“For Hillary to claim that she is an agent of change while climbing into the sack with these agents of polarization is all that you need to know about what lurks behind her tight-lipped smile.”

Why don't you just say that instead of the calling her a whore and being pre-emptively indignant about our response?

http://www.recreate68.org/album1_dnc_011.htm

The Dem race is far from over (and neither Dem is untainted; while the extreme fringe may attempt not only to call McCain “the George Bush candidate” but even to call Clinton “the Rush Limbaugh candidate,” Obama is the Reverend Wright candidate these days.

What does Hillary (and by default Bill) plan on gaining by aligning herself with the likes of Limbaugh. While it may not be an overt alignment, it still exists.

http://thepajamapundit.com/

I know Shaun is a “Happy Warrior” of the Left…and often deliberately provocative…but really:

Hillary as a “slut”; Rush as her “pimp”; HRC doing a “cheap trick” and her meeting the right-wing published as a pole-dancing strip show; her open-legged amorality.

What would you do were Obama described as servicing Rezko or Wright in similar sexist language? Would you even think of using sexualized language to describe Obama in the same way?

All of this could have been said without the sexist rhetoric.

BTW: the rhetoric is also inaccurate…given the fact that HRC's campaign famously blew the $100,000,000 it had collected from fundraisers…I doubt any rational observer could term Hillary a “cheap trick”.