Is Hillary Toast?

Fresh off her third place finish in the Iowa caucus, Hillary Clinton is trying to reinvent herself once again. She enjoyed a small lead in New Hampshire but that seems to have eroded according to the latest Rasmussen poll. B. Hussein Obama now leads Hillary Clinton by ten points with the primary only three days away. A lot will ride on tonight’s debate and I expect Hillary to go very negative. She will be attacking Obama all night long.

The attacks have already begun as the Clinton campaign sent out a mailer criticizing Obama on his abortion rights record. Hillary’s mailer claims that Obama did not take any stance on abortion issues where as she has been the champion of women’s right to choose. She has been trying to reinvent herself starting with claims of being the most experienced candidate (which must have been news to Dodd and Biden who have now bowed out) and then she went to the Obama play book and became the candidate of change. She has been talking about change but is surrounded by relics from her husband’s administration and those who helped him get elected. Not that she shouldn’t use talent she thinks is the best but it is hard to claim you are for change when your campaign rhetoric keeps returning to the days of yesteryear. Going back to the Clinton administration is not the best way to present a forward looking campaign.

Rush Limbaugh had an interesting article in his most recent newsletter where he took a bunch of Hillary’s (among others) quotes and showed how she will force people into health coverage, force pharmaceutical companies to lower prices and force oil companies to spend their money of R&D for non fossil fuels. Rush points out that this is the opposite of freedom and that the government should not be making these mandates. Hillary sounds like a Nazi. Interestingly, this silhouette photo (I think it is from AP) makes it look like Hillary is giving a Nazi salute.

Hillary is losing New Hampshire though things might change after the debate but the question is, is she toast? She lost Iowa, and she is behind in New Hampshire. Obama has been running an even campaign and he appears to be picking up momentum. A win in New Hampshire might be the death of Hillary though she, like Giuliani, might be looking to Florida to make a run. The candidate from each party who wins Florida will likely win the nomination. Super Tuesday is right after that and none of them have the money or resources to run ads in all the states participating in that event and it is physically impossible for them to be in all of the states at once. Hillary will probably send Bill to one state with a huge number of delegates while she campaigns in another but she must win Florida in order to compete. She also has to convince voters that Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton is a good thing…

This is going to be fun. She is melting down and I would love to see her explode. A few more losses might just do that.

Of course, she might turn things around and win. Then the real fun will begin.

Big Dog

Hillary Lies Again

Hillary Clinton, fresh off a tail whipping at the expense of B. Hussein Obama and John Edwards, is not trying another make over that she hopes will resonate with the voters. Personally, I think she would have run if she never campaigned. People were in awe of her and she was the front runner when she entered. Then people got to meet her, listen to her and see her perform at the debates. That turned a lot of people off. Hillary is now retooling and it is a sure bet she will go real negative and that she will be in attack mode in the debate. Hillary is also out there lying again (still):

“Of all the people running for president, I’ve been the most vetted, the most investigated, and — my goodness — the most innocent, it turns out,” she told a cheering crowd in an airport hangar. The politico

Hillary Clinton is surely the most investigated of the people running for president. This is a new twist because she use to say the most investigated person and then it was shown to be untrue. That aside, the whopper comes when she says that she was the most innocent, as “it turns out”. First of all, since she was talking only about those running for president, how can she be the most innocent when none of them have been found guilty of anything? If this were true, she would be as innocent as the others.

However, Hillary has not been found the “most innocent.” There is a big difference between being innocent (which means you did not do it) and not being found guilty or not having charges pressed. Hillary has been caught in several lies during those many investigations but charges were never brought. She is guilty of campaign finance violations and there is video taped evidence of it. A judge appointed by her husband decided that the case could be dropped. She was guilty of holding secret meetings on health care reform and had to stop but no sanctions were ever imposed. Hillary deliberately hid documents to keep them out of the courts. They miraculously surfaced after the statute of limitations on her potential crimes had expired.

Not being sanctioned for wrong doing is a hell of a lot different than being completely free of sin, legal guilt or fault. She has done a great number of unethical and illegal things but they have either not been investigated or she was protected by the media and friends in high places. The book Whitewash has an in depth look at these issues and many more.

However, given Hillary’s position on this I must ask how she feels about one thing. President Bush has been investigated time and again and he has not been found guilty of anything. Is it fair, under Hillary’s definition, to assume he is INNOCENT? This will be tough for the moonbats who support her because if they answer yes then Bush is INNOCENT and it puts an end to their vicious attacks on him. If they answer no then they are saying Hillary is not innocent.

Being found not guilty or not being charged is not the same as being innocent. Perhaps if Hillary had actually used her law degree to practice the profession (instead of being employed as an over-billing, paper pushing lawyer as a favor to her hubby) she might know that.

Big Dog

Is Ron Paul Allowed to Debate Now?

As many people know, Ron Paul was excluded from the Fox News Forum and the ABC debate in New Hampshire. Those events are to take place this weekend and Paul was excluded from Fox who decided to only take candidates who had polled in double digits. ABC has criteria for inclusion. In order to be in the debate a candidate has to meet one of these:

  • place first through fourth in Iowa
  • poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major New Hampshire surveys
  • poll 5 percent or higher in one of the last four major national surveys

As far as Fox is concerned, Paul does not have double digit support in New Hampshire so if that is their criteria he should be excluded. But, so should Fred Thompson who, in the latest Zogby Poll (1/4/08) polled lower than Paul. I can’t imagine Zogby is not one of the major surveys.

However, the ABC event should include Ron Paul because he polled at 7%. While Thompson polled at 2% he came in third in Iowa so he should still be included. When ABC and Fox announced their requirements they probably felt safe that Ron Paul would not be able to meet any of them. That is the case with Fox but Paul has exceeded one of ABC’s requirements and should be included.

I am willing to bet that ABC will not let Paul in the debate even though he has met their threshold. It is a shame, but they will exclude him even though he raised more money that Giuliani and placed 7% higher than him in Iowa. Of course, Giuliani has already been invited to the debate.

I am not in favor of excluding anyone. These people have decided to run for the presidency of the United States and all of them have some number of supporters. Additionally, the American people should hear everyone so they have all the information they need to take an informed decision.

I might not support Paul (I have not selected anyone as of yet) but I completely support his right to participate in the debates.

Big Dog

UPDATE: It appears as if Ron Paul will be part of the debate in New Hampshire. After posting this Drudge put up a story that did not make it clear as to whether he had been included or not. I checked the ABC site and he is listed as part of it. Duncan Hunter will not be invited. If he is still in he should be allowed to debate.

Clinton Campaign: Unthinking Iowans Picked Obama

This is the message out of the Clinton camp today as Hillary suffered a stinging defeat in Iowa. The caucuses were held yesterday and on the Democratic side it was Obama, Edwards and then Clinton. The Republicans selected Huckabee, Romney and Thompson as their win, place and show horses. Interestingly, Ron Paul garnered 10% of the vote, more than Giuliani (3%).

Today has to be a bad day for both Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney. Both spent a fortune in Iowa and did not do as well as they had hoped or expected. Clinton, who was supposed to be the shoe in for the Democrats was smacked hard by an upstart Senator named Obama who handed her a 9 point loss. Clinton’s people have a few problems. When this all started she was inevitable and then people actually got to see her and meet her and she lost. First she had experience and when that was not working it was decided that Hillary needed a make over. Her campaign needed to get her out and let America see who she really is. Evidently, at least in Iowa, they did not like what they saw. Her campaign blames this on unthinking voters:

“Everyone underestimated this conflagration,” said a former Clinton administration official.

“If people think he’s electable, they’ll vote with their hearts and not their minds.” The Politico

This statement just shows the arrogance of anything Clinton. Even this defeat was not her fault because people did not vote with their heads, they voted with their hearts. To me this says, if you had brains you would have voted for Hillary. Hillary has vowed to push on and she should. One state is not the end for her because she has a huge organization and lots of money. A one state loss means the end for candidates who have little money even if they are most experienced. Such was the case with Dodd and Biden who both threw in the towel last night.

The remarks of the Clinton campaign show how much disdain they have for the American people. They believe that only thinking people will select Clinton and any other pick is an event that did not involve a thought process. I would make the argument that voting for any Democrat involves no thought process but with regard to this situation, the Clinton campaign remark shows contempt for the American electorate.

People from every state should remember that if they vote for someone other than Hillary they are unthinking rubes who are getting in the way of Hillary’s birthright. You people, and you know who you are, are not worthy of the Queen…But please vote for her, K?

“We’re going to keep pushing as hard as we can,” she said, with former President Bill Clinton and their daughter Chelsea at her side. “I am so ready for the rest of this campaign and I am so ready to lead.” Breitbart

It is too bad that they could not be gracious losers and move on to the next contest. Instead they chose to take a swipe at the people who get to decide in this process. therein lies the problem. Clinton does not believe you should have a choice. Her platform involves a number of things that people or companies have no choice in. She will mandate any number of things involving our lives, if only she can win the big prize.

Remember America, she cannot mandate what you do and how you do it unless you give her a mandate by voting for her.

Think about it…

Big Dog

Others with similar items:
Nuke’s, Outside the Beltway, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Allie is Wired, Adam’s Blog, Shadowscope, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Cao’s Blog, and Wolf Pangloss, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Lying Meatbrain Does it Again

The lying Terry Meatbrain is at it again. Terry likes to call people liars if they do not use the exact words in a quote or title or if it is within his definition of a lie. He attacks a lot of people and calls them liars even when their writing shows they made no attempt to distort the truth. Terry Meatbrain, on the other hand, loves to cherry pick and tell outright lies. He has “quoted” me as saying something when the words he accuses me of are not even in my post. But there is no lie that Terry Meatbrain will not tell. Case in point. His latest post is entitled:

Bush tells troops to go stuff it

The president never said those words.

There is no lie that Meatbrain will not tell

There is no lie that Meatbrain will not tell

There is no lie that Meatbrain will not tell

This is the same thing that Terry accused Jim Hoft of here

So Terry Meatbrain, I have a few questions:
Where exactly did the President use the words Stuff it?

When did George Bush tell the troops to stuff it using those words?

I will sit back and wait for your response liar. And when you figure there is no response because you lied, I demand that you apologize to the president.

Folks, don’t hold your breath waiting for this cretin to admit he lied or to apologize. Terry Meat brain will more than likely attack me and say I am a coward and a liar because that is what he does. This is the problem with socialist moonbats. They distort the truth and they outright lie and then they make excuses or lie about lying.

OK lying moonbat, it is your turn to explain your deceitful ways. Have at it, coward.

Big Dog

Author note: This post is a parody of how Meat Brain writes and attacks others (and resembles the linked post for that reason). It is designed to show that he is guilty of exactly what he accuses others. In reality, I know what he meant by the post but I am holding him to the same standard to which he holds others.

So answer up Terry…

Update: Terry is already telling people they are idiots because they asked him to show where the president said Stuff It.