<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hillary Would Lose To Huckabee?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2007/11/26/hillary-would-lose-to-huckabee/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2007/11/26/hillary-would-lose-to-huckabee/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:02:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2007/11/26/hillary-would-lose-to-huckabee/#comment-384884</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 04:41:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/2007/11/26/hillary-would-lose-to-huckabee/#comment-384884</guid>
		<description>"I guess her negatives are catching up with her."

Her negatives have nothing to do with her being a woman, it has everything to do with her transparent lust for power. She makes a lot of assumptions which tends to turn people off but the most unappealing thing about her is she seems to care everything about what people want to hear and nothing of what people don't want to hear. She's got her finger on the populist pulse, always careful to mold her image to what she believe the people want. 

It doesn't help her cause that her husband, a supposed "liberal" (liberal my ass!) worked with Bush Sr. to enact NAFTA and the fact that Clinton was just another corrupt politician but happened to be a Democrat. We now know that it doesn't matter which of these parties control the government, you can expect corruption run amok. The only difference is what corporations will benefit, weapons manufacturers or big agriculture. 

This bitch is bought off just like Bush was before he was even sworn in. The wheels were turning and the money machine churning. Bush and friends are going to be benefiting from his presidency for the next decade and beyond. I guess it's time for the Democrats to throw some of that pork the other direction now. I mean, we can't have half of the nation's corrupt corporations going hungry now can we?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I guess her negatives are catching up with her.&#8221;</p>
<p>Her negatives have nothing to do with her being a woman, it has everything to do with her transparent lust for power. She makes a lot of assumptions which tends to turn people off but the most unappealing thing about her is she seems to care everything about what people want to hear and nothing of what people don&#8217;t want to hear. She&#8217;s got her finger on the populist pulse, always careful to mold her image to what she believe the people want. </p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t help her cause that her husband, a supposed &#8220;liberal&#8221; (liberal my ass!) worked with Bush Sr. to enact NAFTA and the fact that Clinton was just another corrupt politician but happened to be a Democrat. We now know that it doesn&#8217;t matter which of these parties control the government, you can expect corruption run amok. The only difference is what corporations will benefit, weapons manufacturers or big agriculture. </p>
<p>This bitch is bought off just like Bush was before he was even sworn in. The wheels were turning and the money machine churning. Bush and friends are going to be benefiting from his presidency for the next decade and beyond. I guess it&#8217;s time for the Democrats to throw some of that pork the other direction now. I mean, we can&#8217;t have half of the nation&#8217;s corrupt corporations going hungry now can we?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.599 seconds -->
