<p>Tony Blankley is the editorial page editor of, and a weekly columnist for, The Washington Times. He also is a regular “talking head” for various television shows, including The McLaughlin Group.
During much of Newt Gingrich’s tenure as House Speaker, Blankley served as Gingrich’s press secretary, as well as for a few years beforehand. Afterwards, he had a brief stint at George, the political pop culture magazine founded by John F. Kennedy, Jr.
Blankley’s stated political opinions are generally conservative.
He is an immigrant to the United States from the United Kingdom.</p>
<p>You forgot to mention that Blankley was also a movie actor as a child. I will be interested to see what commentary he will have should his former boss continue his public dalliance with Hillary.</p>
<p>IDad, I’m late to leave for what promises to be a longish but mostly boring bi-monthly company meeting and can’t reply at length, but to your list of horrible episodes in politics I would add the RNM’s (Republican Noise Machine’s) trashing of John McCain in the South Carolina primary in 2000.</p>
<p>Now McCain is nowhere as near as politically moderate as his image suggests and I disagree with his positions up and down the line. But he is a fundamentally a decent and principled human being and to be trashed by the orcs skulking in the shadows of Karl Rove was indefensible. E.g., the push polls suggesting that McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child, the looney Veteran appearing on camera with Bush saying that McCain “came back and forgot us,” the leaflets accusing his wife of being a drug addict and a “weirdo” (shades of the attacks on Teresa Heinz Kerry!), and then the unmitigated gall to accuse McCain of negative campaigning when he responded.</p>
<p>Oh, and the ads morphing quadraplegic vet Max Cleland into Osama bin Laden in the Georgia Senate campaign.</p>
<p>Gah. I’ve got to run.</p>
<p><a href=“http://nymetro.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/12099/index.html[/url]”>http://nymetro.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/12099/index.html</a></p>
<p>Interesting article with author of HClinton book.</p>
<p>Not upset. Sometimes saddened by the depth of your cynicism (too deep for your age) and the shallowness of your labels, xigs.</p>
<p>Have you read the Mao book? That is “utter wickedness”. Nothing Hillary has done comes close. A conversationalist devalues the label by applying it to mere polititical dislikes, contempts, hatred, IMO. </p>
<p>Rove and Limbaugh use those labels to promote an political agenda. Their use isn’t part of conversation or discussion and shouldn’t be viewed as such.</p>
<p>Sadly, I agree Cheers. Distressing to see how easily manipulated the intelligent Xigs of the world can be.</p>
<p>
Many of the “intelligent Xigs” feel the same about you, I’m sure.</p>
<p>Whoa…do we want to get into that kind of shrill tit for tat, driver?</p>
<p>Let me be clear. I fully appreciate Xigs political positions. I generally appreciate his contributions to debates of all kinds, this one included. I don’t think he has been manipulated. It would not be easy to manipulate Mr Xiggi!</p>
<p>I only have qualms about this particular label for this particular politician for thsi particular discussion. End of story. If Xigs were 47, I wouldn’t bother with the comment. He is free to disregard the comment–as my Ss often do!</p>
<p>McCain didn’t need any attacks or trashing, he simply shot all of his appendages off when he went south and said basically that he thought Falwell and Robertson were about the same as Farrakahn and Sharpton.</p>
<p>Whoever in the world wrote or conceived of making that point must have never been south of Canada.</p>
<p>Somewhere way back someone said something about</p>
<p>Bill Hill…regular folk, okay, I grant they aint regular, but than neither are George and Laura…</p>
<p>Or Ronald and Nancy</p>
<p>I think the most regular folks we had in office were Jimmy and Rosalyn</p>
<p>Ah, you should not worry that much about me! :)</p>
<p>I do understand what Cheers says, and I respect her position. It is only normal for the Hillary Clinton issue to be divisive. Some people love her, other like her, and others… like her a lot less. </p>
<p>I hate for anyone to believe that my perception is a result of a manipulation -which in itself intimates that having a negative perception of Hillary is in fact wrong. </p>
<p>The issue is, however, quite simple: elections are decided by people WHO vote on perceptions. I will gladly admit that no other politician leaves me with such a negative perception. This why I used the word wicked as in “morally bad in principle or practice.” and as being an antonym for virtuous. And, to state it easily, between her first speech at Wellesley to her latest public diatribes, I find nothing virtuous in the life of Hillary. </p>
<p>But, does this really matter? Having her in the White House would not change my life much, except that it would represent a lost opportunity of having someone better. And that is the real crime of our current politicians and politics: the good and decent ones have no chance to survive the demands of the extremists of both parties. What a shame! </p>
<p>In the meantime, I can only lament that the job done by politicians such as Governor Bill Richardson is buried in the sea of negativity that comes from national politics. Yes, Richardson is a FOB, but it is easy to recognize one’s heart and brains. </p>
<p>Also, to show that not all Southerners are morons, good democrats do get elected in Texas. For instance, just a week ago, Roll Call magazine released a Cook Report study which showed that Texas Congressional District 17 is the most Republican district in the nation represented by a Democrat. Of the 435 total congressional districts, Chet Edwards’ district is the 21st most Republican in the United States, with a PVI rating of R + 17.7. That means the district gave George W. Bush 17.7 percentage points more of the vote than the nation as a whole did in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. </p>
<p>It is also the home district of President Bush in Texas!</p>
<p>[Chet</a> Edwards For Congress](<a href=“http://www.chetedwards.com/]Chet”>http://www.chetedwards.com/)</p>
<p>I would not hesitate a second to cast my vote for them.</p>
<p>“Bill Hill…regular folk, okay, I grant they aint regular, but than neither are George and Laura…”</p>
<p>CGMOM, I am really, really afraid that you know very little about our latest First Ladies.</p>
<p>Please share how she is “wicked”- she stayed married, something rare these days, there was no criminal wrong doing found in her business dealings, and believe me, they looked.</p>
<p>Please give me something specific. I am sure you have alot. I want to learn.</p>
<p>If you are going to pass judgement on someone, you should have something to back it up. Lets hear it. And not just inuendo, gossip, and political disagreements. Politically, you can disagree, but that doesn’t make some one wicked. </p>
<p>I don’t know why someone applogized to you for comments made. That poster just had a perception of you.</p>
<p>Laura is not regular. Thats a bunch of whooey and image. Mrs. Kennedy was not regular folks either.</p>
<p>CGMom, did you READ anything I wrote? Sure does not look like it. </p>
<p>Would a long list of “arguments” make any difference? I am not here to convert you, nor do I have to “document” my position. </p>
<p>Feel free to have your opinion … and I’ll have mine.</p>
<p>I am jsut curious what you regard as wicked…simple question</p>
<p>Maize, oh please, Maize?</p>
<p>“I am jsut curious what you regard as wicked…simple question”</p>
<p>Reading my earlier post would have given the answer to your simple question. It is number 192 … that way ^^^^^.</p>
<p>From Xiggi Post # 192</p>
<p>“I will gladly admit that, with the exception of Mrs. Albright, no other politician leaves me with such a negative perception. This why I used the word wicked as in “morally bad in principle or practice.” and as being an antonym for virtuous. And, to state it easily, between her first speech at Wellesley to her latest public diatribes, I find nothing virtuous in the life of Hillary.” </p>
<p>Gives me no specifics, just a bunch of generaliztions…what about Hillary in specific do you find “wicked” </p>
<p>I really want to know…</p>