Skip to comments.
Falling Out of Favor? (Analysis of Hillary's Dismal Performance as NY Senator)
Buffalo News ^
| May 4, 2003
| Douglas Turner
Posted on 05/04/2003 8:47:17 AM PDT by mountaineer
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-93 next last
Clinton told The News there are no circumstances under which she will be a presidential candidate next year. Click on link for rest of article, which includes this:
She repeated, as she so often has, that she will serve out her Senate term, leaving open the possibility, some say the likelihood, she will run for president in 2008.
Let's hold her to this promise.
To: mountaineer
2
posted on
05/04/2003 8:52:54 AM PDT
by
ALOHA RONNIE
(Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
To: mountaineer
Independent commentators on the left, center and right said Clinton's interest in Western New York seems to have waned.
hahaha
One shouldn't laugh, I guess. But HClinton never had an interest in Western New York; HClinton had an interest in only getting into a viable position to run for the Presidency.
Snookered.
That's the word, New York. She snookered you.
3
posted on
05/04/2003 8:52:55 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: TomGuy
Born and raised in Illinois. She doesn't know where Buffalo is.
To: TomGuy
5
posted on
05/04/2003 8:55:38 AM PDT
by
Sofa King
(-I am Sofa King- tired of liberal BS!)
To: mountaineer
Let's hold her to this promise.Yeah, let's hold a serial liar to her promise.
To: Paul Atreides
IF and when she runs, we simply need to remind the public how her husband pardoned 16 Puerto Rican terrorists who had killed Americans in the homeland.
The pardon stank in 2000; in a post 9/11 world the stench should make her unelectable.
7
posted on
05/04/2003 8:59:59 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: Paul Atreides
Oh, the irony! When the serial liar runs for the presidency in 2004 after promising not to do so, will the press make an issue of it?
To: mountaineer
Let's hold her to this promise.Lots of luck>
9
posted on
05/04/2003 9:00:20 AM PDT
by
monocle
To: Paul Atreides
'Too bad' there isn't a Republican legislature enacting a conservative "Constract with New York". That way she could claim credit for their accomplishments the way her "husband" took credit for the accomplishments of the Contract with America.
10
posted on
05/04/2003 9:03:32 AM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(Socialism is slavery.)
To: mountaineer
I'm wondering with all the talk of her positioning herself to run in 2004, might she be afraid of loosing her sentate seat in 2006? I thought Chuckie might be vulnerable, but maybe Clinton is as well. That would kill a 2008 presidential run. I think this is why John Edwards jumped into the presidential race. Most think he might loose his senate seat this year! This sounds fun considering the Novak reported that the DEMS calculate a 4 seat loss in 2004. Could be 2 - 7 in my analysis, especially if someone in Alaska can oust Murkowsky in the Republican primary.
11
posted on
05/04/2003 9:06:08 AM PDT
by
dwswager
To: TomGuy
Snookered I like that!
so she can help revive New York's former prominence in defense procurement.
Sheesh. I guess she should have called her book "It Takes a Village to Build a Bomb". I had no idea she was soooo supportive of the military.
Obligatory photo of the Her Royal Smugness:
We are not amused!
To: Paul Atreides
Don't EVER underestimate the power of the Clintons. By hook or by crook, they make things happen that are always beneficial to them.
It's about the Power, stupid.
Be ever vigilant.
To: mountaineer
You beat me by seven minutes, just about the time it takes to format--sorry for the duplicate post!
15
posted on
05/04/2003 9:07:32 AM PDT
by
NYpeanut
To: mountaineer
Independent commentators on the left, center and right said Clinton's interest in Western New York seems to have waned. The Shrew never had an interest in Buffalo or the state of New York. If one listens to Schumer, it is obvious that he actually understands what concerns western New Yorkers. The Shrew has always sounded phoney.
Turner (the author of this article) is not a very bright man. His writing (like most News writers) is embarrassing. Oh, and he is a liberal. In other words, the perfect stooge for The Shrew.
To: baseballmom
Sadly, they haven't gotten to where they are without the help of a lot of sheep.
I think that not getting into the White House will be more devestating to Hillary than it was for Bill to leave it.
To: mountaineer
Hillary won't be blamed for the national recession. However, like Ann Richards, I'm hoping her initially engaging schtick won't wear very well over time. We'll see.
18
posted on
05/04/2003 9:11:45 AM PDT
by
RLK
To: Free State Four
I had no idea she was soooo supportive of the military.
Remember, she tried to join the military in her youth .... but was declined because she wore thick glasses.
And she always liked having military guards close by--to get her coffee.
19
posted on
05/04/2003 9:11:54 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: baseballmom
I have repeated that many times in various posts, but it must be repeated over and over.
Don't EVER underestimate the power of the Clintons. By hook or by crook, they make things happen that are always beneficial to them.
It's about the Power, stupid.
Be ever vigilant.
20
posted on
05/04/2003 9:14:26 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-93 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson