Author Topic: Kathleen Parker: Karl Rove's 'Todd Akin Moment' Ensured Hillary Presidency  (Read 415 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 248,442
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/13/Kathleen-Parker-Karl-Rove-s-Todd-Akin-Moment-Ensured-Hillary-Presidency

 by Tony Lee 14 May 2014, 6:43 AM PDT

Kathleen Parker, a Washington Post Republican columnist whose standing among the mainstream press and the D.C. chattering class improved as she spewed vitriol at Sarah Palin and other conservatives, said on Tuesday that Karl Rove ensured Hillary Clinton's presidential election with his remarks that suggested Clinton had brain damage.



    Hillary Clinton, should she decide to run, owes Karl Rove a thank you note. With remarks about brain injury, he ensured her election.
    — kathleenparker (@kathleenparker) May 14, 2014


Rove may have had his Todd Akin moment by suggesting Hillary Clinton had brain damage after she suffered from a blood clot shortly before she was scheduled to testify in December of 2012 on the Benghazi scandal. He quickly walked back those remarks on Tuesday, but Parker, whose Parker Spitzer show was unceremoniously canceled on CNN after a short run, said that Hillary Clinton owes Rove a "thank you note" nonetheless.

According to the New York Post, Rove told a conference in Los Angeles last week, “Thirty days in the hospital? And when she reappears, she’s wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury? We need to know what’s up with that.”

Support the USO

Offline Chieftain

  • AMF, YOYO
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,633
  • Your what hurts??
uh huh.....wonder what Kathleen will have to say when the Hildebeest decides on to run because her brain injury prevents it??

 :smokin:

Offline rb224315

  • Custom Title goes here
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 588
  • Personal Text goes here
Hillary Clinton, should she decide to run, owes Karl Rove a thank you note. With remarks about brain injury, he ensured her election.
    — kathleenparker (@kathleenparker) May 14, 2014


If the electorate is so easily swayed that they'd vote for someone because of a remark like this, we're truly doomed.

I don't care for Parker these days because she's always taking a backhanded swipe at Republicans and/or conservatives.  Unfortunately, with today's electorate I'm afraid she could be right about this.  After all, this same electorate voted for Barack Obama.  Twice.
rb224315:  just another "Creepy-ass Cracka".

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 16,416
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
I agree with the author. Rove did the GOP no favor.

I think if she runs, she wins. So do several polls.

Brain or no brain, she wins.

In the meantime, over 2.5 more years of Obama.

Online jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,931
  • ^^ Actual picture of me.
    • Fullervision
This will be forgotten.

No, a Todd Akin moment is when a guy, backed by Democrats, poses as a social-conservative and then goes out, sabotages his own campaign by saying something so blatantly and outrageously false that it is indefensible, then refuses to get out of the way.

This is nowhere near that threshold.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 02:37:19 PM by jmyrlefuller »
STILL a proud supporter of the Free Conservative Resistance (no affiliation with the left-wing "Resistance")

"Just because people in positions of authority are stupid, it doesn’t mean you have to go along with it." —Arlo Guthrie

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
I agree with the author. Rove did the GOP no favor.

I think if she runs, she wins. So do several polls.

Brain or no brain, she wins.

In the meantime, over 2.5 more years of Obama.

I don't know.  Depends who she runs against.

Hillary does not look good.  She looks old and doesn't act very vigorous.  If you'll notice, she seems to be always sitting down for events now.  She'd rather do interviews than speeches.  Wonder why that is.

At 69, she is not going to hold up well to the rigors of a campaign.  She might get elected, but I wouldn't bet on it at this point.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,502
    • Boiling Frogs
I agree with the author. Rove did the GOP no favor.

I think if she runs, she wins. So do several polls.

Brain or no brain, she wins.

In the meantime, over 2.5 more years of Obama.

December 18, 2007
Clinton Maintains Large Lead Over Obama Nationally
Leads Obama by 18 points in latest poll
by Joseph Carroll
for Gallup

PRINCETON, NJ -- Despite extensive news coverage of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's improved position in Iowa and New Hampshire recently, there has been little change in the positioning of the Democratic presidential candidates on a national level, according to a new USA Today/Gallup poll. New York Sen. Hillary Clinton continues to have a substantial lead over the group of Democrats vying to win the party's nomination for president in 2008. Obama remains a solid second, as he has been all year, with former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards continuing to hold down third place. Clinton's support improved modestly from a dip earlier this month and is nearly back to her high levels from the late summer and early fall. Obama's support has shown a gradual improvement in the past month, and has returned to its late summer/early fall levels.

Democratic Nomination Ballot Trends

The Dec. 14-16, 2007, poll shows that Clinton continues to have a large lead over her competitors, with 45% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents saying they support her for the nomination. Twenty-seven percent of Democrats support Obama and 15% support Edwards. Sen. Joe Biden (3%), Gov. Bill Richardson (2%), and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (2%) are well behind in what has pretty much been a three-person race the entire campaign.
“[Euthanasia] is what any State medical service has sooner or later got to face. If you are going to be kept alive in institutions run by and paid for by the State, you must accept the State’s right to economize when necessary …” The Ministry of Fear by Graham Green (New York: Penguin Books [1943] 2005, p. 165).

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 16,416
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
I don't know.  Depends who she runs against.

Hillary does not look good.  She looks old and doesn't act very vigorous.  If you'll notice, she seems to be always sitting down for events now.  She'd rather do interviews than speeches.  Wonder why that is.

At 69, she is not going to hold up well to the rigors of a campaign.  She might get elected, but I wouldn't bet on it at this point.
She is my age, more or less.  In the last 5-10 years I have noticed the aging process. And I walk 5 miles every day if I can.

But it is not just the physical changes; it is also mental. By age 69 a lot of people are focusing on how to live out the final chapters of their lives, not on mounting a challenging race for their highest office ever. IOW the ambitious days are rapidly passing on.

I can certainly relate to why she might just say no, not going to run that gauntlet, take those risks, be that person.

The flip side of what I stated is that if she does run, it will likely be the result of deep soul searching thought, and careful preparation, by herself and her support team.

At her best she would be hard to defeat.

Online Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,545
sinkspur wrote above:
[[ At 69, she is not going to hold up well to the rigors of a campaign.  She might get elected, but I wouldn't bet on it at this point. ]]

If she can't endure the rigors of a campaign, just how long will she last as president?

She could quite possibly take ill and die in office.

Folks better look carefully at who she chooses as her running mate....

Offline mountaineer

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 34,034
Sunday, May 18, 2014
The Democratic Party's Brain Damage
Posted by Daniel Greenfield @ ]url=http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-democratic-partys-brain-damage.html]the Sultan Knish blog[/url]
Quote
In 2008, Democrats insisted that Senator John McCain was too old to be president. At a rally introducing Hillary Clinton, Congressman John Murtha criticized him for even running. "It's no old man's job," he said.

Obama and Kerry used language suggesting that McCain was senile. Left-wing activists claimed that  could die of skin cancer at any moment. Late night comedians turned McCain's age into a target.

McClatchy headlined a story, "Some wonder if McCain's too old and wrinkly to be president."

 There are no stories in which reporters ask passerby if Hillary is too old and wrinkly to take 3 AM phone calls.
   
 In Newsweek, Anna Quindlen, a fanatical Hillary supporter, wrote that, "The senator's pursuit of the presidency reminds me a bit of those women who decide to have a baby in their late 50s." If she has any objection to Hillary's pursuit of the presidency while pushing 70, she hasn't written about it.

 By October, spurred by repeated media attacks on his age, 34 percent of Americans said that McCain was too old to be president. The sharp spike in the poll numbers over one month showed how effective the Democratic age smear was.

 Had McCain been elected, he would have taken office at 72. If Hillary Clinton wins, she'll be 69. And age is suddenly no longer an issue. Neither is health.

 Quindlen emphasized that McCain couldn't lift his arms over his head. No one is going to ask how flexible Hillary Clinton is in body (the political flexibility of the woman who opposed and supported nearly everything at one time or another is already renowned).

 The problem as it turned out was not that McCain was old. It was that he was a Republican.

Slate ran an article claiming that McCain's brain would go bad over the next eight years, but discussing the state of Hillary's brain is out of bounds. Late night comedians won't be making jokes about how old Hillary is or how confused she gets in the morning.

 Those jokes could only be made about a man who was three years older than she is now.

 It's outrageous to question the medical consequences of Hillary's "traumatic brain injury" which took her six months to recover from after passing out and falling down while boarding a plane. But ridiculing Bob Dole's dead arm, an injury he suffered while dragging one of his men into a foxhole out of enemy fire during WW2, or McCain's inability to lift his arms or perform certain tasks after they were broken by his torturers, was part of the game.

 We can question the health of war veterans, but not of a career politician.

 There will be no stories about how wrinkled Hillary's skin is. No one will ask her if she can tie her shoes. Or if she can use Twitter without an assistant. Or whether she forgets things sometimes.

 But if a Republican in his late sixties or early seventies becomes a candidate, then the switch will flip and suddenly asking those questions will become fair game.

 Again.

The issue isn't Hillary's brain. It's that Democrats don't consider themselves accountable in the same way that they expect Republicans to be. It's that they consider attacks on Republicans fair game that they are too thin-skinned to accept when they rebound on them.

If McCain was too old and his brain too infirm to serve in the White House, the same people making that argument should have to explain why those same questions can't even be asked about Hillary. Does three years make a world of difference? Has medical science been so dramatically revolutionized over the last eight years that they no longer matter?

 If Hillary isn't too old and if her health is off limits, then Democrats should admit that they engaged in cynical ageist attacks to win the White House. But that too would be accountability.

 And we have a crisis of accountability.

 The Democrat in the White House and his associates refuse to accept responsibility for anything or to display even a smidgen of intellectual consistency. Every press conference and press release is a torrent of lies that isn't even tangentially related to the truth. Any call for accountability results in an explosion of outrage as if the very act of holding the ruling party accountable is a crime.

 The huffing and puffing over the suggestion that a woman who took six months to recover from a serious health episode may have health problems that will affect her performance is typical of the way that the Democratic Party behaves.

 And of the way that its media auxiliaries echo its agenda.

 When Murtha accused McCain of being too old, the media took the attack seriously. When Karl Rove mentioned Hillary's health problem, the majority of the stories focused on it as a cynical attack. This partisan coverage gap is not an anomaly. It's the new normal.

 The problem isn't Hillary's brain damage. It's the Democratic Party's brain damage

 The Democratic Party, which has been around since the early 19th century, is just too old. The parts of its brain that relate to accountability and integrity have been burned out. The political party suffered a traumatic brain episode in the sixties and it hasn't recovered from it since. The left side of its political brain is dominant while the right side has completely withered away.

 The Democrats keep insisting that they're moving forward, when they're actually wandering off to the left without even being able to recognize it. They insist that they're centrist when they've completely drifted off the road.

 It doesn't matter how young or old its candidates are as long as they base their worldview around discredited 19th century ideas about economics and equally discredited 20th century ideas about the virtues of central planning. A youthful body with a decayed brain rotting with ideas that were old when Nixon and LBJ were toddlers isn't progressive.

 It's hopelessly reactionary
.

 Obama may have been in his late forties when elected, but his ideas were around one hundred and forty years old. No matter what age Hillary is, her ideas are equally old and unworkable. It's not the state of her brain that's the problem, it's the things she's been putting in there since a very young age. 

The Democratic Party has become a brain damaged party of old radicals in youthful bodies. Its radicalism leaves it incapable of performing such basic mental functions as practicing intellectual consistency. It no longer believes in universal truths or codes of behavior. It insists with senile petulance that it should be allowed to do and say anything it wants while its opponents should not be allowed to say or do anything at all.

 Eight years of this partisan totalitarianism has divided the country as never before and Democrats, with predictable hypocrisy,  refuse to take any responsibility for this state of divisiveness or its outcome. They also refuse to take responsibility for the setbacks in the War on Terror or the economy.

 Or for anything at all.

 If Hillary and her Democratic Party really want to demonstrate their mental fitness, they can start by naming one single new economic idea that they've brought to the table in the last seventy years. And if they can't, working Americans will ask themselves whether they can afford another eight years of 19th century economics from a political party whose last new idea is even older than Hillary.
Just being unique doesn't make you useful.

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,807
I've been thinking about Rove's "Todd Akin" moment for a couple of days.  My first reaction was like many.  Why would he do something that would turn sympathies toward Hillary?  Then Bill came out and confirmed it took her six months to recover fully.

So folks will be castigating Rove for his mean comments, but as the months go by, people will also remember that she had this injury.  And by the time 2016 rolls around, they won't be thinking about how mean Rove was, but wondering just how healthy Hillary is.  Just maybe Hillary won't want to send out that thank you note after all.
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline alicewonders

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,053
  • Live life-it's too short to butt heads w buttheads
I'm beginning to think that Hillary is the "Trojan Horse" candidate - now whether SHE knows this or not, I don't know.  But I think she is being touted as the ONE, warts and all, so that we get all up in arms about her and gear all of our arguments to be against HER.

Remember Sean Hannity's Stop Hillary Express?  Well, that worked great - Hillary was stopped alright - by BARACK OBAMA!

Just like Obama, and Bill Clinton before him - and Jimmy Carter before him, I think the Democrats are going to pull another nobody that anybody has ever heard of out of their hats to ride in and take the candidacy away from old incompetent haggy Hillary.  Right now, my guess is favoring Julian Castro, the mayor of San Antonio, who was just nominated to head up HUD.

Coming out of nowhere...

Don't tread on me.   8888madkitty

We told you Trump would win - bigly!

Online jmyrlefuller

  • J. Myrle Fuller
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,931
  • ^^ Actual picture of me.
    • Fullervision
I'm beginning to think that Hillary is the "Trojan Horse" candidate - now whether SHE knows this or not, I don't know.  But I think she is being touted as the ONE, warts and all, so that we get all up in arms about her and gear all of our arguments to be against HER.

Remember Sean Hannity's Stop Hillary Express?  Well, that worked great - Hillary was stopped alright - by BARACK OBAMA!

Just like Obama, and Bill Clinton before him - and Jimmy Carter before him, I think the Democrats are going to pull another nobody that anybody has ever heard of out of their hats to ride in and take the candidacy away from old incompetent haggy Hillary.  Right now, my guess is favoring Julian Castro, the mayor of San Antonio, who was just nominated to head up HUD.

Coming out of nowhere...
Remember, though, that prior to Obama getting nominated we were subjected to four years of absolute gushing over the guy, pretty much from the day Jack Ryan's divorce papers were released-- the moment that Obama got put on the map. The 2004 DNC speech. The election as a young, charismatic senator, and his rise through the Democratic waves of 2006. Heck, we're still dealing with the gushing in a few corners. His cult of personality was built over the course of years.

Whoever Hillary is acting as the stalking-horse for this time does not have that benefit. Nobody knows who Julian Castro is right now other than the political junkies.
STILL a proud supporter of the Free Conservative Resistance (no affiliation with the left-wing "Resistance")

"Just because people in positions of authority are stupid, it doesn’t mean you have to go along with it." —Arlo Guthrie

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,967
Right now, my guess is favoring Julian Castro, the mayor of San Antonio, who was just nominated to head up HUD.

Coming out of nowhere...

That's a good one. Since identity politics trump all, and finding a woman is critical, regardless of her qualifications, I wouldn't be surprised to see Elizabeth Warren surface.

Online LottieDah

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 331
I don't know.  Depends who she runs against.

Hillary does not look good.  She looks old and doesn't act very vigorous.  If you'll notice, she seems to be always sitting down for events now.  She'd rather do interviews than speeches.  Wonder why that is.

At 69, she is not going to hold up well to the rigors of a campaign.  She might get elected, but I wouldn't bet on it at this point.



It does not matter who Hillary runs against.  They will be trashed, tarnished, vilified and left for dead. 

Offline MACVSOG68

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,807


It does not matter who Hillary runs against.  They will be trashed, tarnished, vilified and left for dead.

Hillary's got some issues that will dog her well through a campaign.  First her age and looks.  Yeah, yeah I know, that's sexist.  But truth is youth isn't as important to a man as it is to a woman running for office.  Next of course is her health, which is a seed of doubt planted by Rove and to some extent validated by Slick Willie.  Then of course, Benghazi does have legs, and that "What does it Matter" moment will keep surfacing.  She didn't exactly leave the State Department with any successes to tout.  US foreign policy is a disaster, and she was the chief policy-maker behind Obama. 

Finally, Her Party's left wing has no love for her at all, and might put up more than just token resistance to her coronation.
It's the Supreme Court nominations!

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,502
    • Boiling Frogs


It does not matter who Hillary runs against.  They will be trashed, tarnished, vilified and left for dead.

That's probably the same way she treats anyone who has sex with her..
“[Euthanasia] is what any State medical service has sooner or later got to face. If you are going to be kept alive in institutions run by and paid for by the State, you must accept the State’s right to economize when necessary …” The Ministry of Fear by Graham Green (New York: Penguin Books [1943] 2005, p. 165).


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf