Tuesday, November 27, 2007

A Must Read for All Supporters of Hillary Clinton

I originally wrote the following article exclusively for BlogCritics, but I must say, I have been blown away by the comments. Guess I'm used to civility in a courtroom. People can be so brutal when they don't speak face to face. I'm not one to shy away from controversy, in fact, I rather enjoy it.

But comments like "idiot," "shameful," "ridiculous," "not an iota of brains," and worse have no place in the blogosphere. Let's all just agree to disagree, make our points, and move on, shall we? No need to become personally offensive.

Feel free to post your comments here as well. If possible, keep the venom to a minimum.


Color me woman overboard from the Hillary Express. A lifelong Democrat, I cannot imagine a worse fate for my political party, or for that matter the United States of America, than bringing this ship to port.

Democratic candidates who can win next November do, in fact, exist. Yet, the national news media doesn’t publicize the credentials of candidates like Joe Biden or Chris Dodd. Rather, the media consistently downplays these candidates' political prowess, accomplishments, and admirable experience.

Like some vast left wing conspiracy, media conglomerates and their minions continue to herald Clinton as the clear Democratic frontrunner. Their blatantly obvious bias is not so much indefensible as it is incomprehensible. Hillary is nothing more than one of seven credible challengers perched behind an uncut ribbon at a pre-dawn marathon. Still, the media proclaims she will handily win the nomination as well as the presidency.

It’s time the American people sent a message to the national news media and vote their own minds in the upcoming primaries. Democracy cannot function effectively unless each American formulates and voices an opinion about the candidate who best reflects their individual needs and interests.

I, for one, will not hand Mrs. Clinton my party's nomination on a silver platter. I thumb my nose at media elite, and throw my support behind any other Democratic contender, going so far as to pledge my vote in the general election to the Republican – any Republican – if my party nominates this pathetic excuse for a candidate. Here’s why:

1. Clinton does not have the credentials to lead America. She has no track record of successful management of any large organization. She has never led the charge for successful passage of any consequential legislation. Even liberal Democrats give Hillary a pitiful 60% approval rating for piggyback voting, i.e. a failing grade on legislation Clinton supported but did not initiate.

2. She is ethically unsuitable for the office of president. Clinton will do or say anything to get elected. Her recorded support on opposite sides of the same issue recently came home to roost. This isn’t the first time opponents have caught Hillary in the act of doublespeak. Not long ago, Clinton equivocated her stance on the Iraqi war, stating, “I do not think it is smart strategy to set a date certain.” More recently, she introduced legislation setting a date certain to bring the troops home.

3. Clinton casually employs intimidation, marginalization, and fear of elimination to silence detractors. As first lady, Clinton viciously vilified numerous women levying sexual harassment charges against hubby Bubba. Her disingenuous finger pointing exemplifies the depths she is willing to sink to deflect blame. Had Monicagate not blossomed into a full-blown national scandal, Hillary very well may have destroyed the lives of numerous womanized victims.

4. Clinton leads the pack in campaign fundraising only because her campaign consistently violates FEC regulations. Fundraising for her 2000 senate campaign, as documented by former supporter, Peter F. Paul, is a brewing scandal unreported by national news organizations. Most likely, this is because three branches of government linked to Bubba’s administration systematically banded together to discredit Mr. Paul. His personal lawsuit against the Clintons remains pending in civil court despite numerous set backs. Google mysteriously banned the trailer video documenting Clinton’s campaign fundraising violations, a brewing scandal in its own right. The former embed code no longer functions, although edited videos continue to play online ... for now.

5. Clinton’s presidential campaign is tainted by a distinctive “kook factor.” Can she appeal to enough Americans? The short answer is no. Just recently, an Iowa waitress involved in a minor tipping flap made a curious about face following serious criticism directed against Clinton. Circumstantial evidence shows a heavy-handed response to this imagined controversy, thereby raising the specter of deeply entrenched paranoia in the Clinton campaign. A Hillary presidency could make the Nixon years seem like the ministry of Mother Theresa. For anyone who survived this chapter of American history, the prospect is terrifying.

6. Twenty years of Clintons and Bushes have not exactly positioned America for prosperity. If anything, the nation has regressed. Take, for example, the shrinking value of the American dollar against the Israeli shekel. Reduced American buying power in a second world nation formerly besieged by rampant inflation is simultaneously sobering and humiliating. Now is the time to send a fresh face to Pennsylvania Avenue, not more of the same expecting a different result.

7. Sure, I’d like to see a woman president in my lifetime. Unfortunately, this particular woman is as spineless as a jellyfish, a repulsive characteristic in any politician, let alone one vying to become leader of the free world. Hillary knows she’s just another face in Congress without Bubba. Despite impeachment and national scandal, that’s precisely the reason she stayed married to him. What's the difference between Billary’s relationship and that of Prince Charles and Princess Diana? At least Diana had the courage to recognize the whorish nature of their marriage and get out.

8. Clinton’s socialist tendencies will wreak havoc on this staunchly capitalistic society, eventually bringing the United States to its knees. Top earners, movers and shakers, and successful entrepeuners can migrate to greener pastures if forced to support the do-nothings and do-littles of America. That’s exactly what other countries are banking upon and likely why so many foreigners are the most vehement Clinton supporters.




Update: After original publication of this article, I discovered the words "about face" in paragraph #5 linked only to a blank page. I hope this was due to some temporary glitch rather than a response to threats of retailiation.

Second Update: One commentator queried whether I dislike Hillary because she is a woman. The simple answer: no. I have no problem electing a woman president. In fact, I hope to live to the day when the U.S. elects a woman or some other minority as president.

I dislike Hillary because she is the wrong person for the job for the reasons stated in my article. When a woman takes a clear stand on the issues and doesn't flip-flop, proposes a solid domestic policy that will jump start the economy, and demonstrates honesty and integrity in their politics - that is the woman I will vote for. Hillary is not that woman. In fact, if you took Hillary and put her in a man's body, hardly anyone would want her to be their president.

People are fooling themselves if they think electing Hillary will put Bill back into a position of power. Hillary is chomping at the bit to make Bill her underling. If she becomes President of the United States, she'll make certain Bill knows exactly who's in charge. Believe me, it won't be him.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Is it that you are not a fan of Hillary or women as leaders..My feeling is that if I had to choose today I'd choose Hillary..not for her but for the experienced husband of hers.. Bill...I am also still waiting for Al Gore to step back in..I have read the credentials of all the candidates..I still love Bill, or Al......mauniejames

Ralph said...

SO TRUE! PIAPS IS NOT QUALIFIED TO HOLD PUBLIC OFFICE!!!!

HOWEVER, SHE WILL WIN BY MEANS OF VOTER FRAUD!!!

WHAT IS ELECTION THEFT TO SOMEONE WHO IS ALREADY A MASS-MURDERER?!?!?!

CLICK HERE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT PIAPS' RÔLE IN THESE LAST DAYS!!!

Carlos R said...

Well, it is difficult to pose a reply that would artfully and skillfully dismiss your point. Let's just agree that Hillary is an emotionally charged topic...pro and con!

I, as a Democrat will vote for her. Why? Because I really believe she will bust her ass to be the best President she can. It's about commitment...not necessarily commitment to all campaign promises, but a commitment that when she goes to bed ( alongside Bill) she would have given us, the American people, her best. What else can we really ask for?

Mia T said...

As someone in math and science, I , too, was originally shocked by the rampant online ad hominem (abusive): indeed, by the total absence of logic and civility. I suppose I have, over the years, become so inured to it, I had almost forgotten. Thank you, Cheryl, for reminding me....

I addressed this problem at your original posting. I was responding to personal attack engendered by my original comments, listed below:

#32 — November 28, 2007 @ 02:09AM, 'Why would any woman, any feminist, any person of intelligence and compassion, vote for hillary clinton?'

#33 — November 28, 2007 @ 03:09AM , 'NEW ZOGBY POLL CONFIRMS: 3-CARD MONTE AT VEGAS DEBATE WON'T STOP HILLARY'S FREE FALL '

#34 — November 28, 2007 @ 04:09AM, 'STALINIST RISING? HILLARY CLINTON ABUSE OF POWER (WHERE IS THE UNREDACTED BARRETT REPORT ANYWAY?)'

My response follows:

Ad hominem seems to be your only game--tacit admission that you are unable to refute the facts.

Did you check out the Barrett Report ?

Do you disbelieve the warnings of liberals and Democrats like Carl Bernstein, Jerry Zeifman, Mark Goodman and Bradford DeLong, who have firsthand knowledge of clinton abuses, corruption, dysfunction and ineptitude?

And what about all the bill and hillary clinton rapes and predations? Are the leftist elite women who believe Juanita ('Mothers Who Think,' Salon.com) also 'insane'?? You really ought to listen to Rep. Chris Shays--the NYT calls Shays a voice of moderation. Shays saw all the 'Ford Building' rape evidence documenting the Broaddrick rape and other clinton abuse of women. A link to his comments HERE.

ASIDE: You are aware, are you not, that neither clinton has ever denied doing the rapes and predations? ('Did he rape that woman, Juanita Broaddrick?' The Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2000) If you were falsely accused of rape, wouldn't you deny it and deny it vigorously? The clintons haven't done so because the charges are true and to deny them would de facto vitiate the statute of limitations.

Missus clinton was confronted by Katherine Prudhomme in NH recently and, incredibly, denied knowing who Juanita Broaddrick was! To believe the clintons are innocent of the rapes and predations would require one to believe this denial, which is absurd on its face.

Finally, did you listen to Michael Scheuer, CIA bin Laden division chief under clinton? (VIRTUAL KILL-YouTube)

Scheuer: 'Bin Laden is alive today because Mr. clinton, Mr. Sandy Berger, and Mr. Richard Clarke refused to kill him. That's the bottom line.'

Your abject, willful ignorance and rigidity empower defectives like the clintons and imperil us all. Thanks a lot.

"God save us from people who do the morally right thing. It's always the rest of us who get broken in half." (Paddy Chayefsky)

And God save us from the morally unencumbered clintons, who get us broken in half nonetheless.

MorganLighter said...

Cheryl,
Just goes to show you that there a those people who have no sense of decorum.
After reading your original article, which, might I say, is thoughtful and well written, I went on to the comments and was amazed at the puerile mutterings of many - thankfully there were a few who shifted the balance back to normalcy.
Isn't it sad that many of the liberals need to use venom to get their point across while the rest of us - be us democrat or republican needn't stoop so low.
Just take a look at the blogs and books that the leftist writers and media are authoring and publishing about the republican consortium - they are full of hatred, lies and half-truths.
I suppose I'll be the target of some of those who disagree - that's just fine. I welcome them. They might want to pack a lunch.

MorganLighter said...

Cheryl, I should learn to read - you wanted feed back on your piece about Ms. HRC.
Truer words have never been spoken and I totally agree with what you said.
Too many people do not know the history (or have conveniently forgotten) of the Clinton's and how the media treated them like the King and Queen of the USA, unlike they have treated President and First Lady Bush.
Hillary scares the hell out of me, and the reasons are contained in your piece. There are others that we could touch on, but the highlights have been already addressed.
I have no problem with a woman being president - only if they are capable to hold that office with the goal of helping our country to become safer, stronger, less divided and a nation that will work for the common good.
Hillary and the far-out left do have an agenda - and a frightening one at that - I'm only not sure which insane policy she'll want to follow.
All of America should want the person who will lead us to better things, with a high moral compass and the ability to do what's right, not what's popular.
And, in my opinion, that could never be a Clinton.

verna said...

Your points- of-view are well taken. I would however, point out that as somone who has never missed an opportunity to cast my vote, and have over so many years cross party-lines, when I feel like it, Clinton will not be the worst candidate I have come across/voted for.

I see her imperfections as I see them in her counterparts. I cannot speak to, or even attempt to talk about Broderick, et al, given I have no information to make a judgement-- right/wrong. However if there was a candidate that has generated so much ink before Hillary I cannot think of who that is, and I am talking at the level of a nominee. The woman is yet be elected, and the scrutiny continues and I think way over board. She is not good for the party, Democrats have a choice.

I will say as someone who majored in political science and worked /volunteered on a number of campaigns, the ability to lead comes not with gender, family affiliations, etc, but with a desire to make a difference, delegate well, and give it your best shot. I am still undecided. How I will vote this time around, is still to be determined, but Hillary will clearly be considered. That she has learned poorly from her male counterparts-- too bad. As a women she followed/modelled what she saw around her and which represented --power. Wish she never read Machiavelli's "Prince", but clearly she has. But in contemporary American politics, all candidates play to their audience, some more than others, but in the long run-- all are flip floppers.

I see only a horse-race and may the best candidate win; even if the name of the jock-- spells Hillary! This nation has survived a great deal-- it will survive Hillary too!!

www.vernasmith.blogspot.com

ss_blog_claim=b2bbf1587aa8ca90bac621e412981fcc