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!

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!