Archive for the ‘Socialist Ties’ Category

Vast army of ‘Hillary haters’ has claws out

August 26, 2007

This “IS” ALMOST too funny!

Here we go with the lamest of the lame losers going off whining about the obscurity abyss the Chief Leninist of the DNC will soon find her self sinking into. This article is a Godsend.

Thanks, Jill Zuckman. She is apparently a graduate for the same Moonbats In Training school as the idiot from Huff and Puff.

I was wondering where all these Moonbats from the Fruit Loop Brigades were coming from and we have it right here.

Chicago Tribune…LOL!!

 

DALLAS – Richard Collins, a wealthy Texas philanthropist, businessman and political aficionado, heaps praise on the woman he has set out to destroy, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.).

“She looks like a winner,” said Collins, sitting in his high-rise office with sweeping views of the city. “She’s run a good campaign, very consistent, no mistakes.”

But make no mistake about it: Collins is just one in a vast army of professional “Hillary haters” who are banking on Clinton becoming the Democratic nominee. Like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in the 2004 election who denigrated John Kerry’s military service in Vietnam, Collins and others are searching for just the thing that will crystallize the way voters think and feel about her.

What is with these sad-sacked Slumber Party attendees on the left? There is a conspiracy under every rock. One could draw the conclusion that since they slither out from beneath the rocks, one would see the conspiracies. Simply amazing. Come one, come all. This is all too good!

Hillary, the Budding Leninist is a Clear and Present Danger and I don’t care if Hillary is a man, woman or any combination thereof. She talks from both sides of her backsides and has the nerve and the audacity to charge people with doing the exact same things she does. Double Standards. Plain and simple.

She comes across one way while hiding her darker side from the public eye and her followers are dumber than a box of turtle turds.

Come on Hillary! What’s the deal?

LOL!!

rantings continued 

Advertisements

Go Publius!!

August 3, 2007

Czarinas’ Thesis Is Now Made Available

Go Publius posted a link at the Hot Rodham Blog that presents a copy of the long suppressed Alinsky Thesis.

Freedom Underground has the PDF as well.

Go download the PDF file and read it. Or, got to Go Publius and read one page at a time.

Future posts on this WILL BE forthcoming.

An American Communist: Hillary Clinton & The Democrats

July 28, 2007

Call them liberals, progressives or Democrats, it is all the same thing. I once penned a piece, listed under my “featured posts” in the sidebar, called “Liberal Communist Manifesto“, where I showed my readers the comparisons, if fact, some of the exact wording from the Communist Manifesto stated today by our “progressive, liberal democrats”.

The NYT has a piece today showing us the exact time in Hillary Clinton’s life where she made the transition from being a conservative to a communist. (Via memeorandum)

Before I continue, go read the Communist Manifesto, in its entirety, make the comparisons yourself to what you read from the document, written in 1848, to what the Democrats/liberals/progressives have to say today.

Specifically when they refer to “common good“, “taking from the rich to give to the poor“, and what they call “progressive or graduated taxation“, definitely keep those terms in mind when reading the Communist Manifesto. (You will learn where the “progressives” of today GOT those talking points, and how they are simply the Communists of yesterday, using another name)

Now the definition of Communism, defined from the dictionary, I am using Dictionary.com, but most all dictionaries use the same definition is:

1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.

2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.

3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.

Now that we have shown you just three simple examples of how the Democratic party, call them liberals or progressives if you prefer, the “label” doesn’t matter as much as the philosophy does, how the democratic party is trying to bring Communism into America.

It is said in the Principles of Communism that all the measures to ensure communism cannot be brought about at once and it must be introduced into a country gradually, as we can see the progressive liberal democrats trying to do today.

It is impossible, of course, to carry out all these measures at once. But one will always bring others in its wake. Once the first radical attack on private property has been launched, the proletariat will find itself forced to go ever further, to concentrate increasingly in the hands of the state all capital, all agriculture, all transport, all trade. All the foregoing measures are directed to this end; and they will become practicable and feasible, capable of producing their centralizing effects to precisely the degree that the proletariat, through its labor, multiplies the country’s productive forces.

Finally, when all capital, all production, all exchange have been brought together in the hands of the nation, private property will disappear of its own accord, money will become superfluous, and production will so expand and man so change that society will be able to slough off whatever of its old economic habits may remain.

Please keep that definition in mind also as you read this post.

Our country has fought against Communism for decades and the history of Russia should have taught us what Communism can and will do to a country.

One of the first measures of War Communism was the nationalisation of land. Banks and shipping were also nationalised and foreign trade was declared a state monopoly. This was the response when Lenin realised that the Bolsheviks were simply unprepared to take over the whole economic system of Russia. Lenin stressed the importance of the workers showing discipline and a will to work hard if the revolution was to survive. There were those in the Bolshevik hierarchy who wanted factory managers removed and the workers to take over the factories for themselves but on behalf of the people. It was felt that the workers would work better if they believed they were working for a cause as opposed to a system that made some rich but many poor. The civil war had made many in the Bolsheviks even more class antagonistic, as there were many of the old guard who were fighting to destroy the Bolsheviks.

On June 28th, 1918, a decree was passed that ended all forms of private capitalism. Many large factories were taken over by the state and on November 29th, 1920, any factory/industry that employed over 10 workers was nationalised.

War Communism also took control of the distribution of food. The Food Commissariat was set up to carry out this task. All co-operatives were fused together under this Commissariat.

War Communism had six principles:

1) Production should be run by the state. Private ownership should be kept to the minimum. Private houses were to be confiscated by the state.

2) State control was to be granted over the labour of every citizen. Once a military army had served its purpose, it would become a labour army.

3) The state should produce everything in its own undertakings. The state tried to control the activities of millions of peasants.

4) Extreme centralisation was introduced. The economic life of the area controlled by the Bolsheviks was put into the hands of just a few organisations. The most important one was the Supreme Economic Council. This had the right to confiscate and requisition. The speciality of the SEC was the management of industry. Over 40 head departments (known as glavki) were set up to accomplish this. One glavki could be responsible for thousands of factories. This frequently resulted in chronic inefficiency. The Commissariat of Transport controlled the railways. The Commissariat of Agriculture controlled what the peasants did.

5) The state attempted to become the soul distributor as well as the sole producer. The Commissariats took what they needed to meet demands. The people were divided into four categories – manual workers in harmful trades, workers who performed hard physical labour, workers in light tasks/housewives and professional people. Food was distributed on a 4:3:2:1 ratio. Though the manual class was the favoured class, it still received little food. Many in the professional class simply starved. It is believed that about 0% of all food consumed came from an illegal source. On July 20th 1918, the Bolsheviks decided that all surplus food had to be surrendered to the state. This led to an increase in the supply of grain to the state. From 1917 to 1928, about ¾ million ton was collected by the state. In 1920 to 1921, this had risen to about 6 million tons. However, the policy of having to hand over surplus food caused huge resentment in the countryside, especially as Lenin had promised “all land to the people” pre-November 1917. While the peasants had the land, they had not been made aware that they would have to hand over any extra food they produced from their land. Even the extra could not meet demand. In 1933, 25 million tons of grain was collected and this only just met demand.

6) War Communism attempted to abolish money as a means of exchange. The Bolsheviks wanted to go over to a system of a natural economy in which all transactions were carried out in kind. Effectively, bartering would be introduced. By 1921, the value of the rouble had dropped massively and inflation had markedly increased. The government’s revenue raising ability was chronically poor, as it had abolished most taxes. The only tax allowed was the ‘Extraordinary Revolutionary Tax’, which was targeted at the rich and not the workers.

War Communism was a disaster. In all areas, the economic strength of Russia fell below the 1914 level. Peasant farmers only grew for themselves, as they knew that any extra would be taken by the state. Therefore, the industrial cities were starved of food despite the introduction of the 4:3:2:1 ratio. A bad harvest could be disastrous for the countryside – and even worse for cities. Malnutrition was common, as was disease. Those in the cities believed that their only hope was to move out to the countryside and grow food for themselves. Between 1916 and 1920, the cities of northern and central Russia lost 33% of their population to the countryside. Under War Communism, the number of those working in the factories and mines dropped by 50%.

In the cities, private trade was illegal, but more people were engaged in this than at any other time in Russia’s history. Large factories became paralysed through lack of fuel and skilled labour.

Small factories were in 1920 producing just 43% of their 1913 total. Large factories were producing 18% of their 1913 figure. Coal production was at 27% of its 1913 figure in 1920. With little food to nourish them, it could not be expected that the workers could work effectively. By 1920, the average worker had a productivity rate that was 44% less than the 1913 figure.

Even if anything of value could be produced, the ability to move it around Russia was limited. By the end of 1918, Russia’s rail system was in chaos.

In the countryside, most land was used for the growth of food. Crops such as flax and cotton simply were not grown. Between 1913 and 1920, there was an 87% drop in the number of acres given over to cotton production. Therefore, those factories producing cotton related products were starved of the most basic commodity they needed.

Read the rest and remember, this is just one example of what Communism does to a country.

I once read a quote from Hillary Clinton and it infuriated me because it proved what I had thought for a very long time, she wishes to bring communism to America and makes no bones about it.

At a San Francisco fundraiser in 2004- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., told wealthy supporters the government will need to take money away from them for the “common good.”

Clinton headlined an appearance with other women Democratic senators in San Francisco, where donors gave as much as $10,000 to California Sen. Barbara Boxer’s campaign.

“Many of you are well enough off that … the tax cuts may have helped you,” Clinton said, according to the Associated Press. “We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.

“We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

Link to the story here.

I said on that post linked above:

The common good be damned if that is how they are going interpret it. Since when is it acceptable to “punish” people that have worked hard to earn good money, for the common good? Since when is it unobjectionable to take from the rich by simple virtue of them BEING rich or well off? Since when has any Democrat ever, ever cared about the common good of the people, except when it benefits them politically? To top it off, she dared say that to people that were taking their hard earned money and donating to her…. the woman must have borrowed her husbands balls for that speech.

The term is “common good,” and it’s catching on as a way to describe liberal values and reach religious voters who rejected Democrats in the 2004 election. Led by the Center for American Progress, a Washington think-tank, party activists hope the phrase will do for them what “compassionate conservative” did for the Republicans.

“It’s a core value that we think organizes the entire political agenda for progressives,” said John Halpin, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “With the rise of materialism, greed and corruption in American society, people want a return to a better sense of community — sort of a shared sacrifice, a return to the ethic of service and duty.”

So, the basic concept here is that “materialism” is bad, people earning the wealth to enjoy some of the finer things in life is “bad“, they object to “greed”, but in their self righteous world, greed is defined as those that work their asses off to EARN MONEY, wow, wanting to earn more money is a BAD thing again…ok so I am bad!!!! “Shared sacrifice”, what the hell does that mean? Does that mean that if I am capable of earning a good living, because I am good at what I do for a living, the “Democratic Government” should be able to take more from me? How the hell do they justify THAT?????? For the Common Good be damned and so should the Democrats.

To be fair, the people that originally created that phrase many decades ago, did so with good intentions, but the way the phrase has been corrupted by the Democratic party is disgusting.

To use the catchphrase, “common good” to justify atrocities, is beyond comprehension. To think the American people will sit still for it, bend over and take it, is sheer stupidity.

The Democratic party and their definition of “Common good” can go to hell.

Pure and simple, Hillary Clinton is a communist.

I am a capitalist and damned proud of it, Capitalism is a good thing.

Capitalism as defined in the dictionary:

an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

Capitalists produce, manufacture, employ millions, provide healthcare to millions, they expand and hire more employees, the money those employees make gets spent and helps economic growth throughout our country.

There is one thing that Democrats/progressives/liberals do not account for.

What if the Capitalists of this world do not wish to be punished for producing, manufacturing, employing millions and providing healthcare for those millions and helping the economy?

What if they stood as one and said, “SCREW YOU”?

What if these capitalists got tired of being punished for their ability?

What if they drained their bank accounts, moved their money overseas where the vultures/Democrats could not touch it and just went to live on some island somewhere, where they could live quite comfortably on the billions or even millions they already have?

Millions of Americans would be out of a job and on welfare, millions of Americans would be on medicaid or other government programs where the rest of us would be paying for their insurance. Unemployment would jump to increasingly unacceptable and unmanageable rates.

The snowballing effect of such a “strike” , for lack of a better word, would take America from being one of the healthiest economic countries to one of the weakest, poorest countries in a matter of decades if not before.

What incentive would our millionaires and billionaires have to keep their businesses thriving should the Democrats/liberals/progressives force their communistic agenda upon us?

Name one.

We have fought communism for decades in other countries and it is time we looked at ourselves and started fighting against communism in our own country.

To be continued….

Cross Posted from Wake up America

All The More Reason To Expose Hillary As The Leninist She Is

July 25, 2007

FOR HILLARY CLINTON, the presidency is not in the bag. Even winning the Democratic presidential nomination is considerably less than a sure thing. But of the 18 Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, Clinton is the most likely to be the next president. And she did nothing last night in the bizarre presidential debate in Charleston, South Carolina, to alter that.

BIG-TIME HILL $$ PAL HELPING RUDY

July 15, 2007

Early indicators of folks bailing out on Czarina…

Big-time Hillary Rodham Clinton donor and supermarket magnate John Catsimatidis chipped in cash to the senator’s potential GOP rival Rudy Giuliani, new campaign records reveal.

Catsimatidis, owner of the Gristede’s supermarket chain, and his wife, Margo, each gave $2,300 to Giuliani’s presidential campaign last month, according to the former mayor’s filings for the last financial period, which were released Friday.

Catsimatidis has been a major Clinton backer since she first ran for the Senate in 2000, and has been closely identified with the former first couple for years.

He has helped bundle donations for Clinton and hosted an event for her presidential campaign – even once predicting she would be the leader in the fund-raising field.

Catsimatidis, who is mulling a run for mayor as a Republican, couldn’t be reached for comment. Besides his supermarket interests, Catsimatidis has also been involved in aviation, oil refining, real estate and publishing.

Other Giuliani donors during the last three months included former Met and Yankee pitcher Al Leiter, actress Melissa Gilbert, screenwriter Lionel Chetwynd, department-store heir Andrew Farkas and former New York Judge Donna Recant.

maggie.haberman@nypost.com

Perhaps people are beginning to see the light. Hillary has a habit of showing her true socialist underpinnings and people that have benefited from Capitalism are beginning to fear Hillary’s threats of taking from the “rich” and giving it to folks that are too lazy to fend for themselves.

Tag Team Clinton…The New Vision(s) For Amerika

July 14, 2007

The Trashing of America

 

Trashed America

The trashing of America

The Jeremiah Project has a great piece (really long) on Bill Clinton and in the process of nearly vomiting, I came across some things about Bill and Hillary as well.

“The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people” — Bill Clinton 1993 on MTV

“We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans” — Bill Clinton in 1993 from USA Today

You know the one thing that’s wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say.” — Bill Clinton in 1993, Philadeplphia

“I’m not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president” — Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpeonaed documents.

“I have said that I’m not running and I’m having a great time being pres – being a first-term senator” — Hillary Clinton

Anyway, here is an excerpt from The Jeremiah Project. Keep in mind the Hillary quote where she said, “…we are the President…”

 

The Enemies of your freedom

Following the events of Sept. 11, 2001 Americans have been distracted by the governement and the media into devising the enemy of our freedom. We are told that militant Islam has the goal of destroying freedom as we know it and goes by the names, Jihad, Hamas, terrorist, insurgent, Saddam Hussein, Al-Qaeda, bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, etc.

While those may indeed be enemies to our freedom… there is an even more sinister enemy at work within our borders. It’s called: the Progressive Caucus, multiculturalism, Hillary’s “village”, and has names like Ted Kennedy, Charles Rangel, Jesse Jackson, Sarah Brady, and Bill Clinton, among others.

It is Socialism and it’s quickly spreading throughout America.

  • The individual loses all rights and everything is done in the name of the commonwealth (public) (read – “village”); you are officially the property of the state and not an individual with wants, desires, and needs. There is only the rich and the commonwealth. If you are not rich, then you are a member of the commonwealth. The needs and wants of the rich come before the needs and wants of the commonwealth. In the commonwealth there are no individuals and no one has any rights whatsoever. All decisions in your behalf are made by the state. Your children are the property of the state and it is decided by the state what they will learn, who will teach them, and what will become of them. As a parent, you have little or no say in what becomes of your children, all decisions are made by the government and you accept or become an enemy of the state.
  • The government owns and/or controls the basic means of production and distribution of services and goods. We are told that business and other things will be regulated but that we will still be free. Free to do what? They will operate under the illusion of a free enterprise system. All business and land, if not owned by the government or the rich, is controlled and taxed very heavily. What a contradiction of terms. How can anyone have a Socialist form of government with freedom? As stated, in a Socialist form of government the rich rule and have the power, not the people. Consider the actions the government has taken in recent years concerning tobacco, health care, the environment, and the airline industry. Vice President Al Gore promised to make air travel safer and Americans were eager to accept the further erosion of their rights and pay even higher tarifs to government to protect them from an unseen enemy. One lady I recently travelled with told me that she was willing to undergo an extensive selective search of her luggage “if it would make traveling safer.” Safer than what? I ask. The Clinton administration took full advantage of the crash of TWA 800 to play on the fears of American travellers. It would seem a foregone conclusion that the airplane was brought down by a terrorist act – regardless of the fact there is no conclusive evidence to date that it was a criminal act. The events of 9/11 only cemented the governments reach into the transportation industry. This heightened state of security at American airports is nothing more than another ploy of the government to further control the airline business and raise another “hidden” tax to pay for it.
  • The creation of a federal (Homeland Security & FEMA) or state police force; the purpose of which is to put down disturbances, political or otherwise, “root” out political enemies, ensure the loyalty of the people, and enforce laws upon taxation, population control, religion, the workplace, and the family unit.  Consider Clinton’s now infamous 100,000 more police officers on the street. Along with the government funded of those officers comes the federal control over how the recipients of the funding are used. Will this new police force be held accountable like the FBI? Attorney General Janet Reno promoted Larry Potts—who coordinated the Waco raid and was censured for his role in the 1992 Ruby Ridge, Idaho, shoot-out — to deputy director of the FBI.
  • The redefining of justice and injustice to better fit the Socialist State.
  • The subjection or elimination, generally the latter, of all religious institutions, with the exception of a state approved and mandated religion. This “New World Order” institution will also be used to ensure the loyalty of the people and will be used in the collection of taxes.

The Socialist State cultivated by the Clinton presidency obviously presents a clear and present danger to the traditional American way of life that has been grounded in Judeo-Christian principles. But a much greater danger is on the horizon. This danger is the socialistic serpentine worldwide government that the Scriptures say will emerge in the end times (Rev. 13:7-8). This world empire, based in a reunified Europe, will abrogate the sovereignty of every other nation on the face of the earth. Its government will be run by godless, amoral Humanists who will worship the creation rather than the Creator (Romans. 1:25).

Just some things to think about…view the videos in the VODPOD and see if Hillary’s antics fits this article.

 

NOTE: I do not necessarily agree with the entire article above and the excerpt above should be read in the context of which it was written for the complete “feel”.  It does, however give me pause…

Thank You, Hillary! Thank You! I Can Crap Better Now!

July 9, 2007

This woman is the very definition of MORON!  Who or what in the hell does she think she is?  Czarina? Queen Pork Spending Whore?  Woman’s gift to Harlotry?  Listen to this jerk.  She has some serious head shrinking voodoo dance doctor requirements.

Times Watch: (in its entirety…this one cannot be piece-meal delivered)

Hillary Forgives Republicans of Their Sins

“Her Methodist faith, Mrs. Clinton says, has guided her as she sought to repair her marriage, forgiven some critics who once vilified her and struggled in the bare-knuckles world of politics to fulfill the biblical commandment to love thy neighbor.”

Posted by: Clay Waters
7/9/2007 3:21:34 PM

Reporter Michael Luo’s front-page Saturday story on Hillary Clinton’s religious faith, “For Clinton, Faith Intersects With Political Life,” was a pretty transparent attempt to moderate Hillary Clinton’s secular reputation by emphasizing her religiosity.

 

Meanwhile, Luo naively cast candidate Clinton as a passive spouse betrayed by her husband during the Monica Lewinsky scandal — as if Bill Clinton’s White House philandering came as a total shock after all the years in Arkansas.

 

“Long before her beliefs would be tested in the most wrenching of ways as firs lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton taught an adult Sunday school class on the importance of forgiveness. It is a lesson, she says, that she has harked back to often.”

 

Through the long piece, Luo portrayed her as a victim: “Her Methodist faith, Mrs. Clinton says, has guided her as she sought to repair her marriage, forgiven some critics who once vilified her and struggled in the bare-knuckles world of politics to fulfill the biblical commandment to love thy neighbor.”

 

Unless the neighbor happens to work for the White House Travel Office, in which case all bets are off?

 

“Mrs. Clinton, the New York senator who is seeking the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, has been alluding to her spiritual life with increasing regularity in recent years, language that has dovetailed with efforts by her party to reach out to churchgoers who have been voting overwhelmingly Republican.

 

“Mrs. Clinton’s references to faith, though, have come under attack, both from conservatives who doubt her sincerity (one writer recently lumped her with the type of Christians who ‘believe in everything but God’) and liberals who object to any injection of religion into politics. And her motivations have been cast as political calculation by detractors, who suggest she is only trying to moderate her liberal image.”

 

Luo was swept up with the symbols of Clinton’s religiosity, symbols the Times would no doubt see as suspicious or bothersome if openly displayed by a Christian conservative: “In the interview and a subsequent telephone conversation, she described her spiritual habits — she carries a Bible on her campaign travels, reads commentaries on Scripture and on other people’s ‘faith journeys’ and spoke of experiencing ‘the presence of the Holy Spirit’ on many occasions.

 

Luo has still more on Saint Hillary, who graciously forgives Republicans for their sins: “And she talked of forgiveness. Mrs. Clinton volunteered that she was moved by apologies in recent years from David Kuo, a Republican speechwriter and evangelical Christian who later worked in the Bush administration, and Senator Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, both of whom have confessed to harboring hateful thoughts of her. She spoke of her own shortcomings — ‘it’s a challenge every single day’ — in leading a moral life and of turning to Christian writers for solace after her husband’s infidelity.”

 

After some brief criticism from the left and right, Luo returned to his credulous portrayal of Clinton’s religious beliefs: “Mrs. Clinton’s religious roots run deep….As for how literally to interpret the Bible, she takes a characteristically centrist view….Shortly before her father’s death in 1993, Mrs. Clinton sought to meld her faith and political ideology into an overarching philosophy of public service. In delivering a passionate speech on health care, she said Americans suffered from a ‘sleeping sickness of the soul’ and called for a ‘new politics of meaning.”

 

“Liberal and conservative pundits alike jumped on what they called her religious moralisms wrapped in New Age language. But Melanne Verveer, her former chief of staff, said the speech was merely an extension of how Mrs. Clinton’s religious values infused her sense of public service.”

 

Luo was not nearly so respectful of the views of Republican Mitt Romney in a May 10 story. Ostensibly covering the controversy over Al Sharpton’s suggestion that Mormons weren’t real Christians, Luo instead devoted most of his story to allowing Sharpton yet more attacks on Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith as racist and backward.

And just what did this wasted efforts of human tissue do just recently?  Did she not vehemently attack GWB for doing far less than her Zipper Loose Cigar Muppet husband did?

Please.  Enough is enough.  Those jerks at HillaryRub are worse than she is.

Shrillary: The Never Ending Queen of DNC Double Standards

July 7, 2007

The NY Post has a slam-bam herd of Hillary atrocities today.  I wonder why that is?

DEMS DUMP ON HILL HEAVY

July 7, 2007 — SEN. Hillary Clinton is facing increasing Democratic criticism for using Mark Penn as her presidential campaign’s chief strate gist while he also serves as CEO of Burson-Marsteller, the public relations giant with corporate clients whose policies run opposite to Clinton’s.

Clients include Royal Dutch Shell (attacked by Clinton for “windfall profits“), as well as tobacco and pharmaceutical firms with records she has deplored. Penn was a key operative in President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign and continued as a second-term adviser.

A footnote: Penn criticized Bloomberg News, which has reported on conflicts between Burson-Marsteller and the Clinton campaign, for obtaining “several months” of Penn’s internal blogs. On June 29, a former employee who started a rival firm filed suit in New York City against Penn for monitoring his personal e-mails.

Dear Hillary: MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!

Does anyone else see the Double Standards here or do we need to spoon-feed you?

OH!  WAIT!  There’s MORE!

HILLARY’S POLL VAULT (WIDENS LEAD OVER BARACK)
July 7, 2007 — Capitalizing on her experience, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has opened up a 23-point lead over Barack Obama, a new poll released yesterday shows.

The Newsweek poll shows Clinton leading Obama 56-33 percent in a two-way matchup of the Democratic presidential candidates.

That’s almost double a previous survey in early May that showed Clinton with a 51-39 percent edge over Obama.

First of all,  Newsweek did the deal so that right there is “suspect”.  A far-leftist Jihad loving waste of a magazine is “seemingly supporting” a far-leftist Jihadist Sympathizer (Hillary), and I am supposed to believe their shiite?  Not hardly.

The latest numbers also indicate that the question of which candidate is experienced enough to take the Oval Office is playing into the equation.

Asked “do you think he or she has enough experience in politics and government to be a good president,” some 70 percent of voters said Clinton does, compared to 25 percent who gave her experience level a thumbs down.

Five percent said they didn’t know.

If, and I stress “IF”, this is “true” (snicker-snicker snort-snort), there are some folks in dire need of a cranial enema.

But asked the same question about Obama, 40 percent said he had enough experience, while 34 percent thought he didn’t. Another 26 percent of voters weren’t sure.

So how long has Obama been a Senator?  What IS his experience level?  And Czarina?  What is her claim to fame?  A botched Socialist health-care quagmire?  Again,  there are quite a few folks in dire need of cranial enemas.  Something is stuck.

The notion of experience has been a hallmark of the Clinton campaign, and it’s been an issue on the stump for Obama in recent weeks.

Hallmark?  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA?  What has she done again except Pork Barrel her way into the bowels of Socialistic Double Standardom?

The Illinois senator recently told a crowd at a fund-raiser for his White House bid that the only person prepared to lead the nation on “Day One” is Bill Clinton and not Hillary, and on a recent Iowa campaign swing he painted the couple as part of a has-been past.

And Clinton pollsters reportedly message-tested questions about Obama’s experience with Democratic primary voters.

In other findings, 86 percent of voters said if a woman were their party’s nominee they would cast a ballot for her, but only 58 percent said they think the nation is ready for a woman president.

When the same question was asked about the first black presidential nominee, a whopping 92 percent said they’d vote for their party’s choice, but 59 percent said the country isn’t prepared for a black president.

Clinton’s approval rating is at 57 percent in the poll, with Obama right behind her at 54 percent, according to the survey.

The poll also showed President Bush’s job-approval rating at a dismal 26 percent.

And the approval ratings of CONgress…the DEMOCRATIC PARTY leadership and majority is what?  Hello?  Reid is at 19%…Cheney at 38%…Hello?  Newsweek “left” that one “right” out of the article?  Gee.  I wonder if there is any BIAS there?  Morons.

The poll of 1,002 people nationwide was taken this past Monday and Tuesday.

The margin of error for the entire survey is 4 percentage points, while the margin for the Democratic candidates was 6 points.

According to recent fund-raising reports, Clinton was trounced by Obama in a key area: money.

For the second quarter of this year, Obama reported raising $31 million in funds that can be spent on the primary season, compared to $21 million in primary dollars for Clinton.

Obama also reported taking in money from 250,000 donors.

That number suggests a deep level of small-dollar, grass-roots donors whom the Obama campaign hopes will translate into votes when the primary balloting begins next year. With Post Wire Services

If anyone votes for either of these TWO losers, they need to immediately check into a rehab center for dumb-ass abuse and get that cranial enema.

 

On Hillary and Scooter Libby

July 3, 2007

 

By now, even the jerks on the left know that the “issue” with Scooter Libby was a manufactured BDS driven witch hunt. Fitzgerald KNEW from the beginning that Armitage was the leaker of the non-covert bitch Valerie Plame and her retarded and wussified dweeb of a coward husband knew as well.

Is my angst showing?

This is what makes Czarina’s statement about the commutation of Libby’s sentence the real joke of the day. This woman, and I use that term loosely, is no better than Fitzgerald and Armitage. Knowing the truth and doing nothing of it equates to needing to be euthanized. They should all check in immediately to wherever Kavorkian is hanging out so he can assist them with the relieving themselves of all this BDS hatred. It would the best they could do for this country. They just plain suck.

Here is what the idiot that would be King (she has to have a bigger unit than Bill does):

Liberals Cry about Bush commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby

 

Liberals are all upset about President Bush pardoning Scooter Libby.

 

Senator Clinton issued the following statement on President Bush’s decision to commute the sentence of Scooter Libby:

“Today’s decision is yet another example that this Administration simply considers itself above the law. This case arose from the Administration’s politicization of national security intelligence and its efforts to punish those who spoke out against its policies. Four years into the Iraq war, Americans are still living with the consequences of this White House’s efforts to quell dissent. This commutation sends the clear signal that in this Administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice.”

That criminal Hillary DARES claim someone is above the law? PLEASE! Spare us the bullshit! Hillary is a QUACK!

Please visit the site above to see the list of PARDONS Bill The Cigar Boy Sex Fiend and Addict issued. WHERE WAS HILLARY’S ANGST THEN? Oh. Wait. Her brother-in-law was pardoned by Billy Bob Can’t Keep His Pants Zipped Moron. I see. And Scooter Libby was the attorney! GO FIGURE!

What a schmuck this Hillary creep is. DAMN!

Which Is It…Scary or Amazing?

June 27, 2007

Or could it be amazingly scary enough to be spooky? Someone thinks Hillary isn’t “Progressive” enough. The term “progressive” is liberal-speak for “socialist”. So, Hillary isn’t “socialist” enough? Yep. Darn right and dirty low-down spooky right there.

This same “someone” thinks that there is “outright hatred for her that has been brewing for more than a decade on the right.”  That remark shows the stupidity of those on the left.  The mutants on the left are sadly in error.  What this particular veteran doesn’t like about Czarina is her communist jibber-jabber while she wears the socialist garb and the idiot that wrote the article is just as socialist as Czarina is.

I  wonder if the idiot author writes for that waste of a site HillaryRub.