Insomnia (insomnia) wrote,
Insomnia
insomnia

Hillaryity ensues.

  You know how I was comparing Tracy Flick in Election the other day to a certain unmentioned candidate? Well, apparently the people over at Slate have come to a similar conclusion.

And Maureen Dowd's editorial in the New York Times wasn't pulling punches either, either on Hillary Clinton, or on her supporters...

"Better the devil you know than the diffident debutante you don’t. Better to go with the Clintons, with all their dysfunction and chaos — the same kind that fueled the Republican hate machine — than to risk the chance that Obama would be mauled like a chew toy in the general election. Better to blow off all the inspiration and the young voters, the independents and the Republicans that Obama is attracting than to take a chance on something as ephemeral as hope. Now that’s Cheney-level paranoia."

I don't know about you, but when I think "diffident debutante" and Democrats, I think JFK.  

And the reporters are obviously having fun today, reporting on how Hillary Clinton has **ALREADY** had to dip $5 million into her pockets to fund her campaign through Super Tuesday, and now seems on the verge of having to spend even more of their money to keep in the race.

And yes, the media will have a little chuckle about it, because they know how the Clintons earned a lot of that money

Well, that and insider trading on cattle futures. The Clintons made their first riches based on what was essentially a bribe scheme. The overall investment technique was akin to baiting a four-year-old's fishing pole for them, watching over it, and then letting them reel in a big fish on one of your own lines.  

Payback is a bitch sometimes, isn't it?  Perhaps they should pull Bill off the campaign trail and put him back on the lecture tour, to help pay for the campaign...

Don't feel sorry for the Clintons. Hillary Clinton knows that if the voters actually do give her the nomination, she can always keep raising money for her campaign, turning to corporate lobbyist friends in order to pay back her millions in loans to her campaign. 

(i.e. She'll take bribes to directly pay off her personal debts, prior to taking office.)

So... why didn't she want to tell us about her self-funding before the race? Why did her campaign take so long in comparison to Obama's to report their income for January, only doing so after being repeatedly pressured by the press? Perhaps they didn't want to be known as the astroturf campaign?

Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 0 comments