Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Hillary plays the teary eyes and bullied cards, again

Hillary plays the teary eyes and bullied cards, again

Just like in 2008 New Hampshire primary and 2000 NY Senate race

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/clinton-important-to-stand-up-to-bullies-590378051524

Hillary lives with Bill Clinton.

It’s doubtful there is ANYTHING that could truly shock or dismay her when it comes to frat-boy-like behavior. Or sexual innuendo.

Donald Trump said Hillary got “schlonged” in the 2008 election. Trump’s explanation is that it means to be beaten badly:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/679506175239532545

Regardless, whether a slang word to be beaten badly, or a Yiddish term for a schlong, there is zero chance Hillary was actually offended or upset. Zero. SHE LIVES WITH BILL CLINTON. She has covered for Bill Clinton’s sexual antics and went after his female victims.

Yet Hillary got teary eyed when talking about campaign bullying later that same day, an obvious reference to Trump’s comment.

The excuse was a child’s statement about people making comments about her asthma behind her back. That child’s personal message was used as a political launching board for Hillary:

It was all a game, a pose for the media. How do we know? Because Hillary has a history.

After she lost Iowa in 2008 to Obama and was far behind in the New Hampshire polls, Hillary got teary eyed at a campaign stop:

After that performance Maureen Dowd in The NY times asked, Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House?. Hillary won New Hampshire in an upset as a result of what Newsweek called Hillary Clinton’s Emotional Moment, but it didn’t win her the White House.

Hillary and her supporters also know how to play the bullied card. They know that works for her.

That’s how Hillary won her 2000 NY Senate race against Rick Lazio. When Lazio crossed the debate stage to hand Hillary a piece of paper, it was portrayed as BULLYING, and it generally is credited with winning the campaign for Hillary:

If there is anything we know about the Clintons, it’s that they will do anything to win. Teary eyes and the bullied card are in the deck. Regardless of who the opponent is.

So to repeat Maureen Dowd’s question, Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House?

What do you say, Hillary?

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Any political contender that cries when someone says something uncouth or insulting about him/her is NOT capable of being the leader, the Commander in Chief, of the United States of America.

Period.

(All the rest – the lies, scandals, and outright lawbreaking – are also key to disqualification; however, the MSM and DoJ aren’t pursuing this, so it’s been buried, excused, and generally “disappeared.” But this should hit even the LIV’s in the face……..)

Phony baloney, period.

http://twitchy.com/2015/12/23/former-obama-speechwriter-who-groped-cardboard-cutout-of-schlonged-hillary-clinton-now-thinks-trump-is-gross/

I’m sure that Barracula has said MUCH worse, and Hellary never batted a false eyelash.

When every facet of your life is ruled by lies and their maintenance, you learn to mimic real, human reactions to stimuli.

That’s one very important characteristic of a psychopath.

LOL. Too funny. Hillary was well-known for her foul-mouthed screaming rants at Bill, SS agents, staffers, and other she considered to be beneath her exalted status.

She is such a fraud. In every conceivable way.

    It’s so much worse than just fraud–how can anyone trust her on ANYTHING? Her Black followers–do they know she is a Margaret Sanger Award winner? Her female followers–do they realize how demeaning her vile husband is? PS.There are court remedies for fraud; no remedy for the Clintons. We are struggling as a moral nation now; if she’s elected, we are done.

      meyou: Her Black followers–do they know she is a Margaret Sanger Award winner?

      So was Dr. King.

      “There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger’s early efforts. She, like we, saw the horrifying conditions of ghetto life. Like we, she knew that all of society is poisoned by cancerous slums. Like we, she was a direct actionist – a nonviolent resister. She was willing to accept scorn and abuse until the truth she saw was revealed to the millions. At the turn of the century she went into the slums and set up a birth control clinic, and for this deed she went to jail because she was violating an unjust law.”
      https://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-gulf-coast/mlk-acceptance-speech

        Ragspierre in reply to Zachriel. | December 23, 2015 at 11:55 am

        “Like we, she was a direct actionist – a nonviolent resister.”

        MLK was wrong about many things, but none as much as this.

        Several million unborn Americans would take exception to Sanger’s “nonviolent” acts and her legacy of death.

          Sanger was generally against abortion, and saw birth control as the best preventative. This was strenuously resisted by conservatives of the day.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 23, 2015 at 12:43 pm

          Horseshit. As always with you, Zachy!

          Sanger, Birth Control or Abortion, Birth Control Review 1918:

          “To understand the more clearly what these dangers are, and to realize the more fully how much better it would be to avoid them, it is first necessary that women should know something of the processes of conception, the prevention of which frees them of all risk of having to resort to abortion.”

          “While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.”

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 23, 2015 at 1:19 pm

          “Many, perhaps, will think it idle to go farther in demonstrating the immorality of large families, but since there is still an abundance of proof at hand, it may be offered for the sake of those who find difficulty in adjusting old-fashioned ideas to the facts. The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
          —Margaret Sanger, eugenicist and Progressive racist

          The statement was made in the context of a time when a large portion of children born into poor families died before adulthood, wherein women would limit family size through abortion or infanticide in order to give the remaining children a chance at survival. Again, the solution Sanger advocated to avoid this dire situation was contraception.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 23, 2015 at 2:36 pm

          “Again, the solution Sanger advocated to avoid this dire situation was contraception.”

          Along with abortion, forced sterilization, and “segregation” for any resisters.

          Like I say, Zachy, you’re full of horseshit, as always.

          Sanger did advocate the segregation or sterilization of the insane and those who were severely mentally disabled, a common view at the time. She was wrong on that issue. Sterilization should have been left to the family or legal guardian, not the state to decide. The policy led to a number of abuses, and has been abandoned.

          Sanger thought abortion should only be a last resort, and that the way to prevent abortion was with contraception.

          Sanger: While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.

        nomadic100 in reply to Zachriel. | December 23, 2015 at 2:19 pm

        “Like we…” ???

America, choose your poison: Hillary’s endless lies and criminal behaviors or Trump’s inappropriate verbiage.

When I first heard the stories about this comment, the word was bleeped and I thought it was “reemed”. Though the context isn’t quite right.

Then I heard someone describe it as a Yiddish word. So I looked up what word he actually said. There is no bleeping on the Internet!

I’ve never heard the idiom used. So I’m a bit surprised. Even when the word was bleeped, it was clear that Trump was using some metaphor of being humiliated in a sexual way to depict that she was totally humiliated by Obama in 2008. I guess “schlonged” is some New Yorkism like “schmear”. Certainly you would expect a New Yorker to know that.

Of course media outside of New York may be surprised by the term.

    Yeah my best friend told me how Fox bleeped it, which made it sound like a worse word than it was.

    My response was, 20 million people then went on the Internet to find out what Trump really said. That’s what happens in the Internet era when you treat 70 year old grannies like they’re five year old children.

    HandyGandy: Even when the word was bleeped, it was clear that Trump was using some metaphor of being humiliated in a sexual way to depict that she was totally humiliated by Obama in 2008.

    It means “pistol” whipped.

    MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to HandyGandy. | December 23, 2015 at 12:54 pm

    I didn’t think he meant it in a sexual way when I first heard it. I thought he got tongue tied and meant to say “shellacked”, but it came out as “schlonged”. The reason I thought that is because Obama used “shellacked” to describe the Democrats performance in the 2010 mid-term elections, so it was a similar context. I just figured Trump misspoke.

“SHE LIVES WITH BILL CLINTON.”

Awesome.

    HandyGandy in reply to Daiwa. | December 23, 2015 at 12:10 pm

    Yes but in all fairness to Hillary, Bill has got bimbos for that.

    ( Triple fist pump. I’ve been waiting to get that one in. )

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to HandyGandy. | December 27, 2015 at 12:18 pm

      It’s a bit off topic, but one of the fun parts of cultural differences is: we all know what the word “Bimbo” means in American slang. In Spanish, it is used as a brand name for a line of baked goods found in a lot of stores out here in the Southwest. (They are actually pretty good; they are WAY less sweet than, say, Nabisco or Keebler.)

“When I said that Hillary Clinton got schlonged by Obama, it meant got beaten badly. The media knows this…”

This is the guy you want to represent the Executive office and Reagan’s legacy? A person who walks and talks like the Eminent Domain thug that he is?

The Democrat’s election news cycle was already on auto self-destruct until self-professed conservative voters decided to lavish their support on a foul-mouthed narcissist whom they would not otherwise tolerate in a leadership position in their church or at their employment.

Any Republican candidate who is incapable of envisioning the trajectory of their words; who needs to clarify or revisit what they’ve said is just abetting the enemy media at this stage.

“Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent, and discerning if they hold their tongues.” Proverbs 17:28

    “This is the guy you want to represent the Executive office and Reagan’s legacy?”

    YES ABSOLUTELY !!!!!!

    Presidents don’t have anything to do with eminent domain, and the founders who drafted the constitution liked eminent domain so much THEY PUT IT IN THE CONSTITUTION.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | December 23, 2015 at 6:14 pm

      Yes, yes. The happily aped talking point lie. Again.

      Of course presidents have a GREAT deal to do with property rights.

      And Constitutional eminent domain and Kelo are like the pre- and post-FDR views of the Commerce Clause.

        Property rights do not equal eminent domain.

        Presidents don’t have anything to do with emibent domain. I’m sorry if that fact is an inconvenient truth for your strawman diversions.

        Without eminent domain we would not have the intercontinental railroads in the 1800s or the interstate highway system in the 1990s.

        Kelo type tak8ngs involve local city and county politicians not presidents.

        So other than being deceptive, filled with strawman and completely wrong your post was quite persuasive.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | December 23, 2015 at 10:00 pm

          Um…Gari, you’re schlonging yourself again.

          You’re too stupid to even know what a straw man is, and I certainly haven’t employed one.

          You’re ALSO a complete idiot about history. Eminent domain have VERY little to do with building the transcontinental railroads. There was very little private property they needed a ROW through. It was considered government land.

          The interstate highway system is a LEGITIMATE use of the power…see the word, Gari….power of eminent domain. And it was built LONG before the 1990s. What rock were you under?

          And you can count on T-rump to appoint JUDGES and JUSTICES to Federal courts to oppress the people’s property rights, just as he himself has done in his crony dealings.

          Yes a typo should be 1900s. President Trump’s favorite justice is Clarence Thomas and that is the kind of Justice he has promised to support and yes your post was full of strawmen and diversions which is typical for the happy horse shit you like to cut a paste.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | December 24, 2015 at 7:16 am

          Gari, you ignorant, lying SOS, the interstate system was started under the Eisenhower administration.

          I never used a straw man, and you’re now LYING about that.

          T-rump SAYS a lot of things. Like you, he often LIES to say what he thinks might curry favor.

          I’m using what we KNOW he’s DONE, all his long, corrupt, crony capitalist life. Which is a perfectly clear history of hating market economics and property rights.

          Just like Bernie Sanders. As you’ve admitted.

          Original point remains true and uncontradicted by your strawman diversions and attempts to argue about matters irrelevant to original point.

          Original Point above:
          “Presidents don’t have anything to do with eminent domain, and the founders who drafted the constitution liked eminent domain so much THEY PUT IT IN THE CONSTITUTION.”

          Your lies about lies and your use of strawman diversions are not facts or rebuttals to anything. Just your usual filler when you have nothing to say.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | December 24, 2015 at 11:31 am

          No, Gari, you lying SOS, NONE of that is truthful, and you know it.

          Eminent domain is a THREAT to property rights, and presidents have a great deal to do with property rights.

          T-rump has a proven history of deploring and predating on the property rights of others. He approves of and has USED Kelo-type takings. Plus, he’s bullied those who called him on it.

          You’ve proven your thumping historical AND legal ignorance, yet again, in your really laughable attempt to vindicate a stupid talking point you had stuffed in your crap-packed skull by one of the sources you rely upon.

          Now you’ve been schloonged, good an proper. I’ll be happy to do you some more.

That evil Trump!

Spreading stereotypes of black men ( Obama ) and penises,

Though a black Chicago comic, Aaron Freeman, once said “that’s a stereotype I don’t mind”.

    HandyGandy in reply to HandyGandy. | December 23, 2015 at 11:59 am

    If course I now expect Ragspiere to claim that Trump actually said this.

    Then when asked to prove it he won’t, instead he will insult you when he fails to prove it.
    Like he did when he said that Trump wants to confiscate all remittances sent by Mexicans and I asked for proof.

    He will then go on to say that since this is not a trial he does not have to engage in rational discourse or behave properly.

    Then he will insult you.

    Then he will say Trump should not be president because he insults people.

      Ragspierre in reply to HandyGandy. | December 23, 2015 at 12:08 pm

      The words are “impound remittances”.

      Any idiot who can read the T-rump immigration paper can find them for himself/herself. But some idiots are so intellectually dishonest they refuse.

      As HandyGandy has admitted.

        HandyGandy in reply to Ragspierre. | December 23, 2015 at 12:35 pm

        Well back when it came out I looked at it, and I saw nothing of the sort. Then when you claimed he said it I double checked, saw nothing of the sort.

        Since you made the claim he said it, it is up to you to prove it.
        Oh I’m sorry, you only behave rationally in court. We shouldn’t expect the rationality that every judge routinely expects.

        After all if any idiot can find it, then you should be able to find it and point it out.

Using the schlong word didn’t help Trump, but is it really such a big deal? NPR thought it was just fine, and no one batted an eye. There was zero sexual intent, as it was about Ferraro, spoken after her death. No disrespect intended at all. “That ticket went on to get schlonged at the polls”

So it’s apparently got a history of usage within the election terminology. But there are different rules for the left, and hate is a powerful tool.

Schlonged: beaten badly in an election

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/222166/

Hillary crying over that? She was laughing when he said because she figured she could score some points, with a lot of media help. Did she ever get caught crying for Bill’s victims?

I bet some of her secret service are mock crying about how abused they are by the vile disrespect they receive from Hillary. “… and then she called me *&^$$, sob sob”

    I disagree that this will hurt Trump. It is going to help Trump. Hillary and the media both losing credibility over this. Hillary for pretending to be a delicate flower unfit to be commander in chief and Fox News and others who have been trying to make schlonged into a word that can’t be spoken on TV.

    In addition to NPR radio saying Ferraro got schlonged, it was used in 1967 when female CUNY candidate for student government who lost badly was quoted in student newspaper as saying we got schlonged. And it was used on TV on the family feud where number one answer was schlonged.

    So not even vulgar or improper.

    Fox News milking this Faux story every 15 minutes. Pitiful.

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Gary Britt. | December 27, 2015 at 12:30 pm

      “Fox News milking this Faux story every 15 minutes. Pitiful.”

      Fox is just a supermarket tabloid done with electrons rather than printed on paper. I never understood the big deal about Fox. They are only slightly less revolting than the other “news” channels, and their over-busy screen layout can cause seizures.

Well back when it came out I looked at it, and I saw nothing of the sort. Then when you claimed he said it I double checked, saw nothing of the sort.

Since you made the claim he said it, it is up to you to prove it.
Oh I’m sorry, you only behave rationally in court. We shouldn’t expect the rationality that every judge routinely expects.

After all if any idiot can find it, then you should be able to find it and point it out.

Hillary is a terrible candidate.

But Americans aren’t the people we used to be, either. Decades of federal intrusion into education at all levels has given us at least two generations of uneducated, indoctrinated idiots. And 30 years of Rock the Vote, etc., has encouraged every apathetic, disinterested, and uninformed citizen to register and vote.

Trump is a trip , but he is making people talk and think and argue, I am not sure I could support him for the nomination , but if he gets it , he will have my vote . Anyone who would vote for a Clinton , and especially the worst of the 2 needs a serious A kicking .

Interesting that the media would portray the Lazio incident as “bullying”. Clearly, it was just a manifestation of “You cannot approach the Queen without permission”. During the bathroom break at the recent “debate” she also refused to enter the room when another, surely a commoner, was using it.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Hucklebuck. | December 27, 2015 at 12:42 pm

    The bathroom incident; her treatment of Arakansas state troopers; her use of enlisted military personnel as “the help” during White House parties; her behavior with the SS… All of these demonstrate her character and what sort of president she would be.

    As for her turning on the waterworks: will she try this tactic with Putin, or with whomever is Israeli prime minister at the time, or with any other national leader?

Clinton’s reaction disqualifies her from the Presidency. If she haz the sadz to this degree over something like this, she’s too weak to be in any position of authority.

Do we really want a President who is going to break down and have a good cry because the leader of North Korea doesn’t like her?

She is NOT presidential material!
Never will be, Never has been!

Trump will shred her in the debates!
And he won’t even have to try very hard.

    Ragspierre in reply to Common Sense. | December 23, 2015 at 3:49 pm

    T-rump is not presidential material, either.

    Unless you LIKE Jackson, Wilson, TR, FDR, Nixon, Obama…

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Common Sense. | December 27, 2015 at 12:46 pm

    It is not even a question of her being shredded by some other candidate in the debates. It is her nasty, vindictive, “mean girl” demeanor. If anything, I believe she is a bigger seeker of revenge than Obama.

Hillary’s entire campaign is and will be ‘don’t pick on my I’m a girl’ in case you were wondering. And if she wins, the last people she will attend to will be women.

Original point remains true and uncontradicted by your strawman diversions and attempts to argue about matters irrelevant to original point.

Original Point above:
“Presidents don’t have anything to do with eminent domain, and the founders who drafted the constitution liked eminent domain so much THEY PUT IT IN THE CONSTITUTION.”

Your lies about lies and your use of strawman diversions are not facts or rebuttals to anything. Just your usual filler when you have nothing to say.

Oh Great!! We really need a President who will respond to bullying by Putin, ISIS and the other strongMEN by bursting into tears. Would the “First Woman President” sob out her surrender to every aggressor, just like the first ‘person of politically preferred pigmentation’ to occupy the White House?

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Topnife. | December 25, 2015 at 9:07 am

    ha ha … yeah, that would make a good Saturday Night Live skit, but they’d never do it.

    Hillary sobbing over missile defense “Putin was mean to me, he told me I can’t put missiles in Poland, sob sob. And then he told me my reset button was stupid sob sob he’s always so mean”

    She flew around the world and drank and partied, and collected foundation money in return for aid, as far as I can tell. She acted as front “man” for Blumenthal’s business plans in Libya … God knows what other policy was misdirected as she was busy collecting.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend