National Review supporting...Hillary?!?!...

[misanthrope]

...Author claims H. Clinton the least liberal of the Democratic candidates

What gives?

[Stephanie]

1. What are you confused about?

Makes perfect sense to me.

[leftchick]

6. perfectly clear to me as well

duh!

[rinsd]

2. I believe the frame is of the top 3 she is the most conservative

Because he only mentions Edwards and Obama (Edwards is the most liberal, Obama is somewhere between Clinton and Edwards)

I like this bit at the end though

"At some point, politically sophisticated conservatives will have to recognize that no Republican can win in 2008"

[FiveGoodMen]

3. The pukes can't win in '08 so they'll have to settle for Hillary

What's that tell you?

[rinsd]

4. It tells me chances are excellent for a Democrat to be President.

Some people here rather settle for a Republican than vote for Hillary.

What does that tell you?

[FiveGoodMen]

5. It tells me that they think she's pretty bad.

[leftchick]

7. it tells me the same corporations support Hillary

and repukes.

[roamer65]

8. Sounds like an tacit admission from the NR that Bill Clinton was...

the best Republican president ever. LOL.

[Alexander]

9. Didn't they support Bill Clinton in 1992?

I remember reading an article that explained why the Clintons tack so far to the right.

It was the NR, I think, or maybe another magazine, which endorsed Clinton over Bush in 1992. Clinton felt he owed them one, so he named Woolsey, a right-winger, CIA Director. Whoever was quoted in the article said they didn't feel the endorsement won Clinton anything, and he certainly didn't owe them anything. Clinton disagreed.

[Cha]

10. Yeah, until the general

and then they bring out the big guns.

Gonna be fooled again?

[JNelson6563]

11. Amazing, isn't it?

The R's so blatantly want her as our candidate, I can't believe there are DUers who think they fear her or genuinely support her.

One born every minute as it were....

Julie