The Wile E. Clinton campaign: a Roadrunner rerun?
You’d think the Clinton campaign would have the good sense to stay far, far away from the issue of Donald Trump being a misogynist, or even his merely being a misbehaving boor toward women. It’s becoming obvious that every time the Clinton campaign lays a media ambush for Trump, he not only sidesteps it nimbly, but also spins it back with far more effect.
So the Clintons try to stain Trump with the bristleless brush of the Republican war on women; Donald responds with a fresh can of scarlet sexual predator paint, which he loudly upends on Bill Clinton’s head, splashing a huge scarlet E on Hillary as Bill’s enabler. The decades-old charges against Bill, the lawsuits, the payoffs, the cigars, his impeachment, all that sleaze that had faded to a dim pink is now screaming scarlet again, thanks to those geniuses on the Clinton campaign staff who said, “Hey, here’s an idea…”
However, the Clintons apparently failed to fire the errant geniuses, because now they and their in-house publicists, better known as the New York Times, the Washington Post, and network TV, are all busy doing their best to dig up some sexual dirt on the Donald. Instead, they get women praising the man as a gentleman who offers a helping hand for them to succeed and never asks anything in return. That is a completely alien concept to Bill Clinton, who believes that in such situations quid pro quo is an anatomical reference.
Recently some CBS Clintonista was interviewing Trump’s lovely daughter, Ivanka, and asked her about the possibility of her father groping women. Ivanka defended her father forcefully but gracefully, an ability possessed by all the Trump offspring, denying that he could ever do such a thing. Ivanka acquitted herself well, but should she ever be asked that question again, she should respond with a succinct “Who do you think I am? Chelsea Clinton?” and walk away. Can you imagine that liberal CBS reporter asking Chelsea about Juanita Broaddrick’s very credible claims that she was raped by Chelsea’s father?
So what will the Clintons try next? I’m beginning to suspect that this campaign may play out like one of the old Roadrunner and Coyote cartoons, with the Clintons ordering all sorts of fanciful devices from the Acme Rocket-Propelled Election Corporation in scenarios that inevitably do not end well for the Clinton Coyotes while the beep-beeping Donald runs circles around them, all the way to the finish line.
And doesn’t that coyote “desperate to win” persona just fit the Clintons so exquisitely well?
Crossposted at American Thinker
Category: Politics
Hmmm… this is interesting. The ‘surveys’ show the Donald 47% to Clinton’s 41% or Clinton 47% to Trump 41%, depending on who does the survey.
And now the shrillarians are trying a smear campaign of some kind? Ain’t that kind of the rusty, badly aging old pot calling the kettle black?
Oh, yeah – she’s just a front for that slizzard she’s married to.
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/280447-clinton-world-criticism-of-bill-mind-boggling
My prayer for BOTH the lying clintons is that their lying tongues rot in their mouthes!!
I listened to Ivanka’s response on a radio talk show. She has far more class and grace than all of the Clintons put together a thousand fold!
The NYT and the rest of the liberal media will always be sniveling and slobbering for Hitlery Cankles every time she snaps her fingers. Donald trunp is far smarter than the mainstream mess media gives him credit for and I think the Roadrunner vs. Wile E. Coyote is the perfect metaphor!
Ivanka Trump is a class-act, no doubt.
But for better or worse, that’s largely irrelevant as she’s not the candidate. And, for that matter, neither is Bill.
To me, it’s rather obvious why the Clinton campaign is digging up this dirt on Mr. Trump – it provides them with a direct attack on his character. That’ll play well to independents and women. The Trump campaign, by focusing on Bill instead of Hillary, is at best aiming for collateral damage – it plays well with conservatives who already dislike the Clintons, but I don’t think picking on the husband of the candidate will play well with independents.
If you haven’t made up your mind about the candidates and you’re a ‘character’ voter (as opposed to a policy one), this is a net positive approach for the democrats because both sides are playing stupid ‘character assassination’ games, but only one side is firing at the primary target.
Well, it’s been recently established that Ole Bill The Horndog took a lot more flights on Epstein’s Pedo Island Express than was first reported. And, it seems that he ditched his Secret Service detail to do so. Now, why would a protectee do that? Inquiring minds, even female and independent, might want to know.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/13/flight-logs-show-bill-clinton-flew-on-sex-offenders-jet-much-more-than-previously-known.html
Bill’s character does matter, but the implications are more oblique than direct cause and effect.
When the Lewinsky scandal was happening there were those who saw Hillary’s role as that of woman scorned, and target of public humiliation. Initially, there was some sympathy for her but that tended to go away over time. In another, perhaps more honorable era, someone in her position would probably have done the stand-up thing of divorcing the errant husband, and faded from public life. The fact that she did not points to character traits driven by hubris, blind ambition, and personal revenge.
These are not leadership qualities you want in a President.
Anyone old enough to have sat through the Senate hearings on Watergate could probably tell you that it wasn’t any one single thing that brought down the Nixon White House. What was also most important wasn’t necessarily the details of a bungled office burglary. It was the accumulation of small things like Sam Ervin asking Donald Segretti to explain the term “rat fucking” as it applied to Nixon’s political enemies.
Hillary has definitely sacrificed her self-respect for a shot at the title. Unfortunately, a leader with zero self-respect is a shell of a man/woman and will demand zero respect from other world leaders.
Especially ones from countries that don’t even recognize women in leadership positions.
Here’s a taste of what the USSS thinks of Hitlery Cankles:
http://nypost.com/2015/10/02/secret-service-agents-hillary-is-a-nightmare-to-work-with/
He adds: “Hillary Clinton can make Richard Nixon look like Mahatma Gandhi.”
Here’s another version:
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/secret-service-agent-says-good/
Even the UK’s Daily Mail is in on it:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3258858/Secret-Service-agents-view-Hillary-worst-duty-assignment-consider-assigned-form-punishment.html
Here’s what Breitbart said:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/20/report-hillary-clinton-huma-abedin-abuse-secret-service-agents/
I respect all of my bosses, but I am neither a doormat nor a scratching post. Bosses don’t scream at me unless they want a new hire, and all bets are off for the one who makes the mistake of touching me. I have to respect me before anyone else does, and NO job is worth my self-respect.
Here’s another comparing POTUSes from JFK to B-HO:
http://blackquillandink.com/?page_id=12366
Huh? The attack on Hillary is that she was Bill’s enabler, and did her best to destroy the reputation of his victims. That is direct.
Methinks it’s also the truth.
Years ago, I heard first-hand from a state trooper who was part of Clinton’s protection detail that what has surfaced about Clinton was only the tip of the iceberg. Word the media also sidestepped was Hillary had a preference for women which is why she put up with his shit.
Can’t speak to her preferences, but she did spend time picking up males at the Rock for entertainment purposes. Lotta C-130 crews saw and/or participated in those escapades, which also somehow manage to be largely forgotten/ignored by the press. Word at the time was that she and he each kept off site apartments as playpens.
All just to say that it is difficult to say which of them was the greater player in the game of infidelity.
Really interesting analogy of the Coyote and the Roadrunner, check out Chuck Jones’s rules for scripting the Roadrunner cartoons, http://twistedsifter.com/2015/03/chuck-jones-9-golden-rules-for-coyote-and-road-runner/
Especially Rule #3: The Coyote could stop anytime—if he were not
a fanatic (repeat: “a fanatic is one who redoubles his effort
when he has forgotten his aim.” – George Santayana
Her people are determined to get her elected, not because she has any great vision- but because she’s Hillary. Desire for power with no underlying principled force, we are so screwed.
“Her people are determined to get her elected, not because she has any great vision- but because she’s Hillary. Desire for power with no underlying principled force, we are so screwed.”
That and “It’s her turn”
Really? Is she 5?
Billy got it for 8 whole years, now I want to play with it! If I don’t get my way I’ll hold my breath until I turn blue!!!
Neener Neener Neener
This just in, I just heard that the game of Bridge has been banned from Emory University because they don’t want the precious little snowflakes’ hearts broken anytime someone Trumps a play!
PI, that is one of your best yet.
Hey RIR,
Bernie, Hillary and Donald walk into a swanky bar in Manhattan. Bernie orders a round for the house, and says ” put it on Donalds tab. Hilary orders one drink and tells the barman to “bill this to the Clinton Foundation”. Trump says “Fuck this shit!”. He buys the bar and tells the Bouncer “Throw this little Communist out, and beat the ugly off the lesbian”.