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).
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!