Hillary may be in big trouble

  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
I guess Al Gore can run now huh?

If this all pans out to be what it looks like There will not be any woman in the race next year.
 
Depends on how fast it pans out. I didn't notice if there was a schedule mentioned in the article. It certainly doesn't sound good for Hill, she doesn't really seem to have the teflon coating Bill does.

There are still quiet rumblings about Obama's ties to an indicted Chicago business man.


Al Gore, Democratic nominee for President.

Fred Thompson, Republican nominee for President.

Michael Bloomberg, Unity Party nominee for President?

Ralph Nader, Pain in the Ass nominee for President. (Yes, he's thinking about it.)
 
It certainly doesn't sound good for Hill, she doesn't really seem to have the teflon coating Bill does.

Now it can be told: Bill's teflon coating consisted of a complicit fourth estate, which enjoyed a monopoly on the dissemination of information in this country. It's a new day; NO ONE has a teflon coating any more.
 
By far in the Years Ive been on the net the main stream media has avoided for YEARS things I saw on the web that were bad for the Rs.

I was posting and reading about

No WMDs

White phosferous in Fallughia

Tillman's Death

Lynch's real story

Unreliable voting machines

and many many more subjects that the MSM completely Ignored until they just could no longer ignore them.


It generally takes a couple of days for the internet news to reach the MSM IF it ever even does.
 
I would also like you guys to remember it was a liberal who brought you this news and from a "liberal" news sight.

So while you are rejoicing just WHERE this might go think for just one second about who promotes truth no matter who comes off looking bad.
 
By far in the Years Ive been on the net the main stream media has avoided for YEARS things I saw on the web that were bad for the Rs.

You're young yet, Truthmatters. I can tell this because you think in terms of "years I've been on the net". You can't conceive of life before the net; the concept of a thirty-year MSM/DNC monopoly on the dissemination of information might as well be science fiction to you. That's cool, though; the future is yours. Maybe some of us older folk can impart to you a bit of wisdom and historical context before we all die off. I remain hopeful.
 
Im 49 years old

Precisely my point, you young whippersnapper - LOL!

Tell me, then - is your attempt to blur the reality of what constitutes mainstream media disingenuous semantic gymnastics, or the result of your having slept under a log for the last 49 years? Because mainstream media means traditional media; traditional, as in MSM/DNC.
 
Now what the hell are you trying to say?

It has been the internet who has provided the real news in the last 10 years or so and the MSM which has been proven lacking.

I really dont hink you know what you are saying.
 
Now what the hell are you trying to say?

It has been the internet who has provided the real news in the last 10 years or so and the MSM which has been proven lacking.

I really dont hink you know what you are saying.

You really don't hink so? Actually, I hink I'm hitting the nail right on the head. You'd like to lump Fox News into the category of "mainstream media", wouldn't you? Sorry - no sale.

If you hink the MSM/DNC has been softballing the Bush Administration on ANYTHING, you'd better hink again.
 

Forum List

Back
Top