Powder Blue Report: HILLARY/OBAMA CAT FIGHT

Friday, February 23, 2007

HILLARY/OBAMA CAT FIGHT

"Everybody in politics lies, but they (the Clintons) do it with such ease, it’s troubling." "Hillary is overproduced & overscripted." David Geffen in the NY Times

When Slick Willie did his thing with Monica in the Oval Office, Hillary accused Republicans of a VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY. After he lied to the American people about it and finally admitted it, Hillary never apologized for her comment. However, she thinks Obama should apologize for Geffen’s "vicious attacks." Geffen used to be a big Clinton supporter and fundraiser. He had a falling out with them over the Marc Rich pardon. Clinton stooge Terri McAuliffe is trying to scare Hollywood into supporting Hillary by telling them "Your either with us or against us." Hillary’s support must be pretty shallow if she is having trouble getting Dems to support her over a media generated empty suit rookie like Obama with no legislative record to speak of. Even Barbra Streisand is donating to both instead of just backing a woman. George Soros is backing Obama. Hillary has tried to appeal to women by making them think they would be empowered by having a woman president. Having Obama & Edwards running against her is a big advantage for Hillary. It gives her someone to beat. Since their views on the Iraq War are extremely liberal, Hillary can trick people into thinking she is really a moderate instead of a liberal. This puts her in a better relative position for the general election.

7 Comments:

At 2:08 PM, Dan Chmielewski said…

a "Cat Fight" is a fight between two women.
Hillary is having no trouble getting dems to support her. Neither is Obama.
I plan to write her a big check and see her again whenh she comes to Laguna Lee.
At 5:33 PM, Anonymous said…

You don’t believe there was a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy? Well lets take a look.

Richard Mellon Scaife paid David Brock $80,000 to go to Little Rock and interview the
Arkansas state troopers who were also paid $80,000 by Scaife. Scaife didn't pay the troopers
to tell the truth - he was purchasing a scandal that he hoped would harm the very popular president.

When Brock's article came out in the American Spectator (financed by Scaife) Paula Jones got word there was "a Paula" in the book, so she immediately ran into the national media spotlight screaming, "Me, me, I'm the Paula in the book! Me, me, I'm 'blow job Paula.' Everybody look at me!"
...and then, blamed Clinton for exposing her.

Vultures like Susan Carpenter McMillan descended and convinced Paula to file a lawsuit,
and the last last thing she could ever do was to settle this abortion of justice out of court..

Did Paula sue David Brock who wrote the story she was suing about? Did Paula sue the state troopers who told the lies she was suing about? Did Paula sue the magazine who printed the lies she was suing about?

She sued Clinton, who had never said a word about her. None of these people were there to
help Paula Jones. They were there to screw the president, and poor Paula got passed around
like a pack of no-filter Camel's in Cell Block D. Few people know or remember, but Ken Starr
helped Paula file her early papers, but they said he was "impartial" in this matter.

Meanwhile a crooked judge named David Hale was arrested in Little Rock, and Ken Starr
told this crooked judge that he'd go free if he could give them some usefull dirt on Clinton.
Hale had a mountain of claims, but nothing he could prove, so Ken Starr had Ted Olson
fly to Arkansas to represent Hale in an effort to make Hale more credible and once again
try to overrule the wishes of the majority of voters who elected Clinton twise.

Clinton was stupidly messing around with (but no intercourse) Monica.
Monica stupidly told her friend, who unfortunately for her was a Clinton-hater named Linda Tripp,
"I'm a good friend to have."

Linda Tripp betrayed her friend in an effort to bring down the Clintons. Tripp had a friend who was a literary agent named Lucianne Goldberg.

Lucy kept gossipping with Matt Drudge, (who owes his entire career to Lucy) and in
a third example of the anything-goes new rules to smear the Clintons, major papers and TV networks began using rumors Drudge printed to lead off their nightly newscasts.

Newt Gingrich was directing multi-layered investigation teams led by Henry Hyde, Bob Barr and Dan Burton using the subpoena power as House Majority Leader. All the while Orrin Hatch were running multi-layered investigations in the Senate.

And…

Larry Klayman (nutcase trial lawyer) was filing one idiotic lawsuit after another, and still is to this day..

Richard Mellon Scaife was funding The Arkansas Project, which is just a gaggle of black-hating klansmen, which was feeding gossip and rumors directly to Henry Hyde and Bob Barr, but it was all horseshit - none of it was true, but that didn't prevent the major media outlets for running every "Clinton fathered baby with crack whore" story Drudge fed them.

On another front...
The print press like the NY Times created/fabricated this whole Whitewater mess to start with. Then you have the Wall Street Journal printing the most vicious lies every day. And that doesn’t count the Washington Times (owned by the Rev. Moon) trying to outlie the WSJournal, then under these new rules, most papers in America went with money-over-dignity.

On another front...
Tim Russert was relentless at demanding answers on the Constitutionally important matter of Clinton's sex life.

And then of course there is my favorite conservative icon Rush Limbaugh leading the 24/7 talk radio assault, which made hundreds of hack writers into stars if they were willing to get behind a microphone and SCREAM lies to people who were listening for updates.

We-didn't-know-then partisan and crooked Supreme Court was green-lighting one no-foundation lawsuit after another. Paula Jones was never more than one woman making a no-proof claim, but the Whore Court decided it was OK for individuals to file no-proof lawsuits as a way to attack a president politically.

Do you remember when the Supreme Court ruled that Clinton had no attorney-client privileges?

All you need for a "conspiracy" is two people.
"Vast" is imprecise, but how many dozens/hundreds of people do we need for "vast?"
And "right-wing" pretty much speaks for itself.
At 10:54 PM, Anonymous said…

For a “popular president” Slick Willie sure does seem to have a lot of enemies! The liberal NY Times, Wall Street Journal and Tim Russert (who used to work for Governor Mario Cuomo & Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan) are part of the VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY? Wow! That’s one I haven’t heard before. What a stretch! Gee Fred (or whatever you real name is) you sure are paranoid. Hillary’s VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY accusation was that Republicans were trying to pin an affair on Slick Willie that wasn’t true. However, it WAS TRUE. After Slick Willie lied about it, he finally admitted it. So her accusation was wrong.
At 6:31 AM, Anonymous said…

Lee. If the outlets you claim as the 'liberal media' were as liberal as you believe, negative stories about Clinton would have never seen the light of day. Yet they did. The first news outlet to break the Paula Jones story was the LA Times. The second one was CNN. For us libs we don't see the 'liberal media' bogeyman you paranoid right wingers blabber about daily.

And you've never explained why conservatives were so insterested in a person's private life. Something they claim is sacred under their tennants. Yet they were in full speed with their faces glued to his pants.

And it all worked out. Clinton was finally found "not guilty" of the trumped up impeachment charges brought against him and ended up enjoying far greater popularity than even your icon Ronald Reagan. As it turns out, Clinton will easily be considered one of the best presidents this nation ever elected while your hero Bush will be easily be considered one of the worst.
At 9:42 PM, Anonymous said…

Even liberal media like the NY Times, Washington Post and LA Times can't totally ignore Slick Willie's oral sex in the Oval Office. The best they can do is to downplay it. Obviously, when things like Abu Garib happen that they think can make conservatives look bad, they emphasis them with story after story. I think I heard they did 24 front page stories about Abu Garib. Clinton showed what kind of a person he is by having oral sex with a bimbo in the Oval Office while he was married. Since you think doing that is just fine, it shows what your standards are. Trumped up impeachment charges? Again, Clinton ADMITTED HE LIED! He also had his law license taken away by the Arkansas Bar because of the perjury. Clinton better than Reagan? Your dreaming! Reagan won the Cold War. What major issue did Clinton accomplish except letting Osama Bin Laden escape?
At 1:31 PM, Anonymous said…

Please explain how daily coverage of the Monica episode is downplaying? This ought to be good. It was in the major daily papers for well over a month.

That's kind of trying to have it both ways. If the media doesn't cover the story, then they're covering up. If they do, then they're intentionally beating the dead horse to bore the public.

But what to make of the screaming heads from the right on the TV political "talk" shows, the news conferences from Clinton opponents given constantly during the scandal? Did the media intentionally give them the platform so they could ultimately annoy the populace? Is the leftist media also responsible for content on the internet, with email innuendo and Scaife disinformation on websites part of its master plan to make the public indifferent?

And "you heard" about the number of stories regarding Abu Ghraib. I am at a point in time in my life when someone says "I heard" it really means, "I have no idea what I'm talking about." Which explains you perfectly.

I've never defended Clinton's actions. Please point me to where I've done that. Once again you either assume or fabricate something from wacko right wing perspective. I found Clinton's behavior as despicable as anyone. But it wasn't my issue. It was between he and his family. And I've asked you several times which you've refused to answer. How can conservatives who claim to want the government out of one's private life justify their actions with Clinton's private affairs?

The claim that Bin Laden was allowed to escape by Clinton has been disproved so many times it is almost laughable that a person who claims to be ruled by logic and organization would still be expressing its validity.

Par for the course from you.

And apparently those in charge of determining his guilt or innocence didn't believe the impeachment charges had any validity. Sounds like you're still pretty bitter about the whole thing.
At 3:12 PM, Dan Chmielewski said…

Lee -- the entire Monica Lewinsky affairs is like 9 or 10 years old. How is this relevent today? Hillary had nothing to do with what Bill Clinton did with Monica. Bill Clinton is no longer in office. Hillary has her own record to run on. And she has a reputation for working with Republicans on bi-partisan legislation. You make no sense at al1.