Hillary refuses to denounce MoveOn ad when asked by reporters

posted at 5:00 pm on September 15, 2007 by Allahpundit

She didn’t spend the day kissing ass at Yearly Kos to ruin her detente with the left now. Yesterday Ed Koch called her refusal to knock them for the ad a “terrible error — which is still correctable.” Not anymore, pal. Rudy 1, Glacier 0:

Senator Hillary Clinton said Saturday that she disagrees with Republican Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani when it comes to Iraq but she stopped short of disavowing a controversial ad by the liberal group MoveOn.org…

When pressed as to whether she thought MoveOn should not have run its advertisement, Clinton skirted the question: “Well, I have repeatedly not only expressed my strong admiration and support for our men and women in uniform, but with respect to General Petraeus, I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuudy!

JayHaw Phrenzie on September 15, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Well no ones ever expected her to stick to any principles, just expediency.

jeanie on September 15, 2007 at 5:03 PM

Since I’m more generous than most people here towards Hilary, I’d like to simply express my disappointment about this.

Will KP do the same?

thuja on September 15, 2007 at 5:03 PM

bought and paid for

bnelson44 on September 15, 2007 at 5:04 PM

yaaa, but duuu Rudy put his name on it DUhhhhhh. Republicans can be so stupid…His nefarious ploy works my friends whom eat their own.

tomas on September 15, 2007 at 5:07 PM

I wonder if anybody at Daily Kos or MoveOn.org has actually used the words ‘This is where you pucker up and kiss my a**!’ to any of the dem candidates. I would. If I completely controlled such a spineless and pathetic bunch of egotistical self absorbed lickspittles like the Democrat presidential candidates, I would remind them at every opportunity that I can jerk their chain over the most inconsquential moronic statements they make.
Good on Rudy and even good old Ed Koch. I wish they still made democrats like him.

austinnelly on September 15, 2007 at 5:07 PM

Do it again, Rudy!

Stormy70 on September 15, 2007 at 5:10 PM

she’s a coward, plain and simple… among other things

D2Boston on September 15, 2007 at 5:11 PM

Allahpundit, why do you think Rudy’s done again?

He seems to be the only one taking on the Democrats effectively.

I know he’s socially liberal. As someone who’s strongly pro-life, this would bother me. But his competitors are Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney.

I just don’t see how he’s “done” against them.

Competitive, maybe… but it’s a shoo-in either of them take it?

Which one?

And why?

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:11 PM

“He’s a liar but I respect him.”

I can see Hillary saying that.

lowandslow on September 15, 2007 at 5:12 PM

Last night on Hannity & Colmes, that douche Marc Lamont Hill said that he “agrees” with MoveOn.org and their ad. He tried to stay clear of agreeing or disagreeing until towards the end when he let it slip… Then, as stupid as Hannity is, he managed to force Marc Lamont Hill to say that he thinks Petraeus is “betraying us”. This isn’t spin or a misinterpretation, these are his words.

When Lamont Hill first started making appearances on Fox, he tried to come off as level headed… he’s gotten increasingly moonbatish lately, and I can only hope RedEye sees it, and doesn’t waste their time with him any more.

Allah, do you happen to have that video? It’s actually quite remarkable. Most of the libs we’ve seen (outside of the blogosphere) have tried to tip toe around calling Petraeus a traitor, and always offering the tired “we support the troops, we just want them home” qualifier to their remarks. Well, this is:

Dr. Hill is an assistant professor of Urban Education and American Studies at Temple University.

Shameful SOB. Certainly you’d agree that saying Petraeus is “betraying us” on national television, is as bad (and IMO, worse) than the mustache saying he’s spit on Michelle. (I’m not saying that wasn’t news, I sent O’Reilly numerous emails begging him to cover it… just that this certainly rises to to at least the same level)

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:12 PM

Will KP do the same?

If you mean will she also criticize Hillary for this, I’m wondering that myself. I’m hoping for a weak “yeah, she should have said something” on O’Reilly Monday night; needless to say, you’re not going to get anything from her as harsh as what Koch said. Don’t be surprised if she defends her, though, using this article from ABC from support. “She said she respects Petraeus, didn’t she?” That’ll be disappointing but I wouldn’t put it past her.

If you mean will KP denounce the ad herself, she’s already called it “despicable.” She did a good job on that.

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:12 PM

When Lamont Hill first started making appearances on Fox, he tried to come off as level headed… he’s gotten increasingly moonbatish lately, and I can only hope RedEye sees it, and doesn’t waste their time with him any more.

He’s always been fringe left. I do have the video but he’s simply not prominent enough to make it worth posting.

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:13 PM

bought and paid for

bnelson44

‘Nuff said

darwin on September 15, 2007 at 5:15 PM

“Well, I have repeatedly not only expressed my strong admiration and support for our men and women in uniform, but with respect to General Petraeus, I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself.”

Really, calling him a liar (admittedly in “prettier” language) is “respect”?

“…this requires the willing suspension of disbelief.”

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:15 PM

He’s always been fringe left. I do have the video but he’s simply not prominent enough to make it worth posting.

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:13 PM

I hear ya, he’s definitely a nobody… I guess I was just seeing the “shock value”, of actually hearing a lib openly admit that he thinks Petraeus is Betrayus. Tough to say who’s more offensive, him or Truthers.

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:17 PM

She sure knows how to turn a phase – slime ball.

“with respect to General Petraeus, I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself”

She made it clear all right. She has no respect. I don’t know why her comment about “suspended belief” is twisted into something it was not.

She clearly said that she had “decided” not to “believe” Petraeus (regardless of what he said). Yet the press twist it into a metaphor for watching a sci-fi movie, making Petraeus into the fabricator.

Agrippa2k on September 15, 2007 at 5:19 PM

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:17 PM

You mean (Western) Europe?

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:20 PM

with these ads and truthers…are there really so many people that have mental illness. I’m serious. Why are sooooooooooooooooooooooooo many people so wrong. I can’t blame it all on the news.

tomas on September 15, 2007 at 5:20 PM

I would love to see Allahpundit’s take on if Rudy’s going to sink like a stone, who exactly is going to rise like a cork.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Allah is trying to be one of those “Republicans ad odds with Bushers” the media loves to trumpet.

tomas on September 15, 2007 at 5:27 PM

No one’s going to rise like a cork. Fred or Mitt will back into the nomination after voters object to the rest of the field. And then they’ll be slaughtered in the general.

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:28 PM

Allah is trying to be one of those “Republicans ad odds with Bushers” the media loves to trumpet.

As opposed to you, who mindlessly, reflexively defends Bush every time he so much as farts?

Yeah, I’m looking for media love. That’s why I chose the alias “Allahpundit.”

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:30 PM

Whereas Rudy could win the general, but not the primary?

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:30 PM

GOP Voters are more strategic than the big A gives em credit for. Rudy will get the nod and rudy will bury the b…

JayHaw Phrenzie on September 15, 2007 at 5:31 PM

Whereas Rudy could win the general, but not the primary?

I don’t think any Republican can win in the general although Rudy would probably have the best shot, especially if Hillary is the nominee on the left. A moot point anyway given his prospects in the primary.

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:32 PM

“He’s a liar but I respect him.”

I can see Hillary saying that.

lowandslow on September 15, 2007 at 5:12 PM

That’s exactly what she said. Despicable *spit*

jdawg on September 15, 2007 at 5:32 PM

You mean (Western) Europe?

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:20 PM

Huh? You lost me somewhere.

As opposed to you, who mindlessly, reflexively defends Bush every time he so much as farts?

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:30 PM

I know that was directed at someone else… but I can’t resist… You smelt it you dealt it.

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:34 PM

“I respect him for being a liar. A very good one I might add. I should know. I was married to the best.”

            – Hillary Clinton

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:34 PM

hey, thank for responding Allah you are so awesome…I will fall lock stock and barrell behind everything you say. I don’t agree with Bush on everything, but he is my pres and I respect him.

This site seems as to treat republican candidates like Bush on Immigration. You have to take a stand at some point.

Wow, it is cool to get a response.

tomas on September 15, 2007 at 5:35 PM

I know that was directed at someone else… but I can’t resist… You smelt it you dealt it.

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:34 PM

Speaking of farts, someone accused me of being a Star Trek nerd who couldn’t get laid in an Arabian brothel with the Sheik out being beheaded by Saladin.

And I refute that. Getting the ladies to watch this video together is my master key to “romantic” success.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:40 PM

Bad link, sorry. Corrected.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:41 PM

Clinton skirted the question: “Well, I have repeatedly not only expressed my strong admiration and support for our men and women in uniform, but with respect to General Petraeus, I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself.

Yeah, Hillary. Like when you called him a liar in the Senate the other day.

jaime on September 15, 2007 at 5:43 PM

I don’t think any Republican can win in the general.

Allahpundit

Illegal immigration and border security cross party lines. Any candidate who understands that it isn’t just “whites” who want immigration strictly controlled and the borders secured, and is willing to use the language necessary to convey that message … can, and probably will win. Immigration and security trump any other issue, including Iraq, and on either issue the Democrats have nothing to offer except amnesty. Plus, Elvira wants to vote Democrat!

darwin on September 15, 2007 at 5:44 PM

Has any of the Democratic Pres. candidates unambiguously told moveon that they crossed the line with that ad? Has any of them suggested (much less demanded) that they recall their ad?

Pelosi and Reid distanced themselves from the ad, true. Sort of. But they certainly did NOT tell moveon to apologize to Gen. Petreaus.

What the Republican leadership in both Houses ought to do is introduce a sense of the congress resolution condemning moveon for defaming one of America’s finest generals and demanding retraction.

I know it will be a cold day in Hell, but it puts the Democrats between the rock (the traitors at moveon) and the hard place (American public opinion supports the military). And if it destroys the Traitor Party in the process, then all the better.

georgej on September 15, 2007 at 5:44 PM

Yeah, I’m looking for media love. That’s why I chose the alias “Allahpundit.”

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:30 PM

Heh. Hard to get less PC than that.

ReubenJCogburn on September 15, 2007 at 5:44 PM

Has any of the Democratic Pres. candidates unambiguously told moveon that they crossed the line with that ad? Has any of them suggested (much less demanded) that they recall their ad?

I’ve heard Biden did, but haven’t seen the quote. I wouldn’t doubt it though.

Biden has a personal stake in this and, personal honesty (plagiarism) and intelligence aside, doesn’t seem like a bad guy.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:46 PM

“…Giuliani’s finished…”

“…Rudy 1, Glacier 0…”

Allahpundit

But….he’s still finished, right?

JWS on September 15, 2007 at 5:49 PM

Someday, I hope folks on different sides of an issue she’s trying to dodecahedronate on will ask – in the same room – something like “So you have great respect for General Petraeus?” “Yes.” “And he’s a liar?” “Yes.” With her skills, it will be tough to create un-squirm-out-of-able questions.

eeyore on September 15, 2007 at 5:51 PM

But….he’s still finished, right?

Yeah. Republicans can get the same hawkish, anti-jihadist message minus the liberal social policies from Fred or Mitt. Or even McCain, for that matter, who’s been consistently pro-life notwithstanding his “maverickness” on other issues.

Allahpundit on September 15, 2007 at 5:55 PM

Anyway, Allahpundit, thanks for replying. I kind of figured that’s where you were going.

I’m not at all sure you’re right. I just don’t see Rudy getting a huge amount of animosity from the right whereas Mitt’s Mormonism attracts a huge amount (for valid Biblical reasons although I personally consider him a capable, decent man who would make a good President) and Fred just doesn’t seem all that energetic, quick on his feet, or accomplished.

I think that he rose to great stature so bravely leading New York and a good part of the nation through September 11 will buy him a lot of slack on the right and combined with his accomplishments, fight, and ability to think and make decisions rapidly I’m not at all sure he’s going to be beaten by his primary challengers.

The only one who matches him intellectually I think is Mitt, but Mitt was never tested under fire and coupled with Christian conservatives uncomfortable with elevating a high-profile Mormon to this stature, I’m not sure he can do it either.

I just can’t see Fred Thompson beating Rudy Guiliani. I just can’t picture it somehow.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:56 PM

Or even McCain, for that matter, who’s been consistently pro-life notwithstanding his “maverickness” on other issues.

Maybe that one. I think he’s doing the smart thing by staying in the race. I still think you’re counting out Rudy way too quickly, but I acknowledge you’re usually a very sharp political analyst, far above the norm.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 5:59 PM

Think you bank too much on the fact that you expect a dem to win over a republican in the general Allah

A GENERIC democrat over a GENERIC republican yes in polls would win

but we dont vote generically. ITs always a head to head thing

I say the election will be a closely run contest as in every election since 1988. No one has gotten more than 51% of the vote since then.

The republicans great problem is that they have almost NO organization. They try and win on message alone. One thing I have berated the RNC about since the 1990s (not like theyd listen to me anyhow)

The dems have rediscoved machine politics. They get their troops all lined up and send out marching orders and get the job done.

The republicans ? They send out pyramid email schemes and tell people “hey get ten other people to go out an vote !”

That difference is why republicans lose elections

William Amos on September 15, 2007 at 6:01 PM

William Amos on September 15, 2007 at 6:01 PM

That and that tramp stamps have eclipsed religion in the national consciousness.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 6:08 PM

O’Reilley had a great segment on topic last night, with two liberal ladies as guests (not KP). Both agreed that the Moveon.org ad was a huge mistake because instead of talking about the war for at least 4 days, most all are talking about the MO.org add.

The one lady, who is usually a feisty liberal, said something like this “now the conservatives have the ad to show every single day until Nov. ’08″. She was despondent.

If only the conservatives had the brains and the stones to enact her fears…

Entelechy on September 15, 2007 at 6:13 PM

Sorry, the brain didn’t kick in soon enough…the despondent one was Laura Schwartz.

Entelechy on September 15, 2007 at 6:17 PM

I would remind them at every opportunity that I can jerk their chain over the most inconsquential moronic statements they make.

I’d insist on sexual favors, though in the vast majority of cases that would mean staying far, far out of my sight.

CK MacLeod on September 15, 2007 at 6:28 PM

Don’t underestimate Rudy or Mitt in a general election. It looks like Mitt has weathered the “September Dawn” storm. The next hurdle will be South Carolina. If he can do half way well there,he would have a better than even chance of defeating Hillary in a general.

Ask yourself this question of all the rep candidates…..

What negatives do they have that will turn away independents and casual voters?

Fred? One word….LOBBYIST.

Rudy? I don’t see many.

Mitt? I don’t see many with him either.

Now, lets look at Hillary…..of all the issues that will motivate swing voters in the general, where does Hillary come down on them? Her high negatives speak for themselves and there aren’t any undecideds that she can swing to her side. She is very polarizing. Rudy isn’t and I think once people get to know Mitt, they will be very pleased with him. Fred can’t do anything except perhaps some mass hypnotism to make people forget he was in the same exact job as Abramoff.

csdeven on September 15, 2007 at 6:49 PM

“When pressed asked as to whether she thought MoveOn should not have run its advertisement, Clinton skirted the question …”

Fixed it.

Pressing her to respond would have involved asking the question again and again, until she is forced to answer.

Problem is, no one is pressing her. And they never will.

fogw on September 15, 2007 at 6:52 PM

double talk from a forked tongue.

madmonkphotog on September 15, 2007 at 6:54 PM

Fred? One word….LOBBYIST.

For God’s sakes, csdeven, that one part of his life does not define him.

I think he hasn’t really accomplished a whole lot compared to Mitt, Rudy, or McCain, and he may have trouble in debates (he’s welcome to prove me wrong) or with reacting to new inputs (for example, Rudy jumped on this and this is the same intellectual quality that lead to his fast reaction and great leadership on 9/11), but the fact he was a lobbyist is not going to be a big deal.

I still think the strongest possible ticket would be a Romney-Rudy ticket, in that order. The other way around wouldn’t work at all.

That ticket simply isn’t going to happen, but it would be tough to stop.

Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 6:55 PM

For God’s sakes, csdeven, that one part of his life does not define him.
Christoph on September 15, 2007 at 6:55 PM

Maybe not for himself, his family, or his groupies, but for regular folks who vote in a general election? The word “lobbyist” is absolutely radioactive. Especially since almost every single client he lobbied for was working against the exact type of folks that will be voting in the general.

Fred couldn’t be elected dog catcher in a general.

csdeven on September 15, 2007 at 7:17 PM

I am so glad Hillary is running to the left in a desperate attempt to get the nomination. The American people have been waiting since “Hillarycare” to force her to listen to what they think of her by pulling the lever against her in a general election.

csdeven on September 15, 2007 at 7:22 PM

I asked if any of the Democrat candidates had criticized moveon and demanded retraction.

Christoph replied: “I’ve heard Biden did, but haven’t seen the quote. I wouldn’t doubt it though.”

Does anybody have a link to any such statement from Biden?

georgej on September 15, 2007 at 7:42 PM

Georgej-

here.

JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 7:59 PM

well maybe not demanded retraction. And for all I know, he no longer wants to stand by his initial words, as Harry Reid did with CNN.

JiangxiDad on September 15, 2007 at 8:01 PM

I don’t think that Rudy is done but then again if I wanted to vote for a pro abortion, anti gun, pro amnesty type who wants us still fighting in Iraq when my great grandkids are born I’d have his sign up in the front yard already. I don’t.

Then again Mitt would have us out of Iraq even faster than Hillary’s plan and he gave up his anti gun, pro abortion ways about the same time he decided to run for President as a Republican.

Then there’s Fred. I’m not exactly sure where he stands on a lot of stuff but he went to a gun show this weekend.

Buzzy on September 15, 2007 at 8:12 PM

I’m actually guardedly optimistic. The dhimmis are becomming more and more a caricature of themselves. The Hillary/ Hsu thing was a gift from above; every time Obama opens his mouth he seems dumber and dumber; Edwards? Nuff said. I’ve said it before-if one of the Repub’s supports across the board conservatism and starts acting like the adult in the room: landslide. And regardless of the flaws our “conservative” host keeps hammering home, over and over, about our guys (I guess only a perfect human will do? Or Obama?), they are ALL, far better choices for the spot of CIC…

JWS on September 15, 2007 at 8:18 PM

“Well, I have repeatedly not only expressed my strong admiration and support for our men and women in uniform, but with respect to General Petraeus, I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself.”

What a crock!!!

allrsn on September 15, 2007 at 8:32 PM

What the Republican leadership in both Houses ought to do is introduce a sense of the congress resolution condemning moveon for defaming one of America’s finest generals and demanding retraction.
…………..

georgej on September 15, 2007 at 5:44 PM

Amanda Carpenter Townhall.com

After the Moveon.Org advertisement ran on Monday, Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) introduced a resolution which “strongly condemn[ed] personal attacks” against Petraeus and indicated support for all members of the Armed services. When it was offered Wednesday on the Senate floor, the Democratic Majority Whip, Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.) used a parliamentary move, called a point of order based on “germaneness,” against the measure to prevent the Senate from voting on it.

News2Use on September 15, 2007 at 8:57 PM

Allah,

If you’re going to keep running this picture of Hillary, in which she strongly resembles a rat sniffing, please at least airbrush in a large cheese wedge in front of her.

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on September 15, 2007 at 10:06 PM

If you mean will KP denounce the ad herself, she’s already called it “despicable.” **She did a good job on that.

**Hubba hubba….. XO XO

No one’s going to rise like a cork. Fred or Mitt will back into the nomination after voters object to the rest of the field. And then they’ll be slaughtered in the general.

I don’t think any Republican can win in the general although Rudy would probably have the best shot, especially if Hillary is the nominee on the left. A moot point anyway given his prospects in the primary.

But….he’s still finished, right?

I’m beginning to wonder who is shilling for Hillary Clinton…..

Yeah. Republicans can get the same hawkish, anti-jihadist message minus the liberal social policies from Fred or Mitt

.
AllahPundit, did you get the memo that I’m blaming all my negativity on you from now on if you’re not careful?

Here is an appetizer:

Just where in the hell does all this negative sentiment for the republicans comes from unless you are shilling for Hillary (You and Drudge both)? Drudge mentioned he would probably vote for Hillary if he wasn’t afraid that she was going to raise the blogger’s taxes. So all Hillary has to do I guess is promise she won’t raise taxes on bloggers and you guys are in.

Sweet.

As opposed to you, who mindlessly, reflexively defends Bush Hillary every time she so much as farts?

Is it the 3rd hand Hillary farts, AP?

Mcguyver on September 15, 2007 at 11:17 PM

Well, I have repeatedly not only expressed my strong admiration and support for our men and women in uniform, but with respect to General Petraeus, I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself.”
Really, calling him a liar (admittedly in “prettier” language) is “respect”?

“…this requires the willing suspension of disbelief.”

RightWinged on September 15, 2007 at 5:15 PM

RightWinged—you and I are cut from the same thought brain. Your words were EXACTLY what I was going to comment! Touche’!!!!!!

auspatriotman on September 15, 2007 at 11:20 PM

I don’t think any Republican can win in the general

A year is an eternity in politics. Ford almost pulled it out in ’76, post-Vietnam, post-Watergate and unelected to the job.

Here, the Dems’ prohibitive fave is HRC, who habitually scores a majority or near-majority who already say they will not vote for her.

Karl on September 16, 2007 at 12:15 AM

Let’s just get this election over with, put Rudy in the WH, and never hear from this windbag beyotch again.

HarryBalzac on September 16, 2007 at 12:27 AM

I have also made my respect for him abundantly clear and I think that speaks for itself.” ~The Glacier

Yeah, we noticed Hillary, but crapping all over people isn’t in line with most people’s definition of “respect.”

BKennedy on September 16, 2007 at 6:00 AM

Mcguyver on September 15, 2007 at 11:17 PM

Which AP were you talking to/about? The one who posts blogs, or the one who comments in them?

JiangxiDad on September 16, 2007 at 8:50 AM

JiangxiDad on September 16, 2007 at 8:50 AM

The one who works like hell, has family values, hides his hot air and is suspicious of the dogs.

Mcguyver on September 16, 2007 at 9:56 AM

With much respect for the quality of Allahpundit’s writing and the work he does on this blog, I have to plant my flag on the opposite pole of the 2008 political world. I just don’t see how the Democrats can win. It’s just a feeling, with no poll data or other hard evidence to support it, and only time will tell which of us is right… but I just can’t see America ushering the Clinton Mafia back into the White House, complete with their endless circus of lies and corruption, especially since the candidate on the ticket is the antimatter version of Bill: stiff, clumsy, frightening, and a hardcore ideologue. Even with the MSM enthusiastically rendering Hillary as a stained-glass church window saint, and chasing the GOP candidate around like pitchfork-and-torch-wielding peasants giving chase to Frankenstein, and even granted the formidable power of Democrat machine politics, I just don’t see it – provided the GOP doesn’t nominate someone completely radioactive. None of the front-runners strikes me as being that poisonous. I’m sure the strengths and weaknesses of Fred!, Rudy, McCain, and Mitt will make for an exciting primary season, but in the end, I just can’t believe that any major constituency of the GOP will sit home because the nominee is weak on their preferred issue – when the alternative is the Glacier. I like McCain the least of the bunch personally, but if it’s him versus Hillary, I’d crawl through barbed wire and land mines to vote for him. No matter how Republican pundits and primary voters express their opposition to this or that candidate because of abortion, campaign finance, Mormophobia, or his past as a lobbyist, I truly believe those opionions will change rather dramatically when the primary season is behind us, and we find ourselves staring into the icy eyes of a bleak socialist future clad in a pink pantsuit, surrounded by swooning journalists.

Doctor Zero on September 16, 2007 at 10:51 AM

Doctor Zero on September 16, 2007 at 10:51 AM

You actually had me laughing out loud. You’re right about Republican voters- at least those with brains. But it’s a year til election day, a few hours til football, a few more hours til baseball, so why not bash Rep. candidates a bit? I’m with you Doc. Vote R on elec. day.

JiangxiDad on September 16, 2007 at 10:59 AM

she will disavow the moveon ad after she wins the primary and needs to work on the general election.

primary play to your leftist,
general lie about being a leftist to try and fool the general .

Mojack420 on September 16, 2007 at 2:06 PM

Move to the center in ’08 or lose..Mitts your man..Dr. Michael Savage has already dismissed the rest of the candidates. Rudy won’t even be able to give you the state of NY in the general against Hillary. Savage likes Tancredo and Hunter, being smarter than 99.9999% of the general population Savage knows these two are unelectable so I agree with Dr. Savage, its Mitt..Forget Fred. Fred only reads the scripts he doesn’t know how to write them. Remember I’m just the messenger, DON’T SHOOT THE MESSENGER better to have a centered GOP than no GOP at all.

Legions on September 16, 2007 at 3:32 PM

I continue to believe that Rudy has the best chance of defeating Hillary in ’08.
Thompson needs energy on the scale of The Transfiguration; otherwise he stays a novelty.
Maybe the patriotic McCain, maybe the competent Romney, but Rudy seems to have more of the whole center-right package with charisma and credibility …. Except for the skull and cross-bones of abortion.
Still a ways to go.

williars on September 17, 2007 at 1:18 AM

In defense of Allah, Hillary is the favorite right now.

But you don’t defeat a strong leftist candidate by veering to the middle. Bush 41 proved that all too well. Provide a clear contrast for the public with a strongly conservative agenda and the adults will carry the day.

T J Green on September 17, 2007 at 3:50 AM

The more listen to her the more I think that any rep candidate could beat her in a general. Except for Fred the lobbyist of course. And Ron Paul.

csdeven on September 17, 2007 at 8:54 AM