Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
You could ask the same question to Obama re: The first woman president.
The real question was ignored by the media last night. I do not know if it was their lack of ethics, standards, or so called professionalism. The media ignored the crushing loss of Hillary. They elided over it. She got a free pass again. The inevitable candidate, the chosen one, the anointed one was crushed by the new kid on the block. The media loves Hillary. They do not question her flaws, her dishonesty, and the secrecy of her past. Hillary did not just lose, she could not even come in second. That was a rout for a person who is inevitable, chosen, and anointed.I guess the media does not like to eat their words; the ink and paper cause indigestion.
What a question! Is she still beating her husband, too?
Hillary would be smart to withdraw and throw her support behind Obama. She would likely then be offered the VP spot. Talk about inevitable. In 2016, with 4-8 years administrative experience, she'd be in an enviable position.
It's as repulsive as Brooks' column, for the same reasons.
Trying to steal from Obama's theme, Hillary stood behind a lectern sign last night that said "Ready for Change". Behind her stood the former president, his former secretary of state (who looked ancient) and Wesley Clark, one of his former generals. What's wrong with this picture?
Any chance the very public caucus process skewed the results toward Obama? That even the independent Iowa voters didn't want to appear racist?
Same question applies about the win of Huckabee amongst the evangelicals.
"That even the independent Iowa voters didn't want to appear racist?"Not likely.After all, if they didn't want to appear racist, they could easily have stayed home.But they showed up. And the ones who were new to the process tended to go strongly for Obama. They sought out going to support him.That's not trying to avoid appearing racist. That's showing excitement for a candidate.
"The media loves Hillary. They do not question her flaws, her dishonesty, and the secrecy of her past."I'd sure like to know what newspapers you read or what news shows you watch. Maybe its the medication because if you honestly believe this, you are out of your friggin mind.
At first glance, I thought this was an interesting question, but after further consideration, I don't think it's as important. Isn't this the constant struggle of primaries? The candidates have to balance being good individual candidates and good Party members. That is, they can't hit too hard because as soon as they're out of the running they will likely throw their support behind their former opponent for the good of the Party.
"I'd sure like to know what newspapers you read or what news shows you watch. Maybe its the medication because if you honestly believe this, you are out of your friggin mind."Most of them. Which one's do you see that are critical of her?
STOP THE PRESSES"...tearing down the man who is poised to become America's real first black president?"I must have been asleep.Who was the NOT "real first black president"? Some trickster run as a white but was really black?Someone get my decoder ring.
hdhouse: Don't you recall how, when Clintonoids were defending Bill's sexual scandals, they started referring to him as the first black president?
That is such a ridiculous framework. So, if a black person runs, all the whites should stop?To the credit of both Clinton and Edwards, they're not playing that game.
EnigmatiCore, good point. Thanks for the feedback.
"Most of them. Which one's do you see that are critical of her?""Hardball"Frank Rich - The New York TimesMaureen Dowd- The New York TimesTim Russert - NBCMike Barnacle- NBCSean Hannity- FoxFred Barnes- Fox New York PostEugene Robinson- Washington PostFor starters.
Post a Comment