Friday, June 6, 2008

Hillary's Failed Speech, Sarah's Promise

Note: At the botton of this column I've posted what might be the first blog comment on Hillary Clinton's preposterous speech today in Washington, DC. The remarks conflicted with most of the statements she's made over the past 18 months, but perhaps that's par for the course in Beltway Rhetoric. If you want to read about a true American patriot, check out my comments on a remarkable woman: Gov. Sarah Palin.

This very strong woman, Gov. Sarah Heath Palin, of Alaska, could be a key to victory for the women whose pictures are below: Marina Kats, Toni Gilhooley, Melissa Hart, and Dana Walsh. If John McCain names Sarah as his running mate, which seems increasingly likely, she would campaign hard in places like Pennsylvania and, one hopes, in Dana Walsh's California. I will be writing this weekend on this site (and on my national blog) about what Sarah's presence on the McCain ticket would mean to Republican challengers in the Keystone State. For obvious reasons, Sarah has tremendous appeal to young voters, women professionals, mothers, social conservatives, gun owners, and military families. (Her son, Track, is an infantryman in the U.S. Army.) She also appeals to working families, mainly because she comes from one. (Her husband, Todd, has been a commercial fisherman and oilfield production worker.) If McCain chooses Gov. Palin, he could break the election wide open. For women generally, the best way to ensure that a qualified females gets elected President is to start voting for people like Sarah, Marina, Toni, Melissa, and Dana. As early as 2012 or 2016, we could have two women running against each other for President (Sarah versus Hillary?). To learn more about Sarah, go to: If it sounds as I'm asking Toni, Melissa, Marina, and Dana to start promoting Palin for V-P well, that's exactly what I'm recommending!

Republican congressional candidate Marina Kats, PA 13th Congressional District

Republican congressional candidate Toni Gilhooley, PA 17th District

Republican congressional candidate Melissa Hart, PA 4th District

Republican congressional candidate Dana Walsh, opposing Nancy Pelosi and Cindy Sheehan in San Francisco

On this site I've urged Republican congressional candidates in Pennsylvania and elsewhere to go aggressively after supporters of Hillary Clinton. The following three paragraphs are from a column I put up today on several sites:

The biggest buzz in the blogosphere nowadays reflects the vast number of Hillary Clinton supporters who intend to vote for McCain. As I explain on my Hillary Supporters for McCain blog -- the original such site -- one of the Hillary supporters for McCain may be the New York Senator herself.

Here's the link: Doesn't Hillary Really Favor McCain?

On the above column on that popular site, I assert the following: Tomorrow, Senator Clinton will endorse a man she despises: Barack Obama. Her heart definitely will not be in it.I believe Hillary Clinton will be "blowing smoke" at us in her Saturday endorsement of Barack Obama. She's going to have her fingers crossed.

Everything Sen. Clinton does between now and November 4 (Election Day) is going to be based not on the 2008 election, but on the one in 2012. Right now, she's in full "grin-and-bear-it" mode. Conversely, her supporters are not grinning -- and, as we hear in the movie "Network," they're "not going to take it any more."

I'm putting up pictures of four Republican candidates: Dana Walsh, running aganst Nancy Pelosi and Cindy Sheehan in California; Melissa Hart, running against Jason Altmire in PA; Toni Gilhooley, running against Tim Holden in PA; and Marina Kats, running against Allyson Schwartz in PA. Today (and everyday), I'm asking all visitors to make at least a small contribution to these outstanding candidates.

Do any of them have a chance to win? I believe that all of have a chance (key word) to win.

Here's what my friend Adam (founder of the
palinforvp movement) said about Dana Walsh:

"While I'm obviously skeptical of our chances of beating Speaker Pelosi, this might be a good campaign to highlight. With two strong liberals in the race, there is an slight outside chance that a very well funded and publicized Republican might be able to run up the middle and win a plurality. If nothing else, a strong second . . . place showing would be a major black eye for Pelosi, who usually makes mincemeat of the local GOP out there."


Adam makes an excellent point: yes, Dana Walsh is a true long-shot, but there is a "just maybe" factor. Just maybe this is the year and the time to defeat Nancy Pelosi. If Dana could get 40% of the vote in a three-woman race -- not an impossible number -- she just might end up as congresswoman elect.

The whole point of this column has been to discuss ways that Republicans -- especially first-rate female candidates -- can win. To achieve that, however, they need your support, and they need it now.

In very difficult races, winning and losing should not be a major concern -- at least until late October. Christine Todd Whitman of NJ "lost" a big race against Sen. Bill Bradley 20 years ago. But she came so close that she wrecked Bradley's presidential aspirations. She also established the foundation for a great political career (as Governor and as head of the EPA) for herself.

Winning is part of a process. Admittedly, it's a process great candidates want to speed up. As I keep reminding people, Newt Gingrich lost his first two elections for Congress. The third time for him -- in 1978 -- truly was the charm. Get the process underway candidates, and most assuredly you will win at some point.

Supporters: Please visit those web sites -- and give as generously as you can.
"I would rather lose an election than lose a war." (John McCain) Can anyone believe that either Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama would make such a statement?
Hillary Chooses Party Over Country
Senator Clinton's address today was well-delivered but substantively empty. She reminded me a great deal of Roseanne Roseanna Dann (Gilder Radner) on the old "Saturday Night Live." She was the one who wildly misunderstood political concept and, when that was pointed out to her, would say, "Oh, never mind."
Today, Sen. Clinton gave us a tagline for her presidential campaign: "Oh, never mind."Sen. Clinton's speech today was one that valued Party over Country, which is profoundly disturbing. In her campaign, she raised serious question about Barack Obama's fitness to be President. In today's speech, she did not deal with -- or resolve -- those questions.
Are we really to believe that when that 3 a.m. call arrives on the red phone that Obama has suddenly become ready to answer? Does she want us to believe that he has suddenly transformed himself into some who can deal effectively with great challenges? Is the man -- Obama -- that Bill Clinton said last week had "slimed" his wife through surrogates like Rev. Wright and Father Pfleger now a man of decency?
Mrs. Clinton told us this afternoon how great the Democratic Presidents of our lifetime had been. Oh really? President Carter with high inflation, high unemployment, a terrible energy crisis, and Americans languishing captive in Iran? President Johnson engaged in an endless conflict in Vietnam? President Clinton entertaining Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office? Those are not good memories, Hillary.
Presidents Johnson, Carter, and Clinton were all men who valued Party slightly more than country -- and they did great damage to their nation. In the campaign, Hillary Clinton spoke some hard truths about the inadequacies of her opponent. Today, she delivered a speech, one written by someone else, that was in total conflict with everything she said over the past two years. It was certainly not her finest hour.
The people who supported Hilary's historic campaign should be very dismayed at what she said today. If you want to read about a woman of real courage and toughness, you'll find one right below. She values country and family first, and she's a critic of her Party when it falls short of its obligations. Mrs. Clinton feels her Party is perfect, and that's just one of the ways she fails to live up to the standards manifested by Gov. Palin.
Sarah is America's future. Hillary Clinton is a fading remnant of America's past.


Joe Talarico said...

They all lose. this is the year of the democrat.

Stephen R. Maloney said...

You mean the Year of The Dummiecrat?

Joe Talarico said...

Call us what you want, it won't help. The majority has finally learned that people do well when democrats are in charge. The greatest sustained economic growth in world history occurred as a result of the democratic new deal. Since the depression, every single democratic president has created more jobs than every single republican president (according to dept of labor stats, check for yourself). You don't need to look any further than today's unemployment report to see what 7 years of republican rule does to the average citizen. You call us dummiecrats and socialists when in reality your party has practiced corporate sociaism (profits privatized while risk is socialized). You're done!

Michael Pasternak said...

My favorite Dennis Miller quote about Bill Clinton is "Sure he is a horndog, but my stocks are doing great!" The Democrats were good for everyone when you look at the statistics.

Republicans hate primaries and do everything they can to prevent them from meaning something and giving their party members a choice. The Republicans couldn't wait to make McCain their candidate even though they might have gotten a stronger candidate if they let the process play through.

Everyone got out of Melissa Hart's way, so the Republicans are stuck with a candidate that Steve Maloney still can't think of anything good that she acomplished in her career. I wonder if she would have even won her primary had there been a challenger, but the party leaders made sure that didn't happen.

For Governor, everyone got out of Swann's way thus denying the Republican's a chance to choose the best candidate. Rendell crushed him.