Comments on: Hillary’s a liar, part 99,999,999

By: Straight_Talk_Luigi

Straight_Talk_Luigi — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 03:17:46 +0000

Wow, thanks for this article! She didn’t even get a letter? Then it must’ve been pretty bad.

Violate the Constitution? I’m ashamed to say I was surprised, but democrats do that all the time.

By: BrianNY

BrianNY — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:07:55 +0000

#27 chap said:

Failing the bar exam is not uncommon, it can happen to even the best.

Agreed, my father and sister said it was a beast. The Series 7 is no cake walk either.

My beef is that she gets the rep as being one of the smartest and best female attorneys in the US (see ABA’s choice in 1992.)

The lawyers in my family laugh this off, claiming that there have always been far more accomplished women law partners (non-wives of state governors included)who have billed more and taken on more weighty cases than Hillary.

And many of these women attorneys might have even passed their bar exams the first time!

By: Pro Cynic

Pro Cynic — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:16:47 +0000

A scuttling?…

This column by Dan Calabrese on the conduct of Hillary Rodham Clinton (then Hillary Rodham) as a staff member of the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings is now making the rounds in the blogosphere:

The now-retired general c…..

By: JWS

JWS — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:13:57 +0000

The only reason this MAY matter to the Dhimmis is B. Hussein. If that lying racist wasn’t running as the second coming, none of them would be in any way disturbed by anything it did or does…

By: dakine

dakine — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:27:01 +0000

chap, that was funny as hell brah.

By: granite

granite — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:25:56 +0000

#49 On April 2nd, 2008 at 5:20 pm, chapoutier said:

“It was a joke granite. A joke.”

Ah.
If so, you got me.
Rim shot to you.

By: chapoutier

chapoutier — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:20:57 +0000

It was a joke granite. A joke.

By: granite

granite — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:20:18 +0000

#47 On April 2nd, 2008 at 5:16 pm, chapoutier said:

“Not sure I would phrase it exactly that way, granite, but I guess that is the general point.

But ask yourself: Why do you hate hope? I’ll bet you hate change we can believe in too.”

With the utmost respect, but…What the blazes does that mean?
What change? Hope for what? Any specifics?

Hate change?
Hate hope?
Wow, two straw men at once!

By: chapoutier

chapoutier — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:16:08 +0000

Not sure I would phrase it exactly that way, granite, but I guess that is the general point.

But ask yourself: Why do you hate hope? I’ll bet you hate change we can believe in too.

By: An Empty Pantsuit, Hillary's Thirty Five Years Lies (Part One) | Stuck On Stupid

Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:04:27 +0000

[...] Michelle Malkin, Hot Air /* “, ” »”); /* ]]> */Popularity: 23% [?]SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “An [...]

By: granite

granite — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:02:59 +0000

#44 On April 2nd, 2008 at 4:35 pm, chapoutier said:
Larraby,

“The University of Chicago respectfully disagrees.

He taught three courses a year. I know technically that he was considered part time, but I’d say that is pretty much what most full time professors do.

Why are you trying to make such mountains out of molehills?”

Thank you for the link.

Agreed.

What is important is not whether Obama was a “professor”, a “lecturer”, a “senior lecturer”, an “instructor”, a “tenure track professor”, or an “adjunct professor”, depending on a particular institution’s definitions and preferred titles…ZZZ…ZZZ…ZZZ.

What is important, what is critical, is:

How much more of our hard-earned money will Obama seek to extract from us at, essentially, gunpoint? (Remember, the power of the State to tax – ultimately, if one resists the State, the State can imprison, even kill one.)

How quickly will Obama stop fighting the Muslim Jihad barbarian savages?

How soon will Obama abandon Israel?

How quickly will Obama gut our military defense capability?

How much easier to obtain, and more commonplace, will Obama make abortions?

How quickly and how severely will Obama destroy the quality of our healthcare by moving to socialized medicine?

How many dangerous, the-Constitution-means-just-what-I-want-it-to-mean-no-more-no-less judges will obama appoint?

How quickly and how severely will Obama curtail our freedoms, by further pushing and magnifying the power of the nanny state, to the point that we have neither freedom nor security?

There are undoubtedly more examples, but I fear my post is already long enough that readers’ eyes have glazed over.

These are the issues of overriding importance; that indicate that what we face, indeed what we ahve been facing for well more than 40 years, is a clash of irreconcilable worldviews.

By: dakine

dakine — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:00:01 +0000

chap, I’ll take a shot at answering your question to Larraby. Because it’s not enough to disagree with the substance of a particular politician’s position on the issues. If you’re an extreme ideologue who uses demagoguery as your primary debating tool, then you must demonize those with whom you disagree and denigrate their accomplishments and credentials at every opportunity. I’m a McCain guy and disagree with Obama on most issues, but I am capable of admitting that he is an extremely accomplished individual and a highly regarded attorney with an impeccable resume.

Have you ever take a bar exam Larraby? I’ve taken and passed two (California and Colorado).

By: chapoutier

chapoutier — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:35:44 +0000

Larraby,

The University of Chicago respectfully disagrees.

He taught three courses a year. I know technically that he was considered part time, but I’d say that is pretty much what most full time professors do.

Why are you trying to make such mountains out of molehills?

By: Larraby

Larraby — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:20:57 +0000

Obama claimed that he was a law professor at the University of Chicago. Actually, he was nothing more than one of these part time practitioners who show up once a week and teach a class for an hour, usually at night. He was never hired through the normal procedure in which lawyers apply to be considered for a professorship. He never had to be vetted through that competitive process. He just got some assistant dean to hire him on a nontenure track part time position. But at least he passed his bar exam. The DC bar exam has something like an 80% pass rate. So Hillary was in the bottom 20% of her group. Maybe she got tripped on multiple choice questions like: What to you do when you are asked a question under oath?: a) lie b)tell the truth c)say you don’t remember d) say that Clintons are special people and don’t have to tell the truth.

By: md1964

md1964 — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 19:44:47 +0000

Just shows how pathetic our country is becomeing when the three choices for the highest position and most powerful position are:

1. A woman who is so in love with lying, she appears that telling the truth might be detremental to her health.

2. A man who has ingested 20 years of Anti-White & hatred for America rhetoric, that evidently agrees with it. (He may fool brain dead liberals into believeing otherwise, but just apply a little common sense, and the truth will enlighten you).

3. A self proclaimed Republican (Lord knows very few others consider him one) who considers (And has basically called) American Workers lazy and worthless, and wants to subplant Americans with illegal aliens as fast as possible. He is a One man “Illegal Alien Union”.

Its a sad state of affairs if THIS is the best America can Muster.