance the Hillary effect with women. At first, the attractive Alaskan governor was refreshing, speaking from prepared text, even causing slippage in Obama's poll ratings, until a little later in the campaign she proved a non-highschool graduate knew far more about politics and the world in general than she did (the katy couric interview).

Not only did Sarah Palin hurt McCain politically, she is still at it, damaging the Republican brand, but is now defined as a stubbornly ignorant petty-minded Tea Party racist who appeal to the worse traits in our kind.

OMG! How grossly insulting to a woman in her 60s! McCain, once again, offers us an insight into the smallness of his itsy-bitsy mind. How utterly narrow-minded and shallow can a prominent politician be? I knew McCain was petty, but thought he would have the political decency to "not open his mouth and remove all doubt." McCain makes Karl Rove look angelic by comparison.

I wasn't being completely serious when I wrote that.

Are you saying we need more women in congress and fewer men? Do you realize what that would to the arms industry? Women discuss while men look for their guns.

I thought you had me on ignore.

This why we need Hillary in the presidency.

http://www.upworthy.com/dont-ask-hillary-clinton-about-abortion-if-you-cant-handle-her-answer?c=reccon1

Chris Smith is an asshole...and an embarrassment to New Jersey. Hillary was spot on in her reply to him. I am sure she was grateful for the opportunity to answer that question. I hope Smith was glad he asked it, but I sorta doubt that.

Have you seen the attacks on GOP women from the left? You are going to complain about this? First off step off the soapbox and until you can explain the sexist attacks by the likes of Bill Maher. Or how about the pics taken of Sarah Palin from behind and between her legs. Not sexist?