Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
06.02.2008 6:18 pm

It’s more than politics — it’s Clinton politics

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Can anything be more obvious than the Clinton camp’s current strategy?

Out thought and out organized at every turn, seeing the once sure nomination disappear to a virtual unknown midwest senator, their sight has now shifted to 2012. How to get there? 1. Tell the party you are the more electable candidate for 2008. 2. Champion yourself as the representative of the disenfranchised (whom, when you were the front runner, you had no concern for) 3. .Create and prolong intra-party divisiveness to guarantee that this year’s nominee will represent a fractured and divided party. 4. Sit back and wait for the loss to a 72 year old candidate of a currently maligned opposition party who had little chance of winning until you helped divide your party. 5. From the wreckage present yourself as the party healer and the unifying choice for the next election. One can say this is politics. It is actually Clinton politics. What is good for me is good for you. If I can’t get what I want I will work to deny you what you want. Judge me not by my actions, only by my words. Remember this campaign. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

Mike Stern

Olivette

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4 votes, average: 2.5 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
8 comments

Comments are closed.

The Donks/Socialists only have themselves to blame for the politics of Clinton. “It’s only about sex” was the cry from the Left. “Vast right-wing conspiracy” was the cry from the Left. Well, it seems that the “vast right-wing conspiracy” was on target about Clinton’s sleaziness. At least when Nixon broke the law, the Republicans were the first ones to show him the door. But, since the Donks were so power hungry, it didn’t matter what laws Clinton broke, you stuck with him. You threw your morals and ethics out the window and you stuck with your guy. What did you think he’d do, go quietly? Ya’ll made him what he is and he’s ruining your party.

Vanity Fair has an article out written by Dee Dee Meyer’s husband. He’s written how Clinton has been chasing tail since he left office. Are ya’ll proud of that? Family values, you guys think Joe Six-Pack is going to look to the Donk party for family values when you’ve got a guy out there bangin’ every woman he gets near? The guy is a conceited, self-centered goon and you have encouraged his behavior by not taking him to the wood shed when you had your chance.

Your party has shown that power is the goal, the ends justify the means no matter how many women Clinton has raped and degraded or how many times he’s perjured himself.

You can say Bush is just as bad, and you will, but Bush has not been impeached for ANY offense. If Bush was guilty of any crime, Conyers, Pelosi, Reid and the rest of the loony Left would have already impeached him by now.

You reap what you sow and now you’re stuck with him, the both of them.

— Tango Golf Sierra
9:22 pm June 2nd, 2008

TGS,

How exactly is lying about sex somehow on par with lying about breaking into Democratic party headquarters? And how exactly is it similar to lying about reasons for a war costing us trillions of dollars and thousands of soldiers’ lives?

— sej
9:41 pm June 2nd, 2008

I’m no fan of the Clintons, but I don’t buy the idea that Hillary is doing anything wrong by running for the presidential nomination. Since voters have gotten a glimpse at some of Senator Obamas flaws, his halo has slipped a bit and he’s struggling to regain his momentum.

Senator Clinton’s big mistake was assuming she would win the early primaries in a cake walk, and any challengers would be left in the dust after Super Tuesday. Still, she ran strongly among key demographic groups the Democrats will need in the general election in November, while Obama veered from one embarrassing gaffe to another, and ended up limping to the finish line instead of blasting across it.

— MercMan
10:31 pm June 2nd, 2008

Well, sej, ol’ TGS is no stranger to hateful hyperbolic haranguing…

— Thomas F. Maher
12:33 am June 3rd, 2008

Tango,

You are correct. In fact, I was one of those who you speak about. I thought in error that Clinton was a great President only to learn much later that he was in fact an awful President who played a great role in selling out this country, finishing and completing what the 1st President Bush had begun. But, back then, I was a very blind to most things.

But in no way do I think that the Democrats are stuck with the Clintons, many eyes have been opened to the depts of their self serving, at any cost sickness they suffer.

— D. Walker
1:05 am June 3rd, 2008

The politics of destruction, that the Clintons made famous, has come back to bite them in their butt’s. What goes around, comes around. They deserve it.

— JD
8:09 am June 3rd, 2008

I seem to remember in 2000 or was it 2004?, that the Democrats were screaming that all elections should be decided by the popular vote and to do away with the electoral college. If you go with that logic, then Hillary would be the nominee since she got the most votes, just not the most delegates.

— Kenrick
9:20 am June 3rd, 2008

Mike,

For all of those so-called Clinton outrages, Obama is sorta limping across the finish line, a victim of his own flaws.

He’s demonstrated an inability to address issues head-on, tries to paint every comment critical of him as “out of bounds” or “divisive”, and seems to have shown very poor judgement (or, as Joe Biden calls it, “judge-a-ment”) in selecting his associates. He’s been treated with kid gloves by a fawning media, and has never articulated a coherent domestic or foreign policy.

I am no fan of Hillary Clinton, but I give her due credit for hanging tough when everyone said she was out of it. I believe that if Obama’s weaknesses had been exposed earlier and Clinton not taken him too lightly in the early going, Hillary would be preparing her acceptance speech for the Democrat Convention while Bubba was picking out new White house china patterns!

— MercMan
9:10 pm June 3rd, 2008