"ONE OF THOSE GROUPS OBSESSED WITH THE CLINTONS"

U.S. News & World Report (Washington Whispers) | March 11, 2003 | Paul Bedard

[lentulusgracchus]

Inquiring minds want to know:

Why did The Rapist opt to avoid engaging the terrorist threat from Al-Q'aeda, Iraq, and the Iranians, and let the North Koreans snow him on their nuclear programme -- a feat the Iranians seem to have duplicated?

Why did Clinton willingly allow problems in this area to fester and intensify, when it would be evident to a blind horse that he would inevitably be judged harshly for his nonfeasance?

I've got a hole in my picture that needs a piece of the puzzle. Any FReepers got any ideas about this, please FReepmail me.

Still wondering -- what could the boy have been thinking? Hell, he was supposed to be a Rhodes scholar!

One last thought: for years, one of the advantages accruing to American politics, in the view of some historians, is that it never followed Mediterranean personality-cult tendencies, like the Peronists in Argentina who, like all Latin America, were heirs to the classical world's Romanized view of politics as personal and dynastic.

Looks like we're screwed now, as long as the Clintons are around. The mephitic odor of late-republican Roman politics, complete with libels, scandals, kangaroo-court trials of political liabilities, "access" boodling, and dead bodies, rises to a stinking cry above the Clintons and their hangers-on.

[lentulusgracchus]

This is classic. Thanks for posting it, Mia -- Helen Thomas, the tame press-hound, licks Clinton's hand while he carries evidence of massive felonies out of the White House to destroy at leisure at Camp David.......right under her useless nose.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 29 (UPI) -- President Clinton [upon the discovery of the body of Barbara Wise in the Commerce Department offices] briefly interrupted his Thanksgiving holiday weekend at Camp David Friday with a quick trip to the White House to gather data...and then returned to the mountaintop retreat... The president, still suffering from a raspy voice, and ordered by his doctor to rest his vocal chords, carried a briefcase as he strolled to the waiting helicopter to return to Camp David. He wore a leather jacket and was followed by an aide carrying a huge box ...

Thanks, Mia, I'd had no idea how totally useless Helen Thomas was. Well, not totally -- at least she documented what was done, even if she didn't have the wit to realize what she was looking at!

[lentulusgracchus]

The quote is mine...

I stand corrected. It is my view that clinton failed to go after the terrorists for two main reasons:

(1) For clinton, job security always trumped national security

(2) His essential stupidity and cowardice. "It was the TERRORISM, stupid."

I agree with the first proposition, but I don't know about the second. He was not so much a moral coward -- he braved the justice system repeatedly, remember, jeopardizing e.g. not just his job as attorney-general of Arkansas but his career for the sake of a momentary rape-romp with Juanita Broaddrick -- as he was an amoral seeker of certain self-realizations that we call criminal, but which were somehow powerfully attractive, compelling, vindicating and validating to him.

Why was he driven throughout his political career to tempt ruin, and to wipe his derriere with straight types like the Madison Guaranty investigators, Ken Starr, and Bill McCollum -- taunting them publicly, it seemed to me at the time, and expressing his contempt for everything they represented? It seems to me that that is what he did. He repeatedly relied on unreliable people like the McDougals and Webster Hubbell while committing crimes that would, if proven in court, end his career immediately. And yet he got away with it time and again, even as his associates filed off to prison, and in prison found reasons to reassess their "friendship" with the perpetual scapegrace.

What's with this guy?

And why did he avoid the terrorism issue?

[Mia T]

 

The only way they can win is to convince people that we're space aliens.

--bill clinton

 

June 9, 1999

 

Peggy Noonan's excellent piece in yesterday's Wall Street Journal is really the story of the death of democracy. At its core it is the description of the human double helix gone terribly awry, of a denatured protein grotesquely twisted, of two mutant, tangled strands of DNA, the basest imaginable of base pairs linked permanently, as firmly as guanine to cytosine, bill inexorably to hillary and conversely, doing what they do best, and doing it relentlessly.

Killing.

Killing insidiously.

Killing as they pose and pander and feel our pain.

My only complaint is with Peggy Noonan's title.

The Mad Boomer, doesn't begin to capture candidate clinton considered separately or even taken as the self-anointed "twofer," permanently conjoined at that cavity conspicuously empty except for ego, that place where brain and soul and guts and heart normally reside.

This is not to say that she -- that they -- are not both quite mad and of that self-indulgent, arrogantly, ignorantly solipsistic age sandwiched flatly between yesterday's innocence and tomorrow's insouciance. Rather, it is that their madness and their boomerism don't even begin to explain their noxious influence: The cloying, internally inconsistent clinton calculus. The unspoken clinton threats. They permeate the atmosphere like a coiling miasma, choking off all freedom.

Even in New York.

Especially in New York.

When she wrote "The New Colossus," Emma Lazarus hardly had in mind this pair of mutant, deadly, twisted aliens.

So forget Arkansas-Illinois carpetbaggery and standard issue muckraking. The clintons are aliens of quite another sort. They are extrinsic, not of this world. They are inhuman. They are dehumanizing.

You may recall that the first act of this story of two degenerates maintained by iterating idiots, farce of farce ad infinitum, was generated quite by accident by iterated AlGoreRhythm, who, it should be noted, is now himself the object of iterated calculation by said degenerates who want iteration 2004 all for themselves.

And thus the odd bit of bloody Gore in Act II: The ugly sight of a corrupt, bottom-heavy hillary self-impaled on the horns of a Treason-Dilemma- masquerading-as-a-Third-Term-Dilemma-masquerading-as-a-Senate-stampede, for example, or bill's recent unsolicited, underwhelming Times interview on the Gore candidacy.

Act I was called "The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover." Ostensibly the tale of the wife of a bloodthirsty crime boss who finds romance with a bland bookseller between courses at her husband's restaurant, it was in fact the Thyestean and moveable -- yet unmoving -- feast of hillary clinton at her husband's sham restitution. (Note the reciprocity. The sham restitution in Act II is all hillary's.)

Food, color coding, sex, murder, torture and cannibalism were the exotic (if mostly horizontal) fare in this beautifully filmed but brutally uncompromising modern memoir which passed as ancient fable about nouveau riche rapacity.

Not for the faint at heart, Purple Hearts or queazy stomachs, this depiction of the gross debasement of America was heavily peppered with irony and dark humor throughout.

Although she baked no cookies, didn't do illicit land or cattle deals and stood by no man, hillary clinton starred in the triple role of the Cook, the Thief and his Wife. Her lover was played at once vaporously and in workmanlike fashion by the ghost of Eleanor Roosevelt, with Janet Reno, between her stints rendering intermittent injustice for the Husband, as the reliable stand-in. Sidney Blumenthal was the stand-in for the Cook and Craig Livingstone the stand-in for the Thief. The last-minute addition of Christopher Hitchens as the snitch was a stroke of absolute genius notwithstanding its cerebral accident, its predictable-if-perfect pitch and its facile alliteration.

Although Act I had no rating, the new clinton soccer-mom directive will require a photo ID for any viewer without independent proof of illegal alien DNC <-> DNA sequencing.

In Act II, rabid anti-clinton voters, roughly 33% of the U.S. populace according to as-yet-unpodded pollsters, become increasingly aware that they are disappearing in droves and being replaced by alien pod replicas which have their physical attributes but lack all anti-clinton affect.

If Act I was a thinly veiled allegory about naked clintonism, then Act II is a parable about the plan for world domination by the Establishment, aged hippies in pinstripes all, with their infantile, solipsistic world view amazingly untouched by time.

THE ALIENS

 

[Mia T]

 

 

 

 

by Mia T

 

Not Joe Klein's Primary Colors. And not Jack Stanton.

bill clinton is straight out of

Stanley Kubrick's A CLOCKWORK ORANGE.

 

clinton is Alex,

one of the few truly amoral characters in either film or literature;

not quite as Kubrick (or Burgess) had imagined him, however,

but rumpled, wrinkled, paunchy, edematous,

stripped of the youth-excuse

after 30 additional, pathetic, recidivistic years

of marauding, stomping, raping, gangbanging, deceiving and destroying.

 

Like A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, the story of bill clinton

is the story about a society that has lost its capacity for moral choice.

But unlike in the less fabulous and no more ironic fable,

clinton is not mere nascent symbol but nihilistic agent.

 

clinton, like Alex, is the leader of the gang, the "droogies."

Eerily prefigured by the rocking, crooked phallus,

clinton's a conscienceless sadist

who thrills at risk and gratuitous destruction,

whose sexual and non-sexual impotence

is at the root of his obsession with "the old inout."

 

When Alex kills a woman during a rape, Alex is sent to prison.

When clinton rapes women, girls, his country and God knows what else. . .

and kills? --- check out those fourscore-plus deaths, please!

And don't forget the wag-the-dog, desperately-seeking-a-legacy bombings,

or the cold-blooded Ricky Ray Rector execution---

not clinton but society is imprisoned,

imprisoned in clinton's

besmirched, semen-stained, feckless presidency.

 

A risible and repulsive result;

yet not even the punch line.

 

While Alex is conditioned in prison with aversion therapy,

transmuted into a moral robot who becomes nauseated

by the mere thought of sex and violence,

bill clinton and his Thought Police,

in a perverse reverse aversion,

have conditioned society's collective brain

into not mere acquiescence but twisted admiration.

 

In the end,

if clinton's arrogant, ruthless, reckless nature is restored to him,

it seems the joke will be on all of us,

for it will be a victory for infinite victimhood and irresponsibility,

for seduction, for violence, for nihilism, for anarchy.

 

We will have set apart clinton as the hero

by making his victims less human than he;

we will have allowed clinton to carefully estrange us from his victims

so that we can enjoy the rapes and the beatings

as much as clinton himself does.

 

 

[Plutarch]

Well, if anyone thought that FR was obsessed with the Clintons, this thread would do little to disabuse them of the notion!

[JulieRNR21]

They said FreeRepublic is obsessed with the Clintons... We're not obsessed, I think we are bewitched, dominated, gripped, held, possessed, prepossessed; bedeviled, beset, dogged, harassed, haunted, plagued, troubled; overcome... but deffinently not obsessed...I don't think!

I'll add disgusted!

[Mia T]

As I imply in my original post, the fundamental issue isn't "obsession" per se but rather the object of the obsession.

Had Paul Bedard and his ilk been "obsessed" with taking out the trash rather than with retaining it, we wouldn't be in this mess today...

the logic of pathologic self-interest

by Mia T

 

There was a third chance to get rid of the clintons. In '98, when there was still time to stop bin Laden...

The failure to remove the clintons in '98 was a monumental error and is directly traceable to the logic of pathologic self-interest.

Recall in particular:

• THE LIEBERMAN PARADIGM: (clinton is an unfit president; therefore clinton must remain president)

 

• THE SHAYS SYNDROME: (clinton is a rapist; therefore clinton is a fit president)

 

THE LIEBERMAN PARADIGM

Senator Joseph Lieberman's bifurcated Monicagate speech in 1998 on the floor of the Senate was almost universally misperceived as an act of honesty and courage.

In reality, it was neither.

Reduced to its essence, Lieberman's argument was this:

clinton is an unfit president;

therefore, clinton must remain president.

I have called this argument "The Lieberman Paradigm."

Lieberman's argument that sorry day was rightly headed toward clinton's certain ouster when it suddenly made a swift, hairpin 180, as if clinton hacks took over the wheel. . .which they probably did.

What was Joe promised? A place on the 2000 ticket, perhaps?

To be fair, I must note that it was not the Lieberman speech but rather a New York Times apologia that institutionalized this shameless scheme to protect a thoroughly corrupt and repugnant--and--as everyone except The New York Times now knows-- dangerous -- Democrat regime.

The Lieberman Paradigm made its debut in The Times' utterly loony 1996 endorsement of clinton. The Times actually argued--NOTE: this is NOT satire--that although bill clinton was a "corrupt," "dysfunctional personality [with} delusions" -- The Times' own words -- we need not--we must not--remove bill clinton; we need only remove.the character lobe of bill clinton's brain.*

 

THE SHAYS SYNDROME

Not an aberration, the Shays Syndrome was quickly adopted by the entire Senate as its impeachment show trial deus ex machina of choice.

Shays, you may recall, examined the evidence in the Ford Building, concluded that clinton did, indeed, rape Broaddrick -- "VICIOUSLY!" AND "TWICE!" he declared at the time-- and was planning to vote to impeach; he changed his mind, however, after a little tete a tete with the rapist.

Any cognitive dissonance Shays may have experienced rendering that verdict was no doubt assuaged by the political plum clinton had given Mrs. (Betsi) Shays...

Each of the 50 senators, on the other hand, cured the cognitive dissonance problem pre-emptively by making certain not to examine the damning Ford Building evidence in the first place.

*_{Pushme-Pullyou}

by Mia T

 

We're waist deep in the Big Muddy

And the big fool says to push on.

--Pete Seeger

 

The halls of fame are open wide

And they are always full;

Some go in by the door called "push,"

And some by the door called "pull."

--Quoted by STANLEY BALDWIN

 

John Sununu is Dan Quayle's new brain.-

--Maureen Dowd, 11/15, Trouble in Mind

 

 

 

The alleged brain trust, Quayle-Sununu

seems less transplant than graft:

a pushme-pullyou,

a phantasmagoric composite,

a Chimera,

a visual joke more hilarious than the Porsche Boxter.

 

The underlying theory, I suppose, is that

Sununu's (self-described) genius

and Quayle's (self-evident) political judgment

will somehow combine synergistically

to produce a brain worthy of the presidency.

(Is presidential brains really on this electorate's collective mind?)

 

But what assurances are there

that the resultant brain won't be

Sununu's political judgment and Quayle's intellect?

 

After all,

prior attempts at presidential brain surgery

have proven less than brilliant.

You will recall that, as recently as 1996,

The New York Times insisted that

bill clinton undergo the surgical procedure;

its endorsement of clinton was predicated

on clinton undergoing a partial brain transplant:

specifically of the Character Lobe.

 

clinton assured us immediately (if tacitly)

that this would be done post haste (or was it post chaste?),

that whatever crimes he never did, he would never do again.

 

If brain surgery was ever performed on clinton,

it has produced no discernible improvement.

 

 

Perhaps our approach to the problem

of deficient presidential brains

is itself wrong-headed;

that the problem is ultimately

a problem of deficient electorate brains.

 

Voters would be wise to heed

the old roadside ad:

 

Don't lose

Your head

To gain a minute

You need your head

Your brains are in it.

 

Well, with the help of the 100 corrupt and cowardly cullions, clinton walked. The senators' justification for their acquittal votes requires the suspension of rational thought (and, in the curious case of Arlen Specter, national jurisdiction).

--Mia T, Musings: Senatorial Courtesy Perverted

THE OTHER NIXON

by Mia T

Hypocrisy abounds in this Age of clinton, a Postmodern Oz rife with constitutional deconstruction and semantic subversion, a virtual surreality polymarked by presidential alleles peccantly misplaced or, in the case of Jefferson, posthumously misappropriated.

Shameless pharisees in stark relief crowd the Capitol frieze:

Baucus, Biden, Bingaman, Breaux, Bryan, Byrd, Cohen, Conrad, Daschle, Dodd, Gore, Graham, Harkin, Hollings, Inouye, Kennedy, Kerrey, Kerry, Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Mikulski, Moynihan, Reid, Robb, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Schumer.

These are the 28 sitting Democratic senators, the current Vice President and Secretary of Defense -- clinton defenders all -- who, in 1989, voted to oust U.S. District Judge Walter Nixon for making "false or misleading statements to a grand jury."

In 1989 each and every one of these men insisted that perjury was an impeachable offense. (What a difference a decade and a decadent Democrat make.)

Senator Herb Kohl (November 7, 1989):

"But Judge Nixon took an oath to tell the truth and the whole truth. As a grand jury witness, it was not for him to decide what would be material. That was for the grand jury to decide. Of all people, Federal Judge Walter Nixon certainly knew this.

"So I am going to vote 'guilty' on articles one and two. Judge Nixon lied to the grand jury. He misled the grand jury. These acts are indisputably criminal and warrant impeachment."

 

Senator Tom Daschle (November 3, 1989):

"This morning we impeached a judge from Mississippi for failing to tell the truth. Those decisions are always very difficult and certainly, in this case, it came after a great deal of concern and thoughtful analysis of the facts."  

 

Congressman Charles Schumer (May 10, 1989):  

"Perjury, of course, is a very difficult, difficult thing to decide; but as we looked and examined all of the records and in fact found many things that were not in the record it became very clear to us that this impeachment was meritorious."

 

Senator Carl Levin (November 3, 1989):

"The record amply supports the finding in the criminal trial that Judge Nixon's statements to the grand jury were false and misleading and constituted perjury. Those are the statements cited in articles I and II, and it is on those articles that I vote to convict Judge Nixon and remove him from office."

 

* * * * *

"The hypocrite's crime is that he bears false witness against himself," observed the philosopher Hannah Arendt. "What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; but only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core."

If hypocrisy is the vice of vices, then perjury is the crime of crimes, for perjury provides the necessary cover for all other crimes.

David Lowenthal, professor emeritus of political science at Boston College makes the novel and compelling argument that perjury is "bribery consummate, using false words instead of money or other things of value to pervert the course of justice" and, thus, perjury is a constitutionally enumerated high crime.

The Democrats' defense of clinton's perjury -- and their own hypocrisy -- is three-pronged. 

ONE:

clinton's perjuries were "just about sex" and therefore "do not rise to the level of an impeachable offense."

This argument is spurious. The courts make no distinction between perjuries. Perjury is perjury. Perjury attacks the very essence of democracy. Perjury is bribery consummate.

Moreover, (the clinton spinners notwithstanding), clinton's perjury was not "just about sex." clinton's perjury was about clinton denying a citizen justice by lying in a civil rights-sexual harassment case about his sexual history with subordinates.

TWO:

Presidents and judges are held to different standards under the Constitution.

Because the Constitution stipulates that federal judges, who are appointed for life, "shall hold their offices during good behavior,'' and because there is no similar language concerning the popularly elected, term-limited president, it must have been perfectly agreeable to the Framers, so the (implicit) argument goes, to have a perjurious, justice-obstructing reprobate as president.

clinton's defenders ignore Federalist No. 57, and Hillary Rodham's constitutional treatise on impeachable acts -- written in 1974 when she wanted to impeach a president; both mention "bad conduct" as grounds for impeachment.

"Impeachment," wrote Rodham, "did not have to be for criminal offenses -- but only for a 'course of conduct' that suggested an abuse of power or a disregard for the office of the President of the United States...A person's 'course of conduct' while not particularly criminal could be of such a nature that it destroys trust, discourages allegiance, and demands action by the Congress...The office of the President is such that it calls for a higher level of conduct than the average citizen in the United States."

Hamilton (or Madison) discussed the importance of wisdom and virtue in Federalist 57. "The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust."

(Contrast this with clinton, who recklessly, reflexively and feloniously subordinates the common good to his personal appetites.)

Because the Framers did not anticipate the demagogic efficiency of the electronic bully pulpit, they ruled out the possibility of an MTV mis-leader (and impeachment-thwarter!) like clinton. In Federalist No. 64, John Jay said: "There is reason to presume" the president would fall only to those "who have become the most distinguished by their abilities and virtue." He imagined that the electorate would not "be deceived by those brilliant appearances of genius and patriotism which, like transient meteors, sometimes mislead as well as dazzle."

(If the clinton debacle teaches us anything, it is this: If we are to retain our democracy in this age of the electronic demagogue, we must recalibrate the constitutional balance of power.)

THREE:

The president can be prosecuted for his alleged felonies after he leaves office. (Nota bene ROBERT RAY.)

This clinton-created censure contrivance -- borne out of what I have come to call the "Lieberman Paradigm" (clinton is an unfit president; therefore clinton must remain president) -- is nothing less than a postmodern deconstruction in which the Oval Office would serve for two years as a holding cell for the perjurer-obstructor.

Such indecorous, dual-purpose architectonics not only threatens the delicate constitutional framework -- it disturbs the cultural aesthetic. The senators must, therefore, roundly reject this elliptic scheme.

In this postmodern Age of clinton, we may, from time to time, selectively stomach corruption. But we must never abide ugliness. Never.

 

[carlo3b]

bewitched, dominated, gripped, held, possessed, prepossessed; bedeviled, beset, dogged, harassed, haunted, plagued, troubled; overcome... AND DISGUSTED! That about sums it up...nice touch! :)

[carlo3b]

"The Lieberman Paradigm."

Brilliant !
Truth however sad, is still fact, and cannot be honestly denied! People who deny their own eyes and ears, and are simple-minded enough to be persuaded that they cannot trust there own senses, are doomed to be used.

[Mia T]

 

 

 

 

It is natural for man to indulge in the illusions of hope.

We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth,

and listen to the song of that siren

till she transforms us into beasts.

Is this the part of wise men,

engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?

Are we disposed to be the number of those

who, having eyes, see not,

and having ears, hear not,

the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?

For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost,

I am willing to know the whole truth;

to know the worst, and to provide for it.

Patrick Henry

 

In a dark time, the eye begins to see.

Theodore Roethke

 

But even as the clintons fails to grasp the scandal's metabolism

they understand all too well its most significant byproduct.

You can see it in their eyes. 

Once reflecting a Machiavellian confidence,

they now dart back and forth reflexively,

searching futilely for approval,

attempting desperately to dispel their own certain knowledge

that their moral authority is gone. . .

forever

Mia T

[joanie-f]

Thanks for the ping, Dan.

Allowing our memories of the Clinton era to fade from our minds would be the easy way out. Who, after living with a rotting, festering tooth for eight years, finally to have it extracted, would want to spend even one moment of his time reliving the memories of the pain, debilitation, and ugliness of it all?

But we have to.

If the Clintons had merely slithered away (having defaced our White House, and no doubt stolen much of what was not nailed down) once their term in office had expired, it might be advisable for the sake of national healing for us all to dismiss them (and their eight-year deadly, degrading orgy) from our minds.

But they have not merely slithered away. They are simply on hiatus, waiting in the wings for the next round to begin. Still rubbing elbows, no doubt, with the behind-the-scenes leftist power brokers. Still doing everything within their power to degrade and weaken this republic and its current leadership. And all the while considering these last three years a mere respite from the Clinton (and their self-serving minions) dynasty.

When Bill Clinton was elected in ‘92, I don’t believe many of us (with the possible exception of his victims in Arkansas) knew him well. When he was re-elected in ’96, any American who didn’t already know what he was made of (and recognize the long-term damage he had done to this country) was living in a world of denial.

Senator James Inhofe, on the floor of the senate in March of 1999, gave a speech describing the true Clinton legacy (All here on this forum know what that entails – treason, rape, perjury, murder complicity, moral degradation, etc. No need to go into detail.) Inhofe ended his speech with the words, ‘Mr. President, everything I have said during the course of the last thirty minutes is absolutely true. I hope America is listening. We’ve got a nation to save.’

We still have a nation to save. The Clintons are still out there. She is serving (against the best interests of our republic, and individual liberty in general) in the senate. He is actively campaigning for a position of global power from which he can affect this republic from the outside, and seizing every opportunity to degrade, weaken and denigrate the current administration. She is even now being groomed for the presidency – with no more qualification for that office (if you discount chutzpah, that is) than you or I – and probably significantly less (if you count duty, honor, character, and integrity).

The American public is woefully ill-informed (by the mainstream media, and as a result of rampant apathy to look much further than their left-leaning offerings). Those of us who have a real awareness of the true, (and unbearably) ugly nature of Clinton legacy need to see to it (as has Mia so brilliantly here) that that legacy is burned into the brain of every American. Now …. tomorrow ….and the day after tomorrow. Four years from now, as she is putting her presidential campaign into high gear, will be way too late. There needs to be a constant drumbeat. Each time we find ourselves (or our neighbors) minimizing the deadly effects of the Clinton era, we have to shake ourselves and remember. America will be decades recovering from the Clinton era – if the madmen and enemies he willingly and knowingly empowered don’t destroy us first. Our greatest charge is to remember what they did to this republic, and to guarantee that their brand of history will not repeat itself ever again. America couldn’t survive the sequel.

[sport]

Heck Joanie, I rather have you for President over hillary [ I capitalized ypur neme because I never capitalize a clinton's name] any day.

[Mrs Zip]

Ping

[Victoria Delsoul]

They said FreeRepublic is obsessed with the Clintons... We're not obsessed, I think we are bewitched, dominated, gripped, held, possessed, prepossessed; bedeviled, beset, dogged, harassed, haunted, plagued, troubled; overcome... but deffinently not obsessed...I don't think!

LOL! great post, Carlo.

[carlo3b]

I haven't wanted to mention it..but,... I and a few of your close friends think that you may be a bit obsessed with Willy, Chilly, and their Hubbled offspring Silly... You might try to NEGLECT, blink (at or away), discount, disregard, fail, ignore, omit, overlook, overpass, slight... Just a thought.. ;)

[FITZ]

But they have not merely slithered away.

That's what it is --I think most of us would be glad if they went away for good and we could just forget them.

[bmwcyle]

Hillary is still in office. Having people who will dump their friends in parks in VA to cover their butts is something worth fighting.

[carlo3b]

If you wish to Foster those kind of resentments, the media in this country will think your obsessed....think about it! :)

[bmwcyle]

If I worry about what liberals think, I would sit and do nothing. Don't think about it. You might over load with thought.