Hot Rodham Blog

Hillary Takes Credit For The Troop Surge [UPDATED]

snooper — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:51:13 +0000

BITCH! BITCH! THE BITCH IS BACK! BITCH! BITCH! THE BITCH IS BACK!

OK. This is what we have been expecting for quite some time. As the Defeatocrats ignore the successes of the Troop Surge and Victory in Iraq is imminent, the Leftinistra have been consorting and their Spin Machines have come up with a plan…pretend they were for the Troop Surge and take all credit for the Victory in Iraq. I have written about this on my “old blog” Take Our Country Back and I will dig up those posts and place them here fairly soon.

HT to Gateway Pundit for the data here presented for our readers and subscribers:

It Has Begun…Hillary Takes Credit For Surge She Opposed!!
Imagine that. To set the damn record straight, please recall that the Defeatocrats INCLUDING Czarina the Budding Leninist opposed the Bush Troop Surge from the beginning. Hillary’s “sudden” turn around and accepting the credit for the successes of the Bush Troop Surge requires the willful suspension of disbelief, as she herself said about General Petraeus’ testimony before the CONgress way back in September of 2007. Remember that one? This is unbelievable but it has been expected.

From Gateway: (we at A Newt One concur)

Judith Apter Kliinghoffer at the History News Network posted this amazing attempt by Hillary Clinton on Meet the Press to take credit for the success in Iraq even though she opposed the Bush Surge that brought about this success:

MR. RUSSERT: If General Petraeus says, “Senator, in September you called the surge the suspension of belief. It has worked, and you know it’s worked”–let me finish–”you can see on the ground. I’m saying to you, Senator, or president-elect Clinton, don’t destroy Iraq. It’s working, the surge is working. Keep troops there just a few more months to get this reconciliation complete.”

SEN. CLINTON: …The point of the surge was to quickly move the Iraqi government and Iraqi people. That is only now beginning to happen, and I believe in large measure because the Iraqi government, they watch us, they listen to us. I know very well that they follow everything that I say. And my commitment to begin withdrawing our troops in January of 2009 is a big factor, as it is with Senator Obama, Senator Edwards, those of us on the Democratic side. It is a big factor in pushing the Iraqi government to finally do what they should have been doing all along.

Amazing!She voted to surrender Iraq with the rest of the Democrats– a move that would have brought total destruction to the country.
Now, she wants to take credit for its success!
Truly, amazing!

Today, Hillary Clinton also blasted antiwar Barak Obama on the War in Iraq.
And, yet here’s a look at Hillary Clinton’s many stands on Iraq:

video here

I, Snooper, have willfully suspended my disbelief. Simply amazing how so many will swallow this creeps’ bullshit lockstep and goosestep.

Hillary Clinton on October 2, 2002:

“So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interest of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war. It is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our president.”

Hillary Clinton on February 7, 2007:

“Nearly four years ago our president rushed us into war in Iraq.”

Yet today, this troubled and dishonest politician is bashing antiwar Barak Obama for his stand against the war we are now winning.

Hillary also attacked Barak Obama for raising the race issue!

Who wants change?

This woman is certainly NOT ready for the Big Times and is clearly unfit for command.

Catch the wave at memeorandum right here…

Read Heading Right‘s take:
Hot Air:
Meet The Depressed video here:
Riehl World View:
Suitably Flip:
Wake Up America:
Flopping Aces:
Don Surber now steps in:
MacsMind:
The Astute Bloggers:
Weasel Zippers:
Snakes and Snails:
Right Voices:
Protein Wisdom:
Poligazette:

I wonder why General David Petraeus sent a letter to Debbie Lee of Move America Forward a letter of thanks for supporting the troops and he didn’t send one to Hillary?

Proof Positive Hillary Is Unfit For Command

snooper — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:47:58 +0000

Emotional. Insecure. Angry. Vindictive. Zero experience. ‘Nuf said.

THIS JUST IN: CLINTON LEGACY OFFICIALLY DEAD

snooper — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 11:17:42 +0000

If the latest post Iowa poll is to believed, (and I have bad news for the Clintonistas, it’s from Rasmussen- the best pollsters there are) Hillary Clinton is done. Stick a fork in her, turn out the lights etc…. etc….. etc…..

The latest poll from Rasmussen Reports shows that Obama has surged to a 10 point lead over Hillary in the granite state. If Hillary gets owned in NH like she did in Iowa, it’s just over and that is all there is to it.

This is both extremely bad news and extremely good news for Republicans (and, as a consequence, America).

Bad news

I was begging, in fact praying, that Hillary would be the nominee. There is no more hated, polarizing figure in politics and most of America would have crawled for miles over broken glass to vote against her.
Obama is far more affable, far more charismatic and (most importantly) far more unknown.

Obama will be an infinitely harder opponent to beat than Hillary. I still think we will do it, but it will not be easy.

Good news

Well……

There is no more hated, polarizing figure in politics and most of America would have crawled for miles over broken glass to vote against her. That apparently includes Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire. This proves that the Clintons have left such a nasty stain on American history that even their own party now hates them.

Despite the fact that it may not be the best thing for Republicans, there is something utterly delicious about such a total and humiliating repudiation of Hillary and, by extension, Bill.

The Clintons, as a political force, are dead if Hillary loses New Hampshire.

They won’t be missed. I assure you.

A Merry Christmas Message From Czarina

snooper — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:28:41 +0000

~Snooper~

Hillary Rodham Clinton wishes us all a Merry Bash Bush, Bring The Troops Home, Socialist Health Care, Take Your Money, Larger Government Tax-Funded Programs, etc, etc, etc. Everything a good socialist wants to shove up a Free Man’s arse.

Simply amazing.Hot Air
Right Angles
The American Mind
BCB
Right In A Left World
Gateway Pundit
STACLU

The Tired And Pathetic Rodham…Would Be Czarina

snooper — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 00:13:11 +0000

Don Surber seems to think that Czarina is tired and old. Jamie Wearing Fool says she looks pathetic as she panders door-to-door. I am just sick and tired of her Leninistic and Stalinistic idiocy and she still represents a Clear and Present Danger to this country. I place her in the same category as Medea (Susan) Benjamin.

DESPERATION TIME FOR HILLARY

snooper — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 07:00:56 +0000

HILLARY FALTERING… DAMN IT!

Republicans – hoping to run against the smartest woman in America – are sitting on pins and needles as Obama makes big strides

Jimmy Z - The panic and tension in the Hillary campaign is unquestionable. Democrats by and large are skeptical now about her candidacy. Liberals want to win the White House. They do not want to run with Hillary if Hillary can’t win.

Oprah Winfrey’s embracing and endorsing of Barack Obama was in the news literally all weekend long (never mind that Rush Limbaugh’s appearance in Washington State drew more people than the largest Oprah/Obama fiasco). Obama is on a roll.

But does Obama have the legs to take the prize? We don’t think so. The Obama team cannot possibly out maneuver Clinton, Inc., can they?

Barack also lacks any real experience in national politics. In the long run this is going to cause him some real trouble. As the major primaries roll up, Hillary is likely to take over and come on strong.

We sure hope so. What Obama has shown is that although he doesn’t have the stamina and team to pull it off, Hillary is obviously not invincible. And if someone is going to knock her out, we want it to be a Republican candidate.

William Jefferson Clinton Redefines the Term “Liar”

snooper — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 06:56:39 +0000

~Snooper~

Thank God for the internet that Gore made! A special transcript can be found at Newsbusters.

The former (thank God) President, Bill Clinton, “didn’t keep all of his speeches” but, some of us have and, we, The Rabid Right Wing Steam Rollers know how to “Google It”. This tid-bit is just too much. Today, on the CBS Early Show with Harry Smith, a softball interview with Bill Clinton went south.

Harry Smith said, “When you were in Muscatine a week and a half or so ago, right, and said, I’ve always been against this, speaking about the Iraq war, I did a little Googling last night, and the best I could tell was you said the weapons inspectors should be allowed to do their jobs.”

That’s the best this asshat could do? No wonder the Lame Stream Media is in such shambles! Here, at A Newt One, we will do what the Lame Stream should be doing. we have, at our beckon call, the internet that Gore made therein, all manner OF “things” can be found. We “Googled It” and found…GASP! Bill Clinton LIED!! This is Clinton’s answer, like it was the truth or something:

Look, I said something like that a hundred times. I supported threatening Saddam so we could do the inspections. The mistake we made was not letting the inspections finish. If they had, there would have been no war. And I was always against doing it without the inspections. As you pointed out, most of my speeches weren’t getting covered by the press and we didn’t copy them or anything back then. But we do have several records, including one six days before the invasion, where I said, I don’t think they should do this until the inspections finished. That was the deal. And, if we’d done it, there would have been no war.

Now, ain’t that sweet? The problem is…it is a lie. And, we do know what “IS” is.

President Clinton addresses THE Joint Chiefs of Staff: 2/17/1998

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program. We have to defend our future from these predators of the twenty-first century. They’ll be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein.

OOPS! Then, there is always this: 4/16/2003

“Saddam is gone, and good riddance,” former President Clinton said yesterday. Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren’t found. Said the president, “I don’t think you can criticize the president for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. That is what I was always told.”

WHAT? That is what he had always been told? Was that a slip of ye ole tongue? Is that the data Sandy Burglar Berger stole? WHAT? Bats in the belfry and the sound of crickets.

5/18/2003 Speech: Remarks at Tougaloo College Commencement

I supported the president when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

OOPS! I wonder if the salary Harry Smith is receiving is commensurate with his inability to “Google It”. If his pay is any more than $2 per year, heads should roll. Try this: Google Bill Clinton and Iraq War…let me know what you come up with. K?

One more out of about 1.5M…Time Magazine, 6/28/2004

So you’re sitting there as president, you’re reeling in the aftermath of 9/11, so, yeah, you want to go get Bin Laden and do Afghanistan and all that, but you also have to say, well, my first responsibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material. I gotta do that. That’s why I supported the Iraq thing.

The Iraq thing? The Iraq thing? I cannot believe that he would actually say that. The Iraq thing. I never want to hear any more whining about GWB’s pronunciation problems or quips about his Texas swagger. The Iraq thing?

The man is a pathological liar. No ifs ands or buts. The Clintons are the Darlings of The Media and always have been. They represent the epitome of socialistic America so richly pined after and lustfully desirous to bring to the United States.

Over. My. Dead. Body.

A note from El Rushbo:

[...] He just got away with lying again on the CBS Early Show because their researchers couldn’t find anything other than Clinton talking about weapons inspectors when they Googled. I find it just breathtaking, folks, I do, at how incompetent the Drive-By Media is. They can’t do anything right, and they don’t want to. They don’t want to get it right where the Clintons are concerned. [...]

Dittos.

A while ago, others were chatting about this at memeorandum and at Captain Ed’s.

Let’s Talk About Hillary

snooper — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 07:18:23 +0000

~Snooper~
Hillary, whose apparent zero is Kerry, is more often than not for something until she decides she was actually undecided about being against that which once was neither for or against.

Which, is better than what?

And, where is Hillary? Ever since she internationally embarrassed herself at the most recent “debate”, if, you can call it that, her Toy Boy Billy has been her voice. Is this how her alleged Presidency going to be? Is this what America needs or, more bluntly, wants? Will Hillary, at the first sign of a whoopsie, call for Billy? Perish the thought.

Over at Political Grind, they have this to say:

[...] For the first time in a long time, Mrs. Clinton finds herself under intense scrutiny from her opponents and the mainstream media. Are they “piling on”? Of course. Is it fair? This is a query unworthy of an answer; it is merely what it is. Welcome to the race to be president of the United States, Mrs. Clinton.

A much more pertinent side question: what took so long for the genuine media scrutiny?

For some reason, Hillary Clinton enjoyed extraordinarily positive press coverage for the last eight years. Why? I have no satisfying explanation. Had the left-leaning mainstream media been cultivating and protecting a favored candidate? Not likely. This hypothesis is deliciously inviting, but it seems far too facile and “breathtakingly” conspiratorial. Perhaps the media felt genuine sympathy for the famously humiliated wife of the most celebrated philandering husband in all of American history? Or perhaps the media believed that they went too far during impeachment, and they owed the Clintons a “pay-back call” or two. Maybe. [...]

From an outsider looking in, I see the media’s “turn” on Hillary as wild animals turning on the wounded member of the pack. Just an observation based upon nearly 53 years on this planet. All in all, most of the Lame Stream sides with Hillary but the occasional barb is indicative of vultures waiting for their prey to actually die off before they dine.

At Lightning Fingers’ place at Wake Up America: Panic In Hillaryville

[...] Rasmussen again showed that she was hemorrhaging points in NH…in September 18th, she held a 23 point lead, October 27th, that lead dropped to 16 points and November 7th, that lead dropped to 10 points.

That is a 13 point drop since September 18th, 2007.

Worse news, the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll that heads up against Giuliani, Hillary only enjoys a 1 point lead.

USA/Gallup shows married men do not favor Hillary.

Zogby shows trouble for Hillary in Iowa.

This next Rasmussen poll is no big surprise, since it is Texas, but added with everything else, my question yesterday about whether Hillary Clinton is losing that “shoe in” status becomes more relevant. [...]

Don Surber has a knack for the obvious to those wide awake…unlike the Leftinistra. As our readers should quickly realize, we call out the inconsistencies of the Leftinistra on a regular basis. I dare say that 99.9% of them will NEVER accept responsibility for their own actions if the outcome is a negative. There is always someone else to blame or something else.

[...] So the big news from Planet Clinton is that Bill is cavalierly accepting the blame for the failure of Hillarycare in 1994.

The New York Times quoted him as saying: “You know how much she cares about this. She has taken the rap for some of the problems we had with health care the last time that were far more my fault than hers.”

And indeed, the headline on an Oct. 3, 1994, story via NYT News Service said: “First lady takes blame for health care demise.”

Except for the part where she did not say that. Mrs. Clintonâ€™s construct was that she was to blame for failing to make you people (mouth breathers that you are) understand the genius of her perfect plan.

Reported the Times in 1994: â€œBut the most frustrating failure she acknowledges is not getting the country to understand that the plan the Clintons offered a year ago was an opening offer, ‘constructed to be deconstructed.’ Instead of being a basis for negotiations, she said, ‘it was described as an ultimatum by our opponents and therefore used to undermine the process of reaching agreement.’”

Got that? The VMWC (vast medical wing conspiracy) did her in, preventing her from bestowing upon the dumb masses the wisdom of her perfect plan. [...]

Case closed. Or, as my partners here at ANO would say, checkmate.

So, we have determined that at the first sign of actually having to admit to something that could go wrong for Hillary, she calls on others to fall on her own sword, lest she get harmed, and then blame game then ensues and when the dust settles, she will emerge and say something akin to, ‘What?’

And what of her Porkness? Ed Morrisey chimes in on that:

Guess which presidential candidate has the temerity to talk fiscal responsibility while outstripping the other candidates in pork-barrel spending? It turns out the Woodstock museum was only the headline act in a long concert of earmarking for Hillary Clinton. Not only does she lead the Senate delegation in this cycle’s presidential race, but despite her junior status, she earmarked more than five times more money than her nearest competitor: [...]

Again, we ask, is this what America needs? A spendthrift Socialist? No, Hillary. America cannot afford you and your 1,000,000 “things America cannot afford”.

Flopping Aces:

[...] Ahhhhh, the Clintons. You can always count on them for some kind of dishonorable conduct. [...]

Exactly so.

A Hat Tip to Stop the ACLU for this article here:

Two new reputable polls of New Hampshire Democratic Primary voters will show statistically significant drops in support for frontrtunner Hillary Clinton, Democrats who have seen those polls said today.

The polls will be released this weekend and are embargoed; though I’m not privy to the embargo agreement, I’ll be a little vague out of respect for the polling organizations.

One of the polls shows that the gap between Clinton and Barack Obama narrowed by more than 10 points. Her biggest decline was seen among older voters.

The other shows Clinton’s lead over Obama reduced by approximately 9 points.

John Edwards remains at about 15 percent in both.

And, there are reports that Hillary leads Rudy by 1 point now. In cases such as this, I consider Bad News for Hillary to be Good News. I so hope that Hillary is the nominee for the DNC. The GOP may not be able to take back the Senate but the GOP sure does have a good shot at taking back the House and WILL retain the White House.

Bring it on, Hillary.

Others blogging:

Snooper / A NEWT ONE: Let’s Talk About Hillary

Chris Bowers / Open Left: Obama, Non-Christians, and New Hampshire

Spree / Wake up America: Panic in Hillaryville? â€” Yesterday we pointed out a few polls done â€¦

Peggy Noonan / Opinion Journal: Things Are Tough All Over â€” But Mrs. Clinton is no Iron Lady.

Jonathan Singer / MyDD: Ambinder: Two New Polls Show Race Tightening in NH

Gaius / Blue Crab Boulevard: Wonder Why Camp Hillary Is Almost Frantic?

Reliapundit / THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS: JUST LIKE DEAN, HILLARY IS FADING FAST. SO, WHO WILL BECOME THE NEXT KERRY?

JammieWearingFool: Pantsuit Plummets in NH Polls

John Riley / Spin Cycle: Clinton gets a big endorsement but a bad poll

Ed Morrissey / Captain’s Quarters: All Hail The Pork Queen

Catch the wave.

Hillary: Defining Her Position

snooper — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 07:16:36 +0000

~Snooper~

Watch the video and contemplate upon it.

Clear enough?

Good.

Hillary: The Sickness of The Beguiled

snooper — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 07:11:29 +0000

~Snooper~

The Budding Leninist, Czarina, the Modern American Progressive, is a Clear and Present Danger to the very survival of Traditional America. Traditional America is under attack by these budding Leninists, calling themselves “Progressives”. If one carefully examines the mantra of said same, one will see that which they prattle and yammer upon is Socialism with a smattering of Communism, disguised as “progressive”.

What are these “progressives” progressing towards? No one on “their” side of the aisle, whichever that side might be, has explained their talking dulls satisfactorily, have they? Does anyone even know? I have performed a scientific study and I do believe that our team has discovered the ailment causing the sickness that “progressivism” is. It is kind of scary and without further ado, we provide a CT Scan of a “progressive’ we found wondering aimlessly around SE Texas, incoherent, inaudible and in dire need of a rubber room.

And there you have it. We call it Hillaroncasinseptocacka. Like the Sci Fi Borg technology, the human brain was injected with this nanoprobes and this victim of this tragic attack fought the assimilation to their ultimate peril. It deteriorated the thought process to the point that the victim actually drowned in its own drivel. The recorded dying words were, “Bush did it”.

The nanoprobes disintegrated immediately following death.

In other news, we find that the Hillaryscare Campaign is in a tizzy over their stature in Iowa. It seems as though that damn Obama character is actually pulling ahead.

Naturally, her apparent falling from grace could be a direct result of the criminal activity she has conveniently side-stepped and her money-bag and emotional standard bearers are charlatans.

Some are saying that her woes are catching up with her now that Czarina is making a play to The Big House…woops…The White House.

As the Czarina expresses her feigned caring drivel towards our troops, we are reminded how our troops think of her. As for her sexual inclinations, I really don’t care but the rumor is still out there and I am with Don…it is just a rumor at this point and it really should be left well enough alone.

With her woes in Iowa making the road ahead indeed troublesome, her paperwork is being held hostage someplace and is due to be released but the delay-game is “Rather” irksome. I would rather see these documents that are sure to pin-point her qualifications to be CIC…without them, what is her justification?

The Dema Sutra positions of the Budding Leninist, as intriguing and hard to track and keep up with are “Rather” typical of a liar, charlatan and someone with something to hide, I find her inability to maintain eye contact all too revealing.

Her ever “evolving” and “progressive” (whatever that means) pseudonyms for whatever position she takes with whatever the prevailing winds are at the time, is always so evasive and unclear to the minds of the intellectually sound. With the continuing scandals surfacing, I find it interesting that she even shows herself in the public eye. The Clinton machine pathway is littered with the bodies of those that know the Real Deal.

What should serve as an adequate wake-up call to the American People is being shunted to ground and her supporters include terrorists and their moppets.

Carl Rove says she can be beat but the road to defeat for the Czarina would be an easier path if her drones would wake-up to smell the coffee and to call into question her patriotism or better yet, ask the question as to what she is actually patriotic towards.