Is this what we will need to expect in Hillary's socialist police state?
"Clinton campaign kills negative story"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5992.html
2007-09-24 09:03:51 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I'm certainly not surprised and see this as being par for the course. I love when things like this come out because it reinforces my feelings as well as those of many others......
2007-09-24 09:12:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
The magazine wants to sell ads. Bill Clinton is extremely popular and many people will buy the magazine only because his picture is on the front of it. The negative story, which you have not seen nor have I may have been full of lies.
Your attempt at equating Hillary with Socialism is getting tired and old. Everyone knows how lame that is and you just look foolish continuing to use that brush to paint her. Just because you and your narrow little mind doesn't agree with her doesn't make her a Socialist or anything else. Seeing the world in black and why one must miss an awful lot. Obviously you have.
2007-09-24 16:14:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
What Police state?That publication prefers a picture of Bill Clinton on the cover over its journalistic integrity..
Police state is police breaking your door down shutting your publication down.This is called negotiations and part of the Democratic process.If anyone should be looked at negatively in this case it's that publication.
2007-09-24 16:21:16 · answer #3 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Why would Bill Clinton be obliged to appear in a magazine that was preparing to do a hatchet job on his wifes campaign? Do you think it would be any different if it was one of the republicans and his wife or George and Laura Bush in 2000?
Socialist police state? Give me a break.
2007-09-24 16:13:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Any campaign seeks to silence and control negative stories - that is part of their purpose. They have staff dedicated to doing nothing else but ferreting out negative stories and attempting to neutralize them. It's Politics 101, not just Hillary 101.
2007-09-24 16:11:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
In America, they like to call what she did "politics". It is fairly common today, and has nothing to do with socialism. If she was a socialist, she would have had the editors thrown in jail and executed. You are just making crap up like some of your other very annoying republican counterparts.
2007-09-24 16:13:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Typical "Hill Billy" tactics!!
And I am sure we will be able to addto this list when they are through!!!
The Scandals:
Whitewater
Cattlegate
Nannygate
Helicoptergate
Travelgate
Gennifer Flowersgate
Filegate
Vince Fostergate
I wonder where those Whitewater billing records came fromgate
Paula Jonesgate
Federal Building campaign phone callgate
Lincoln bedroomgate
White House coffeegate
Donations from convicted drug and weapons dealersgate
Buddhist Templegate
Web Hubbell hush moneygate
Lippogate
Chinese commiegate - Clinton was practically endorsed by red China Update!
Let's blame Kenneth Starrgate
Zippergate/interngate - the Lewinsky affair itself
Perjury and jobs for Lewinskygate - the aftermath
Willeygate
Web Hubbell prison phone callgate
Selling Military Technology to the Chinese Commiesgate
Coverup for our Russian Comrades as Wellgate
Wag-the-Dog-gate
Jaunita Broaddrick gate
PBS-gate
Email-gate
Vandalgate
Lootergate
Pardongate
2007-09-24 16:13:08 · answer #7 · answered by Boredstiff 5 · 1⤊ 5⤋
uhhhh...yeah....sure. Do you believe that Bush & Co. haven't used these tactics before?
Also, blame GQ for not having the balls to stand up to Hillary and print the story anyway.
When people complain about corporate ownership of the media, this is what we are referring to.
2007-09-24 16:12:17 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
They certainly have the option to refuse to talk to reporters from a particular magazine.
Bush has done precisely the same thing -- denying reporters access to the White House when they publish unfavorable stories.
2007-09-24 16:09:47 · answer #9 · answered by Steve 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Yes. This is exactly what you can expect.
I advise you to relocate immediately to someplace more in keeping with your views on freedom, such as Iran.
2007-09-24 16:27:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Not surprising from most politicians these days. Sad.
2007-09-24 16:10:13 · answer #11 · answered by ohio gal 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋