Lew Hodgett wrote:


"Charlie Self" wrote:

One thing has baffled me about Clinton's critics: most are
conservatives (small and capital C) who staunchly defend family
values
(with the occasional exception such Giuliani, Gingrich, Craig and a
few thousand others), standing by one's man and so forth, yet for
years, they've criticized her as a bitch for not divorcing her
husband
when he drops trou in the wrong places.

I get the impression that as a group they are scared s__tless of her
and what, as a woman, she represents.


What, exactly, as a woman do you think she represents?

Rugged individualism and rising to status on her own? The only reason we
even know who she is comes as a result of her association with her husband.

Great achievements? What exactly has she done? Rose Law firm? First
Lady? Moving to one of the most liberal states in the US in order to get
elected Senator? -- a donkey could have been elected as long as it had a
(D) by its name.

... and the second great hope is a guy who just got elected to the Senate
and has done, what, exactly?



As a result are running around like Chicken Little announcing the sky
is falling.

Well, we certainly know that describing her as a Stalinist is not exactly
hyperbole. "I'm going to take those oil company profits and use them
for ..." If she wants those, what make you think that someday your
profits shouldn't be used to help those she thinks needs help.

/I'm done. This is way too early for presidential election politics anyway.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough