VIEW MY LATEST SLIDE SHOW

VIEW THE OBAMA COLLECTION

VIEW MY HILLARY COLLECTION

VIEW MY DEMOCRATIC PARTY COLLECTION





Archive for the ‘Democrat Crooks’ Category

Rasmussen: Plurality of TARD Democrats support … nationalizing America’s oil industry

Tuesday, June 17th, 2008

This Via Hot Air

I was going to lead with something about McCain wanting to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling — duly qualified, of course, with conservationist panders about leaving the final decision up to the states, keeping ANWR off-limits, etc etc — but this is bigger news, isn’t it?

Suddenly that infamous Maxine Waters clip seems less funny than ominous. Great Society II fever — catch it:

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 29% of voters favor nationalizing the oil industry. Just 47% are opposed and 24% are not sure.

The survey found that a plurality of Democrats (37%) believe the oil industry should be nationalized. Just 32% of voters in Barack Obama’s party disagree with that approach. Republicans oppose nationalizing the oil industry by a 66% to 16% margin. Unaffiliated voters are opposed by a 47% to 33% margin…

Data released yesterday showed that Americans believe developing new energy sources is the best long-term solution to the nation’s energy problem. Forty-seven percent (47%) said private companies were more likely to solve the nation’s energy problem than government research programs. But, at the same time, only 52% said companies should be allowed to keep the profits from the discovery of any alternative fuel sources.

READ THE REST

I posting this again because maybe it did not sink in how retarded some of these Democrat liberal hacks are…

Sphere: Related Content

Retard Liberal Barack Pushes Windfall Profits

Tuesday, June 10th, 2008


1d.jpg
This is by Neal Bortz from the Nealz Nuze section

Barack Obama has been toying with the idea of imposing a tax on windfall profits on US oil companies, and it will definitely be a part of his presidential platform.

Take a look at this latest statement he made in Raleigh, North Carolina. He said,

“I’ll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we’ll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills.”

Gee, that sounds like a wealth distribution plan if I’ve ever heard one. Rob from the rich to give to the “poor.”

Ok .. first of all, just what are “windfall profits?” Does anyone have a handy definition? Might I offer one? Damn right I might. Try this: “A tax levied on a industry by a politician eager to pander to economically ignorant voters who, for whatever reason, are upset with that industry.”

This term “windfall profits” has become another buzzword for liberals, and particularly the Barack Obama campaign. A majority of Americans probably couldn’t tell you the first thing about windfall profits … but the word inflicts these feelings of evil and wealth envy. Therefore, the Obama campaign will continue to use this fancy term to get you all riled up. Politicians are good at that.

Once again we run up against the economic ignorance of the American people. Most people couldn’t tell you the difference between a profit and a profit margin if their flat-screen TVs depended on it. The profit margins – the amount of money they earn for a dollar of sales – have actually declined a bit. Banking institutions, cosmetics companies and pharmaceutical companies are just part of a long list of businesses that earn more than the evil oil companies.

Hopefully most Americans have enough economic smarts to know that the profits from these oil companies belong to the shareholders. Problem is, these people probably think that the shares in these oil companies are fat-cat insiders just reaping millions a year from their investments.

Wrong.

Throughout the oil and natural gas industries only about 1.5% of the stock is owned by company executives. Now this statistic doesn’t come from the oil companies themselves, the numbers – and the numbers that follow – come from Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs; one Robert J. Shapiro.

Here’s what Shapiro has to say about the ownership of the other 98.5% of oil company shares: “The data show that ownership of industry shares is broadly middle class, with the majority of industry shares held by institutional investors, often on behalf of millions of Americans through mutual funds, pension funds and individual retirement accounts.”

So … when Barack Obama talks about a windfall profits tax, just who’s money is he going to seize? He’s talking about taking the savings, investments and retirement funds of middle class Americans.

Pardon my language … but would you folks please wise up out there? Quit being so damned ignorant to what is really going on!

You want more details on just who owns the shares? OK, I have those details. Just remember, when Obama talks about windfall profits — THESE are the people who’s money he plans to seize:

Again … from the Shapiro study:

Almost 43 percent of oil and natural gas company shares are owned by mutual funds and asset management companies that have mutual funds. Mutual funds manage accounts for 55 million U.S. households with a median income of $68,700.
Twenty seven percent of shares are owned by other institutional investors like pension funds. In 2004, more than 2,600 pension funds run by federal, state and local governments held almost $64 billion in shares of U.S. oil and natural gas companies. These funds represent the major retirement security for the nation’s current and retired soldiers, teachers, and police and fire personnel at every level of government.
Fourteen percent of shares are held in IRA and other personal retirement accounts. Forty five million U.S. households have IRA and other personal retirement accounts, with an average account value of just over $22,000.

You see? The people listed in this study are … YOU! Not fat-cat oil company executives. Not George Bush and Dick Cheney. This is YOUR money he’s after … YOUR money he wants to seize to create yet another government entitlement program … helping people buy gas and pay electricity bills.

Someone (perhaps John Wayne) once said that it is too bad stupidity isn’t painful. Well, in this case is just might be. Look at those median incomes above. That’s you, my friends … and if you sit by and let this anti-capitalist leftist rail against the oil companies; if you sit by and let him pander to the ignorance of the American voters with this idiotic “windfall profits tax” crap … then try not to bitch when your retirement doesn’t turn out to be as sweet as you thought it would.

By the way … if you want to call BS on me with these numbers and statistics, by my guest. Here’s the link for you to read the study for yourself.

Knock yourself out, sport.

Sphere: Related Content

Maxine Waters: Socialize the Oil Companies

Tuesday, May 27th, 2008

This from Stop The ACLU


gas.jpg
Glenn Beck: Government isn’t the solution, its the problem. 

Guess what this liberal will be all about? Socializing!


Link: sevenload.com

Kim Preistap breaks it down:

Now, if the US government and the Democrats like Ms. Waters were truly interested in erasing the oil companies’ record profits and helping the American consumers, then they would be doing everything they could to increase oil and gasoline production so as to saturate the market. The price of oil and gasoline would then drop through the floor. Remember when oil was $8 a barrel and gasoline was a mere $.95? Oil companies were merging left and right because they couldn’t stay in business on their own and the price of gas wasn’t on the American people’s radar. If punishing the oil companies is truly what Democrats like Maxine Waters really want to do, then they would glut the market. They would change the law so that the supply of oil and gasoline vastly outpaced demand and oil and gas prices dropped.

But they won’t do that because they don’t care about the American consumers. They don’t want the American people using more oil or gasoline. They want the American people to hurt at the pump so they don’t drive as much. Why? Because Democrats actually think the America people are the problem in all of this to begin with.

The oil executive’s answer?: We’ve heard this before, its called Hugo Chavez. This is a hero of the left. Note to Congress: Read Atlass Shrugged.

Also read the Astute Blogger’s post on the slipping mask of the Democrats.

Sphere: Related Content

The Tall Tale of Tuzla

Tuesday, April 1st, 2008

bos3.jpgHillary Clinton’s Bosnian misadventure should disqualify her from the presidency, but the airport landing is the least of it.

By Christopher Hitchens on Slate

The punishment visited on Sen. Hillary Clinton for her flagrant, hysterical, repetitive, pathological lying about her visit to Bosnia should be much heavier than it has yet been and should be exacted for much more than just the lying itself. There are two kinds of deliberate and premeditated deceit, commonly known as suggestio falsi and suppressio veri. (Neither of them is covered by the additionally lying claim of having “misspoken.”) The first involves what seems to be most obvious in the present case: the putting forward of a bogus or misleading account of events. But the second, and often the more serious, means that the liar in question has also attempted to bury or to obscure something that actually is true. Let us examine how Sen. Clinton has managed to commit both of these offenses to veracity and decency and how in doing so she has rivaled, if not indeed surpassed, the disbarred and perjured hack who is her husband and tutor.I remember disembarking at the Sarajevo airport in the summer of 1992 after an agonizing flight on a U.N. relief plane that had had to “corkscrew” its downward approach in order to avoid Serbian flak and ground fire. As I hunched over to scuttle the distance to the terminal, a mortar shell fell as close to me as I ever want any mortar shell to fall. The vicious noise it made is with me still. And so is the shock I felt at seeing a civilized and multicultural European city bombarded round the clock by an ethno-religious militia under the command of fascistic barbarians. I didn’t like the Clinton candidacy even then, but I have to report that many Bosnians were enthused by Bill Clinton’s pledge, during that ghastly summer, to abandon the hypocritical and sordid neutrality bos2.jpgof the George H.W. Bush/James Baker regime and to come to the defense of the victims of ethnic cleansing.

I am recalling these two things for a reason. First, and even though I admit that I did once later misidentify a building in Sarajevo from a set of photographs, I can tell you for an absolute certainty that it would be quite impossible to imagine that one had undergone that experience at the airport if one actually had not. Yet Sen. Clinton, given repeated chances to modify her absurd claim to have operated under fire while in the company of her then-16-year-old daughter and a USO entertainment troupe, kept up a stone-faced and self-loving insistence that, yes, she had exposed herself to sniper fire in the cause of gaining moral credit and, perhaps to be banked for the future, national-security “experience.” This must mean either a) that she lies without conscience or reflection; or b) that she is subject to fantasies of an illusory past; or c) both of the above. Any of the foregoing would constitute a disqualification for the presidency of the United States.

READ THE REST HERE

*****
Ya know unless Hillary is able to hire someone to assassinate Obama her chances of winning the presidency is pretty much zero.
Putting aside Rush’s “Operation Chaos” successfully fucking up the Democratic Party, after her sniper fire lie I have often thought about the mental acuity of people who still actually believe that Hillary Clinton should be president.
EVEN AFTER THIS MOTHER OF ALL PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE LIES, how
could someone willingly show up at one of her campaign rallies and keep their integrity in check?

I have yet to find a blogger or columnist who is willing to bang out on a keyboard truthfully and honestly why Hillary, despite being a lying fuck should be president.
Only the fact that she is a woman and her name is Clinton. If she were a man named
Tom Richardson everyone including flaming lib tards would avoid her like the plague.
after reading this article, I’m just dumbfounded.

Sphere: Related Content

It’s Only Going to Get Worse

Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008


slaves2.jpg

This article by Marty Peretz from The New Republic

Bill Clinton dozed off at the Convent Avenue Baptist Church in Harlem just as his wife was receiving the endorsement (or, more properly, the blessing) of Calvin Butts at Abyssinian Baptist Church, eight or so blocks away.  This church had been the pulpit of Adam Clayton Powell Jr. — “Mr. Jesus” to his congregation, member of Congress and husband to the politically fearless lefty (just one instance: as a witness before the House Un-American Activities Committees) and staggeringly sexual songstress of my youth, Hazel Scott, like Lena Horne.  A randy fellow. I don’t think that black preachers have the sway they once had. Or white ministers, for that matter, except for those who are evangelicals and fundamentalists operating out of humongous mall churches.But back to the black ministers and their diminished sway.  The decline of preacher power is a coming of age of the African-American population, much as it is among Irish and Italian Catholics or Jews or, for a demographically near-fatal shift, mainstream Protestants, who mostly and at best think their ministers are irrelevant.  The black clerisy cannot any longer instruct its parishoners about their voting.  It is an irony, of course, that the Harlem pastorate’s last swing at real political influence over their congregations is for a white woman and against a black man.  Yet it also emphasizes their reactionary cast.  No one since Martin Luther King has anyone so inspired and energized young whites as Barack Obama.  This, then, is a real cross-racial alliance built on the cultural and educational achievements of African-Americans and on the true openness of whites and Asians to their black brothers and sisters. The bond between every Calvin Butts in America and Hillary is the old fix, pliant for the former, patronizing for the latter. And, as for the latter and her husband, it is also ugly.  An article in this morning’s Financial Times by Edward Luce and Stephanie Kirchgaessner makes clear how perilous this is for the Clintons — and for the Democrats, in general.  The most significant trap is that Bill risks making himself the prime issue of his wife’s campaign, two nasty and unimaginably calculating folk baying at Barack Obama whom almost everyone finds gracious. Me too.

There is a calculus to the Clintons trying to make Obama run as the black candidate.  It is to stir up fear in one part of Hillary’s constituency, white women and particularly older white women.  The other goal for Hillary is to turn Obama into a taunt for Hispanic Americans.   After all, there was not one significant black figure in the Clinton administration, except on what you’d have to call the black reservations like Housing.  Yes, there was the supreme fixer outside the administration, probably because he couldn’t get confirmed for anything or no plausible appointment was high enough for him, Vernon Jordan. The Clintons did not offend Hispanic Americans, not at all.  For instance, they made Bill Richardson U.N. ambassador.

One of the largely unexamined frontiers in American politics is the one between African-Americans and Hispanic Americans, and it is at best a frosty frontier.  There are more voting Latinos than there are voting blacks in the electorate, and probably more in the larger states that are soon to have primaries.  Like New York and California on Super Tuesday.  Watch for malicious mischief. 

Sphere: Related Content

Barack Obama screwed up, Attack on Hillary Backfires

Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008

The post below is from a blogger Aidan Maconachy from back in June of last year. I remember reading about Obama’s connection with this Tony Rezko dude months ago. Now his attack on Mrs. Bill opened a door he should have avoided opening.
But forget about that, attacking the King and Queen of dirty politics is a HUGE mistake.
I’m certain they have a library of dirt on Obama and if he goes down that road they Mr and Mrs. Bill will slap him down like a runaway slave.


Barack Obama’s campaign recently accused Hillary Clinton of fund raising among Indian-Americans and investing with an Indian company. This of course also includes the suggestion that the senator is a supporter of outsourcing. India, in the eyes of some, has become almost like an off-shore service center. Many union members see this as selling out America and it is a hugely divisive issue.
There were two main problems with this tactic. Even if there is truth to the accusation, it plays to anti-Indian sentiment and there isn’t enough in the way of damning evidence to make it stick in a manner that will pay off for Obama.Another problem relates to perception. The view that the senator is a gung ho free trader goes back to the administration of Bill Clinton. The problem with that perception is that senator Clinton has put distance between herself and the former administration of her husband given that she is now a candidate in her own right.

rezko.jpgA statement released by the Obama campaign, appeared shortly after senator Clinton’s congressional financial disclosure forms went public. The statement accused the Clintons of accruing “significant financial rewards from their relationship with the Indian community.” It also included a reference to the senator as - “Sen.Clinton (D-Punjab)”.

This comes off as juvenile at best, racist at worst and in general not the type of petty attack you would expect from America’s self-proclaimed unifier.

I frankly doubt if Obama himself was in on this. It seems more like the work of over enthusiastic staffers looking to increase the profile of the campaign with a broadside intended to grab attention. As it turns out, it attracted the wrong type of attention.

The head of the US-India Political Action Committee, Sanjay Puri, relayed his displeasure and suggested the Obama campaign may be trafficking in “anti Indian-American stereotyping”. The protests hit home and Obama apologized to leaders of the Indian-American community.

Obviously in terms of demographics, the Indian-American community isn’t a major factor at the polls at this juncture in US history, but that is hardly the point. The fall-out from this gaff comes down to perceptions. Obama’s support has been slipping of late. He didn’t hit his stride in the TV debates and seemed nervous at times. He even admitted to having a case of the jitters. Incidents such as “D-Punjab” followed by yet another apology, risk making him appear unfocused and even weak. His claim to be about unity and a fresh vision is bound to suffer when attacks of this sort are judged to be petty and self-serving.

His stance as a campaign finance reform champion, has also been tarnished to some degree by his long standing connections with Tony Rezko, variously described as a “gangster” or “slum landlord” or even “regular Chicago-style business type guy” - depending on your point-of-view. Whether or not Rezko is more like a Donald Trump than a Tony Soprano is hard to say, but once again it comes down to perceptions.

Obama’s tendency to under-perform on the big stage along with recent gaffs makes you wonder if he is capable of landing a major punch under pressure that can hit the mark and score needed points.

Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake - November 5, 2006

Broken promises, broken homes


Two decades ago, Antoin “Tony” Rezko was running a food company that peddled hot dogs on Chicago’s beaches. Daniel S. Mahru supplied the ice.
These businessmen had a brainstorm for a new venture — rehabbing rundown buildings for poor black families.Rezko and Mahru had no construction experience. Yet City Hall gave their new company, Rezmar Corp., a $629,000 loan to help fix up an abandoned apartment building at 46th and Drexel.

They had applied for the loan just six days after Richard M. Daley won his first term as mayor in 1989, having campaigned on a promise to build more housing for the poor.

The rise and fall of Tony Rezko

Sphere: Related Content

New probe urged for Hillary crimes

Wednesday, January 2nd, 2008

From World Net Daily

The top donor to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s 2000 campaign has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission asking the agency to re-open an investigation into illegal contributions and to probe alleged continuing violations of the law by the Democratic presidential candidate.The complaint by business mogul Peter Franklin Paul also asserts the Clinton campaign’s 2005 conciliation agreement with the FEC – in which a finance aide was fined $35,000 – effectively let Clinton and other top aides off the hook.

Paul says that unless the FEC sets aside the agreement and rescinds immunity granted the senator, the agency itself will “have aided and abetted in the commission” of a felony.

As WND reported, Clinton is seeking dismissal from a $17 million fraud case filed by Paul in which her husband already is a defendant. Paul is appealing Sen. Clinton’s removal to the California Supreme Court, but whether or not she is a defendant, she will be required to testify as a material witness in a trial this year.

In May 2005, Sen. Clinton’s former finance director, David Rosen, was acquitted for filing false campaign reports that later were charged by the FEC to treasurer Andrew Grossman, who accepted responsibility in the conciliation agreement. Paul points out the Rosen trial established his contention that he personally gave more than $1.2 million to Clinton’s campaign for a lavish Hollywood fundraiser in August 2000 and that his contributions intentionally were hidden from the public and the FEC.

Read the rest here



Remember this is the kind of “experience” America is looking for…

Sphere: Related Content

Hillary’s A Porker

Monday, December 10th, 2007

hillarycash.gifFrom the Blog California Yankee

Hillary has earmarked more than $2.3 billion in federal appropriations for projects in her state:

Since taking office in 2001, Clinton has delivered $500 million worth of earmarks that have specifically benefitted 59 corporations. About 64% of those corporations provided funds to her campaigns through donations made by employees, executives, board members or lobbyists, a review by the Los Angeles Times shows.[. . .]

Clinton is not the biggest earmarker in Congress; senior congressional leaders and members of the appropriations committees can and do write many more such provisions into the huge spending bills they draft. But Clinton does significantly more earmarking than most others with her relatively low level of seniority.

Read the rest

Sphere: Related Content

Hillary backed lab of controversial donor

Tuesday, October 30th, 2007

hillafro1.jpg(link)

Lawmakers, including Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, have taken thousands in campaign cash from an embattled Nobel-prize winning scientist while earmarking federal money for his New York lab.Mrs. Clinton and Sen. Charles E. Schumer, also a New York Democrat, requested a $900,000 earmark in June for the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, where James D. Watson served as chancellor before resigning last week after apologizing for comments that suggested that people descending from Africa aren’t as intelligent as those from Europe.

Watson apologized “unreservedly,” saying, “This is not what I meant.”

Federal campaign filings show that Mr. Watson has donated more than $70,000 to candidates and their political causes, including a total of $3,000 to Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign on May 17 and June 25. Two days later, a Senate committee report showed that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Schumer earmarked $900,000 for the lab.

The majority of Mr. Watson’s donations over the years have gone to Sen. Tom Harkin, Iowa Democrat, who has received more than $30,000 from the scientist, records show. Mr. Harkin is chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on labor, health, human services and education.

Phillippe Reines, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, yesterday referred all questions about the earmark to Mr. Harkin’s office but added that there was no connection between political donations and the earmark.

“One thing had nothing to do with the other,” he said.

Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign has returned nearly $1.3 million to hundreds of donors since July 1, including more than $800,000 tied to disgraced one-time fugitive Norman Hsu. The total figure is more than triple the returned donations for the rest of the Democratic field combined.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Harkin yesterday said the earmark is not likely to move ahead, partly because of the furor over Mr. Watson.

Source:  Washington Times

Sphere: Related Content

Harry Reid, you just got punk’d!

Monday, October 22nd, 2007

pearly_gates_t051305.gifThis from Doug Powers on World Net Daily

If there was ever a real-life example of the difference between the conservative and liberal philosophies, especially as it concerns our politicians, we saw it last week when Rush Limbaugh auctioned off the letter Harry Reid sent to the chairman of Clear Channel, the company airing Limbaugh’s program.Below is part of what Reid said on the Senate floor after it was clear that his backdoor attempt to control somebody’s freedom of speech, and another’s freedom to do business, backfired like a Model-T puttering up Lombard Street:

When I spoke to Mark May, he and I thought this probably wouldn’t make much money – a letter, written by Democrat senators, complaining about something. This morning, the bid is more than two million for this. We’ve watched it during the week. It keeps going up, and up, and up. There’s only a little bit of time left on it, but it certainly is going to be more than two million. Never did we think that this letter would bring money of this nature. And for the cause, Madam President, it’s extremely good.
Now, everybody knows that Rush Limbaugh and I don’t agree on everything in life. Maybe that’s kind of an understatement.

But, without qualification, Mark May, the owner of the network that has Rush Limbaugh, their auction is going to be something that raises money for a worthwhile cause. I don’t know what we could do more important than helping to ensure that children of our fallen soldiers and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty have the opportunity for their children to have a good education.”

No doubt about it; Harry Reid is one of the most generous people in the country when it comes to donating somebody else’s philanthropy.

This is so typical of the kind of liberal psychosis with which Reid is stricken. A woman gives more than $2 million of her money to a charity. Limbaugh gives $2 million of his money to the charity. And a liberal politician who gave nothing jumps in to take credit. Just another day in Washington, D.C. What more could we possibly expect from a group of people who commission the construction of roads and buildings, with our money, and then have the audacity to name said roads and buildings after themselves?

Read full article here

Sphere: Related Content

Won’t you take me to Chinatown?

Friday, October 19th, 2007

moneymachine-md.jpgFrom Michelle Malkin

The Los Angeles Times digs into Hillary’s finances and uncovers more mysterious Chinatown donors with dilapidated addresses in NYC and jobs unlikely to put them in the position of maxing out campaign contributions. They include dishwashers, waiters, contributors who deny making contributions, and another who “admitted to lacking the legal-resident status required for giving campaign money.” And more:

Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton’s campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown……Of 74 residents of New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx or Brooklyn that The Times called or visited, only 24 could be reached for comment.

Will Hillary accuse the Times reporters of “stalking” now?

Read the rest here

Sphere: Related Content

Hillary and The Socialist Agenda

Monday, October 15th, 2007

hc2s2.JPGFrom the Hot Rodham Blog

A few facts…to spread around.

Hillary Clinton will raise taxes if she is elected president… Sharply! As her candidacy gains momentum and she closes in on the Democratic nomination, it would be well to review the record and underscore the tax increases she would be likely to enact.

As always, Hillary speaks in code. So here’s the code book. She says that she will “…let President Bush’s tax cuts for top earners expire.” Most people assume that this pledge means that she will raise the top bracket (for those earning more than $200,000 a year) on income taxes from the 35 percent to which Bush cut it, to the 39.6 percent to which her husband raised it in 1993. But, in reality, it means a whole lot more.

It also means increasing the tax on capital gains from the current 15 percent to at least 20 percent and probably to the 30 percent level backed by most liberals. Some even believe she may eliminate capital gains taxation entirely and tax it at the same rate as ordinary income.

She certainly would repeal Bush’s tax cut halving the tax rate on dividends and would raise it from its current 15 percent to 30 percent. She would also most likely end the planned elimination of the estate tax and probably reduce the size of estates subject to the tax.

rangel.jpgRobert Novak reports that Rangel’s staff is “hard at work on an audacious plan that over the next decade would redistribute up to a trillion dollars in American income through the tax system.” Rangel, himself, calls the new legislation “the mother of all tax reforms.”

Read the rest of this entry here

Also check out: The trillion dollar tax fight - Lisa Lerer - Politico.com

Sphere: Related Content

He’s back: Sandy Berger now advising Hillary Clinton

Monday, October 8th, 2007

sandy_burgler.jpgWASHINGTON - Sandy Berger, who stole highly classified terrorism documents from the National Archives, destroyed them and lied to investigators, is now an adviser to presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Berger, who was fired from John Kerry’s presidential campaign when the scandal broke in 2004, has assumed a similar role in Clinton’s campaign, even though his security clearance has been suspended until September 2008. This is raising eyebrows even among Clinton’s admirers. “It shows poor judgment and a lack of regard for Berger’s serious misdeeds,” said law professor Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University, who nonetheless called Clinton “by far the most impressive candidate in the Democratic field.”

Adler told The Examiner that it is “simply incomprehensible to me that a serious contender for the presidency would rely upon him as a key foreign policy advisor.”

He added: “If Senator Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee, at some point she will begin to receive national security briefings that will include sensitive information. At such a point, continuing to keep Berger on board as a key advisor, where he might have access to sensitive material, would be beyond incomprehensible.”

The Clinton campaign declined to comment.

No shit! Read the rest , but why bother, this bitch has some balls. She clearly does not give a fuck what you people think and she is basically saying, so he is a fucken crook what does that have to do with anointing me Supreme Ruler of the Unites States?

 Also check out:  Hillary’s ‘Low Profile’ National Security Adviser: Sandy Berger.

Sphere: Related Content

VISIT TO BIZARRO WORLD

Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007

Found on the blog Hang Right Politics

democrat6k.jpg

My spacecraft has crash landed on a unknown planet. It is called democrat world.There is the strange behavior on this planet, almost to disbelief. Consider:

1. The leader of this world is called Her Highness, CacklingHillary.

She came to power even though her lifemate, FingerBill, had destroyed their world past viability and a neighboring world, RepublicanWorld (A happy Prosperous World) had to come in and restore the planet.

2. This world just passed a law that would give all the lovely chilren healthcare based on taxing an item they are doing everything in their power to outlaw and force people to quit smoking it.

3. Even funnier is this new idea from CacklingHillary: Pay each family $5,000 to have a child, even though CacklinHillary and her drones (The dreaded Fems) are trying to get the child killed just before it is born by having a doctor stab the baby with a pair of scissors.

4. The planet is just a few days from destroying their bitter enemy, The Cackling Queda’s, but now have decided it is two much trouble to continue fighting ,because they are anti-war and would rather be poked in the eye by the Queda’s than to to honor their warriors, want to pull their troops back to their own quaint planet. You can hear the Cackling Queda’s laughter all the way from their planet to democratworld.

Read the rest here

Sphere: Related Content

“Political Parties: A Buyer’s Guide” by George Soros

Monday, October 1st, 2007

soros2.jpgMore George Soros education from the blog Texas Rainmaker

In 2003, George Soros declared that defeating President Bush is the central focus of his life.

Apparently his scorched earth approach also includes trying to tear down the basic pillars of our country.

He aggressively supported campaign finance reform under the guise of “reduc[ing] the corrupting influence of very large donors to political parties and candidates.” Then he drove a mack truck through the loopholes in that legislation and became one of the single, largest donors to political parties and candidates.

He uses his “Open Society Institute” to funnel cash from those “very large donors” (including himself) to groups designed to undermine the U.S. government…

Partnering with the Tides Foundation in 2004, Soros’ organization helped the Kerry campaign funnel money into a group of 9/11 widows who were campaigning against Bush.

He gave millions to Americans Coming Together, a group focused on committing election fraud.

He’s also thrown millions of dollars behind Moveon.org, a group focused on perpetuating lies about President Bush in the 2004 election and more recently publishing a full page ad in the New York Times calling a United States Military General a liar.

So what did Soros do when all the money he spent to undermine the elections went to waste? He started a new back channel of contributions designed at undermining the current U.S. administration.

And it’s hardly been the model of openness he and his organization claim to achieve.

Read the rest here

Sphere: Related Content

Caught on tape: Watch John Murtha cut and run

Tuesday, September 18th, 2007

From Michelle Malkin

The troop-smearer can’t hide from Jason Mattera of Young America’s Foundation, teaming up with Hot Air TV, who asks the Democrat congressman whether he will apologize to the exonerated Haditha Marines:

Flashback: Investigating officer recommends dropping murder case against Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum

Flashback: Hello, Jack Murtha, are you there?

Flashback: Charges against Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt dropped

Flashback: Marine’s parents want Murtha censured

Sphere: Related Content

Hsu Paid For Hillary Staff’s Las Vegas Vacation

Monday, September 17th, 2007

Found on the blog Sweetness & Light, LA Times Story

vegas2.jpgLast year, to celebrate New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s reelection victory, Norman Hsu capped an amazingly successful year as a Democratic fundraiser by treating members of her campaign staff to several days at the glitzy Mandalay Bay hotel and casino in Las Vegas, complete with free show tickets and dinners at posh restaurants.

Among Hsu’s guests was Patti Solis Doyle, who now heads Clinton’s presidential campaign and has long been one of Clinton’s most trusted advisors

Clinton’s campaign spokesman, Howard Wolfson, emphasized that Hsu never asked for any legislative favors from the senator in return…

By living on a lavish scale, he convinced associates that he was backed by great personal wealth. He also made a point of doing favors. He would provide hard-to-get dinner reservations at exclusive restaurants, or bestow elegant gifts on associates.

Clinton confidant Solis Doyle got a coveted, and pricey, designer handbag — a gift that made her so uncomfortable she returned it

And yet Ms. Doyle had no qualms about accepting a far more expensive all expenses trip to Las Vegas.

The Clintonistas are all alike.

Folks all day have been commenting and blogging on Mrs. Bill’s billion dollar health care extravaganza. Anyone willing to look past her bullshit rhetoric whether it’s health care or some other entitlement program simply needs to refer back to these stories of her fundraising corruption.

This woman is about people living high of the hog in her presence whether it’s Vegas vacations, cushy jobs or cold hard cash.
Her power comes from her ability to deliver the goods to people who have her back via cash providers like Hsu.

However for the rest of us, she will attempt to deliver health care to the masses.
From more food stamps to government gas, she can’t give y’all cool vacations but dammit she can GIVE you free healthcare!

Just watch as she will promise more and more shit to the masses. This crazy bitch wants the presidency badly and she will do damm near anything and give away YOUR money to achieve that.

Sphere: Related Content

Child’s Play In Iraq

Thursday, September 13th, 2007

By Michael J. O’Shea - The American Thinker
 

childsplay.jpgI am reminded of the time I saw my 3-year-old daughter trying and failing to tie her shoes. She got angry. Still, she kept trying.

“‘This is difficult,’ she concluded. ‘But I like difficult.’”

A child grittier than Congressional leaders, spunkier than people twenty times her age.

She’s Bill Gates’ daughter, but that’s immaterial. Her mother Melinda wrote those words, but that’s immaterial, too. What matters is what Melinda Gates also said to other philanthropists about starting the Gates Foundation.

“It turns out that her parents like difficult, too. And I suspect that you all like difficult, which is why you’ve devoted your lives to solving some of the world’s toughest problems.”
That’s what Congressmen are elected to do: solve some of America’s — and therefore the world’s — toughest problems. But Congressmen prefer childish ways instead and so play: play statesmen, play leader.

Listening to leaders in Congress one would imagine that, like a child, they still believe in the stork: Iraq, which they voted to liberate from Saddam’s rule, would go from tyranny to ally against terrorism in four-tenths of a decade.

Which it might well have, had Iran, Syria, Al Qaeda not intervened. Iran, Syria, Al Qaeda — threats all, threats each to peace in the Middle East and the world long before Operation Iraqi Freedom — rushing to Iraq to cripple Iraq; and Congressional leaders now say, “Have at it.”

We attacked Iraq when it invaded Kuwait and the world applauded: we defend Iraq from foreigners invading it and the world, Senate and House leaders included, spits in our face.

But much of that world at least is not two-faced; it didn’t back regime change in Iraq as American policy under George W’s predecessor, authorize action under W himself, approve hundreds of billions to oust Saddam and start rebuilding his country, approve every general charged with directing the Iraqi campaign, hear testimony under oath from those generals themselves on Iraq’s problems and progress — and then, bludgeoned with blogs, bail.

In starting philanthropy, Melinda Gates wrote:

“We knew what we stood for.”
Other than re-election, what do Congressional leaders stand for? As important: What can they withstand?

Mr. and Mrs. Gates believe

“Ultimately, all people, no matter where they live, deserve a chance to live a healthy, productive life.”
Congressional leaders would amend that to exclude Iraqis to whom we’ve given our word.

Leaders frequently tout their business backgrounds as signs they’re savvy, then display astounding ignorance of the struggles all businesses — including Microsoft — meet just to keep getting ahead. As if iPods wondrously appeared with nary a Newton among its ancestors, IBM never stumbled, Mercedes never goofed, Kodak never almost croaked, Xerox has the entire globe copying only it, the Big Three are still big and still three, AT&T didn’t have to be disemboweled to be reborn.

Sports isn’t without scars either. Becoming a champ is nowhere near as hard as staying a champ, as Packers and Forty-Niners and Jets and Cowboys painfully know — and, unlike Iraq, they have game films and scouting reports and player profiles and rules everyone obeys or they’re out. Terrorists don’t play fair; neither do Congressional leaders who, when it comes to Iraq, could teach jihadists tricks on sighing to the heavens while slitting throats.

Male leaders must have missed labor room or passed out; females leaders must have hired surrogate moms: none seems to recall that birth is painful and child-raising is not non-stop glee.

Despite billions in the bank and fame Congressional leaders can only envy and do, Bill and Melinda Gates met hard knocks:

“Our foundation works hard to think through problems carefully, but it’s simply impossible to get our strategies exactly right in the beginning.”
Robert Gates would say the same, and he’s not even kin. Don Rumsfeld would, too, and did, withdrawing American troops when he thought Iraqis were ready to handle more on their own and finding they were not. Yet.

Any leader who’s actually led and not just sweet-talked knows what “sweat equity” means: life is tough, business is tough, football is tough, and they all have regulations: terrorists have none.

The military is adamant on lessons learned: and it learns. Name one lesson Congressional leaders have learned other than to emote before CSPAN cameras.

Which Congressional leader could be this blunt?

“The list of lessons Bill and I have learned since we started is just about as long as the list of mistakes we’ve made. And we’re still making mistakes and learning lessons every day.”
Who in Congress would dare be this frank?

“Seeing where we missed something can be humbling, but it helps us understand how we can be more innovative the next time. We try to bring that spirit of learning and changing to all our work.”
Look at Congressional leaders one by one: who among them has convictions as deep as Bin Laden’s? Who among them, like Bin Laden, is unwavering no matter what?

Jihadists and US troops have one thing in common and one thing alone: they’re willing to sacrifice themselves for something greater than themselves. And Congressional leaders?

Bin Laden sacrifices everything he has — wealth, health — for his beliefs. Belief: that’s Bin Laden’s power. You can see it in his eyes. And Congressional leaders? Beliefs that deep? Eyes that steady, firm?

How many thousand Iraqis will join Al Qaeda when Al Qaeda in Iraq rules over Iraq?

Any Congressional leader who can’t see that Iraqis are dying to live free, that Iraqi security forces are killed serving their country, that Iraq’s politicians need help and American politicians could give it, that the world has looked to America because America has honored its word and stood by its allies no matter what, has a jihad of his own.

And there’ll be no virgins stroking when all’s said and done.

Sphere: Related Content

Hsu captured in Colorado; Update: Hsu fell ill on Amtrak

Friday, September 7th, 2007

.whereis.jpg

The Grand Junction Sentinel reports that Hsu was captured after getting sick on an Amtrak train: “Disgraced Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu was arrested in Grand Junction tonight, after he failed to show up for a court appearance in California related to a felony theft conviction. FBI agents took Hsu into custody around 7 p.m. at St. Mary’s Hospital FBI, spokesman Joseph Schadler said in a statement. Hsu was traveling on an Amtrak train when he became ill. Grand Junction paramedics were summoned to the Amtrak station near downtown about 11 a.m. Thursday to treat a patient, Battalion Chief Robert Ferguson said. The patient, whom Ferguson said he found out eight hours later was a fugitive, was not in great pain, Ferguson said.

Much more on Michelle Malkin

Sphere: Related Content

New Orleans Mayor May Run for Governor

Thursday, September 6th, 2007

.nagin2c.jpg

NEW ORLEANS (AP - Link) — Mayor Ray Nagin could be days away from announcing he will run for governor of Louisiana — a move many in this stricken city regard as preposterous.If Nagin runs, he will do so on his stewardship of New Orleans. But this is a city in great distress two years after Hurricane Katrina, with large swaths still empty, an appalling murder rate and a painfully sluggish recovery. Nagin’s disapproval rating stood at 65 percent in a recent poll.

***** 

I saw this in a news headline and I thought it was a fucken joke.

This has got to be the most unbelievable crazy shit I have seen in politics, if it happens.
I swear to God this can’t be real, this idiot ass nigga fuck can’t possible be contemplating taking on a governorship when he can’t even get his head out of his ass on the situation in NOLA.

The sad thing is, if he runs, he will actually be competitive, a whole bunch of retarded ass Negros would actually vote for this fool, not to mention that Louisiana is corrupt enough politically that this is a possibility.

I’m just speechless, what the fuck can you say about this, either dude has been smoking too much crack or he is mildly retarded and he is clueless as to the situation in NOLA.

Sphere: Related Content

“Hsu, fly, don’t bother me” - LOL!

Thursday, September 6th, 2007

Some of the leading Dems who’ve taken fugitive-former fugitive-fugitive Norman Hsu’s money can’t decide what to do. Looks like Pennsylvania’s Democrat governor Ed Rendell may need some public feedback to help him make up his mind:

hsu.JPGDisgraced Democratic fund-raiser Norman Hsu, who was wanted by California authorities for the last 15 years, is once again on the lam, putting Gov. Rendell, a staunch supporter, in an increasingly awkward political corner.And for now, Rendell isn’t saying whether he will reverse his decision and return nearly $38,000 in contributions from Hsu or continue to stand by the man he recently called “one of the best 10 people I’ve met.”

 More at Michelle Malkin

I found the following links on a blog called bluecrabboulevard. He points out as have a number of other right leaning blogs that the left side of the blog world is dead silent on this issue. The MSM has only been begrudgingly mentioned it. On Tuesday I watched MSNBC damm near all day and except for Pat Buchannan mentioning it briefly on a segment with Andrea Mitchell the media is avoiding this like the plague.

 ”it’s an all-right extravaganza! Amazing, isn’t it? Not one left-leaning blog has commented on this - at least none are showing on MemeorandumMichelle Malkin, Hot Air, Wizbang, Right Wing Nut House, The American Pundit, Suitably Flip,  Riehl World View, Wake up America, Don Surber, Jammie Wearing Fool, A Blog For All, Liberty Pundit, Fausta, Captain’s Quarters, Gateway Pundit, Sister Toldjah, Pajamas Media, Detroit Populist Times, TigerHawk, Betsy Newmark, NewsBusters, In From the Cold, The Belmont Club, Badger Blog Alliance, MVDG, The Oxford Medievalist, John Lott, The Influence Peddler

Sphere: Related Content