The basic problem with Hillary is her evident inability to beat McCain even if she would manage to con the nomination. The case is that not only herself, but some brain-washed voters either are confusing being a fighter and being a b..ch.
Being a fighter means to be ready to sacrifice your dearest personal things like your life or health to win, and Hillary is ready to sacrifice just her voters’ money and her party’s election success, nothing personal. Being a b..ch means to say or do anything to destroy somebody.
Therefore, b..ches can only deal with nice guys like Obama who tries to show “some constraints” when competing with his party fellow. But they, b..ches, have no chance against a real fighter, with no ever constraints, like the older outgoing soldier McCain who made already real personal sacrifices in Vietnam war. Although he was not under sniper fire in Bosnia, but survived 5 years in Vietnam POW camps, let alone being under actual fire over there.
Just recall him joking, with no actual reason, but for fun: Why is Chelsea so ugly? If real competition starts, all Clintons’ dirty laundry of 90s, let alone recent developments (like the pending lawsuit in LA), would be brought to the daylight and put on Hillary, and she would have to go into such a defensive position, unless somewhere deeper, that she would not get any chance to even show her ability, much less to have it, for real fighting. Her only real experience is just a huge baggage of scandals brought from the past.
Republicans dream to have her as an opponent in November so that even Mr. Rove is now explaining to Democratic superdelegates on 10 reasons why they should prefer her to Obama. Therefore, voting for Hillary now is like voting for McCain, so think again who you would wish for President.
Here is a brief list of those people who are now actively supporting Hillary Clinton’s candidacy: Pat Buchanan, a charming man slightly to the right of Genghis Khan; Rush Limbaugh, the most voluble and incendiary of right-wing talk-show hosts; Richard Mellon Scaife, the media mogul who financed the virulently antiClinton crusades of the 1990s; and, if you read between the lines, even Karl Rove, the “architect” of the past decade or so of Republican dominance in electoral politics.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article3821271.ece?openComment=true
