How to Beat Hillary (Next) November

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Swift2001 @ 11/19/2007 3:46:56 AM

    Hey, Karl, answer the subpoena when it gets to you. Where are the e-mails, Karl? Isn't there a law, observed by every previous administration, that e-mails had to be preserved on White House servers and given to Congress on request? But you put your mail on GOP servers? and they're all strangely lost? Stop telling these silly stories about Hillary being, well, truthful, and start confessing your lies. Ha. That'll be the day.

  • Posted By: Rick0101 @ 11/19/2007 1:12:24 AM

    I suspect that Lincoln, when he debated Douglas, did not need to have his aides prepare and feed "softball" questions to college students in order that he could deliever pre-prepared and "canned" answers. The fact that this person is the leading candidate of a major party is quite telling and that the opposing party finds in her a formidable opponent means we are truly lost....

    • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 2:22:52 AM

      Lincoln also didn't need planted quesions from fake reporters (a.k.a. Jeff Gannon) either. Shame on Hillary for having someone throw her a softball. However, this tactic is right out of the Karl Rover playbook.

      • Posted By: Paulie200 @ 11/19/2007 3:03:15 AM

        Didn't the Bush administration's FEMA dispose with the planted question routine and go straight to faking the entire Press conference?

        • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 3:34:36 AM

          Yeh. The excuse was that they called the press conference but didn't give the press ample advance time to be present.

    • Posted By: xenophile @ 11/19/2007 1:48:11 AM

      Lincoln also didn't need to have the Secret Service run his political rallies like the Gestapo, weeding out dissenters and making absolutely sure that Dear Leader never hears from anyone who disagrees with him. Seems like Decider Guy just can't handle the fact that 76% of the people despise him.

  • Posted By: Falcon2222 @ 11/18/2007 11:43:48 PM

    Has anyone seen the documentary "Clinton Chronicles" where both the Clintons are accused of drug trafficking, money laundering, and murder? I am voting for the candidate who has a track record for honesty, integrity, and patriotism: Congressman Ron Paul for President.

    • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 3:26:55 AM

      Yeh, it's a bunch of crap just like Troopergate, Whitewater, and the accusation that Hillary had Vince Foster murdered. Don't be gullible.

  • Posted By: deep thinker @ 11/18/2007 11:49:15 PM

    ROVE-on, Karl! Thanks for your special insight. You're providing a welcome service and valuable education to the Democrats. Moreover, you can be sure that Hillary is paying close attention. Once again, THANKS

    • Posted By: celsol @ 11/18/2007 11:59:38 PM

      too (and, yes, spelling is correct) deep thinker, must be in a cave underground to consider karl has brought anything other than lies and manipulation.

      • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 3:24:46 AM

        I believe free thinker is not in a cave. He is using sarcasm. :-)

      • Posted By: deep thinker @ 11/19/2007 12:33:25 AM

        Lies and manipulation (when recognized, for what it is) also provides valuable education. Besides, the most effective "manipulation" is based on at least an element of truth. I trust Hillary is wise and polically savvy and alert enough to adept her "running strategy" whenever she learns (from whatever source) that it is needed.

  • Posted By: kemojr @ 11/19/2007 1:03:07 AM

    I don't think the U.S. should have invaded Iraq. It has cost this country much in lives and resources we could have used in the war against terror. I'll be glad when Bush is out of office, but I don't want to see Hillary as President. She will be as devisive as Bush is since she will promote a socialist agenda and socialism is a rot to any sociiety and many are against thyis form of governance. As far as Rove is concerned, I don't think he has done any more harm to our country than the far left who have the same cjharacter as Rove. They are no better than the far right. .Fascists are fascists regardless of their political affiliation. We need a centrist president who will try to govern equitably.

    • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 3:04:11 AM

      I agree with your comments about Rove, but where did you learn that Hillary is a socialist or that she will bring socialism to the U.S. I'm undecided about the 2008 election, so don't mistake me for a Hillary supporter. But I hear this word socialism a lot in connection with Hillary. Why? Is it because she wants to make sure all Americans have access to affordable health care? Why not? Is it because she believes in good public education and affordable college tuition? Is because as a Democrat she believes that the government can serve the people, "promote the gernal welfare" as stated in the U.S. Constitution.

      Ronald Reagan, to paraphrase, said "government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem." If this is the view of the current adminstration, they certainly are out to prove it. Moreover, they are raiding the American treasury and paying private corporations to do what the government can do cheaper. For example, we pay Kellog Brown and Root about $100,000 a year for one of their people to drive supply trucks in Iraq. We could pay one of our army folks about $30,000 a year. (Privatizing the military began when Dick Cheney was secratary of defense, by the way. We wouldn't need Blackwater, Halliburton, and so on.) Aetna manages medicair for about twenty-five cents on the dollar, while goverment bureaucracy does it for about a nickle. Our government is responsible for our highway system which private insdustry uses to conduct business. I just don't understand why Republicans today say government is bad. Conservatism is not "no government" or just a "little government" that favors the powerful. No, conservatism is efficient government that intrudes as little as possible on our civil liberties while maintaining justice. Hell, why do Republicans who think government is the problem even bother to run for office? And why do so many Americans, against their own self interests, buy into this crap?

  • Posted By: NewChallenger @ 11/19/2007 2:25:30 AM

    I always believe Karl has many great stuff. This article shows why he is named " The American Greatest Architect in Politics" and his words is always relevant. Men, I can't believe the Newsweek--left-wing magazine, invited Karl to be its contributor. It is a great and very useful article for any Repulican Candidates who really want to be nominated and win the WhiteHouse.
    Frankly, I believe Mrs Clinton will win the nomination of Democrat side because other democratic candidates are so weak--they don't even know why they are the Presidential Candidates for...No clue ...what so ever...They got beat up so badly by the Clinton machine...poor them...!

    Great article, Karl!
    Congratulation for Newsweek having such a distinguished contributor!

  • Posted By: NewChallenger @ 11/19/2007 2:25:09 AM

    I always believe Karl has many great stuff. This article shows why he is named " The American Greatest Architect in Politics" and his words is always relevant. Men, I can't believe the Newsweek--left-wing magazine, invited Karl to be its contributor. It is a great and very useful article for any Repulican Candidates who really want to be nominated and win the WhiteHouse.
    Frankly, I believe Mrs Clinton will win the nomination of Democrat side because other democratic candidates are so weak--they don't even know why they are the Presidential Candidates for...No clue ...what so ever...They got beat up so badly by the Clinton machine...poor them...!

    Great article, Karl!
    Congratulation for Newsweek having such a distinguished contributor!

    NewChallenger

  • Posted By: jabowery @ 11/19/2007 12:42:03 AM

    A better graph of the conditional probability of being elected if nominated is up now at:

    http://ronpaulgraphs.com/intrade_electability_rep.html

    • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 12:48:12 AM

      "Ronpaulgraphs.com"??? You gotta be kiddin' me!!

      • Posted By: jabowery @ 11/19/2007 1:37:05 AM

        What do you have against facts, "Fact Finder"?

        • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 1:50:14 AM

          Nothing! That's why I laugh at "facts" provided by Ron Paul's campaign! LOLOLOLOL

          • Posted By: jabowery @ 11/19/2007 2:12:42 AM

            First of all -- ronpaulgraphs.com is not provided by Ron Paul's campaign but by a grassroots supporter. Secondly, if you would be so kind as to point out what is false or in error at the URL provided it would be much appreciated -- particularly given the _fact_ that prediction markets like intrade.com have been demonstrated time and time again to be more accurate than polls or pundits at measuring electoral potential.

  • Posted By: American Middle Class Peon @ 11/19/2007 1:38:49 AM

    No one gives a damn about the progress in Iraq ! What do Americans care about taking care of every country in the world EXCEPT it's own !
    You tell me what 1 Trillion dollars could have been spent on here at home !
    If the Iraq war had never started and the question was asked in 2001 do we have the money to build schools, universalize health care, pay down the debt, take care of this flood of illegals coming into our country and wrecking the real estate and wages market, the answer would have been unanimous in saying we don't have the money. Yet, Republicans certainly were able to come up with billions every few months to fund Bush's war in Iraq!

    • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 2:10:58 AM

      And I bet there is a link between the political contributions of the corporations benefitting from the war and this administration and the staunchest war supporters in Congress. The American people are against this war. World public opinion has turned against us because of this war. The Iraq war is now a rallying cry for Moslem jihadists. I din't think we're leaving any time soon either. Why are we building the largest embassy in the world and permanent military bases in Iraq? The bases are strategically based around oil platforms and fields. Who will benefit? And, some in this administration want to attack Iran.

  • Posted By: nova @ 11/18/2007 11:58:41 PM

    Newsweek.... I thought the writer's strike only affected "Hollywood"... nobody else to choose from must be the reason for placing Karl on your staff. he is very polarizing, has a huge shadow around him in regards to the Plame matter and should not have this platform...

    Wasn't Rove nicknamed "Bush's Brain"? That alone in itself should be reason not to give him any time to spew his thoughts.

    • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 1:09:42 AM

      Nicknamed by someone who didn't know anything, sure, that's true. As long as Newsweek doesn't allow Sandy Berger (who IS a criminal) the ability to post articles, I'm fine with it.

      • Posted By: cristanti @ 11/19/2007 1:29:20 AM

        right on !!!!1 SANDY BURGLER who got away with anything that would have hurt hillary and bill, I just bet she owes him plenty!!!!

        • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 2:02:21 AM

          Sandy Berger did not write this column. What does he have to do with this? My great great great grandfather was a pirate. So what?

          I'm glad Mr. Rove has this forum. This way he can read what ordinary Americans think of him.

  • Posted By: pwandersen @ 11/19/2007 1:15:25 AM

    I think it is telling that the best representative Newsweek could find for the Republican Party is a man who opens his first column by admitting that he lied about Hillary and the mirror story. Was he also the one who concocted the lie that Clinton's staff had trashed the White House before leaving?

    • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 1:19:18 AM

      Wow...pretty bold. You twist the facts RIGHT IN FRONT OF US. Impressive. Were you hoping that we didn't read the article? Or do you think we're stupid enough to buy into your drivel?

      • Posted By: Paulie200 @ 11/19/2007 2:02:10 AM

        If there is a twisted fact in pwandersen's post please point it out. I think you're the one who is spouting drivel.

  • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 12:35:39 AM

    The last two posts need to check their facts. Rove isn't a criminal. Are they even aware that Richard Armitage (A Clinton holdover) is the one who leaked Plame's identity? And do they realize why he wasn't arrested for it? Because it wasn't a crime! She wasn't a COVERT agent! Guys, put your blind partisanship aside for a second and pursue FACTS.

    • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 12:46:41 AM

      Hey Fact Finder, you better check your facts. She was COVERT! Her CIA boss said she was. In fact the CIA requested the investigation that resulted in Fitzgeralds quest for the truth. Her status as a covert agent also came out in the Libby trial. Moreover, she stated she was covert while under oath during a congressional hearing. Perhaps Mr. Rover should apoligize as Richard Armitage did. Nah, he said she was "fair game", why should he apologize.

      • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 12:52:18 AM

        Guess again. The judge on the court even said that her status (whether covert or not) "had nothing to do with" the charges against Libby. It should have had EVERYTHING to do with it! That was what they were there to investigate, right? And do you think if she was covert and it was a crime that a simple "apology" from Armitage would be enough to save him? Give me a break!!!

        • Posted By: cmicah6:8 @ 11/19/2007 1:55:17 AM

          Sounds like you are conceding that Valerie Plame was covert. Libby was not tried for outing a covert CIA agent. He was tried for perjury. Therefore, as the judge stated, Plame's status had no bearing on that case. You may recall that a certain president was impeached for no lesser an offense he committed while being deposed for another, unrelated matter. Fact stands. Plame was covert.

  • Posted By: Grapevine @ 11/18/2007 4:17:21 PM

    "She didn't have it taken down, either, now, did she? I believe that's his point."

    Neither did he, as he admitted he kept the mirror in his office. So, what is his point then?

    • Posted By: AlexandriaDumas @ 11/19/2007 1:45:20 AM

      You asked "What's his point?" His point is that Rove told what he thought was an amusing story to a group of people that didn't include Mrs. Bill Clinton. It not only got back to Mrs Clinton, but she went out of her way to tell him, in person, that she was displeased. Not just one time, but twice. It's really rather, well, creepy.

      On another note, a woman isn't well dressed if she doesn't have a full-length mirror..

  • Posted By: ginopi @ 11/18/2007 11:57:33 PM

    Bushy2008- I have one word for you, education. You only said one correct thing - your last line. However, you either work for a medical insurance company or you watch FOX News. Socialized Medicine works great in Canada and Europe. I lived in the UK for years it works a hell of alot better than our system. I live in WA now and I can tell you most of the elderly who move here (even those with insurance) go across the border for their medical proceedures. Even when you have to pay for it, it's cheaper by far. When I lived in California, I used to go to Mexico for treatments. Surgery is pennies on the dollars there in hospitals that far exceed anything here. So before you go talking about something make sure you know what you are talking about. Go rent Sicko - it's a good brief explanation of what and many others already use.

    • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 1:00:01 AM

      You are referencing "Sicko"? LOLOLOLOLOLOL And this is supposed to ADD to your credibility? LOLOLOLOLOL

      The truth is that socilaized medicine is an abysmal failure everywhere it is tried. People are waiting for months and months to get surgery from sub-par doctors. Why do you think people come from Canada into the U.S. to get medical treatment?

      Anytime the government runs anything, it sucks. Go stand in line and the DMV and tell me otherwise.

      • Posted By: American Middle Class Peon @ 11/19/2007 1:36:34 AM

        OMFG! you are such an idiot and are spuing idiocy from your mouth! Socialized medicine works like ALL emergency rooms in the entire U.S. you get surgery according to diagnosis, NOT FIRST COME FIRST SERVER you idiot!
        Yes, there are people waiting in line, those people's diagnoses is such they can wait, if you have a life threatening need for surgery you go to the head of the line and still get put up against other people with life threatening needs. How many people do you think are on waiting lists here in the U.S. waiting for donor organs.
        As a poor/middle class AMERICAN who has been sucked dry by our government. I WOULD GLADLY WAIT IN LINE TO HAVE FREE SURGERY OR FREE MEDICINE PAID FOR BY MY TAX DOLLARS RATHER THAN HAVE TO FILE BANKRUPTCY AFTER STAYING A FEW DAYS IN THE HOSPITAL.
        Or better yet, I can do what illegal aliens do and just NOT PAY in the first place. That way I get FREE F**CKing healthcare AND PAY NO TAXES!!
        people in the U.S. have to wait til they are almost dying to go to the E.R. and drive themselves cuz an ambulance drive costs them $200.00 plus TAX! in Canada you can go to the hospital ANY time you need to and NOT EMPTY YOUR BANK ACCOUNT!
        GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT YOU IDIOT!!!!!!

    • Posted By: American Middle Class Peon @ 11/19/2007 1:29:55 AM

      Holy crap! I just wanted to /agree with this post although it has nothing to do with the OP. The only ones in America who are against Socialized medicine are people who are STEALING money from the hands of the poor and middle class.
      And I wanted to make a comment AGAINST idiot Glenn Beck when he stated on his show awhile back attacking socialized medicine. He stated that America has the best medical care system in the world and when some prince needed to have life saving surgery he came to the U.S.
      Yes, America's medical system IS the best place to come if you are RICH!
      The only reason why issues like this work so well in other countries is because their governments although I'm sure have corruption they are not completely BOUGHT and PAID FOR by corporations and lobbyist bribery like the laughing stock U.S. government

  • Posted By: leah's last nerve @ 11/18/2007 7:22:03 AM

    You are beneath contempt Karl. Even Lee Atwater understood at the end that you need to atone for your sins. Propaganda doesn't sell anymore because your name has become synonymous with the word traitor. When you sleep, perchance to dream, may it be of Leavenworth.

    • Posted By: xenophile @ 11/19/2007 1:29:16 AM

      Yeah, Atwater got religion just before the curtain fell on his miserable existence. It's still a matter of debate whether his repentance was sincere or mere bargaining with the devil for his maggot-infested soul. With Rove, one strongly doubts that even a brain tumor and the knowledge of his imminent demise would prompt that outhouse rat to repent his evil ways.

  • Posted By: celsol @ 11/18/2007 11:37:22 PM

    Let's ask cristanti to look in the full length mirror to see the fool - or can you, given your diatribe.

    No one in their sane mind would give any thought to karl's gibberish deceit..

    • Posted By: cristanti @ 11/19/2007 1:23:54 AM

      what's the matter celsol, truth hurts????? I have no problem looking into a mirror, but I just bet hillary does, look at her........she's not real, but then we all know she has no conscience, you all are quaking in your boots if she is the nominee, i love it, there is so much dirt on her, you just can't stand it, gotta go now, will not be back, so you will just have to hold your venom.......than's the liberal kook in you, ha! ha!

  • Posted By: debcoop @ 11/19/2007 1:10:01 AM

    The telling part of the anecdote is not about Hillary Clinton, but about Karl Rove himself.
    He tells a story that when he tells it he already probably already knows it???s not true???that the mirror was not there when it was Hillary's office. If the story or its point was to make fun of his own dumpiness then it was irrelelvant that the office belonged to Hillary Clinton. The only reason to mention it the first time was to make fun of her as a woman because she's vain. That's a good, traditional way to demean women.

    But the most telling, indeed, damning part was that even AFTER he knew the mirror wasn't there when it was her office.....he tells it AGAIN despite now definitely knowing it wasn't true. Because of course he wasn't making fun of himself, but of her.

    So Karl Rove is so oblivious and deaf to his own invidious actions that he thinks his nasty little story tells us something only about her and not about him. Well he just revealed himself. As the say in poker the tell is visible. The man is a liar and he keeps lying, even when the truth has been thrown in his face.

    • Posted By: Fact Finder @ 11/19/2007 1:20:36 AM

      It's telling that you don't know how to post things. Twice? A bit on the side of overkill, no?

  • Posted By: American Middle Class Peon @ 11/19/2007 1:19:03 AM

    What!

  • Posted By: fakesmith @ 11/19/2007 1:08:15 AM

    I expect more from you, evil genius. What a simple little article. all you did was say nothing while getting a chance to re-tell the mirror story. Newsweek, take notice, Rove's calling it in.

  • Posted By: debcoop @ 11/19/2007 1:08:04 AM

    The telling part of the anecdote is not about Hillary Clinton, but about Karl Rove himself.
    He tells a story that when he tells it he already probably already knows it???s not true???that the mirror was not there when it was Hillary's office. If the story or its point was to make fun of his own dumpiness then it was irrelelvant that the office belonged to Hillary Clinton. The only reason to mention it the first time was to make fun of her as a woman because she's vain. That's a good, traditional way to demean women.

    But the most telling, indeed, damning part was that even AFTER he knew the mirror wasn't there when it was her office.....he tells it AGAIN despite now definitely knowing it wasn't true. Because of course he wasn'ttmaking fun of himself, but of her.
    So Karl Rove is so oblivious and deaf to his own invidious actions that he thinks his nasty little story tells us something only about her and not about him. Well he just revealed himself. As the say in poker the tell is visible. The man is a liar and he keeps lying, even when the truth has been thrown in his face.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse