WILL HILLARY CLINTON RUN? COMBINATORIAL GAME THEORY MAY PROVIDE THE ANSWER

Happy belated Thanksgiving, gonz and a Merry Christmas and great New Year, 2007! Compliments of the Season!

BUMP

Great collection, Mia, thanks. Please add me to your ping list.

I missed the whole Jeff Greenfield story. What happened? When was it? Is there a transcript, or a link????

I *love* seeing Herself making a fool of herself. :-)

Thanks, Brian! Hope your Thanksgiving was great and a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and yours!

Stay well...................FRegards

Thanx + done, pinz. :)

I originally posted the report of the Greenfield interview of missus clinton on January 22, 2002. The interview likely took place a few days or weeks earlier....

You can find the transcript at the following link:
THE COMPLETE ANNOTATED_('_{you know}_') INTERVIEW

As for hillary clinton making a fool of herself, note that even her own handlers don't trust her not to in an unscripted, (even friendly) venue.

Thank you, Brian. I wish you and yours the same. :)

As for hillary clinton making a fool of herself, note that even her own handlers don't trust her not to in an unscripted, (even friendly) venue.--me

And with good cause:

Hillary in Aviary

: by Mia T, November 2000, sometime before "the first Tuesday after the first Monday"

"Bird of paradise" would have been a brilliant wrong answer for the New-York-state-bird question; in one fell swoop it would have flattered the necessary constituency, rendered hillary's cheating marginally believable and suggested a quick, secure, creative mind.

But the obsessively perfectionistic dodo wasn't able to fake even one wrong answer in the Letterman phony "pop quiz," a nostalgic electuary of "Twenty-One" fraud and (Groucho) Marxist left-wing crow.

Instead, this documented incompetent with no apparent creative or analytic (not to mention thespian) skills gushed forth with a lame--"It's the bluebird--I know that" --globally exposing herself to be the corrupt clown that the sentient among us already know she is.

It is no accident--and the Sheehy hagiography notwithstanding, it is certainly not because of any patriarchal society--that this reflexive kleptocrat never sought office. She never ran simply because she is a perfectionist and an incompetent who cannot tolerate personal (as opposed to bill-related) criticism, witness the prescreened, heavily controlled, sycophantic crowds, her pre-programmed, totally scripted appearances (or, alternatively, her totally mute "listening tour"), her unavailability to the press, indeed, her "bluebird."

Thus, the question begging to be asked is this:

Why would this compulsively perfectionistic grotesquerie allow herself to be unambiguously exposed as the utter incompetent and fraud and fool and horror that she is?

And why would this self-proclaimed protector of "the children" prolong her own child's profound trauma by forcing her own bottom-heavy self, soiled in its own right, onto the political stage?

The answer, I believe, resides more in liberty loss than in power gain.

Simply put, she is not running for office; she is running from indictment.

And I fear Starr successor, Robert Ray, is unable to catch her...
Or catch on. (On second thought, maybe the problem is that he does....)

Ray's recent statement , " I have been charged with responsibly conducting the work of this office. Some of my responsibility is to ensure that there is no untoward effect on the political process," both confirms and encourages this latest round of clinton raping, pillaging, despoiling, destroying.

Will this nightmare never end?

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2000, 2005

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006

You know, I, uh, really, you know, appreciate your, uh, response, and, uh, do seem, you know, to uh, recall, you know, that, uh, interview, you know, in my, uh, far away, you know, uh, memory.

^{(2/21/2005) Despite Russert's best efforts to help, Clinton stammered her way through a nonsense answer that made it plain that the use of military force wouldn't be in her playbook. "Well, you know, Tim, I don't think that you either rule it in or rule it out. I think that, you know, depending upon circumstances, it's something that, you know, the American government would have to, you know, consider. "But, for goodness sakes, I think we are a very long way from beginning to have that conversation, if we ever have to have it. But I don't believe in having any president of the United States or anybody, you know, in a position like Senator McCain and I in the United States Senate, you know, saying we would take anything off the table. But before we get to that question, let's try to, you know, deal with the many other possibilities."--hillary clinton
For those counting, that was seven "you knows" in five sentences.}

And if you read the sentence without the you-knows to distract you, it means absolutely nothing.

Maybe the you-knows aren't accidental....

And if you read the sentence without the you-knows to distract you, it means absolutely nothing.
Maybe the you-knows aren't accidental....--pinz-n-needlez

The frequency of clinton "you knows", which varied directly with intensity of Greenfield contempt and inversely with magnitude of Greenfield softballs, suggests otherwise.

clinton vacuity notwithstanding, I think clinton's tic-like insertion of "you know" is reflexive and a marker for ineloquence, vulgarity, ignorance, rube-meets-valley-girl demographics, low self-esteem, anxiety and insincerity.