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!

Are Democrats Smarter than a Fifth Grader?

Senator Clinton speaking before an obvious pro-Clinton debate crowd


PLANTED BOOS?

Are Democrats really this stupid? When was the last time you heard booing in a Presidential campaign debate. Let me answer that for you never!(please see video)



So let’s walk this back, Hillary admittedly bombs in the debate two Tuesdays ago in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, resulting in her campaign issuing a stern warning to CNN and Wolf Blitzer that their candidate had better not be asked any questions that could make her look bad in the Las Vegas debate. (A diamonds or pearls question is perfectly acceptable)

Wolf did so well, in fact, that he was promptly patted on the head for being a “good boy” by the Clinton campaign as reported by the Drudge Report.

CNN debate moderator Wolf Blitzer did an 'outstanding' job in Vegas, a senior adviser to the Hillary campaign said early Friday. 'He was outstanding, and did not gang up like Russert did in Philadelphia. He avoided the personal attacks, remained professional and ran the best debate so far. Voters were the big winners last night.'

A rival campaign insider charges: 'Wolf turned into a lamb. No follow-up question on Clinton's huge flip on drivers licenses?'

By the way the diamonds or pearls girl, Maria Luisa, is now claiming that she was forced to ask that obviously staged question by CNN. The question she wanted to ask was concerning the building of a nuclear waste plant in her area.

Along with all of that amazingly, Senator Clinton’s opponents were booed? Come on Booed? I’m I the only one who sees that as strange? No apparently not, because it’s all over the internet everyone, except perhaps Democrat zombies, believe that the Clinton campaign put up the boo-ers to stifle Hillary’s Democrat opponents. This whole pathetic manipulation cancels out any gains that the Clintonestas claimed that they received because of the Vegas debate. Senator Clinton hasn’t regained her footing; she’s sinking deeper into a quagmire of her own making.

In the normal course of politics men say very critical things of one another, but these are not normal politics are they? These are affirmative action politics where the rules are in constant change to protect the unqualified candidate. And planting pro-Clinton people in the audience to stop any negatively about your Dynasty is now acceptable for Democrats it seems.

A candidate who obviously can’t stand the heat and would better serve IN the kitchen baking cookies where she said that she’s most comfortable. (And please Hillary drop your contrived use of that Harry Truman quote. You’re no Harry Truman!)

Let’s face it if you resort to supporting your candidate by booing other candidates in your own democrat nominee selection process then either your candidate is pathetic or your Party is pathetic or both!

And if your campaign is the one responsible for planting boos in the Democrat Presidential debate crowd you are the lowest of the low not only a deceptive two faced politician but a straight cold liar to deny it.

Ex-Clinton supporter and perhaps ex-friend Hollywood mogul David Geffen said it best, "Everybody in politics lies, but they [the Clintons] do it with such ease it's troubling."

It’s about believably stupid! And right now the Clintons have none! Senator Clinton’s campaign has none! And they’re not even as smart as a fifth grader if they think the shenanigans of the last few weeks are fooling anybody except mindless Democrat drones!

The Dumb Dems Don't Get It!

The Democrats, led by Senator Harry Reid, continue
chipping away at the support for the war in Iraq.

They will keep proposing bills that just don't make
any more sense, than the victory that they achieved
last year.

To cut off funding for the war, and then claim what
patriotic and dedicated representatives of the people
they are, shows exactly how two-faced they are.

The only way to bring our troops home, is with a
victory in Iraq. They talk about the US losing the
respect of the world, and yet, they deny that they were
the very cause of that loss. They, together with the
far left sympathizers in the country, forced the end to
a war that we were actually beginning to win.

Now, they want to do the very same thing in Iraq. It
doesn't bode well for the country, when the people
can be duped by a bunch of self-centered, egotistical
morons such as control the Congress.

Let's hope that come the '08 elections, those who voted
these worthless idiots into office, come to their senses
and get them the hell out........ starting with Reid and
Pelosi!!!!

brooklyn

Pro-Clinton Audience protects Hillary

Democratic Debate, Las Vegas, Nevada: November 15, 2007

There was no speaking truth to power at the Democrat’s gathering (notice I didn’t say debate) on last night. No “all-so-rans” bringing down the Democrat front runner. This was a carefully constructed righting of the Liberal agenda to keep their front runner in front.

And by the number of boos that were issued each time Senator Obama and former Senator John Edwards even looked at Hillary one would have thought that the Clinton campaign planted the audience with pro-Hillary supporters and instructed them to boo and or shout down anyone who attempted to lay a glove on their beloved. (I wouldn’t be surprised if someone comes forward in the next couple of days saying exacting that!)

For the most part this was a pitiable question and answer period disguised as a Presidential debate, there was no debate there was only a very boring and staged attempt to restore one Senator to her rightful place as keeper of the Presidential dynasty.

From the very first question served up all pretty on a silver dish to Senator Clinton, to all the other softball questions lobbed her way, one knew that this was going to be her night all night. A showcase to give her just the right opportunities to hit such sound bits out of the park like, "People are not attacking me because I'm a woman, they're attacking me because I'm ahead."

This was a birthday and not only Governor Bill Richardson’s birthday either. This was all about celebrating the birth of a dynasty. The Clinton dynasty.

John Edwards and Barack Obama should have taken my advice and pulled out of this fixed debate. It was a lose, lose situation for them. They just didn’t know the extent to which the Clinton campaign would go to, to secure a victory.

The pre-emptive strike at Wolf Blitzer set a tone which Edwards and Obama never was able to recover from. Nor was either man able to capitalize on the opening that they created in the last debate.

Instead they both were held captive by a tightly controlled pro-Hillary love feast; moderators, fellow candidates and an audience that was not going to let their damsel be distressed by Hillary bashers even if they are Democrats.

To borrow from a song, Hillary is so vain she probably thinks that this election is about her, she accused the other candidate of the politics of “pile on,” she’s virtually has stirred up hate sentiments against Tim Russert and she’s accused the Republicans of being fixated on her but she said George Bush’s name or “this administration” referring to the Bush administration 100 times if she said it once last night.

That was about 100 times more than anyone else on the stage. I call that a fixation!
Finally like most narcissist Senator Clinton believes that all of history evolves around the fact that she is campaigning to be President and she presents herself as if she is doing something historic. For example Campbell Brown one of the three moderators, asked the Senator about all the feminism themes that she has interwoven into her campaign.

Senator Clinton, you went to your alma mater recently,
Wellesley College, and you said there that your tenure had prepared you to compete in the all-boys-club of presidential politics.
At the same time, your campaign has accused this all-boys-club, surrounding you on stage, of piling on with their attacks against you. And then your husband recently
came to your defense by saying that these, quote, “boys,” had been getting rough with you.

And some have suggested that you, that your campaign, that your husband are exploiting gender as a political issue during this campaign.

What’s really going on here?

Senator Clinton’s answer was bereft of any historical understanding or knowledge. She attempted to frame women’s accomplishments and event civil rights gains to the period of her life time she said,

…But, you know, this is really one of the kind of issues that we can laugh about because it’s exciting when you look at this
field of candidates.
You know, several of us would never have had a chance to stand here and run for president — a Latino, an African-American, a woman — if it hadn’t been for the
progress of America over my lifetime. And I am thrilled to be running to be the first woman president.

Unless Senator Clinton was born in year 1872 her statement was an ignorant attempt to frame all civil rights gains and women’s suffrage around her lifetime. The fact is Hillary is not the first woman to, as she said, “to be running to be the first woman president" there have been many! (list courtesy of Worldwide Guide to Women in Leadership)

1872 and 1892 Victoria Chaflin Woodhull

1884 and 1888 Belva Ann Bennet McNall Lockwood

Candidate for National Equal Rights Party. In 1878 she was the first female attorney to practice before the supreme court. Her running mate in 1884 was Marietta Lizzie Bell Stow. She lived (1830-1917).

1964 Senator Margaret Chase Smith Republican member of the House of Representatives 1940-49 and Senator 1949-73. In 1964 she was Presidential candidate in the primary elections. She was defeated by Barry Goldwater in the party convention. Chairperson of the Republican Conference in the Congress 1967-72. She lived (1897-1995).

1968 Charlene Mitchell
Candidate of the Communist Party with Michael Zagarell as her running mate.

1972 Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm The first female black member of the member of the House of Representatives 1968-82 and was candidate for the Democratic nomination of Presidential candidate at the Democratic Party Convention. She lived (1924-2005)

1972 Patsy Takamoto Mink Member of the Territory House of Representatives of Hawaii 1956-58, the territory Senate 1959 and the State Senate 1962-64. Member of the US House of Representatives 1965-77 and from 1990. 1983-85 Chairperson of the Honolulu City Council. She was a candidate for the Democratic nomination as Presidential candidate, but withdrew her candidature before the convention. She lived (1927-2002).

1972 Bella Savitzky Abzug
Stood as a candidate for the Democratic nomination as Presidential candidate but withdrew from the race before the party convent. She lived (1920-98).
1972 Linda J. Osteen Jenhess Candidate for the Socialist Worker’s Party.

1976 and 1980 Ellen McCormack
Ran in the Democratic Presidential Primary race in 1976 and was the first woman to receive matching funds. She he appeared on the ballot in 18 states and received a total of 267.590 votes in the primaries and 22 votes from delegates at the Democratic National Convention, and engaged in a debate with President Jimmy Carter. 1978 she was candidate for Lt. Governor of New York State and in 1980 she ran as a third-party Right to life presidential-candidate and received 32.327 votes.

1976 Margaret Wright
Candidate for The People’s Party.

1980 Deidre Griswold Candidate for the Workers World Party.

1980 Maureen Smith Candidate for the Peace and Freedom Party.

1984 Sonia Johnson Candidate for Citizen’s Party. Her running-mate was Emma Wong Mar

1984 Patricia Scott Schroeder
A congresswoman, she was Democratic candidate for the nomination of Presidential candidate in the primary elections in 1987 (June September) but withdrew from the race before the Party Convention. The first Democratic woman to actually appear on the ballot-paper was Geraldine Ferraro who was Vice-Presidential candidate in 1984 as Walther Moldale’s runningmate. They lost against Ronald Regan. (b. 1940-)

1984 Gavrielle Holmes
Her running-mate was Gloria E. LaRiva. She had been Vice-Presidential candidate in 1980.

1988 and 1992 Leonora B. Fulani Candidate for the American New Alliance Party. The first black woman to appear on the ballot papers in all 50 states. In 1992 her running-mate for the post of vice-President was Elizabeth Munoz.

1988 Willa Kenoyer Candidate for the Socialist Party.

1992 Gloria E. LaRiva
Vice-Presidential nominee in 1984, 1988, 1996 and 2000.

1992, 1996, 2000 and 2004 Millie Howard
Independent. 2004 she is seeking Republican nomination as Presidential candidate. (1937-).

1992 Susan Block

1992 Helen Betty Halyard
Candidate for the Workers League / Socialist Equality Party. Vice-Presidential candidate in 1984 and 1988.

1996 and 2000 Dr. Heather Anne Harder
Candidate in the Democrat Primary. 2004 she did not manage to get nominated as primary candidate.

1996 Mary Cal Hollis
Works as a special education teacher. A former Democrat, she has also been active for many years on behalf of numerous leftists and vegetarian causes. As the Socialist Party's Presidential nominee in 1996. She was her party's Vice-Presidential Candidate in 2000.

1996 Susan Duncan
Sought nomination as Republican Presidential Candidate and was a candidate in the primaries in a number of states.

1996 Ann Jennings
Sought nomination as Republican Presidential Candidate and was a candidate in the primaries in a number of states.

1996 Joan Pharr
Sought nomination as Republican Presidential Candidate and was a candidate in the primaries in a number of states.

1996 Mary Frances Le Tulle
Sought nomination as Republican Presidential Candidate and was a candidate in the primaries in a number of states.

1996 Georgina H. Doerschuck
Sought nomination as Republican Presidential Candidate and was a candidate in the primaries in a number of states.

1996 Elvena Hoyd-Duffie
Sought nomination as Democratic Presidential Candidate and was a candidate in the primaries in a number of states.

1996 and 2000 Monica Moorehead
Candidate for the Worker’s World Party. In 1996 her vice-Presidential running mate was Gloria La Riva.

1996 and 2004 Dianne Beall Templin
Candidate for the Amercian Party. Candidate for the State Assembly 1994, for Attorney General of Callifornia, 1998 and 2002, for the US Senate 2000 and in the California Gubernatorial Recall Election in 2003. (b. 1947-)

1996 Marsha Feinland
Candidate for the Peace and Freedom Party with Kathe McClatchy as running mate.

1999/2000 Elizabeth Hanford Dole
1981-83 Assistant to the President for Public Liason,
1983-87 Secretary of Transportation, 1989-90 Secretary of Labor, In 1990-99 President of Red Cross of USA, Married to former Senator Bob Dole, who was the Republican Presidential Candidate in 1996, in 1999 she run herself but withdrew before the Republican Convention because of lack of funding. In 2002 she was elected Senator for New Carolina. (b. 1936-)

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is neither historic nor special because she is a woman.

The only thing that is unique about Senator Clinton’s campaign is that she is the only woman in American history that has attempted to exploit the fact that she was first lady and claim that entitles her to be President of the United States of America.

If the saying, “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas” is true what I saw of the Democrats last night should stay in Vegas clearly none of them are ready for prime time.

Hillary will win the Democrat nomination for President because Democrats only care about appearances and Hillary appeared to be Siegfried & Roy to Edwards and Obama’s caged tiger act.

It’s time to put on the “Anybody but Clinton” buttons!

Will Senator Clinton bring her "A" Game?

Hillary Clinton: Bad Two Weeks?

"I wasn't at my best the other night,"--Senator Hillary Clinton,referring to the last Presidential debate

Had a bad two weeks? Just thank God you’re not the Democrat Presidential Front runner who had the fact revealed that she doesn’t answer questions, well not in any discernable fashion. She also plants questions in her campaign audiences to make it seem that she is in touch with what Americans are concerned about. And tonight she has to debate with the men of her party who like her are seeking the Democrat Party’s nomination to be President of the United States of America. But unlike her they are men.

But first, last Saturday after a speech in Iowa where it was discovered that the Senator uses fake questions, an ominous sign. Could this be what portends for America if Hillary Clinton wins tonight’s debate and goes on to be elected to the Presidency? (see below)



It would be funny except for Michael Crowley’s Bunker Hillary where he gives a broad account of Hillary Clinton’s manipulation of the media. However, Crowley couldn’t resist attempting to blame Senator Clinton’s behavior with the media on President Bush. This is a ridiculous and laughable Liberal tendency and nonetheless wrong because Bush became President in 2000. Crowley goes on to outline Hillary’s history with the national media which began in 1993 seven years before Bush became President. (Darn those pesky facts)

[R]eporters who wanted to question her about policy were told to submit written questions. "Her ground-zero assumption is that [a reporter is] an asshole," a senior Hillary aide told her biographer, Carl Bernstein.

Further, Crowley asserts that Hillary’s press disdain was forged by her husband's nightmarish experience on the 1992 campaign trail. Battered by stories about Bill's mistresses and financial dealings, Hillary seethed at the press and resolved to control their coverage. Seem to me that Bush is not the blame for Clinton’s media behavior by Crowley’s own accounting Bill and Hillary Clinton are.

Crowley’s piece doesn’t tell us anything that we didn’t already know about the Clintons’ hyper-control and manipulation of the media, much like the Clinton campaign’s warning to Wolf Blitzer regarding tonight’s debate. What Crowley's piece does do is show a campaign that’s unraveling, media that is not doing its job because it is afraid of the Clintons and a gullible public that is engaged in a maniacal heroine worship. A public that is forsaking what is best for this country for failed political ideologies and a political candidate whose campaign seems to be falling down around her like so many American flags.

Or is this a sign of what has obviously already begun, the falling down of America, the final piece will come after the Clinton campaign and the media declares that Hillary won tonight’s debate (Oh believe me they will declare it, unless of course Hillary falls off the stage) and America votes for a candidate who is the most polarizing figure in American politics today. (hum… is that why those flags seemed to be repelled?)

Enjoy the Democrat Presidential debates!

Obama and Edwards Should Cut and Run from Thursday’s Vegas Debates

John Edwards and Barack Obama

CNN's Wolf Blitzer has been warned not to focus Thursday's Dem debate on Hillary. 'This campaign is about issues, not on who we can bring down and destroy,' top Clinton insider explains. 'Blitzer should not go down to the levels of character attack and pull 'a Russert.'' Blitzer is set to moderate debate from Vegas, with questions also being posed by Suzanne Malveaux... Blitzer says he is not being pressured by any campaign: 'No one has pressured me. No one has threatened me. No one is trying to intimidate me'... Developing...—Drudge Report

The fix is in. How can the Democrat’s debate in Las Vegas moderated by Wolf Blitzer this Thursday night be fair now that Hillary Clinton is dictating the terms of fairness? According to the Drudge Report that’s exactly what she’s doing.

All male debaters should withdraw from Thursday’s debate, why? With this one warning Clinton operatives have tilted the up-coming debate in favor of reverse sexism and in favor of one woman, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

This debate is now tainted with spurious sexism charges that will influence everything; every question and every answer because the Clinton Campaign began to toss around the sexism card from the last debate prompted by Senator Clinton’s losing effort a week ago.

Now any question to Hillary will be carefully asked so not to offend her or women, any rebuttal will be seen as an attack against her. Hillary has poisoned the water and given herself an unfair advantage from this point on.

It’s like affirmative action gone amok. Because Hillary’s camp has made her sex the issue, the unspoken thought on everyone’s minds; those who participate or those who watch this debate will be thinking, “Hillary Clinton is a woman.” That thought will be the 900lb gorilla on the stage. The moderators will treat her differently than the other candidates. Oh they wouldn’t think so and they will tell you that they won’t, but they will!

We all will! And that’s not fair to the male Democrat hopefuls.

We will all be looking to see how the woman was treated in the debates; or did the men hold back because she’s a woman? Did the moderators treat her special because she’s a woman? Did the men get different questions than the woman? Or did the men get more or did they get fewer questions than the woman?

Hillary has created an affirmative action nightmare and she isn’t even the Democrat nominee yet!

Democrats John Edwards and Barack Obama have run from debates (withdrawn) for much lesser reasons. For instance the mere mention of the Fox News Network put the Democrats all in a thither. See here, here and here.

Democrats have cancelled all debates that where co-sponsored by Fox because of moveon.org netroot pressure on Democrat Leadership. The Radical leftist wing of the Democrat Party has forced its leadership from appearing in debates on Fox. Apparently Democrats think that they won’t be treated fairly on Fox. So will debating Hillary now that she has “warned” Wolf Blitzer be fair? NO!

Wolf Blitzer says he is not being pressured by any campaign: 'No one has pressured me. No one has threatened me. No one is trying to intimidate me'

One question Mr. Blitzer who asked you if you were being pressured? Did any one ask you if you were being threatened or intimidated?

The fact that you feel that you have to answer an unasked question says to me that in fact you do feel pressured, threatened and intimidated. This will be more than evident on tomorrow night when you let Hillary skate through without one significant question or one follow up question or one challenge to something ridiculous that she might say. You’ll let her skate to a de facto win by default. You have a history of allowing Clinton to have her way in an interview Mr. Blitzer.

The only way that the other Democrat hopefuls, who happen to be men, can be on fair footing with Hillary tomorrow night is to remove the reverse sexism that Senator Clinton has introduced into the race which she is using against them, an impossible feat at best!

No one is going to feel comfortable in this debate because Clinton has played the sexism card so the men will attempt to go forward pretending all the while that Mrs. Clinton doesn’t have the advantage of her claim of sexism over them. Clinton has effectively made all the other Democrats “racists” and this next meeting a NAACP meeting!

The men do have an option, they could treat tomorrow’s debates like the Fox network and cut and run, pull out and leave Hillary on stage to answer questions all alone.

I realize that they won’t withdraw from the debate even though it would be the right thing to do. So at the very least their campaigns must issue a statement today that they feel that Hillary Clinton has unfairly turned this debate into a men against women event which it is not. It is a debate about the merits of each candidate.

Further each of the men participating in tomorrow’s debate should state that they are participating under protest citing the Clinton campaign’s pre-emptive warning to Wolf Blizter as an attempt to unfairly influence the conducting and the outcome of the debate.

Or they could do the right thing and withdraw from the debate. Only thing is Blitzer wouldn’t be able to get Senator Clinton to answer one single question even if she were on that stage alone!

Desperation Seizes Democrats

Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha

"We should be supporting our troops as they are succeeding, not finding ways to undercut their mission,"—Tony Fratto, White House spokesman

Against the wishes of their rank and file members Democrat leaders are once again advancing a hair-brained scheme meant to signal to their radical code pink, moveon.org constituency that they are worthy of higher polling numbers than the sub-Bush numbers they currently suffer from.

Rank-and-file Democrats expressed dismay on Friday over their party's latest anti-war strategy, with some members reluctant to vote around Veterans Day to bring troops home.--Anne Flaherty

Wisely the rank and file doesn’t want to be associated with manipulating and play politics with U.S. troops so close to the Veteran’s day holiday but atlas such wisdom is wasted on Democrat Leaders Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha who have cooked up another “cut and run scenario” bill all dressed up as an incremental troop redeployment measure tied to war funding so that Democrats can report to their radical fringe that they attempted to stop the war. (That should raise their low poll numbers.)

Whew! Sounds complicated but wait until you hear how Nancy Pelosi attempted to explain a similar failed March 2007 attempt to set benchmarks on a video link that I’ve provided.

If this is the way Democrats reward success I’d hate to see what they do to failure.

That’s right the President’s surge is a rousing success and violence has been down in Iraq going on 2 months. No thanks to “The War is Lost” Democrat Senator Harry Reid and “We can’t win, bring the troops home” Democrat Congressman John Murtha.

Leading journalists have been reporting for some time that the war was hopeless, a fiasco that could not be salvaged by more troops and a new counterinsurgency strategy. The conventional wisdom in December held that sending more troops was politically impossible after the antiwar tenor of the midterm elections. It was practically impossible because the extra troops didn't exist. Even if the troops did exist, they could not make a difference.

Four months later, the once insurmountable political opposition has been surmounted. The nonexistent troops are flowing into Iraq. And though it is still early and horrible acts of violence continue, there is substantial evidence that the new counterinsurgency strategy, backed by the infusion of new forces, is having a significant effect.--Robert Kagan

That’s right! We are winning and the war is not lost. Not only that the surge is so successful that generals are planning on actual surge reversals.

The first big test of security gains linked to the U.S. troop buildup in Iraq is at hand. The military has started to reverse the 30,000-strong troop increase and commanders are hoping the drop in insurgent and sectarian violence in recent months—Robert Burns

So why are the Democrats still attempting to sabotage the war effort?

Simple answer 2008 elections, Presidential and Congressional, what this eight year political battle has been about, establishing and legitimizing the Liberal agenda legally, politically and socially once and for all in the United States of America.

More Democrat wins mean a more activist judiciary,reversal of progress made on the Supreme Court, more government nanny state control and a liberal social ideology that will be forced on Conservative Americans. Conservatives, I might mention, who make up half of the electorate and voted George W. Bush into office twice.

A feat to be proud of in a Liberal dominated culture. The only problem is Bush didn’t fight for Conservativism like Liberals fight for Liberalism. It is that political negligence that has put Conservatives in the funk they are in now. (So vote for a “Real” Conservative this time! Duncan Hunter are you doing anything for 2008?)

Because of that Conservative funk Democrats are depending upon a dispirited Republican Party to allow them to take control of this entire government and wreak havoc on it much like what prevails presently in the Senate and the House of Representatives in Congress. (That is not going to happen!)

In a March 8, 2007 press conference called to explain the Democrat original plan to de-fund the war, if the President didn't acquiesce to their demands of cut and run, Democrats had a very difficult time explaining just how their plan would have worked. (See 8min attempt to explain it by Murtha and Pelosi)

It seems that a reporter thought that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi explanation of the bench mark plan was unclear which interestingly forced repeated Nancy Pelosi frustrated attempts to explain her plan of sabotage of the U.S. war effort. Let’s hope the Democrat’s current effort is easier for them to explain!

At this point Conservatives and Independents have seen enough to realize that Democrats have jeopardized the safety and sovereignty of this Nation for going on sixteen years now, eight years under Democrat President Bill Clinton and eight years under George Bush. Both these groups of voters should now realize that awarding additional Congressional authority and or the White house to Democrats would be political and social disaster for this nation.

Just take a look at what they've done to Congress... Not good!

Clinton: Johnnie Appleseed of Campaign Questions

Johnny Appleseed planted Apple seeds all across America so the legend goes; Senator Hillary Clinton plants questions in campaign audiences all across America so the reality is.

Apparently Clinton is hoping to appear to be answering what is on the hearts and minds of the American electorate when in fact the questions she is answering on the campaign trail are politically staged questions that are apparently only on the Senator’s heart and mind.

This is but another example of Hillary Clinton’s blatant attempt to con her way into the office of the President of the United States of America.

The Clinton Campaign busted once for planting questions in a campaign forum last weekend at a bio-diesel plant in Newton, Iowa promised that this was not a campaign practice and vowed never to do it again, unbelievably was busted yet again for the second time outside Fort Madison, Iowa.

She called on a young woman. "As a young person," said the well-spoken Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff, "I'm worried about the long-term effects of global warming. How does your plan combat climate change?"
"Well, you should be worried," Clinton replied. "You know, I find as I travel around Iowa that it's usually young people that ask me about global warming."

This was Clinton's first plant!

When the Clinton campaign was asked if a second plant was attempted in another campaign crowd by Clinton campaign worker Chris Hayler outside Fort Madison, Iowa as reported by campaign attendee Geoffrey Mitchell who said he was approached by Hayler to ask how the Senator is standing up to President Bush on the question on funding the Iraq war and a troop withdrawal timeline Clinton campaign spokesman Mo Elliethee said,

"I'm not going to comment on what he said, referring to Mitchell. "I'm going to discuss what our interpretation is. They had a previous relationship, the subject came up and there's nothing more to it than that. It's not newsworthy. It's innocent. It's not yesterday."

Yesterday referencing Clinton's campaign admitting, first to FOX News, that it planted a question on global warming at a Newton, Iowa, event on Tuesday.

Look this would not even be an issue if questions about Senator Clinton’s campaign methods and strategies were not being discussed for their duplicitous and deceptive attempts to present an unreal picture of the candidate Hillary Clinton to the American people.

The fact is Hillary Clinton’s role in Bill Clinton Whitehouse was that of behind the scenes subterfuge. To find the very same tendencies in Senator Clinton’s campaign should be expected. Just as a Hillary Clinton campaign is full of planted questions and manipulations of public impression, a Hillary Clinton White house would be full of political manipulations of the same extreme kind.

As the story goes Johnny Appleseed planted apple seeds for the good of America. Senator Clinton’s planting of fake questions in Iowa on the Campaign trail is for the good of Senator Clinton which ultimately will be bad for America if she should happen to win the Presidency under false pretenses and Clintonian deception!

Senator Clinton’s Morning after Pill

Hillary Clinton: Strikes a “what I said was” pose
One thing for certain a Senator Hillary Clinton statement is like a morning after pill, if what the Senator says is deemed a mistake by her campaign one, they will swing into action to clean up the mess made by the Senator by lashing back at anyone with any criticisms of the Senator’s statements and/or two, her campaign will arrange for the Senator to explain what she meant the “morning after” her misstatement in various attempts to clarify her meaning.

For example Senator Clinton’s campaign launched a preemptive strike the last Democratic debate where she anticipated fellow Democrat nominees to hold her feet to the fire. The Senator’s campaign attempted to control the conversation an attempt that didn’t work.

Senator Clinton had posted on her official website a slick message meant to convey the idea that if she was criticized in anyway that criticism would be an attack and that attack would be a negative campaign ploy from her Democrat rivals.

After the debate and Clinton’s apparent Immigration gaffe she made several appearances attempting to explain exactly what it was she was saying about immigration in the debate.

In a subsequent CNN interview the Senator is asked several questions meant to give her an opportunity to answer her critics’ charges of double talk and flip flopping during the Democratic debate.

Remarkably at the end of the Clinton interview it is stated (by the interviewer) that the Senator was still unclear on what she said! Unbelievable!

Below see the Senator’s original statement the night of the debate and the “morning after” CNN interview where the habitual parser Hillary Clinton given a wide berth still can’t seem to say it straight.

CNN Interview with Senator Clinton

Do we ready want a, “What I said was…” President?

Founder of The Weather Channel: Global warming is a “Total Scam!”

John Coleman, Meteorologist

Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam.—John Coleman

John Coleman is an American meteorologist and the founder of The Weather Channel.

According to Coleman Global warming ;

“[I]s the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in allusion of rapid global warming.

Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

There is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. I am incensed by the incredible media glamour, the politically correct silliness and rude dismissal of counter arguments by the high priest of Global Warming.

Nonetheless the discussion regarding Global Warming is over according to Al Gore. Al Gore has won an Oscar and the Nobel Bell Peace Price for his work regarding Global warming. According to Coleman the former Vice President’s work and awards are bogus!

The real story behind Global warming is that of Fascist repression of human behavior in the name of science and a plan to implement world-wide taxation represented as a Carbon tax.

Make no mistake, Global Warming is about money and control not saving the planet as Global Warming ideologues represent. Global Warming is about radical environmental groups, like Greenpeace, pushing global warming hysteria and imposing Global Warming World wide taxes.

Duke Energy, a leading U.S. electricity and gas utility, announced this week its support for a global warming tax — essentially a consumption tax on consumers of gasoline, oil, natural gas and coal. The tax is intended to reduce energy use and resulting emissions of greenhouse gases.

Duke calls it a “carbon tax,” but we might call it the “Greenpeace tax” in honor of the various radical environmental groups, like Greenpeace, pushing global warming hysteria and supporting such a tax. But we could also call it the “corporate appeasement tax” in honor of businesses like Duke Energy that are stumbling over themselves to curry favor with the Greens.

Thus another example of special and/or corporate interest replacing the will and interest of the people which the America constitution was written to establish and protect.

Not accepting the verdict of the political process, the activists are moving to implement the Kyoto Protocol on a corporation-by-corporation basis, thus circumventing our democratic process.

Many of you may have noticed NBC’s recent efforts to introduce a “green” theme into their programming. Bob Costas and his team of football experts plus Keith Obermann sat in a dark “lights out” NBC studio demonstrating their total commitment to the global warming hysteria created by “warm earthers.” Hysteria that is based on fraudulent scientific claims.

Reinforcing the thought that football and any mention of football should be immediately taken from the NBC broadcast company. Why? NBC chose to mix bogus politically correct propaganda with such an American iconic tradition as football, that's why!

Further, NBC has allowed itself to be used by radical special interest to manipulate its viewers. Preparing those viewers to conform to the demands of the coming forced Global Warming taxation scheme by the radical “warm earthers.”

Are you ready for some more Fascist government control of your life?

Pelosi’s Political Reverse Psychology

Nancy Pelosi working the President’s mind

"I know that Congress has low approval ratings, I don't approve of Congress, because we haven't done anything that — we haven't been effective in ending the war in Iraq. And if you asked me in a phone call, as ardent a Democrat as I am, I would disapprove of Congress as well." –Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, Speaker of the House

So there it is, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s acknowledgement and agreement that she is doing a lousy job but that’s not all.

Actually Ms. Pelosi is not saying that she is doing a lousy job, she is saying that Congress is doing a lousy job but in spite of Congress’ dismal performance she is on your side America.

Nice try Congresswoman but you are a part of the problem not apart from the problem. I seem to recall that it was you reveling in your 2006 victory of sweeping Democrats into majority status in both the Senate and the House of Congress based upon promises that you would end corruption in Washington and end the war in Iraq.

Just give you majority control of Congress, you said and the Democrats will change the direction of this country you said.

Now Congresswoman you’re attempting to stand aloof from Congress and the poison partisanship that you and your Democrat allies have created? I don’t think so!

Not surprisingly, Pelosi said President Bush and his Republican allies are mostly to blame. She noted that Bush has vetoed Democratic-led efforts to wind down the war, expand a children's health program and broaden stem cell research.CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writer

Ms. Pelosi you declared war on this President and attempted to subvert his power by setting up a mirror co-Presidency with Senator Harry Reid. Then you created an unworkable division between you the President, Republican members of the Senate and the House of Representatives and now you have the gall and the temerity to blame the President for the discord and the dissention that you’ve created? I don’t think so Congresswoman!

The American people are aware of your tactics of “Bushwhacking” the President on every opportunity you get. We are also aware your ideological differences with Conservatives have prevented you for working with Republicans and this President.

Congresswoman Pelosi you are not an innocent by-stander in this political calamity in America you are the political prime mover, the cause for the partisan war which rages in our government. Which you and Democrats continue to escalate.

Ms. Pelosi your little attempt of political reverse psychology is not fooling anyone; your 2006 shtick of Democrats good and Republicans bad is old hat and exposed as a lie.

Why? Because Ms. Pelosi the American people are sophisticated enough to know that the culture of corruption that you were speaking about in 2006, Democrats were a part of that corruption, and still are, not apart from it.

If you really don’t approve of Congress stop the partisan war with the President. You have that power. Either that or you’re just fishing for another angle which to come at President Bush with.

See Congresswoman we know all your moves now!

Show me yours and I’ll Show you mine: Politics of Hillary Clinton

Maureen Dowd

Maureen Dowd’s “Gift of Gall” is as warped a piece of liberal logic as one could ever imagine.

Dowd’s “You go girl,” salute to Hillary Clinton for Clinton’s attempt to have it all ways in the Democrat Debates is a disturbing insight into the degenerate thinking of the Liberal mind.

Dowd’s high praise for the unscrupulousness of Hillary Clinton forever makes the point that Liberals are debased unethical creatures of justification; anything and everything can be justified by running it through a liberal’s mind.

At first read Dowd’s commentary seems to be a tongue-in-cheek barb at Senator Clinton but three-fourths down the column you find yourself saying, hey wait a minute she’s really serious here for example, Dowd’s opening salvo:

I must rush to a sister’s defense.

Women need to rally to support Hillary and send her money because there are men, men like Tim Russert, who have the temerity to ask her questions during a debate. If there are six male rivals on stage and two male moderators and heaven knows how many men manning lights and boom mikes, the one woman should have the right to have it two ways.

One would think okay, Dowd’s not seriously attempting to rally feminists and women’s support of Senator Clinton because a moderator of a debate asked the Senator a question is she? And even thought Ms. Dowd surreptitiously introduces the idea that Senator Clinton is the only female in the building (of course she wasn’t the only female in the building) by alluding that the debate was an all male production we really don’t know if there were women as well as men “manning” the lights and boom mikes now do we?

Then there is Ms. Dowd’s estrogen laundry list outlining why it’s perfectly acceptable for Senator Clinton to play the reverse sexism card.

1. A woman has the right to keep secrets as in Senator Clinton’s White house records (Records which the Senator claims shows that she has experience to lead this country).
2. A woman has the right to say anything she wants about immigration because men say anything that they want about it. (Dowd cites Lou Dodds here as a man who says what he wants about immigration).
3. A woman has the right to play the reverse sexism card because it works!

All errantly weak points justifiable only in a reverse sexist’s mind!

However as the saying goes, with friends like Maureen Dowd Senator Clinton doesn’t need any enemies, what Dowd does is reinforce the perception that the Senator is a cold calculating contradictor, equivocator or liar.

Dowd reinforces the idea that in the span of a single sentence Senator Clinton can and often does say one thing and then completely the opposite. Ms. Dowd cites the obviously staged attempt of Senator Clinton to have it both ways by making the public statement that she realizes that her opponents were merely challenging her as the front runner while secretly she directed her campaign to run a website edited version of the debate skewed to appear as men attacking a poor defenseless woman.

In New Hamphire on Friday, she stayed above the fray, saying that her male rivals are not “piling on” because she’s a woman but because she’s “winning.” Meanwhile, she let her aides below the fray stir up fem-outrage by putting a video on the campaign Web site called “The Politics of Pile On,” edited to highlight men ganging up on her to the tune of Mozart’s “Marriage of Figaro.”

This Ms. Dowd is everything that Senator Clinton’s opponents have ever said about Mrs. Clinton, she speaks from both sides of her mouth therefore she can’t be trusted!

According to Maureen Dowd nothing should be sacred when it comes to rousing the women’s vote. Yet this is another example that anything can be justified in the mind of a liberal.

To which I say, if that is the case then nothing should be sacred or off limits from preventing a lying, manipulation woman from become the Democrat Nominee for President of the United States. Nothing! Not piling on, not attacking a woman nothing!

And for any man who is attempting to stop this woman who is a reverse sexist and a manipulating female politician, I say, you go boy!

Now how’s that for what’s good for the gander is good for the goose politics? (Has it really come to this? Thanks to Senator Clinton, yes it has!)

Attack, Attack, Attack

Senator Hillary Clinton

The “war room”, the hub of attack, counter-attack and spin which was at the heart of Bill Clinton’s presidential campaigns in the 1990s, has swung back into action with renewed force after Hillary Clinton was bloodied by her rivals for the first time in a debate last week.

It was Hillary Clinton who invented the war room during her husband’s campaign and she has developed her own fighting machine. —Sarah Baxter, Washington

From this point on believe nothing that you hear for the Clinton campaign. Hillary has been wounded and like a wolf with its paw caught in a trap the growling and the snarling that you heard from the Clinton campaign will be invectives and charges against her opponents; Democrats as well as Republicans. From this point on everything said or leaked to the media will be meant to hurt those who hurt her.

Up to this point Senator Clinton had been cuddled and cooed like a new born baby by Main Stream Media, everything that she did was cute, everything that she pronounced was treated like baby’s first word.

And then the unthinkable Clinton was treated like all the other adults in the room by the moderator and her democrat opponents. That’s what the Clinton campaign is complaining about, equal treatment! I thought Senator Clinton spent her life’s work fighting for equal treatment… apparently not!

For one night, for a change, it wasn’t all about, “Some girl named Hillary!” No this night was about who was best qualified to be nominated the Democrat’s Presidential candidate. But beware because Hillary is a “Dem-o-Hawk” remember Clinton’s vote to give President Bush authority to go to war with Iraq. Clinton is unapologetic about her invade Iraq vote and with that same attitude Hillary has declared war on everyone who opposes her, Code Pink Democrats and Republicans alike.

Senator Clinton has proven that she feels most comfortable waging these propaganda wars. She did it for eight years in her husbands administration. This will be made clear enough if the documents in the Clinton Presidential Library ever come to light before Clinton Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger decides that these papers are yet more official documents that the American public shouldn’t see.

You see destroying documents is one of Senator Clinton’s skills over the years her lawyerly training has taught her if there is no evidence there is no proof. What Sandy Berger did and was convicted of is but an extension of what had gone on in the Clinton White house for years. If Bush Lied, the Clintons Deceived and the American public still doesn’t know the extent of the damage that was done to our National Security under the Clinton Presidency, thanks to Berger some of the evidence has been scrubbed.

I’m sure the Clinton’s would love another chance to get back into the Whitehouse to scrub clean any evidence that they weren’t able to destroy before they left eight years ago.

To accomplish that the plotting and planning of the Hillary Clinton war room is fully engaged to drop bombs on the Senator’s rivals and opposition. You heard of the term “Spin” Hillary invented that too.

Is America really contemplating going backwards to a time when every communiqué from the Whitehouse was legalistic code decipherable only by the International Court at The Hague? I don’t think so!

But, that is what Hillary Clinton wants. She only knows one way to get it, on the attack. Always forward not relenting, never saying quite what she means, and never saying she’s sorry.

Attack, attack, attack… war room, propaganda, spin, Hillary Clinton is the mother of political division in this country.

In Tuesday’s, November 29th Democrat debates was the first signs that some are beginning to become aware of the Clintonian methodologies of political manipulation. If the American people begin to get it too nothing that comes out of the Clinton war room will be taken at face value.

As it should be for a candidate and her campaign who’s propaganda and spin are untrustworthy and who’s legalistic parsing is only decipherable by the International Court at The Hague!

The Politics of Reverse Sexism

“[I]n so many ways this all-women’s college prepared me to compete in the all-boys’ club of presidential politics.”—Senator Hillary Clinton preaching Sexism at her alma mater women only Wellesley College

Hillary Clinton stood on a stage for two hours Tuesday night, being yelled at by six men. —GAIL COLLINS

Hillary Rodham Clinton can’t have it both ways either she is the best candidate for the job or she is an affirmative action under-qualified woman who is attempting to exploit the fact that she is a poor little defenseless woman who needs the help of “The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants” or the “Divine Secrets of the Yaya Sisterhood to win the Presidency of the United States of America.

I’m going to say this as crystal clear as I can, no man would be attempting to use sexism to win the Presidency as Clinton is. Senator Clinton’s call for all women to unite to vote her into office is the severest case of reverse sexism!

So Senator Clinton doesn’t think that former Senator Edwards and Senator Obama stepped up their rhetoric against her in the 2008 Democrat Presidential Debates simply because she’s the front runner of her party?

A man would have thought that. A man would have said, Okay I should have expected to be attacked as the front runner. But oh no not a woman, not Hillary she wants to rally girl power ‘cause those mean old men have ganged up on her and hit a girl.

What do you think the Arabs or the Mexicans or any of the Chauvinistic male dominated world cultures are going to do when you’re attempting to negotiate with them Hillary? If you can’t take on Barak “Positive Politics” Obama and John “$500.00 haircut” Edwards without bitching like a little girl, then Mahmoud Ahmadinejab, Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez and the United Arab Emirates will certainly made you their little “BITCH.”

Hillary Clinton had to pull the Sexism card making this an all women “unite against the men” campaign. Of all of the things that divide this country Sen. Clinton has found yet another divider. Hillary Clinton is not a uniter she is a divider. This is fast becoming the lowest point of Senator Clinton’s campaign.

Clinton has been claiming that she is the one candidate that can bring the Country together how dare she pull the sexism card and talk about an old boys club and glass ceilings. That’s reverse sexism Senator. Senator Clinton isn’t running against an old boys network, Obama and Edwards, an old boy’s network doesn’t not make!

Clinton is running before you the American people! She’s applying for the job of President. But true to her nature she is trying to obfuscate and confuse. You’re suppose to be a mindless twit and say, Yeah it’s the 1920’s all over again and Hillary is leading the American women suffrage movement. Not!

Senator Clinton’s a little late for that, because there have been many great female leaders as heads of state. Golda Meir Prime Minister of Israel, 1898-1978, Indira Gandhi Prime Minister of India, 1917-1984, Margaret ThatcherPrime Minister of England, b. 1925, Benazir Bhutto, prime minister of Pakistan (1988-90, 1994-97); Kim Campbell, prime minister of Canada (1993); Edith Cresson, prime minister of France (1991-92); Maria Pintasilgo, prime minister of Portugal (1990-91); Kazimiera Prunskiene, prime minister of Lithuania (1990-91); Mary Robinson, president of Ireland (1990- ); Hanna Suchocka, prime minister of Poland (1992-93) and Argentina's new President-elect Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.

Women all around the world have broken the glass ceiling and transcended the old boys network. If Hillary Clinton doesn’t win her party’s nomination for the presidency it won’t be because women are victims as she is attempting to portray. The world is not waiting for Hillary Clinton to become the first woman president, don’t be so vain Hillary, that has already been accomplished in Ireland and soon in Argentina.

On the contrary, if Hillary losses the Democrat nomination that will be a rejection of Hillary Clinton only, not women! Senator Clinton doesn’t represent the plight of women in America or the world.

Senator Clinton represents Senator Clinton only, otherwise she would not have invoked the sacred images of women’s suffrage so carelessly by blaming the fact that she bombed in the Presidential debates on sexism.

In 2007 you’ve really got to seek out instances of sexism. Senator Clinton didn’t experience sexism in front of thousands of people in the middle of the Democrat Presidential debates. Obama and Edwards were doing what anyone would do to attempt to win an all out political fight.

What Senator Clinton experienced was the front runner being taken down a notch by her opponents and after that she experienced her campaign’s total implosion because the Senator played the sexism card instead of taking her lumps like a man.

Clinton Unmasked on Halloween Eve

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton –Debate Tuesday 10/29/07 Better watch your back tonight



The veneer of invincibility was striped away from Hillary Clinton Tuesday night on the campus of Dartmouth College during the Democrat Debates.

There are only two reasons that anyone would vote for Senator Clinton to be President of the United States of America now, actually there has always been only two reasons but they have been made all the more clear by her performance on Tuesday night.

First, reason that anyone would vote for Senator Clinton is that she is a woman and second, her last name is Clinton.

That would make anyone who would vote for Hillary Clinton chauvinisticly sexist and/or hyper-partisan because her supporters would rather vote for a woman named Clinton than any man who is more qualified to be President.

The aftermath and subsequent reaction to Senator Clinton’s performance, by her own campaign is evidence that Senator Clinton is not ready for primetime. They lashed out at Tim Russert blaming him for asking Senator Clinton questions that he would have asked any Republican man without blinking. According to the Drudge Report:

CLINTON INNER-CIRCLE BLAME 'UNFAIR' MODERATOR TIM RUSSERT. 'HE BORDERED ON THE UNPROFESSIONAL,' TOP HILLARY ADVISER CHARGES. 'HE BROKE DEBATE RULES AND WAS BELLIGERENT'

What did Russert do? He didn’t let Senator Clinton get away with non-answers and obfuscation. For once in her life Senator Clinton was asked to actually answer a question and she didn’t like it.

Still, she continued her strategy of avoiding direct answers to questions: She wouldn't say how she would address Social Security; she declined to pledge whether she would stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, or say whether she supports giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

Instead she tried to turn every issue into an argument against President Bush. She said Bush's name 25 times, more than all six of her rivals combined.—NEDRA PICKLER

All tricks from the Clinton playbook but they only work if Hillary is not pressed to answer a question. Most mainstream media have allowed Senator Clinton to get away with for years.

But Tuesday was not a night that anyone was giving Clinton her usual free pass. Everyone knew her tricks and held her feet to the fire which resulted in the Senator’s poor debate showing.

However it was Senator Clinton’s lawyer like manipulations that were the most noticeable regarding the issue of issuing driver licenses to illegal aliens.

It was not just that her answer about whether illegal immigrants should be issued driver's licenses was at best incomprehensible and at worst misleading.

It was that for two hours she dodged and weaved, parsed and stonewalled. –Roger Simon

Two hours? Senator Clinton has dodged and weaved, parsed, stonewalled and manipulated her entire public career this perhaps is the only time that she was held into account. Her husband did it for eight years of his presidency and ultimately brought disgrace upon the Whitehouse. Didn't you know? Parsing is the defination of what is, is!

America can ill afford to return to the Clintonesque type of politics that so divided this nation and that are embodied in Hillary Clinton. Letting Bill Clinton back near the Lincoln Bedroom is not a good idea either.

Senator Clinton once remarked, “Now I kiddingly say to people that I'll walk into the Oval Office well aware of the record of cronyism and corruption and incompetence and deception, and then I'll pick up the rug in the Oval Office and find so much stuff under there I won't know where it came from.”

Big ambitions Senator Clinton but many of us would be satisfied if you started by lifting off your mask of double talk, dodging, weaving, parsing, stonewalling and manipulation. The cronyism, corruption and deception are obviously your own Senator.
(Below Senator Clinton having difficulty with deception explaining her position on illegal alien’s driver’s licenses.)

US AGAINST THEM CONGRESS

The U.S. Capitol


Patrick O'Connor’s piece on the Politico, “New Congress at War on Everything,” is cutely partisan and typifies the Liberal perspective. Liberals never ever take responsibility for the messes that they create. It‘s always, “Bush’s fault,” with a Liberal. Nonetheless this is a Congress deeply engaged in a partisan war and the political bloodletting is about to begin. Let it be known America that you voted for this fight when you voted for Democrats.

Remember Democrats promised their constituents that if they were voted into the majority in Congress that they would fight President Bush, they would end the war in Iraq and they would change the direction of America. You can’t expect to do any of that without a fight and Democrats called this fight. If you are a Democrat I guess one out of three ain’t bad, because the only thing that this Congress has accomplished is fighting with the President!

And that‘s exactly what they set out to do. The new Democrat majority declared war on the White house and attempted to get Republicans, (mostly RINOS) to side with them as they attempted to storm the White house walls regarding the war in Iraq and lay siege to the White house’s keep.

John Ashcroft gone, Donald Rumsfield gone, Scooter Libby gone, Albert Gonzales gone, and Karl Rove gone, if Democrats hated al Qaeda as much as they hate Republicans al Qaeda would be gone too!

Interestingly enough, in the midst of the battle with the White house Democrats noticed that their polling numbers were being affected. They noticed a marked disapproval of the Congress as a whole and specifically their Congressional leaders. Why? Because Congress began a war of personal destruction waged on Americans rather than fighting on the behalf of Americans and America.

Yet to Patrick O’Conner both Democrats and Republicans are equally at fault. So how is it Republican’s fault too Patrick? You seem to be attempting to place equal blame. Oh I know, perhaps the Republicans aren’t abandoning their principles fast enough and perhaps they aren’t acquiescing to the Democrat agenda in the way Democrats wish. Is that it Patrick?

And Republicans are supposed to be multi-faceted enough to work bipartisanly with Democrats while Democrats run attack ads in Republican districts. Ads meant to unseat the very Republicans that are discussing bipartisan deals with Democrats. I see what you mean Patrick if those pesky Republicans weren’t around Democrats wouldn’t have to resort to backstabbing to get rid of them, now would they?

Even the most challenged (dumbest RINO) Republican has figured out that throwing in their lots with Democrats makes for a short political life.

GOP lawmakers, all of whom had expressed interest in a bipartisan deal on the SCHIP legislation, were furious that the Democratic leader from Maryland had not reached out to them in a more serious way early on.

They also criticized him and Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois for failing to stop his allies outside Congress from running attack ads in their districts, while they were discussing a bipartisan deal.

Democrats are under tremendous pressure from liberal activists to take a hard-line approach against everything Bush. –Patrick O’Conner

Democrat actions such as these have created a bitterly divided Congress, Patrick. Only in the Liberal mind can you advance on your political enemies, make political kills, attack their ideas, attack their leaders, attack their beliefs and their principles and then expect them to join you as you plot their own demise.

Democrats have attempted to advance such a radical agenda on the subjects of Iraq, health care and spending that according to Mr. O’Conner, the Rank-and-file Democrats have turned on their leaders this fall in a series of minor upheavals, forcing them to suspend consideration of bills to update warrantless wiretapping laws, reclassify the killing of ethnic Armenians almost a century ago, expand workplace protections for gays and lesbians and require all electronic voting machines to produce paper records.

In other words, Democrat leaders planned to gut Homeland Security surveillance laws, insult the Government of Turkey with a meaningless congressional resolution (a la Nancy Pelosi), advance the homosexual agenda and further exacerbate the Debolt voting machine fiasco (which Democrats created in the first place) had their colleagues, the Democratic Congressional party members not stopped them and rebelled against the clueless Democrat leadership.

Democrats are reviewing poll after poll showing sagging popularity not only of Congress but also of their congressional leaders. So, some lawmakers have begun to argue, it just might be in everyone’s interest to show that Washington can actually tackle a serious issue without all of the theatrics and games.

The energy bill might be the turning point. With both sides desperate for a legislative achievement, Bush and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have displayed rare, if quiet, cooperation on the issue.

At this point anything that this Congress does should be held up as suspect, a rouse, and a ploy. Any bipartisan show behind an energy bill or any bill will not fool the American people. We have seen enough to know just what Democrats in power will do. And it ain’t nothing good!

For those of us that do not hold to Democrat or Liberal ideology we have been put on notice that Democrats intend to force their ideology on America.

Interestingly enough, the last two elections that I checked I noticed that half of the citizens in this country voted for President Bush!

Nevertheless, it has become all too apparent that Liberal Democrats will fight to accomplish their goal of Europeanizing America. Hell Europe doesn’t even what to be Europe anymore!

The only things that are not clear at this point, are there Republicans with sufficient values and backbone that are willing to fight for America and are they smart enough not be be deceived by Democrats and bright enough to win back the hearts and minds of America!

This is indeed an “us against them” Congress and the fighting is about what America is becoming or whether or not there should even be an America. I have seen enough to conclude that Democrats don’t think so.

Choose your side carefully because your children undoubtedly will live in conditions determined by the outcome of the struggle to control Congress, the White house and ultimately America. Will they live in treachery or tyranny or freedom.

In the end this “us against them” mentality will further divide an already divided America the question is, will we live in tyranny or freedom.

The challenge, your challenge is to decide which side is offering which!

US or THEM…

Bushwhacking Hillary

Sen. Hillary Clinton

Edwards has been making a more vigorous case recently against Clinton's ability to win a general election. He's also led criticisms of her that have been picked up by other candidates — that she's too connected to lobbyists and that her vote to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization could be a repeat of her mistake in voting for the Iraq war.—AP Washington

Democrats who are worried that Hillary will win the Democrat nomination only to lose the Presidency in the general elections because of possible Republican, “Anybody but Hillary” sentiments do have something to fear.

Conservative ire is bound to rise because of Clinton’s years of polarizing ultra-partisan politics against the people she named the vast right-wing conspiracy when in fact it was the vast sexual compulsion of William Jefferson Clinton(According to President Gerald Ford) that was the cause of her and her unfaithful husband’s problems. Now that she knows the truth (that Bill lied) you’d think that she’d apologize for her mischaracterization of the people that she opposes. (Don’t hold your breath!)

Memo to the Democratic presidential candidates: You can still beat Hillary Rodham Clinton, but you better act fast.—AP Washington

Nonetheless Democrats don’t have to feel helpless they already have a way to rid themselves of the possibility of Hillary sucking all of the air out of the room in this presidential campaign yet they act as if they are presently unaware of it.
It’s true, Democrats already have the means to stop Hillary if they chose to use it. They could Bushwhack her.

Bushwhacking is a Democrat devise created to attack President Bush 7/24, 365 days a year. I’ll explain how it works.

Every time that you as a Democrat say anything publicly, anything at all, you always tie it negatively to President Bush. For example you might be asked a question about new hospital being built in your congressional district you say.

Yes while it is nice that this hospital was built, you do know that President Bush denied adequate funding for federal stem cell research and he is generally opposed to science. (Listen to Reid, Pelosi or Clinton they work this tactic to perfection)

That’s how it works you’ve been so accustomed to hearing it over the last eight years that you probably though that every sentence that a Democrat spoke had to be punctuated with some negative aspersion against President Bush. No that’s just Bushwhacking at work!

You can turn on any Sunday morning news show Face the Nation, Meet the Press, Chris Matthews and a wide range of topics might be discussed but every Democrat to a person will tie whatever remarks they make into something negative against the President.

For going on eight years; 7/24, 365 days a year that is what the American people have been exposed to. In every Liberal remark another whack at the President.

Effective? Take a look at the President’s poll numbers. I’d say almost eight years of Bushwhacking has been a very effective tool which Democrats have used against President Bush. So effective that foreign enemies of America will often use Democrat talking points to Bushwhack the President.

"It never occurred to us that the commander in chief of the country would leave 50,000 citizens in the two towers to face those horrors alone . . . because he thought listening to a child discussing her goats was more important,"—Osama bin Laden

That’s bin Laden referring mockingly to the President’s visit at a school when the 9/11 attack occurred, mocking derision that he obviously learned from listening to Americans demeaning their own President.

Yes one of the few American exports we have left, bin Laden Bushwhacking Bush like he picked up from the Democrats, oh and he’s not the only one who could forget Hugo Chavez, dictator of Venezuela to the applause of U.N. delegates mockingly Bushwhacking an American President with allusions to fire, brimstone and the smell of sulfur.

So how does this help Democrats rid themselves of the specter of the blue stained dress that is hovering over the White house once again?

Well the very first test if a Democrat is worthy of the White house is whether they can beat Hillary. If the Democrat “also rans” can’t beat Hillary there’s really no reason for Democrats to even talk about the White house. If Hillary can’t be beaten in the Democrat primaries she will certainly be stopped in the general election wasting yet another Democrat opportunity to get to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Right now the Democrat campaign is political Survivors Island and as a Democrat “also ran” if you can’t beat Hillary you might as well get off of the island!

So Bushwhack her, treat her like she is wearing a George W. Bush Halloween mask. Use the Bushwhack technique against what stands between Democrats and the occupying of the Whitehouse. The Clintons !

Every statement every question answered has to be punctuated with a negative about Hillary. If you are asked about ending the war you say.

Yes I would make it my first priority to end the war but you do know that Senator Clinton will not guarantee bring the troops home as I would.

You know the drill a continual steady drumbeat of unadulterated negativity against Hillary Clinton, 7/24 365 days a year. (The bonus is you don’t even have to make Hillary’s negatives up!)

Bushwhack her, you did it to a sitting President you certainly can do it to save the Democrat party from the second worst mistake it could possibly make.

What was the worst mistake you ask, the worst mistake of the Democrat party is that Democrats have allowed the elite of the party to sell the party’s soul to the radical fringe element of the George Soros Moveon.org persuasion.

A hard left Democrat party is not the party of America so after you’ve Bushwhacked Hillary you’ve still got some work to do!