Saturday, January 20, 2007

The Beast Has Left Her Lair

Miz Clinton has tossed her witches hat into the ring. Starting with a bout of "listening" of course. After all, one must let the proles prattle before issuing orders to the commissars concerning the size of the camps to be erected.

Perhaps, if we're lucky, she'll team up with Speaker StarKist and offer seminars concerning the key to successful investing.

Love the pictures. She looks almost lifelike.


buddy larsen said...

Well, all I can say is, sometimes it's GREAT to be getting old. If I work it right (smoke/drink/couch/depression/gloom/misery/despair), I can be in oblivion in a few short years, yippee!

Just kidding! I kind of like the idea of the warehouse loads of 'I told you so's' coming up about year 2 of her presidency.

I mean, yesterday she called for a 'kee-app' on the number of troops in Iran or Irak or whatever. Now that's pure military-thinking--no politics there! Regardless of things like 'military operations', she now has that perfect sentence for those of us who don't want anything to get worse, or better, or anything at all.

Fresh Air said...

Madame Tussaud's has nothing on her!

Rick Ballard said...

Cheer up, Buddy. VP Hussein Obama will be a perfect counterbalance to Her Hideousness.

terrye said...

Gale will have a seizure if this woman wins. I will have to hospitalize him.

Oh yeah, the Clinton Obama ticket. Be there or be square.

I wonder how thye will work in the "anyone who doesn;t vote for us is a bigot and a sexist" thingee. I am sure they will find a way.

Allof a sudden Edwards doesn't look so bad.

buddy larsen said...

What makes the whole thing so gloomy isn't her politics--though that's bad enough--but the fact of the gargantuan scandals of the previous Clinton. It's like they vaporized, she breathed them away with a phrase (VRWC).

The gloom that sets in is the cold creeping realization that we have no standards anymore, and furthermore that we won't even know it when we get what we deserve.

The whole jernt is gwan nutz i tells ya. it's the cellphones.

buddy larsen said...

Seriously--if the nation had any political sanity left, Sandy Berger/Nat'l Archives would have put an end to any future Clintonista holding high office.

But it's as if it didn't happen. The danger of this sort of hypnosis is that bad people understand it, and it sets them loose like packs of hungry wolves.

chuck said...

I don't have a dog in this looming Democratic fight for the nomination, but no doubt it will be an amusing distraction for the next 18 months that will keep folks minds off more serious business. And in the end, I expect we will know the candidates better than we would want too.

loner said...


Back in 1976 I used to get all the time from otherwise intelligent people the strange notion that Ronald Reagan was just too conservative to be elected President of the United States. I was, then, a supporter of the former California Governor. I did try, before the 1976 election, to convince those with whom I argued politics that electing Carter would make it much, much more likely that Reagan would be President in 1981. I changed no minds. Time passed. No one ever acknowledged that I'd been right.

Standards? Time passes. Standards change.

I personally don't think she's got what it takes, but I also think that if Americans are still dying in Iraq on election day in 2008 and she's the nominee (and she's well-positioned to be,) she'll be the next President of the United States.

...and time will pass and there'll be another election in 2012.

terrye said...


This is not about how conservative or liberal Clinton is, it is about the insane amount of stuff they seem to get away with. The number of people who were indicted or charged or pardoned with some crime or other in the Clinton administration is stunning. Not to mention some Hillary's own business dealings. But the press likes the Clintons and that is really all that matters. An asteroid could be heading for the earth and as long as there is a Clinton in the White House the media will be tap dancing to Happy Days are Here Again.

Maybe in the course of the campaign someone will ask her about Sandy's pants. But I doubt it. If that was an R behind her name, there is no doubt they would.

buddy larsen said...

"...and time will pass and there'll be another election in 2012"

Yessir, and it will be between Hillary and whoever will have survived her presidential powers within the federal establishment since 2008.

I do understand and appreciate your suggestion that we try to maintain perspective when contemplating such fundamentalist-flavored questions as 'where are our standards'. I agree. Americans get up and go to work, and run the best country in the world. Point taken. The battle at the margins is hot, and can burn one up all too easily.

Witness my schizoid turn between para #2 and para #3. Ok, end para #4.

loner said...


I get that she's not George W. Bush. Who is?


As I've written before, I don't contemplate there being any likely matchup in which I'd end up voting for her, but then I only voted for her husband (the one time I voted for the winning candidate) in 1992 because I was confident that Perot's poll numbers were going to transform into an equal percentage of actual votes.

Your burn makes enjoyable reading.


terrye said...

I never said she was Bush, I said that she gets a free ride.

And then there is Bill, what do we do with him?

terrye said...

And how about if Americans are dying here after she gets elected then what? People think this is all about Bush and that the terrorists are just some damn side show. Not true.

terrye said...

And you know what? HC voted for the war in Iraq. Nobody made her do that.

buddy larsen said...

Well, exactly.

Look at the damage caused by the load the first eight years left behind, in civil-service.

So you can't even say "they're baaack" because they never really leeeft. Or is that 'leffft'?

buddy larsen said...

The agencies, the judiciary, all left in 2000 with a corruptive rot in place--and it's still there, in place, a little smaller here, a little larger there. She wins in 08, you ain't seen nothin yet.

Rick Ballard said...

"And then there is Bill, what do we do with him?"

Widder ladies get quite a sympathy vote (vide Carnahan). Bill has been looking a little peaked already...

terrye said...

Yeah, bill will be grab assing the maid while Hill is all serious in the Oval Office trying to figure out the latest polls so she can tell us what she thinks and feels.

At least until the situation changes and she needs to "adjust" her thinking.

terrye said...

I wonder what would have happened if Al Gore had won that election instead of Bush? I know the paranoid left will say the Towers would not have fell, but that is BS.

Imagine the WTC is attacked, only the Clinton people have been around for years..what to do? Who gets the blame?

And what about Iraq? The sactions regime is collapsing, we can't stay in SA forever and keep flying the no fly zones, what then?

After Slam Dunk Tenet was a Democrat, Gore's buddy...he would have had that job at the CIA.

Makes you wonder.

buddy larsen said...

The left could fight the war better than the right--if it wished--due to the fact that then the country wouldn't be waving a surrender flag in the background at all times. Irony of ironies.

terrye said...


That and if the left was running the war the media would be hyping it a lot better.

Today there was a bad chopper accident in Iraq. I am not sure what happened but the report said the chopper was not functioning properly. Freaking death traps. That made me think of the bad accident last year when the men were drowned.

The war tends to claim about 2 to 3 men a day on average, so when something bad like that happens it makes casualty numbers rise rather dramatically. But to the press there is never a difference between an accidental death or a natural death or a death by terrorist or whatever, they are all the same.

I am not saying that if Democrats were running things they would not report casualty numbers, but they would not exploit each and every death for maximum political impact. That not only does not help the troops, it places them in more danger. It puts a bulls eye on them in a way that might not otherwise exist.

BTW, I read that the death toll in 2005 was higher than 2006. That surprised me.

buddy larsen said...

Just as restaurants are about location, trading about price, love about trust, etcetera blah blah, matters of the will are about presentation. Framing.

That's the nigh-unforgiveable sin of most of the politics of this struggle.

terrye said...


Yes, I agree. Spinning death. The ghouls.

For instance Hillary says we need more people in Afghanistan. To do what? Fight or teach finger painting? And if they fight does that mean some of them might die? Well don't their families matter? Will they go to the homes of grief stricken parents who lose a son in Afghanistan after President Hillary ups the troop level and ask them if their son's death was worth it?

chuck said...

Yeah, bill will be grab assing the maid while Hill is all serious in the Oval Office...

You know, I think we missed something there. Bill wasn't the first Black president, he was the first French president.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

Two points. The appeal of Hillary isn't simply that the press loves her for some reason. Lots of people like her, not clear why. Second, if the press really has that much power, then it behooves any President who wishes to succeed to befriend them. And if one retorts that they are completely owned by the Democrats (WSJ? Fox News?), then it behooves the Republicans to befriend and control them.

terrye said...


I have had the same thoughts to some extent but...... I think it is not so much that the press loves the Democrats, as it is simple partisanship. The Democrats love the press and so they become journalists.

When you look at the Sunday Talk shows or even Chris Matthews doing his thing, it is worth noting a lot of these folks actually worked for the Demccratic Party. Matthew, Russert, George Stephenopholis [how do you spell that anyway] are just the most noted Democrats we see but in truth they are the rule not the exception.

As for Hillary I think people like Rush Limbaugh actually helped her to some extent. Rush was just rude and crude when it came to Hillary.

I think she is intelligent and tough, but I don't trust her. As a woman I resent the pressure to vote for her that I have gotten from some other women who seem to think I am supposed to stick with my kind.Whatever that means.

And I wonder if her negatives will ruin her chances.