SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON ??

Hey, McG, since you're benefiting from Hillary's work for New York right now, does that make you a pimp?

0 Replies

Pimpin' ain't easy.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

She is a political whore. Right now, she is sleeping with New York State with the sole purpose of furthering her political career which I sincerely hope dies in 2006.

McG, I don't know how old you are or how long you've lived in NY state, but let me fill you in on a bit of law, in case you don't know it. NY has unusually liberal (if you'll pardon the expression) rules re how long one must live there before running for the Senate. And Hillary is not the first person to move there and run. In my memory (and I was living there at the time), Bobby Kennedy did it, and--here's someone more to your liking--William F. Buckley's brother did it, too.

So bash Hillary all you like, but it hardly seems fair to lay the charge of political whoredom on her...

0 Replies

Ok, RFK and Buckley's brother were whores as well.

Feel better?

She has no interest in who she is representing and only got elected by name recognition. She has no experience and it saddens me that people in New York City would elect her. I did my part and did not vote for her. Otehrwise, i am left no recourse but to complain about her.

0 Replies

McGentrix
She has more experience and is a hell of a lot smarter than most of the dunderheads now in congress. Rememer what your majority house leader was before coming to congress. An exterminator and he still acts the part.

0 Replies

What experience does she have? Being Bills sloppy seconds? A failed law practice? The ability to lie and hide documents?

0 Replies

McG

You're a smart guy, and that is a really dumb post.

0 Replies

A significant difference between McG and Hillary is that she goes to Washington an idealist, knowing that she's working even for people like McG, and still works hard. She doesn't suffer from the either/or brain defect or the moral cretinism which seems to affect at least one of her constituents. McG has an option: get the hell offline and spend that time volunteering for a candidate to replace Hillary. That's the democratic, mature option, isn't it?

0 Replies

Tartarin
Temper, temper. I know it is sometimes difficult.

0 Replies

I believe we have discussed this. I did campaign for Lazio. I did my part. Now I can sit back and bitch as much as I want about her and how much I hate to even look at a picture of her. You should be aware of this as you do it with Bush all the time.

0 Replies

McG's may seem a bit abrupt, but if someone is going to praise Hillary's experience, that experience, or lack of, does become fair game. Still, she did make a good call on some options, at one time. That's worth something.

0 Replies

Very nice to see you roger! Stop by more often.

Abruptness wasn't the problem with McG's post. It was the zero-brainer dehumanizing trick of demeaning a woman's character and capabilities through reference to her sexuality. The other two claims are merely silly.

0 Replies

Good post, Blatham. Thank you.

0 Replies

I smell right-wing cant in the above. Or something similar.

McG -- Do read the Garry Wills article in the NYRB(.com) about Hillary.

0 Replies

No, do you have a link?

Again I ask though, is any of that untrue?

0 Replies

In another thread (Dead Brothers) I wrote the following to McG.

Quote:

Your postings in this thread and the thread dealing with Hillary Clinton disgust me -- and should disgust anyone with a brain and a sensitivity for one's fellow human being.

Don't get me wrong -- you have a right to hold obnoxious views -- and to express them as you see fit. I acknowledge those rights and would defend them on your behalf and on the behalf of any other human. But it rankles me to see anyone so angry with the world and his lot in life -- that he has to stoop to the kinds of observations you are making.

If I may indulge myself -- I would advise you to grow up!

It is not as painful as you might suppose.

I still feel that way -- however, in fairness to McG, his last post was much more mature and reasonably presented. I agree with Tartarin that the smell of a right-wing cant drifted up from the posting -- but it was measured, carefully thought out, and reasonably respectful.

I don't agree with most of what McG says (and in this instance with his inferences) -- but it is a pleasure to hear him say his piece in a reasonable way. Thanks McG.

0 Replies

Let's start on Dubya's outline of credentials, his resume if you will. Oh, but that's already been done and all the weak rationalizations and excuses have been heard. By the criteria set forth, Dubya has no business in the presidency.

0 Replies

Please peddle your Bush hatred on one of the multitude of other threads in this forum built for that pupose.

I was accused by Blatham of "Abruptness wasn't the problem with McG's post. It was the zero-brainer dehumanizing trick of demeaning a woman's character and capabilities through reference to her sexuality. The other two claims are merely silly.
"

I responded with evidence to back up my initial "abruptness" and I am awaiting a valid arguement explaining the falsities of my statement.

0 Replies

Start on anything you want LW. The title of the discussion is still "SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON ??", if that makes any difference.

0 Replies

SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON ??

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know