I don't get it.
What is it with the Republican party's obsession with Hillary Clinton? Is it really going to destroy the social fabric of the United States if a woman is voted President. This website is the latest to attack Clinton for alleged lies by a former campaign manager to the FEC. Not that this has been anyway linked to her. The website focuses on a concert given for "A" list celebrities, aka the "liberal elite".
How is this website raising money? Of course they are giving away the video of the concert in question.
"Contributors who give $50 or more will receive an exclusive DVD of the Hollywood Gala Salute to President Clinton, featuring performances by Cher, Diana Ross, Toni Braxton, Patti LaBelle, Melissa Etheridge, Sugar Ray and Michael Bolton. Please allow 3-4 weeks for delivery."
Brilliant.
How is this website raising money? Of course they are giving away the video of the concert in question.
"Contributors who give $50 or more will receive an exclusive DVD of the Hollywood Gala Salute to President Clinton, featuring performances by Cher, Diana Ross, Toni Braxton, Patti LaBelle, Melissa Etheridge, Sugar Ray and Michael Bolton. Please allow 3-4 weeks for delivery."
Brilliant.
posted by mochi at 8:27 AM
5 Comments:
Same obsession Democrats have with Bush, Moch! (Before and after he was elected)
-Jack
Circumstances are a little bit different; I never heard of George W. Bush until 1999. People have been bashing Hillary since 1992 and she is still standing. We are more than 3 years from the next election too! They are obviously terrified of her.
Chickenhawk is right. The orchestrated character assasination of the Clintons has been going on for years and years, and the attackers have had to make stuff up and go to ridiculous lengths.
The difference is in their obsession. They made the Clintons' downfall their obsession; they were proactive in their pursuit.
The left's interest in Bush, on the other hand, has been reactive, in response to his administration's policies, and to the practices of organizations connected to Bush and his cohorts.
Henry Hyde said the assault on the Clintons was in retaliation for the impeachment of Nixon. However, I think their issues with Hillary are more complex and involve gender-role issues, among other things.
and, hmmm: http://mediamatters.org/items/200505040004
I remember speaking on the phone with a lady from Alabama last summer at work, she was a hardcore Christian, and she PRAISED Hillary, and said that she feels that a part of the reason she is always being dissected is that she is an outspoken woman, and she speaks her mind. Now, this lady of course does not speak for all Christian conservative women down South, but at the same time, women admire that strength and courage. If you look at Hillary's voting record and her interest group ratings, you will see that this woman DOES NOT WAIVER. There is no question where she is coming from on issues like civil rights and liberties, education, environment, gun control. She rates very highly on issues pertaining to seniors, veterans, laborers, health care, family- the core issues that affect our country. She will be attacked on business group issues (rich people), immigration, gun control, and taxes. She did vote for the Iraq war (Senate Democrats voted 21-19 for that) and surely, she will continue to be assaulted. But personal issues they attack her for, America has seen 10 times over during Bill's presidency; it is redundant and past us. Hell, we have twice in the past 5 years elected a failed businessman who sodomized his state economy and education system. In other words, people do not give a shit about the past, unless you are a veteran running for president during wartime and have made some questionable comments about your fellow soldiers during war time. If anyone thinks her sketchy past might hurt her, review some of our current govt officials and their pasts- left and right. Oh, visit www.vote-smart.org to see what I am talking about.
Post a Comment
<< Home