/_____-__ //
Sorry, your browser does not support inline SVG.

Ohio, Texas not ideal Clinton firewalls

22 February 2008 _ 15h48m11 EDT
related content: , ,

Warning: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/ashley/public_html/log/wp-content/plugins/ad-injection/ad-injection.php on line 824

Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/ashley/public_html/log/wp-content/plugins/ad-injection/ad-injection.php on line 831

~ we can’t wait until the texas presidential primary is finished, and the only reason is not just to stop hearing from hillary ‘she voted for the war’ clinton until 2012. what annoys us more than that charlatan is the repeated use of the term ‘firewall’ to describe states that some candidate has to win in order to continue campaigning. we heard it first about new hampshire, but we only found it mildly irritating in the sense that it did not sound nearly as ‘plugged in’ as the person who coined it might believe; we also believed that the phrase would never be uttered again, once hillary ‘nafta was a good idea’ clinton was trounced in new hampshire. however, clinton cried on tv and won enough sympathy votes to carry on. now that every time hillary ‘defense of marriage act’ clinton loses a primary, the next set of primaries become the new set of states that she ‘must win’, ‘firewall’ does not die a ‘quiet death’; it has maintained ‘staying power’ as this season’s ‘must have’ turn of phrase for every npr reporter and politico-blogger. ‘firewall’ is this ‘cycle’s‘ ‘parse‘.

related content: , ,

'j' responds:

i look forward to what will be this general election’s ‘hanging chad.’

public response: