Replies

The videos are a wonderful expansion of your armamentarium of truth delivery systems. I see your point that women have special reasons to want to see Hillary' candidacy atrophy, and that women may well represent the swing vote in any national election.

We are however, currently, at such a low ebb vis a vis the American political left generally, that I favor a less targeted message. For example, Hillary and the entire leftist choir, are now calling for Gonzales to resign, not because America deserves a better Attorney General, which it does, but because they think they have another piece of string with which to restrain and incapacitate traditional american political values, currently represented, however weakly, by President Bush and the republican party. The response, that it is inconsistent for Hillary to make this demand, given the Clinton's administration's history in mass firings of US attorneys for purely political and personal reasons, is not enough. The response should be a demand that Hillary resign for any of the thousand reasons that make her and her husband threats to the general welfare.

As in Iraq, we make a mistake in confronting evil, when we restrict our actions to the certainly and demonstrably guilty, and when we restrict our actions to universal standards of acceptability. Just as your work is unique in seeking to hold Hillary accountable for her conduct, we need to react strongly to the entire leftist apparatus, from the NYT to their long sitting political leaders, who have been backstabbing American interests for decades.

... Hillary and the entire leftist choir, are now calling for Gonzales to resign, not because America deserves a better Attorney General, which it does, but because they think they have another piece of string with which to restrain and incapacitate traditional american political values, currently represented, however weakly, by President Bush and the republican party. The response, that it is inconsistent for Hillary to make this demand, given the Clinton's administration's history in mass firings of US attorneys for purely political and personal reasons, is not enough. The response should be a demand that Hillary resign for any of the thousand reasons that make her and her husband threats to the general welfare.... Gail Wynand I posted this one-liner elsewhere concerning hillary clinton's web effort to oust Gonzales: "It serves Gonzales right for not nailing her. This woman belongs in the slammer. At a minimum." Said another way, notice how, with her entry into the political arena in her own right (albeit only on paper), missus clinton's downside changed overnight from prosecution to resignation. Resignation doesn't do it for me. Hillary in Aviary by Mia T, November 2000, sometime before "the first Tuesday after the first Monday" "Bird of paradise" would have been a brilliant wrong answer for the New-York-state-bird question; in one fell swoop it would have flattered the necessary constituency, rendered hillary's cheating marginally believable and suggested a quick, secure, creative mind. But the obsessively perfectionistic dodo wasn't able to fake even one wrong answer in the Letterman phony "pop quiz," a nostalgic electuary of "Twenty-One" fraud and (Groucho) Marxist left-wing crow. Instead, this documented incompetent with no apparent creative or analytic (not to mention thespian) skills gushed forth with a lame--"It's the bluebird--I know that" --globally exposing herself to be the corrupt clown that the sentient among us already know she is. It is no accident--and the Sheehy hagiography notwithstanding, it is certainly not because of any patriarchal society--that this reflexive kleptocrat never sought office. She never ran simply because she is a perfectionist and an incompetent who cannot tolerate personal (as opposed to bill-related) criticism, witness the prescreened, heavily controlled, sycophantic crowds, her pre-programmed, totally scripted appearances (or, alternatively, her totally mute "listening tour"), her unavailability to the press, indeed, her "bluebird." Thus, the question begging to be asked is this: Why would this compulsively perfectionistic grotesquerie allow herself to be unambiguously exposed as the utter incompetent and fraud and fool and horror that she is? And why would this self-proclaimed protector of "the children" prolong her own child's profound trauma by forcing her own bottom-heavy self, soiled in its own right, onto the political stage? The answer, I believe, resides more in liberty loss than in power gain. Simply put, she is not running for office; she is running from indictment. And I fear Starr successor, Robert Ray, is unable to catch her... Or catch on. (On second thought, maybe the problem is that he does....) Ray's recent statement , " I have been charged with responsibly conducting the work of this office. Some of my responsibility is to ensure that there is no untoward effect on the political process," both confirms and encourages this latest round of clinton raping, pillaging, despoiling, destroying. Will this nightmare never end? COPYRIGHT MIA T 2000, 2007