Blog @ MoreWhat.com

CNN has gone out of its way to provide support for the widespread shared opinion that the MSM is biased. Due to the massive number of references to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s lying, planting questions, choreographing every campaign event to exclude public scrutiny and an understandable suspicion the media is doing their level best to help her perpetrate a fraud on the voting public, CNN has added another chapter to HRC’s string of exposed violations of the public trust during the last couple of weeks.

This post was intended to be a lengthy treatment of the fraud that is Hillary Rodham Clinton. But as stated above, the sheer volume of reports covering Clinton’s latest misdeeds renders that task unnecessary. While this blog regularly presents information on why Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign for President in 2008 should be rejected, it is worthwhile to present other sources dealing with the same topic so readers do not get the impression this is personal or that there are some sort of unreasonable accusations or allegations unfairly manufactured to destroy someone’s reputation.

To the contrary, there is an abundance of evidence in the Clinton history, whether Bill, Hillary or both, to suggest if not prove that there is ample reason to select a lower risk candidate for President in 2008. The lower risk notion is submitted for those who have some difficulty separating themselves from the blind support often attached to Clinton fans. To dismiss the overwhelming body of evidence contained in records of the Clinton years in public office as well as the current reports of campaign finance irregularities, misleading the public as demonstrated in this week’s accounts of the Clinton campaign is entirely irresponsible.

All that said, a couple of reports from the LA Times as well as a link to Leaning Straight Up offer other sources that agree with this blog’s appraisal of Hillary Rodham Clinton. While the political leaning of other blogs referenced here being predominantly right leaning or somewhere near the middle, the LA Times being part of the MSM is left for the reader to define in terms of political viewpoint. Blog @ MoreWhat.com is certainly not alone in expressing concern that Hillary Rodham Clinton is to be rejected as a candidate for President.

After two weeks, can Clinton stop the slide?
Two weeks ago in the last Democratic debate, Clinton was doing her usual steady job as the front-runner until the last few minutes, when she stumbled over two issues — her support for/opposition to the driver’s licenses and whether she would open her first lady document files, which she says provided the experience that qualifies her to be president but won’t allow anyone to see.

Two stories behind the alleged Clinton debate success
True to form, Clinton straddled the answer, saying she likes them both.

And the truth came out today when CNN… admitted that a producer allegedly seeking to end the “debate” on a light note gave the question to the student.

And while we’re talking about integrity, what in the world was CNN thinking when it booked its post-debate “analysts” with Anderson Cooper?

Here were the other two “analysts”: James Carville and David Gergen. That’s right, two former aides of Bill Clinton’s are supposed to “analyze” the performance of the candidates opposing their friend’s wife.

from Leaning Straight Up……
CNN softball debate included planted (and sexist) question for Hillary Clinton
Posted by Karl under MSM hillary OTA

The headlines read that the wolf had become a lamb, referring to Wolf Blitzer, who softballed the debate.

After Hillary’s flopping over illegal immigrants and drivers licenses, how could he not make that an issue?

But he didn’t. And Edwards and Obama laid down for her and let her steam roll. I don’t get it. She is on the ropes, and in politics, you dont back off and wait for the other person to catch their breath, you finish it…if you want to win.

Well now, beyond all that, the accusation comes that the final question CNN picked from the audience for Hillary was softballed as well:

This entry was posted on Saturday, November 17th, 2007 at 2:19 pm and is filed under wordpress, Politics, campaign, election, Democrats, conspiracy, Clinton, disclosure, ethics, hillary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.