Monday, December 18, 2006

Sen. Clinton Flakked By Hacks

In a post entitled "Voyeur Journalism" Taylor Marsh raises her hackles: ". . .The journalistic hack pack is back. But this time instead of obsessing about Nancy Pelosi before she's even been sworn in, the Washington Post's Lynne Duke is dripping with tantalizing tidbits about some future fantasy fixation of voters focusing on the Big Dog and all his bad boy deeds. Never mind his wife, who just happens to be a second term United States Senator who might be the first female to run for president. Let's make it all about him and his, er, well you know. Of course, we can't forget to insinuate that even though he's bad, she's just not him. The woman just can't win. Yeah, they say that too, but that trails back to him as well.

Can voters look at Bill without thinking of sex?

The real question is whether the filth fulminators of the fourth estate will let them.


Patrick Healy of The New York Times has no intention of keeping his eye away from the Clinton peep hole. But it looks like he's got company. However, one does wonder why no one is writing these types of stories day in and day out about Rudy marrying one of his cousins. Or that McCain was a serial womanizer for years. Or that Newt asked his wife for a divorce when she was recovering from cancer. You know the story. Instead, it's all about the Big Dog, over and over and over again, hoping to make a bank shot that hits his powerful wife.

It's the Rick Lazio confrontation method. Remember during the debate when he tried to shove a sheet of paper down Hillary's podium? But if the press keeps this up what they're going to do is get the voters, especially women, to turn against them and towards the very woman they're trying to smear. . ."

By the way, will everyone quit dissing the woman by calling her "Hillary?" Is she your second cousin or something? Do you know her? I don't; so, therefore, she is either "Clinton" or "Sen. Clinton" if I need to separate her from her other half. The tone of familiarity is not conducive to helping her image methinks.

No comments: