Is the right right on the Clintons?

Los Angeles Times ^ | January 26, 2008 | Jonathan Chait

[EdnaMode]

The continued use of the word “liberal” for people who are anything but reminds me of how the word “amateur” is still used to describe Olympic-eligible figure skaters. Despite the fact that dozens of these skaters are actually millionaires, they continue to use that word (Michelle Kwan and Sarah Hughes both won the Sullivan Award for best AMATEUR athlete, despite the fact that BOTH were MILLIONAIRES from endorsements, prize money, touring contracts and appearance fees).

[EQAndyBuzz]

“Kinda like the Republicans voting for McCain....”

Would you rather eat dog food of cat food?

[Savage Beast]

"But what happens if she's embroiled in another scandal? Will liberals rally behind her..."

Uh...is that a serious question?

[Reaganesque]

Well, better late than never, I suppose.

[cgbg]

Hillary SCARES those on the left because they see that she doesn't have the ability, like Bill did, to OBSCURE what she's really about.

What they fear most is that a Hillary administration will convince the average "moderate" voter that the Hillary _is_ the left and their sixty year old con job (liberals=reasonable moderates) will be exposed.

[NaughtiusMaximus]

But the conservatives might have had a point about the Clintons' character. Bill's affair with Monica Lewinsky jeopardized the whole progressive project for momentary pleasure

Note tagline.

[wayoverontheright]

What they fear most is that a Hillary administration will convince the average "moderate" voter that the Hillary _is_ the left and their sixty year old con job (liberals=reasonable moderates) will be exposed.

Yep. I detect also that liberals are afraid she will embarrass them.

[originalbuckeye]

That’s a big DUH, Jonathan. But, yes, the Libs will vote for anyone with a D so as not to get another R in the WH.

[rtbwood]

We on the right have known all along about the slime politics of the Clintons. Now that their power is threatened, they are turning on their own. Ravenous dogs do the same. They eat their prey and if still hungry, they will then turn on each other. This couple knows no boundries, have no principles. It’s all about power, winning, and if need be, utter destruction of any opposition, whether black or white. Now, maybe black America has seen the real Bill Clinton, who was in fact NOT the first black American to be elected President. He used them and then threw them away. Shame on him. He should just get off the stage. His time is up.

[y6162]

Eh, the libs will forget all about how the Clintons trashed Obambi to get the nomination once they start lying about the right wing again. The left loves politics of personal destruction when applied to the right.

It’s inevitable that the Clintons will be involved in scandal moments after returning to the White House. I personally enjoyed the impeachment process a lot. I can’t wait until it starts again.

[hinckley buzzard]

Nah. They had similar revelations at the end of the eight year Clinton debauch, expressing disillusionment at the corrupt pardons, and indignation at the mass theft of government property from the White House. But having momentarily stumbled over the truth, they hurriedly picked themselves up and moved on, attempting to appear as if nothing had happened. It wil be the same now. Come November, the present evidence of Clinton moral turpitude wil be long gone down the memory hole.

[no dems]

If Hillary wins the nomination, most of us will probably vote for her because the alternative is likely to be worse.

Good article until this near-the-end sentence. WHAT A STUPID STATEMENT TO MAKE.

[okie01]

I haven’t read the book. But here’s a description from Publishers Weekly:

Which clearly demonstrates that Chait is an objective observer of the national political scene -- thoughtful, non-partisan and unbiased.

Actually, though, it demonstrates that Chait is literally unhinged by his hatred for Reagan, Republicans and conservative philosophies.

So blinded by rage that he cannot differentiate between right and wrong. Until the Clintons blind-sided him...

[Dianna]

So maybe the answer is that the Clintons would have smeared their opponents in the 1990s, but lying is unnecessary when the other party is doing things such as voting to slash Medicare to pay for a big tax cut for the rich.

Nope, they're still the same stupid libs. That the Clintons are lying cheating scum now, certainly doesn't mean they were in the 90's.

[kaycee]

ALMOST amusing to see the LA Times agonizing about the Clintons. They will not ever “change their stripes” and support Republicans. My sister worked for them, and refuses to discuss the possibility the paper is wrong; her support of Hillary is BAD; etc.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

["...but the fact that tens of millions of Americans are seized with irrational loathing for her ..."]

It's FAR from irrational.

[I still care]

“Will liberals rally behind her, or will they remember the Democratic primary?”

Or the White House Travel Office, Rose Firm Law Records, Clinton pardons, Monica, Whitewater, China bribes, Lincoln bedroom, any number of corrupt Chinese donations...

And don’t forget the WH silverware. Someone just reminded me of that yesterday.

The Clintons are finding out what it’s like to be treated like a Republican by the press. The MSM glossed over and made excuses for all their scandals, except Monica, because they can’t resist sex. But now, they are running against a black liberal, and Her Royal Clintoness is probably amazed the press isn’t protecting her anymore.

[Cicero]

They only feel disdain for the clintons because they think they are Lying and Losing.

They greatly admired bill clinton when he showed his great talent for Lying and Winning, which they generally referred to as his remarkable ability to use Language to Communicate.

And when we come to the Democrat Convention and they see hillary LIE and WIN once again, they will start to admire her once again.

They know very well which side their bread is buttered on. They know who will be giving the cocktaill parties on the DC circuit.

[wideminded]

Bill's affair with Monica Lewinsky jeopardized the whole progressive project for momentary pleasure.

I didn't know there was a progressive project for momentary pleasure.

[holden]

Bill's affair with Monica Lewinsky jeopardized the whole progressive project

The author does display the flag here, as if to flash his bona fides, needing to make clear what it's all about for them.

The undercurrent is, "Just like it's not lying if you're doing it for Islam against the infidel, neither is it lying if you're a progressive tearing down a conservative or his argument."

Lying to juries doesn't matter to either of the Clintons, as they've proved repeatedly. For that, and sleeping with more black women than Barry Hussein, the Clintons may claim to be great in progressive circles, claim the spoils from the Nina Burleigh-types, and all the votes that end up in the Dhimmocrat box on election day.

...all for the goal of advancing America's shining path toward Communism.

HF