Thursday, November 30, 2006


The extraordinary Anchoress has a posting called Anti-Clinton: Weirdest Headline of the Day on her site.

Apparently, if you give money to another person seeking the presidency, you are Anti-Clinton. My question is, why does the MSM consider that to be a perjorative term? Certainly, as the Anchoress correctly points out, George Soros was never described as making anti-Bush contributions (although that is inescapably true).

What is more interesting to me, and something that has continued to fascinate me for the past six years, is the deference shown to the Junior Senator from New York, Hillary Rodham Clinton, by both government officials and employees and the mainstream media.

Why exactly has this POLITICIAN never had to face a tough question in two political campaigns in what is arguably, one of the tougher states in which to run for office. Last time I checked, New York people were neither dainty nor shy!

It follows from the manner in which Mrs. Clinton has been treated for these six years that this kid glove treatment will continue should she run for president, thus making it possible for someone to (heaven forfend) be elected to the presidency without ever having revealed anything about her true character and beliefs.

If you don't find that frightening, I'm worried for you.

No comments: