White House criticizes Rove over reported Hillary Clinton comment

Comments (30)
malosi1040 wrote:

This is a classic example of how the left-wing activists attack attack attack. Never mind the facts, nor the context in which things are presented. The media loves to serve up fluffy questions which allows the crazy lefties to get their chops all wet for the kill.

Is it possible that Hillary has had a brain malfunction?

What the hell difference does it make at this point!!!

May 13, 2014 6:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
carnivalchaos wrote:

malosi1040: Um, I think you mean RIGHT-wing activists attack attack attack. Karl Rove was the one doing the attacking.

May 13, 2014 6:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Greenspan2 wrote:

Can’t wait to see Republican misogyny released to its ultimate extreme. But then, it probably could keep getting worse. I guess there are no limits. Makes one so proud to be an American.

May 13, 2014 7:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Ralphooo wrote:

Karl Rove may have to deal with questions about whether he is genuinely human. Karl, you have to have been born on this planet, remember? Do you have a birth certificate as a Homo sapiens and a citizen of Earth? I thought not. I suggest you consider applying for asylum on Jupiter. I hear it is a nice quiet vacation planet where no one bothers you.

May 13, 2014 7:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whipsplash wrote:

Karl, your a perfect example of a scum-bag republican, congratulations on keeping that picture in front of the voting public.

Vote every republican out of every office every chance you get!

May 13, 2014 9:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
onlyif wrote:

How is this any different from questioning the age of possible candidates and how that may impact on their time in office? Oh yeah, she’s a women, on the left and thus above petty misogynistic criticism of the type that typifies the comments of rich, white, men.

And that’s how you shut down debate.

May 13, 2014 9:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
elsewhere wrote:

Mr. Rove is dead on and his critics are off base like usual.

May 13, 2014 9:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Randy549 wrote:

A non-story story about a reaction to a misquote. The barrel today must be near empty.

May 13, 2014 9:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

You extreme liberals need to realize that Hillary is too old and not in the best of health to run for president. You fussed when we accused her of faking her illness to get out of the Benghazi investigation. Now that it is seen that her illness was much worse and perhaps even some brain damage, you more or less claim she was not that bad off (code for faking her illness). You guys make it up on the run, don’t you.

May 13, 2014 10:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Redford wrote:

Questioning the health, age, resilience and eligibility of a presidential hopeful is standard in American politics. She is hardly the first to be subject to such scrutiny! Nor will she be the last. She will need to be thoroughly vetted. So, like it or not, the question remains: does she have brain damage from her condition?

May 13, 2014 10:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
grasspress wrote:

hey republicans, hear this: hillary with ‘brain damage’ is better than anyone you can put on the ballot.

May 13, 2014 11:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

Can Karl Rove prove that Hilary Clinton has brain damage?

If so – lets see it.

If not, it is just another Republican lie.

May 14, 2014 1:37am EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Rove’s comments simply make him look petty. You would have to be brain damaged not to acknowledge that Obama beat Romney in Ohio. Fact of the matter is that in 2012 both Romney and Ryan lost in the states where they held office and were born. Romney lost by more than 20% points in Massachusetts where he was governor. The people most familiar with Romney and Ryan voted against them. I think that speaks volumes.

May 14, 2014 2:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
borisjimbo wrote:

No wonder why his wife divorced him.

May 14, 2014 5:38am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ORAXX wrote:

This a new low for Rove, and I wasn’t sure that was possible.

May 14, 2014 6:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
DwDunphy wrote:

4825 wrote:

“You extreme liberals need to realize that Hillary is too old and not in the best of health to run for president.”

REAGAN. You’re welcome.

May 14, 2014 6:53am EDT  --  Report as abuse
blanddragon wrote:

Two words, Turd Blossom

May 14, 2014 6:58am EDT  --  Report as abuse
smit1610 wrote:

Karl Rove is usually correct; no always, but usually. There are enough questions about Mrs. Clinton’s health that his questions are relevant. If she wants to be in the public light let her respond in kind. Good going Karl!

May 14, 2014 7:00am EDT  --  Report as abuse
carnivalchaos wrote:

If Hillary really had brain damage the Republicans would be embracing her as one of their own.

May 14, 2014 7:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
mkreider wrote:

Very strange but I remember how the Democrats questioned McCain’s health, Reagan’s health…. I guess this is there usual method of operations anymore. Obama’s legacy: Lies, scandals, more lies, etc. That’s okay because apparently Obama only finds out things when the liberal media decides to report something. Hillary is nothing but Obama in drag.

May 14, 2014 7:17am EDT  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

How long will it be before these over priced and over fed walruses of politics, with funding dripping out or every pore, have at it thanks to to recent campaign financing decision of the SCOTUS?

It’s obviously no holds bared warfare with them, but still lite. They will be assassinating each other the same way Iraqi political parties are now devolving into open warfare over oil funds. Some of them never want to set foot out of the Green Zone for fear of assassination. I’m sure politicians (and their handlers) will be doing the same thing here if the price is right.

I’m no fan of Hillary – she was useless in the ME – but Rove just gets even more inferior material elected and probably wouldn’t have succeeded any better at her task. If the prize is more important then the results they will become open assassins, sooner or later.

May 14, 2014 7:30am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

That would explain all her answers of “I don’t recall” every time she is asked a tough question. That even goes back to the whitewater scandal that she and Bill were in. When you have brain damage you usually do not recall.

May 14, 2014 7:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse

It’s startling how having a minority president, and the prospect of having a woman president, really brings out the pure unfettered racism and misogyny at the ugly heart of the GOP.

Not having one of their own in power has always made them a little crazy, but having their president be part of a demographic they are dripping with animosity towards… now that’s got them to an entertaining but borderline scary level of agitation.

Thanks, Republicans, for once again showing your true colors and reminding America why we don’t vote for you anymore. The GOP is a regional party and will never win another national election as long as cooks like these are running the show.

May 14, 2014 10:35am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

USofRationality wrote: “It’s startling how having a minority president, and the prospect of having a woman president, really brings out the pure unfettered racism and misogyny at the ugly heart of the GOP.”

USofrationality confuses a strong dislike of liberalism with terms such as racism and misogyny. Is it a willful confusion in order to discredit those opposed to extreme liberalism, or an inability to realize there are people that disagree with their politics?

May 14, 2014 11:48am EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

“The New York Post reported that Rove made the suggestion last week at a conference. Rove denied using the phrase, but told the Fox News Channel that Clinton’s health would be an issue should she run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016.”

No mention of a quote anywhere in the article. Pretty poor reporting if you ask me. What did Rove say, what was the actual words? I have no doubt he would say something that is offensive. I don’t like the man. But still, if you are going to write an article like this you should include the quote.

May 14, 2014 12:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@USofRationality

Like the DNC has so many nice things to say about Clarence Thomas, Condeliza Rice, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Herman Caine, and so on. Not to mention Obama calling Kamala Harris the best looking attorney general in the country. Did you just give him a pass for his sexist comment?

May 14, 2014 12:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld..part of the problem with politics today is all the personal attacks. And both sides are guilty. Why is that necessary? Most of which is half-truths or lies. How about all politicians run on their record and their proposals to fix the problems. Then as American’s we hold then accountable.

May 14, 2014 2:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@xyz2055

I blame Rush Limbaugh and talk radio for getting the ball rolling on the heated insults. But it is certainly not reserved for the right wing. I guess when you know your side is full of corrupt idiots that are only in it for the money the only thing you can do is point out that the other side is worse. Elections for many people boils down to voting for who you can tolerate the most. It helps to have someone in the media on your side. The Super Pacs have taken it to a level though with misinformation and outright lies though.

It helps to have a section of the media on your side. Ron Paul could never get traction with anyone outside of John Stewart and others who are not afraid to hear different opinions and is not afraid to say when they agree with someone on many issues even if they are not going to vote for them. Of course when you have a debate moderator on your side it makes it hard to lose too, but we wont see the TV media fall in love with another candidate like we did Obama. It was a rare situation with a charismatic, energetic candidate combined with the historical significance of his election. I am not trying to blame his race for getting him elected or anything, it was just a really good moment and aspect to the 08 election that I think motivated a lot of the support for him. His charisma killed Hillary’s campaign and you could see it on her face in the primaries. Absolutely priceless.

I think we need publicly funded elections with factual advertising for the candidates. When you go vote there should be a short bio and list of positions that the politician holds and their voting record on those issues when applicable. No D or R beside their name either. There is no way that will happen. The incumbants want to keep their jobs.

May 14, 2014 6:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld…I absolutely agree. Publicly funded elections were every candidate gets the same amount of money to spend would help. It would take the Big Money donors for both sides out of the equation. Perhaps with limited time and exposure..candidates would work on their presentation rather than those with high war chests flooding the market with disinformation. But you are right..you’d be hard pressed to get Congress to pass such legislation. And with the Supreme Court we currently have..they’d probably shoot any such legislation down. It all comes down to votes having to be smarter and doing their due diligence on what politicians are throwing out. It almost requires that everyone be an Independent.

May 14, 2014 9:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@xyz2055

“It almost requires that everyone be an Independent.” I voted for GW Bush in 2000 so I wouldn’t “waste” my vote. I knew what he was, and fiscal conservative was not it. That was the last time I use a vote for someone, as a vote against someone else. It would take Hillary or Jeb to get me to use my vote as an against vote again. I threatened to vote for Obama if Newt got the nomination last time. I just really despise dynasties, and dirt bags like Newt. I feel if you are too tied into a political party to consider voting for anyone else you aren’t smart enough to think for yourself. The two parties have completely ruined the whole idea of representative government. They don’t represent your state and district when it comes to voting against the party. They know where that funding and support comes from. That is why the Bush tax cuts, the patriot act, Guitmo, all of our seas bases and operations, etc… are still in place even through a Democrat House and Senate for four years and trifecta for two. And don’t tell me they didn’t have the votes, they didn’t need a single Republican to pass through the ACA…

May 14, 2014 10:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.