NEW YORKER'S FOR POLITICAL HONESTY, INTEGRITY, AND REFORM
I don't know how else to explain it. Liberals must love liars as long as they perceive the liar to be smarter than they are. Which, given that the most loyal constituents of the Democratic party are those citizens bereft of a high school diploma, is not hard to be. It is difficult, if not impossible, to examine Mrs. Clinton's political career and not find several lies, several little ones and some real whoppers. That said, how can an individual who has an Alice In Wonderland-like attitude towards the truth (the truth is whatever I want it to be) have any credibility. I can't think of a high ranking Republican who has such a cavalier approach to the truth who has not been rejected by the party, eventually. That is not the case with lying liberals. I can only assume that being right on the issues, i.e., pro abortion, and the ability to get votes are the only requirements needed to be a leader among liberals.

The only time Mrs. Clinton allowed herself to be interviewed by anyone with the guts to ask a tough question, she got called out on one of her bigger lies. In the debate with Rick Lazio, Tim Russert asked Mrs. Clinton about her "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" lie. Her response was classic Clinton. She immediately went to the victim card. Mrs. Clinton was the woman wronged, and she claimed there was a lot of pain. No, there was not a lot of pain, there were a lot lies, and she and her husband were telling them. The idea that Mrs. Clinton, the "Smartest Women in the World", did not know all of the facts pertaining to the Lewinsky affair at the time she made that statement, is laughable. The idea that she would find it hard to believe that her husband, the serial adulterer, would have been misusing a 22 year old intern, is absurd. Mrs. Clinton had all the facts and went onto the Today Show with one objective, to lie to the American people. And that is exactly what she did.

Now we get e-mail from liberals who tell us that Mrs. Clinton is smarter that we are and who ask if we are afraid of a strong woman. Let's do something that most liberals hate to do (just to warn you liberals, I am going to use the "f" word in the next sentence). Let's look at some facts. Mrs. Clinton may be smart, I don't know. I've never met the woman. But, to paraphrase Forrest Gump, smart is as smart does. Smart people want to hone their positions and opinions by having them challenged and defending them. I have not seen Mrs. Clinton defending her positions or opinions anywhere on television or in the news. I would imagine Mrs. Clinton has a standing invitation to be a guest on any one of the Sunday morning shows. I saw Mr. Lazio being questioned by the aforementioned Mr. Russert on October 1. Lazio seized the opportunity to present and defend his positions and opinions to a New York and a national audience. Where's Mrs. Clinton. She is fielding softballs being lobbed in by supporters at staged media events. So much for smart. Would a strong person hide from reporters who want to ask her tough questions. Would a strong person refuse to expose herself to any challenge to her views. I don't think so

Just a personal note to one of our nastier e-mailers: We put our views out there and take the hits that come from people who disagree with us. You, on the other hand, want to lob in a grenade and then run and hide. It must be a requirement of the Democratic party that all males have to check 'em at the door before entering. You certainly have.

CLICK ON LINKS BELOW
BEST OF HILLARY
Email: griffbuff52@yahoo.com
1