Comments on: The Truth About the Truth About Hillary

By: Editor - 201k.com

Editor - 201k.com — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 21:40:30 +0000

*I* have to prove that a woman who is married, has a child, and who has never been connected romantically with another woman is not a lesbian?

But those who claim she is don't have to prove it? No names of someone she was with, no confessions from an old lesbian lover, or even someone who claims they SAW her with another woman--they can just point out that she went to Wellesley, wink-wink-nudge-nudge?

How about this: YOU prove you've never robbed a bank. Or had gay sex. Or that George W. Bush REALLY believes in God.

I love that right-wingers claim to be so value-oriented, but hesitate not a bit to sugest that a married mother has to prove she's not a lesbian.

By: Bithead

Bithead — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:55:07 +0000

Câmon, you can do it. Try it, âI profoundly dislike Hillary Clintonâs politics and personality but as a person of integrity I admit that sheâs a married heterosexual woman and mother, and that allegations of her being a lesbian are just nasty political smearsâ.

And you know this... how?

By: Juan the Landless

Juan the Landless — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:56:26 +0000

As Terry says, Karl Rove has read his Goebbels. Karl has also read his Mencken. "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." Thus, Bill O'Reilly, Mel Gibson, George W. Bush, and so many more.

By: Terry

Terry — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:31:51 +0000

Make some stuff up.

Say it over and over again.

Get it said enough times on the corporate media, et voila, "everybody KNOWS that Clinton did ... ".

"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one
fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly...it must confine itself
to a few points and repeat them over and over."

-Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister

By: Editor - 201k.com

Editor - 201k.com — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 21:20:39 +0000

Why wouldn't Klein make the allegation? It's only a matter of degree worse than things people have been making up about the Clintons for years. In the race to sell books to Clinton haters an escalation of wild charges is inevitable. Who'd buy it if it said the same stuff that's been said a thousand times? But it's nice to see that so many right-wingers consider it over the line. While you're at it you might consider going all the way and acknowledging that Hillary--whatever you think of her politics--isn't a lesbian. C'mon, you can do it. Try it, "I profoundly dislike Hillary Clinton's politics and personality but as a person of integrity I admit that she's a married heterosexual woman and mother, and that allegations of her being a lesbian are just nasty political smears". I knew you could do it!

By: DaveD

DaveD — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 20:58:40 +0000

I have to agree with Bithead. Unless Klein has lost it I cannot believe that anyone who wanted their work to be taken seriously would make this allegation in print. You'd have to be an idiot to not to see how unsavory this is. I could say I will wait to see for myself when the book comes out, but I wouldn't buy a book on the Clinton's no matter what was in it.

By: Juan the Landless

Juan the Landless — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 18:41:28 +0000

Don't hold your breath, Bithead. Anyone stupid enough to read Ed Klein's book is still struggling with Dick, Jane and Spot.

By: Al

Al — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 18:34:56 +0000

I dunno, I think the more sensational carges is that Hillary has had lesbian relations with known satanists.

By: Juan the Landless

Juan the Landless — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 18:32:58 +0000

Jack Newfield had it right. The best thing about the Clintons is their enemies. From high profile losers like Matt Drudge and Jerry Falwell to bottom feeding losers like Ed Klein, the Clintons have it all.

By: Big Brother

Big Brother — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:54:09 +0000

let's face it, Bill is no stranger to rape... Juanita Broderick can attest to that. But as evil as the Clintons are it's hard to see anyone wanting to rape Hillary!

By: tubino

tubino — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:02:52 +0000

Given that the publisher has stated that they hope the book kills Hillary's political aspirations, doesn't Hillary have perfect grounds for a libel suit? A number of credible witnesses and legal records support the picture of a drunk-driving irresponsible coke-snorting AWOL George Bush -- but the rightwing nutcases get plenty more media attention with less or no evidence. John Gillnitz wonders, "Wow. An inflammatory accusation by an anonymous source. Where has that happened before?"

By: Bithead

Bithead — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:02:33 +0000

Personally, I'll withhold judgement until someone actually READS THE BOOK.

By: The Liberal Avenger

The Liberal Avenger — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:01:11 +0000

For what it's worth, I personally wouldn't want to run that ad, but I don't have any problem with you doing so - nor do I think it is hypocritical of you.

By: The Liberal Avenger

The Liberal Avenger — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 16:59:19 +0000

I'm very happy to see this post. I have been wondering what sort of response would come from the right from that allegation. I certainly would not have given a similar claim about Bob and Liddy Dole or George and Laura Bush any credence.

By: Backbone

Backbone — Tue, 14 Jun 2005 16:55:02 +0000

Appreciate the response, however I wonder if you would allow a publication to advertise (at the same rate) if it claimed that Reagan or W raped their respective wives and fostered their children through such a despicable act.