"In Greenwood, some voters expressed enthusiasm for a “two-for-one” presidency, saying they liked the Clintons’ “package”. Others left the hall full of praise for Bill but with doubts about Hillary.
While others couldn't stand the thought of her at all? While still others disliked Bill as well? So its Bill or Hillary and thats it? No dissent?
The sins of omission. In a rambling, semi-coherent article that was supposed to be about the possibility of a Constitutional amendment forbidding family members from succeeding one another as President, the Times Online made it seem as if there were no people disliking both Clinton's. A distinct possibility one would imagine, seeing as how William Jefferson Clinton only received 43% of the popular vote while running for HIS first term.
This is what liberal rags do, and quite well. Lure us with the hope of an open minded dialog then turn it into a campaign ad for democrats.
Hillary is sinking and sinking fast. To make this appear that it isn't really HER fault, this thinly disguised Clinton commercial would have us believe that we are so very much against dynasty's...we're not...that poor Hillary might be having problems because Bill was there before her. Forget the fact that in 2004 no democrat wanted Bill Clinton anywhere NEAR a close race for fear of rejuvenating bad feelings about his appalling, disgusting, and disgraceful Presidency.
Here's hoping she continues to slide.
No comments:
Post a Comment