Let's Talk About Hillary
Sat, November 24, 2007 at 1:18
Mark "Snooper" Harvey in Character, Clear and Present Danger, Double Standards, Dubious Character, Electability

~Snooper~
Hillary, whose apparent zero is Kerry, is more often than not for something until she decides she was actually undecided about being against that which once was neither for or against.

Which, is better than what?

And, where is Hillary? Ever since she internationally embarrassed herself at the most recent "debate", if, you can call it that, her Toy Boy Billy has been her voice. Is this how her alleged Presidency going to be? Is this what America needs or, more bluntly, wants? Will Hillary, at the first sign of a whoopsie, call for Billy? Perish the thought.

Over at Political Grind, they have this to say:

[...] For the first time in a long time, Mrs. Clinton finds herself under intense scrutiny from her opponents and the mainstream media. Are they "piling on"? Of course. Is it fair? This is a query unworthy of an answer; it is merely what it is. Welcome to the race to be president of the United States, Mrs. Clinton.

A much more pertinent side question: what took so long for the genuine media scrutiny?

For some reason, Hillary Clinton enjoyed extraordinarily positive press coverage for the last eight years. Why? I have no satisfying explanation. Had the left-leaning mainstream media been cultivating and protecting a favored candidate? Not likely. This hypothesis is deliciously inviting, but it seems far too facile and "breathtakingly" conspiratorial. Perhaps the media felt genuine sympathy for the famously humiliated wife of the most celebrated philandering husband in all of American history? Or perhaps the media believed that they went too far during impeachment, and they owed the Clintons a "pay-back call" or two. Maybe. [...]


From an outsider looking in, I see the media's "turn" on Hillary as wild animals turning on the wounded member of the pack. Just an observation based upon nearly 53 years on this planet. All in all, most of the Lame Stream sides with Hillary but the occasional barb is indicative of vultures waiting for their prey to actually die off before they dine.

At Lightning Fingers' place at Wake Up America: Panic In Hillaryville

[...] Rasmussen again showed that she was hemorrhaging points in NH...in September 18th, she held a 23 point lead, October 27th, that lead dropped to 16 points and November 7th, that lead dropped to 10 points.

That is a 13 point drop since September 18th, 2007.

Worse news, the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll that heads up against Giuliani, Hillary only enjoys a 1 point lead.

USA/Gallup shows married men do not favor Hillary.

Zogby shows trouble for Hillary in Iowa.

This next Rasmussen poll is no big surprise, since it is Texas, but added with everything else, my question yesterday about whether Hillary Clinton is losing that "shoe in" status becomes more relevant. [...]


Don Surber has a knack for the obvious to those wide awake...unlike the Leftinistra. As our readers should quickly realize, we call out the inconsistencies of the Leftinistra on a regular basis. I dare say that 99.9% of them will NEVER accept responsibility for their own actions if the outcome is a negative. There is always someone else to blame or something else.
[...] So the big news from Planet Clinton is that Bill is cavalierly accepting the blame for the failure of Hillarycare in 1994.

The New York Times quoted him as saying: "You know how much she cares about this. She has taken the rap for some of the problems we had with health care the last time that were far more my fault than hers."

And indeed, the headline on an Oct. 3, 1994, story via NYT News Service said: "First lady takes blame for health care demise."

Except for the part where she did not say that. Mrs. Clinton’s construct was that she was to blame for failing to make you people (mouth breathers that you are) understand the genius of her perfect plan.

Reported the Times in 1994: “But the most frustrating failure she acknowledges is not getting the country to understand that the plan the Clintons offered a year ago was an opening offer, 'constructed to be deconstructed.' Instead of being a basis for negotiations, she said, 'it was described as an ultimatum by our opponents and therefore used to undermine the process of reaching agreement.'"

Got that? The VMWC (vast medical wing conspiracy) did her in, preventing her from bestowing upon the dumb masses the wisdom of her perfect plan. [...]


Case closed. Or, as my partners here at ANO would say, checkmate.

So, we have determined that at the first sign of actually having to admit to something that could go wrong for Hillary, she calls on others to fall on her own sword, lest she get harmed, and then blame game then ensues and when the dust settles, she will emerge and say something akin to, 'What?'

And what of her Porkness? Ed Morrisey chimes in on that:

Guess which presidential candidate has the temerity to talk fiscal responsibility while outstripping the other candidates in pork-barrel spending? It turns out the Woodstock museum was only the headline act in a long concert of earmarking for Hillary Clinton. Not only does she lead the Senate delegation in this cycle's presidential race, but despite her junior status, she earmarked more than five times more money than her nearest competitor: [...]

Again, we ask, is this what America needs? A spendthrift Socialist? No, Hillary. America cannot afford you and your 1,000,000 "things America cannot afford".

Flopping Aces:

[...] Ahhhhh, the Clintons. You can always count on them for some kind of dishonorable conduct. [...]

Exactly so.

A Hat Tip to Stop the ACLU for this article here:

Two new reputable polls of New Hampshire Democratic Primary voters will show statistically significant drops in support for frontrtunner Hillary Clinton, Democrats who have seen those polls said today.

The polls will be released this weekend and are embargoed; though I'm not privy to the embargo agreement, I'll be a little vague out of respect for the polling organizations.

One of the polls shows that the gap between Clinton and Barack Obama narrowed by more than 10 points. Her biggest decline was seen among older voters.

The other shows Clinton's lead over Obama reduced by approximately 9 points.

John Edwards remains at about 15 percent in both.


And, there are reports that Hillary leads Rudy by 1 point now. In cases such as this, I consider Bad News for Hillary to be Good News. I so hope that Hillary is the nominee for the DNC. The GOP may not be able to take back the Senate but the GOP sure does have a good shot at taking back the House and WILL retain the White House.

Bring it on, Hillary.

Others blogging:

Snooper / A NEWT ONE: Let's Talk About Hillary


Chris Bowers / Open Left: Obama, Non-Christians, and New Hampshire


Spree / Wake up America: Panic in Hillaryville? — Yesterday we pointed out a few polls done …


Peggy Noonan / Opinion Journal: Things Are Tough All Over — But Mrs. Clinton is no Iron Lady.


Jonathan Singer / MyDD: Ambinder: Two New Polls Show Race Tightening in NH


Gaius / Blue Crab Boulevard: Wonder Why Camp Hillary Is Almost Frantic?


Reliapundit / THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS: JUST LIKE DEAN, HILLARY IS FADING FAST. SO, WHO WILL BECOME THE NEXT KERRY?


JammieWearingFool: Pantsuit Plummets in NH Polls


John Riley / Spin Cycle: Clinton gets a big endorsement but a bad poll


Ed Morrissey / Captain's Quarters: All Hail The Pork Queen


Catch the wave.

Article originally appeared on Snooper's Take Our Country Back (http://snooperreport.com/).
See website for complete article licensing information.