Well expressed, Linda. Yes, it is scary that Hillary is leading in the polls. I like the "tough questions" line, because Hillary has shown that she prefers planted questions.

Terhune's back and were in trouble.....Ah-la, Ah-la! Terhune's back!

OMG! You are back! I thought you got banned! This will indeed please Michael Pacholek!

Hillary likes planted questions? As opposed to our current president? Of course Hillary is a calculating, opportunistic woman. She's a politician.

I did find this rather amusing.

McKludge - It has been asked over and over, name one specific time that the current president planted questions as Hillary does... one! It may be true or just another left wing attack of the day - but name one! Now I have a question for you; this parody is about Hillary Clinton, not the president or anyone else, just Hillary... one should comment on the parody at hand. Maybe next time I will do one on Bush - but in this comment section, it merely sounds as it you are whining.

I'll be honest with you, Linda: I've not liked previous parodies you've written...not necessarily because of their political slant, but because of their simplistic, unrefined anti-liberal venom (I'd say the something similar to Tong if he'd let me) But I have to admit, although I don't agree with your politics, this is a pretty clever parody; satire is always better when delivered with a wry smile than a grimace. 544

That was a funny parody, Linda....and the parts of what she'll do if elected President are very scary!

Kristof Robertson - Point taken, thank you. --- Adagio, thank you & yes, very scary!

Well, there was that Jeff Gannon guy, but I really don't know for certain if he was a plant or not. He was accused of it, and his journalistic credentials were questionable. My point was that it's not unprecedented for a national politician to ask a friendly journalist/reporter to ask a specific question to steer the discussion in a particular direction. I wasn't attacking Bush (for that, see http://www.amiright.com/parody/70s/billyjoel220.shtml and http://www.amiright.com/parody/70s/rush8.shtml), just saying that both Bush and Clinton are politicians, and though their goals are quite different, the game is the same.
But, your overall point is correct. My comment had little to do with your parody. I was commenting on a comment, which is not unusual around here. So my honest comment on the parody.
Like Kristof, I'm not a fan of political parodies on either side where the writer's anger is too obvious, and here, it's clear to me this was inspired not by humor but by anger. But the line about moving to New York is good, so I give a 3 for humor. There's quite a few lines with extra or too few syllables, so 3 for pacing. Makes it an overall 333.

I didn't vote on this one, because I'd rather not allow my bias to affect my rating of this. Let me just say that I don't like Hillary anymore than Linda does, but this was about as overdone as William Tong's stuff often was.

McKludge - let's just hope you are not in the field of psycology, because you sort of suck at it. I am not angry at all - I have no reason to be. So your assesment about my anger is your personal, uninformed and very wrong opinion... (but I suppose it helps you to think I am angry, so I won't take that away from you)

MrMacphisto - I don't really care one way or the other if you voted or not. Political songs don't really have honest voting anyway on either side. And the rest of your dribble regarding William Tong's stuff being like mine, is just that, dribble. If you read mine you would see that they don't contain the crude crud that Tong's do. He doesn't allow comments for a reason. I never use words like "Prick", "shrill" (constantly) or "sh*tty". I would never call another person a "ho" or "sleazy" either - not for any reason, even if their political views differ from mine. It is commonplace for Tong to use those words, which should be an embarrassment to all democrats. Tong and other crude, rude and potty-mouthed immature left wing nut cases are in a league of their own. Anyway, if you think it is "over-done" (what ever) and like Tong's songs - so be it. To me, however, it makes your credibility in everything you say suspect, (for example, your not likely Hillary). Bottom line, MrMacphisto, I am not on this earth to please you.

2LD4U & Jason -- back, yes! Jason, why would you think I was banned? Maybe! I don't know! And as far as Michael Pacholek, I hope he is "indeed pleased" -- I aim to please him when ever I can!

Linda, apparently you are not a psychologist either to think that "labeling" you helps me, but as the hack-psychologist Dr. Phil would say, "Be angry, that's OK." Perhaps anger was a tad harsh, but the hate towards Hillary is pretty obvious. And again, it's fine if you hate her. I'm not a fan of Hillary either.
But if you're reaction to criticism is to attack the criticizer, like Macphisto above, I think you might understand why I think there is some anger there.

visited this from Kristof's comment, which I agree with regarding the cleverness of some of the couplets - and although you lost me on "in her corner is bin" you went easy on Bill regarding the number of his affairs - lol - which are probably closer to 555 - btw are you Republicans really still proud of Dubya, or is that just superficial party line?

McKludge - even still, you think wrong! I don't hate, I am not angry and have absolutely no reason to be. I want Hillary to win the primaries, makes it more of a sure thing for the right. And there is a huge difference between criticism, constructive criticism, backhanded criticism and passive aggressive criticism... huge difference - night and day! (and a great thing to learn about too)

McKludge - ohhhhhhhhh, now I see!! --- You are one of those like Tong, one who uses words like "prick" in your POLITICAL parodies and calls them good!! And goodness, didn't you just tell me above that you not a fan of political parodies? Aint you a bit hypocritical! And they sound hateful and angry to me & like Tong, you use words that are over-the-top crude too & it's your thing! WOW! Now I understand your problem with my parody and my reaction to those types of words, you are one of those who I described above!! I should have read your parodies sooner - you know, to get past your lies, hypocrisy and to the truth sooner... silly me! wow!

stuart mcarthur – I would have used 555 but it doesn’t rhyme well in this parody. I don’t know about “all republicans” – but I am proud of the president. I don’t tend to be like a sheep who listens to the mindless words of far left wackos and totally disregardes facts. Our economy is better than it has been in over 30 years under Bush; under Bush, the poorest Americans do not pay taxes and get tax credits; our national pay increase is the second highest in our history, second only to the year after world war two; Bush’s unemployment average is lower than it has been in decades; we haven’t been attacked again since 911 – and even with two wars and 911 and all that comes with that sort of thing, Bush fixed the recession left by Clinton. The list goes on and on. One can disagree with a policy or two or perhaps a choice or two, but to not recognize the good things our country is experiencing under Bush is just partison bullshyt. Almost every president did great things for our country, even if the president was a democrat!

I didn't realize Linda the Loon was still around. The "I Hate Gays", "I Hate the Constitution", "I Hate everything that doesn't fit into my idea of perfect" Loon. . .McKludge. . .this parody is very tame by her standards, if you really want to be offended read her "Kill the Babies" one. . .she really goes over the top, and her rhetoric, don't argue it . . .she'll use it over and over and over again, and use words that really describe her (like sheeple and mindless) to describe anyone who disagrees with her (which by the way means you are automatically a Democrat (or in her mind Demoncrat), though I myself am not affiliated with any party as in my opinion the big 3 are awful. . .The rest of us disregard facts, the president didn't disregard a lack of evidence to go to war over "Weapons of Mass Destruction" though in a country that we had no real reason to do. This country is still in recession, and unemployment may be low, but savings is at an all time low (unemployment was low during Clinton too, but of course fanatical Linda won't ever admit it--it goes against her way of life--remember Demoncrat) I no longer address her, I try to save those that comment or try to reason with her, as she can not be reasoned with, trust me it's a waste of your breath, I like your work (usually anyway) and respect you as a strong SOTM contender. . .don't play around with this Looney Tune, let her spiel her crap, everyone here is used to it. . .not all her parodies are bad (Hillary is a democrat--automatically evil, wouldn't matter what she is about.) but most of them are very biased or full of half-truths, exaggerations, delusional view points and lies.

Linda, you don't take criticism very well, do you? I know that a lot of people jump on you for what you write, but I tried to take a less aggressive approach. I don't expect you to please anyone (other than the the far right), but I figured I might get a more reasoned response than something Ann Coulter would typically say. I guess I was wrong.

One last thing... I repeat that I don't like Hillary either. There are plenty of people on either side that I don't care for. Just because someone disagrees with your view of things, it doesn't make them ultraliberal either.

Linda, you are clearly reading into things only what you want to read. I haven't called my parodies good, I will leave quality judgment to the readers. And I said I'm not a fan of political parodies "where the anger is obvious," not all political parodies. Some are quite funny.
But why am I bothering? You clearly don't believe anything I say, and I clearly don't believe what you say either. So I'm out.

In your response to Stuart McArthur, you state that "Almost every president did great things for our country, even if the president was a democrat!" What is on your list of great Bill Clinton accomplishments? I could probably think of 2 or 3 things, but I am curious what positive things you would attribute to President Clinton.

I can list a few... Almost ending the Palestinian-Israeli conflict (if it weren't for a crazy Zionist murderer). Working well with a Republican Congress toward prosperity (with a few notable periods of conflict). Helping to curb military spending that had once been out of control and balancing the budget. I wouldn't consider Bill one of our greatest presidents, but he was certainly better than our current one.

-----Surprised ------- I am not surprised you were too cowardly to put your own name in your comment and I am not surprised that you validated my points about demoncrats calling names and being vulgar to make their silly points. As to the specifics of your post: yawn. ---------- MrMacphisto -------- Silly boy, Ann Coulter is my idol! ----------- McKludge ---------- So you submit parodies that you do not think are good and just “hope” others think so? That really doesn’t matter, you are “not a fan of political parodies where anger… blah blah” – and yet you write politcal parodies calling people PRICKS! What do you call that, a loving parody – come on – your hypocrasy is so blatent its scary! ---------- John Jenkins ------- To answer your question about Bill….. Regardless of his neglect in handling Bin and his declaration of war against the US and his four attacks on our country – causing 911, the terrible recession he left our country in, the yearly shrinking of our military, his lies under oath and impeechment etc., he did play the saxaphone well! So there you go!

You shouldn't be surprised, I don't wanna be bombed or attacked by fanatics, and I didn't make up the name demoncrat. . .that is a name, Pot calling the kettle black much are we?

Linda, thank you for your response.

To quote the astute Mr. Pacholek, I think that I can comment on this parody simply based on the OS. This was so bad that perhaps it will prompt me to write a funny Hillary parody to this OS. Linda, you are crazy - really - you're out of touch with middle America and most of the time you just make up your facts or outright lie. In this instance, however, your writing was much too forced and lacks creativity (not unlike many of your others). By the way, I thought you were creative in how you blamed Clinton for 9/11 - I've got to figure that four years from now you nuts will figure out a way to blame him for the unjust Iraq war.

By the way, those of us from the great state of New York (you know, where there's a city without monuments) are proud to have such great Senators as Senator Clinton and Senator Schumer. To paraphrase one of those intelligent minds: It takes a Clinton to clean up the mess of a Bush. Piss off the fascists - Elect Hillary and Obama.

Robert J. Pagliaro - you only describe "Mr. Pacholek" as astute because his politics agree with yours. EVERYTHING I said in this parody is correct and true (no matter how many times you call me names because my opinions are not yours). Bottom line; your immaturity bores me and you might do well to remember that jealousy is odious.

Immaturity, that's rich coming from someone who contradicts herself every other sentence, Robert--your points are valid, and I agree with your sentiment (particularly the first post)

Hey Linda......look out! Soon I am gonna write a parody all about YOU!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Yes, you are correct - Mr. Pacholek is astute because his politics are correct. You don't like my immaturity? I'm crushed - does this mean that the two of us don't have a shot together? I mean - here I thought, and who wouldn't, that you and I would be the next Bill Maher and Ann Coulter. Come on now, is my immaturity worse than your bi-polar disorder? How can I bore you? I've never bored anyone - good thing that there aren't any monuments in this town or I might be tempted to jump. How's Larry Craig? Ted Haggard? Oh, so sorry about the hypocrite Henry Hyde - although his death came much too late.