Ironically, had Clinton helped Kerry win in 2004

[mudesi]

She may have had a good chance at running and winning in 2012, after 8 years of a successful Democratic presidency. Instead, she quietly worked behind the scenes to keep Bush in for 4 more years, thinking that 2008 would have been a cakewalk (witness her "strategy" of having it all wrapped up by super Tuesday), but didn't anticipate a charismatic Obama getting in the way.

Now she's stuck having to help McCain win 2008 so she can run again in 2012. By then people will be throughly sick of her, and Democrats will never forget the way she tore Obama down for her own personal ambitions over the good of the party and the country. Unlike the last time, this time her support of the GOP candidate is obvious.

From implying that McCain would be a better commander in chief, to her refusal to concede after having mathematically lost the nomination. Her actions are obvious and despicable. She is cut from the same cloth as other so called "Democrats" like Joe Lieberman. The same corporately bought, DLC power structure that has held America in a vise grip for the last 25 years.

It's all crashing down before their very eyes.

[Liberal Veteran]

1. She that soweth the wind, shall reap the whirlwind.

Sucks to be her.

[ecstatic]

A DUer said it best... this is a clear case of her "Chickens coming home to roost"

[polichick]

2. imo Hillary Clinton will hit rock bottom like any addict, and discover that...

...her journey wasn't the one she thought she was on ~ then she'll regroup and do her most important work.

[stevietheman]

3. k&r; you nailed it! n/t

n/t

[Lady President]

4. Nope, then she would have been a bad wife

Clinton was in a no win situation... If she would have spent more time with the Kerry campaign, then she would have been labeled a bad wife. MSM would have lambasted her for campaigning for Kerry, rather than caring for her husband after his heart surgery.

Plus, if you think that she would have changed anything, then you clearly weren't on the ground it Ohio-- we needed the National Guard and paper ballots, not the Clintons.

[anamandujano]

5. Where is your proof that she worked to defeat Kerry? BTW, Kerry won

but rolled over for his fellow Skull and Bones man. He had millions that he gathered from Democrats before the election for a post election rumble. What happened to that? He filed it for a run this time around.

[blm]

7. That's untrue. Clinton-McAuliffe's DNC made sure the election process was unsecured after

2000s theft so Kerry wouldn't be ABLE to have the legal evidence to challenge in court.

You KNOW damn well McAuliffe didn't secure the election process and never strengthened the party infrastructure in crucial states like Ohio.

You just are so devoted to Clintons you are willing to defend the undermining of the party and its 2004 nominee and Carville's sabotage of Ohio Dem voters.

You HAVE to blame Kerry because those were the talking points McAuliffe and TeamClinton pushed to distract from THEIR machinations and betrayals of the party.

The backstabbing was noted by HISTORIAN Douglas Brinkley in April2004:
http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Bill's 3 week book tour REPEATEDLY DEFENDED BUSH on his Iraq decisions that Kerry was criticizing.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

Carville SABOTAGED Ohio Dem voters.
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

Clintons have betrayed honest Democrats like Kerry and Gonzalez who worked to expose BushInc for decades - and you want to pretend Skull and Bones protects Bushes more than Clintons did?
http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[mudesi]

6. .

[OhioBlue]

8. kick.