Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CBS News: Hillary lucks out.
CBS News ^ | 8/10/05 | John Nichols

Posted on 08/11/2005 9:17:22 PM PDT by nycfree

Hillary Lucks Out August 10, 2005

This column was written by John Nichols.

New York Senator Hillary Clinton has always looked like a good bet to win re-election in 2006 -- probably by a margin wide enough to jumpstart the 2008 presidential campaign that many Democrats want the former First Lady to make.

With the decision of Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro to seek the Republican nomination to challenge her, however, Clinton's fortunes have taken a dramatic turn for the better.

Pirro, a hyper-ambitious publicity hound who frequently turns up on the Fox News Channel as a "legal affairs" commentator, had been weighing races for governor, attorney general or Clinton's Senate seat. With the fortunes of the state Republican Party in decline (even the conservative New York Post says that "New York's GOP is withering -- fast"), Pirro was unlikely to win any of those posts. So she opted for the showcase contest: a challenge to the woman Republicans around the country love to hate. Pirro's announcement garnered homestate headlines, enthusiastic coverage on Fox and conservative talk radio and promises of hefty campaign contribution checks from Hillary-haters nationwide.

But, as the Post admitted, the Pirro campaign is "not one (Clinton's) likely to lose sleep over."

Here's why:

Pirro supports abortion rights and reproductive freedom. She's for civil unions and other gay rights measures. She favors affirmative action and opposes the strict immigration quotas favored by Congressional conservatives. She's a big backer of gun control. And she's been enthusiastic about precisely the sort of "big-government" solutions to child-welfare and community issues that Republicans condemn Clinton for promoting.

In other words, Pirro is more of a Rockefeller Republican than a Reaganite. Yet, in an era of sharper-than-ever partisan divisions, Pirro will attract few if any votes from moderate-to-liberal New Yorkers who have sent clear signals that they do not want to give aid and comfort to President Bush and Congressional Republicans. Don't forget that Bush lost New York State by more than 1,350,000 votes in 2004. In the same year, Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer was re-elected with 71 percent of the vote and the GOP suffered a rare loss of a House seat in the Buffalo area while several of its House incumbents, such as upstater Tom Reynolds, saw their victory margins slashed.

It is comic to suggest that Clinton will lose many moderate-to-liberal votes to Pirro just because, in the words of the King of the Hillary Haters, Dick Morris, "Hillary will have to end up running against someone who is quite like herself in her public positions." New Yorkers are savvy enough to know that, if Pirro wins, she will vote to put right-wing Republican opponents of choice, gay rights and gun control in charge of the Senate, and that will disqualify Pirro with precisely the sort of voters she would need to mount a serious challenge to Clinton.

Morris suggests that Pirro might be able to draw support as a "tough-on-terror" candidate, playing the national security card against Clinton as have other Republicans in other states. But that is an even more comic claim. There is nothing progressive, nor even liberal about Hillary Clinton's stance on national security issues -- she wants to "stay the course" in Iraq, she's backed even the most over-the-top spending allocations for the war, she's been a supporter of the Patriot Act and other assaults on civil liberties and she's frequently more in line with the Bush Administration's approach on national security issues than a number of Senate Republicans.

When all is said and done, Clinton could end up benefiting from the "name" Republican challenge posed by Pirro, as it will reinforce the Democrat's position with base voters who might otherwise have problems with her centrist stances.

Indeed, if there is a candidate who is going to have a problem with her base, it's Pirro.

Several more conservative candidates are in the Republican race, including Ed Cox, a prominent New York lawyer who is the son-in-law of former President Richard Nixon, former Yonkers Mayor John Spencer and attorney Bill Brenner. Pirro may beat the three of them for the GOP nod. But one member of that trio is likely to be the nominee of the Conservative Party, a New York state institution that refused to back Schumer's moderate Republican challenger in 2004 and gained 220,960 votes for a little-known candidate running on its party line in the race. (In the presidential vote, the Conservatives backed Bush, who obtained 155,574 votes, more than 5 percent of his state total, on its line.)

If Pirro loses hundreds of thousands of votes to a Conservative Party nominee, she could well run a weaker race than Clinton's 2000 foe, former US Representative Rick Lazio, who had the Republican and Conservative endorsements. (Lazio got 43 percent of the vote that year, while polls currently put Pirro at around 29 percent.)

That may not be the worst of it for Pirro. While there is no question that Hillary Clinton suffers among some voters because of her association with her husband, former President Bill Clinton, Pirro has a husband problem of her own. As the Post's able political scribe, Fredric U. Dicker, gently notes, "Pirro's strength as a candidate is handicapped by her husband Albert's conviction in 2000 on federal income-tax fraud charges, an earlier revelation that he fathered an out-of-wedlock daughter, as well as the recent allegation by a Mafia informant that Al Pirro leaked confidential material from an ongoing Westchester DA's probe."

Plenty of ink will be spilled over the next fifteen months on the Clinton-Pirro race, and talk-TV and radio will love the fight. But if there was any cheering heard after Pirro announced on Monday, it was coming from Clinton's headquarters.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: New York
KEYWORDS: cbias; cox; edcox; hillary; pirro; spencer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
Hello New York Republican's. Wake up! Dicker has it right, the party is almost dead.

How do you want to go down? Compromising and bending over for a NARAL endorsed RINO? or sticking to your principles and supporting a real conservative?

Pirro is pro abortion, anti gun, pro gay agenda, pro affirmative action, and pro unrestricted immigration.

Are you people kidding me? Good grief!!!

1 posted on 08/11/2005 9:17:22 PM PDT by nycfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nycfree

It's not about Pirro winning, it's about making Hitlery show her hand early.


2 posted on 08/11/2005 9:20:05 PM PDT by MarkeyD (I really, really loathe liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
give aid and comfort to President Bush

To Dems:  Bush is not running in '08.

3 posted on 08/11/2005 9:21:50 PM PDT by quantim (I'm at the point now where I refer to all liberals as "insurgents.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
Nice try CBS .. but NY is a blue State and not likely to election a true conservative any time soon

But Hellary could very well lose a lot of votes to Pirro

4 posted on 08/11/2005 9:22:23 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
Clinton's fortunes have taken a dramatic turn for the better.

The Democrats sent CBS a memo to this effect.

5 posted on 08/11/2005 9:22:42 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD
John Nichols is an extreme leftist and worships scum. Quote from 2/05 The Nation article: Durbin has challenged the Bush Administration on everything from judicial nominations to flu vaccine to torture at Abu Ghraib. He has hit the ground running with votes against Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales and Secretary of State nominee Condoleezza Rice. And there is every indication that he intends to show Congressional Democrats how to be something they have not been since Bush assumed the presidency: an effective opposition.
6 posted on 08/11/2005 9:29:01 PM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

Pirro is pro abortion, anti gun, pro gay agenda, pro affirmative action, and pro unrestricted immigration.
------
*** THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THE SO-CALLED REPUBLICAN PARTY ***
As far as I am concerned, the Repubs are digging their own grave because they are not fighting, they are not conservative, in fact, WHAT ARE THEY ??? Just liberals that are not TOTAL socialists yet ???


7 posted on 08/11/2005 9:30:27 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

At least if Hellery gets re-elected, you know what you have at face value: A dirty lying rat wench. Everythign I have read about Spirro is she is pretty much like Hellery only she decided to be a republocrat for some reason. Should would turn out to be another backstabbing RINO.


8 posted on 08/11/2005 9:31:09 PM PDT by vpintheak (Liberal = The antithesis of Freedom and Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak
Quick everyone send her some $$$$ Chafee, Collins and Spector need her help so that they can all caucus with the Dems. I have a bad feeling about this woman.
9 posted on 08/11/2005 9:37:51 PM PDT by nycfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

Its amazing the person most responsible for 9/11, is the leading candidate for the N.Y. Senate. If 9/11 didn't wake them up, you wonder what will?


10 posted on 08/11/2005 9:39:37 PM PDT by HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath (Pray for America like its future depended on it, because it does!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

CBS is concerned about Republicans chances in knocking off Hillary. Right.

Nice try.


11 posted on 08/11/2005 9:45:13 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
She's is certainly better to look at than Mrs Clinton.


12 posted on 08/11/2005 10:02:17 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
Agree...a crass/very transparant attempt @ rope-a-dupe...CBS stands for Clinton Bu!! Sh*t
13 posted on 08/11/2005 10:14:38 PM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

Hillary Clinton gets to establish her conservative credentials by running to the right of a New York "Republican". Sheesh!


14 posted on 08/11/2005 10:17:32 PM PDT by AZLiberty (Binary: The Power of Two)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

Lucks out ? Wishful thinking, the witch is going to have to spend heavily to stay in this race.


15 posted on 08/11/2005 10:26:37 PM PDT by John Lenin (Hillary Clinton =RAT Titantic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

Underestimating your opponent is not very wise for a political party that has been losing ground nationally for years.


16 posted on 08/11/2005 10:36:00 PM PDT by somemoreequalthanothers (All for the betterment of "the state", comrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

Bravo Sierra spin from a lefty writer. They know damn well she's in for a fight.


17 posted on 08/11/2005 10:50:00 PM PDT by Tom_Busch (I'm a victim of Rovian mind control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
But Hellary could very well lose a lot of votes to Pirro

Yeah, nice try CBS but I'm not buying it either.
By the press' own way of defining election "victories", if "Hellary" doesn't win big, she loses. And she could very well come out of this contest wounded.

I don't think of her as a National candidate. Her honeymoon appeal lies in her lack of exposure so far, her not having to answer any of the tough questions yet.

Who has asked her about all the muck? the investment bonanza, the Billy gate travel agency scandal, the Rose law firm records found in her bedroom, the relationship with Vince Foster.
So much muck!
And Pirro sounds like she wants to challenge her heinous directly and that means bringing up all the muck.

A juicy cat fight would be very damaging to Ms. big ankles and hurt her presidential image before the real fight even begins!

18 posted on 08/11/2005 11:45:19 PM PDT by ThirstyMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

Dicker is and always has been a Hillary suck up.

But go ahead and cast cut off your nose to spite your face.


19 posted on 08/11/2005 11:47:46 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan
A juicy cat fight would be very damaging to Ms. big ankles and hurt her presidential image before the real fight even begins!

Yep!

And after one day ... she is already slipping in the polls

20 posted on 08/11/2005 11:47:53 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan
Who has asked her about all the muck?

Nobody! And that's the beauty of Pirro; she's a big time talker; she'll be all over TV, answering anybody's questions, which will make Hillary look like she's hiding something.

And the first question will be: will you serve a full six years. Watch her jump and jive, sports fans.

21 posted on 08/11/2005 11:51:23 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Her Royal Heinous!


22 posted on 08/11/2005 11:54:52 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave ("Liberals out of power are comical-Liberals in power are dangerous!" - Rush quote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: montag813

Double nothing is still nothing.


23 posted on 08/11/2005 11:56:55 PM PDT by SAJ (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Ha ha!
Right!

He describes Pirro as "...a hyper-ambitious publicity hound who frequently turns up on the Fox News Channel..."

What he's missing is that it's so perfect!

OK, so Pirro is a big time talker, not conservative enough. So?
She has NOTHING to lose compared to Ms. hiney.

"So Ms. Clinton, is it true that you won't let subordinates look you in the eye?"
If she denies it bring a witness forward. Ha!

Oh boy! What a match up!

I hope its as fun as I'm imagining!

24 posted on 08/12/2005 12:02:47 AM PDT by ThirstyMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
I have a bad feeling about this woman.

I don't share your feelings about her. I only know her from what I have seen on television, but I think she's smart enough to think for herself and will not blindly follow Chafee, Collins or Spector. I don't doubt that she would not please me with ALL her votes, but neither does my conservative Republican Senator! I would much prefer her to Hillary Clinton.

25 posted on 08/12/2005 12:12:23 AM PDT by PeskyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

Pirro will weaken Hillary's powerhold on NY voters and diminish the effect of Hillary cult's supportive propaganda. Pirro is a much better speaker than Hillary. Hillary at ad lib spontaneously projects her true inverted ideation and agenda. No matter the issues, Pirro upstages Hillary spotlighting the fact that Hillary Clinton is NOT the smartest woman in the world. While Hillary is transparently duplicitious, Pirro is assertive and firmly set. Pirro has an excellent speaking presence and communicative skills far superior to Hillary's convoluted NEWSPEAK screech and harrange. Pirro will effectively counter, or should I say, prosecute Hillary?


26 posted on 08/12/2005 3:49:36 AM PDT by purpleland (Vigilance and Valour!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
 

Pirro will support:

  • Bush's national security and war-on-terror agendas
  • Bush's judicial nominations, which is where the real leverage is on the abortion issue--NB pro-lifers!
  • Bush's fiscal policies

So there is every difference in the world between Pirro and clinton.

And this doesn't begin to discuss hillary clinton's corruption, betrayal and ineptitude. Or the rapes and other predation.

Let us not forget that it was hillary clinton who hired Jamie Gorelick. Gorelick proceeded to do hillary clinton's bidding, which undermined the national security and was the efficient cause of 9/11.

hillary clinton must never be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office... She must not be allowed near any position of power....

see:
HILLARY'S TRIPLE PLAY
the clinton putsch + filegate + the gorelick wall

The contrast between these two women could not be more stark.

BEAUTY AND THE HILDABEAST
  • JEANINE PIRRO: 30-year career fighting for the abused woman
  • HILLARY CLINTON: 30-year career abusing women
 
JEANINE PIRRO: 30-year career fighting for the abused woman

 
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

New York, New York -- if hillary can't make it there, she can't make it anywhere

 

HILLARY DUD -- NOT DUFF -- PORTENDS JEANINE WIN

 

"Married to the Mob" and other stop-Jeanine sillygisms

 

 

 

the MAD hillary series
WHY MISSUS CLINTON IS DANGEROUS
FOR THE CHILDREN,
FOR AMERICA,
FOR THE WORLD


madhillary.com (coming soon)
madhillary.blogspot.com
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005

MAD hillary talks series #1
ALFRED E."What, me worry?" CLINTON
+ CRAZY HIL MAD COVER STORY



THE THREAT OF TERRORISM AS CLOSE AS
A CLINTON TO OVAL OFFICE
MAD hillary talks series #2
HILLARY'S
MIDDLE-FINGER MINDSET



Do you really want THAT finger
on the button?

MAD hillary talks series #3
"What, me worry?"



THE THREAT OF TERRORISM AS CLOSE AS
A CLINTON TO OVAL OFFICE

MAD hillary talks series #4
NANO-PRESIDENT



the danger of the unrelenting smallness
of bill + hillary clinton


MAD hillary talks series #5
SCHEMA PINOCCHIO



how the clintons are handling
the hillary dud factor


27 posted on 08/12/2005 3:56:05 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree

what we're seeing here is the Clinton game plan for the national election folks. Try to split the conservative and moderate wings of the GOP. We all need to remember Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment-"speak no ill of a fellow Republican"....in other words, do not let the perfect become the enemy of the good.


28 posted on 08/12/2005 3:58:44 AM PDT by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Dicker from the NYPost? He is not only an idiot--he's intellectually dishonest. Last night was asked to comment on missus clinton's poll numbers that had dropped like a brick when Jeanine announced her candidacy. Dicker cited a supposed counterexample. But that poll was taken BEFORE Jeanine entered the race.

So my question is this: Why did Chris Wallace (who was subbing for Brit Hume) book this obvious (s)hill to discuss the Jeanine entry? And why didn't Wallace follow up on Dicker's "error"????


29 posted on 08/12/2005 4:45:10 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: purpleland
Bump! Excellent. Looking at it from a slightly different vantage point:

We could not have conjured up a more perfect counterpoint to the rapist clintons than prosecutor-of-rapists extraordinaire,
Jeanine Pirro. Her presence in the race will serve as a constant reminder to the voter that the clintons are rapists, terrorizers,
that the clintons are serial abusers of women.

 

thanx to WorkingClassFilth for the video
special thanx to Jim Robinson


The closest that President Clinton has ever come to answering allegations that he raped an Arkansas woman in 1978 is a distance measurable only in light-years. After Juanita Broaddrick made the accusation in 1999, the president's attorney, David Kendall, alone answered, saying any such charges were "absolutely false." Of course, attorney Robert Bennett believed Mr. Clinton when he said he hadn't had sex with Monica Lewinsky and defended the president then on no less sturdy grounds. Thus while lawyers can spare Mr. Clinton awkward moments at the podium in which he has to say, "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky" or "I did not fondle that woman, Kathleen Wlley" or "I did not rape that woman, Mrs. Broaddrick," their comments are, in effect, non-denial denials.

Mia T, 6.11.05
CLINTONS' DOCUMENTED ABUSE OF WOMEN:Did he rape that woman, Juanita Broaddrick?


30 posted on 08/12/2005 4:48:46 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
One, Two, Three, Four,
Pirro declares a MAM War!

Hah.

31 posted on 08/12/2005 4:50:07 AM PDT by MaxMax (God Bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeskyOne

bump. see #27


32 posted on 08/12/2005 4:52:26 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
Are you backing Hillary? She stands for everything you complained about and more. And with your type of support, she'll win. Doesn't work for me.

Just because you can't get everything you want, doesn't mean you should take your ball and go home.

33 posted on 08/12/2005 4:53:57 AM PDT by GOPJ (A person who will lie for you, will lie against you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

"the witch is going to have to spend heavily to stay in this race."


Yes maybe she will exhaust all her campaign money so she won't have much to run for president


34 posted on 08/12/2005 4:55:16 AM PDT by LittleMoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan
By the press' own way of defining election "victories", if "Hellary" doesn't win big, she loses.

LOL. The press declared a "mandate" for Bubba back in 92 when he only got 42% of the popular vote.

Hillary could win by one vote and they will be calling it an overwhelming victory.

35 posted on 08/12/2005 4:58:42 AM PDT by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

This will be interesting to see play out. I was listening to Hannity on the way home yesterday and he had Susan Estrich on. The first thing out of her large mouth was the legal problems with Pirro's husband. When Hannity reminded her that despite disbarrment, impeachment, etc..., the left told us that Hillary should be judged on her own and not by the actions of her husband, Estrich then blamed Hannity for bringing up the issue (WTF?!) but kept reiterating that Pirro's husband makes her unelectable.


36 posted on 08/12/2005 4:58:44 AM PDT by Hatteras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: LittleMoe

She'll be able to beat Pirro with a Kinko's account and a half dozen volunteers from a high school chess club.

This is NY politics. Pirro got suckered into the race to keep her out of Albany.


37 posted on 08/12/2005 4:59:18 AM PDT by durasell (Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath
We must make the causal connection known, i.e., that the clintons were the proximate cause of 9/11
HILLARY'S TRIPLE PLAY
the clinton putsch + filegate + the gorelick wall



BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE


HIROSHIMA'S NUCLEAR LESSON
bill clinton is no Harry Truman



ALFRED E."What, me worry?" CLINTON + CRAZY HIL MAD COVER STORY
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE


Alfred E. Neuman + the threat of terrorism, according to hillary


HILLARY IS NIXON-PLUS part 1
BEWARE THE SYNERGY

Nixonian paranoia and fascistic mindset combine with
clintonian megalomania, ineptitude and, most important,
easy betrayal of America
to make hillary clinton deadly dangerous for us all.


NANO-PRESIDENT, MEGA-DISASTER: history will not be kind to bill + hillary clinton

38 posted on 08/12/2005 5:00:32 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LittleMoe
Missus clinton has an endless supply of cash. Even if domestic sources go the way of Geffen, she'll still have plenty. Missus clinton will do as she has always done: auction off America's security, sovereignty and economy to the highest foreign bidder.

So, in other words, when she drops out of the race -- and she will -- it won't be the dough. It will be Pirro.

New York, New York -- if hillary can't make it there, she can't make it anywhere

39 posted on 08/12/2005 5:15:16 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD

What the heck has CBS been drinking?


40 posted on 08/12/2005 5:17:47 AM PDT by PilloryHillary (Eva Peron + Chappaqua = Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hatteras
Estrich was bringing up Pirro's husband to make it clear she was not bringing up Pirro's husband.

But as for the hubby felony factor, the lefties have it right.

Al is no bill.

41 posted on 08/12/2005 5:22:16 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: purpleland

Two summers ago, Hill took speech lessons and thus no longer says 'uh' and 'ya know' every six seconds. That aside, she'll definitely be in trouble during the primaries since she can't take the heat or serious debate. Never fear, though, Hillary fans, she can do the 'don't answer direct questions' ploy, otherwise known as fogging, in her sleep. Fasten seat belts. Bette Davis was right about bumpy nights.


42 posted on 08/12/2005 5:49:46 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

I saw Chris Wallace last night and was appalled at the way he reported Pirro's entry into the race. He acted like Hill's lapdog. Slobber, slobber.


43 posted on 08/12/2005 5:53:53 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: LittleMoe

Bill and the missus (the Power Couple), will be on Nantucket this weekend, or maybe today, for a fundraiser! Probably the Heinz-Kerry's are vacationing elsewhere and won't be able to attend, but I bet they got an engraved invitation.


44 posted on 08/12/2005 5:57:37 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: hershey
I saw Chris Wallace last night and was appalled at the way he reported Pirro's entry into the race. He acted like Hill's lapdog. Slobber, slobber.

An apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

45 posted on 08/12/2005 6:00:20 AM PDT by Libertarian444
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
This race might become the best comedy on tv.

If the "goddess" goes after Pirro's husband than I would venture to say Bubba and the carpetbagging wench are fair game as well. Could be a whole lot of fun next year.
46 posted on 08/12/2005 6:07:36 AM PDT by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nycfree
After reading this article and a few of the "new member" comments, plus billaries recent comments. I am positive of one thing..

The queen beeeeaaaaaach is pissing down her leg right now. They know it will be tough to beat the challenger and a hard fought campaign followed by a close election will destroy her chances at running for prez.

BTW... who gives a sh-t (other than dem disrupters) if the challenger is a RINO. The goals in this race are different than getting a conservative in office in one of the bluest of blue states. To politically kill the beast is priority. Fringe benefit is we at least have a rino to work with rather than a f--king marxist. Killing the beasts chances of furthering her political career is a win no matter who we beat her with.
47 posted on 08/12/2005 6:13:11 AM PDT by myself6 (Nazi = socialist , democrat=socialist , therefore democrat = Nazi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi
The beast has needed the "poor victimized wife" label to get her in to office. If she attacks Pirro's husband she loses the ability to carry that label for this race and any future race. She will give that title over to her opponent if she attacks the husband and for some reason, blue state voters eat that sh-t up. It would be a Pirro positive if clinton attacks the husband.
48 posted on 08/12/2005 6:19:48 AM PDT by myself6 (Nazi = socialist , democrat=socialist , therefore democrat = Nazi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ

I am in no way supporting Hillary. If Pirro is on the ballot in November 06 I will hold my nose and support her. But my question is, why are you all so quick to write off John Spencer and Ed Cox?


49 posted on 08/12/2005 6:29:32 AM PDT by nycfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: hershey

The clintonoids doth protest too much, methinks. Or, in this case, is it 'too little'???


50 posted on 08/12/2005 6:38:55 AM PDT by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson