Reply With Quote
He's toast!!
Top officials and journalists are distancing themselves from Dan Rather and there appears to be a civil war errupting within the ranks of CBS. However biased the others may be, they realize that Dan has had the "weenie". I predict that he has less than a month before he is standing in Hillary's welfare line.
He's toast!!
Speaking of Hillary. I wonder where Bill and Hillary
fits into this picture. Kerry Win = Hillary's loss in 2008.
Anyone have a good theory?
I've heard the conspiracy theory of Hillary wanting Kerry to lose so she can have a shot in 2008 and I just don't buy it.
It could be Edwards/Clinton in 2012?
Joe, how did McAuliffe get his job?
The Clintons wield a lot of influence in that party. Her presidential ambitions are not exactly a secret.
Why didn't she just run this year?
He should have humbly apologized and taken responsibility. Everybody makes mistakes, but these people with big egos have a really hard time admitting them.
She didn't run this year because they didn't feel they could beat Bush.
Back to the original topic, Rather won't get canned. Some producer with a smaller paycheck will take the fall for this.
The "they couldn't beat Bush" theory is just that...a theory that cannot be proven, or unproven for that matter.
I think Rather needs to be dropped like a drunk's lunch.
I've heard liberals say it themselves (about her not being able to beat Bush).
Wow, you got me, it can't be proven or disproven because she's not running.
But there is this nugget...
www.townhall.com/columnis...0903.shtml
If she thought a Democrat had a good chance of winning, she would run.
The same Associated Press story that reported Hillary's statement at the state fair observed: "A 2004 Democratic victory by another candidate would likely delay any Clinton run for the White House until 2012, when she should be 65 years old." Otherwise, she would have to challenge an in bent Democrat in 2008.
Conclusion: Mrs. Clinton is planning to run for an open White House in 2008.If Mrs. Clinton has concluded this election cycle will not be the Democrats' version of 1980, she may suspect it will replay 1984, when Reagan was re-elected easily.
I've never said it to myself. But that's just me.
I do not subscribe to a defeatist at ude.
2012, Joe?
She'll be an even older, embittered, hag by then.
Which makes her different how?
Oh, and on Dan Rather, I think See BS is trying to pin the whole thing on Mapes so they can throw someone to the wolves without having to fire the man with keys to the See BS closet.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
