Me Thinks that Al Gore and the U.N. Protest for Global Warming to Much!

Lord Christopher Monckton and Albert A. Gore

He’s probably still in his white tie and tails, you’ve got to savor every moment of your Nobel Peace prize experience you know.

I’m still trying to figure out the connect between peace prize and global warming I guess after all of the draconian carbon emission regulations that the United Nations is planning to put in place and after all carbon emitting life forms are put to death on earth there will be peace on earth and good will toward the non emitting carbon objects that are left.

You suppose that was what the Oslo committee meant when they gave Al Gore and the IPCC of the United Nations the Nobel Peace Prize?

The U.N. is meeting in Bali this week in a two fold effort to drum up support for or to shame countries into supporting the Kyoto 2 agreement because Kyoto one is about to expire. An agreement that will have the affect of transferring the wealth of developed nations to the poorer third world nations in a convenient tax all disguised as concern for an environmentally safe planet.

The voluminous evidence now strongly suggests that unless we act boldly and quickly to deal with the underlying causes of global warming, our world will undergo a string of terrible catastrophes, including more and stronger storms like Hurricane Katrina, in both the Atlantic and the Pacific.—Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth

Has it come to anyone attention that we have gone through two hurricane seasons since Al Gore made the ominous and dire predictions that a string of terrible catastrophes, and more, stronger storms than Hurricane Katrina, would manifest in both the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans?

Oh it’s not hard to track Al Gore’s exaggeration footprint about Global warming. Gore alone has emitted so much inaccurate information and fearmongering regarding Global warming that he ought to be checked for whatever steroids gives one the super human ability to create false scenarios and mislead the world about Global warming.

After Gore tests positive for this rhetoric enhancement steroid (he’s got to be on something to say what he does) he should be stripped of his Nobel peace prize and written out of the Oslo records or maybe even do some prison time for giving false testimony before the world about Global warming.

Now, the scientific community is warning us that the average hurricane will continue to get stronger because of global warming. A scientist at MIT has published a study well before this tragedy [Hurricane Katrina] showing that since the 1970s, hurricanes in both the Atlantic and the Pacific have increased in duration, and in intensity, by about 50 %.

The newscasters told us after Hurricane Katrina went over the southern tip of Florida that there was a particular danger for the Gulf Coast of the hurricanes becoming much stronger because it was passing over unusually warm waters in the gulf. The waters in the gulf have been unusually warm. The oceans generally have been getting warmer. And the pattern is exactly consistent with what scientists have predicted for twenty years. – Al Gore, speech at the Sierra Summit, September 9, 2005

Lord Christopher Monckton is a UK climate researcher, Albert A. Gore is a…a, truth is I don’t know what Al Gore is but on the subject of Global warming who are you going to believe?

Monckton told the United Nations group that has gathered in Bali Indonesia that "Climate change is a non-problem. The right answer to a non problem is to have the courage to do nothing," Monckton told participants.

"The UN conference is a complete waste of our time and your money and we should no longer pay the slightest attention to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,)" Monckton added.

Not only that, the latest reports show that Climate warming is naturally caused and there is no human influence or cause. And get this CO2 is not a polluent!

Now think about it. Has the United Nations or Al Gore ever done anything right? Well there you go, we would be foolish to sign a Kyoto 2 agreement (Kyoto expires in 2012) which is a ruse hidden in false concern for the planet.

Global warming is but an environmental oil-for-food scandal meant to enrich the United Nations and those who assist them in this latest attempt to monetary shakedown the United States. They intend to levy a world carbon tax which will be used to fund another needless world bureaucracy and enrich Al Gore and his Halliburton like carbon credit business partners.

I don’t know how many ways or how many times we have to sound the warning Global warming is a scam and you’re the sucker if you allow the U.N. or Al Gore to convince you to submit to taxation to save the planet.

The American people ought to know by now that no matter how much money bureaucrats take from them it will never be enough, it will enrich only a small group of individuals and you will never get the promises that they take your money for.

Hillary Clinton always wanted to be a Kindergarten Cop

Move over Arnold, Hillary’s wearing the badge now and she’s busting those naughty little ambitious Kindergarten dreamers according to Stuart Taylor Jr.’s “Honesty: Hillary's Glass House.”

Yeah it seems that Hillary busted Barack Obama for having the dream in Kindergarten of one day becoming the President of the United States. Bad, bad Obama!

He probably didn’t know that those Clintonistas would go rummaging through his kindergarten dreams and papers to discover all of his deep dark secrets. And of course Obama didn’t know that they’d find his Kindergarten teacher to testify against him but they did!

And apparently it’s true while all the other kids were playing and finger painting Barack Obama was sitting over in a corner plotting and planning to one day become the leader of the free world!

Yes that’s right America the dirt that the Clinton campaign is dishing is that Obama’s been planning running for office since kindergarten, I can see him now organizing on the playground and giving mock campaign speeches from the wooden railing of the sandbox.

I guess Hillary has Obama dead to rights Sen. Obama made the statement that he had not been planning to run for President like some people (an obvious reference to Sen. Clinton) but oh contraire Senator Obama, Senator Clinton’s crackerjack team of mudslingers (investigators) have your kindergarten teacher saying that you laid out the plans to become the chief executive of this country when you were but six years old!

They’ve even got your detailed strategy written down in an essay entitled “I want to become President” by Barack Obama.

In kindergarten, Senator Obama wrote an essay titled 'I Want to Become President.' "Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." [AP, 1/25/07 ]

So the Clintonistas’ point is, you lied Senator Obama, when you said you haven’t been planning to become President therefore you’re in no position to judge anyone who has been planning on running for the presidency (like Hillary) if you yourself have been planning to do so.

But wait a minute if the Clintonistas are going to use that kind of logic then they have no business judging someone who lied because Hillary has been lying at least since she was in kindergarten. Or so it seems!

But let’s just deal with some well document lies that we can prove. According to Stuart Taylor Jr. of the National Journal there are a number of Hillary Clinton lies that would disqualify her from ever calling someone else a liar. (If we apply the same logic that Sen. Clinton is attempt to use against Sen. Obama)

Hillary lied about Gennifer and Monica, she lied about travelgate, she lied about the $100,000 windfall profit she made on insider trading on cattle futures, she lied about removing the files from the dead Vicent Foster’s office, she lied about whitewater which resulted in columnist William Safire to write on January 8, 1996, that "our first lady ... is a congenital liar." And she lied about the existence of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

Yeah Sen. Obama may have wanted to become President since he was in kindergarten, but I’m pretty sure that what Sen. Clinton wanted to become is a liar for at least that long!

And her second choice must have been becoming a Kindergarten Cop!

Natural Heir to the Presidency, is that even Constitutional?

The Regal Mrs. Clinton
Albert Hunt of Bloomberg.com reports that even the best laid plans can go awfully wrong. Senator Hillary Clinton was supposed to be the undisputed Democrat frontrunner at this point in the campaign for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States but a few things have gone wrong on Senator Clinton’s way to the coronation ceremony in 2009.

The Clinton organization had a clear plan A: It envisioned the candidate[Hillary Clinton], as the choice of the party establishment and natural heir to the presidency, to so dominate 2007 that she would be able to corner, not have to capture, the nomination. It worked perfectly for most of the year.--Albert R. Hunt

Apparently there are concerns about Senator Clinton, 60, D-New York. The concerns are that she is devious, calculating and a divisive figure in American politics.

These concerns are coming from Democrats and are the results of polls and focus groups that are favorable to Sen. Clinton and that are moderated by Democratic pollster Peter Hart. Despite the fact that, Democrats are become more willing to raise questions concerning Senator Clinton’s character yet most of them felt inextricably tied to the Clinton plan to coronate Hillary to complete the Clinton dynasty and vote for a candidate just because that candidate is a woman.

There has been a phenomenal amount of effort by the Clinton campaign to present Hillary Clinton as the inevitable legatee of the Democratic nomination to be President. As well as that Senator Clinton, her husband the former President, Bill Clinton and her campaign have all played the sexism card though out this campaign hoping to gain some sort of advantage playing on fact that Senator Clinton is a woman.

There are a significant amount of women who say that they will vote for Senator Clinton for no other reason than the fact they want to see a woman president.

Clinton was clearly a hit among Drnach's mainly young, single, professional and white guests. "It's mostly the gender," admitted one of them, Jill Cartwright, a law student. "Just as a woman, I feel that a woman can represent my interests better - no matter how liberal or progressive a man is."—Guardian Unlimited

Which is exactly the kind of reverse sexism and gender identification that the Clinton campaign is depending upon to ensure the inevitability of their candidate.

“Natural heir”, “mostly the gender,” who needs military experience or the experience of governing a city or a state? Or the experience of running a business, meeting a payroll or any of the qualifications that one would normally associate with selecting someone to be the most powerful executive politician in the free world.

No other experience is needed other than the fact that Hillary Clinton was married to a President and that Hillary Clinton is a woman. Contrary to Bill Clinton’s claims that his wife’s experience is not fairly covered in the media, apparently dynasty and the novelty of being the first are the only two factors needed that make one eminently qualified to be President of the United States of America in the 21st Century. Besides the fact constitutionally you must be born a United States citizen and at least 35 years of age of course!

I’m thinking after Hillary let’s just keep the dynasty alive Laura Bush in 2012!

Waterboarding and Liberal Hypocricy

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi


Is “waterboarding” torture? Oh in 2002 it wasn’t! As reported by Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen of the Washington Post. Just ask Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi who was given a virtual tour in 2002 of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk, waterboarding included.

Did Pelosi or other Democrats decry the techniques as violating the Geneva Convention or as inhumanity cruel then? No. Why? It wasn’t politically expedient to do so then and Liberals do nothing unless it is politically expedient!

In fact no objections were raised by the bipartisan panel that was briefed on interrogation techniques used by the CIA. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder according to Warrick and Eggen, "The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough," said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.

Liberals and Democrats now seize on waterboarding as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Bush administration's counterterrorism effort. Why? Political expediency.

Before waterboarding became the evil with which to beat Republicans over the head with, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 (count them)that’s 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.

Any queasy stomachs then? Only one, other than that no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter.

The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

"In fairness, the environment was different then because we were closer to Sept. 11 and people were still in a panic," said one U.S. official present during the early briefings. "But there was no objecting, no hand-wringing. The attitude was, 'We don't care what you do to those guys as long as you get the information you need to protect the American people.' "-- Warrick and Eggen, Washington Post

It’s like the 2004 Presidential election when a President with military experience was of the utmost importance. Democrats nominated as Senator John Kerry as their Presidential hopeful based on his Vietnam War experience against incumbent George Bush who flew fighter Jets for the National Guard.

This year because none of the leading candidates have any war experience to speak of, its funny how experience in the armed services is not a factor any more. One would think it would be because we are still in the midst of a war that was declared against the United States in 1998. If it were still a factor Republicans Duncan Hunter or John McCain would be the only candidates qualified to be President. So conveniently there is absolutely no talk, none whatsoever, about military experience of the Presidential candidates this year! What a difference a political term makes.

So in 2002 waterboarding good. Now that waterboarding can be used as a political tool against the Republicans, waterboarding is evil! Likewise in 2004 military experience was important now that the leading Liberal Presidential candidates don’t have any military experience, military experience is of no importance. Liberals are sooooo pathetically hypocritical.

Warrick and Eggen reports that, ‘Only after information about the practice began to leak in news accounts in 2005 -- by which time the CIA had already abandoned waterboarding -- did doubts about its legality among individual lawmakers evolve into more widespread dissent. The opposition reached a boiling point this past October, when Democratic lawmakers condemned the practice during Michael B. Mukasey's confirmation hearings for attorney general.’ Opportunistically the subject would be used as a political tool from this point on.

Democrats have been doing this type of convenient political opportunism and distancing themselves from policies that they knew of, where involved in and had full knowledge for years hoping that the American people would not blame them for Democrat complicity in the whole political process. Most recently you may remember Senator Dick Durbin’s claim that as one of the Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee he knew that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction and he knew that the American people were being lied to. (see it for yourself)



Sen. Durbin’s wild claim that he knew that the American people were being lied to because he sat on the senate intelligence committee doesn’t add up.

Why? Durbin the Illinois Democrat claimed that he knew that the American public was being misled into the Iraq war but remained silent because he was sworn to secrecy as a member of the intelligence committee. Durbin was not the only Democrat on that committee.

Let’s do the math there were 9 Democrats and 8 Republicans on that committee. If all nine Democrats on the Intelligence committee felt as Sen. Durbin then 9 Democrats to 8 Republicans stops the recommendation from going to the full Senate to be voted on. The resolution to go to war with Iraq is stopped in committee never to have reached the senate floor.

Now do the math, only four Democrats Durbin and three others voted against the recommendation based on the same evidence that Senator Durbin saw and 5 Democrats along with the 8 Republicans voted for it.

Sorry Senator Durbin your opinion wasn’t even held by the majority of Democrats who were the majority on the Intelligence committee! Had it been, had a majority of Senators felt that the American people were being lied to Sen. Durbin, Democrats could have done like you and voted against sending the resolution to the full Congress.

And subsequently Congress would not have given the President authority to go to war with Iraq. But once again Democrats use convenient political opportunism to try distance themselves from the decision to go to war. How pathetic!

Conversely, what Senator Durbin statement does is unwillingly support the Bush administration’s assertion that the Senate had the same information regarding the war as the administration did with which to base their decisions.

Mr. Durbin, lied when he said that half the Democrats on the intelligence committee voted against the war over concerns of the White House's case for war. In addition what Mr. Durbin doesn’t tell you is that there were nine Democrats on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and five of them voted for the measure as did all eight Republicans to send recommendation to the entire body to vote for use of armed force against Iraq, Liberal deception and hypocrisy as usual once again.

If as Senator Durbin contends, the White House’s case for war was not good then why did five Democrats vote to recommend to the Senate for war?

Think about it, if nine Democrats vote as Durbin did they out number eight Republicans and the authority for war in Iraq never gets out of committee. The fact is Democrats had the power to prevent this war all along from the very beginning.

So whether its waterboarding as torture, WMD or any subject Democrats depend on the public’s ignorance of the facts to dupe the unsuspecting into believing that they are better than Republicans who would stoop so low as to torture or go to war under false pretenses.

The truth of the matter is Liberal Democrats are equally as responsible for all of the so called atrocities that they blame their Republican counterparts for. The difference between the two is that Democrats believe that the American people are fools.

Why else would you lie and attempt to deceive the American people in everything from the 2000 elections were stolen to “Bush lied us into war.”

Why else would you fraudulently campaign, planting questions and the like, base your entire campaign strategy to defeat Republicans on deceiving the American people about everything if your whole Party weren’t corrupt hypocrites?

You wouldn’t but Liberal Democrats are.

Is There a Choice?

For those of us concerned with the illegal immigration
issue, Numbers USA has made it easier to understand.
They have compiled a graphic list of ALL candidates,
both Democratic and Republican, and their present stand
and record on immigration in general.

This is truly worth a visit............ if for no other reason
than curiosity. And an absolute MUST, if you plan on
voting come November '08.

http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez2008.html

brooklyn

No Religious Test a Conservative Values Test

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney



The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.—Article XI section 3 U.S. Constitution

I only have one question for Mitt Romney or any of the Conservative candidates and it has nothing to do with religion.

Will the Conservative nominee fight for and protect Conservative values against the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean? The just mentioned are Liberals who fight for Liberal Democrat values and have sworn to destroy Conservative values.

That’s all that really matters.

Former Governor Romney obviously felt compelled by his recent poll standings to address questions about his Mormon religion though he did not speak about the Mormon faith in great detail he did offer what I believe to be some understanding about what is happening to America. Romney offered this quote from President and founding father John Adams:

In John Adams' words: 'We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.'
Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone. – Mitt Romney

Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people. Though the American government was purposely designed to be a secular government, a government based on law, it was equally and purposely designed to be an instrument in the hands of moral and religious people. I’ll have plenty to say about this in upcoming weeks.

The next important thing that our constitution was made for was to prevent any and all forms of tyranny as the founders saw tyranny in their day and in the past they wanted to prevent any tyrannous entity from taking control in America.

Obviously there are those who wish to make this a test about Mitt Romney’s religious beliefs and confessions. I will say this. Any man or woman who would curse his or her mother is not fit to live.

Likewise, if the Constitution is the father of this country’s government, religion is its mother. Those who have contemptuously mocked, spit at and derided the value of religion, and its significance, to this country you are not fit to live here.
Something else Romney points out, in his words, that Radical violent Islam seeks to destroy us. An emerging China endeavors to surpass our economic leadership. And we are troubled at home by government overspending, overuse of foreign oil, and the breakdown of the family.

Governor Romney these are merely symptoms of a much larger and insidious problem in America that problem is corporate power. Every problem that America has can be traced back to the tyranny of corporate power. Corporate power as I use it here is the tyrannous power that Corporations weld over every facet of American life, no… over lives on the entire planet.

If you or any of your rivals were to say that you understand the grave dangers that face this country and the world and would do nothing about the corporate menace that has created radical Islam, how has corporations created radical Islam you ask? By injecting billions of oil dollars into the middle east making adherents of that faith so unimaginably wealthy that they can fund jihad against the rest of the world.

Whereas before oil revenues they are running around in the desert shouting, “Allah akbar” only fighting one another, I would say that you and the rest of the Presidential candidates offer nothing that will save America from the imminent danger in which we find ourselves if you don’t speak to how you would reign in corporate power.

The only test that is constitutional and the only test that I am interested in Mr. Romney is whether or not you are righteously fearless enough to take on the real enemies of freedom and democracy, unrestrained and unbridled corporate power.

If you or the other Presidential candidates fail this one challenge then it really doesn’t matter what religion you are because…

We haven’t got a prayer!

Stop corporate tyranny now!

Is this Intelligence?

Former CIA Director George Tenet

"This was a final shot to those who, in the past several years, spread a sense of threat and concern in the world through lies of nuclear weapons,"— President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

You’ve probably heard that a U.S. intelligence report released Monday concluded that Iran had stopped its weapons program in late 2003 and shown no signs since of resuming it, representing a sharp turnaround from a previous intelligence assessment in 2005.

Well nothing could make the enemies of the United States happier except of course if a Democrat were to be elected into the Whitehouse. The enemies of America have been openly supporting and campaigning for a Democrat candidate since 2000 but that’s another story.

The story here is one of “Wagging the Dog.” You see there are those in government specifically the state department and mainstream media who have accused President Bush of planning to go to war with Iran. You know, they believe that the Bush administration is setting the stage for such a confrontation. Here, and here.

Which is really stupid when you think about it because President Bush knows that the biggest enemies that he and America faces are those enemies in his own government, it took him eight years to figure it out but all the leaks and undermining of his policies clearly indicate that there is a very strong anti-Conservative strain in the high echelons of government that Mr. Bush failed to rid himself of early on in his Presidency. Bush could have avoided a lot of destruction to his government by cleaning house of all Clinton loyalists.

It was a like contingency of pro-Clinton anti-Bush forces that released this report as a pre-emptive strike against the President, virtually cutting him off at the knees, attempting to insure that he would not be able to go war with Iran even if it were necessary for America to do so. Now why would I make such a claim?

You remember that about two weeks ago in the news some in the state department were assigned duty in Iraq which drew vehement protest from those assigned.

"It's one thing if someone believes in what's going on over there and volunteers, but it's another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment, and I'm sorry but basically that's a potential death sentence,"—Jack Croddy, a senior Foreign Service officer

There are anti-war, anti-conservative, anti-Bush forces in the State Department that are not supportive and don’t believe in what’s going on “over there” in Iraq and they have been leaking crucial information attempting to punish President Bush and defeat his effort to win in Iraq. In fact they have done everything in their power to impede or destroy America’s ability to defend itself.
Starting in 2002 CIA director George Tenet told the President that it was a slam dunk that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction a comment that launched a war. Later Tenet threw this statement into controversy by denying that he said it when that wasn’t believed he then claimed that his comments were taken out of context.

Unfortunately George Bush trusted Tenet because he was there from terrorisms beginning. Tenet was CIA Director for Bill Clinton as well as a member of the Clinton’s advisory team concerning terrorist Obama bin Laden. Consequently they did nothing to prevent terrorism.

Presently, in 2005 the NIE said that, “Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons" and do so "despite its international obligations and international pressure." This was a "high confidence" judgment meaning that the National Intelligence Estimate a comglomarate of all United States .

As recently as 2005, the consensus estimate of our spooks was that "Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons" and do so "despite its international obligations and international pressure." This was a "high confidence" judgment.— Opinion Journal

What this current report is intended of doing is to prevent the President from attacking Iran. This is State Department bureaucrats attempting to run the country from the comfort of their cubicles.

The NIE is not dependable intelligence reporting and remember these are the same people who originally said that Iran was gearing up for nuclear weaponry.
Either they were wrong when they said Iran was preparing nukes in 2005 or they are wrong now! Either way they are not to be trusted and this report should be held in suspicion.

The final proof of that is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad trusts this report. Since when is an intelligence report published in such a way to cripple the U.S.’s ability to protect itself and at the same time give credence to it’s enemies?
That’s exactly how this report was released, this is a bureaucratic attempting to reign in an American President from the delusional misgivings that those in the State Department imagine about him. The State Department has once again put America at risk.

The next Republican President is going to have some excessive cleansing out of moles and disinfectant midlevel bureaucrats in order to gain control of this government.
President Bush did not do that. That was the number one failing of the Bush administration and it cost him dearly!

Darfur is Waiting

It has been the rallying cry for the Liberal Left for years, “Save Darfur” but what has the Left actually done about Darfur ?

2.5 million refugees, 61 percent said they had seen a family member killed before their eyes in violence blamed on Sudanese forces and government-backed Arab militias accused of a scorched-earth campaign against African villagers.

As many as 200,000 to 400,000 innocent people have been killed and more than 2.5 million more have been driven from their homes. These refugees now face starvation, disease, and rape, while those who remain in Darfur risk torture, death, and displacement.

What has the United Nations done to stop the violence? What have the high profile Movie stars and peace activist done to stop the killing?

Let Darfur be a warning to all people. If a nation or a state needs protection against violence, murder, genocide or injustice do not wait on Liberals or their institutions to do anything to fight against the persecutors. Liberals will make a country like Darfur a cause celebre but they will not wage war to save you. They will not lift a actual finger to help.

PLATITUDES AND BUTTONS

Most liberals perform their fighting virtually by lawsuits or by legislating their wishes on the rest of us. Sadly, opposition against America’s effort to protect itself against terrorism combined with the lack of absolutely any physical effort to save the people of Darfur from years of war, torture, displacement and death is evidence that liberals will rarely do anything but issue platitudes and wear buttons to protest the injustices of the world.

Let someone actually do something and that person becomes a warmonger, do something and one is accused of, “Lying us into war” or some such excuse employed to stop any real effort to stop injustices in the world.

If the victims of the world wait on help from Liberals they will get meetings, resolutions and world condemnation directed against their slaughterers but no real help for countries like Darfur.

Liberals are better apt at resisting real attempts to help. They resisting the war effort in Iraq even with the knowledge that a victory there means freedom and safety for hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people who have been suffering the rule of a cruel sadistic dictator. Liberals talk the talk but rarely walk the walk when it comes to protecting victims of warring aggressor nations.

Darfur is waiting like the people of Iraq, the victims of al Qaeda and the fatalities of Osama bin Laden under President Bill Clinton were left waiting for someone to do something, anything as outlined in chapter 4 of the 9-11 commission report.

Under President Clinton according to the 9-11 report his administration planned to capture Osama bin Laden in 1998 but as Liberals often do they waited and then cancelled the effort because doing something meant consequences.

Ultimately that decision give way to September 11, 2001 and Clinton advisor Richard Clarke’s subsequent testimony before the 9-11 commission which he said that he and the government failed the American people.

On May 20,[1998] Director Tenet discussed the high risk of the operation with Berger and his deputies, warning that people might be killed, including Bin Laden. Success was to be defined as the exfiltration of Bin Ladin out of Afghanistan. A meeting of principals was scheduled for May 29[,1998] to decide whether the operation should go ahead.

The principals did not meet. On May 29,[1998] "Jeff" informed "Mike" that he had just met with Tenet, Pavitt, and the chief of the Directorate's Near Eastern Division. The decision was made not to go ahead with the operation. "Mike" cabled the field that he had been directed to "stand down on the operation for the time being." He had been told, he wrote, that cabinet-level officials thought the risk of civilian casualties-"collateral damage"-was too high. —9-11 commission report

Under Liberals tragedies like Darfur and 9/11 are destined to occur because of the Liberal propensity to wait and do nothing.

Nothing, that is, but castigate anyone and everyone who acts against the evils that Liberals only seem to be able to protest about.

Darfur is waiting!

Stoop so Low? You’ve got to be Kidding!

Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich

Dr. Robert Reich is the nation's 22nd Secretary of Labor for the Bill Clinton administration and self described friend of the Clintons assesses his old friend’s campaign performance to date on his blog.

What’s so interesting is Reich’s tone. Why is it that Liberal’s always assume their positions to be condescendingly superior to that of their opponents? Dr. Reich’s whole premise is contained in the thought that Senator Clinton’s attacks on Barack Obama is a different behavior for her and beneath her dignity. As if Democrats don’t negatively attack their opponents with false charges and inaccurate allegations.

Perhaps Dr. Reich has been unconscious for the last eight years. Had he been awake he would know that it is not beneath a Liberal to lie on an opponent nor is it beneath Democrats to deceived the electorate with empty promises so that they can (shall I say it?) win control of Congress.

That aside, Reich concerns himself with Hillary Clinton’s stridency and the inaccuracy of her charges against Barack Obama.

First Reich says that Hillary’s attack on Obama’s Social Security plan is wrong and deceptive. Reich calls Obama’s plan a progressive solution to the Social Security problem and Senator Clinton’s plan irresponsible. Dr. Reich says that Senator’s Clinton’s charges that Obama’s plan would “raise taxes” compared to her plan (which she claims won’t) is a lie.

Senator Clinton also claims that her health care plan covers more people than Obama’s plan. Another lie according to Reich.

Equally Reich believes that Senator Clinton’s attacks on Obama’s courage are disingenuous he writes :

I just don’t get it. If there’s anyone in the race whose history shows unique courage and character, it's Barack Obama. HRC’s campaign, by contrast, is singularly lacking in conviction about anything. Her pollster, Mark Penn, has advised her to take no bold positions and continuously seek the political center, which is exactly what she’s been doing.

Dr. Reich’s overall premise is that Liberals, particularly Hillary Clinton, are above rancor and lying on their opponents which Dr. Reich is simply wrong. Democrats; Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Al Gore, John Kerry, Bill and Hillary Clinton ARE the personification of political rancor and lying.

Furthermore, the negative and false attacks that are being employed by Senator Clinton against Senator Obama are nothing new, she has been doing exactly that to Republicans for the last fifteen years or at least that is what she has been bragging about to anyone that will listen.

Stoop so low? You’ve got to be kidding!

Give 'em Hell, GW!

I saw President Bush deliver his speech aimed at
the Democratic controlled Congress, this morning
on Fox News. All I can say is, "way to go, Georgie"!

This "pointing the finger" attitude is long overdue.
Had the president done this much sooner in his
tenure, there might have been results by now. He
is finally calling the do-nothing Dems to account!

Funny............... how when they were out of power,
the libs were quick to point to the "evils" of the
Republican administration and the Party in general.
They created an aura of unbelievable corruption on
the part of their opponents, which was not only
insignificant, but as unimportant to the country, as
they claimed Clinton's dalliances in the White House
were.

Now, I for one, certainly don't condone any of the things
that were brought to light, but somebody please
tell me if the Republicans did anything that the
Democrats had not done for longer and better?

Go back and trace the Democratic scandals, the graft
and the corruption, since Boss Tweed! Actually, the
Clinton Whitehouse was one of the leaders in shady
doings, which can trace their roots back to
the pre-governor Billy-Bob and Witch-Bitch!

So I applaud our President for this morning, calling
the Democratic controlled Congress to task for holding
the country hostage to their wishes and not the wishes
of the people who elected them, and the people whom
they are supposedly there to represent.

What ever happened to the Reid and Pelosi promises
prior to the election, to work with the
President, and not to seek retribution
against any Republicans or the Administration in
general? They have been bitter and waiting since
2000, when they rightfully lost power, because
of their own graft and corruption.

Mark my words, it will come to pass that they
will once again be the minority party in Washington.
Their vindictiveness and anal retentive attitudes have
already doomed them in the '08 election.

brooklyn

LIE BILL

Former President Bill Clinton

"Yet another time when the Clintons
were unwilling to stand for the things that they genuinely believe in. Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling."--David Geffen, one time friend and confidante of the Clintons

David Geffen comments were spoken in an interview with Maureen Dowd regarding the Presidential pardon that Bill Clinton gave Marc Rich oil-profiteer and expatriate who left the country rather than pay taxes or face justice.

Apparently Geffen saw this as a betrayal of Liberalism because Clinton pardoned Rich a corporate crony of the President while failing to pardon an ideologically pure American Indian activist Leonard Peltier, who was convicted of murdering two FBI agents. Geffen felt betrayed, as well, he must have felt lied to.

Why do the Clinton’s feel compelled to lie and deceive? In my opinion it is because they think that they are smarter than voting America.

For instance, recently on the campaign trail for Hillary, Bill lied when he said that he opposed the war in Iraq from the [beginning]start. And there was absolutely no logical reason for it. No one was pressuring him because of his past support for President Bush’s decision to go to war with Iraq. Democrats are all forgiving and short on memory when it comes to their first family of dynasty.

Maybe he thought that he was helping Hillary deflect criticisms that she supported the decision to go to war with Iraq, which wasn’t necessary at this time because no one’s talking about the war right now because the surge is working and positive news is coming out of Iraq. Even Congressman “we can’t win” John Murtha reported the surge is working after a visit there!

Even the most intellectually challenged Democrat knows that for right now the word is mum on Iraq until more bad news can dominate the discussion so what’s up with Bill?

Bill Clinton has always been a stranger to the truth, but is it possible that he's never heard of Google?

Apparently.

How else to explain his ridiculous claim - while campaigning for Hillary out in Iowa - that he "opposed [the] Iraq [war] from the beginning"? –New York Post

Maybe Bill knows that nothing that he or Hillary says or does will have any negative consequences for them from the Democrat faithful. Nothing “Clinton” will come under close scrutiny from those that idolize the husband and wife Politicalstars.

Interestingly enough, that is becoming less true since Democrats realize that they can not win simply using the polarizing politics of the past. Democrats know that if they don’t attract Independents and some fringe Conservatives they do not have the numbers to win the Presidency out right.

Bill Clinton won the Presidency in 1992 with only 43% of the popular vote and was reelected in 1996 with only 49.2% of the popular vote compared to the numbers 47.9% in 2000 and 50.7% in 2004 for George W. Bush.

So why this most blatant and obvious lie that is so easily discernable that even the most neophyte of politicos is able to dispatch it with a single google query?
There really is no reason other than, “Because he could!” But because he did that does bring up this point.

In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.—CNN.com/inside politics

Though it was the President Bill Clinton that started the showdown with Iraq and it was Democrats as well as Republicans that voted to give President Bush authority to go to war with Iraq(making it a legal war). In addition, as you know it was Democrats as well as Republicans who voted repeatedly to fund the war, Democrats will not be able to claim any responsibility for a win in Iraq because of their conspiratorial efforts to cause the United States to lose in Iraq with all the negative statements such as the former President and Democrats have made.

Or maybe former President Clinton thought that there has been so many Democrat lies told on President Bush and the war that he might as well pile on too!

Only thing is this lie was so blatant and obvious that it was an insult to everyone’s intelligence, Democrats notwithstanding!

Tim Russert obviously still smarting from the Clinton campaign rebuke on his handling of the Democrat Debate trended very lightly on the former President’s Lie about Iraq (see below:

Democrat Plants in the Republican Debates?

Cooper Anderson, Moderator Republican CNN Debates

Allow me to give you a one word answer. Yes! Are Democrats really this stupid? Another one word answer. Yes!

But why is anyone surprised and why would anyone think that after Democrats refused to debate on the Fox News Network that Democrats are fair and balanced? Fox’s debates incidentally were co-sponsored by the exclusively Black Liberal Democrat Congressional black caucus, but Democrats were so hell bent on disparaging Fox that it didn’t matter. So why wouldn’t anyone think that Democrats would try the dirty tricks that they delusionally projected onto Fox News and Conservatives? I did.

We know that a Democrat’s fantasy of Republican evilness is just a projection of the deep dark inter-Democrat. Now we have proof that even Democrats can’t deny.

The gay retired California National Guard Brigadier General Keith H. Kerr lied his way on to CNN according to CNN’s Cooper Anderson. Anderson claims that General Kerr was asked if he was a Republican and the retired one star liar told officials that he was. Really, CNN should have better control and screening of their debates! And what’s with the jeering and the booing does CNN normally stock their Presidential debates with WWF fans?

The truth is the gay General is a Democrat and he is working for Hillary Clinton and has worked for John Kerry’s campaign in 2004. Kerr’s whole presentation was a set up crafted by Clintonestas. You could see Clinton fingerprints all over it!

What General Kerr’s carefully crafted question signals is that Democrats intend to make homosexuality a major action item in their Presidential administration. (Wink, wink hey homosexuals vote for us)

Who could forget, one of President Clinton’s very first presidential acts was an attempt to force homosexuality on to the military? A campaign promise he made to secure the homosexual lobby’s support. That action a long with cutting troop ranks and under funding the military to balance the budget brought the morale of the armed forces to its lowest point in recent history.

But it was attempting to force homosexuality on the military that brought a stern rebuke by General Colon Powell who said, "The presence of homosexuals in the force would be detrimental to good order and discipline for a variety of reasons, principally relating around the issue of privacy," Powell’s remarks came in a January 1993 speech at the U.S. Naval Academy

Regardless of that, Homosexuals, Liberals and Democrats view the military as the last remaining Government institution in America that the homosexual agenda needs to conquer so that their domination over the entire American culture will be complete.

What that means is that a President Hillary Clinton or a President Barack Obama would pick up on President Bill Clinton’s policy even if that policy is flawed or detrimental to the armed forces as pointed out by General Powell.

The issue of allowing homosexuals to serve in the military — again, a policy favored by Bill Clinton but opposed by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell — achieved political prominence in the Clinton administration, ended in Clinton signing Don’t ask, Don’t tell a compromise, which many feel caused such a political divide in our nation that it obscured other Clinton policy initiatives.

Nevertheless, in 1993 the Pentagon, under executive order from President Clinton, completed an exhaustive survey of the military’s policy, and in the end determined, “The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a long-standing element of military law that continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service.”

The Pentagon’s reasoning? Due to the close living quarters and sometimes “primitive” conditions enlistees must endure, the military concluded that, “The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.”

The actual law with regard to this issue clearly states that homosexuality is incompatible with military service. This was codified in 1993 by Congress with bi-partisan support and veto-proof majorities in direct response to Clinton‘s attempts to change military policy.

Yet the Homosexual agenda will not rest and will continue to attack this issue until they are either soundly defeated and beaten back by strong social Conservative Republicans or until a Democrat or Compassionate Conservative Republican sabotages military capability for the liberal popular social engineering that the homosexual agenda favors.

In another development as reported by Michelle Malkin General “homosexual” wasn’t the only planted questioner in the CNN debate.

Almost every question had a Democrat connection; Abortion questioner, “Journey,” a.k.a. “Paperserenade, is declared Edwards supporter (and a slobbering Anderson Cooper fan); David Cercone, Log Cabin Republican questioner is declared Obama supporter and lead toy questioner and Concerned Undecided Mom LeeAnn Anderson is a prominent union activist for the Edwards-endorsing United Steelworkers.

What no questions from Republicans in a Republican debate? Only sophomoric Liberal concerns?

Republicans have only themselves to blame. Democrats have shown by their hyper-partisanship in the last 15 years that they will stop at nothing to defeat Republicans. If they will stoop to treasonous acts such as attempting to destroy the Bush administration in the midst of a war they would certainly try to ruin the Republican debate with planted questions meant to put Republicans in a negative light.

As a final point, CNN was not a fair and objective moderator for the Republican Presidential debates if there was a clear loser it was CNN undisputedly and running close second are the Republican planners who permitted this travesty!

Some good did come out of this fiasco, Undecideds, Independents and Republicans who were considering voting for a Democrat candidate for President have got to be reevaluating their reasons now. Why?

Democrats have made such total fools of themselves between the destructive partisanship of a Democrat controlled Congress, they being wrong when they said we lost the war and now hate filled debates, their own, and attempting to inject Democrat hate into the Republican debates, it appears to every fair minded person that Democrats are puerile minded simpletons who believe they can lie, deceive and plant their way to a Presidential victory in 2008.

See below Cooper Anderson admitting that the “one star homosexual” was a Democrat plant!


CNN News, WHAT A JOKE!

Here’s Joe Scarborough commenting on the Clinton Campaign’s Plant



By the way the Steering Committee that Kerr is a member of is Hillary Clinton's Gay, Lesbian, Transvestite and bisexual military committee!

Clinton Attack Dogs Unleashed Against Zogby

Mark Penn, Chief Clinton strategist

Penn mischaracterized this latest online Zogby poll as our first interactive survey ever – a bizarre contention, since we have been developing and perfecting our Internet polling methodology for nearly a decade (Zogby Intreractive Methodology), and since Penn’s company has been quietly requesting the results of such polls from Zogby for years.-- Fritz Wenzel, Director of Communications, Zogby International

Wounded dogs will bite. Apparently that is also true of wounded politicians. As I predicted two days ago the Clinton campaign is denigrating the recent Zogby poll that shows that America is in an “Anybody but Clinton ” kind of mood these days. Zogby polling indicated that any Republican beats Senator Clinton in the General election.

This is nothing new before Senator Clinton even considered running the sentiment in most political circles (even Democrat) was that she would win the Democratic nomination and lose in the general election because of her years of high negatives or as Senator Clinton likes to put it her 15 years of fighting the Republicans.

It’s hard to forget or forgive someone who has considered you their enemy for 15 years. This combined with the recent antics of a Democrat controlled Congress that has waged their own little private partisan war on Conservatives. People are not feeling very comfortable with the prospect of Democrats with power.

Mark Penn’s minimization of the new Zogby poll on MSNBC(see video)comes straight out of the Clinton playbook and for most partisans his spin will be enough to assuage their concerns until of course they awaken the day after the elections to the stunning realization that for the third consecutive Presidential election their candidate was rejected by the majority of the American people.

Mark Finkelsteinreports that Mark Penn went on Joe Scarborough’s morning show and scolded him for even mentioning the poll.

Zogby denies Clinton ’s campaigns charges that this was a defective new experimental poll. Zogby stands behind the poll’s results. They also offer that until now the Clinton campaign has been their most regular customer regarding polling information.

Goodbye to You

Senator Trent Lott


Senator Chester (Trent) Lott of Mississippi has become an official ex-Senator walking, he’s announced his retirement Monday which will take affect at the end of this year.

Senator Lott and Republicans like him are the reason that the Republican Party is in such terrible disarray. Democrats have caught Republicans completely unprepared with a Democrat styled assault that won Democrats both the house and the Senate in the 2006 midterm elections. Better known as the Politics of Personal Destruction (PPD) first employed by President Bill Clinton during his Presidential election bids. Democrats have used PPD to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee while Senator Lott and Republican like him used 1867 Marquis of Queensbury rules of politics which caused them to get their brains bashed in, in the 2006 midterm elections.

Senator Lott fancied himself a deal maker which translates today into a Republican who is willing to compromise Conservative ideas simply to get along with Democrats.

The epitome of Lott’s deal making was evident in the President’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform earlier this year in which the President and Senators attempted to grant citizenship to illegal aliens against the will of the America people. Lott and 23 other Republican Senators voted with Democrats to close discussion on the immigration bill thus attempting to move the bill closer to become law.

This action evoked a firestorm of protest among the citizenry of the United States. Fortunately loyal Republicans in the Senate were able to stand against an over confident President Bush who promised to “see you at the bill signing.”

The political capitalless President and certain Senators fought against their own supporters and political base in an attempt to enact legislation that was meant to appease big business and special interests over and above the people of the United States of America.

Republicans who followed along with this scheme are: AK Jr Sen. Lisa Murkowski, AK Sr Sen. Ted Stevens, AZ Jr Sen. Jon Kyl, AZ Sr Sen. John McCain III, FL Jr Sen. Melquiades Martinez, ID Sr Sen. Larry Craig, IN Sr Sen. Richard Lugar, KS Sr Sen. Samuel Brownback, KY Sr Sen. Mitch McConnell, ME Jr Sen. Susan Collins, ME Sr Sen. Olympia Snowe, MN Sr Sen. Norm Coleman, MO Sr Sen. Christopher Bond, NC Jr Sen. Richard Burr, NE Sr Sen. Charles Hagel, NH Sr Sen. Judd Gregg, NM Sr Sen. Pete Domenici, NV Jr Sen. John Eric Ensign, OH Sr Sen. George Voinovich, PA Sr Sen. Arlen Specter, SC Sr Sen. Lindsey Graham, UT Jr Sen. Robert Bennett, VA Sr Sen. John Warner.

The Senate voted 64 to 35 for cloture, Americans are opposed to amnesty for illegal aliens but the Senators listed above who are now “ex-Senators walking” voted for it and will now bear the full weight for their disregard of the American people.

Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 51% would like their legislators to “take smaller steps towards reform” while 16% believe they should wait until next year. That’s 67% of the electorate saying no on S.B. 1348. Yet 24 Republicans joined 39 Democrats and independent Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, to defy the will of the people

Senator Lott is just one such Republican who needed to be replaced because unlike their Democrat colleagues Republicans like Senator Lott will not fight for Conservative ideas.

Our government and our society is at a crossroads. If America is going to be preserved for our children we are going to have to make sure that American traditions and values are protected. If Republicans who are elected to the Congress cannot or will not fight for and protect Conservative ideas they should retire too and allow real Conservatives do the work that American Republicans apparently can’t or won’t do.

Our nation is in need of politicians who believe in America and American traditions and for those who believe in compromise over principles we say please don’t hesitate to follow Mr. Lott into retirement.

And to Mr. Lott we say Goodbye to you!

ABC, ABC, ABC…

Oh them polls, them polls. The Clintons who governed while they were in the White house almost strictly by consultant and opinion polls, made their administration the first Family Feud, survey says Poltocracy; a government governed by popular opinion rather than sound decision making policies, just received a bit of live by the polls die by the polls bad news.

According to the Zogby International poll Senator Hillary Clinton would not beat any Republican candidate in a National election. That’s right if the elect were held today Hillary Clinton would be defeated by anybody. A sort of reverse Democrat “Anybody but Bush” from several years ago only this time this is ABC, Anybody but Clinton!

In the new survey, Clinton trailed Senator John McCain 42 percent to 38 percent, former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani by 43 percent to 40 percent and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney by 43 percent to 40 percent.

She also lagged behind former Arkansas Republican governor Mike Huckabee by 44 to 39 percent, and former Senator Fred Thompson by 44 to 40 percent in hypothetical general election matchups. --AFP News

Senator Clinton who’s whole campaign has been propped up by manipulative polling data which was designed to give the impression that she was the inevitable favorite to win the White house in 2008 has been on a downward trend since her catastrophe showing in the October 30th Democrat Debates held in Pennsylvania.

This poll raises major problems for a waning Clinton campaign which uses planted questions and other forms of public manipulation to create desired perceptions of inevitability and invulnerability for Senator Clinton.

The Zogby poll was conducted online among 9,150 likely voters across the United States between November 21 and 26, and carried a margin of error of plus or minus 1 percentage point.

In upcoming days look for the Clinton campaign to attempt to marginalize or dismiss this poll and look for the national media to offer their own polls to counter the Zogby poll.

This attempt to skew perception is the reason that Democrats could not accept the 2000 and 2004 election results. The skewed polls of the 2000 and 2004 elections distorted Democrats perception of reality so much that they thought that Al Gore and John Kerry actually won their respective elections.

If Democrats continue to choose to ignore the electability issues of a Hillary Clinton they will undoubtedly be in the same position that they have been in the last two Presidential elections trying to reconcile their perceptions of reality with actual political outcome.

The actuality is in this up and coming election, if Senator Clinton should win her Party's nomination,this will be an ABC election. Independents and Conservatives alike will vote for anybody but Clinton and Democrats will be left scratching their collective heads wondering what happened again for the third time in as many tries.

When all along Democrats should have known that only they have fond memories of the Clinton Whitehouse the majority of Americans, Independents and Conservatives, do not share Democrats’ admiration for former President Bill Clinton and his former First lady Hillary from Littlerock Arkansas.

I’ll Defend your Right to Say it!

Sunsara Taylor

"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too."—Voltaire

Watching the political narrative play out in the up coming American presidential elections I’ve come to believe that so much has been lost to the Western World in the 21st century. In the 19th century humankind made tremendous strides attempting to be enlightened.

What is evident is the political narrative in this country is not advancing and maturing for a 21st century world on the contrary we have devolved into a third world political Balkanized country which is in the process of pulling away from it’s constitutional moorings.

Today, enlightenment has been lost to those who claim to be the intellectual superior and the purveyors of truth for us all, the Liberal leftwing in this Country.

Not just the radical fringe of the Leftwing, no all Liberals, in all walks of life whether it be in college, media, business or society in general liberals have been infected with the politics of hate as propagated by George Soros, moveon.org, Howard Dean, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton of the Democrat Party.

“I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write." —Voltaire

Gone are the days that Liberals were for individual freedoms. Today’s Liberal is advancing an ideology which calls for imposing a socialist agenda on the masses and they will use any and all sources of government to achieve their goals of controlling all aspects of life as we know it.

As a result there is a chillingly fascist element afoot in the liberal left. One that is fixated on destroying all opposing ideologies in particular this neo-Liberalism is obsessed with obliterating Conservativism and Conservative speech.

This new Liberal political fascism is focused on preventing Conservatives from freely speaking on College campuses, talk radio or any venue in the public square, this effort uses law and government in it’s attempt to suppress conservative expression such as conservative talk radio by legislation which is meant to resurrect a modern anti-Conservative form of the archaic FCC Equal Time Rule.

Also, this neo-Liberal movement uses terms like Neo-con and George Bush like they are the equivalents of the words nigger and faggot, both derogatory words but not as derogatory as the word neo-con or Bush in the mouths of Senator Hillary Clinton or former Senator John Edwards.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"—Evelyn Beatrice Hall, commenting on Voltaire’s attitude regarding freedom of expression.

Recently Radio talk show host Laura Ingraham substituting for Bill O’Reilly on the cable TV show O’Reilly Factor attempt to dialogue with one of the current ideologues of the anti-conservative left Sunsara Taylor.

Ingraham attempted to dialogue about the recent demonstrations of what appears to be fascist militancy developing in the liberal movement in media and on college campuses.

As you view what turns out to be a very spirited exchange between the two women one thing becomes apparent Conservatives who wish to succeed in this Liberal created caustic and negative political environment will have to disassociate with all things compassionate and find a way and a will to fight for conservatism.

Or the alternative will be that conservatives are overrun and vanquished by the Liberal Fascist hordes who are fighting what appears to be a fight to the death to deny Conservatives of their rights, one of which is free speech.

Why the Deer Caught in the Headlights Look Hillary?

Senator Clinton Listening to her own words

Oh you don’t like the sound of your own words. When your own words are recanted back to you they become mudslinging and attacks out of the Republican playbook.

John Edwards didn’t call you a liar he just repeated both of your position on the same issue as you always do. He just did it in the same place at the same time before the same witnesses!




Even the most unintelligent Clinton supporter should be able to understand that you’re on both sides of the issues Senator Clinton. Which means you can’t be trusted!

80% of Americans Disapprove of Democrat Congress

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi,Chuck Schumer,Jim Clyburn and Dick Durbin

The latest Gallup Panel survey as reported by Lydia Saad, conducted Oct. 25-28, 2007, asked Americans to say whether they are “pleased,” “neutral,” “disappointed,” or “angry” about the way the Democrats in Congress have been dealing with seven major issues confronting the nation. A CNN poll says that 75% of Americans disapprove of Congress.

This information comes at a time when Gallup's latest poll finds only one in five Americans approve of the job Congress is doing at this time. That current rating is among the lowest that Gallup has ever measured dating back to 1974. According to this Gallup poll 80% of the American people disapprove of the Democrat controlled Congress.

Results for this panel study are based on telephone interviews with 1,000 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Oct. 25-28, 2007. Respondents were randomly drawn from Gallup’s nationally representative household panel, which was originally recruited through random selection methods. The final sample is weighted so it is representative of U.S. adults nationwide. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

On the seven major issues confronting the nation; Terrorism, The Economy, Government Reform, Healthcare, Iraq, Immigration, The Federal Budget Deficit a majority of Americans were disappointed with Democrats than pleased with them as shown below:

	Pleased %	Neutral %	Disappointed %	Angry %
Terrorism	17	35	31	16
The Economy	12	35	41	12
Government Reform	12	33	41	14
Healthcare	12	28	43	17
Iraq	11	20	43	25
Immigration	8	27	39	26
The Federal Budget Deficit	7	32	44	16

This information couldn’t have come at a worst time for a Democrat led Congress because of the positive news regarding the war in Iraq with violence down and generals considering decreasing to pre-surge numbers. The Democrat leadership has begun a fight with the Whitehouse regarding the war to curry favor with the more extreme netroot, code pink, George Soros moveon.org part of the Democrat base.

Ultimately Democrat acts are a thinly veiled threat to de-fund the war while American soldiers are in harms way.

Hillary is Bleeding

Senator Hillary Clinton

Barack Obama charged Monday that Hillary Clinton acts as if she were a cabinet secretary instead of First Lady when she attacks his résumé.-- KENNETH R. BAZINET DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Senator Barack Obama IS the Democrat front runner, well at least in Iowa he is. An ABC/Washington Post poll shows Obama increasing his lead in Iowa, topping the field with 30% support, compared with 26% for Clinton and 22% for John Edwards.

Which is quite an accomplishment because he did it without the help of the media establishment. It is Senator Clinton who was anointed all-odds-on front runner by the media well before she even declared her intentions to run. What this means is the Vulcan mindmelt that media had been attempting on the public didn’t completely take and they are going to have to try some other kind of pro-Hillary brainwashing.

Despite her[Senator Clinton's] status as the runaway frontrunner for the 2008 Democratic nomination for president--Sarah Baxter, Timesonline September 3, 2006

Up until now all of the media foreshadowing that Hillary Clinton is the Democrat front runner produced a zombie-like populist that had polled accordingly. However seeing the Clinton machine in action has apparently awaken the dead.

Gross inconsistencies, duplicities, reverse sexism, campaign dishonestly and talk of political dynasty has all but erased the Clinton pre-fabricated lead. If Clinton is going to win the Democrat nomination she will have to work for it like everyone else instead of relying on royal bloodlines.

53% of independent voters said they would not vote for her.

“The prospect of a Hillary for President campaign has put much of the Democratic establishment in a bind,” Time concluded. “The early line is that Hillary would be unstoppable in a Democratic primary but unelectable in a general election.”

Once anointed unstoppable in the Democrat’s primary it is unbelievable that the Clinton campaign is now concentrating on stopping the political bleeding of the a campaign that may not see the general election.

Senator Clinton was been touting her experience over that of any other Presidential candidate but when pressed to show documents pertaining to her years as first lady all of those documents are currently under controlled custodial care in the National archives as protected by her husband and former President Bill Clinton.

Senator Clinton claims that she has no control over their release which is another negative for the would be Democrat president nominee hopeful.

"I am happy to compare my experience to hers when it comes to the economy. My understanding was she wasn't Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration. I don't know exactly what experience she's claiming."—Senator Barack Obama

Finally no matter how the national media continues to spin it Senator Clinton is bleeding. She may still be the prohibitive favorite to win the Democrat primaries but her recent campaign troubles has made it next to impossible to win over the Independents and Conservatives that she needs to win in a general election.

IT’S ABOUT BELIEVABILITY STUPID!

Robert Novak, Columnist


Senator Hillary Clinton has none!

If believability is political capital Hillary Clinton is bankrupted. Everything is a vast rightwing conspiracy or everything is Bush’s fault. It doesn’t matter that she voted to give the President authority to go to war with Iraq. We should all believe that she now knows what is best for the United States of America.

Everyone is piling on Hillary because she’s a girl, no because she’s the front runner, oh it all depends on which audience that she’s speaking to at the time. And don’t forget that everyone who criticizes her is using the Neocon Republican play book.

Who believes any of this? Radical partisan Democrats do! And you wonder why would anyone give these people power. You’ve seen the ghetto that they’ve made of Congress. For twelve years in the minority Democrats obstructed Congress making sure that the people’s business, our business, would not get done. They did this to politically thwart their hated rivals the Republicans.

Now that they are the majority they have alienated so many of the Republicans by their politics of personal destruction and hate they can’t get anything done now that they are in power.

Democrats have made Washington an absolutely toxic and caustic place to inhibit with their intolerance for Christians and Conservative values so much so that what happens in Washington is adopted in Vegas!

Back to Hillary, over the weekend Robert Novak reported that the Clinton campaign was circulating a rumor among Democrats that they had some major dirt on Senator Obama who happens to be Hillary’s closes competition for the Democrat nominee to be President of the United States. Immediately Clintonestas attempted to deflect the blame to Republicans…again.

Now this is just fresh off of the Iowa planted questions fiasco where the Clinton campaign planted two questions (we know about) in the Iowa campaign audience the second one was planted after they were busted for the first one. They then stated that planting questions was not a Clinton practice and they would never do it again. Well they lied!

On to Las Vegas where Senator Clinton needed a strong showing because she did so poorly, flip-flopping all over the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania debate stage on the issue of driver licenses to illegal aliens.

Now questions arise as to whether CNN was complicated in planting a Clinton friendly question, as well as, staging an entire pro-Hillary debate format complete without one single follow up question to the Senator.

And there was that precedents setting boo down your opponents never before heard in the back and forth between on stage candidates. Planted boos too?

Now Robert Novak reports that little Miss, “Let’s not mudsling” campaign is dishing mud on Senator Obama but they aren’t really slinging they’re just saying that they could sling if they were prone to sling. So noble don’t you think? Yeah right!

So they accuse Novak of being a rightwing reporter, yeah like the newly Clinton demonized Tim Russert, who tracks to the left. Russert is now accused of attempting to swiftboat Hillary because he dared to ask her a question in the Presidential debates held at Dartmouth. Ridiculous! No wonder CNN didn’t!

Need I remind the Clinton campaign that this is a Presidential election not the High School Prom Queen popularity contest and if one says that they are qualified to lead they had better be able to prove it.

As yet we’ve not seen Senator Clinton’s basis for her claim that she is qualified to be President, her White house first lady papers because the Clintons won’t release them.

Nor will the Clinton’s release papers concerning Hillary as first lady when Bill was governor of Arkansas.

I’d say if the Clinton’s want to release secrets they should start by releasing Hillary’s first lady papers from the White house years where she claims that she gained the experience to be President. I’m sure Senator Clinton doesn’t expect the American people to simply take her at her word for the most important job in the world now does she? Well does she?

After all this whole nominee process is actually a job interview before the American people and no serious interviewee would show up without a written résumé, asking the American people to just believe.

Here’s Novak not backing down from his report and in addition to that Novak’s years as a trustworthy reporter gives him something that Hillary Clinton doesn’t have… BELIEVABILITY!