For more on the Clintons at their best read this interview with Kathleen Willey the democrat widow who was groped by Bill when asking for a job and then seriously intimidated to silence.

http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2007/11/the_kathleen_willey_interview.php

Good to see CNN is as unbiased as the CBC about some things .

Thought I was linking just the video , oops . Scroll down and have a peek tho .... loopy left warning in effect .

Lame. Spitzer is a hardline illegal immigrant appeaser and a treasonous one at that. Hillary had nothing to do with this, notwithstanding the logrolling of the New York intellectuals at NRO looking after one of their own. It should be pointed out that NRO is soft on illegal immigration to the point of treason and has been for some time.

Ref. the Godmother:

At a rally of Sen. John McCain and supporters in S. Carolina, the question was put to the Sen. BY A WOMAN, "So, how do we beat the b*tch?"

Check out the story, and a video of the precious moment:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/11/14/comedy-gold-rick-sanchez-has-an-aneurysm-over-the-mccain-bitch-video

I do share the questioner's opinion of the junior Senator from New York. And I'm not a prude but generally consider vulgar language a substitute for intelligent, forcefully articulate argument. So, the vocabulary word-of-the-day substitute for "b*tch" is: CALUMNIATOR.

So, in 2008, how DO we defeat the calumniator??? I fervently hope some candidate, darn near any candidate, has the answer to that one.

Yeah, Bill D, Cat, did you read the comments over at Hot Air about Sanchez?

I think this guy pees sitting down.

LOL! Amazing about how some Liberal Blowahrd can get so indignant over a comment made by a WOMAN, about another WOMAN and McCain simply responding very politely and diplomatically.

Liberals have nothing to stand on but their feelings. In this case, their baseless feelings of faux-indignation.

Yeah, Bill D, Cat, did you read the comments over at Hot Air about Sanchez?

I think this guy pees sitting down.

LOL! Amazing about how some Liberal Blowhard can get so indignant over a comment made by a WOMAN, about another WOMAN and McCain simply responding very politely and diplomatically.

Liberals have nothing to stand on but their feelings. In this case, their baseless feelings of faux-indignation.

I watched the Sanchez video. First, he takes two sentences from McCain "I respect Sen. Clinton. I respect anyone who wins the Democratic nomination.", and says that the second sentence qualifies the first, so that McCain is saying he would only respect Clinton is she is the nominee. Anyone with a knowledge of Grade 12 English would see that these are two independent declarative sentences, and that neither one qualifies the other in any way.

Next, he says that McCain's second sentence implies that he would "respect Mr. Magoo if he got the nomination". This is a well-known rhetorical fallacy called "reductio ad absurdum". I wish I'd been the person he was interviewing. I would have ripped him a new one.

Sorry, kevin, but when he says "I respect anyone who wins the Democratic nomination", that pretty clearly does mean that he would respect Mr. Magoo if he got the nomination. It's not an implication, it's the plain meaning.

And it's entirely reasonable. The Democrats are, after all, something like half of America, and their selection process is as open and demanding as that of the Republicans. If Mr. Magoo wins that process, he's earned respect, no matter what you thought of him before. Of course, he's then free to piss that respect away again.

This isn't even hypothetical. Consider John Kerry.