Why do I say this?

On the evidence, of course.

Karl Rove...who despite the best efforts of the spin-heads to make it seem otherwise is and has been a BIG winner in the election plotting department and is still up to his fat little neck in the ongoing attempt to win in 2008...recently offered THIS lovely missive to the undecideds in the coming primaries.

Are you ready?

Try to guess who he wants as Dem nominee.

Think of this as the 1/7th of the vast right-wing conspiracy iceberg that peeps up through the polluted media ocean. The other 6/7ths awaits Party Titanic as it blindly churns along...as usual...into uncharted and frigidly political waters.

Financial Times

Memo to Obama: win Iowa or lose the race

By Karl Rove

Published: December 2 2007 22:00

TO: Senator Barack Obama

FROM: Karl Rove

SUBJECT: How to Beat Hillary

Not that you have asked for advice, but here it is anyway: Iowa is your chance to best her. If you do not do it there, odds are you never will anywhere. You are way behind her in most national polls. The only way to change that is to beat her in Iowa so people around America take another look at you. You did a smart thing organising effectively in the early primary states. But you can take advantage of that only if you win Iowa and keep her from building an overwhelming sense of invincibility and inevitability.

The good news is you have again got "the buzz". Polls are looking better for you in Iowa and the other early states. Your press is improving, with your performance at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson dinner a big help. Hillary Clinton has made unforced errors. But she is still the frontrunner and there are several things you need to do quickly to win.

First, stop acting like a vitamin-deficient Adlai Stevenson. Striking a pose of being high-minded and too pure will not work. Americans want to see you scrapping and fighting for the job, not in a mean or ugly way but in a forceful and straightforward way.

Hillary may come over as calculating and shifty but she looks in control. You, on the other hand, often come over as weak and ineffectual. In some debates, you do not even look at her when disagreeing with her, making it look as if you are afraid of her. She offers you openings time and again but you do not take advantage of them. Sharpen your attacks and make them more precise.

Take the exchange in the Philadelphia debate about Bill and Hillary keeping documents hidden about her role as first lady in his White House. She was evasive. You spoke next. You would have won a big victory if you had turned to her and said: "Senator, with all due respect, you and your husband could release those documents right now if you wanted to. Your failure to do so raises questions among a lot of Americans about what you're hiding and those questions would hurt our party if you were our nominee." But your response was weak as dirty dishwater. Do not let other great opportunities pass by.

Second, focus on the fact that many Democrats have real doubts about Hillary. They worry she cannot win, will be a drag on the ticket and that if she got to the White House it would be a disaster. You know better than most what they are worried about; they have told you their fears. It is why you have done so well raising money from Bill's backers and gaining support from Clinton administration officials. Talk about those doubts. Put them in a bigger context than just the two of you. Remind primary voters that these shortcomings will hurt Democratic chances.

This goes on in the same manner for quite a while. You get the drift. Go read it at the link if you need more.

Meanwhile, ANOTHER member in good standing of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy has this to say about Bill Clinton. Thus of course about Hillary Clinton as well.

Notice that he simultaneously volunteers to act as the Vice-Cheney of whichever dolt the Rats try to pass off as President in 2008.

From: Examiner.com:

Newt slams Clinton as "fundamentally dishonest," leaves door open for VP slot
December 2, 8:20 PM
Speaking on C-SPAN's "In Depth" Sunday, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich issued a strong condemnation of President Bill Clinton's character, Clinton's recent comments against Gingrich over the 1998 impeachment and the former president's recent claim that he was always against the war in Iraq.
"He is fundamentally dishonest on a routine, regular basis," said Gingrich. "It's just his personality. He tells you the version he needs to be who he is to get through this week. And he just did it in Iowa over whether he used to be against the war in Iraq."

Clinton told a crowd gathered in Iowa on Tuesday that he that he "opposed Iraq from the beginning." This statement doesn't perfectly square with previous statements by Clinton, including one in 2003 when he said, "I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

Gingrich also took exception with Clinton's recent characterization of the impeachment proceedings (Clinton told C-SPAN's Brian Lamb earlier that Gingrich thought the impeachment of Clinton "was something where he could manipulate the press in the present and the historians in the future. And maybe spook the Democrats into running me off.  And I think he knew me well enough by then to know that he couldn't spook me and run me off.").

"Clinton is a wonderful story teller and he's a very charming man," said Gingrich. "But he has the greatest ability to rewrite his own life of anybody I've ever seen. ... Perjury was committed, perjury is a felony. ... He should have been impeached for breaking the law. ... Presidents should not be above the law. That's a very dangerous precedent."

Gingrich fielded a question about whether he'd accept an offer to serve as vice president of the United States. "Depending on the circumstances, I'd be honored to be considered and under some circumstances I'd probably feel compelled to say 'yes.' "

No more information is necessary.

The Rats are scared to DEATH of Hillary Clinton.

With good reason.

They figure that they can either:

1-Beat Obama by using his youth, inexperience and race against him.

or

2-Pull a Carter him if he does win and turn him into an almost instant lame duck because he does not really know the secret paths and byways of DC insider bullshit power politics.

Of which Ms. Hillary is a MASTER.

Not to get all sexist about this, but...you DO know that Hillary has a hardon for that "vast right-wing conspiracy" that she so publicly and accurately named way back in 1999, don'tcha?

They know it.

Bet on it.

And they fear for their lives if she is elected.

Bet on THAT as well.

Real politics is a blood sport at this level, and she is a fucking KILLER.

A smiling killer.

Meanwhile the weak, moody, overfed so-called "left" is out for HER blood.

Why?

Because she plays power politics.

And gets elected by rounding up a majority. EVEN IF THAT MAJORITY IS NOT A PURE-AS -THE-DRIVEN-SNOW LEFTIST MAJORITY..

Duh!!!

WHADDA BUNCHA MAROONS!!!

But the people who run the right ain't maroons.

They may be evil-hearted. felonious criminals who will kill quite gladly kill tens or even hundreds of thousands in order to hang onto their privilege, wealth and power.

But morons?

Nope.

Smart like bloodied whips they are.

Which is why they do NOT want to face Hillary Clinton in the 2008 election.

Bet on that as well.

All 'a you kneejerk anti-Clintonites?

Wake the fuck up.

Advice to Barack Obama?

From Karl Rove?

Please.

What the fuck else do you believe that he could be thinking?

Except:

"ANYBODY BUT HILLARY!!!"

Just like YOU fools.

Unbelievable.

Later...

AG