Skip to main content

View Diary: Fox News brings on 1990s Bill Clinton accuser to declare Hillary 'is the war on women' (219 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Oh PUHLEEZE (28+ / 0-)

    I say BRING IT ON MOTHERFUCKERS.  If that's all the GOP has is to rehash shit from 20 years ago then they're more fucked than we're being led to believe.  It's not gonna help them win the war on women by bashing Hillary with shit her husband did 20 years ago.  The sins of the husband crap won't fly.  I for one hope they continue down this path because it'll only mean 60% of all women will vote Dem in 2016.

    This is your world These are your people You can live for yourself today Or help build tomorrow for everyone -8.75, -8.00

    by DisNoir36 on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 07:40:55 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  This woman is not voting based on a soap opera (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ellid, schnecke21, blueoasis

      I really resent, and I'm not picking on you specifically when I say it, this idea that all women are just going to vote for Hillary because we're watching The Talk or The View or  Young and the Restless or something other than paying attention to her positions on policy.  

      It's just the mirror image of Fox.  We keep having these diaries about avoiding sexism but we seem to be gearing up to have a big cat fight.

      FOX is doing what it needs to do.  It's trying to goad us into the big cat fight and get the folks ready for the mud wrestling to come.  

      If you choose Hillary, the soap opera comes with it, so pay attention to your Social Security because they may just snatch it while you're eyes are glued to the entertainment.

      •  The only thing the GOP (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dr Swig Mcjigger, Sue B, Darwinita, dewtx

        wants to talk about is the 20 year old soap opera, since they are an ongoing policy disaster.

        I don't think anybody here is saying women will vote for Hillary based on her having a vagina. Women will vote for her or any other Democratic Party candidate because the Republicans have nothing to offer besides these ghoulish attempts to bring this 20 year old story back to life.

      •  Have a small problem with this: (6+ / 0-)
        If you choose Hillary, the soap opera comes with it
        I agree that our focus should remain on Clinton's policy positions, but blaming her for the 'soap opera' is like blaming Obama for the 'Birthers'.  I won't be discouraged from voting for her because there are lunatics who invented much of what Fox is attempting to rehash.

        There was no Whitewater Scandal.
        There was no Travelgate Scandal.
        There was a concerted and vast Right Wing Conspiracy (confirmed by a one of the Top Smear Merchants who went on to admit that he and others just made shit up -- David Brock.) to discredit the Clintons by inventing scandals.
        Hillary did what every spouse of a politician as under seige as Bill Clinton was.

        Nope -- with Fox and the Republicans, this will be SOP for whomever ends up running and getting the Dem nomination.  At least with Hillary Clinton, much, if not ALL, of what will be said has been thouroughly vetted and debunked.  And the public will grow tired of such attacks in short order.

        all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

        by 4kedtongue on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 09:45:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  `this is the reason (0+ / 0-)

        I didn't support Hillary in 2008.  I don't want to hear this trash again.

        One of the stated reasons for the Revolution was "taxation without representation." Now we have "legislation without representation" or "representation without legislation."

        by regis on Thu Feb 20, 2014 at 08:54:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Blaming the victim never works (n/m) (0+ / 0-)
    •  Hillary isn't this great symbol of womanhood (0+ / 0-)

      For me. She doesn't have my vote just because she's a woman. As of now, she doesn't have my vote period.

    •  Technically, they're bashing Hillary with shit... (0+ / 0-)

      Hillary did 20 years ago.  She did disparage, insult, and ridicule the women her husband has extramarital affairs with.  They are trying to reach the 2-4% of the population that might be influenced by that, and change an election.  The genius of Karl Rove was the strategy to attack strength (Kerry on Viet Nam, Obama for making great speeches) rather than attack weakness.  Attacking Hillary on women's issues is another version of that.  Will it work?  I don't know.  

      To avoid starting dumb wars, punish the dumb people who vote for them.

      by joesig on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 11:14:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bill Clinton didn't have... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        joesig extramarital affair with Kathleen Willey.  
        She accused him of sexually assaulting her.  And, while it's impossible to know for certain what really happened, there were reasons to believe she was less than truthful.
        But the Willey allegations were not another Flowers or Lewinsky kind of thing, it was much more serious.

        •  You're right: it's tough to keep the alleged... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          sexual assaults separate from the proven and alleged extramarital affairs.  And again, the strategy is to turn 2-4 % of people that might have voter for her into people that sit out or vote against her.  It was the exact same strategy that worked against Kerry and failed against Obama.  

          And while I hate to have to say it, I'll offer the obligatory (and true) disclaimer: in the general I'll vote for Hillary over any Republican.  

          To avoid starting dumb wars, punish the dumb people who vote for them.

          by joesig on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 11:33:55 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Looks like it's all he said she said. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sharman, carrps

          That being the case, I will vote for Hillary in absence of an actual progressive candidate, just to keep republi-vermin from getting in.

          The Final Report of the U.S. Office of the Independent Counsel report noted that "Willey and President Clinton are the only direct witnesses to their meeting, and their accounts differ substantially on the crucial facts of what occurred." It also stated "Willey gave false information to the FBI about her sexual relationship with a former boyfriend, and acknowledged having lied about it when the agents confronted her with contradictory evidence. Following Willey’s acknowledgment of the lie, the Independent Counsel agreed not to prosecute her for false statements in this regard."[3] According to Independent Counsel Robert Ray’s report, "Willey’s [Paula] Jones deposition testimony differed from her grand jury testimony on material aspects of the alleged incident."[4]

          ... all that oration sounds like capitulation now.

          by Darwinita on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 12:00:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'd be interested to hear the evidence against (0+ / 0-)

          I recall the Willey allegations, and thought they were credible.

          IMO, the Big Dawg suffered from having so many women quite happy to accept his advances, that he foisted the same on less willing ladies.  And Willey was seeking help from him, so walking a tightrope between rejecting and not losing an important friendship.

          If there was sinister harassment like missing pets, that is serious.  That part I have a hard time believing though, a very hard time believing.

          Was Bill flawed, sure.  Does it have much to do with Hillary or his stature and accomplishments, nope.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site