Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Blast from the past Hillaryscreech: it's patriotic to dissent

24 comments:

Aric said...

So, was that really Hillary, or was she channeling Bill?

Mesa Mike said...

No, no, no, no, NO!

I am NOT going to click the "play" button....

DJP said...

Come on.... you KNOW you WILL, Miiiiike....

Trinian said...

Well, duh, the debate is only reasonable and good when the administration is WRONG, not when it's doing something RIGHT. Obviously.

Stan McCullars said...

What she meant to say, and what her ilk believe, is: It's patriotic for us to dissent.

witness said...

She did say "any administration"... right?

James David Beebe, Jr. said...

ringtone...

trogdor said...

It's only patriotic when you're openly rooting for American soldiers to die and for the US to lose a war. Duh.

Paula said...

Regarding Hill's Congalese rant: "You want me to tell you what my husband thinks?My husband is not secretary of state, I am," an obviously annoyed Clinton said sharply. "If you want my opinion, I will tell you my opinion. I am not going to be channeling my husband."

I can't imagine how that must have gone over in the largely patriarchal society. You'd think she'd have learned a little cross- cultural diplomacy in her years in the White House. No wonder they didn't send her to fetch the girls in N. Korea. I shudder to think of what kind of international incident she might have triggered.

DJP said...

< blinking innocently >

Yeah, and everyone knows that HRC was mainly chosen for her well-known diplomacy, tact, and ability to smooth ruffled feathers.

Stan McCullars said...

witness,
She did say "any administration"... right?

Sure, but it depends on what you mean by the word any.

Susan said...

Word verification: squalect

(This video is a perfect example of it.)

CR said...

James: ringtone...

ROFL!!!!

steve s said...

I don't get it.
I'm no fan of Mrs Clinton and I'm not American, but, isn't this what you guys are doing most of the time? debating? dissenting?

JackW said...

Steve, you are correct, it's just that one party is for it when they are out of power, but wants to deny it to the opposition when they are in power.

If they were right and not hiding and lying they would have nothing to fear, but ...

DJP said...

Steve, here's the deal:

What Shrillary was defending was things such as politicians and others deriding the commander-in-chief and the troops and the mission, often on foreign soil, during time of war.

But now that the liberals want government to seize control of our health care (and thus, to a greater degree, of our lives), in violation of the whole point of there even being an "America," they don't like dissent. Free citizens expressing disagreement is being quashed, met with violence, called "mobs" and "Nazi-like" and all — by the very people who were all for dissent when it did actual harm during a war.

Hypocrisy, is the point.

Plus, Hillary screeching, always a plus.

steve s said...

Thanks, NOW I get it. You're saying this wouldn't be a speech she'd make today.

DJP said...

< chuckle >

Yes, I think that's pretty safe to say, Steve.

(c:

David Kjos said...

Of course, as we have recently learned, it's also patriotic to report dissenters to Big Brother.

I love irony.

Tristan724 said...

I find this critique of the Obama administration a little ironic at a blog where critiquing Bush and/or Palin will get you banned.

DJP said...

Really? What blog is that?

Mesa Mike said...

> Plus, Hillary screeching, always a plus.


Duuuude... You have SERIOUS thrill issues.

threegirldad said...

Tristan724,

If Merriam-Webster Online and Ask Oxford really aren't adequate for you, please invest in a print copy of a reputable dictionary. Thanks.

Stan McCullars said...

Tristan724:
Criticizing Bush and/or Palin is a far cry from Bush/Palin-Derangement Syndrome.

Incidentally, my word verification is "swine" which is a little ironic given that this post is a critique of the Obama administration.