More Bad News for Hillary
Hillary Clinton may be in for a disappointing two years as her hopes of becoming the first female President slip away. Who is it that is going to keep her from her ultimate goal? Republicans? Evil conservatives bent on convincing the American People that she is Satan? No! The ones that are standing in her way, as of this moment, are her own "constituents." The Left, of which she is definitely a part of, is having doubts about her. And the stories that have emerged in the past few days have pointed to this.
First, there was the New York Times piece talking about the status of her marriage to Bill. Then, with the release of his movie, Al Gore began getting great press and talked about as her major opponent in 2008. (We commented on one of these stories by Andrew Sullivan.) Now, we have yet another installment on the problems she has with Bill, this time involving the guest list for his birthday party later this summer in New York. The Sunday Times (UK) is stating that everyone with a vested interest with Hillary's '08 run is keeping an eye on who is--or isn't--on the guest list. Everyone is looking out for a Canadian MP and heiress, Belinda Stronach, to see if she will be at Bill's bash. Who is this young woman you ask? She has been the subject of tabloid speculation about another Bill romp with other than public intentions. There has been considerable refutation of this by Bill and Ms. Stronach, but the simple fact that Democrat Pols in Washington are hoping that she is not at Bill's party tells us that there maybe more there than just the avoidance of tabloid headlines. In fact The Times piece ends thus, "If history repeats itself and another glamorous blonde sings 'Happy birthday, Mr President' from the stage of Madison Square Garden, Democrats will be praying she is Hillary."
Democrats are already, about a year and a half out, giving reasons for why they will not nominate Mrs. Clinton to be on the top of the ticket for their Party. I am not saying that the Republicans should sleep on her, but there is reason to believe that she is not as invincible as she appeared when she won the Senate seat that she now occupies.
Oh, yeah, here's that Times piece: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2200169,00.html
Editor's Update: May 30, 2006
I found this through www.instapundit.com and thought that I would pass this along.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/v-echo/story/422082p-356248c.html
First, there was the New York Times piece talking about the status of her marriage to Bill. Then, with the release of his movie, Al Gore began getting great press and talked about as her major opponent in 2008. (We commented on one of these stories by Andrew Sullivan.) Now, we have yet another installment on the problems she has with Bill, this time involving the guest list for his birthday party later this summer in New York. The Sunday Times (UK) is stating that everyone with a vested interest with Hillary's '08 run is keeping an eye on who is--or isn't--on the guest list. Everyone is looking out for a Canadian MP and heiress, Belinda Stronach, to see if she will be at Bill's bash. Who is this young woman you ask? She has been the subject of tabloid speculation about another Bill romp with other than public intentions. There has been considerable refutation of this by Bill and Ms. Stronach, but the simple fact that Democrat Pols in Washington are hoping that she is not at Bill's party tells us that there maybe more there than just the avoidance of tabloid headlines. In fact The Times piece ends thus, "If history repeats itself and another glamorous blonde sings 'Happy birthday, Mr President' from the stage of Madison Square Garden, Democrats will be praying she is Hillary."
Democrats are already, about a year and a half out, giving reasons for why they will not nominate Mrs. Clinton to be on the top of the ticket for their Party. I am not saying that the Republicans should sleep on her, but there is reason to believe that she is not as invincible as she appeared when she won the Senate seat that she now occupies.
Oh, yeah, here's that Times piece: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2200169,00.html
Editor's Update: May 30, 2006
I found this through www.instapundit.com and thought that I would pass this along.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/v-echo/story/422082p-356248c.html
posted by Robert A. McReynolds | 1:49 PM
2 Comments:
At least Sen. Clinton has the balls to run for office. That is more than I can say for Mr. Rush Limbaugh, who just hides behing his golden microphone. And pretends about his dependency on perscription drugs!
Why do you comment as anonymous? And why don't you comment on what was written by me? You do not comment on the substance of what I wrote and therefore you must be intellectually weak. I find you to be impotent in your posts and I do wish that you would give me more than what you have give thus far. Thanks for visiting the site though.
Post a Comment
<< Home