You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘clintons’ tag.
Getting a twofer from this old Ted Kennedy fishy story that was used in 2008: attack their favorite target while seemingly being “friendly” to the candidate NYC voted for (subliminal message: Ds are racist too)
Click here to add text
Obviously, assuming that Ted got it right through his fat, drunken ears and assuming that he told it accurately through his backstabbing opportunistic mouth, it still refers to rank in he party hierarchy not race.
I saved this leaftlet the Obama campaign was handing in 2008 because I knew it will come in handy
That leaflet that was the net change after 2 elections (1994 and 200) was circulated by the Obama campaign.
After telling Marion Berry in 2009 that this will be different than 1994 because “This time you got ME”
Well, this is what “ME” got in just one election
Senate – add one seat from last December special election – 6+1
and 13 state legislatures.
8 years of the Clintons vs 2 years of Obama! With the media investigating Clinton non-stop and making Obama the Messiah little difference.
Of course, Obama doesn’t think this is his fault and is ready to compromise some moore
But the president is said to not view the Republican wave as a personal rebuke. Rather, he sees it as an indication of continued economic anxiety and an admonition for both parties to work together. Some of the “no compromise” rhetoric Republicans are using is a misreading of the public mood, a senior White House official said.
It was only Clinton’s fault back them as IACF.
And about that economic anxiety – whose job was to fix that? Clinton’s?
Even NY Post
The “elbowing town” beams with pride in the local press (even if they were slow in getting the actual wedding pics)
On the oil-kill front, in the news embargo area, yesterday’s chest beating from BP is followed by softer headlines