I love this quote of hers: "I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president." -- Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpoenaed documents
Gee, I guess the cigar was not the only Freudian slipped in the WH.
Ever since Bill became the president, she has done things and said things that were "conveniently" time. How many years did she not use "Rodham?" When it was "convenient" she began to use it.
With this book, I think it is conveniently timed to backtrack on some things and to explain other things such as why she was so gung-ho about the Healthcare issue.
Allegedly, in the book she just skims over her affairs. What is this? If you aren't going to share with us the details, then don't tease us with the carrot dangling in front us.
posted on June 7, 2003 04:38:53 PM new
It's funny how the leaks have started already about her lying on the time frame of when Bill admitted his relationship with Monica. Two other previous book writers have stated different time frames. Hearing other claims she made in her book don't jive with what was being reported in print at the time either. Gosh.....who to believe. LOL
At least this time she gives credit to the ghost writers....where she didn't in her last book.
As others have stated they're sure the book was gone over with a fine-toothed comb by lawyers before it was published. Wanting to be sure it was PC enough to set her up for a bid on the White House.
And for someone who was being so demanding of her privacy....all it took was 8.5 million for her to share.
hummmmmmm.....did she ever apologize to those 'right winged conspiracy people' who were making up all these **lies** about Bill and all his women?
LOL
If, as is reported, she said in her book she was truly taken back by Bill's deception and lies in regards to Monica, then I don't think she's as smart as many give her credit for being. That's like the wife of a drunk being surprised/taken back that he fell off the wagon again. Yea....what a surprise...never would have believed it.
posted on June 7, 2003 05:00:49 PM new
I Gotta Bridge in Brooklyn for Sale
"If you believe Hillary's story in the book, you'll believe anything."
- Former Clinton adviser Dick Morris
*****************************************
Hillary's "Rewriting History"
Let's be real for a minute here. The ONLY reason anyone could possibly be even vaguely interested in Hillary's version of the Clintons' White House years is to see what she has to say about the oral presentations intern Monica Lewinski coughed up to the Commander-in-Briefs.
And according to the Associated Press, what we'll find out in "Living History" is that Madame Hillary was "furious" and "outraged" at being lied to by her husband and "wanted to wring Bill's neck."
(I doubt that is what she really wanted to wring)
Whoa! Stop the presses! Omigosh! Really?
Want more? OK, get this. Hillary writes: "For me, the Lewinski imbroglio seemed like just another vicious scandal manufactured by political opponents." Whew! Ground-breaking stuff here. It's not like Hillary ever mentioned a "vast right-wing conspiracy" before. Get Amazon on the phone!
Seriously, anyone who plunks down 28 bucks for 562 pages of this crap ought to have their heads examined and fitted for a padded room.
posted on June 7, 2003 05:07:20 PM new
As for the "right wing conspiracy" she does mention this and IMO in a roundabout way apologizes, but still does allude to a force (my words) that targets certain people.
To be fair to Hillary, it really doesn't matter how much intelligence a person has nor the education and experience, one can still believe what they want to believe. So many such people lose their life savings because of a flim flam.
However, I do suspect that that she is drawing on sympathy. According to B. Walters, Bill was in the house when she came to interview the Senator. Bill though didn't talk with BW, not even as much as a hi and he left.
Then I heard later that he wasn't even in the house. Now why would BW tell a falsehood?
posted on June 7, 2003 05:16:40 PM new
By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. Published 6/5/2003 12:12:00 AM
Washington -- Frankly, when I heard that Hillary Rodham Clinton had signed a deal to write a book for $8 million I doubted that she would write a word of it. For one thing, whenever Hillary testifies she lies. Any prosecutor who has ever pursued her knows that, and any publisher willing to fork out $8 million for a book wants it to be at least plausible. For another thing, when she published her last book, It Takes a Village, she did not write the book -- and, of course, lied about that. She claimed the mawkish little monograph was from her pen and her pen only, when actually it was written by Barbara Feinman. Everyone suspected Hillary had lied about writing the book. It was simply too free of lies for it to be her work. Angered by Hillary’s insistence that she alone had written the book, Miss Feinman leaked the news that Hillary held séances with Eleanor Roosevelt. Naturally, Hillary then lied about that too.
With this new book, Living History, an account of her life in the White House during the late scandals, again there is speculation that others did the writing. I have yet to read the book so I do not know if it contains a sufficient number of lies to sustain her claim of authorship. From what I have read I do believe that she wrote at least some of the book. Apparently in Living History she claims that from January 1998 to August 1998 she believed her husband’s claim that he had not had sex with the White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. That is a sufficiently implausible lie to conclude that it is a genuine effort by Hillary.
Lewinsky’s relationship was precisely the kind of relationship Bill Clinton had been having for years, right down to the trademark Clinton Biblical exegesis about oral sex not being adultery. Just four years before the revelations about Monica, the Arkansas state troopers in the pages of The American Spectator described assignations between Clinton and women, some of them being government employees, that involved precisely the same sex acts that Monica revealed. Moreover those of us familiar with the Clintons know that through all her years in Arkansas Mrs. Clinton had been engaged in propitiating the victims of her husband’s active libido. Surely when the story came out of the White House intern servicing her husband Hillary knew it was true.
Hillary probably also wrote the lines she claims to have uttered on August 15, 1998, after Bill told her in the White House that he had been lying about his blameless relationship with Lewinsky and that there had been intimacy. “I could hardly breath. Gulping for air, I started crying and yelling at him….” That sounds like Hillary to me, particularly the yelling.
In fact the very nature of this lie is pure Hillary. Hillary and, for that matter, Bill, lie when there is no reason to lie. Who would blame her, if she were now to write that, yes, when the Lewinsky story broke she began to suspect it was true? Or for that matter why could she not now maintain a decorous silence about the whole embarrassing matter? No one would blame her for not bringing it up again. The country was supposed to move on, she told us. The country has, but here Hillary is again lying when she does not have to. And the lies keep coming.
According to the Associated Press’s report on the book, Hillary claims that during the six months when her husband was lying to her, to his staff, and to the nation about Monica, “For me, the Lewinsky imbroglio seemed like just another vicious scandal manufactured by political opponents.” There were no “vicious scandals manufactured by political opponents.” Or at least there were very few.
Most of the scandals were acts Bill and Hillary actually committed. They did not need “political opponents” to “manufacture” them. All that was needed was a free press to report them and federal prosecutors to pursue them. In the end Clinton paid fines, gave up his license to practice law, and agreed to a huge financial settlement with Paula Corbin Jones. I have always thought that other women such as the abused Kathleen Willey and raped Juanita Broaddrick deserved settlements too.
As for Hillary, Independent counsel Robert W. Ray, in his last report on the Clintons, asserted that though there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute she had given factually inaccurate testimony and Whitewater involved criminal activity. Well, that is what we have come to expect from her, dishonesty. She is now the most popular Democrat in the country.
posted on June 8, 2003 10:07:45 AM new
Hillary Clinton Taking Fire From Left as Well as Right
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
May 29
"After years of being vilified by conservatives, Hillary Rodham Clinton is suddenly facing mounting criticism from an unlikely quarter: liberals.
Core Democratic constituencies that helped Mrs. Clinton win her Senate seat in New York two and a half years ago are expressing deep disappointment in her, saying she has been unwilling to challenge President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress on issues of importance to them.
Those who have expressed disappointment in Mrs. Clinton include gay rights advocates, antiwar organizers and even advocates for children and the poor, a group with which she has been closely associated for decades.
'Is she playing to a national audience?' asked Anne Erickson, the director of the Greater Upstate Law Project, a group that advocates for poor people in New York.
'As a Democrat with liberal leanings, I can personally say that it is pretty disappointing to watch her stances on issues,' Ms. Erickson said. 'We expected better from her.'
Mrs. Clinton's aides say her decisions are not part of any calculated effort to win over a wider constituency outside New York. Rather, they say, they reflect positions she has held since her days as first lady, like advocating stiffer restrictions on welfare recipients.
'This view of Hillary Clinton as a dyed-in-the-wool leftist is a caricature,' said Howard Wolfson, an adviser to Mrs. Clinton. 'Anyone who is surprised about her views on welfare reform and the war was not paying attention during the campaign.'"
posted on June 9, 2003 11:48:49 AM new
Who here has read the book? So far we've got a lot of "Gee I hate Hillary" vitriol (the same old same old) ..... and oh yeah, a few snippets of material ripped off from other people who haven't read the book.
At least I own the book. I haven't started it yet, but I did pick up a copy at lunch.
What is so funny is that I'm likely to get a flood of responses saying "I'm not giving her my money"[/i] followed by the predictable chorus of IHateHerSheUsesHerMaidenName IHateHerShe'sAWomanWhoHasOpinions IHateHerSheDidn'tDivorceBillThoughAGodlyWomanWouldHave IHateHerEvenThoughGOdlyWomenDon'tGetDivorces IHateHerSheRanForTheSenate IHateHerSheWasCaughtInPossessionOfAnActualIdea IHateHerIHateHerIHateHerIHateHerIHateHerIHateHerIHateHerIHateHer
[ edited by msincognito on Jun 9, 2003 11:49 AM ]
posted on June 11, 2003 08:45:10 AM new
I would like to take hibbertst & msincognito seriously, but to do so would be an affront to your intelligence.
[ edited by bear1949 on Jun 11, 2003 08:46 AM ]
