Who's Surprised?

http://thehill.com/

"In their book about Clinton's rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta
Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth,
who spent 30 years as an investigative reporter at the paper, wrote:
"Hillary's defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the
microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status
of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she
listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of
Clinton critics plotting their next attack.

"The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface
with allegations about an affair with Bill," Gerth and Van Natta wrote
in reference to Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton.
"Bill's supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the
tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions."

A GOP official said, "Hillary Clinton's campaign hypocrisy continues
to know no bounds. It is rather unbelievable that Clinton would listen
in to conversations being conducted by political opponents, but refuse
to allow our intelligence agencies to listen in to conversations being
conducted by terrorists as they plot and plan to kill us. Team Clinton
can expect to see and hear this over and over again over the course of
the next year."

Seems like the Democrats are being shown for what they really are.
Friends of Henry?

On Oct 16, 9:39 am, wrote:
http://thehill.com/

"In their book about Clinton's rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta
Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth,
who spent 30 years as an investigative reporter at the paper, wrote:
"Hillary's defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the
microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status
of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she
listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of
Clinton critics plotting their next attack.

"The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface
with allegations about an affair with Bill," Gerth and Van Natta wrote
in reference to Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton.
"Bill's supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the
tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions."

A GOP official said, "Hillary Clinton's campaign hypocrisy continues
to know no bounds. It is rather unbelievable that Clinton would listen
in to conversations being conducted by political opponents, but refuse
to allow our intelligence agencies to listen in to conversations being
conducted by terrorists as they plot and plan to kill us. Team Clinton
can expect to see and hear this over and over again over the course of
the next year."

Seems like the Democrats are being shown for what they really are.

Yeah, "people who learned something from the Carter years" for one
thing.

Have allegations surfaced to the effect that Hillary has been treating
with foreign nations before the election/innaugaration or something?
That would make her, at least, equally dirty as Reagan-BushCo :

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/xfile.html

Remember Iran-Contra? What was it that made that OK, again?

http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/iran_contra/

IOW, did the CIA bring any of the drugs into the USA that figured in
some painful family history chez Kunich?

I see Limbaugh got his draft-dodging, hemorrhoid-infested ass in
another pinch recently. His defenders are calling him a "private
citizen". Ha ha. "Felon" would be better. Oh yeah, that's right, he
used his power and influence to escape punishment he prescribed (to
fix "the biggest problem in the country") for others who did exactly
the same thing he did but didn't want to go to jail for.

Well, why should he? The rules only apply to the little people!

Have you seen any trigger-happy convoys in California yet? --D-y

rec.BICYCLES.RACING

On Oct 16, 9:07 am, " wrote:
On Oct 16, 9:39 am, wrote:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/xfile.html

Remember Iran-Contra? What was it that made that OK, again?

You can believe what you want. I happened to know one of the men who
was on that aborted "rescue" mission into Iran. He said that it was
designed to fail from the start.

http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/iran_contra/

IOW, did the CIA bring any of the drugs into the USA that figured in
some painful family history chez Kunich?

Too bad that you'll take the word of some know-nothing and those who
lie purposely.

A couple of days ago General Sanchez raised hell with the media saying
that they were reporting false stories and were even hiring Al Queda
sympathizers in Iraq to "cover" news events.

What did the press print?

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/123518.html (UPI)

"Sanchez said that in Iraq the United States is "living a nightmare
with no end in sight.""

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...r=U.S._3363824

"He called current strategies - including the deployment of 30,000
additional forces earlier this year - a "desperate attempt" to make up
for years of misguided policies in Iraq."

And more - All in order to do one thing - to misrepresent what the
General said.

These are the people you're willing to put first. So enjoy yourself.
With any luck the Democrats will elect Hillary and she'll be the last
President elected.

Seems like your kind of world.

I see Limbaugh got his draft-dodging, hemorrhoid-infested ass in
another pinch recently. His defenders are calling him a "private
citizen".

Apparently you haven't any idea what the hell he said and are having
all sorts of fun repeating absolute lies about what he did say. I
don't listen much to Rush but I happened to be changing channels on
the car radio JUST as he said that and heard it from his very mouth.
So I KNOW that the Democrats are lying absolutely about this and
you're right there to help them along.

On Oct 16, 9:39 am, wrote:
http://thehill.com/

"In their book about Clinton's rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta
Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth,
who spent 30 years as an investigative reporter at the paper, wrote:
"Hillary's defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the
microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status
of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she
listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of
Clinton critics plotting their next attack.

"The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface
with allegations about an affair with Bill," Gerth and Van Natta wrote
in reference to Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton.
"Bill's supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the
tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions."

A GOP official said, "Hillary Clinton's campaign hypocrisy continues
to know no bounds. It is rather unbelievable that Clinton would listen
in to conversations being conducted by political opponents, but refuse
to allow our intelligence agencies to listen in to conversations being
conducted by terrorists as they plot and plan to kill us. Team Clinton
can expect to see and hear this over and over again over the course of
the next year."

Seems like the Democrats are being shown for what they really are.
Friends of Henry?

In the future, please mark these posts OFF-TOPIC. This is
rec.bicycles.racing. There are plenty of political newsgroups on
Google.

Smokey

In article .com,
wrote:

http://thehill.com/

"In their book about Clinton's rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta
Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth,

Would that be the same Van Natta and Gerth that got everything on Whitewater
wrong, Tom?

--
tanx,
Howard

Faberge eggs are elegant but I prefer Faberge bacon.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article . com,
wrote:

Apparently you haven't any idea what the hell he said and are having
all sorts of fun repeating absolute lies about what he did say. I
don't listen much to Rush but I happened to be changing channels on
the car radio JUST as he said that and heard it from his very mouth.

Ah, what a happy coincidence, that.

So I KNOW that the Democrats are lying absolutely about this and
you're right there to help them along.

I guess the recordings of him saying it and the original transcript are fake? Huh,
funny thing that after the loudmouth got called on it, he tried to claim that those
bits of evidence were phony and proved it by chopping a minute and thirty-five
seconds out of the originals.

--
tanx,
Howard

Faberge eggs are elegant but I prefer Faberge bacon.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

On Oct 16, 3:11 pm, wrote:
You can believe what you want. I happened to know one of the men who
was on that aborted "rescue" mission into Iran. He said that it was
designed to fail from the start.

Was that the guy who was riding the motorcycle that broke the record
even after the chain fell off, or the Nobel Prize winner from the dope
lab, among the thousands of important "guys" you know?

The Rush bull**** is on transcript for any/all to read. USA Today,
that bastion of the Left, covered it. Even with their slant (attempted
gloss-over "correction"), Rush has a problem. He said "soldiers", not
"soldier", meaning not just the one (alleged) phony mentioned in the
story. That was a really lame attempt by USA today to wash, clean, and
('scuse me) press that one.

IOW, anyone who criticises is a phony, whether they served or not...

This was in the USA Today "Comments" section, sorry for lacking
attribution:

"I'd Follow You to the Gates of Hell, Col. Rush!"

At times like this, when Cut-and-Runners are seizing control of the
country from God-loving Americans who would take this battle to the
gates of the religious fanatics around the world, I'm reminded that
America has a long tradition of Outstanding Private Citizens who,
having reaped the bounties of God's righteous capitalism, founded and
armed their own regiments to fight Jesus' good fight. Nathan Bedford
Forrest comes to mind...when confronted with the peril of the Yankee,
Forrest having been blessed with vast wealth from the cotton and slave
trades, formed his own regiment, privately paid for, which he then led
as a Colonel, to smite the Iraqi Infidels of his day. In this present
age of Private Smiting Forces (Blackwater, for example), might it not
be a good time for the Good Colonel, that Righteous Firebrand of Godly
Warfare on the radio to rise up and lead us in his own regiment in
this time. For years, the libs have branded him as a fat, bigoted loud-
mouth, too-clever by half--an elitist fatcat content to protect the
wealthy aristocracy and send others off to do the dying for him and
the American ruling class while hiding behind a microphone. Now is the
time to rise up, Col. Rush and lead us to smite the Iraqi Invaders who
attacked us on 9/11. I'm not part of the aristocracy, but I can say
that, as a commoner, I'd be honored to follow great Americans like
Lord Limbaugh and Lady Ann Coulter into battle, if only they'd lead
us! Let us smite with the bayonet, and not just the microphone!

Rush is a Chickenhawk, don't forget. Ingrown hair follicle on his ass
plus who knows what other shenannigans, got him a pass on risking his
butt in 'Nam. Not to mention problems with getting drugs (more than
one addiction, remember) on base, I guess.

(Remember, laws only apply to the little people, even the laws that
are aimed at The Biggest Problem in the USA Today-- "white guys doing
drugs and getting away with it").

I guess he was like Dick Cheney and had other things to do besides
defend his country against that older enemy, Big C Communism?

Or maybe his apparent lassitude IRT righteous patriotic fervor had
other grounds:

http://www.counterpunch.org/stclair07142005.html

Enjoy! --D-y

smokey wrote:
There are plenty of political newsgroups on Google.

Do I hear a snort from off stage ?

On Oct 16, 4:37 pm, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article .com,

wrote:
http://thehill.com/

"In their book about Clinton's rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta
Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth,

Would that be the same Van Natta and Gerth that got everything on Whitewater
wrong, Tom?

So you're saying that they're wrong here? By all means tell me - are
they the glorious Friends of the People if they report against
Conservatives and Abject Liars if they report things deleterious about
Ultra Liberals? Every time you post you demonstrate what a joke you
are. Maybe you ought to go turn a bolt.