Front Page Story on Drudge about Hillary having a lesbian affair with her assistant

Pathetic.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashhh.htm

not that old chestnut again???

:banghead:

We know him don't we, he scrambles raw eggs rubs them ALL over his body in the shower. Scrapes them off, cooks them, and feeds them to his ALL MALE friends. Get that MALE friends.

I sometimes check Freeperville in the morning to see what the Hillhaters will be posting in the afternoon. Surprising this took so long to hit DU...

It's an ugly insult to tar those of us who dislike Senator Clinton as reactionary primitives.

It seems pretty consistent that virtually all the hardcore Clinton bashers on this board do so from the left. This pretty much makes your contention spurious or silly, since those of us farther to the left don't tend to read that nasty site.

Are you just incapable of seeing something so obvious, or does the righteousness of your champion's "goodness" warrant any slur necessary?

OT I know but as far as Hillary's concerned, what a load of crap.

As long as she gets as much action as Bill!

This is really bad politics. They should wiat until after the Convention if she is the nominee.

So, this time Drudge is a little slow with the (probably untrue) story.

Isn't there a cell in Guantanamo reserved for Drudge, just down the block from Karl Rove?

If you think it's so pathetic?

drudge is mainstream media now. All the networks and newspapers read his site. We have to know what the jackass is posting to be prepared for his attacks.

the first was someone using Barack Obama's middle name repeatedly b/c the RW strategists would be using it, now I'm being told that Drudge links should be posted on DU and used as a source for stories b/c that's what all the MSM are reading.

:eyes:

called him our "Edward R Murrow". I only read the online excerpt of their book and was amazed that they did not recognize their own role. They had a long convoluted story of how Drudge turned an uneventful, normal $75 DC haircut that Kerry got into a story of a $1000 styling, highlighting, coloring etc complete with made up quotes on how particular Kerry was on his hair. They lavished praise on Drudge for fabricating the story - and, though Kerry and the salon immediately corrected the story - hit Kerry for it.

You are right that the candidates have to hit Drudge on his lies, because he seems to be one of the early people in their echo chamber. This will lead to the story appearing on all the hate radio stations. The danger in some stories (though I doubt this will fly) is that people then start hearing it from multiple sources, which they consider independent, though they aren't. My guess is that this will end as quickly (or faster) than the fake Kerry intern story.

It does suggest that all the candidates will need a way to get the true counter stories out to enough people to "vaccinate" them from these stories to halt their spread. It is not a level playing field, and this echo chamber is an enormous advantage for the Republicans.

I do not care who other adults have sex with! That is why it is called a
private life. Hillary Clinton's sex life should be private .... end of story.

??

:)

:shrug:

:hi:

But it would have to be from a difference source first.

the smears that are all over South Carolina. It is mentioned in the same line as the rumor that Obama is a Moslem to give you some measure of how the Times views the issue.

n/t

..."oversees every minute of Senator Clinton's day." teehee

Any further comment would be superfluous or republican (which amounts to the same thing).

but wow she is stunning.

Now I'm all hot and bothered.

If there was proof otherwise, Id have to give HRC props.

That sums him up.

I made the mistake of googling to seek out more info. Now I feel like I need to take a shower to scrub off the slime.

to these people.

when people visit his site. :puke:

The Times is owned by Rupert Murdoch. The Times is speaking of smears and innuendos, while Sludge presents them as facts.

every Democratic charge is categorically untrue while all the Republican ones have some truth to them. Very interesting how they lumped that together.

I thought everyone knew that.

Its just another cheap and tacky slur. To be expected

Why not wait until if and when Clinton is the nominee? They're supposed to want her as our nominee really bad.

n/t

real subtle-like 'osam... i mean obama!' type stuff on fox news

If one clicks on the story, it makes Matt some more money to spend on his boytoy.

try to grasp that. He LOATHES them.

Link?

Perhaps you're just angry someone beat you to it about posting this 'Clinton's Gay!' story?
How many times will you now parrot this smear?

They say clearly there is nothing true in the article. About as supportive coming from Drudge as you can get!

... we see witches!

It is blasting the Times for its article.

Drudge is blasting the Times article. I wished he had been as nice to other Democrats than he is to Hillary.

yes, drudge is paid off to do supportive stories on Clinton. Sure. He's only posted a freakin' gazillion stories slamming her. He was leaked her fundraising story, and according to your "creative" accounting, he's paid to do supportive stories about her.

you are a card.

:rofl:

Seems to me that Drudge has run a lot of nasty lies about both Clintons over the years. I must have missed all the positive ones. Please show us.

or bite me.

Somehow, with her history, I could not see the very disciplined Hillary Clinton having an affair with anyone.

It's trash.

Rather supportive in a strange way...

GOP'ers can't be trusted, period.

She should reject the tired old DLC philosophy that you need to ignore your base and cultivate Republicans in order to attract new voters. It doesn't work, it never has.

One would think someone as smart as Hillary would have learned that by now.

defend the dramatical charges.

I'm sure Chris Lehane can handle it all by himself.

Drudge links to a story in a European paper that would otherwise remain unseen to his readers,Drudge displays the headline and story prominently in case his readers are too lazy to go to the London Times and read it themselves,Drudge repeats the lesbian rumor in case his readers are too lazy to read the front page he's printed on his site. Drudge disingenuously tut-tuts the rumor mongers who originally printed it. Anyone who believes that this is somehow "in support" of Clinton is being naive.

our nominee. There is soooo much dirt to be dredged, er, drudged up by all the well known suspects and lesser known suspects; Some true, some not that Hill's nomination could turn what should be a blowout win for Democrats into a very close contest at best, that could well be maneuvered into another close loss.

We Democrats have other, and I would submit much better choices among our candidates so why select the most vulnerable to incoming rounds. :-)

They haven't held back anything regarding Clinton. The supposed lesbian angle is old worn and tired. How many references to Hillary being butch have you seen by now over the years? They hit Hillary hard from every direction possible already when Bill was in the White House, including accusing her of murdering Foster and massive corruption with Whitewater. Your guy has only gotten a taste of the full treatment for example. Same with every other Dem except for Kerry, Dean (his role as DNC Chair kept him in the cross hairs), Ted Kennedy and of course Bill Clinton.

The roughest stuff didn't start hitting Kerry until he bacame the Democratic nominee. The same would be true for Edwards, Obama, Richardson, and Biden. Republicans don't have anything fresh and thus captivating to come at Clinton with anymore, it will all be summer re-runs. Meanwhile we know how Hillary Clinton holds up under full attack, and how she fights back. We can't say the same for the other Democrats now running.

I increasingly have started scoring this as a point in Hillary's favor. I am tired of Democratic candidates who don't know how to defend themselves from Republican attacks.

Fighting back is being able to categorically refute w/ fact your opponents accusations. When you have innumerable open wounds that invite exploration you will have no recourse but to constantly be on the defensive.

Being stuck on the defensive with no where to turn is not a mark of strength, but rather a sign of inherent weakness. It is my contention that we would prefer as our candidate, someone who will be less vulnerable to distracting attacks, and so limit the offense of our opponent intrinsically.

Such a candidate will have a much more nimble and flexible armamentarium with which to persuade the public of our advantage in bringing benefit to themselves and their children.

In nominating our candidate we must also consider who the Republicans would most prefer as our nominee.:think:

"constantly on the defensive".It doesn't seem to distract her at all. Perhaps,as a candidate,she can do more than one thing at a time,and do it well.

(and to be fair some agreements as well) but one thing that I feel almost all fair observers give both of them credit for is their highly effective "War Room" mobilization response to attacks genrated against them. There is a whole lot more to it than "spiffy one liners" though spiffy one liners have their role to play also.

In an environment in which your opponents are willing to invent lies to use against you (Vince Foster for Hillary, faked war wounds for Kerry etc.) If you consider constant allegations made against Democrats to be open wounds than all Democrats running for President in the current political environment will be covered with open wounds, often completely unfounded, and more frequently based on some distortion of reality.

We can not lessen the number of political attacks against us by screening for candidates who are attack resistent. The Rove play book concentrates on the tactic of attacking Democrats on their perceived strengths more so even than on their perceived weaknesses. What we need are candidates who are skilled at political Aikido, who can take the viscious energy of the negatives constantly hurled against them, and redirect it back so that it harms the attackers rather than their intended target.

I am not at all sure that Republicans want to run against Hillary Clinton, honestly I am not. Yes they are prepared for her, just like she is for them, but she is a tough and highly skilled politician who may best be able to mobilize minorities (next to Obama perhaps in that regard) and women, who can tap into a deep American undercurrent of nostalia for the first Clinton Administration, and who Bill Clinton himself will be most motivated to fight for. There are many true things said about Bill, both positive and negative, but being a masterful politician is always one of them. I am not sure that Republicans would welcome direct comparisons between the last Democratic and Republican Administrations.

is 2 fold.

1) As you mentioned, they make stuff up. That means there are still an infinite number of stories. A realistic assessment of Kerry's vulnerabilities would have concentrated on his commendable but controversial anti-war actions, not his highly decorated service. Having watched Going Up-river, it is clear they had a plan to differentiate his protests from the anti-war left of the time. He and Gore were about as clean as politicians get. The stories against both were false. (I doubt this lesbian story would fly but consider that if this were to be the story - they could have Hillary lovers from Wellesley instead of SBVT.)

2) When HRC was hit in the 1990s, it was not with the force used now. (Remember Bill Clinton changed his avoiding the draft story at least 3 times, having started with a claim that he did "not remember". The war room was turned into mythology, but it suceeded only because GHWB was below 40%, the media was sick of him, and Bill Clinton was charming.) The media often protected her. Some issues like making $100,000 off of $5,000 in cattle futures trades led by a Tyson lawyer left me wishing I hadn't read the article as I supported the Clintons, when they were in office far more and longer than I should have. The 1996 campaign finance problems were never completely disproven and they unfortunately hurt Gore. There have already been 3 stories (Hsu, Chinatown, and the most recent WP story this weekend on Canto (sp?), each of which raises eyebrows. With the 1996 memories there, we will hear all those stories repeatedly.

If they come at Hillary stronger now than in the 90's it will only be a matter of relatively small degree, not of real magnitude. They have been all over her since her earliest comment about Tammy Wynette and it kept building from there. They raked her over the coals for seeking to exercise power without getting elected. They flayed her over the health care task force she headed up. They singled out her office in the White House to blather on endlessly regarding "Travel Gate". Most of the Whitewater investigation dirt search was targeted at Hillary. It is hard to imagine a more sleazy personal attack than the efforts to link her with Vince Foster's death in some kind of sex and murder plot. Hillary was also the number one target of the entire Feminnazi line of smearing that was big throughout Bush the Junior's first term in office.

The point regarding number one is not that the Republican's won't make up stuff against Hillary the same as they have against any Democrat, it is that much of the downside potential of the effects of getting attacked in that way is already "fully priced in" for Hillary. She has taken her lumps and we can see where those attacks have left her - still competitive. We don't know how that type of treatment hitting a different Democrat for the first time will effect their public standing, and we don't know how well they will stand up to that type of pounding. We have a pretty good track record to appraise how well Hillary handles it.

Rocket J Moose says Edwards is far and away the better candidate and I believe this will be born out as HRC and Barack battle it out with Edwards emerging victorious from the maelstrom.

Norman Hsu is a huge connection to all of the past foibles. Finance "issues" really are painful for any candidate, but twisting the arms of Chinese dish washers is not very attractive. ;(

What about the Peter Paul story?

We can only hope that Iowa voters are as savvy as they are purported to be.

Remember this is only the primary:smoke:

welcome to DU :hi:

While the Clintons have been attacked more and longer, the Edwardses have been under sustained attacks for 10 years led by some of the most viscious operatives associated with Jesse Helms, beginning with his Senate campaign and never stopping.

Since I am in Chapel Hill, I get to see and hear more of the attacks on the Edwardses. A few of these attacks (mansion, haircut) had legs and became national talking points. Many, many more attacks failed to resonante nationally, _except_ among those who would never vote for any Dem. (As an example, most people didn't believe that Elizabeth was an elite snob who wouldn't even speak to her neighbors, even when the story was pushed by the NYT, AP, and others. BTW the "bad neighbors"/"not people like us" attack was part of the whisper/email attacks when he ran for Senate.)

Most of these attacks follow the pattern used by the Helms/"Congressional Club" with great effect in various NC and national campaigns. These attacks follow familiar patterns trying to portray Edwards as a "rich, elitist, effeminate, hypocrit of a trial lawyer who will say anything to get elected so he can take your hard-earned money and give it all those blacks and illegals on welfare who only want a handout ..." or a "godless Chapel Hill liberal who doesn't share the family values of real Americans like you". As usual, they attack a candidate's perceived strengths.

For examples of these attacks, check out the postings at www.wral.com following almost any news regarding Edwards. Even the posts not deleted by the moderators are still rather viscious.

Overall, Edwards has handled these reasonably well with only a few missteps. Stories such as the WP story about the buyer of their DC house generally dropped from sight after a day or two.

It appears that some of these same attacks are now being used in Iowa against Edwards, but it isn't clear to me who is pushing them, whether the RW or the supporters of another Dem candidate.

it may be safe to assume they've already hit her with their best stuff. Her national popularity has gone steadily up despite the fact.

I sincerely do not believe for one minute that the GOP machine will have any less ammunition, real or imagined-- to fire at any of the other Democratic candidates should they win the primaries rather than Sen. Clinton.

One could quite easily underestimate the GOP machine and believe that one candidate will get it easier than another, but I don't.

As their newly polished machine (circa '92-'93) has only had one Dem President to attack before, one can only surmise that the attacks on other candidates will be just as vicious, just as untruthful and just as mean as their attacks on Sen. Clinton's husband.

I cannot stand Hillary...however, this kind of BS is really, really out of line. Even if it were true...all I can say is, "So what?"

Sheesh!

This is the kind of s*** aimed at people who would never vote D in the first place and not those of us who are critical of her for any real reason.

Stop it.

and, no, inanimate objects don't count

made from Vince Foster's fingerbones...

I would hope I would have the privilege of giving her her new toaster!

"Nobody’s goddamn business.” - Hillary's response when asked by her then-campaign manager if she was gay. Christopher Anderson, 2004, American Evita, HarperCollins, New York, New York. p. 56



And a couple of unrelated quotes from Hillary.

“I have to kick his ass every morning.” Hillary, on Bill – Christopher Anderson, 2004, American Evita, HarperCollins, New York, New York. p. 163


“She could cut your heart out with her tongue.” – Thomas Mars, a colleague of Hillary’s Little Rock law firm

D nominee. They are also backing Thompson and believe the entire R party will push him forward as their nominee at a brokered R convention.

It was an interesting Thanksgiving visit...

Boom Chicka Wah Wah

He's got to have trouble sleeping at night.

Hang in there Herman! :hi:

That's all I have to say.

can "cure" her.