Tuesday, October 09, 2007


Senator Hillary Clinton (Photo by Kiichiro Sato/AP)

You were first lady in an administration in which your husband was dubbed the nickname Slick Willie because of the way he parsed meaning and manipulated language like a cheating husband caught in the act of infidelity (no reference to actuality intended.)

You sat by him when he pointed his bony finger in the faces of American viewers and bold faced lied that he did not have sex (in the oval office) with that woman… Ms. Lewensky, which he later recanted and pled guilty to lying to a grand jury. His law license was pulled and he disgraced this Nation as well as your marriage.

Yet you have the Hubris to drag him out and flaunt the former President in the faces of half of America (that will not vote for you) that is still doing damage control on little boys and little girls who believed that that they can imitate and do what the President did with that woman, Ms. Lewensky and still maintain plausible deniability like Slick Willie did.
[Sandy]Berger has admitted stealing documents from the National Archives in advance of the 9/11 Commission hearings in 2003. The documents, written by White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, were a “tough review” of the Clinton administration’s shortcomings in dealing with terrorism, Clarke’s lawyer told the Washington Post.

On several occasions, Berger stuffed highly classified documents into his pants and socks before spiriting them out of the Archives building in Washington , according to investigators. On one occasion, upon reaching the street, he hid documents under a construction trailer after checking the windows of the Archives and Justice Department buildings to make sure he was not being watched.

Berger came back later and retrieved the documents, taking them home and cutting them up with scissors. Two days later, he was informed by Archive employees that his removal of documents had been detected.

“Berger panicked because he realized he was caught,” said a report by the National Archives inspector general, which also recounted his initial reaction. “Berger lied.”
Berger also lied to the public, telling reporters he made an “honest mistake” by “inadvertently” taking the documents, which he blamed on his own “sloppiness.”

Bill Clinton vouched for the explanation for Berger, who served as his national security adviser.
Now you bring back Sandy Berger as an advisor to your campaign. Berger who stole, lied and destroyed federally protected records from the National Archives all to protect you and your husband’s political image so that the American people would remain ignorant about your culpability regarding 9/11 and your subsequent mishandling of the terrorist threat to America.

Mrs. Clinton, need I point out again that Sandy Berger is a convicted theft, liar and a possible traitor to this Country.

The fact that anyone would have to tell you this speaks to either a profound and deep ignorance regarding right and wrong and/or an out of touch sense of pride that is unnatural in its blatant display of political HUBRIS!

At the very least the fact that you would even allow this to happen demonstrates that you don’t think to highly of the intelligence of the American people or you think that you can do anything that you want and you will not be held accountable for your actions.

One word describes this behavior Mrs. Clinton HUBRIS. But I must say that bringing Sandy Berger back into your campaign is indicative of the corruption that typified the co-Presidency of Bill and Hillary Clinton.


  1. Anonymous8:58 PM

    Hillary does have hubris, almost as much as Bill or Lyndon had. That's why she has the highest dissaproval rating of any candidate since George Wallace. Unfortunately, she also has the highest approval candidate of any candidate. Let's just hope she has enough HUBRIS to loose.

    However, the Republicans will still have to give the voters some reason to vote for them. The Republicans lost in 2006 over complacency, and they can do it again. Frankly, I do not see any active Republican candidate extolling any virtue other than not being Hillary. This tepidness is the stuff from which defeats are made.

    McCain-Feingold knocked out our best Candidate, Newt Gingrich, author of the 1994 Contract with America Campaign which gave voters a reason to vote Republican. His inspiration is sorely missed.

    There is a lot to lose here. If Hillary wins, the first thing that will be "fixed" will be the "structural imbalance of Talk Radio", never mind the REAL Structural Imbalance of Network TV that was institutionalized by the Truman Administration when the DuMont Network (which eventually evolved into Fox News) was hounded out of their networkship.

    Just look for a repeat of the 2000 cliffhaner Election, but on a MUCH GRANDER SCALE. I wish I could be as optimistic as you, but I know too much. It is a regrettable fact of life that in elections between Barabas and Christ, Barabbas has the edge.

  2. The Clintons were the primary reason for the decline of moral values in the US Government. But..........the American voter is the secondary reason for their "success".

    From the time they occupied the Governor's mansion in Arkansas, any intelligent being could have seen that they had neither the honesty nor morals to deserve the White House.

    But, voters' memories being what they are, they either forgot or just didn't care enough to vote against them.

    Let's hope this time, we have both, the memory and the clout.... because another Clinton in the White House would be a disaster for this country.


  3. Judging from the behavior of Senate and House Democrats any Democrat in office would be a disaster for this country,