Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Larry J. Sabato: Hillary needs no cover story should she surprise us and spurn another White House tour. Now in her mid 60s, she knows as much as any human being alive what an arduous journey lies ahead even for a heavily favored contender. ... Low job approval numbers for President Obama, should they persist, will make it difficult for any Democrat to win, even with the party's seeming Electoral College edge and growing demographic advantages among minorities and the young. Just ask John McCain how President George W. Bush's unpopularity affected his 2008 White House bid.

Advertisement

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Seems to me she has picked up a lot of excess baggage since she went to work for little o.

#1 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-01-22 10:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

Wouldn't take a brain surgeon to produce anti-Hillary campaign ads. Plenty of material.

#2 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-01-22 10:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

I can't think of any realistic candidate, Dem OR Rep, who has a better shot at the Whitehouse. I also can't think of any realistic candidate who would be better at the job. Sure, Hillary's got warts, but who doesn't in that business?

#3 | Posted by Karabekian at 2014-01-22 10:59 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 2

Maybe she should do what Bill did in 1988 and not enter the race because of the baggage.

#4 | Posted by KBM at 2014-01-22 11:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

#3

There you go again, being all, "realistic" again.

What has that got to do with ideologues on the left and right jabbering mindlessly out of their lower rear orifices?

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 11:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

Sure, Hillary's got warts, but who doesn't in that business?

#3 | Posted by Karabekian

Scott Walker

#6 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-01-22 11:13 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 3

Scott Walker is as pure as the driven cream cheese... er, I mean, snow.

#7 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 11:32 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Scott Walker is as pure as the driven cream cheese... er, I mean, snow.

#7 | Posted by Corky

Must be or you'd post a link to claim otherwise.

#8 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-01-22 11:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

General knowledge usually doesn't require links.

True 9 (11%)(9)
Mostly True 11 (13%)(11)
Half True 18 (21%)(18)
Mostly False 15 (18%)(15)
False 25 (29%)(25)
Pants on Fire 7 (8%

www.politifact.com

(remember, you like politifact now, lol)

#9 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 11:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Well, I'm sure glad those 85 statements Politifact has chosen to focus on have closed the book on Scott Walker. Who knew that one website could tank a 20-year political career?

#10 | Posted by JOE at 2014-01-22 12:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

I love the one from Mary Burke, his challenger. His income tax plan is a tax hike. Problem is he's refunding it to the taxpayers.

#11 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-01-22 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

I also can't think of any realistic candidate who would be better at the job.

#3 | Posted by Karabekian

WHAT???????? You can.t be serrial. At this point what does it matter? Nothing went right for her while she was working for little o b ut her and her aid can really get it on.

#12 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-01-22 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary's a slam dunk. I have no reason to believe that certain Americans have increased their I.Qs since they voted and put our current disaster in the WH in 2008 and 2012. Just wait until we get our next economic and stock market downturn before 2016. It won't be pretty.

#13 | Posted by matsop at 2014-01-22 12:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

#6 I don't consider Scott Walker a realistic candidate in the same way I never considered Rick Santorum a realistic candidate. Beside, realistic candidate or not, he wouldn't make a better president than Hillary Clinton by a country mile.

#14 | Posted by Karabekian at 2014-01-22 01:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Any Democrat for president has to overcome the habitiual lies told by Obama and the democrat party in relation to Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the targeting of conservative groups by Barry and the IRS, and the so called recovery.

The list goes on and on...

#15 | Posted by Marty at 2014-01-22 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Maybe RCADE can set up some kind of wagering system, since we're already getting pretty heavily into the 2016 election. Hillary is the Sea Biscuit of 2016.

#16 | Posted by Karabekian at 2014-01-22 01:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

It is difficult to get enthusiastic about a Hillary Clinton run for presidency. Let alone an actual Hillary Clinton presidency. The feeling of 'been-there-done-that' hovers arounds everything related to Hillary Clinton. Also, I can't shake the perception but that she is in the pockets of Goldman Sachs and the other Wall Street banks.

If the DNC really wants to get the base excited, nominate an Elizabeth Warren or some other relative newcomer.

#17 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-01-22 01:30 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Sea Biscuit had better ankles.

#18 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 01:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

#17 - Warren is too green, just like Obama was when he was elected. She needs to be seasoned, as Obama should have been as VEEP under a Hillary administration, although I'm not sure he would have made anything better than a so-so president at that. I don't know what the rush always seems to be, except that an unseasoned candidate has less time to grow warts.

#19 | Posted by Karabekian at 2014-01-22 01:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary basically is warmed over meat. After Obama hyped the folks and fell flat on his face, how does anyone think they can market Hillary and get the folks feeling that this establishment type will make any difference for the average Ameican. She doesn't have a clue and will just put America on auto-pilot to its' ongoing decline.

#20 | Posted by matsop at 2014-01-22 01:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

I can't shake the perception but that she is in the pockets of Goldman Sachs and the other Wall Street banks.

Agreed, but I like how you act like this is some abstract "perception" rather than an observation of reality.

www.theatlantic.com

#21 | Posted by JOE at 2014-01-22 03:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

As the main street economy continues to lose the democrats will not gain in office.

America wants to be put back to work and it is becoming more clear that the democrats are not interested in making that happen, but race is a good issue.

#22 | Posted by moneywar at 2014-01-22 03:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary Clinton announced that she's running for the 2016 Presidential nominee?

Oh no, this is just more preemptive nonsense.

Also, with or without BushJr's legacy, McCain would never have won the election.

#23 | Posted by ClownShack at 2014-01-22 03:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

#19 | POSTED BY KARABEKIAN AT 2014-01-22 01:48 PM | FLAG:

I don't disagree in terms of performance in office, but in terms of candidate desirability, part of Obama's charm in 08 seemed to be both his newness and appearance as not an "insider" along with his more youthful fluency with tech.

#24 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-01-22 04:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

-Obama should have been as VEEP under a Hillary administration,

That's what I thought should have happened. She would have kept a high heel on Mitch McConnell's throat and not put up with the TP BS.

But hey, maybe it's a chauvinist thing and the black guy got to before the woman, lol.

She has her chance now if she wants it.

#25 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 04:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary's a slam dunk. I have no reason to believe that certain Americans have increased their I.Qs since they voted and put our current disaster in the WH in 2008 and 2012. Just wait until we get our next economic and stock market downturn before 2016. It won't be pretty.

#13 | Posted by matsop

Obamanoids = Hillaroids IQ = room temp

#26 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2014-01-22 05:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Will you GOPers please dig up more dirt on hillary and knock her out of the picture? The last thing dems need is another dem president who's more concerned with spying on everyone and signing free trade agreements than fighting back against wall street plutocrats. Bill and Hillary are wall-street dems = not liberal or progressive where it counts.

#27 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-01-22 06:39 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

-The last thing dems need is another dem president who's

No,as bad as you think that might be, the last thing the country needs is a Mitt! or a Cruz or a Christie, no matter what you might think of the Dem candidate.

If some other Dem candidate like a Warren or a Cuomo or anyone else showed they had a good chance of beating the Republican candidate in a general election, I would certainly consider them.

But today, that isn't the case by a long shot.

We might not like that fact, but it's the reality we have not some wishful thinking.

#28 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 07:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who knew that one website could tank a 20-year political career?

#10 | Posted by JOE

Herman Cain. Romney's buddies at Politico derailed his train in about 3 minutes.

#29 | Posted by northguy3 at 2014-01-22 07:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just ask John McCain how President George W. Bush's unpopularity affected his 2008 White House bid.

Let's see. Bush, two wars lost and the worst economic collapse since 1929. Obama, troops home from two wars and an improving, if anemic economy.

Throw in the choice of Palin and Hillary and McCain are exactly in the same but totally different position.

I'm sure those are the same reasons Obama lost to Romney. That's what happened last year, right?

Got NOTHING to do with the GOP having no message, no vision, no contact with social reality and no interest in anybody who earn less than themselves.

#30 | Posted by northguy3 at 2014-01-22 07:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"No,as bad as you think that might be, the last thing the country needs is a Mitt! or a Cruz or a Christie, no matter what you might think of the Dem candidate."

Same old DNC song: Our candidate stinks, but not as much as the other guy.

#31 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-01-22 07:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Herman Cain

Herman Cain had a 20 year political career?

How retarded are you?

#32 | Posted by JOE at 2014-01-22 07:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Not only the same DNC song, but they let their candidate get away with far worse things than they would have conniption fits about from a Republican. The Democrats are better off with a Republican president, it seems. Under a Democrat, they trade in their moral compass for "pragmatism." Under a Republican, they keep him to a higher standard and more accountable than their own.

#33 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-01-22 07:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Flag:

Not only the same DNC song, but they let their candidate get away with far worse things than they would have conniption fits about from a Republican. The Democrats are better off with a Republican president, it seems. Under a Democrat, they trade in their moral compass for "pragmatism." Under a Republican, they keep him to a higher standard and more accountable than their own.

#33 | Posted by zeropointnrg

Keeping repubs our of power IS following a moral compass. Voting dem is simply the only current means of doing that.

#34 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-01-22 08:50 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

#31

Same old Puritopian tune; "sure the Dem candidate is better, but they ain't good enough, so where's my knife so I can cut off my nose to spite my face".

(which in this case means enabling the Republican candidate by demeaning the Dem one, for those not well versed in colloquial sayings.)

#35 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 09:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

#33

Ignoring the distinctly different domestic policies put in place by the parties is just ignoring reality. And the SC would be much worse than it is with Republican appointed justices.

#36 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 09:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

#34 NW

#37 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 09:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oh please. A Mitt presidency would be disastrous for one thing: SC nominations. Otherwise, he would face a united Democratic front in majority in the Senate who would once again have been reunited with their balls. The NSA scandal would have faced actual attempts at regulation over mere hand wringing and partisan party over country support. The left would have universally held Snowden up as a hero. And who knows, maybe Mitt could have done better than Obama with his zero Wall Street convictions. Instead, democrats just whine that our guy is somehow marginally better, because he's not AS regressive - though he is regressive - just look at what income disparity has become under him. Look at who Obama's leash holders are. Wall street and the Hollywood types who want the internet regulated into the Chinese version or less. And nobody speaks out against it because it's again party first. "The other team is worse." You know what? They aren't worse when you give your guy a free pass to do what you would call their candidate out on.

#38 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-01-22 09:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillaroid! Love it!

"If some other Dem candidate like a Warren or a Cuomo or anyone else showed they had a good chance of beating the Republican candidate in a general election, I would certainly consider them."

Corky, you will vote for whichever Dem candidate is named. (Full disclosure: So will I, probably.)

#39 | Posted by pragmatist at 2014-01-22 10:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Corky would vote for Adolph Hitler if he had a "D" after his name.

#40 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-22 11:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

- A Mitt presidency would be disastrous for one thing: SC nominations. Otherwise

Complete and utter nonsense.

The entire Republican House agenda would have been passed, devastating the very young, the old, and the poor.

This, 'the parties are the same" crap is promoted by ex-Republicans and far Lefties butt hurt that their complete agenda was not Job One for the President.... or just so cynical about the systemic problems of our government that they give up on it's original promise of government of, by, and for the People rather than fight for it by always taking the more progressive option, even if it isn't perfect in their opinion.

The thing is, it's not perfect in anyone's opinion, but policies can be changed. Just not as fast as some people would like, unless they want to do away with voting and use force instead, as some have proposed.

As long as there is an electorate, the electorate must be brought along to the realization that progressive party policy is the best policy for the country.

As long as half the people don't think so, all this caterwauling about how evil the the Dem party is and how they are the same as the Republicans is counterproductive to say the least.

If you demand cake when the people are offering bread, you'll die of starvation. And if you aren't willing to bring the voters along at a pace they can endure, then you are just pissing in the wind.

#41 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 11:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

#40 |

Coming from a fascist, that's rich.

#42 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-22 11:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Putting the words slam and Hillary in the same sentence is just sick.

#43 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-01-23 12:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

You know you want in that pantsuit SAMES1.

#44 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-01-23 12:34 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Then there's the ol' "KFC Hillary Special" joke....

#45 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2014-01-23 03:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

Stock the White House with Tampons, cause there is nobody from the GOP that can beat Hillary.
Face it, you guys and the crazy train have damaged yourselves for a long time.

If least crazy candidate Mitt couldn't win, nobody the GOP has right now can win.

Jeb could have won, if it weren't for his last name...ahahahahahah....

#46 | Posted by drewl at 2014-01-23 08:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

#40

You mean devastate the young, old, and poor like Obummer has? Wake up, one in six in this country live in poverty, food stamps are at an all time high, you find that acceptable? Romney could not have done worse, there are, in real numbers, about 11 to 12 per cent of the population unemployed. (you need to look at the U6 numbers that includes those looking for work that their unemployment has ended)

Obummer has enriched the Wall Street bankers at the expense of the poor and middle class. Who do you think benefits from artificially low interest rates? Not the poor, not the middle class, not small business (that is the backbone of this country), not the retirees, no it enriches big business and the Wall Street bankers. Just look at some of their financials, compare J P Morgan and Goldman Sachs financials of 2009 and 2013 to see what I am talking about. Low interest rates make it almost impossible for small business to borrow money to expand.

Is this what you call a good administration? Get real.

Oh and by the way Corky, better look up the definition of a Fascist, I am a free market conservative and that is hardly a fascist.

#47 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-23 09:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

If she could dodge sniper fire she can survive negative campaign ads.

#48 | Posted by Sully at 2014-01-23 09:31 AM | Reply | Flag:

- I am a free market conservative and that is hardly a fascist.

Same thing.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power"
― Benito Mussolini

#49 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 10:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

#49

Wrong again Corky,

Guess you better call Merriam-Webster Dictionary and tell them they have the definition wrong and you have it right I am sure they will go right in and change it......right!

1

often capitalized: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2

: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

the rise of Fascism in Europe before World War II
From the first hours of Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union, the propagandists on both sides of the conflict portrayed the struggle in stark, Manichaean language. The totalitarian nature of both regimes made this inevitable. On one side stood Hitler, fascism, the myth of German supremacy; on the other side stood Stalin, communism, and the international proletarian revolution. -- Anne Applebaum, New York Review of Books, 25 Oct. 2007

#50 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-23 10:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

Gee....the more I look at that definition it seems to describe our president, imagine that.

#51 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-23 11:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

I imagine Mussolini knew a lot about Fascism, and how it actually worked in Italy and Germany as, "a merger of state and corporate power.", which it was.

The more corportists control the government, helped by rulings like CU and corporate sycophants like Republicans and other purveyors of the imaginary "free market" the more fascist it is.

#52 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 11:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

Correct, government allows private industry as long as they do what the government tells them to do. It is totally anti business as soon as the busienss violates the rules laid down by the goevernment they are through. It is just short of socialism where the governemnt takes over the businesses.

Suffice to say if you look at the definitions it is not business friendly, it is a form of government that is why your use of it as a business ploy is totally incorrect. I don't know what you are looking for perhaps monopoly, but then again that is controlled, or not controlled, by government.

#53 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-23 11:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ridiculous.

The real problem is more the influence of corporate interests on government than the regulations of government on corporations.

You have it backasswards.

#54 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 11:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

Not only did her campaign make Obama look darker in video, claim she dodged sniper fire, and invent the whole Reverend Wright scandal, but she (while drooling in gleeful bliss) threw her support behind the Iraq War. Who better to lead our country than someone who by vote supported one of the country's biggest blunders?

#55 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 11:46 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Still spreading lies, I see.

www.factcheck.org

#56 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 11:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker than other video of Obama from the same event.

Agreed.

#57 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 12:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

#54

Go back and read the posts, fascism is a government type, it has nothing to do with business controlling anything. If you have an issue with business getting favors from governemnt that is NOT fascism. That is the point I am making, using the word fascism to try to inflame the conversation is incorrect use of the word, read the definition.

If you have an issue with business getting favors, use the correct wording, business is an unwilling participant in fascism.

#58 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-23 12:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Small business is an unwilling participant. Big business is all in, throwing millions into lobbying because it's the best investment return they can make, while using regulation to crowd out new competition. And it is the inevitable outcome of capitalism as those at the top make enough money to gain influence.

#59 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-01-23 12:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

Selective editing (see: still lying)

"The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker than other video of Obama from the same event.

However, the YouTube copy of the ad, on which the bloggers base their conclusions, is darker overall than other copies of the ad. We obtained a digital recording of the ad as it actually appeared on a Texas TV station, and it is lighter.

Furthermore, our analysis of the Obama frames, using Photoshop, shows a fairly uniform darkening of the entire image including the backdrop. It is not just Obama's skin color that's affected.

Also, nearly all the images in the ad are dark, including those of Hillary Clinton. And dark images are a common technique used in attack ads."

#60 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 12:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think Corky has it right: The government is subservient to the "Corporation," rather than the other way around, as it would be under fascism. I think that's what he's driving at and I think that's right. He can correct me if I'm reading him wrong.

#61 | Posted by Karabekian at 2014-01-23 01:26 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

#61

You are correct, sir. - Ed McMahon

#62 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Clinton campaign made Rev. Wright an issue, they wanted the voter to focus on how blackety black Obama was. When they weren't darkening him in video, they were telling you his preacher was super black, so blackety black, that Obama (and his children, wife, etc.) were also extremely blackety black. By pointing out the lack of lapel gadgets and hand on heart during various ritualistic displays of jingoism, they further cemented their idea that he was an "other."

Basically, the Clinton campaign ran one of the most racist piles of poo to ever be called a legitimate campaign. Hopefully another young politician (like Obama) smacks down that old bat and takes one of her last remaining few chances to be President away from her.

#63 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 02:03 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

-When they weren't darkening him in video

Still lying. Must be a habit.

#64 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 02:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker than other video of Obama from the same event.
#60 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2014-01-23 12:58 PM
lol, big lie, even BIGGER scandal. ROFL

#65 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 02:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Of course Hillary isn't a slam-dunk for 2016. Aside from Joe Biden, who else do the Dems have?

#66 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2014-01-23 02:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

"When they weren't darkening him in video...."

Debunked: www.factcheck.org

But why should facts stand in the way of a good political lie?

#67 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2014-01-23 02:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Gee....the more I look at that definition it seems to describe our president, imagine that."

That's ridiculous.

And the second definition is really about authoritarianism. There's more to fascism than that. Remember, regular dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. If you want to cite political meanings, you're better of using political dictionaries/encyclopedias.

#68 | Posted by pragmatist at 2014-01-23 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

#61

You are right, if it was Fascism the businesses would not be willing participants.

#69 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-23 03:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

#66

Doc,

You are hillarious, Joe Bite me? Come on even a left winger like you has to admit he is an idiot.

Just remember early favorites rarely make it to the ticket, and I don't see anything different this time around. I really believe the favorites today on each side will not be the candidate.

#70 | Posted by gtjr at 2014-01-23 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

-But why should facts stand in the way of a good political lie?

It doesn't stop that poster from selective editin... er, lying.

#71 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 03:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary video of Obama, darker.

Let's all get along now and pretend making an issue of Wright and questioning Obama's birth place were just friendly jabs from a competitive, non-racist ally.

#72 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 04:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

#72

Gilligan still in denial. How funny is that?

#73 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 04:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

About as funny as Ginger playing dumb, nothing new.

#74 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 04:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah, buddy.... Obama was so upset about those things that he made Hillary Sec.of State.

You're a joke, son. A joke, I say.

#75 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-23 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're a joke, son. A joke, I say.

#75 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2014-01-23 04:28 PM

What a delusional retard.

"son"

LOL

#77 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Obama was so upset about those things that he made Hillary Sec.of State."

There's an old saw that says, "Keep your friends close to you....and your enemies closer."
I have a strong suspicion that was his primary reason. Face it, he could watch and control her better as a member of his administration.

#78 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-01-23 04:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama's campaign was upset with the Clinton campaign. Remember when Bill was considered a racist in South Carolina?

#79 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-01-23 04:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

#76 - Personally, I'd like to rub her smelly feet with cocoa butter,
so if Corky's got a crush on the ol' girl, who am I to cast stones?

#80 | Posted by Karabekian at 2014-01-23 04:45 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

"Personally, I'd like to rub her smelly feet with cocoa butter,.."

Yeah, well, I expect you're the kind of guy who'd screw a phone booth if a fat lady farted in it too.

#81 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-01-23 04:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

#81 - There are still phone booths?

#82 | Posted by Karabekian at 2014-01-23 05:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

There are still phone booths?

Superman needs somewhere to change into his outfit...

#83 | Posted by ClownShack at 2014-01-23 05:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

I smell another jon stewart vote for me.

The only question in my mind is how bad things have to get before pat robertson starts to look like a viable candidate.

#84 | Posted by Shawn at 2014-01-23 06:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Where did the Princess of Christian principles go? Her lies were almost convincing this time.

#85 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2014-01-23 07:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

-walk a mile barefoot in the snow just to step where she peed in the stream.

I attribute your colloquialisms to inbreeding.

#86 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-24 12:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

-another jon stewart vote

Mickey will be SO disappointed.

#87 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-24 12:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

#77

S'riously? That's all you got? Pretty anticlimactic, really.

#88 | Posted by Corky at 2014-01-24 12:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

I think Hank Johnson and Anthony Wiener should be a team. Vote Johnson/Wiener

#89 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-01-24 12:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Will you GOPers please dig up more dirt on hillary and knock her out of the picture?"

None be needed.

I don't see how ANY self-respecting, self-identifying "Feminist" could even THINK of voting for lil' ole Miss "Stand by your Man".

If she had acted like a woman with a BACKBONE in the 90's and divorced her scumbag, philandering, deviant, degenerate, LYING husband; who made her look like a damn FOOL in front of the nation, then Yes she WOULD be a slam dunk. Girl you couldn't keep your husband in "check" how are you gunna run a country.

#90 | Posted by GotTruth at 2014-01-24 07:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Girl you couldn't keep your husband in "check" how are you gunna run a country."

Yeah, feminism means holding a man by the balls.

As for "None be needed," I disagree. She will do very well. I'm not predicting a win, but the DNC/Clinton machine is strong.

#91 | Posted by pragmatist at 2014-01-24 07:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort