All the Botox in the world...

couldn't possibly mask who she really is!

It seems that, once again, the MSM is apparently surprised that the queen of lies is putting on a plastic face.

Botox rumours put spite into White House race

By Tim Shipman in Washington, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:56am BST 10/06/2007

Hillary Clinton's enemies have long criticised her political -makeover, from the liberal firebrand First Lady to the moderate senator and White House candidate that she is today.

Hillary Clinton in 2006 and at last week's debate: Botox rumours inject fresh spite into race for the White House
Before and after? Hillary Clinton in 2006 and at last week's debate

Now, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination is the subject of a whispering campaign suggesting that she has also undergone a physical makeover - with Botox injections to enhance her appearance.

*snip*

Meanwhile, us regular folks who are keen to ways of the witch, know all too well that for years this prodigy of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky has been working on her image to appear more of a Christian moderate to the political center. Despite the suppression of her radical past by her handlers and the MSM, this prodigal child of the American Socialist Revolution is even more dangerous today than she was a decade ago serving as Ms. President during her philandering husbands pathetic two-term reign in the White House. As the 2008 quickly approaches, it is becoming more and more crucial for the country's swing voters to see through the plastic mask that camp Rodham is desperately trying to maintain.

It goes without saying that more widely read journalistic and editorial columns such as the following by Henry Lamb over at WorldNetDaily need to in order that more folks be aware of what they can look forward to if she succeeds in slithering her way into the highest office in the land.

Hillary and Karl Marx
Posted: June 9, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Henry Lamb
© 2007

In a recent speech, Hillary Clinton described the Bush administration as a "government of the few, by the few and for the few." She's wrong; the Bush government is bigger than the Clinton government. Nevertheless, the government she described might be the government Thomas Paine had in mind when he observed: "That government is best which governs least."

Hillary doesn't agree with Paine's observation. She says she prefers a "we're all in it together" society where "government can once again work for all Americans," with "opportunity for all and special privilege for none."

This could be scary. If, in the world Hillary prefers, one person achieves greater success than another from an equal opportunity, does the result constitute a special privilege that should be denied to the more successful?

Hillary believes in "pairing growth with fairness." This must be one way "government works for all the people" – by keeping track of the success achieved by all the workers to make sure someone doesn't get a "special privilege" as the result of greater success than another. No wonder she doesn't like a government that governs least; it takes a lot of government workers to work for all the people.

Hillary's rhetoric and voting record reveal a philosophy that penalizes success by taxing the rich and rewards failure by expanding the work government does for other Americans. Hillary's description of the government she prefers is one that takes "from each according to his ability," and redistributes "to each according to his need." In fact, she told a San Francisco audience: "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

*snip*

I mean, there's just no way she would want you to see her for who she really is...