Hillary - retain a scrap of dignity! Look up 'sincerity', look to the next time or a good job now, and give it up, will you?
How f*****g awful is this woman?
Euuugh!
Yeah, like she gives an arse about democracy, pledged votes, feminism, human rights or anything!
7 comments:
Well Mr. Mint, looking at your posts I get a very slight impression that you are not too gone on Hillary, but I suppose that that's just me.
Hey Lummox! Yeah, she's an old bag!
Long weekend here and guests today (Walshy and Caz and Chris and Sophie) off Monday and Tuesday. Get in!
The Rhubarb has pinball now and Stapes has Tequila'd it - Tequila Pinball!
A bit early to be getting bent out of shape about the sepctics Ryano?!
I was playing on the squeaky mat at 7 am this morning...
Once again I gotta say you come across as pretty sexist. The choice of words you use to describe Clinton is very disrespectful, and I do not think you would use the same words with a man.
Any way you look at it both candidates have a roughly similar number of votes. Should Clinton just drop out and ignore the many millions of democrats who have voted for her?
And the Florida/Michigan debacle does need to be thought over carefully. Florida is a huge state, and Clinton is right that every vote should count. Giving half the delegates to each candidate is a fudge, and totally ignores the voters’ wishes (as does the fact many Floridians did not bother vote at all, believing their votes would not count). As for Michigan, Obama was not even on the ballot and so he is being screwed out of voters too. A revote should be held – and such a revote would indeed give Clinton the possibility to overtake him. So once again I feel she is right to keep fighting.
Additionally, as I said before it is only a comparatively recent phenomenon that the candidate is decided early. For most of US history it always went to the convention. Dude, this is simply democracy in action (even in the stage-managed US version of democracy) so I do not see the problem at all. They both want to be president, and they should both damn well fight for it.
Of course it’s your blog and you can write whatever you like. But you can do better commentary than this. Sorry to say it; but that’s how I see it.
See, I knew this would interest you, Mr Right On! :) Don't be hittin' me with yer rolled up Guardian and subscription to Guacamole monthly!
Wahwahwahwahwah
Dude, she a ho' and I can't deny that, but she's just such an insincere trollope!
You are quite right , it is my blog and I always welcome your input, even if it is decent criticism.
Sexist? I don't so. Rude - yes perhaps, but she's an irritating beeeeeeeee'atch! I don't write my thoughts to serve anyone else, but they are always what I think. I don't feel I need to do better, arrogant as that sounds - it's not an exam.
Hmmm... I am over here and I have NO clue what her strategy is. She's got to have one, I mean, she is many things but stupid is not one of them.
I don't think your remarks are sexist. I'd say the same things and I am a woman.
Well, you see, in my Guardian ‘What to Think/How to be Right-on’ Guide 2007, it says words like ‘be’atch,’ ‘ho,’ ‘old bag’ and indeed the peremptory use of ‘woman’ are ‘not part of the contemporary political discourse.’ But it is the 2007 edition after all, so maybe they updated this in the 2008 version. I would hate to be behind the times in my carefully-contrived opinions, so I shall have to check this out.
Ok, now off for muesli and to check my chunky sweater collection.
Post a Comment