Proof Positive Hillary Is Unfit For Command

Emotional.   Insecure.  Angry.  Vindictive.  Zero experience.  ‘Nuf said.

William Jefferson Clinton Redefines the Term “Liar”

~Snooper~

Thank God for the internet that Gore made! A special transcript can be found at Newsbusters.

The former (thank God) President, Bill Clinton, “didn’t keep all of his speeches” but, some of us have and, we, The Rabid Right Wing Steam Rollers know how to “Google It”. This tid-bit is just too much. Today, on the CBS Early Show with Harry Smith, a softball interview with Bill Clinton went south.

Harry Smith said, “When you were in Muscatine a week and a half or so ago, right, and said, I’ve always been against this, speaking about the Iraq war, I did a little Googling last night, and the best I could tell was you said the weapons inspectors should be allowed to do their jobs.”

That’s the best this asshat could do? No wonder the Lame Stream Media is in such shambles! Here, at A Newt One, we will do what the Lame Stream should be doing. we have, at our beckon call, the internet that Gore made therein, all manner OF “things” can be found. We “Googled It” and found…GASP! Bill Clinton LIED!! This is Clinton’s answer, like it was the truth or something:

Look, I said something like that a hundred times. I supported threatening Saddam so we could do the inspections. The mistake we made was not letting the inspections finish. If they had, there would have been no war. And I was always against doing it without the inspections. As you pointed out, most of my speeches weren’t getting covered by the press and we didn’t copy them or anything back then. But we do have several records, including one six days before the invasion, where I said, I don’t think they should do this until the inspections finished. That was the deal. And, if we’d done it, there would have been no war.

Now, ain’t that sweet? The problem is…it is a lie. And, we do know what “IS” is.

President Clinton addresses THE Joint Chiefs of Staff: 2/17/1998

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program. We have to defend our future from these predators of the twenty-first century. They’ll be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein.

OOPS! Then, there is always this: 4/16/2003

“Saddam is gone, and good riddance,” former President Clinton said yesterday. Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren’t found. Said the president, “I don’t think you can criticize the president for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. That is what I was always told.”

WHAT? That is what he had always been told? Was that a slip of ye ole tongue? Is that the data Sandy Burglar Berger stole? WHAT? Bats in the belfry and the sound of crickets.

5/18/2003 Speech: Remarks at Tougaloo College Commencement

I supported the president when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

OOPS! I wonder if the salary Harry Smith is receiving is commensurate with his inability to “Google It”. If his pay is any more than $2 per year, heads should roll. Try this: Google Bill Clinton and Iraq War…let me know what you come up with. K?

One more out of about 1.5M…Time Magazine, 6/28/2004

So you’re sitting there as president, you’re reeling in the aftermath of 9/11, so, yeah, you want to go get Bin Laden and do Afghanistan and all that, but you also have to say, well, my first responsibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material. I gotta do that. That’s why I supported the Iraq thing.

The Iraq thing? The Iraq thing? I cannot believe that he would actually say that. The Iraq thing. I never want to hear any more whining about GWB’s pronunciation problems or quips about his Texas swagger. The Iraq thing?

The man is a pathological liar. No ifs ands or buts. The Clintons are the Darlings of The Media and always have been. They represent the epitome of socialistic America so richly pined after and lustfully desirous to bring to the United States.

Over. My. Dead. Body.

A note from El Rushbo:

[…] He just got away with lying again on the CBS Early Show because their researchers couldn’t find anything other than Clinton talking about weapons inspectors when they Googled. I find it just breathtaking, folks, I do, at how incompetent the Drive-By Media is. They can’t do anything right, and they don’t want to. They don’t want to get it right where the Clintons are concerned. […]

Dittos.

A while ago, others were chatting about this at memeorandum and at Captain Ed’s.

Let’s Talk About Hillary

~Snooper~
Hillary, whose apparent zero is Kerry, is more often than not for something until she decides she was actually undecided about being against that which once was neither for or against.

Which, is better than what?

And, where is Hillary? Ever since she internationally embarrassed herself at the most recent “debate”, if, you can call it that, her Toy Boy Billy has been her voice. Is this how her alleged Presidency going to be? Is this what America needs or, more bluntly, wants? Will Hillary, at the first sign of a whoopsie, call for Billy? Perish the thought.

Over at Political Grind, they have this to say:

[…] For the first time in a long time, Mrs. Clinton finds herself under intense scrutiny from her opponents and the mainstream media. Are they “piling on”? Of course. Is it fair? This is a query unworthy of an answer; it is merely what it is. Welcome to the race to be president of the United States, Mrs. Clinton.

A much more pertinent side question: what took so long for the genuine media scrutiny?

For some reason, Hillary Clinton enjoyed extraordinarily positive press coverage for the last eight years. Why? I have no satisfying explanation. Had the left-leaning mainstream media been cultivating and protecting a favored candidate? Not likely. This hypothesis is deliciously inviting, but it seems far too facile and “breathtakingly” conspiratorial. Perhaps the media felt genuine sympathy for the famously humiliated wife of the most celebrated philandering husband in all of American history? Or perhaps the media believed that they went too far during impeachment, and they owed the Clintons a “pay-back call” or two. Maybe. […]

From an outsider looking in, I see the media’s “turn” on Hillary as wild animals turning on the wounded member of the pack. Just an observation based upon nearly 53 years on this planet. All in all, most of the Lame Stream sides with Hillary but the occasional barb is indicative of vultures waiting for their prey to actually die off before they dine.

At Lightning Fingers’ place at Wake Up America: Panic In Hillaryville

[…] Rasmussen again showed that she was hemorrhaging points in NH…in September 18th, she held a 23 point lead, October 27th, that lead dropped to 16 points and November 7th, that lead dropped to 10 points.

That is a 13 point drop since September 18th, 2007.

Worse news, the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll that heads up against Giuliani, Hillary only enjoys a 1 point lead.

USA/Gallup shows married men do not favor Hillary.

Zogby shows trouble for Hillary in Iowa.

This next Rasmussen poll is no big surprise, since it is Texas, but added with everything else, my question yesterday about whether Hillary Clinton is losing that “shoe in” status becomes more relevant. […]

Don Surber has a knack for the obvious to those wide awake…unlike the Leftinistra. As our readers should quickly realize, we call out the inconsistencies of the Leftinistra on a regular basis. I dare say that 99.9% of them will NEVER accept responsibility for their own actions if the outcome is a negative. There is always someone else to blame or something else.

[…] So the big news from Planet Clinton is that Bill is cavalierly accepting the blame for the failure of Hillarycare in 1994.

The New York Times quoted him as saying: “You know how much she cares about this. She has taken the rap for some of the problems we had with health care the last time that were far more my fault than hers.”

And indeed, the headline on an Oct. 3, 1994, story via NYT News Service said: “First lady takes blame for health care demise.”

Except for the part where she did not say that. Mrs. Clinton’s construct was that she was to blame for failing to make you people (mouth breathers that you are) understand the genius of her perfect plan.

Reported the Times in 1994: “But the most frustrating failure she acknowledges is not getting the country to understand that the plan the Clintons offered a year ago was an opening offer, ‘constructed to be deconstructed.’ Instead of being a basis for negotiations, she said, ‘it was described as an ultimatum by our opponents and therefore used to undermine the process of reaching agreement.'”

Got that? The VMWC (vast medical wing conspiracy) did her in, preventing her from bestowing upon the dumb masses the wisdom of her perfect plan. […]

Case closed. Or, as my partners here at ANO would say, checkmate.

So, we have determined that at the first sign of actually having to admit to something that could go wrong for Hillary, she calls on others to fall on her own sword, lest she get harmed, and then blame game then ensues and when the dust settles, she will emerge and say something akin to, ‘What?’

And what of her Porkness? Ed Morrisey chimes in on that:

Guess which presidential candidate has the temerity to talk fiscal responsibility while outstripping the other candidates in pork-barrel spending? It turns out the Woodstock museum was only the headline act in a long concert of earmarking for Hillary Clinton. Not only does she lead the Senate delegation in this cycle’s presidential race, but despite her junior status, she earmarked more than five times more money than her nearest competitor: […]

Again, we ask, is this what America needs? A spendthrift Socialist? No, Hillary. America cannot afford you and your 1,000,000 “things America cannot afford”.

Flopping Aces:

[…] Ahhhhh, the Clintons. You can always count on them for some kind of dishonorable conduct. […]

Exactly so.

A Hat Tip to Stop the ACLU for this article here:

Two new reputable polls of New Hampshire Democratic Primary voters will show statistically significant drops in support for frontrtunner Hillary Clinton, Democrats who have seen those polls said today.

The polls will be released this weekend and are embargoed; though I’m not privy to the embargo agreement, I’ll be a little vague out of respect for the polling organizations.

One of the polls shows that the gap between Clinton and Barack Obama narrowed by more than 10 points. Her biggest decline was seen among older voters.

The other shows Clinton’s lead over Obama reduced by approximately 9 points.

John Edwards remains at about 15 percent in both.

And, there are reports that Hillary leads Rudy by 1 point now. In cases such as this, I consider Bad News for Hillary to be Good News. I so hope that Hillary is the nominee for the DNC. The GOP may not be able to take back the Senate but the GOP sure does have a good shot at taking back the House and WILL retain the White House.

Bring it on, Hillary.

Others blogging:

Snooper / A NEWT ONE: Let’s Talk About Hillary

Chris Bowers / Open Left: Obama, Non-Christians, and New Hampshire

Spree / Wake up America: Panic in Hillaryville? — Yesterday we pointed out a few polls done …

Peggy Noonan / Opinion Journal: Things Are Tough All Over — But Mrs. Clinton is no Iron Lady.

Jonathan Singer / MyDD: Ambinder: Two New Polls Show Race Tightening in NH

Gaius / Blue Crab Boulevard: Wonder Why Camp Hillary Is Almost Frantic?

Reliapundit / THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS: JUST LIKE DEAN, HILLARY IS FADING FAST. SO, WHO WILL BECOME THE NEXT KERRY?

JammieWearingFool: Pantsuit Plummets in NH Polls

John Riley / Spin Cycle: Clinton gets a big endorsement but a bad poll

Ed Morrissey / Captain’s Quarters: All Hail The Pork Queen

Catch the wave.

Hillary: The Sickness of The Beguiled

~Snooper~

The Budding Leninist, Czarina, the Modern American Progressive, is a Clear and Present Danger to the very survival of Traditional America. Traditional America is under attack by these budding Leninists, calling themselves “Progressives”. If one carefully examines the mantra of said same, one will see that which they prattle and yammer upon is Socialism with a smattering of Communism, disguised as “progressive”.

What are these “progressives” progressing towards? No one on “their” side of the aisle, whichever that side might be, has explained their talking dulls satisfactorily, have they? Does anyone even know? I have performed a scientific study and I do believe that our team has discovered the ailment causing the sickness that “progressivism” is. It is kind of scary and without further ado, we provide a CT Scan of a “progressive’ we found wondering aimlessly around SE Texas, incoherent, inaudible and in dire need of a rubber room.

And there you have it. We call it Hillaroncasinseptocacka. Like the Sci Fi Borg technology, the human brain was injected with this nanoprobes and this victim of this tragic attack fought the assimilation to their ultimate peril. It deteriorated the thought process to the point that the victim actually drowned in its own drivel. The recorded dying words were, “Bush did it”.

The nanoprobes disintegrated immediately following death.

In other news, we find that the Hillaryscare Campaign is in a tizzy over their stature in Iowa. It seems as though that damn Obama character is actually pulling ahead.

Naturally, her apparent falling from grace could be a direct result of the criminal activity she has conveniently side-stepped and her money-bag and emotional standard bearers are charlatans.

Some are saying that her woes are catching up with her now that Czarina is making a play to The Big House…woops…The White House.

As the Czarina expresses her feigned caring drivel towards our troops, we are reminded how our troops think of her. As for her sexual inclinations, I really don’t care but the rumor is still out there and I am with Don…it is just a rumor at this point and it really should be left well enough alone.

With her woes in Iowa making the road ahead indeed troublesome, her paperwork is being held hostage someplace and is due to be released but the delay-game is “Rather” irksome. I would rather see these documents that are sure to pin-point her qualifications to be CIC…without them, what is her justification?

The Dema Sutra positions of the Budding Leninist, as intriguing and hard to track and keep up with are “Rather” typical of a liar, charlatan and someone with something to hide, I find her inability to maintain eye contact all too revealing.

Her ever “evolving” and “progressive” (whatever that means) pseudonyms for whatever position she takes with whatever the prevailing winds are at the time, is always so evasive and unclear to the minds of the intellectually sound. With the continuing scandals surfacing, I find it interesting that she even shows herself in the public eye. The Clinton machine pathway is littered with the bodies of those that know the Real Deal.

What should serve as an adequate wake-up call to the American People is being shunted to ground and her supporters include terrorists and their moppets.

Carl Rove says she can be beat but the road to defeat for the Czarina would be an easier path if her drones would wake-up to smell the coffee and to call into question her patriotism or better yet, ask the question as to what she is actually patriotic towards.

Hillary And The Long Shot

Hillary Clinton Not So Inevitable

There is a bit of buzz around the blogosphere about a couple recent surveys/polls and while they make for interesting reading and debate, politics can and usually does turn on a dime, so it is all taken with a grain of salt.

With that said, lets take a look.

Florida: Democrat vs Republican

In a potential match up between Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton, Giuliani wins at 50-43 percent.

Republican Rudy Giuliani, shown here campaigning yesterday at the NASCAR Nextel Cup Ford 400 race in Homestead, is the most popular presidential candidate in Florida, with 57 percent of voters willing to consider voting for him, according to a new Mason-Dixon poll.

In a potential matchup with Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, Giuliani wins 50-43 percent. Republicans Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney also beat her, although their wins are within the margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points.

Clinton is the only candidate, Democrat or Republican, with higher unfavorable than favorable ratings; 45 percent of voters have an unfavorable opinion of her, while 38 percent have a favorable opinion.

Back in August I asked if the DNC stripping Florida of all its delegates to the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, because Florida moved up its presidential primary to January 29, would hand Florida to the Republicans, and in this MiamiHerald.com article, I may have gotten my answer.

The boycott of Florida by the Democratic candidates over the state’s renegade early primary could come back to haunt the party, according to the poll. Statewide, 26% of independent voters and 33% of undecided voters said they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who shunned Florida before the Jan. 29 primary.

Iowa: Democrat vs Democrat

According to the the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll (PDF file), Sen. Barack Obama beats Sen. Hillary Clinton 2-1 as the most honest and trustworthy candidate. She has less support in Iowa than nationally in trust to handle a variety of specific issues. Obama now runs evenly with her on the topic of Iraq. And she’s third in Iowa among men.

From ABC:

Most Democratic likely voters in Iowa, 55 percent, say they’re more interested in a “new direction and new ideas” than in strength and experience, compared with 49 percent in July — a help to Obama, who holds a substantial lead among “new direction” voters.

New Hampshire: Republican vs Republican

In the Republican race in another critical state, meanwhile, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney gained ground in a CNN/WMUR New Hampshire Presidential Primary Poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire.

The poll’s analysis, released Monday afternoon, said Romney’s gain has been “mostly at the expense of Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson.” While Romney “appears strong on domestic issues, foreign policy may be a potential Achilles heel in the coming weeks,” the analysis says.

Polls change, surveys change, people rise and fall fast in politics, especially after some major gaffe where a politicians sticks their foot into their mouth publicly, or a scandal hits, so I fully expect these numbers to continue to fluctuate.

What this does tell us though is that Hillary Clinton has a very high unfavorable rating, she is not seen to be upfront nor honest and married men seem not to like her at all, which can only help the other Democratic contenders as the vie for the Democratic nomination.

Hillary Clinton, her team and many others, myself included, thought she would be inevitable for the Democratic nomination, but recent gaffes, flip flopping over the illegal aliens driver’s licenses issue, not once but 6 times, her campaign being caught planting questions and audiences as well as the campaign finance scandals that have plagued her going all the way back to her Senate campaign all are starting to factor in and she has lost that assumed “inevitability”.

All in all, the horse race just got a bit more interesting.

Get The Gloves Out!

cross post by Spree

We already know and have discussed the fact that Hillary Clinton isn’t inevitable to win the Democratic nomination and the battle of “electability” has begun in earnest between her and Barack Obama.

Clinton about Obama:

Hillary Clinton’s attack on his qualifications. Making an economic speech in Knoxville, Iowa, earlier that day, the New York senator had touted her own know-how, saying that “there is one job we can’t afford on-the-job training for — that’s the job of our next president.” Her aides confirmed that she was referring to Obama.

Obama about Clinton:

Pressed to respond, Obama offered a zinger feathered with amused disdain: “My understanding was that she wasn’t Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, so I don’t know exactly what experiences she’s claiming.”

Everybody laughed, including Obama.

The fact of the matter is neither one of them have enough experience to run a country.

Hillary is a panderer that cannot commit to one stance and goes where ever the polls tell her to whether it is a good idea or bad and Barack thinks that living in a foreign country when he was a child gives him some hint about how foreign policy should be handled.

Both are laughable.

Maureen Dowd points out that the only areas where Hillary does have experience in were dismal failures when she was in the White House:

Her Democratic rivals had meekly gone along, accepting her self-portrait as a former co-president who gets to take credit for everything important Bill Clinton did in the ’90s. But she was not elected or appointed to a position that needed Senate confirmation. And the part of the Clinton administration that worked best — the economy, stupid — was run by Robert Rubin. Hillary did not show good judgment in her areas of influence — the legal fiefdom, health care and running oppo-campaigns against Bill’s galpals.

The Clinton campaign in Iowa is in a panic. Obama has been closing the gap with women and her ginning up of gender has lost her male votes. Speaking around Iowa this week, Obama made the point that his exotic upbringing, family in Kenya and years as an outsider allow him to see the world with more understanding, and helped form his judgment about resisting the Iraq war.

IBD points out something else that Hillary’s so called experience would translate into:

Yet government spending is clearly what Hillary’s White House job experience would translate into.

Time indicates that the recent polls showing Obama taking the lead from Clinton are not the only indicators that his “surge” in Iowa is real:

It’s significant then that Obama’s message seems to be catching on among the notoriously pragmatic Iowans. By 55% to 33%, Iowans—who will take part in a Jan. 3 caucus that will be the first test for Democratic presidential candidates—said they favored “new direction and new ideas” over “strength and experience,” a new Washington Post/ABC poll found. In July the ratio was 49% to 39%. After trailing Clinton in the state most of the year, Obama now leads by 4 points, and he has eliminated her advantage among women voters and older voters. He is also dead even with her when voters are asked whom they trust more to handle the economy, Social Security and the war in Iraq.

The fact is Hillary has quite a bit of baggage as well as past scandals, recent fumbles on simple questions and has been caught planting questions in her audiences so she doesn’t have to address anything and give a direct answer that isn’t pre-scripted.

Immigration is also going to play a big part after the Democratic and Republicans parties pick their nominee for the 2008 elections and whether it is Obama or Clinton, both have shown they are very weak on that issue and the GOP will have a solid platform to stand on against them.

Hillary showed her weakness in the Democratic debate where she was for Spitezer’s plan to give illegal aliens a driver’s license, then changed her mind and claimed she didn’t support it (within 3 minutes), then over the following two weeks, flip flopped 4 more times until Spitzer shelved the idea and then she came out against it firmly.

Barack Obama, as shown in the time piece, linked above, is just as weak on illegal immigration by making statements like this:

By the time Obama moves on to immigration (“These are people who are trying to make a living. I understand they broke the law. But let me tell you something: if the minimum wage in Canada was $100 an hour …”)

The Republicans heard Americans loud and clear with the Immigration reform debacle not long ago and have stated that they heard, they understood and they will now work to enforce the laws, secure our borders and deal with those issues before attempting to reform and create new laws.

The Democrats will never understand that message because they depend on illegals fraudulently obtaining voters registrations and voting for them because they are on the side of amnesty. That is the only reason that Democratic politicians fight so hard about having to have an ID to be able to vote.

Hillary encourages the illegal immigrants to sneak into the country and Barack excuses them.

Both of them will suffer for those stances in 2008.

Neither one has the experience in Foreign policy and they are both on th wrong side of the illegal immigrant issue.

They also have both pinned their hopes on Iraq failing and since it is now seeing very public progress, they can try to ignore it as much as they wnt,but the Republicans that backed the surge and the new strategies would be very smart to make sure the public remembered who fougth the hardest for victory and who fought for failure and voted for defeat.

Taxes we can discuss another day, because everyone knows which party would raise their taxes and which party would keep tax cuts in place.

On every issue of importance, neither Hillary nor Barack have the experience to handle our great country.

Related:
Paul vs Clinton, the court case being heard in the LA Superior Court, is explained in two videos over at YouTube, it explains the case against Hillary and remember the whole time you watch these, that Hillary tried to deny that she even knew Peter Paul while omitting all contributions from him from her FEC filings.

First video here.

(10 minutes)

Second video here.

(4 minutes)

The viral frenzy surrounding the “rough cut” trailer for the documentary “Hillary Uncensored” continues. The trailer has been Google’s top-ranked video since October 8, and has been seen more than 3 million times online.

Watch them.

It is not often a politicians is captured on tape conducting their illegal activities.

The Politics of Parsing

My parents use to tell me, “Your sins are sure to find you out.”
I guess Hillary was never taught that.

Any questions?

Hillary’s Tribute To The Old Smelly Hippies

Hillary’s $1M Drug Addict and Anti War Museum Porker

Yes, I know, this is old news and all but it came up in the GOP Debate this evening and Senator McCain presented and excellent rendering of his opinion.

I remember the Woodstock era and they were the smelly hippies of our time then and to build a museum honoring the anti-establishment, anti-war and anti-Americanists of that time, is all too telling to me and Hillary does not deserve to even think about running for President, let alone be the President of the United States.

I sure am glad that the museum honoring cowards and drug addicts won’t be built.

He said when he was asked about this tribute, that he thinks that no one that supports such spending as this can be the President and he also said that he was not in attendance at Woodstock because he was tied up at the time. Here is the exact quote:

“I wasn’t there. I’m sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event. I was tied up at the time.”

In case you are not in touch with current events, Senator McCain was a POW in North Vietnam at the time Woodstock was taking place.

That got him the ONLY standing ovation during the debate.

Good on John McCain. I think that with a little more “soap box” antics, John McCain will rise to the occasion.

Catch The Wave

Can Hillary Hear The Bubbles?

Hillary’s Ship Is On Fire

Someone once said that never before has a presidential aspirant been elected to the Presidency of The United States when their approval ratings are overshadowed by their disapproval ratings.

Now, we see that Hillary’s approval ratings are at 50% nationwide and her disapproval ratings are at 50%. Gee. Why then, is she still going? Could it be that she has the gift of gab?

Also, now we have a video that the Lame Stream Media will not air. The link was sent to me from one of my readers and I thank Mike M for it. The video is quite long for a video…about 13 minutes…odd that, isn’t it? 13? Curious.

We have Hillary exposing her surveillance hypocrisies and in the GOP Debate this evening, Huckabee said that Hillary, if she took her lips off of the backsides of Soros, she might be able to get some fresh air.

In the last DNC Debate, Hillary and all of the other sponges of Soros fundings, told their trolls and blind followers that the troops would be in Iraq until at least 2013 and just last week, Hillary the Fraud told some folks that when she is elected she will pull the troops out immediately. Do we really need a psychopath in the White House?

I think it would be just swell if the DNC Candidates kept on doing what they are doing. That drop into the Abyss of Obscurity will be all the more sweeter.

Catch The Wave

Hillary…Just Another Spelling For Corruption

Hillary’s Corruption Never Ends.

t has been said that atheists can lie like a rug because they have no moral compunction that requires them to tell the truth.

“The beauty of being an atheist is that you have no moral reason to tell the truth. So Pete Stark can claim such outrageous (if stupidly worded) things about the President.” MT from our private group

Along these lines, we find Hillary taking funds, once again, from questionable sources. One can be justified in questioning her ethics.

The Czarina has been recently exposed as an acceptor of fraudulent funds and has theoretically given the funds back. However, this does not absolve her or her campaign minions from the wrong doings. If it were to absolve them, one can extrapolate from that the following scenario: someone kills someone but didn’t really know they did so, telling folks that you did kill someone, somehow absolves you from the consequences of your actions.

This is why we on the right often state the obvious: personal integrity and accepting responsibility for ones own actions is alien to the Leftinistra. When caught doing wrong, it is invariably someones else’s fault or the blame is placed on something else.

As Sunlit Knight from a Newt One has often stated, as an example of the Leftinistra quagmire of self-induced idiocy:

“People don’t make enough money so let’s raise the minimum wage. That is like saying that all of the boats aren’t the same height so let’s add more water to the lake.”

All raising the minimum wage does, as raising the water in the lake, is make the problems worse because there is no change. It is merely a feel-good action…someone can say that they did something and when that something does not have the affect imagined, it must be the fault of something or someone else.

Hillary has proclaimed her religiosity but her actions are quite opposite of that which she claims. Would a religious individual receive illegal contributions for the sake of political gain just to win an election? Isn’t that hypocritical?

When questioned about such activities, the inquiring minds are accused of smearing and being mean-spirited or racially biased.

From the NY Post:

October 20, 2007 — Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been raising huge piles of money in Chinatown, but some of it has come from donors who can’t be located or who were improperly repaid for their contributions, according to The Post and other reports.

A search of Chinatown donors yesterday by The Post found several bogus addresses and some contributions that raised eyebrows.

[…]

The Clinton campaign dismissed the L.A. Times story as derogatory to Chinese-Americans.

[…]

Dear Leftinistra…we don’t but that kind of crap anymore. Even making that kind of lame claim will and does backfire on you in this day and age and it is high time that you try another tactic because this dog don’t hunt no more.

It is high time that the self-alleged Higher Moral Authority within the Leftinistra to be held accountable to their lies.

However, like MT says:

“The beauty of being an atheist is that you have no moral reason to tell the truth. So Pete Stark can claim such outrageous (if stupidly worded) things about the President.” MT from our private group

How true that is, eh?

There is also an editorial at IBD and it is dead nuts on target:

[…]

An ambitious presidential front-runner. A hot scramble for campaign cash. A corner-cutting past. And now red lights are flashing that she could be in hock to foreign interests. This is going downhill fast.

[…]

Naturally, this will be spun as some lame smear campaign because Hillary is such a nice person, even though she has been shown to be a budding Leninist and a Soros pawn.