<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hillary&#8217;s sting</title>
	<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/</link>
	<description>A daily webzine and forum for discussion of news that arises at the intersection of religion and culture</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: outkast</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-245065</link>
		<dc:creator>outkast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 05:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-245065</guid>
		<description>We're not making the General the issue, Frank. We're making CNN the issue.

You'd do well to read the 70-odd posts preceding your own, brother . . .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re not making the General the issue, Frank. We&#8217;re making CNN the issue.</p>
<p>You&#8217;d do well to read the 70-odd posts preceding your own, brother . . .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank in Phoenix</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244579</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank in Phoenix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244579</guid>
		<description>Sorry for coming late to the party. I probably won't read the 70-odd posts that preceded me.

I have no problem that the homo general's question made the cut. It's a fair question. (And I disagree with his agenda of letting open/practicing homosexuals join/remain in the military. There is a question of fundamental moral fitness of military members that &lt;i&gt;needs&lt;/i&gt; to be discussed.

Shame on our side for making the general the issue rather than addressing the question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry for coming late to the party. I probably won&#8217;t read the 70-odd posts that preceded me.</p>
<p>I have no problem that the homo general&#8217;s question made the cut. It&#8217;s a fair question. (And I disagree with his agenda of letting open/practicing homosexuals join/remain in the military. There is a question of fundamental moral fitness of military members that <i>needs</i> to be discussed.</p>
<p>Shame on our side for making the general the issue rather than addressing the question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SteveG</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244551</link>
		<dc:creator>SteveG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:19:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244551</guid>
		<description>The thing nobody wants to admit is that the retired general's question was completely legitimate. It's an issue the president and whomever the president appoints to be defense secretary will have to deal with. How the candidates feel about it is relevant information (a lot more so than some of the questions asked at debates.)

You can work yourselves up over the fact that the questioner had undisclosed connections to a Democratic candidate, but that's just a smokescreen to avoid admitting the validity of the question. 

Why do none of the good Christians here seem to care that Rudy Giuliani billed his adultery to the taxpayers? 

&lt;a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314003,00.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Fox News&lt;/a&gt; of course slants the story to favor Rudy's defense, but even they have to admit the odd thing:

&lt;i&gt;According to a 2002 letter from the city comptroller and numerous travel receipts and documents released Thursday, Giuliani's administration billed tens of thousands of dollars in security travel expenses to little-known city offices. Those included the Loft Board, which oversees some types of apartments, and an office in charge of helping the disabled.&lt;/i&gt;

Rudy's defense is that the city would be paying his security expenses in any event, and that's true. But for a normal trip, his office would have had the police department pay the expenses. When he traveled to the Hamptons to meet his mistress, he took money out of the hands of the disabled to try to hide the costs. 

But I'm sure whether Hillary sent one of her people to the Republican debate is a much bigger scandal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The thing nobody wants to admit is that the retired general&#8217;s question was completely legitimate. It&#8217;s an issue the president and whomever the president appoints to be defense secretary will have to deal with. How the candidates feel about it is relevant information (a lot more so than some of the questions asked at debates.)</p>
<p>You can work yourselves up over the fact that the questioner had undisclosed connections to a Democratic candidate, but that&#8217;s just a smokescreen to avoid admitting the validity of the question. </p>
<p>Why do none of the good Christians here seem to care that Rudy Giuliani billed his adultery to the taxpayers? </p>
<p><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314003,00.html" rel="nofollow">Fox News</a> of course slants the story to favor Rudy&#8217;s defense, but even they have to admit the odd thing:</p>
<p><i>According to a 2002 letter from the city comptroller and numerous travel receipts and documents released Thursday, Giuliani&#8217;s administration billed tens of thousands of dollars in security travel expenses to little-known city offices. Those included the Loft Board, which oversees some types of apartments, and an office in charge of helping the disabled.</i></p>
<p>Rudy&#8217;s defense is that the city would be paying his security expenses in any event, and that&#8217;s true. But for a normal trip, his office would have had the police department pay the expenses. When he traveled to the Hamptons to meet his mistress, he took money out of the hands of the disabled to try to hide the costs. </p>
<p>But I&#8217;m sure whether Hillary sent one of her people to the Republican debate is a much bigger scandal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: outkast</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244499</link>
		<dc:creator>outkast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 06:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244499</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;It will show the rest of us that when it comes to slander and innuendo, Christians really are no different than the rest of us heathen. It’s disappointing, but not surprising anymore.&lt;/i&gt;

So again, why the h-e-double-hockeysticks do you still hang around here and promote this blog to lurkers and claim some sort of ownership???

LOL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>It will show the rest of us that when it comes to slander and innuendo, Christians really are no different than the rest of us heathen. It’s disappointing, but not surprising anymore.</i></p>
<p>So again, why the h-e-double-hockeysticks do you still hang around here and promote this blog to lurkers and claim some sort of ownership???</p>
<p>LOL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: llama</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244485</link>
		<dc:creator>llama</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 05:53:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244485</guid>
		<description>#4 Joel,

I suspect that CNN did at least a Google search on all the people asking questions (they can't be so stupid not to being some of the smartest people on earth as lefties), but as a mouthpiece of the Democrat Party they felt compelled to put in, what we now know to be at least 6 ringers for the DNC to ask questions.  I suspect that after Hillary put in her college ringer to ask her a question, I am sure that Hillary forced the Clinton News Network to fly in her 'Gay retired General that works for her on her campaign ringer for this debate too.

If there was ever a question that the MSM is a servant slave of the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton. these question  have been forever answered.  Oh I know that the left will deny it, but just like these cases, ignore what they say and their denials and watch what they do (or did in this case instead.  They simply have no self control, no shame and can never be satisfied -just like any other terrorist.

The MSM complicity and being in the pocket for Hillary and Democrats is as plain as the nose on your face.  Sadly, the nose on left's face today grow longer and longer - like Pinocchio :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#4 Joel,</p>
<p>I suspect that CNN did at least a Google search on all the people asking questions (they can&#8217;t be so stupid not to being some of the smartest people on earth as lefties), but as a mouthpiece of the Democrat Party they felt compelled to put in, what we now know to be at least 6 ringers for the DNC to ask questions.  I suspect that after Hillary put in her college ringer to ask her a question, I am sure that Hillary forced the Clinton News Network to fly in her &#8216;Gay retired General that works for her on her campaign ringer for this debate too.</p>
<p>If there was ever a question that the MSM is a servant slave of the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton. these question  have been forever answered.  Oh I know that the left will deny it, but just like these cases, ignore what they say and their denials and watch what they do (or did in this case instead.  They simply have no self control, no shame and can never be satisfied -just like any other terrorist.</p>
<p>The MSM complicity and being in the pocket for Hillary and Democrats is as plain as the nose on your face.  Sadly, the nose on left&#8217;s face today grow longer and longer - like Pinocchio <img src='http://www.worldontheweb.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SteveG</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244477</link>
		<dc:creator>SteveG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 05:11:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244477</guid>
		<description>O Hillary, where is thy sting?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>O Hillary, where is thy sting?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scroop Moth</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244469</link>
		<dc:creator>Scroop Moth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 04:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244469</guid>
		<description>Lynn, could you explain what you mean by "a fast one"?  Rick Scarborough has commented that CNN knew the gay general had "ties" to Hillary.  Hillary didn't choose the questions, CNN did.   So what do you mean?

More importantly, didn't Grover Norquist "pull a fast one"?   The whole point of the debate was supposed to be youtube.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lynn, could you explain what you mean by &#8220;a fast one&#8221;?  Rick Scarborough has commented that CNN knew the gay general had &#8220;ties&#8221; to Hillary.  Hillary didn&#8217;t choose the questions, CNN did.   So what do you mean?</p>
<p>More importantly, didn&#8217;t Grover Norquist &#8220;pull a fast one&#8221;?   The whole point of the debate was supposed to be youtube.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scroop Moth</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244467</link>
		<dc:creator>Scroop Moth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 04:36:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244467</guid>
		<description>Looting liar has a nice ring.  very good!  Did she loot the Arkansas governor's mansion too or was the White House beginners luck?  

Lynn, did Hillary murder Vince Foster?

Who did Bill Clinton murder?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looting liar has a nice ring.  very good!  Did she loot the Arkansas governor&#8217;s mansion too or was the White House beginners luck?  </p>
<p>Lynn, did Hillary murder Vince Foster?</p>
<p>Who did Bill Clinton murder?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hrw</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244442</link>
		<dc:creator>hrw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 03:29:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244442</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;she has been shown a ruthless, White House-looting liar whose husband, as president, was impeached and left a trail of dead bodies and ravaged women in his wake.&lt;/i&gt;

I presume these allegations will be given a higher standard of evidence than the Swift Boaters -- I'll start with the dead bodies. 

As for ravaged women, why portray them as victims. I  never saw Monica as a victim, rather a woman who enjoyed her time with Bill, enjoyed her infamy and made a little money on the side.

Clinton was impeached for lying about an affair. The Star Chamber continued from a real estate deal to a travel agency to his sex life. I've never known an inquiry with a wider mandate. The nerve and "balls" of the Republican party is only matched with the lack of a spine on the Democratic side for its failure to impeach Cheney and Bush. 

Looting the White House struck as the most juvinile of charges and one I was not personally familar with so I did a simple Google search and got this http://dir.salon.com/story/politics/feature/2002/06/13/scandal/

which detailed the childish actions of both parties but major league whining by the Republicans. 

I could go on about a lying thieving administration which has bungled a war and amassed a higher body count. But to detail an alocholic, draft-dodging, cocaine sniffing bankrupt businessmen would take too long. And in the end negative Bush stories are everywhere and google just too easy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>she has been shown a ruthless, White House-looting liar whose husband, as president, was impeached and left a trail of dead bodies and ravaged women in his wake.</i></p>
<p>I presume these allegations will be given a higher standard of evidence than the Swift Boaters &#8212; I&#8217;ll start with the dead bodies. </p>
<p>As for ravaged women, why portray them as victims. I  never saw Monica as a victim, rather a woman who enjoyed her time with Bill, enjoyed her infamy and made a little money on the side.</p>
<p>Clinton was impeached for lying about an affair. The Star Chamber continued from a real estate deal to a travel agency to his sex life. I&#8217;ve never known an inquiry with a wider mandate. The nerve and &#8220;balls&#8221; of the Republican party is only matched with the lack of a spine on the Democratic side for its failure to impeach Cheney and Bush. </p>
<p>Looting the White House struck as the most juvinile of charges and one I was not personally familar with so I did a simple Google search and got this <a href="http://dir.salon.com/story/politics/feature/2002/06/13/scandal/" rel="nofollow">http://dir.salon.com/story/politics/feature/2002/06/13/scandal/</a></p>
<p>which detailed the childish actions of both parties but major league whining by the Republicans. </p>
<p>I could go on about a lying thieving administration which has bungled a war and amassed a higher body count. But to detail an alocholic, draft-dodging, cocaine sniffing bankrupt businessmen would take too long. And in the end negative Bush stories are everywhere and google just too easy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hrw</title>
		<link>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244434</link>
		<dc:creator>hrw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 02:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.worldontheweb.com/2007/11/29/hillarys-sting/#comment-244434</guid>
		<description>Vastly amused. If WoW had an award for thread of the month, I'd nominated this one. Joel's refusal to accept facts when it threatens to collapse his personal narrative has always been amusing but this time the contortions he goes through have reached spectular proportions. 

In a desparate attempt to make sense, he offers the MSM he usually despises. The abscence of any report on the Swift Boater is simple. The election was over, its old news and besides that its hard work to actually investigate. Much better to let someone else form the narrative and then follow the group.

Meanwhile, the diabolical Clinton has infiltrated an open debate to ask a legitimate question. The presumptive woman, how dare one of her friends ask a question that embarrasses the entire Republican party. CNN actually allowed tough questions to be asked and the audience wasn't handpicked. Legitimate political discourse -- what a horrid thought. Sure the Clinton team snuck one by CNN, but it was a more legitimate question than the one about the Bible. Only Huckabee spoke the truth there. I'm surprised the Republicans didn't do something similar or maybe this is an indication the Democrats have grown a spine. 

I just watched a Simpsons rerun featuring Mayor Quimby (kennedy) vs Sideshow Bob (Bush Sr.) complete with a Willie Horton ad. Its an excellent commentary on American politics; Bob cheated and won the election. Lisa and Bart discovered the truth when Smithers (deep throat) exposes his boss, Burns and the corporate elite since the Republican Party conflicted with Smither's choice of lifestyle. Lisa and Bart discovered the dead vote Republican and restore Quimby to the presidency where he continues his corrupt ways with women and wine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vastly amused. If WoW had an award for thread of the month, I&#8217;d nominated this one. Joel&#8217;s refusal to accept facts when it threatens to collapse his personal narrative has always been amusing but this time the contortions he goes through have reached spectular proportions. </p>
<p>In a desparate attempt to make sense, he offers the MSM he usually despises. The abscence of any report on the Swift Boater is simple. The election was over, its old news and besides that its hard work to actually investigate. Much better to let someone else form the narrative and then follow the group.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the diabolical Clinton has infiltrated an open debate to ask a legitimate question. The presumptive woman, how dare one of her friends ask a question that embarrasses the entire Republican party. CNN actually allowed tough questions to be asked and the audience wasn&#8217;t handpicked. Legitimate political discourse &#8212; what a horrid thought. Sure the Clinton team snuck one by CNN, but it was a more legitimate question than the one about the Bible. Only Huckabee spoke the truth there. I&#8217;m surprised the Republicans didn&#8217;t do something similar or maybe this is an indication the Democrats have grown a spine. </p>
<p>I just watched a Simpsons rerun featuring Mayor Quimby (kennedy) vs Sideshow Bob (Bush Sr.) complete with a Willie Horton ad. Its an excellent commentary on American politics; Bob cheated and won the election. Lisa and Bart discovered the truth when Smithers (deep throat) exposes his boss, Burns and the corporate elite since the Republican Party conflicted with Smither&#8217;s choice of lifestyle. Lisa and Bart discovered the dead vote Republican and restore Quimby to the presidency where he continues his corrupt ways with women and wine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
