It wouldn't matter if she was right of Pat Buchanan-they would still hate her. Same with Bill-he was extremely moderate, darn near Republican yet the hate spewed was at a high pitch level from the beginning. A fever of lies spread and we'll never think of our presidents the same way because of that. If those on the right are that vicious to our most moderate presidents or candidates, people will respond in kind. I believe that's very sad but don't see how to solve it. We Dems have to defend ouselves.
2007-02-27 09:07:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
No she's not!! Hillary Rodham Clinton is basically a "Political Whore!!" She'll say anything and support anything only after she sticks her finger in the air and see what direction the political wind is blowing. She's acting like a moderate to elected president. Hillary got a political pass from the liberals in New York. She didn't really answer any questions at all. She voted for the war to become politically viable for her future plan to run for president.
Hillary is now against the war because she needs the far left liberals to win the Democratic Nomination. After winning the nomination, she will slowly proceed back toward the center to win the general election.
Hillary has no principles, just ambition!!
2007-02-27 09:01:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by nixdad96 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
I asked this question on here a few weeks ago, wanting some factual reasons, and even though I asked for no personal insults, they came in like a swarm of bees. That was before their new word "socialist" became part of their chant. The only true answer I got was a very weak "Whitewater."
2007-02-27 10:47:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Petrushka's Ghost 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The only thing I have in common with Hillary is that we are both white and women. She is definately not republican. She is a card carrying socialist and has been since her days at Vassar. She also got her money by defrauding the poeple of Arkansas. She is a criminal who should be in jail and she knows it, that is why she is blocking the release of several very informative parts of the Starr Report. If released I bet she would be up on murder charges along with Billy Boy.
I don't hate her, that would take too much energy. However, I do dislike her and everything she stands for.
2007-02-27 08:58:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
It's pretty sad that republicans love to hate the Clintons. Yes there are Bush haters but most of them arn't self proclaimed Christians. The Christians are the worst Clinton haters spewing lies about them everywhere just because they disagree with and cannot not except that americans voted for Bill Clinton and are considering voting for Hillary.
2007-02-27 08:57:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
In regards to record profits of oil companies she said: “I want to take those profits and put them into an alternative energy fund that will begin to fund alternative smart energy alternatives that will actually begin to move us toward the direction of independence.” (This is probably a bad example because all the liberals hate big oil...) This is socialism. You can't just take a business's profits and distribute them elsewhere - what about free enterprise?
2007-02-27 09:02:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by smellyfoot ™ 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Those who hate the Clintons have always hated them. They writhe and spit out conjecture about them and call them everything from murderers to socialists. Proof of their allegations? Nah, they don't need proof, that's for silly things like indictments and trials, they are content to let slander do its work. Thankfully, most of America has already seen this act and continue to reject it. She's our best hope for 2008 and she's just what this country needs right now. She is indeed centrist, calling her a liberal or a socialist just shows that they don't know much about her. I'm a moderate and she fits my views very well.
2007-02-27 08:57:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
Well, her blatant hypocrisy comes to mind. She's worth millions yet bleats about "wealth redistribution" for others. She acknowledged the dangers posed by Saddam and his WMD program, yet flip flopped to the strings of her uber left support cult. Need more?
2007-02-27 08:55:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by Trollbuster 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
well apparently you are delusions, or misled or just wack.
I don't hate her. Yea she voted for the war, then when it wasn't popular to be a person who voted for the war she claimed she was trickeda nd really wasnt for it. Not something I admire.
I just see alot of hypocracy, and alot of socialistic ideals in her agenda.
I would just never vote for her. nothing more really to say about her.
2007-02-27 08:54:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by sociald 7
·
4⤊
2⤋
And that coming from the left?
2007-02-27 08:53:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Boston Mark 5
·
3⤊
0⤋