NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041213-124920-6151r.htm

Hillary goes conservative on immigration

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is staking out a position on illegal immigration that is more conservative than President Bush, a strategy that supporters and detractors alike see as a way for the New York Democrat to shake the "liberal" label and appeal to traditionally Republican states... Moving to the right of even some Republicans, the former first lady told WABC she favors "at least a visa ID, some kind of entry-and-exit ID. And ... perhaps, although I'm not a big fan of it, we might have to move towards an ID system even for citizens."

"I think she is trying to move to the right, and immigration is one of the ways she is using to do it," said political strategist Dick Morris, who has a history of working with former President Clinton.
"I think this is a particularly misguided choice on her part, however, since two-thirds of Bush's margin this time was due to his closure of the Democratic margin of victory among Hispanics."
Mr. Bush lost the vote of Hispanics — many of whom are wary of tougher immigration laws — by only 10 percentage points this year, whereas he lost it by 20 percentage points four years ago, Mr. Morris said.

...

Not to mention that Texas, California, Arizona, and Florida are rapidly gaining electoral votes due to Latino immigration. Sorry Hillary, your strategy is stupid and offensive. Screw your national ID card. You won't take Alabama just by being "tough on immigration". More likely, you'll just cost us New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and put Arizona and Texas permanently out of our grasps. Keep going like that and we might even have to fight for California.

Hillary, you're appealing to the wrong base. You are a LIBERAL WOMAN. You've already lost the South. Your recent assertations of being an "evangelical" are even more humorous than Kerry's goose-hunting photo-op.

You may have support of the party infrastructure, but you won't expand past Kerry's states unless you see where the future of the Democratic Party is, and it is in the Southwest and Florida. But your conservative posturing is gonna put them firmly out of our grasps, without gaining us Missouri, West Virginia, etc.

And, you're losing my support too. I think Bush has been doing a damn good job with immigration reform (much to the anger of his own party), though I wish it could be a Democrat doing such. Bush is smarter than we give him credit for. Appointing Latinos and being so "liberal" on immigration is paving the way for a future Republican coalition of whites and Latinos. And if that happens, we are SCREWED. New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Massachusetts will continue to lose electoral power to the Southwest and Southeast.

We need a leader who at least recognizes this for chrissakes.

Stay in the Senate. :)

We do need better immigration policies, though. Almost anything would be better than dumb-ass Bush's complete opening of our borders. Am I saying we shouldn't allow immigrants? No, of course not. But we should remove as many illegals as possible, and try to limit the number of immigrants permitted to enter the U.S. each year.

We do need better immigration policies, though. Almost anything would be better than dumb-ass Bush's complete opening of our borders. Am I saying we shouldn't allow immigrants? No, of course not. But we should remove as many illegals as possible, and try to limit the number of immigrants permitted to enter the U.S. each year.
The über-conservative speaks.

The über-conservative speaks.

Especially considering what happened on 9/11, we need to strengthen immigration policies, not weaken them.

Ah, screw it, just close the damned borders and be done with it, I say.

We do need better immigration policies, though. Almost anything would be better than dumb-ass Bush's complete opening of our borders. Am I saying we shouldn't allow immigrants? No, of course not. But we should remove as many illegals as possible, and try to limit the number of immigrants permitted to enter the U.S. each year.
Bush (or Karl Rove at least :p) is quite clearly a genius. He alienates some of his base (like the fellow I quoted), but not enough to actually lose any of his Southern, Plains, or Mountain states. At the same time, he gains the Southwest and holds on to Florida, which is gaining in electoral votes.

We need a Karl Rove. :(

Lol, Doom, I didn't know you visited the General forum! :D

We need a Karl Rove. :(
Yes, looking across the Atlantic, I often cannot believe how good Rove is at his job. The man is a genius. (An evil genius, that is!)

Yes, looking across the Atlantic, I often cannot believe how good Rove is at his job. The man is a genius. (An evil genius, that is!)

A very evil one, at that.

So, do we have the Anyone But Hillary campaign yet? :p

Although, I don't see any other clear Democrat frontrunner for 2008 yet. :(

Though the Republicans aren't much better off...they have several famous moderate to liberal candidates that will never get the nomination (Guiliani, Pataki, McCain, Swarzenegger, etc), a dry boring Senate Majority Leader (Frist), fantasies of Powell, Rice, or Jeb running, and not much else.

So, do we have the Anyone But Hillary campaign yet? :p

Although, I don't see any other clear Democrat frontrunner for 2008 yet. :(

Though the Republicans aren't much better off...they have several famous moderate to liberal candidates that will never get the nomination (Guiliani, Pataki, McCain, Swarzenegger, etc), a dry boring Senate Majority Leader (Frist), fantasies of Powell, Rice, or Jeb running, and not much else.

Jeb?

(Shudders at the thought)

I think this proves one sad point I've heard reiterated on the boards a lot:
Modern Liberals don't have a party anymore.
I knew the situation was bad, but Hillary *came out* as an Evangelical Christian? Moving to the right of the Republicans on border control? (The Hispanics here in Florida love Bush, BTW). Clinton urging Kerry not to stick up for the Gays? Wherever Billary goes, the party follows.
Face it Lefty, the Democrats are no longer your party. You have the right, and the far right. Each step toward the right (bye-bye centrism) is just going to push the far right further to destinguish itself from the ex-left.

Of course, this won't stop anyone here from voting Democratic in the next election. Too bad the ACLU doesn't have a party. Oh, wait. That'd be the Libertarians.
We are now officially a one party system! Welcome to America's tomorrow, have a nice day.

So, do we have the Anyone But Hillary campaign yet? :p
People tried something that here in New York when she ran for senator. I saw lots of cars with yellow bumper stickers that said "Hillary not here not now not ever"

They uh, didn't work.

I think this proves one sad point I've heard reiterated on the boards a lot:
Modern Liberals don't have a party anymore.
I knew the situation was bad, but Hillary *came out* as an Evangelical Christian? Moving to the right of the Republicans on border control? (The Hispanics here in Florida love Bush, BTW).
It's more the early Cuban immigration, which combined with tough Republican policy on Cuba, led to a strong white/Cuban GOP coalition that persists to today. Later Hispanic immigration from elsewhere is not so heavily Republican.

Clinton urging Kerry not to stick up for the Gays? Wherever Billary goes, the party follows.
Face it Lefty, the Democrats are no longer your party. You have the right, and the far right. Each step toward the right (bye-bye centrism) is just going to push the far right further to destinguish itself from the ex-left.

Of course, this won't stop anyone here from voting Democratic in the next election. Too bad the ACLU doesn't have a party. Oh, wait. That'd be the Libertarians.
We are now officially a one party system! Welcome to America's tomorrow, have a nice day.
That may be true for awhile, but the system cannot endure it. The leading party is blamed for the mistakes, the corruption, the problems, and leads to backlashes (like 1994). And as the Republican Party moves further to the right, they're losing their own moderates too.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041213-124920-6151r.htm

Hillary goes conservative on immigration



...

Not to mention that Texas, California, Arizona, and Florida are rapidly gaining electoral votes due to Latino immigration. Sorry Hillary, your strategy is stupid and offensive. Screw your national ID card. You won't take Alabama just by being "tough on immigration". More likely, you'll just cost us New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and put Arizona and Texas permanently out of our grasps. Keep going like that and we might even have to fight for California.

Hillary, you're appealing to the wrong base. You are a LIBERAL WOMAN. You've already lost the South. Your recent assertations of being an "evangelical" are even more humorous than Kerry's goose-hunting photo-op.

You may have support of the party infrastructure, but you won't expand past Kerry's states unless you see where the future of the Democratic Party is, and it is in the Southwest and Florida. But your conservative posturing is gonna put them firmly out of our grasps, without gaining us Missouri, West Virginia, etc.

And, you're losing my support too. I think Bush has been doing a damn good job with immigration reform (much to the anger of his own party), though I wish it could be a Democrat doing such. Bush is smarter than we give him credit for. Appointing Latinos and being so "liberal" on immigration is paving the way for a future Republican coalition of whites and Latinos. And if that happens, we are SCREWED. New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Massachusetts will continue to lose electoral power to the Southwest and Southeast.

We need a leader who at least recognizes this for chrissakes.

Stay in the Senate. :)
Argh, crazy bitch what is she doing!!!??

The democrats just lost by running a candidate who the public didn't understand the position of. And she thinks she needs to move to the centre??

Couple of things here. First, Hillary isn't as liberal as the right-wing has painted her to be over the last 12 years. She's always been a hawk on defense and has been at least moderate on border security. Secondly, look at the source for a second. It's the Moonie Times and they're getting analysis from Dick Morris. To say that they're slanted against Hillary Clinton is to say that the top of Mount Everest is slightly uphill. I don't know what the entire quote was, I don't know what the context was, I don't know what she was talking about in the overall situation, so I'm going to withhold judgment for the moment.

That may be true for awhile, but the system cannot endure it. The leading party is blamed for the mistakes, the corruption, the problems, and leads to backlashes (like 1994). And as the Republican Party moves further to the right, they're losing their own moderates too.

I would agree and say that the Democrats have a great chance of winning back the White House in 2008. Possibly gaining an advantage in the Senate and Congress too (a more remote possibility, but still a possibility).
The Democratic party isn't dead, just the left as we knew it. In other words, just because you have a Democrat President, Congress or Senate, doesn't mean you'll have anything remotely close to liberal representation.
Even the word, liberal, has become an ugly slur.
MoveOn.org knows this, is screaming it from the rooftops, and may be the left's only remaining champoineer.
Do they really own the party as they claim? I'm sure the leftists are hoping so.

I think she is disguising a liberal agenda item in conservative talk - it is clear what she wants is a NATIONAL ID and tracking system so the government can track everything you do and everyplace you go unimpeded - this idea scares the hell out of me.

I think she is disguising a liberal agenda item in conservative talk - it is clear what she wants is a NATIONAL ID and tracking system so the government can track everything you do and everyplace you go unimpeded - this idea scares the hell out of me.
You're not alone. A national ID card, in will let the federal government monitor every move and transaction we make. We should remember what happened with the Social Security number. It was introduced with restrictions and promises on how it'd be used, but it has become a national identifier used by credit agencies to keep track of every transaction you make and application you fill.
It's used to track your earnings for income taxes.
What will the national ID bring us? Nothing but but the loss of more of our waning civil liberties.
As Franklin rightly stated; *Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security!*
Maybe we don't.

You're not alone. A national ID card, in will let the federal government monitor every move and transaction we make. We should remember what happened with the Social Security number. It was introduced with restrictions and promises on how it'd be used, but it has become a national identifier used by credit agencies to keep track of every transaction you make and application you fill.
It's used to track your earnings for income taxes.
What will the national ID bring us? Nothing but but the loss of more of our waning civil liberties.
As Franklin rightly stated; *Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security!*
Maybe we don't.
We've already allowed the Patriot Act. Its not like the ID Card would be worse.

We've already allowed the Patriot Act. Its not like the ID Card would be worse.

Yes it would be.

Hillary, you're appealing to the wrong base. You are a LIBERAL WOMAN. You've already lost the South. Your recent assertations of being an "evangelical" are even more humorous than Kerry's goose-hunting photo-op.


Ermm ... Hillary Clinton has always been a moderate. I'm not sure which Hillary you've been watching, but she leans even more right than her husband.

I think this proves one sad point I've heard reiterated on the boards a lot:
Modern Liberals don't have a party anymore.
I knew the situation was bad, but Hillary *came out* as an Evangelical Christian? Moving to the right of the Republicans on border control? (The Hispanics here in Florida love Bush, BTW). Clinton urging Kerry not to stick up for the Gays? Wherever Billary goes, the party follows.
Face it Lefty, the Democrats are no longer your party. You have the right, and the far right. Each step toward the right (bye-bye centrism) is just going to push the far right further to destinguish itself from the ex-left.

Of course, this won't stop anyone here from voting Democratic in the next election. Too bad the ACLU doesn't have a party. Oh, wait. That'd be the Libertarians.
We are now officially a one party system! Welcome to America's tomorrow, have a nice day.

Hooray Libertarians!

god forbid we have an id system.. oh shit, gotta get rid of my student id card, my blockbuster card, my DRIVERS LICENSE and my social security and bank cards...

some one might figure out who the hell i am with something like an id system like a drivers license for example -_-

god forbid we have an id system.. oh shit, gotta get rid of my student id card, my blockbuster card, my DRIVERS LICENSE and my social security and bank cards...

some one might figure out who the hell i am with something like an id system like a drivers license for example -_-

Don't forget to chop off your fingers, pull all your teeth, and rip off your face. :eek: :eek:

god forbid we have an id system.. oh shit, gotta get rid of my student id card, my blockbuster card, my DRIVERS LICENSE and my social security and bank cards...

some one might figure out who the hell i am with something like an id system like a drivers license for example -_-
have you really likened a national ID to your student ID and your Blockbuster video card?
I see you've thought this through for more than 2 seconds before posting.

have you really likened a national ID to your student ID and your Blockbuster video card?
I see you've thought this through for more than 2 seconds before posting.
and i see your attention span is only long enough for you to get half a sentence into my 2 sentence reply

i also stated DRIVERS LICENSE and social security card

Ermm ... Hillary Clinton has always been a moderate. I'm not sure which Hillary you've been watching, but she leans even more right than her husband.
Haha, once again I forget that she is only percieved as liberal.

But that perception runs deep.

And in that case, I don't want her as president!

STAY IN THE SENATE!


(and fuck the national ID card, I'm serious. I swear to god I'm moving to Canada if that ever happens in America.)

and i see your attention span is only long enough for you to get half a sentence into my 2 sentence reply

i also stated DRIVERS LICENSE and social security card
You bother me kid. Think happy thoughts:
Puppies, angels, death, kittens, pandas, violent anal rape.
Obvously I'm right becuase I mentioned some cute things.
I failed to get your point, as I have any other post you've written.

Haha, once again I forget that she is only percieved as liberal.

But that perception runs deep.

And in that case, I don't want her as president!

STAY IN THE SENATE!


(and fuck the national ID card, I'm serious. I swear to god I'm moving to Canada if that ever happens in America.)
but in canada they have national health care system boogy boogy boogy !

Haha, once again I forget that she is only percieved as liberal.

But that perception runs deep.

And in that case, I don't want her as president!

STAY IN THE SENATE!


(and fuck the national ID card, I'm serious. I swear to god I'm moving to Canada if that ever happens in America.)


I agree ... she should stay in the Senate. She's better off there. As for a National ID card, well, being a Muslim, I'm sure I'll be one of the first to be required to sign up for it and I, being the civil disobedient sort of fucker that I am, will refuse and say that my Passport is good enough.

but in canada they have national health care system boogy boogy boogy !
Do you even realize what a national ID card is?

Hint: It's not a freaking healthcare card.

Do you even realize what a national ID card is?

Hint: It's not a freaking healthcare card.
a card that would identify who you are and various things about you and be required to be submitted upon request by any justice official?

i believe we got that, its called a drivers license.

a card that would identify who you are and various things about you and be required to be submitted upon request by any justice official?

i believe we got that, its called a drivers license.
Do you have to have your drivers licence on you at all times?

No. It's not a national ID card then.

Do you have to have your drivers licence on you at all times?

No. It's not a national ID card then.
thats a bad point, they CAN require you to have it on you at all times AND many people do. and courts have already ruled if you refuse to show a police officer your drivers license if they request to see it, even if they have no legal reason to see it, you can be arrested

a card that would identify who you are and various things about you and be required to be submitted upon request by any justice official?

i believe we got that, its called a drivers license.

DL's are too easily faked and easily obtained, just ask any 16 year old with a fake ID that he uses to buy beer and the 9/11 hijackers who had 63 valid drivers licenses between the 19 of them. DL is NOT a national ID system, it is merely a convenient one that is easily subverted.

I can't believe I'd ever agree with her, but she's right and Bush is wrong on immigration.

thats a bad point, they CAN require you to have it on you at all times AND many people do. and courts have already ruled if you refuse to show a police officer your drivers license if they request to see it, even if they have no legal reason to see it, you can be arrested
What if you don't have a drivers licence???

(Are we talking about normal situations...that is, not driving?)

We liberals do have a party. In fact, we have lots of parties. Take the Nader Party, the Green Party, the various Socialist Parties. You know what? Screw it. It's impossible to be a liberal in this country, since that requires sincerity and logical thinking, which are taboo in politics. See y'all, I'm moving to Sweden, one of the ten or so intelligent countries in the world.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041213-124920-6151r.htm

Hillary goes conservative on immigration



...

Not to mention that Texas, California, Arizona, and Florida are rapidly gaining electoral votes due to Latino immigration. Sorry Hillary, your strategy is stupid and offensive. Screw your national ID card. You won't take Alabama just by being "tough on immigration". More likely, you'll just cost us New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and put Arizona and Texas permanently out of our grasps. Keep going like that and we might even have to fight for California.

Hillary, you're appealing to the wrong base. You are a LIBERAL WOMAN. You've already lost the South. Your recent assertations of being an "evangelical" are even more humorous than Kerry's goose-hunting photo-op.

You may have support of the party infrastructure, but you won't expand past Kerry's states unless you see where the future of the Democratic Party is, and it is in the Southwest and Florida. But your conservative posturing is gonna put them firmly out of our grasps, without gaining us Missouri, West Virginia, etc.

And, you're losing my support too. I think Bush has been doing a damn good job with immigration reform (much to the anger of his own party), though I wish it could be a Democrat doing such. Bush is smarter than we give him credit for. Appointing Latinos and being so "liberal" on immigration is paving the way for a future Republican coalition of whites and Latinos. And if that happens, we are SCREWED. New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Massachusetts will continue to lose electoral power to the Southwest and Southeast.

We need a leader who at least recognizes this for chrissakes.

Stay in the Senate. :)

When referencing Michigan you should just say detroit. They control all elections up here. Despite what the rest of the state votes, how detroit goes the entire state goes.

She's hot.

It took you that long to realize that she would make John Ashcroft look like a Wisconsin liberal?

The same woman who held closed door secret meetings at the White House, and she wasn't even President?

The same woman who ordered FBI agents to wait in the hall while she cleaned out her lawyer's office of any material related to her?

Imagine a Presidency with her instead of Bush. Hillary, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft.

The Living Nightmare. It would be the Totalitarian Act, not the Patriot Act.

What if you don't have a drivers licence???

(Are we talking about normal situations...that is, not driving?)

Even when not driving, i have my license on me. If i want to buy something with a credit card, write a check, or go to a bar then i better have it, otherwise, i'm SOL. Once you get a license, you pretty much keep it on you all the time. It is akin to what a national ID card would do... and in my state, if you're of age, you better have it (or a state identification card, for those adults who don't drive) on you. Otherwise, you're in for a long night with the cops.

Don't be looking at Canada, because we don't want you. If you can deal under the power of Bush, you can suffer two terms under the first female president. Who knows? She may not even with the Presidential nomination for the candidate spot for the Democrats.

When referencing Michigan you should just say detroit. They control all elections up here. Despite what the rest of the state votes, how detroit goes the entire state goes.

True for national elections... but that is slowly changing. For example, notice how close the last elecition was, and that Detroit's population is shrinking as the suburbs grow. And the outer ring suburbs, which are growing the fastest, tend to be upper-middle class, and conservative.

For state level elections, Detroit's inability to do anything is readily apparent. Despite being a heavilly democratic city, the legislature is pretty much controlled by the western, Republican, half of the state. Hence the passage of term limits, tort reform, etc. The state even removed Detroit's control of its own school system a few years back because they were running it into the ground.

So pretty much, do not do what this poster suggested and equate Michigan with Detroit. The former is a generally fine state, while the latter is a cesspool of corruption, blight, and mismanagement.

A driver's license is optional. If I choose not to drive, I'm not required to have a driver's license. (And I may make that choice, if rumors of having to submit a DNA sample to renew your DL are true.)

A national ID is not optional. If that goes into effect, I have zero private life left.

I read somewhere that they tried (successfully?) to slip the National ID provision into the hurriedly-passed budget bill.

You need a passport, which you need other identification to show to the passport office when you hand in your application that you are that person. Sometimes, picture ID even for children these days is a requirement. School photographs do not meet these needs.

I'm not at all suprized that Hillary has gone conservative on this issue.

She (currently) IS the Senator from New York...

In NY national security is a large, large issue and there are many people who feel very threatened by all the "potentially terrorist" immigrants for obvious... "a whole neighborhood and a large section of industry was blown up on September 11th" reasons. Also, New Yorkers think they are the center of the universe and mold their politics accordingly...

While I'm sure a good handful of New Yorkers think this is a fringe issue that impacts national security and thus should be acted on conservatively, I agree that it doesn't look good for her as a set up for anything in 2008 for the reasons stated in the intro.

But she's going a damn good job of representing her NYers!

(The southwesterner in my doesn't like it, but I see where it's coming from!)

Especially considering what happened on 9/11, we need to strengthen immigration policies, not weaken them.
Actually, the best policy would just be to open the border and just search everything coming in through the roads. If the borders were open people wouldn't have an excuse for taking illegal routes so the patrols could crack down hard on anyone they do find and if you seached incoming's thuroughly enough there wouldn't be that much of a problem. Besides, in all honesty something like a suitcase nuke is more likely to come down from Canada.

What if you don't have a drivers licence???

(Are we talking about normal situations...that is, not driving?)
Exactly. One is used as identification (and tracking, etc.), the other for a specific privelege that you've proven yourself capable of handling (sic).

I think that we should have one ID card for everything, and I think that it should be required for voting. It should have an encrypted magnetic swipe and thumbprint code to prevent forgery.

Only problem is, when people can have this, police will be inclined to suspect those who do not. Don't drive or fly or take trips to other countries? Don't drink or smoke, or you look over 25? You should be able to leave it home... or not have one at all if you don't vote. But if you work you will have it tied to your ss#. And if you are a legal immigrant, you should carry it, just like you should your green card today.

Of course if you are an immigrant or naturalized citizen, you could still have hassles if it's not with you. But that's no different from today. And even a native citizen with no foreign sound or appearence can be held, if suspected of a crime or charged with an infraction, until identity is verified when they do not have ID, as opposed to someone with ID who is given a ticket and court date.

We would need new privacy laws to insure that a person does not have to identify themself if not charged or suspected of a crime or not engaged in an activity that requires ID, like driving or flying or drinking-while-looking-possibly-underaged. this would keep heavy-handed cops from demanding to see your "papers" when you're noot doing anything that should require it.

Of course a lot of you have a healthy level of paranoia regarding other potential abuses of a national ID card system. Those who do are concerned that it would help a tyranical government abuse its power. Thing is, if there is indeed a consiracy to oppress the citizenry, the bureocratic(sp?) jigsaw of redundent but unlinked ID systems would not stop them. One building full of Cray supercomputers is enough, probably more than enough, to link it all together and give the MiBs every piece of data that any branch of the government has ever gathered on each and every one of us, at the highest networking speeds available. And if there is such a dark cabal, they have enough black money for several such buildings.

All that preventing such a system does is help terrorists get released by traffic cops because they can't see the watch list, let deadbeat dads get paid in full for jobs in other states because no one there knows about their garnishment orders, give whacko-inspired drivers licences to people who are here illegally, etc. etc. etc.

I think she is disguising a liberal agenda item in conservative talk - it is clear what she wants is a NATIONAL ID and tracking system so the government can track everything you do and everyplace you go unimpeded - this idea scares the hell out of me.

The intelligence reform bill that just passed called for a federal standarization of all birth certificates, death certifcates, state drivers licenses and ID card.

Along with highly increased information sharing.

It has already started.

You know what? There is a simple way to fix this problem of immigration. Unite all the nations of the world under one government. Were all the nations under one government why would there be terrorist attacks; why would there be need for weapons and things of that matter?

I just find it funny that someone in politics has their OWN opinion rather than just towing the party line, and that makes people mad.

I realize that there's the whole 'lesser evil' issue to consider, and getting the republicans out of their massive degree of present power, but cripes, so she has her own views! Gasp!

Wait a minute. Hillary Clinton is JUST NOW starting to scare you? Christ, man! Where were you during the Clinton (Bill) administration. She was his freaking Dick Cheney! She was the real poweer in that administration. He was just there for show and to get his jimmy waxed by overweight interns. Shit, Hillary scares me more than Tipper Gore did - and that woman scares me plenty. Hillary...

*shudders, dives under the computer desk, surfaces with wary looks side-to-side, shudders again*

Hillary scares the beejesus outta me! She wins in '08 and I aint never coming back!