Media Torn Over Whether To Cast Clinton As ‘Weak’ Or ‘Calculating’ For ‘Emotional’ Display
Media Torn Over Whether To Cast Clinton As ‘Weak’ Or ‘Calculating’ For ‘Emotional’ Display
Today at a campaign event in New Hampshire, Sen. Hillary Clinton’s (D-NY) “eyes welled up with tears” as she spoke about why she was running for president. “It’s not easy, and I couldn’t do it if I didn’t passionately believe it was the right thing to do,” she said.
In a piece entitled, “Can Clinton’s Emotions Get The Best Of Her?,” ABC News wrote, “Whether Clinton has appeared too emotional, too sensitive or too weak in her recent public appearances is still up for debate.”
Many in the media have been quick to compare Clinton’s emotions to former 1972 Democratic presidential candidate Ed Muskie, who was taunted as weak and unpresidential after he became emotional on the campaign trail. Fox News pundits Michelle Malkin and Bill Kristol, however, took a different tact, calling Clinton’s emotions a “calculated” moment.
Watch a compilation of the media’s coverage:
The media’s excoriation and mocking of Clinton contrast with their treatment of prominent conservative politicians who have cried in the past. Their tears, according to these pundits, are “genuine,” “poignant,” and “extraordinary”:
Mitt Romney:
Mitt Romney’s eyes filled with tears Monday as the Republican presidential contender recalled watching the casket of a soldier killed in Iraq return to the United States and imagined if it were one of his five sons. Adding a poignant twist to a story he often tells on the campaign, Romney recalled the scene at Boston’s Logan International Airport while he was Massachusetts governor. [AP, 12/17/07]
But the fact that he teared up, people said, “Whoa, we thought he was so wooden and robotic, and there he is actually tearing up.” So actually, I think it does have an impact. It’s a genuine moment. It seems genuine. [Newsweek’s Richard Wolffe, MSNBC, 12/17/07]
President Bush:
The pictures were just what the White House wanted: A teary-eyed President Bush presenting the Medal of Honor posthumously to a slain war hero in the East Room. [Washington Post, 1/12/07]
A tear rolled down Bush’s cheek during the event, an extraordinary display of emotion by the commander-in-chief. Bush has been known to tear up and reportedly once cried in a private meeting with war widows. [Chicago Sun-Times, 1/12/07]
The president is tremendously sentimental. Forget about putting his parents anywhere near him. At his inauguration he purposely kept them out of his line of sight so he could stay as dry-eyed as possible. He has learned not to brush the tears away. [Newsweek, 4/02]
Defense Secretary Robert Gates
Robert Gates almost broke down as he gave a speech at a Marine Corps dinner. … Mr Gates’s show of feeling suggests that he brings a more human side to the role of defence secretary. [BBC, 7/19/07]
What is less often visible is the toll this war takes on the people who run the operation. Tonight we have a rare glimpse of emotion from a man who normally carefully chooses his words, the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. … a rare public display of emotion from the civilian in charge of this war effort. [NBC News, 7/19/07]
George H.W. Bush
Wiping away tears as he recalled praying at Camp David before ordering the start of the Persian Gulf war, President Bush today offered a testimony of emotion, politics and faith to a cheering crowd of thousands of Southern Baptists. [New York Times, 7/7/91]
UPDATE: Matt Stoller at OpenLeft observes, “When Edwards almost gets choked up and talks about how personal XYZ person is on the trail, he’s just passionate. When Clinton does it, she suddenly becomes a hysterical weak woman.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
The conservatives are such hypocrites. Lets also not forget the culture of corruption these teary eyed Boehners have wrought.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:38 pmBoo hoo hoo.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:39 pmPlease make Michelle Malkin go away. She’s frightening my children.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:44 pmGeorge Bush laughed when Carla Faye Tucker pleaded for her life. At least we know that Hillary Clinton is capable of real tears and real human emotion. My problem with her is over her Iraq war resolution vote among other terrible votes she’s made.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:44 pmOH GEEZ…..YOU FORGOT THE ALL TIME CRIER….ALCOHOLIC CRY BABY BOEHNER!!!!
January 7th, 2008 at 7:46 pmIn the misogynistic political world, any woman politician running for president will always be measured against the gold standard of Margaret Thatcher.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:46 pmHow come freaking Bohner gets to cry all the time, and nobody calls him a pussy!
January 7th, 2008 at 7:47 pmMaybe Hillary is just crying because she really cares about being president, and now she sees it slipping away.
Was she wearing pearls or diamonds when she cried? That’s the important question to ask here.
God how I hate the presidential election season. It sure does bring out the worst in people.
And TP, please don’t post pictures of Malkin. I almost puked when I saw the picture of her. She is disgusting.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:48 pmjer3saw beat me to it but Representative Boehner, who tears up at the slightest setback in the House and cries crockidile tears is sensitive and manly, but Hillary is either too wimpy or too calculating…
The usual BS out of the Bobble-Headed media in Washington and NY.
This will probably help Hillary, because she looks human…she shoulda been doing this from the start…try to look authentic (or be actually be authentic? GASP)
January 7th, 2008 at 7:53 pmMalkin has got the crazy (R) eye.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:54 pmShrieking harpy alert level is orangeish red (very high).
January 7th, 2008 at 7:59 pmWhen you develop a reptuation for calculating every angle, everything you do looks contrived. I noticed that three sentences after the breakdown, whatever its sincerity level was, she was attacking Obama. If the tears were sincere she surely recovered quickly.
I have read and watched a lot of commentary on this “moment” and here is what I am finding has the ring of truth: She is exhausted as anyone would be. But if she is feeling true sorrow, it is over the prospect of having her pre-ordained coronation cancelled.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:02 pm…who, BTW, also had larger balls than Dick Cheney.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:04 pmPresident Bush attributes his well-known weepiness to family tradition. “We Bushes cry when we’re happy, we cry when we’re sad,” he said in 2001. Brother Jeb concurred a year later: “Bush men always cry. It’s a little genetic problem” he attributes to his dad, whom Time magazine once described as a “frequent weeper.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ articles/ A53622-2004Sep27.html
January 7th, 2008 at 8:08 pmComment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 8:02 pm
What this is, is simply more organised hypocrisy. Talk about calculating.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:09 pmThis is easy, she was both weak AND calculating.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:11 pmIt’s nice to see the human, open side of a person.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:12 pmTrolls excluded, of course.
Once again,its ok if a thug does it, but not ok if a demo does it. Remember how Bill Clinton was castigated as “weepy”.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:13 pmComment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 8:02 pm
What this is, is simply more organised hypocrisy. Talk about calculating.
Comment by Xisithrus — January 7, 2008 @ 8:09 pm
Are you referring to my comment or Hillary’s tears?
January 7th, 2008 at 8:14 pmPoliticians use feigned displays of emotion often enough that whenever any of them do it it is suspect. Bill Clinton’s lip biting has become a staple of SNL, just like Ford’s klutziness. I believe her tears are genuine, but is she crying for herself or for poor, poor America that will have to carry on without her being President?
January 7th, 2008 at 8:19 pmIOKIYAR, people. IOKIYAR
January 7th, 2008 at 8:21 pmholy cow! that’s a LOT of inches devoted to this clinton story…
anyone else keeping tabs on the bias?
i will say, though, that her emotion was genuine…
January 7th, 2008 at 8:22 pmimagine that, all things considered…
The inevitable juggernaut of the Obama camp is just too, too much for the complacent pundit to digest.
And if the troll-hell-spray of recent is any indication, he’s on the right track.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:23 pmBOO FRICKIN HOO.
Hillary was crying, she said, because she cares so much. She says she understands the change the country needs.
So where was Hillary last month when Chris Dodd was bravely filibustering the despicable FISA legislation that would’ve driven a stake through the heart of the 4th amendment? Why weren’t you there Hillary fighting for the people you claim to understand?
Now all the talking heads are babbling about what Hillary can do to save her failing campaign. “Go negative” shouts one loudmouth. “Define your opponent” blabs another know-nothing.
Here’s and idea Hillary, free of charge. DO SOMETHING. DON’T JUST TALK. DO FRICKIN SOMETHING.
The FISA legislation is coming up for a vote again this week. Why don’t you quietly leave your campagning in New Hampshire and stand shoulder to shoulder with Chris Dodd and SAVE the 4th amendment!! How’s that for an idea?
In doing so you might actually win a few votes from the left-wing of the party…you know…the wing you’ve completely abandoned.
Hillary, if you rush back in Washington, to help save the 4th amendment, and Barack is not there, it could be just the coup your campaign needs. But don’t listen to me. Continue to follow the advice of your high paid beltway consultants. They’ve done a smashing job so far! LOL.
If you were truly the “Change” candidate you claim to be you wouldn’t need anybody to tell you any of this.
And that’s why Barack is beating you silly.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:25 pmI am starting to think that over confidence may drive independent voters to McCain, leaving Obama short against Hill’reh.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:25 pmFair enough, Keltoi, but… any response to the true subject of the thread? I mean… the apparent double standard in the media, wherein Republican candidates who cry on the campaign trail are lauded but Senator Clinton is excoriated?
Thanks.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:26 pmAnd that’s why Barack is beating you silly.
Comment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda
I’m sensing a HUGE knee-jerk backlash against ANYBODY who doesn’t represent a wholesale 180 degree re-direct on this country’s direction and overall agenda.
And that’s a VERY good thing.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:27 pmCome on.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:37 pmComparing crying about war heroes to crying about the campaign?
If she would somehow defeat Sen. Obama, I probably will vote for her, but let’s be honest. This was not her bright shining moment.
Comment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda — January 7, 2008 @ 8:25 pm
#27 - That is incredibly sage advice. Email it to her if you want her to win, she needs to change the subject somehow, anyhow, and she can’t go negative against Obama or she is cooked.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:39 pm“Matt Stoller at OpenLeft observes, “When Edwards almost gets choked up and talks about how personal XYZ person is on the trail, he’s just passionate. When Clinton does it, she suddenly becomes a hysterical weak woman. . Perhaps because she is a hysterical weak woman??
January 7th, 2008 at 8:40 pmWhat will TP regulars call for next, now that name registration has failed them in their attempt at an eco-chamber?
Comment by Clear Conservative — January 7, 2008 @ 8:40 pm
Anyone sick of your shit on TP is welcome at TheZoo. We’re troll-free.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:43 pmComment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda — January 7, 2008 @ 8:25 pm
#27 - That is incredibly sage advice. Email it to her if you want her to win, she needs to change the subject somehow, anyhow, and she can’t go negative against Obama or she is cooked.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 8:39 pm
I only want to defeat the FISA legislation and save the 4th amendment. The only chance we have to do that is if the media brings the issue to the public’s attention. If Hillary heads back to Washington and joins the fight the media will follow her. Then people will understand that their rights to privacy FOREVER are on the line. FOREVER.
I don’t want Hillary to win. I want my 4th amendment back. If I have to use her to achieve that end, then so be it. It’ll be beneficial to her and me (and all of us).
January 7th, 2008 at 8:47 pmThe cloudy con adds nothing, takes away a lot from the atmosphere here. Kinda like an internet acid rain.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:47 pmWhat will TP regulars call for next, now that name registration has failed them in their attempt at an eco-chamber? -CC
Never was the goal…
January 7th, 2008 at 8:47 pmClinton’s tears reveal her relief, that she’ll finally be able to file for divorce and tell Bill to move back to Arkansas, all because she’s confident her campaign will tank at this point. Comment by Clear Conservative — January 7, 2008 @ 8:26 pm
Mayhaps you have been watching too many soap operas and lost sight of reality?
January 7th, 2008 at 8:53 pmSomeone should start a poll. Which media whore/neocon shill will cry loudest when their “permanent majority” becomes a distasteful asterisk?
Will we see “Bloody” Bill Kristol in a pool of tears?
Michele Malkin choking and sobbing?
Hannety blubbering under a “suicide watch”?
I can hardly wait!
January 7th, 2008 at 8:53 pm’m sensing a HUGE knee-jerk backlash against ANYBODY who doesn’t represent a wholesale 180 degree re-direct on this country’s direction and overall agenda.
And that’s a VERY good thing.
Comment by DieNowForPeace — January 7, 2008 @ 8:27 pm
Obama talks a good game (make that a great game). But he’s simply not believable in my book. He’s the change candidate?
He supported Warmonger Joe Lieberman over Progressive Ned Lamont. That’s change?
He’s taken craploads of money from Wall Street and Banks. He’ll owe these cretins his soul. That’s change?
He wants to help insurance policies sell policies and calls this a healthcare plan. That’s change?
He’s funded the Iraq occupation. That’s change?
I could go on but its getting late.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:54 pmPerhaps because she is a hysterical weak woman??
Comment by Ben Dover
Maybe she just wanted to show how hypocritical G(R)OPers are?
Certainly its now quite obvious.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:55 pmAnyone sick of your shit on TP is welcome at TheZoo. We’re troll-free.
Comment by Zooey — January 7, 2008 @ 8:43 pm
What do you find to talk about when the ticket for admission is agreeing with everyone already at the party? I don’t mean to be unfair to the Zoo, but I have never understood the anger that dissent generates here, so much so that you are moved to create your own private chatroom.
January 7th, 2008 at 8:56 pmYou forgot Boo-Hoo Boehner and Blubberer in Chief Poppy Bush.
-GSD
January 7th, 2008 at 9:02 pmWhat do you find to talk about when the ticket for admission is agreeing with everyone already at the party? I don’t mean to be unfair to the Zoo, but I have never understood the anger that dissent generates here, so much so that you are moved to create your own private chatroom.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
Hey, almost 100,000 views in three months counts for something. We are not drones like the trolls, we agree and disagree without being stupid and disgusting.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:05 pmComment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
Speaking only for myself, I welcome dissent and have had many enlightening exchanges with reasonable people I disagree with. It’s the childish vandalism, of certain parties, that ticks me off.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:06 pmClinton was crying because she knows she’s tanking in a big way!
January 7th, 2008 at 9:08 pmHey, almost 100,000 views in three months counts for something. We are not drones like the trolls, we agree and disagree without being stupid and disgusting.
Comment by Zooey — January 7, 2008 @ 9:05 pm
Just out of curiosity, just how not stupid, disgusting and troll-like must one be? I can’t figure out if I fit the description of troll or not in your eyes. I kinda miss Tripmaster, too, he really did vote with his keyboard over the Abel Simmons censorship thing, I don’t think I’ve seen him post here since.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:11 pmComment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:11 pm
Well, just how stupid and disgusting do you find yourself to be?
Are you referring to the Sibel Edmonds censorship issue?
January 7th, 2008 at 9:13 pmAre you referring to the Sibel Edmonds censorship issue?
Comment by Zooey — January 7, 2008 @ 9:13 pm
Yeah! Dyslexia, meet bad memory! It might be a anagram, at least…
January 7th, 2008 at 9:14 pmKeltoi, the Zoo is open to a difference of opinion. We are simply not open to trollish behavior.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:17 pmAbel Simmons censorship thing…
Are you referring to the Sibel Edmonds censorship issue?
Comment by Zooey @ 9:13 pm
Yeah! Dyslexia, meet bad memory! …
Comment by Keltoi at Night @ 9:14 pm
THAT was hilarious… for some reason…
January 7th, 2008 at 9:17 pmi can so identify, keltoi… funny…
What do you find to talk about when the ticket for admission is agreeing with everyone already at the party? I don’t mean to be unfair to the Zoo, but I have never understood the anger that dissent generates here, so much so that you are moved to create your own private chatroom.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
Among other things, we talk about people who completely misconstrue the reason for creating TheZoo in the first place. I have a feeling you weren’t around TP at the time, but we had an infestation of trolls that even you would acknowledge as a problem.
You generalize from a few examples of people who do wig out at dissent, and I make no attempt to justify their anger; they’re capable of handling that on their own. For myself, I like nothing more than a good argument, but the people we clearly identify as “trolls” aren’t interested in argument and aren’t interested in an exchange of views. They come for various reasons, including a really obvious desire for attention (watch them artfully turn a thread into a thread all about them), to belch out whatever nastiness fills them up with incoherent lies about “what liberals really think”, and just out of boredom–let’s poke the liberals with sticks until they get angry enough to bite back.
The threshold for their behavior is pretty low because we’ve been dealing with it for a long time. You just drop in from time to time and not only lack the experience but lack the passion of the progressive; it makes it easier, I would guess, to sit in judgment on what seems like uncalled-for anger.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:18 pmThey should cast her as a devotee of the status quo. Rahm and Harry and Nancy have failed to do their jobs and Hillary voted for all the supposed middle of the road positions. Too bad. It’s over. We all want justice, we all want the truth. Whether Obama can deliver is another question.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:19 pmComment by gummitch — January 7, 2008 @ 9:18 pm
Yeah! What gummitch said! :-)
January 7th, 2008 at 9:22 pmThe president is tremendously sentimental. […] He has learned not to brush the tears away. [Newsweek, 4/02]
what does THAT mean? why not brush the tears away?
January 7th, 2008 at 9:22 pmanyone?
Maybe Hillary pulled a Bohner?
January 7th, 2008 at 9:22 pmThe threshold for their behavior is pretty low because we’ve been dealing with it for a long time. You just drop in from time to time and not only lack the experience but lack the passion of the progressive; it makes it easier, I would guess, to sit in judgment on what seems like uncalled-for anger.
Comment by gummitch — January 7, 2008 @ 9:18 pm
Probably true, though I don’t think of myself as judging you, more making an observation. Semantics aside, I get frustrated with the obvious attempts at chumming red herrings here as well. I read all the threads, I just don’t post unless it is something I think I am close enough to the TP ethos to at least have a chance of batting it around without things getting out of hand.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:26 pmI have never understood the anger that dissent generates here, so much so that you are moved to create your own private chatroom.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
I grant that you and the few other reasonable dissenters face more than your share of vitriol on these boards, Keltoi. I think you get hit with backlash from the vast majority of right-wing voices here who are nothing more than time-wasting trolls. “Clear Conservative” is a prime example. The Man-Slag is another. I could go on, but I think you know who I’m talking about. These “conservatives” aren’t here to argue for conservative viewpoints, they’re just here to amuse themselves with the blog-equivalent of prank phone calls.
They don’t do your side any service other than generating anger and attacks from otherwise progressive posters. Come to think of it, maybe that is a valuable service for your side, after all. Except that you and folks like Captain Mantastic get splashed with the sh!t the trolls stir up, and any kind of meaningful debate becomes all but impossible.
Anyway, the echo chamber isn’t what most of the progressives here want. The problem is, reasonable debate isn’t what the trolls want. We both lose.
If only they weren’t so much fun to whack with mallets…
January 7th, 2008 at 9:29 pmgum, as usual, you said it far better than I could. thanks.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:32 pmIf only they weren’t so much fun to whack with mallets…
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — January 7, 2008 @ 9:29 pm
Well, that is your problem right there. There are also numerous wild-eyed left wing trolls - I am sure you can fill in some blanks here - who also indulge in the blog equivalent of prank calls, but theirs are more like obscene phone calls. I respond to them and try to talk them away from the edge once or twice, then I give up and ignore them. Sometimes the reasonable Progressives even tangle with them, which baffles me as I think it at least possible that they are the real government psy-ops folks that are here to make Progressives look like rabid foam at the mouth types.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:36 pmNot true.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 9:30 pm
Obviously one who couldn’t behave and wound up in the spam bin. :-D
January 7th, 2008 at 9:37 pmI can’t believe no one bit on Margaret Thatcher’s balls.
Tough crowd.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:39 pmNo wonder you only have about 4 or 5 commenters at THE ZOO.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 9:38 pm
Awwww, don’t cry little trollie.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:40 pmSometimes the reasonable Progressives even tangle with them, which baffles me as I think it at least possible that they are the real government psy-ops folks that are here to make Progressives look like rabid foam at the mouth types.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:36 pm
Nah, they’re just nuts.
And, honestly, for some people it’s simple rage and this is a safe place to go batshit. The rage has been fueled by years of helplessness in the face of some truly heinous behavior by so-called “conservatives” in the real world. “Talking people back from the edge” may just shove them off.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:40 pmNo wonder you only have about 4 or 5 commenters at THE ZOO.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 9:38 pm
To quote the eternal Spencer Tracy, “Not much meat on her, but what’s there is is cherce.”
Quantity does not equal quality.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:43 pmI think it’s hilarious.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 9:42 pm
**pat on the head**
January 7th, 2008 at 9:44 pmBack on topic, and this will earn me no friends, but it is a memory that is just too damn funny about the Clintons to not share about the sincerity of their emotiveness.
In the waning days of Bill’s tenure, his dog Buddy - young, beautiful retriever type - died. The WH issued a statement saying the Clinton’s were deeply saddened by this. Well, someone, I forget who, I don’t think Stewart was around then, it might have been Leno, did a compilation of public statements of grief and regret the Clinton’s had issued over the years. I think the wording for Buddy was similar for what they said about Mother Teresea.
Anyway, I remember just going wow, how bad has your credibility become when your dog dies and people question the sincerity of your grief?
I know most here think the MSM is ultraright, which is one of those topics I don’t engage on because I disagree so completely it is pointless to debate, but bottom line, I think the Clinton’s have earned the public skepticism that is directed at the genuineness of their emotions.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:46 pmThere are also numerous wild-eyed left wing trolls - I am sure you can fill in some blanks here - who also indulge in the blog equivalent of prank calls, but theirs are more like obscene phone calls. I respond to them and try to talk them away from the edge once or twice, then I give up and ignore them. Sometimes the reasonable Progressives even tangle with them, which baffles me as I think it at least possible that they are the real government psy-ops folks that are here to make Progressives look like rabid foam at the mouth types.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:36 pm
No dispute there. I’ve even been known to tangle with one or two of the left-wing trolls myself. There’s not a whole lot of difference in tone or tactics between the two.
“Talk them away from the edge”… I like that image. I may steal it sometime.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:46 pmI can’t believe no one bit on Margaret Thatcher’s balls.
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — January 7, 2008 @ 9:39 pm
That is an image I could have lived without. Then again, she was the Iron Lady - coulda lost a tooth!
January 7th, 2008 at 9:47 pm“justasskissing”
Not enough breast-feeding as a baby, eh?
January 7th, 2008 at 9:48 pm**kicks Zooey in the A$$**
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 9:47 pm
Good luck with that, shorty.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:49 pmAnyway, I remember just going wow, how bad has your credibility become when your dog dies and people question the sincerity of your grief?
I know most here think the MSM is ultraright, which is one of those topics I don’t engage on because I disagree so completely it is pointless to debate, but bottom line, I think the Clinton’s have earned the public skepticism that is directed at the genuineness of their emotions.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:46 pm
If I recall, there was also some story about them giving away a dog when they left the White House, but I might have that wrong. I heard the story fairly recently, in fact, and it creeped me out entirely. Almost as creepy is how much I like Bush’s two dogs, but I’m a sucker for a Scottie.
I admit to a lot of suspicion about HRC and her behavior, but I really don’t need to hear it echoed by a vicious creep like Michelle Malkin.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:51 pmI think the wording for Buddy was similar for what they said about Mother Teresea.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:46 pm
Just how large is your repertoire of voicing your sorrow at the death of someone? Really.
I usually say, “I’m really sorry” or “I’m so sorry” or “He looks so natural.” I mean how many things are there?
January 7th, 2008 at 9:52 pmoh god here we go - what’s the bet that all we’ll be hearing ad nauseum for the next few months will be ‘muskie moment’ - seems like a new catchphrase is hatched by the media…..and did anyone elses stomache turn when kristol spoke on that video clip?
January 7th, 2008 at 9:55 pmHillary’s crap pile has more integrity than any thing to ever come out of Malkin’s mouth. That said, I’m still pulling for Edwards.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:56 pmAnyway, I remember just going wow, how bad has your credibility become when your dog dies and people question the sincerity of your grief?
I know most here think the MSM is ultraright, which is one of those topics I don’t engage on because I disagree so completely it is pointless to debate, but bottom line, I think the Clinton’s have earned the public skepticism that is directed at the genuineness of their emotions.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:46 pm
I think the phenomenon you describe was at the very least enhanced by the relentless Clinton-bashing that was the preoccupation of the Right in the 90s. If you convince yourself and your friends in the media that the Clintons are calculating, triangulating political animals without souls, it’s easy to believe that the death of their dog is just another PR release.
I never bought that picture. I think Clinton was a very shrewd political animal, but I also think he’s got a good, if flawed soul beneath his suit. I suspect that I’m not alone, since he was very popular when he left office (I believe Buddy was hit by a car at their new home in New York, after Bill had vacated the WH) and has remained a popular figure for most Americans.
As far as the media goes, I wouldn’t say it is “ultraright” by any means. But I would say it has lost its way and, if there is a bias displayed, it leans right. I think the “liberal media” is a myth very useful to the Right that ceased being even close to reality in the late eighties, if not before.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:56 pmI usually say, “I’m really sorry†or “I’m so sorry†or “He looks so natural.†I mean how many things are there?
Comment by Zooey — January 7, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
I agree, it was just the fact that anyone could question whether you were really sorry your dog had died that blew me away! Anyone who has ever owned a good dog knows what I mean. But again, that is where the Clinton’s veracity dwells in the public mind, and I am convinced it is the single most important factor in HRC going down in flames.
January 7th, 2008 at 9:58 pmKelito-why do you all hate the Clinton’s? Do really know? I sent her an email and pleaded with her not to run. I could not stand 4 more years of the right wing hate toward them. However, I never understood why you all hate them. I hope Obama puts her away real quick so we can get on with fixing this country that has been wrecked by Bush.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:00 pma little genetic problem†he attributes to his dad, whom Time magazine once described as a “frequent weeper.â€
Thanks,I almost forgot about the WIMP the hypocrites elected.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:00 pmgum, the story you’re referring to is about Socks, the Clinton’s White House cat. The way I understand it, the cat went home with Bill’s secretary when the Clintons left the WH. She had developed a fondness for it and since Chelsea was off at school (it was Chelsea’s cat, I think) and the transition to the Clinton’s new home in New York was looming, it made sense to let the secretary adopt Socks.
Pretty innocuous story, especially if you are familiar with rescue and adoption, as I am.
(Now, strapping a dog in a crate to the top of your station wagon and screaming down the interstate — that’s a different story.)
January 7th, 2008 at 10:01 pmHilary has received more money from wallstreet than anyone, even the repubs, she gave up on universal healthcare almost immediately, and certainly has no great track record on Iraq.
But as a MA resident I am pissed about Obama’s attitude on healthcare as well.
Thanks to Romney and Patrick I am being fined $76 for not having health insurance this month and am deciding on a lame plan for next month that will cost $240 - $400 depending how lame I want it to be. We need to demand National, single-payer healthcare!
January 7th, 2008 at 10:02 pm-Steve
What do you find to talk about when the ticket for admission is agreeing with everyone already at the party? -Keltoi
Such is why your not over at Freeper land?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:02 pmMaklin is not “the media”, she is a train wreck.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:03 pmIt’s really a shame , a crime that we don’t have a serious NEWS media in this country, and it’s getting worse every year .
I’m no fan of H.C. but the constant milking and commentary ON her ” emotional moment ” , the speculation with ridiculous , Crass speculation is really embarrassing to watch .
The national news must watch cable all day , ie Blitzer who sensationalized the so called Hillary emotional moment , having the NERVE to first ask Bill Bradley’s opinion , then Donna Brazille and Bill Bennett’s opinion about this non issue . That on top of the poll orgy discussions , and horse race blather . It’s a crime that CNN and the other echo machines, are driving real news into the CESSPOOL of speculation and sensationalism .
In the mean time Bush is conducting a war against Somalia with Ethiopia , he’s using as mercenaries and it goes unreported , as we’ll as the daily killing of Palestinians in Gaza, by the IDF .
CBS had the time for a fabricated , soccer mom story about daughters using gift cards , at the mall . Yet, When Israel blew the head off , a Palestinian 12 YO.girl NOTHING .
January 7th, 2008 at 10:03 pmI agree, it was just the fact that anyone could question whether you were really sorry your dog had died that blew me away!
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:58 pm
I don’t completely discount your thought, but c’mon — name one thing that the Clintons could do that WOULDN’T be questioned by some of the Usual Suspects on the right.
I mean, jeezus, Ann Coulter claimed that 9/11 widows were enjoying their husbands’ deaths. That pretty much raises the bar out of reach.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:04 pmComment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 9:58 pm
You’re probably right.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:04 pmIf you convince yourself and your friends in the media that the Clintons are calculating, triangulating political animals without souls, it’s easy to believe that the death of their dog is just another PR release.
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — January 7, 2008 @ 9:56 pm
Well, it always seemed to me that Power was their God. If that makes them souless…they wouldn’t be the first politicians to be such.
I remember during the 92 debate someone asked Clinton whether he would advocate legalizing marijuana since he had smoked it. I leaned forward in my chair, having sampled the Chronic now and then, and thought, here is your chance to show me you are a person of character and not a pandering politician. Anyone who has smoked pot knows its being illegal is assinine beyond belief. But no, he blathered about fighting the war on drugs because that is where the votes are.
They aren’t so different from other politicians, but as David Geffen said earlier in the season, the ease with which they lie is disturbing, and Geffen knows them pretty damn well.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:07 pmPretty innocuous story, especially if you are familiar with rescue and adoption, as I am.
(Now, strapping a dog in a crate to the top of your station wagon and screaming down the interstate — that’s a different story.)
Comment by ralph the wonder llama — January 7, 2008 @ 10:01 pm
Ah, well, that is different. Especially cats, who really don’t give a sh!t who fills the dish and provides warm places to sleep. “Scratch me here until I’m bored and then p!ss off.”
January 7th, 2008 at 10:08 pmClinton is not winning because of what she said, not because of what others said. Hillary bashing MLK and Obama together says a lot about her.
Obama offers change from the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton cycle of politics which is failing us. He offers hope. His message is powerful. Hope and the desire for change have caused America to be great before, and it can again.
Obama doesn’t do so badly on experience either. Just successfully taking on the Clinton machine is great experience. And unlike all his major opponents, Obama was wise enough not to support the war in Iraq from the start, always advocating finishing the job in eradicating bin Ladin. Obama’s position against the Iraq war was not popular and not easy especially in the middle of his campaign for Senator, but he took the hard road nonetheless.
Obama would be older than Bill Clinton when Bill was first elected President and Obama already is older than JFK when he was elected President. Another successful President who was older than Obama upon taking office was T.R.
If you take a close look at the “experience” of Obama’s opponents, it’s not like they are former successful governors either. Hillary’s main experience as First Lady was failing to implement healthcare reform and then being relegated to the backburner for the rest of Bill’s terms. She still won’t release her official records as First Lady either, which is troubling given that we need government openness more than ever.
Hillary voted for Bush’s warmongering proposal to declare Iran’s military to be terrorists as recently as a few weeks ago - only to write a letter to the President “clarifying” her position. On both her votes on Iran and Iraq, Hillary will not admit she made a mistake.
Unlike Hillary, Obama does not take lobbyist money or 527 money. Obama spearheaded ethics reform in Congress.
It’s time for a change.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:09 pmAh, well, that is different. Especially cats, who really don’t give a sh!t who fills the dish and provides warm places to sleep. “Scratch me here until I’m bored and then p!ss off.â€
Comment by gummitch — January 7, 2008 @ 10:08 pm
I find those things to be their finest qualities. ;)
January 7th, 2008 at 10:11 pmThe media are desperately trying to conjure up another “Dean scream” or a “Dukakis tank moment”, to have a role in the election cycle as a participant and not as a mere observer. Most of the reporters and so-called journalists are inferior intellects who never do their homework and who are full of themselves and think they are actually doing something with their lives. Funny that it almost always seems like it’s the Democratic candidate whose campaign is hounded with one singular image that is echoed to infinity and is supposed to encapsulate their entire nature. By the way, I don’t support Hillary, but I want her defeated on the merits, not through some idiotic media election cycle obssessorama.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:13 pmI have refused to subscribe to cable, for more than ten ears, largely because I refuse to support any of the, so called, “news networks”. I think they, collectively, do this country a disservice and I would be delighted at their demise.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:13 pmbecause you’re overtly calling attention to them and the body language is different. Leaving a tear is one thing but wiping them away often leaves red eyes and calls to mind a different emotional state. I wish I could put it into words, but it’s different. (not saying it should be)
January 7th, 2008 at 10:14 pmWell, it always seemed to me that Power was their God. If that makes them souless…they wouldn’t be the first politicians to be such. -Keltoi
Who are you too decide who is souless?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:14 pmI remember during the 92 debate someone asked Clinton whether he would advocate legalizing marijuana since he had smoked it. I leaned forward in my chair, having sampled the Chronic now and then, and thought, here is your chance to show me you are a person of character and not a pandering politician. Anyone who has smoked pot knows its being illegal is assinine beyond belief. But no, he blathered about fighting the war on drugs because that is where the votes are.
Comment by Keltoi at Night — January 7, 2008 @ 10:07 pm
I agree with you there. I’ve never smoked pot, but almost everyone I know has, and I think it’s absurd that it’s illegal. That was the first opportunity to show extraordinary leadership that Bill punted, and it wasn’t the last.
But on balance, I think he’s a much more soulful pol (is that an oxymoron?) than most give him credit for. I think Hillary less so, and I think she’s got less courage, but I think she’s still more human than the right-wing (and media) caricature of her would have it.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:16 pmSee Zooey? I agree with people that are smart.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 10:13 pm
It’s so sad that you seem to need my approval.
**pat on the head**
January 7th, 2008 at 10:16 pmFunny that it almost always seems like it’s the Democratic candidate whose campaign is hounded with one singular image that is echoed to infinity and is supposed to encapsulate their entire nature.
You must admit though that in Dean’s case, he scared people away because he really did seem maniacal, at least for a moment.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:16 pmComment by Impolitics — January 7, 2008 @ 10:13 pm
That should be “ten years”, though, “tin ears” might apply.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:16 pmHowever, I never understood why you all hate them. I hope Obama puts her away real quick so we can get on with fixing this country that has been wrecked by Bush.
Comment by Joefriday — January 7, 2008 @ 10:00 pm
I don’t hate her. I hate the idea of having her front and center on the political stage. They had their time. Time to move on. Go, Obama.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:17 pmWell to me, leaving political/gossip/show aside, I can’t understand these words:
“It’s not easy, and I couldn’t do it if I didn’t passionately believe it was the right thing to do,†she said.
Passionately believe??? You are going to be a President and you believe that you are the one, passionately?
I mean you kiss your girlfriend passionately, I play soccer leaving my life in the pitch, but, seriously, you DON’T GET TO BE PRESIDENT just because of your passion on that goal.
To me, that’s the most shining example of how public servants just want the power in order to benefit their buddies and them in the process…imagine the whole money that Lockheed Martin, Viacom, IBM, etc have put on Hillary in order to win favors after the election. (Of course, corporations are not married to just one candidate, they probably threw loads of money to everybody, just in case). I mean, there are entire families, but not too many, that are always in the highest economic layers of US society: Rockefeller, Bush, Clinton, Kennedy… these guys are SHARING THE CAKE and they are not leaving any crumbles.
If it was a true democracy, Clinton wouldn’t care less who was the President because, the people would make the decisions…
January 7th, 2008 at 10:17 pmHoward Dean, scream or not, would have made a helluva lot better President than what we’ve had. Phony media refuses to discuss the issues with any degree of intelligence.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:17 pmHoward Dean, scream or not, would have made a helluva lot better President than what we’ve had. Phony media refuses to discuss the issues with any degree of intelligence.
Comment by jb — January 7, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
Hear, hear!
January 7th, 2008 at 10:18 pm…I’m sorry for your loss…
January 7th, 2008 at 10:18 pmThe former shows you are genuine. The latter shows you are weak. Comment by good_golly — January 7, 2008 @ 10:13 pm
January 7th, 2008 at 10:19 pm\
Sending the troops into a quagmire then tearing up over it is not genuine.
Howard Dean, scream or not, would have made a helluva lot better President than what we’ve had. Phony media refuses to discuss the issues with any degree of intelligence.
Comment by jb — January 7, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
That is a matter of conjecture. Dean has had strange little moments simply as head of the DNC, I shudder to think of what he may have done with the WH under his control. The man was just too close to the razors edge all the time, as if a towering rage was always just under the surface.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:20 pmSee Zooey? I agree with people that are smart.
Comment by justasking
mmm…another Zooey fan. What’s with these people?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:20 pmIn direct reference to Hillary’s ‘moment’, I would chalk that up to the media sharks smelling blood in the water.
When she dumped in Iowa, the gloves may not have come off but they were definitely being unlaced.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:23 pmComment by Zooey — January 7, 2008 @ 10:16 pm
No, what I was saying is that I don’t get along with you because you’re not smart.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 10:20 pm
You might be able to fool yourself, but the rest of us know Zooey. You saying Zooey’s “not smart” only reveals the limitations of your judgment.
Unless you’re being sarcastic.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:23 pmNope, I guess you’re not being sarcastic.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:24 pmmmm…another Zooey fan. What’s with these people?
Comment by Juan C. — January 7, 2008 @ 10:20 pm
Unstable, off their meds, batshit insane…. :D
January 7th, 2008 at 10:24 pmI’m saying that Zooey is not smart.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 10:22 pm
And yet, you still seem to need my approval and attention. How very sad for you.
**tweaks nose**
January 7th, 2008 at 10:25 pmI teared up and 2000 election when GWB stole it.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:25 pmBush 41 cried when son Jebb didn’t make an election.
VERY different tears.
If it was a true democracy, Clinton wouldn’t care less who was the President because, the people would make the decisions…
Comment by Juan C. — January 7, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
A true pure form of democracy would have all 300 million citizens voting on every single issue. The republic that exists now may not be perfect but it beats the heck out of having to count 300 million ballots over who gets to be head of the BATF.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:26 pmZooey’s comments seem to me to be well informed, clever and to the point. She can be curt with fools.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:26 pmAnd yet, you still seem to need my approval and attention. How very sad for you.
Comment by Zooey — January 7, 2008 @ 10:25 pm
Stalking is, probably too strong a word, but, it’s close.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:29 pmMaybe you were asleep and missed the joke. I’m saying that Zooey is not smart.
Comment by justasking
Oh, Zooey, do you have luck or what? You just came into this blog and some guy, out of nothing, whose smartest post are 4 word sentences, tells you, you are not smart.
Guess all your life has been a lie, Zoo and my opinion about your wit, too.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:30 pmCC got nuked. What will the next identity be?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:31 pmNo, I don’t need your approval. That’s what bothered you the first time I posted here. Remember? It’s fine. You’ll be ok.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 10:29 pm
**snort** No, I don’t remember. But you do. How quaint.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:31 pmWho hit Michelle Malkin in the face with a frying pan?
Comment by BARTLEBEE — January 7, 2008 @ 7:38 pm
Somebody hit her again…..maybe she will shut up.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:32 pmUnstable, off their meds, batshit insane…. :D
Comment by Zooey
I was going to go with a no-window attic, cold food under the door every day and a pair of the shoes of the same foot.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:33 pmGuess all your life has been a lie, Zoo and my opinion about your wit, too.
Comment by Juan C. — January 7, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
Yep, I really can no longer live with myself. Goodbye cruel world!
January 7th, 2008 at 10:33 pm“Zooey can be witty. Yes. But that’s it.”
Comment by justasking
Witty, but not smart?
You do know you’re not making any sense - don’t you?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:34 pm“Snort?”
Comment by justasking
Slow train?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:34 pmThis thread is about …?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:35 pmThis thread is about …?
Comment by freeman — January 7, 2008 @ 10:35 pm
justasking
January 7th, 2008 at 10:37 pmGet real, Juan.
Comment by justasking
Ok, I will stop being a shimmering pigment of my imagination.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:37 pmIs she going to cry after each primary? Perhaps she is preparing to concede.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:37 pmWho ARE you?
Comment by justasking
A regular. Who are you?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:38 pmOk, I will stop being a shimmering pigment of my imagination.
Comment by Juan C. — January 7, 2008 @ 10:37 pm
You’ll always be a shimmering point in my imagination, Juan. :D
January 7th, 2008 at 10:38 pmAccording to the American Heritage Dictionary, 4th Ed.:
Wit
1. The natural ability to perceive and understand; intelligence.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:38 pm2.
a. Keenness and quickness of perception or discernment; ingenuity. Often used in the plural: living by one’s wits.
b. wits Sound mental faculties; sanity: scared out of my wits.
3.
a. The ability to perceive and express in an ingeniously humorous manner the relationship between seemingly incongruous or disparate things.
b. One noted for this ability, especially one skilled in repartee.
c. A person of exceptional intelligence.
“So?”
Comment by justasking
Wow. That’s one hell of a comeback.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:40 pmWow. That’s one hell of a comeback.
Comment by barfly — January 7, 2008 @ 10:40 pm
justasking is not witty.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:42 pmYou’ll always be a shimmering point in my imagination, Juan. :D
January 7th, 2008 at 10:43 pmComment by Zooey
And people question your intelligence? :D
Comment by Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver — January 7, 2008 @ 10:38 pm
Nice one. :-)
January 7th, 2008 at 10:43 pmAnd people question your intelligence? :D
Comment by Juan C. — January 7, 2008 @ 10:43 pm
Not people — trolls. *yawn*
January 7th, 2008 at 10:44 pmComment by justasking
I just enjoy deflating self-important dorks - like you.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:44 pm“Do you have special standing if you come here more often than others?”
Comment by justasking
Yup, I know the secret password…
January 7th, 2008 at 10:45 pmThis thread is about …?
Comment by freeman — January 7, 2008 @ 10:35 pm
It’s either about the hypocrisy of media, Hillary’s “Muskie moment”, or, justasking’s obsession with Zooey. Frankly, I’m, a bit, confused myself.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:45 pmI’m getting the not-so-subtle aroma of stale pee. It always seems to appear with the Zooey obsession. Something vaguely reminiscent of doritos . . .
January 7th, 2008 at 10:48 pm“Or do you have to agree with certain people to be a regular?”
Comment by justasking
Try being a little less annoying.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:48 pmIt’s either about the hypocrisy of media, Hillary’s “Muskie momentâ€, or, justasking’s obsession with Zooey. Frankly, I’m, a bit, confused myself.
Comment by Impolitics — January 7, 2008 @ 10:45 pm
I really don’t get it.
Is it the Z? Or the ooey? ;)
January 7th, 2008 at 10:49 pmI’ve seen Zooey say UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUgly stuff. And she could do it again. anytime. anywhere.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 10:48 pm
Why thank you, justasking. **sniff*
Which was your favorite?
January 7th, 2008 at 10:50 pmI rather not say. You’re pretty vile.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 10:53 pm
Coming from you, I consider that high praise.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:54 pm“Did you do it yet?
Comment by justasking
You assert that someone can be “witty” without being smart. You rag on others for what you obviously aren’t - either witty OR smart.
Sounds like a big helping of envy, with a side order of intellectual resentment.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:55 pmComment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 10:55 pm
If you’re saying I argued in favor of racial epithet’s then you are lying, and if you insist on continuing to say it, you will have to prove it.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:58 pmSigh. I guess the topic is tapped out, it was interesting but all based on speculation and mind reading anyway.
January 7th, 2008 at 10:59 pmYou remember everything.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 11:00 pm
Yep. And it never happened.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:01 pmI’ve seen Zooey say fiiiiiiiiiiiiine stuff. How stupid a comment is that.
Zooey, you keep at it.
While you’re at it . . .
Crocodile tears? Ick.
To me, the big Democratic “change” issue is big corporate donors, lobbyists, pharma, insurance and energy companies, and vestested special interests . . . when Obama and Edwards speak about “change”, it’s about kicking those interests out . . . why they don’t mention the obvious elephant in the living room (elephant generally equates with the GOP, but Hillary is the biggest beneficiary in history) seems odd to me.
Perhaps this is the elephant gun that they plan to pull out at the finish, but Hill and the elephant are in the living room today . . . why doesn’t anyone shoot it.
You get f’t by an elephant, as we have been, you’re . . .well . . . you know . . . your feelings are hurt.
Why wait?
January 7th, 2008 at 11:04 pmGo ahead. Prove it.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:04 pmY’know, this sounds an awful lot like our dear departed Rachel, just sayin, not askin.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:05 pmY’know, this sounds an awful lot like our dear departed Rachel, just sayin, not askin.
Comment by RUCerious — January 7, 2008 @ 11:05 pm
Rachel was witty.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:07 pmRACIAL EPIPHETS?
Just wait till Obama is the presidential (or even vice-presidential candidate).
My dad’s wife, an avid Limbaugh fan, says Democrats are for
“ni66ers and welfare”…
THIS is what the listeners of Limbaugh, Savage, etc. REALLY think.
You watch…
January 7th, 2008 at 11:07 pm“You disprove it.”
Comment by justasking
You’re even funnier - but not on purpose.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:07 pmNow I do recall justaskin’s first stint. She came on and lambasted us for not calling bs on some loony troll’s racist crap.
On that particular day I was bouncing in and out, running scripts at work.
And she thought I didn’t respond to the troll quickly enough.
Keep askin, maybe someone will sell you a clue.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:08 pmYou get f’t by an elephant….
Comment by rockyroad — January 7, 2008 @ 11:04 pm
AND YOU NEVER GO BACK! BOOM!
That was in honor of Eddie Murphy in trading places. Back to the derailed thread.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:08 pmYou disprove it.
Comment by justasking — January 7, 2008 @ 11:06 pm
You’re just too full of shit, aren’t you? :-D
January 7th, 2008 at 11:08 pm“Vestested” special interests are the worst. They are the 521 unaccountable lobby organizations.
Identify your donors! You are surly vesested. ;> )
January 7th, 2008 at 11:09 pmNice post Arn. There are lots of those crazed bible thumpin bigots out there. My uncle Harold is one.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:09 pmKeep askin, maybe someone will sell you a clue.
Comment by RUCerious — January 7, 2008 @ 11:08 pm
Still no idea, RUC. I really don’t try to remember troll shit.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:11 pmOh, anyone who’s reading.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:13 pmMistress Z, the reason I remember is because she pissed me off the first time I read her. Like I was spending every moment condoning loony tunes troll racist shit. Condescending crapola.
January 7th, 2008 at 11:14 pmMistress Z, the reason I remember is because she pissed me off the first time I read her. Like I was spending every moment condoning loony tunes troll racist shit. Condescending crapola.
Comment by RUCerious — January 7, 2008 @ 11:14 pm
Witless “concern troll” troll?