The Opposition Is Requesting More Hillary Plants

Think I'm joking? As you'll recall, last night during the republican debates, Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr, a retired general who happens to be gay raised a question about the shunning of gays in the service. He wanted to know why gays were forced to keep their sexuality a secret at the risk of being kicked out of the military. Plant or not, this was an excellent question and it was fun to watch the Republicans squirm on the topic. All over the media today, there has been contrived outrage that the general didn't identify himself as a Hillary supporter. Well it turns out, some republicans actually like being questioned by the Hillary plants, and candidate Duncan Hunter actually sent Hillary a thank you letter!

From nytimes.com:

Regarding the “plant”, retired Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr, that you sent to ask me the question at the CNN-YouTube debate last night in Florida …

Send more!!!

Merry Christmas,
Duncan Hunter

It's not quite clear if this is just a sneaky way of the opposition trying to encourage Hillary to keep using the plants so they can then later demonstrate fake outrage and try to make a fool out of her, or if they sincerely welcome the challenging and more intellectually stimulating questions that her supporters put forth. At any rate, this is all just getting more publicity for Hillary, and that's exactly what we need.

Republicans accuse Hillary of planting questions at their debate

It's one thing to accuse Hillary of planting questions during the democratic debate. Even though that accusation is preposterous, at least it makes a little sense because a candidate would obviously want to receive soft ball questions to make themselves look good. But now they're actually trying to say she planted questions at the republican debate. I kid you not.

From Washingtimes.com:

Retired Brig. Gen. Keith H. Kerr was named a co-chairman of Mrs. Clinton's National Military Veterans group this month, according to a campaign press release. He asked a question last night at the CNN-YouTube debate here, and after answers from candidates, debate host Anderson Cooper asked the general if he was satisfied with the answers.

The general then stood up and delivered what amounted to a two-minute speech, stopping only when the audience of 1,500 booed.

"American men and women in the military are professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians. For 42 years, I wore the army uniform on active duty, in the Reserve, and also for the state of California. I revealed I was a gay man after I retired," the general said.

If you were out working on the grassroots Hillary campaign like we were, you probably missed the republican debate last night. Fortunately we have Tivo. This was the CNN/Youtube debate where most of the questions to the candidates came from questions posted on Youtube from ordinary citizens all across the country. There were a wide array of questions - some silly, some serious, some downright ridiculous. One of the Youtube questions came from a retired general who happens to be gay. He raised a really important question about the failed "don't ask don't tell" policy. Essentially, his question was "why can't gays in the military be openly gay? Aren't we mature enough to accept different sexuality preferences?"

This was a very good question on an issue that has been kept under the radar for a few years, and it is refreshing to bring it back to the forefront. What was great about it though is that this is the one issue republicans are afraid of. They try to shy away from it any chance they get. They want to appeal to the conservative right by showing that they're against gay rights, but they don't want to appear to be homophobic and alienate those who sympathize with the gay movement. What was great about it though is that not only did the gay general submit his Youtube video, he was right there in the audience. It's pretty hard to tell a guy right to his face that he doesn't have the right to be open about his sexuality.

Now, as far as the allegation that he's a Hillary plant? He's the chairman of the National Military Veterans, which happens to be supported by Hillary Clinton. A retired general a member of an organization called "National Military Veterans"? I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.

Apparently we live in an age where we're not even allowed to be members of groups that support our cause. If we're to join any group, apparently we're to check every single member's background to make sure there could never be an argument for conflict of interest. This is an absolute disgrace, and it's pretty obvious that the Republicans are really stretching on this one.

At least somebody in the media actually gets it though, as evident by this headline: Gay YouTube General a Hillary Plant - So What?

I couldn't have said it better myself. Hillary's support is so wide and omnipresent, that it would be almost impossible to find someone that isn't tied to her campaign somehow. I could pick 5 random guys off the street and have them ask questions during a debate, and it's pretty likely that at least one of them would be a Hillary supporter. Face it folks: she's that popular. If you had her massive support, you wouldn't have to spend your time worry about her supporters. It's that simple.

For any of you out there that might be getting discouraged by all these bottom of the barrel tactics, I'd like to refer you back to the Grassroots Hillary Oath. We are going to win this folks, and there's nothing they can do to stop us.

December 10th Democratic debate has been cancelled

From Reuters:

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A televised debate set for next month among the Democratic presidential candidates will be canceled to avoid a potential conflict with striking Hollywood screenwriters, a source close to organizers said on Wednesday.

The decision by the Democratic National Committee came after several candidates said they would refuse to cross picket lines of the Writers Guild of America, which has been on strike against major film and television studios since November 5.

A debate among eight Democrats running for the White House had been scheduled for December 10 at the CBS Television City studio in Los Angeles, where striking writers have been routinely picketing.

I know this news may be a big disappointment to a lot of you that wanted to see Hillary stand her ground and take on the boys, but this is actually great news. Let's face it, everyone in America knows about Hillary Clinton and her positions. She has absolutely no problem with name recognition, as some of the other candidates do. These debates actually have more potential to harm her campaign than they do to help, simply because it gives exposure to the lesser known candidates. Right now if an election was held, I guarantee you Hillary would win hands down. But if John Edwards and Barack Obama were able to get enough air time to somehow convince the masses that they would be a more effective president, then they might have a real chance of taking away the election from us. Every debate I have seen so far has been nothing more than an obsessive smear campaign against Hillary. I'm really starting to question the importance of these debates in the different times we live in today.

Diamonds or Pearls

You're not going to believe what people are getting worked up about now. It's simply incomprehensible. Last night during the democratic debate on CNN, a student in the audience asked Hillary Clinton if she preferred diamonds or pearls. Hillary responded that she likes them both equally.

If you're anything like us here at Vote for Hillary Online you're probably wondering, okay..so..where's the story here.

Well the dirty opposition is claiming that CNN forced this student to ask a so-called softball question in order to make Hillary look good. Folks, we watched 10 minutes of this "debate" (a.k.a gang-up-on-Hillary session) and there was nothing about this that made Hillary look good. It was perfectly designed to look objective and honest but we all saw right through that.

Take a look at this article here that covers this "story". As hard as they try to make it look like CNN is in cahoots with Hillary (when we know the opposite is true), they also concede the fact that this question was actually one of the questions the student wrote down. This was not a question made by CNN or the Hillary campaign, and given to a random student to ask. This is someone who wrote down several questions to be asked, just in case one of them had already been covered. Well it turns out one of her questions was over Yucca Mountain, and they had already spent way too much time on this topic already. What is also true is that this was the last question of the debate and they needed a quick one because time was running out. This is the most overblown crap I have ever witnessed in all of covering Hillary's campaign. And the dirty tricks are only going to get worse.

Here's the video everyone is so outraged about:





Actually, we here at Vote for Hillary Online had been curious about whether she prefers pearls or diamonds ourselves so it's by no means a stupid questions.

Democratic Debate Tonight On CNN 8pm ET

There will be a Democratic debate tonight on CNN at 8pm ET. It will be held at the University of Nevada and hosted by Wolf Blitzer. Folks, if this even goes down anything like the last debate, where everyone plays a game of gang-up-on-Hillary, then I suggest we don't even watch it. What we suggest you do is, watch the first 5 minutes of the debate. Go into it with an open mind. But if you hear one attack on Hillary, whether by Wolf Blitzer or by her opponents, the thing to do is just turn off the television.

We need to hold CNN accountable if they let this turn into yet another Hillary Clinton smear campaign. If this in fact goes down the way I suspect it will, then we need to boycott all advertisers that will be marketing during the debate, and we certainly don't need to hear anymore of the opposition's rhetoric. I repeat, if this turns into yet another smear campaign, then boycott CNN's advertisers. This hits them right in the pocketbook. If we lived in a perfect world, everyone would see Hillary Clinton as our only hope, and instead of attacking her, they'd be praising her for politically prowess. But unfortunately we live in a world where greed and ignorance trumps intellectual honesty, and we need to act accordingly.