ANN COULTER Will Campaign For Hillary Clinton

Hannity and Colmes ^ | January 31, 2008 | Ann Coulter

[Don Joe]

I am starting to see the brilliance of Hillary or Obama in the WH... but only on one condition: The Republicans in Congress all grow a pair at least the size of Senators Leahy, Levin, Biden, Kennedy(all traitors in my eyes) and stop all “progressive” initiatives and Leftist judge nominations. Unfortunately,the Repubs haven’t learned a thing from the Dems playbook on how to stop a duly elected President virtually dead in his tracks. Read “Shadow Warriors” and weep for your Nation.

Late to the thread, feel like death warmed over ('cept for that "warmed over" biz), no way I can read everything here, so here's my two cents on the half-shell -- take it, leave it, but spare me the flames, spare me the strongarm tactics, spare me the "go back to DU" flapdoodle, etc., etc., etc. [Not aimed at you, Sioux-san -- the regular suspects will know who they are.]

OK, two cents, coming right up...

Cent One: We're screwed. Period. No matter what. The election is now a Hobson's Choice, a four-sided coin. No matter which of The Four Stooges wins, we're screwed. That's the baseline.

Cent Two:

We are recovering (OK, we're not recovering -- I'm using artistic license) from a Republican Executive "working with" a Republican Legislature.

The result of that nightmare was a Democrat's wet dream. Clinton could NEVER have even fantasized about getting even half the crap that Congress handed Bush on a silver platter.

Gridlock is your friend. Gridlock is OUR friend. Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways. You can't have "GOP on GOP" AND "gridlock" at the same time.

Until some conservatives 1) take the job in Congress, and 2) grow a set, it's madness to have either A) a Republican executive and Republican legislature, OR, B) a Republican executive of the type we have these days -- one that ACTS like a Democrat, and "will work with" a Democrat legislature.

So, in a cold, clinical, sickeningly analytical way, it does make a kind of sense to take the position Coulter is taking.

However... sometimes it's wise to NOT take things at face value.

Coulter is intelligent, and, has an agenda. Part of that agenda is to see Romney elected. She's gone on record. It's no secret that she backs Romney.

But, Romney is taking a flogging in the polls, as McCrazy gains traction.

Seems pretty obvious to me that her strategy is to spook the voters away from McCrazy, so that Romney will have a chance -- and, perhaps -- just perhaps, if that fails, then, last-ditch strategy is gridlock with a witch on top -- tied up and helpless.

There you go, two cents on the half-shell, and remember the directives. If you can't discuss things rationally, then take yer strongarm politicking and YOU "go back to DU!" LOL!

[Don Joe]

---

We can always run against and attack Hillary. It is far worse when the evil resides and permeates within your own party.

The evil has been permeating the party for so long, people don't even recognize that it's evil. They're too familiar with it to see it for what it really is. That's why we're even having this debate. Voting against McCain, voting for the person most likely to beat him and smashing the insurgent left-wing of the party, should be the obvious choice for any conservative. The only choice.

The pragmatists don't seem to understand that the Faustian bargain they're entering into will leave us with a one-party system and absolute leftist rule. They refuse to think their strategy through to its only logical conclusion.

This is the way nations die.

---

We have been "voting for the lesser of two evils" time after time after time, each time ending up with "just a little more" of the evil -- like a boa constrictor, which does NOT "crush its prey to death" -- it just wraps around the ribs, and when the prey exhales, the snake takes up the slack. Eventually, there's nothing left to exhale, and the snake dines on his snack.

We have been blinded by the twin evils of incrementalism, and "party loyalty."

Incrementalism will get you there, but it takes a while. Sadly, we've been playing that stupid game FOR a while, and now we're pretty much there.

And "The Party" evidently cares for but one thing and one thing only: "The Party." As long as "The Party" can have power, it cares little... no, scratch that -- it cares NOT AT ALL about such trivial details as "conservatism."

The "pragmatism of power" is a world unto itself. That old saw about power corrupting, and absolute power corrupting absolutely, is absolutely true. And it's never been more evident than it is today.

Who in their wildest dreams would have imagined ten years ago that we would be living in a lockdown state, where "The Department of Homeland Security" (what a name!) would be architecting nationwide laws prohibiting the possession or use of things like geiger counters or air pollution measuring devices -- with PRISON SENTENCES for "violators"?

We have made ourselves one hell of a bed, and now we're being put to nap.

Now, I fear, the disease has progressed to the point that it will run its course. I doubt that there's anything that can be done to turn it around.

I cannot vote for any of the Four Horsemen of the Electolypse.

[moose2004]

I’m voting for McCain, I could care less what Ann Coulter and Rush have to say about it. I’ve voted in every presidential election since 1980, and here’s who I voted for:

1980 - Reagan
1984 - Reagan
1988 - Bush
1992 - Bush
1996 - Dole
2000 - Bush
2004 - Bush
and
2008 - McCain

[VictoryGal]

> Read the transcript. Look at the issues. I don’t know how old you are, but McCain would be Jimmy Carter all over again.

LOL, you think I am for McInsane? Just because I call out Ann on her “lookit me! lookit meeeeee!” gambit? Uh, no, but thank you for playing. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that Ann is doing this to sell her books and rapidly aging skeleton to easily awed and p-whipped conservative males.

Ah, and since you ask: My first vote of my entire life was for Ronaldus Maximus in 1980. So I think I know my history of that era (and before). I tell you what is different between that glorious election and this stinkburger season. That first time in my life when I pulled the lever, I pulled it positively, for greatness, for America’s rebirth, for an awakening of the American soul. This election? Full of flip-floppers (Mitt), nanny-staters (Huckster)and crazy sellouts (McInsane). And that’s even before tapping the traitorous Hitlery (of which your attention-ho Ann is so fond) or the bumblingly traitorous Obama Hussein. This election is like choosing which way America is to die. By drowning? By fire? Drawn and quartered? You get to choose, America! Lucky you!

[RobRoy]

Keating five.

That is all I need to know. I could never vote for Hillary or Obama. But I also could never vote for McCain.

Sometimes you gotta let the chips fall where they may.

And I have always said that in a democracy (or a constitutional republic) you not only get the government you want. You get the government you deserve.

This country apparently is about to get what it deserves. It is looking more and more like Revelation 17 and 18 are talking about the US.

[Yosemitest]

"Coulter is intelligent, and, has an agenda. Part of that agenda is to see Romney elected. She's gone on record. It's no secret that she backs Romney.

But, Romney is taking a flogging in the polls, as McCrazy gains traction.

Seems pretty obvious to me that her strategy is to spook the voters away from McCrazy, so that Romney will have a chance -- and, perhaps -- just perhaps, if that fails, then, last-ditch strategy is gridlock with a witch on top -- tied up and helpless. "

Ding, Ding, Ding.
You got it. Give the winner a whoopee cushion

[Yosemitest]

You sound better than I though.
Sometimes its better to start over. Bye Bye GOP.

[Ron H.]

Ann Coulter may be onto something here. I tend to agree with her reasoning. That's why I wrote in my candidates choice in both 20000 and 2004 as I knew the Republican Congress would not stand up to a fellow big spending Republican in 2000 and a all-but-liberal Republican in 2004 but would certainly have to declare all out war against a liberal Demoncrat to remain relevant and history has proved me right so far.

My batting is better than those who bought into King Jorges BS IMHO.

[Ron H.]

I’d much rather have Hillary in the White House, Republicans filibustering liberal legislation and gaining seats in Congress in 2010 than McCain or Romney ushering through liberal legislation with no resistance while the GOP becomes an entrenched minority in Congress.

I echo your sentiments exactly.

[Ron H.]

Now, I fear, the disease has progressed to the point that it will run its course. I doubt that there's anything that can be done to turn it around.

I cannot vote for any of the Four Horsemen of the Electolypse.

 

[OPS4]

Editor: Cliff Kincaid
Associate Editor: Notra Trulock

2003 Report #
15 August 11, 2003

Of all the Hillary Clinton scandals and cover-ups, none is more significant than her attempt to whitewash her own personal transformation from Goldwater girl to Marxist. No mainstream media organization has examined how she is determined in her new book to keep people in the dark about what Hillary biographer, the late Barbara Olson, described as her “roots in Marxism.”
http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/hcvrillary.htm

[OPS4]

Well ann are you going to carry the Communist party card?

[Yosemitest]

Great link.
We have a better chance of getting more conservatives into power in the Senate and the House of Representatives, with that vile Hillary as President, than with that backstabbing RINO McCain.

[OPS4]

BULL McCain is way better than Marxist, Hillary!
Republicans are not stupid enough to buy that crap.

[Yosemitest]

Wrong!

But the Democrats that are disgusted with the left (Reagan Democrats) will vote for McCain in droves.

"McCain vs. McCain"

"Tom DeLay: John McCain Has Done the Most to Hurt the GOP "

"No to McCain-Kennedy, Yes to Border Security - Newt Gingrich "

To all, Please stop McCain.
We all knew Rush would be great today. RUSH: Stop caring who the media likes. Screw them!

[OPS4]

The Hillary Clinton Accountability Project will shortly launch its fundraising drive to raise $500,000 to support the most important citizen’s legal initiative of 2008. The landmark civil fraud suit of Paul v Clinton et al which the California Supreme Court ordered to proceed against the Clintons, Grammys Producer Gary Smith and Clinton agent Jim Levin, will be set for trial and a discovery schedule at a special conference to be held in Los Angeles Superior Court on February 21, 2008.

The first law suit in American history to bring a President and a Senator to court for defrauding the Senator’s largest campaign donor and his public company will be set for trial and discovery at the Case Management Conference before Judge Munoz. Discovery and depositions of key witnesses, including the Clinton family, Al Gore, Ed Rendell, Terry McAuliffe, Harold Ickes, Howard Wolfson, Kelly Craighead, Barbara Streisand, Brad Pitt, Larry King, Mike Wallace among an array of political and entertainment leaders, will present an inside look at a culture of corruption that will shock the public.

http://www.peterfpaul.com/

[OPS4]

The 1996 United States campaign finance controversy was an alleged effort by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to influence domestic American politics prior to and during the Clinton administration and also involved the fund-raising practices of the administration itself.

While questions regarding the U.S. Democratic Party’s fund-raising activities first arose over a Los Angeles Times article published on September 21, 1996,[1] the PRC’s alleged role in the affair first gained public attention when Bob Woodward and Brian Duffy of The Washington Post published a story stating that a United States Department of Justice investigation into the fund-raising activities had uncovered evidence that agents of the PRC sought to direct contributions from foreign sources to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) before the 1996 presidential campaign. The journalists wrote that intelligence information had shown the PRC Embassy in Washington, D.C. was used for coordinating contributions to the DNC[2] in violation of United States law forbidding non-American citizens or non-permanent residents from giving monetary donations to United States politicians and political parties. A Republican investigator of the controversy stated the Chinese plan targeted both presidential and congressional United States elections, while Democratic Senators said the evidence showed the PRC targeted only congressional elections. The Chinese government denied all accusations.

Twenty-two people were eventually convicted for fraud or for funneling Asian funds into the United States elections. A number of the convictions came against longtime Clinton-Gore friends and political appointees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy

[OPS4]

2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Hillary Clinton and Norman Hsu

A shady Chinese megadonor to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has close ties to an aerospace mogul accused of placing his business interests before national security by sharing missile secrets with Beijing during the Clinton administration.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57450

[OPS4]

Wikipedia is most kind