« I’m Sorry, Is The Economy Not Supposed to Improve Before the Election? | Home | We Don’t Know the Half Of It »
Hillary Clinton
By Matt Margolis | August 1, 2003
And you thought she couldn’t get any dumber.
WASHINGTON –– Sen. Hillary Clinton said Friday that Supreme Court victories this year for gay couples, minorities and women do not erase the distrust created by other “legally dubious” rulings, including the Bush v. Gore presidential election case.
What she means to say is that a court that has generally leaned leftward in their rulings recently is not to be “forgiven” for making one good call back in 2000.
The court ruled this summer that colleges may continue to use race as a factor in picking students, that gay men and women cannot be prosecuted for having sex and that state government workers are protected under a federal law intended to ease work and family conflicts.
Sounds like Hillary’s Dream Court to me.
“These favorable decisions in recent months should not obscure the torrent of aggressively activist and legally dubious decisions of times past,” Clinton, D-N.Y., told the American Constitution Society.
Okay, so allowing discrimination based on race isn’t legally dubious? What is she trying to prove here? I’ll tell you, what she is saying is she doesn’t want to tolerate any court that makes a “conservative” ruling. Now, I’m not saying Bush v. Gore was a conservative/liberal issue – however, the Democrats have let themselves continually be emasculated over the election in 2000. Get over it already? What can you do? Change the ruling now? The country is clearly better off today because of Bush than we ever would have been with Gore, and regardless of that fact – just because dimwits like Hillary didn’t like the decision made by the court, doesn’t mean it was wrong.
That’s the key difference. Hillary lauds any decision by the court that concurs with her own ideology; however, she’ll consider the entire court fundamentally flawed for a ruling which ultimately put a Republican in the White House.
She said this is “the same court that gave us Bush v. Gore, which made a mockery of one of our most cherished constitutional rights, the right to vote,” a reference to the 2000 ruling that ended Democrat Al Gore’s chances of winning the White House.
Have you ever heard of anything more stupid? Shall I go into the fraudulent methods used by the Democrats to try and ensure Al Gore’s victory in 2000? Like granting citizenship to immigrants and registering them as Democrats for the election? Like allowing illegal immigrants to vote, (The so-called “Clinton Voting Card”)? Like the various methods taken to disenfranchise oversees military personnel including delayed mailing of ballots, delayed returning of ballots, and thousands of unaccounted for ballots?
And Hillary expects us to believe she cares about the rights of voters? The only voters she gives her fat ass about are the ones who vote Democrat, or the ones her Husband-In-Name-Only™ (HINO) sold for pardons.
“In addition to installing an American president, the current Supreme Court has invalidated federal laws at the most astounding rate in our nation’s history,” she said then.
First off, if Bush v. Gore went the other way, wouldn’t they have “installed an American president” too? I guess to liberal idiots like Hillary, that would be a no, but I digress.
She is partially right, though. The Supreme Court did recently invalidate federal laws by saying that discrimination was okay.
On Friday, Clinton defended Senate Democrats’ filibuster of three of President Bush’s most conservative federal appeals court nominees: Texas judge Priscilla Owen, District of Columbia lawyer Miguel Estrada and Alabama Attorney General William Pryor.
Clinton said the White House was playing politics with the choices.
That’s funny. Isn’t she playing politics with her stupid mindless drivel? Isn’t it abominable – George W. Bush, a Republican, has nominated conservatives to the courts! Dear God, how dare he! Let’s not get into the fact that the same courts Bush has been making judicial nominations for are flooded with Democrat-appointed judges… Please… I thought they wanted balance… The only balance liberals want is the balance that tips solely in their favor.
Not even Bill Clinton can pardon his Wife-In-Name-Only™ (WINO) from the MattMargolis.com Liberal Idiots List.
Topics: Liberal Idiots |
Related Posts:
August 1st, 2003 at 11:08 pm
Hitlery Clinton is a piece of trash…. take her to the dump!
August 2nd, 2003 at 5:42 pm
Please explain — legally– how the Supreme Court made “one good call back in 2000.”
I can’t wait to read this one.
August 2nd, 2003 at 5:50 pm
Best decision they made was shutting Gore up.
August 2nd, 2003 at 6:38 pm
Cole,
I understand the fact that you didn’t like the ruling of Bush v. Gore, and that is fine. I don’t care. The fact is it is over, and quite honestly, I could care less justifying the ruling to you. It’s August of 2003, we can debate the ruling of Bush v. Gore back and forth, and it’s not going to change the fact that Bush is President.
It would be silly of me to waste my time discussing an issue that I myself have said isn’t worth Democrats wasting their time on.
Sorry Cole, we’re not going to go there in this blog.
August 3rd, 2003 at 11:34 pm
I was just suprised to see Hillary complaining about an “Activist” supreme court
August 16th, 2003 at 5:38 pm
The only activist court she wants is the radical left wing activist court.
Because it’s not a balanced court unless it’s a radical left wing court…
October 10th, 2003 at 12:28 pm
IM CONSERVATIVE AND MY BROTHER IS LIBERAL. HE KEEPS TELLING ME THAT BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON ARE NO LONGER IN OFFICE ANT THE REPUBLICANS DONT GET IT. WELL FOR TWENTY YEARS THE DEMOCRATES HAVE BEEN BLAMING REAGAN FOR ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING SO IT SOUNDS LIKE FAIR PLAY TO ME
October 10th, 2003 at 12:30 pm
OH BY THE WAY HAS ANYONE NOTICED HOW HATEFUL AND NEGATIVE THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN FOR THE LAST 30 YRS
October 10th, 2003 at 12:40 pm
The issue isn’t about whether or not they’re still in office. Both are trying to influence policy and elections. The actions (and inactions) of Clinton can still be felt today, and we felt them significantly on 9-11, because Bill Clinton’s inactions regarding terrorism ultimately led to the tragedy.
June 18th, 2004 at 4:25 pm
I just read “Kiss the First Lady Goodnight” (Port Town 2003); great parody of Hillary. It involves the murder of former First Lady Susan Billingsly; she’s divorsed and her ex-husband has a talk show. Sound familar?
July 5th, 2004 at 5:34 am
I just read your comments about Hillary Clinton on your webpage . I wish you could read my book First Lady President just released in USA .It is placed on Amazon.com. I am an author from Jaipur(India).
You can find it by searching through my name .
Sincerely
Inder Dan Ratnu
August 26th, 2006 at 10:07 pm
mr chews asian beaver
Idinax33000i
August 27th, 2006 at 7:34 am
galleries of mature women
Idinax33000i
August 27th, 2006 at 9:42 am
latinas cherry
Idinax33000i
September 13th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
bdsm sex slaves in bondage gay male bondage
zd00linkar
September 13th, 2006 at 4:00 pm
gay anal fisting her first anal fisting
zd00linkar
October 23rd, 2006 at 10:03 am
gag me
n00stalgie