She’s on Fox News a lot. In fact, I saw her the other day and she made the same point, about the Clintons sucking up all the air in the Democratic party.

In that case, more power to the Clintons.. hip, hip, urray.. ‘ip, ‘ip, urrayyy..!

Heh! But seriously, this may be the prelude to a public sturggle between the faction of the DP who want the party to move left, and those who want it to keep take a few more right-turns to come back to the center.

Here political analysis is correct, however she still thinks Bill is brilliant, and Hillary is respected by her peers. Brilliance without character equals Hitler. And being respected by peers the likes of the Senate Democrats is like being respected by thieves.

She’s almost there, but still can’t see the error of her ways.

Good read though.

The article did appear in yesterday’s Nashville, TN paper.

I think most newspaper editors would spike it because the column contains the word “blowjob”.

She got a lot of publicity from Rush on Thurs. as he read the whole column on air.

My spouse, the syndicated columnist, would point out that it wouldn’t be spiked over “blowjob”. The editor has alot of discretion to edit a syndicated column, and they’d just use the “*” or shorten it to “BJ” or something like that.

I think they didn’t run it for a more obvious reason: it wasn’t that good. Or perhaps they’re part of the Grand Ol’ Conspiracy…

No, it just wasn’t that good.

Of course the Clintonites won’t shut up; it paves the way for Hillary! in ‘08.

“Queen of Blow Jobs” isn’t going to make the paper, even with initials. I favor “Princess of Personal Service.”

Am a new recruit…Glen Reynolds is my father’s name…we are a big family from Western Kansas with similarly insightful and brilliant views…Ann Coulter is my favorite candidate to replace the late, great Lee Atwater…pre lobotomy.

“Estrich is a well-known figure, and her words tend to get some lift from the media as long as she’s ripping Republicans, conservatives and so forth. But try and find this thing in any newspaper, anywhere.”


I did a quick look through the archives of the New York Times (hasn’t mentioned Estrich in over a year) and the Washington Post (one estrich mention so far in 2003). Yeah, she sure is quoted a lot ripping conservatives.

Your notion that there’s some kind of conspiracy to keep criticism of the Clintons out of the media is, to put it mildly, at variance with what I see and read on a daily basis.

She DOES get it, that Dems don’t have a chance as long as Mrs. Clintin’s shrill voice is the only one that’s heard on the networks. No question. But she does have the credibility problem when she says that BILL Clinton was “brilliant”. Scuze me? The guy had 8 years to do something major. Nada. The guy had 8 years to make a difference. Nada. He spent his whole time in office diddling the copy girls & the world has nothing to show for it. And yet diehards like Estrich STILL have the need to say this guy was “brilliant”? HEY! Show us the money! The guy was great at scamming teachers all of his life, but to expect the rest of us to believe that a man who had the whole world in his hand consistently kissed it off with the laughable “Healh Care Initiative” or the bombing of African aspirin factories or any one of the myriad spectacularly STUPID things Bill Clinton chose to do during his time in office: other than Howell Raines, is there ANYBODY else in the free world who still buys the bogus PR that Bill Clinton was so brilliant? Really?

I hate to say it, but I think Estrich may be right about Clinton’s intellect. The most monumentally stupid things ever foisted on mankind were perpetrated by geniuses, and don’t ever forget it.

Bad link in that last comment of mine. Try this instead.

Sorry. When I talk about how stupid “geniuses” can be, I can’t very well exclude myself, now can I?

“The link you provide no longer goes to the piece you describe. Estrich has now some rant about a florida fetus.

New link to Estrich column.