Video: “Hillary, The Movie”
posted at 2:14 pm on December 18, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Meat so red the cow’s still howlin’. Consider it part of the answer to the question that was posed yesterday to her by one of her supporters.
Even so, I warn you: If it’s her vs. Huck vs. Bloomberg, I’d have to think about that vote very carefully. Which of the three would be toughest with Iran? Which of the three would be most unnerved by intense political pressure not to sign an amnesty bill?
The unthinkable might be quite thinkable indeed, my friends. Click the image to watch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
Comment pages:
Which is what I’ve been saying. Bloomberg’s out for me, leaving me with HuckaGenius or Hildabeast. Which one caves more to pressure from voters?
amerpundit on December 18, 2007 at 2:17 PM
…when you’ve got Barack Obama and Ann Coulter agreeing, you’ve got a SERIOUS problem.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2007 at 2:18 PM
How could anybody vote for this shrew for anything ??
OBX Pete on December 18, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Here’s my issue though: If we bring her down before the primary ends, we can very well end up with Barack. Is he, being the media darling, fresh young man, etc. candidate he is, unbeatable for us? Clinton we could at least roll out the scandals.
amerpundit on December 18, 2007 at 2:22 PM
That was just scary……
I question the timing.
conservnut on December 18, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Exactly the point I made on another thread last night. She is beatable, it’s Obama I am afraid of.
conservnut on December 18, 2007 at 2:23 PM
I’m more willing to take that chance than to allow her to even sniff the general election.
James on December 18, 2007 at 2:24 PM
But really, who’s worst in the Oval Office: Hillary or Barack. Now, before we rehash how bad the Clinton years were, consider this: Obama is much more inexperienced and doesn’t bow as well to voter pressure. He’s basically naive. She’s sleazy but will bow to pressure from voters.
amerpundit on December 18, 2007 at 2:26 PM
I quite agree. I don’t want a CHANCE that she could be in there. If it came down to choosing between the two, I’d choose Barack in a heartbeat. Yes, he’s a socialist. He also has a family that he appears to value. Hillary has nothing to lose but her power, and that’s as dangerous as it gets.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2007 at 2:27 PM
two minutes
hatetruth.TheSitRep on December 18, 2007 at 2:33 PM
Hillary doesn’t want to lose the White House, which means not pissing the American electorate off.
amerpundit on December 18, 2007 at 2:33 PM
When did Blankley get the makeover?
JammieWearingFool on December 18, 2007 at 2:37 PM
I really wish we’d held our fire because I want her to be crushed in the general, in a very public and humiliating way that may assure that she is forever removed from my TV screen.
What I really want is to see her head on a pike so I can look up at her and wave. Vir would understand.
TBinSTL on December 18, 2007 at 2:38 PM
Once she’s in, you don’t think she can wrangle Congress enough to keep her safe? Good lord…her knowledge of presidential power bypasses are probably stunning. I don’t trust her one bit…not because of her policies, but because of her character. I may disagree with Barack, but I think he could do less damage if he were in.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2007 at 2:39 PM
Don’t start that kind of crap here, please.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Hillary. Any day…before, during, or after Bubba was in there.
Naive is OK…he just better have good handlers to smack him with reality if he goes off the deep end. How well would Hillary deal with that?
James on December 18, 2007 at 2:41 PM
It isn’t us. It is the lefties pulling her down. The see her as a politician first, and a comitted socialist second. They do not want ANY reaching across the aisle. They fear exactly what some claim here, that Hillary will run scared of the voters. Obama is their ‘Camelot’ candidate.
Limerick on December 18, 2007 at 2:42 PM
Sorry, but anyone who thinks Canada has a president and fining parents who don’t accept govt. run health care is a good idea is too naive for me. Hillary, I at least know what I’m getting. I know what to expect. Obama? Little experience, very naive, but is a media darling.
amerpundit on December 18, 2007 at 2:47 PM
Wait…Canada has a government?
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2007 at 2:49 PM
I say start hitting her now and don’t let up until the moontards smell blood.
Dork B. on December 18, 2007 at 2:51 PM
At the very least we need to gather up ammo now to use in the fall. Keeping BHO close in the running is the only way the MSM is going to be unafraid enough of her to ask tough questions. It’s only when she is under pressure that her true self comes through. The best outcome is a brutal fight to a Pyrrhic nomination, and right now BHO has the mo but not yet the lead.
pedestrian on December 18, 2007 at 2:56 PM
The issue with Obama is: will Americans decide it is worth it to “coast” for four years. Just o get a Black President? Just to placate the destructive Democrats? Just to avoid Hillary?
Given his inexperience (vs Clinton’s devious political clout) – “how bad can he be?” Democrats don’t accomplish much, and Americans could choose to put Republicans in the Senate and House as a “power check”.
If common wisdom is that Clinton would be a disaster, does it mean she would push distasteful policies just to create total chaos? Yes.
Huck or any Republican could mean disaster as well, as a Democrat tantrum could deadlock government, with Huck being too weak to succeed.
Agrippa2k on December 18, 2007 at 2:59 PM
She looks like a saggy, old vampire in that picture. Countess Shriek. “I want to suck your earnings”.
I have no pity for impeached Bill Clinton, but how can anyone listen to that voice for more than ten seconds?
Hening on December 18, 2007 at 2:59 PM
That’s depressing scenario.
Esthier on December 18, 2007 at 3:04 PM
What we need is a stealth candidate. Another Bush. Someone “mis-underestimated”. McCain? Thompson?
Romney and Rudy are tough guys. They will get Democrat backs up from day one. They will come ready to fight.
Huckabee seems weak to me. A little nasty with all of the Christianity stuff, but likely to capitulate in the name of “bi-partisanship”.
I sure wish I could figure out what is wrong with Hunter’s campaign? I could see him sticking to his guns, when the Democrats think he is a pushover.
Agrippa2k on December 18, 2007 at 3:06 PM
Well that is easy. Huck would fold. The others would sign too, but because they choose to.
Frankly, Huck’s Christianity stuff is getting on my nerves. He better start talking about what that means for Israel, or I might think he is faking it (preacher or not).
Agrippa2k on December 18, 2007 at 3:13 PM
Chances are that no matter which side HildaBeast and Usama come out on, the other half will be on the same ticket in the end. Hit her hard now and throughout, and chip away at the other idiot. You know damn well that after getting this close she isn’t going to risk losing because of her running mate. The only other possibility is Silky, who as much as he turns my stomach, is staying up there in polling numbers. And of course, there’s the republican contenders who are basically chumps. Another Bob Dole ‘96 election. Huckabilly doesn’t stand a chance of winning the nomination. This is a Dean “flash-in-the-pan”. I see the best possible chance for the republicans in the general as Romney (presidential look and feel), and McCain. Rudy is just an opportunist who was in the right place at the right time to be a hero. Mayor of a city (regardless of size) does not qualify him to deal with the rest of the world. I’m thinking that a governership or senior senator (with a good republican record) are the minimum prerequisites for the highest office.
stacman on December 18, 2007 at 3:15 PM
Ok, I just watched that trailer and…Dude.
CP on December 18, 2007 at 3:16 PM
Even scarier than her in the trailer………….Slimy Bill would get his perch back at the top of the hill…
stacman on December 18, 2007 at 3:19 PM
Heh.
I’d forgotten that she bleaches her eyebrows. We can’t even trust her about hair colour, why trust her with the keys to the country?
Uncle Pinky on December 18, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Aw, this is way too soon for this.
drjohn on December 18, 2007 at 3:37 PM
I’d still take Huck over Hill&Bill or Obama. I cannot stomach 8 more years of the Clintons, and Obama is hopelessly naive.
Although I don’t think Huck is going to make it through the final stretch.
Buy Danish on December 18, 2007 at 3:54 PM
I have said numerous times, Hillary is the best opponent for a Republican candidate. Not only is the woman a disaster to her campain, she would be a disaster for the Democrat party. She is so disasterous she would make President Bush seem cherubic. I believe with her as an opponent, not only would she lose her bid for President, she would likely drag down a lot of Democrat Senators, and Representatives.
I do have to add a caveat: She would only be a disaster if there is a strong conservative Republican running as the nominee. Someone like Romney or Guiliani would be like different choices of Hillary.
Rode Werk on December 18, 2007 at 5:48 PM
Cows moo
- The Cat
MirCat on December 18, 2007 at 8:47 PM
Really? I guess that explains why she wanted to have a secret committee revamp our healthcare system even in the face of voter opposition.
Don’t confuse pandering to get your vote with shoving it up your ass once she gets it.
BacaDog on December 18, 2007 at 9:23 PM
I would go for Thompson if Thompson starts going for Thompson. I want to see some life in them bones. Is that asking too much?
Ernest on December 19, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Comment pages: