Hillary Clinton Responds to Critics of Her Vice President Short List Choice

After Republican candidate Ted Cruz hinted strongly that he would pick once-ran-never-elected non-Senator Carly Fiorina from California to be his vice presidential running mate in the 2016 contest, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton felt the pressure to leak a short list of potential running mates anonymously through her buddy, David Brock.

The list includes just one name: George W. Bush. Numerologists called it a “very short” list. Surprised and delighted at the choice, recent Hillary Clinton supporter and former Vast Right Wing Conspiracy member David Brock chuckled with glee. “It’s good to see my old friends getting along so well with my new friends despite me,” David Brock emailed Newscast Now: “I am going to have to give my site MediaMatters.com a makeover to find a new enemy. Maybe it is time to go after those transgenders. I hear there’s good Christian money in that one even though the public and Pearl Jam disagree with it.”

This article is from the parody section, as if you can’t tell.

hillary-clinton-responds-critics-vice-president-short-list-brockWhen Bloomberg viciously cross-examined David Brock about this notion that he was doing the “dirty work for the Clinton campaign,” David Brock noted, “Well, you know, Correct The Record has said publicly we’re doing dill dill do diligence … you’re gonna have to draw some contrasts.”

Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush have much in common. Both became elected leaders in their respective adopted states, both supported the 2003 Iraq war action, and both have their names on the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund, which has done so much good work for humanity.


If elected, the Clinton-Bush team would be the greatest powerhouse of experienced leaders America has ever known. For the first time, both the president and the vice president would be stepping into office with eight years of prior Oval Office occupation. After the passage of the 22nd Amendment which limited presidential terms, this type of grand experience was no longer seen as possible. But here we are in 2016 and it could finally happen.

Supporters of her choice point out that we need experience in these difficult economic and tumultuous times. Those who were in powerful positions when things went so bad for the workers and consumers should be in government now to fix all these problems. Jesus Christ reminded Newscast Now, “Let She who is with sin cast more stones for repentance.” Most citizens agree.


A small number of loud voices disagree with the professional assessment by Jesus. “Seems to me that those who f^@ %ed everything up should be replaced,” commented some ignorant Reddit member. Another replied in agreement, adding, “That Newscast Now website is already pushing Shillary’s [sic] choice in their very first report announcing the decision. They couldn’t even wait for the blood to dry. So biased.”

But most everywhere we look, a yuge and growing crowd of regular people are ecstatic about this duo. “I love Hillary. I’m with her. I am so happy that she invited on GWB because he kept us safe before 9-11,” provided a typical comment. Many others touted that “George W. Bush kept us safe after 9-11 too. Safety is the only thing.”


Some legal scholars complained about the 22nd Constitutional Amendment preventing more than two terms for a president. However, most saw no problems either with Hillary Clinton or George W. Bush.

Hillary Clinton was the first lady of the United States for eight years, having been married to president Bill Clinton. Although the law grants special privileges to married people, for 22nd Amendment purposes they should be seen as entirely separate.

At a conference where he reiterated his opposition to appointing any Supreme Court Justice in a popularly elected president’s “final year,” Paul Ryan noted on the two-term-limit controversy, “This has never happened before. As an ‘originalist,’ we should know that something that never happened before can’t be blocked by judicial activism.”

About the two-term George W. Bush residency, scholars have finally taken a close look at the situation and unrevised the revisionist history back to what nobody could have known in the days surrounding the elections. As strategist Karl Rove described to radio show host:

We didn’t realize it at the time but George W. Bush never actually won either election. In 2000, terrible mistakes were made, causing the electors to erroneously go to Bush over Gore despite the Supreme Court trying with all its skill to straighten the error out. Then there was 2004. We simply didn’t know better. Now that its too late and it serves our purposes, we looked.

George W. Bush was not responsible for these mistakes and there should be no irreparable harm to Bush for the errors of others. Those elections happened a long time ago when we were all young and innocent.

Karl Rove is now considered a respected non-partisan statesman.