March 14, 2007

More "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" Rhetoric From Clinton

Looks like New York Senator and presidential candidate Hildebeast Roadkill Klintoon is out to resurrect one of her greatest lies hits -- but one that only serves to energize her political opponents.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday described past Republican political malfeasance in New Hampshire as evidence of a "vast, right-wing conspiracy." Clinton's barbed comments revived a term she coined for the partisan plotting during her husband's presidential tenure and echoed remarks she made last weekend in New Hampshire, which holds the nation's first primary.

Her rhetorical red meat to a sympathetic audience of Democratic municipal officials comes as Clinton courts New Hampshire voters and squeezes donors for dollars ahead of a March 31 fundraising report deadline. She also continues to face criticism from the party's liberal base for her failure to repudiate her vote authorizing military force in Iraq.

Clinton asserted on Tuesday that the conspiracy is alive and well, and cited as proof the Election Day 2002 case of phone jamming in New Hampshire, a case in which two Republican operatives pleaded guilty to criminal charges, and a third was convicted.

"To the New Hampshire Democratic Party's credit, they sued and the trail led all the way to the Republican National Committee," Clinton said.

"So if anybody tells you there is no vast, right-wing conspiracy, tell them that New Hampshire has proven it in court," she said.

Someone needs to ask the Hildebeast what she makes of the trail of Democrat dirty tricks and voter fraud -- much more extensive than the pathetic and wrong-headed effort by a couple of operatives in New Hampshire -- that are committed ever election cycle. Do they constitute an Even Vaster Left-Wing Conspiracy?

And since she is so concerned about criminal activity that impacts voting, why is she calling for the resignation of Alberto Gonzales after the firing of US Attorney's who were not pursuing election fraud cases in an aggressive enough manner? Could it be that the targets in the cases that were delayed or ignored were Democrats -- and you and your party need election fraud to have a chance of winning the presidency in 2008?

Posted by: Greg at 02:46 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 373 words, total size 3 kb.

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
8kb generated in CPU 0.0058, elapsed 0.0155 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0109 seconds, 33 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]