Hillary’s Socialist Ways “I will Take Your Money”
Feb 3, 2008 Political
At the risk of sounding sad but entertaining to those who drink Hillary Clinton’s dirty bath water, I will continue to attack her socialist views and show how she believes she knows better what to do with your money than you do. I know there are those who, despite mounds of evidence, will say that I attack her (or her husband) based on unsubstantiated items with little evidence. There is plenty of evidence to show Hillary believes in socialism. There is plenty of evidence to show Hillary believes that you should give a huge sum of your money to the government so that the government can run people’s lives. The latest is her new assertion that she thinks the government should garnish wages of those who refuse to buy health care coverage. This came out of her mouth but there are those who will say there is no evidence she said it.
All the Democrats have talked about universal health care and every plan involves taking the choice away from people and putting it in the government’s hands. The government will extort more money from everyone who pays taxes (that is their definition of rich) and they will spend it on an expensive health care plan that will cost more money than we have to pay. The plans will take away choice and will force people to buy something they might not want.
One only needs to ask the question; “Is it right for the government to tell you what you have to buy?” I know many liberals think that is fine but it is not. It violates the Constitution and it denies people the freedom of choice. What next? Will the government tell families that they may only have 2 children and must abort further pregnancies or pay a huge fine?
Hillary Clinton said that she would go after the profits of oil companies (definitely un-American), and that she will provide everything for people. Now she is saying that if a person refuses to get health care coverage the government will garnish wages to make it happen. This is not only Socialist, it is Communist as well. I can envision a future where we are told who to vote for and watched as we vote in a fair and secret election designed to give people like Hillary lifetime jobs.
I don’t care how one looks at this it is wrong. Any person who thinks it is OK for the government to do this is not a true American and does not deserve to live in this country. Anyone who believes that the government should be allowed to garnish wages to force compliance with health care or anything else is a Communist and should be beaten to death. If you want to do something, make people pay their bills. If you go to the hospital and have no money then you pay it off over time or you lose your property to collection. People buy cars on time so they can pay for their health over time, especially of they just choose not to get it. It is called personal responsibility, something most liberals lack.
I have health insurance so this will not affect me except that my taxes will be going to pay for the health care of others. If Hillary can take your money for this what is to stop her from taking your money by force to coerce you to do what she thinks is best? Screw her. I don’t need her to tell me how to live and what to spend my money on and neither does any other real American.
I would hope this country would have another armed revolution before it let that happen.
Some apologist will make excuses or say it is a good idea. That just adds one more person to the list of those who should be beaten to death.
Source:
Yahoo News
Tags: Clinton, communism, death to communists, forced compliance, garnish wages, Hillary, socialism
What Happens When You Cross the Clintons
Feb 3, 2008 Satire
John Kerry’s sister was mugged in New York, the home of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (it figures she would be from a place where criminals run around), and her purse was stolen. Was this a random criminal act or was it a message to the Kerry clan? It would be easy to say it was random but she had never been mugged there before and did not get mugged there until John effin Kerry (a guy many Demos supported but now call a loser) endorsed B. Hussein Obama. Coincidence?
There is a long list of people associated with the Clintons who have died under mysterious circumstances. I suppose that one could look at any well known person and find a bunch of deaths that occurred around him and they would all be coincidence. It is quite amazing that Clinton has had so many die before they were to testify or before they were to release information. What is also amazing is the manner in which some of these folks died.
I have also never seen an autopsy report indicate that gunshots to the back of the head were self inflicted and the death was a suicide but the Clintons were associated with quite a few who died that way (what are the odds). The death of Vince Foster left behind enough irregularities to raise questions but they were never adequately addressed. I believe if Vince Foster actually had a gun that day he would still be alive.
The Clintonista crime family has long arms that reach from the drug deal airports in Arkansas to the rest stops along the roads to DC. Anyone who crosses them or exposes them or even threatens to is asking for trouble. They don’t like people to be against them and they will do what it takes to stop problems. If I just disappear from the blogosphere, they got me (but not without one hell of a fight).
John Kerry and Ted Kennedy (and soon Al Gore) had better look out. They endorsed Hillary’s opponent and though she plays it off, she is probably trying to figure out how to get even. Mugging a sister might just be the beginning…
These guys had better not travel together and if they do, Ted better not drive.
Hillary said that when she was little she wanted to be an astronaut. I figure that is a bunch of crap she said to appear more human but her mother confirmed it (as if that is a reliable source). I just wish they had let her be an astronaut and had put her on the crew of STS-51-L.
Hillary is Satan.
Tags: Clinton, Kerry, mugging, unexplained deaths
Hillary Can Control Bill
Jan 31, 2008 Political
In a recent ABC interview the involvement of former President Bill Clinton was addressed by Hillary. She indicated that any statements he made were not intended to be offensive. Then Cynthia McFadden asked Hillary if she could control Bill.
Her response was; “Oh of course.â€
How is it we are supposed to believe that she can control him when she could not do that in all the years since they met? She sent her father and brother to Arkansas (before they were married) while she was away to keep him from sleeping around and there have been countless women who admitted to having consensual affairs as well as those who claimed to have been raped by him. Then, of course, there was Monica Lewinsky and that whole ugly affair. Despite their denials and defamation of Gennifer Flowers she turned out to be telling the truth when Bill admitted to having an affair with her. Despite his denials and cover up by Hillary, the Lewinsky affair turned out to be true. Even though he denied it and his people tried to portray her as a star struck kid, she turned out to be the one telling the truth.
So tell me, how is is she can control him when she has failed to do so since the time they met?
Source:
ABC Political Radar
Tags: bill, Clinton, control, Hillary, lies, out of touch, sex
Will Sharpton Require Clinton to Quit?
Jan 28, 2008 Political
The Reverend Al Sharpton, our aging antisemitic race baiting poverty pimp makes a name for himself by going after white folks who say things that he thinks are racist. He recently got himself involved in the business of the Golf Channel when one of their female reporters used the word “lynch” while discussing Tiger Woods. Woods took no offense and said it was a dead issue but Sharpton started in. The reporter got 14 days off.
Then of course, there was the Don Imus incident where he referred to a women’s basketball team as a bunch of “nappy headed hos”, a remark that brought Sharpton out in full force. Imus went on Sharpton’s radio show and applied his pursed labia to Sharpton’s ample gluteals but that was all for nothing because Sharpton raised a stink and CBS fired Imus rather than risk losing sponsors to a Sharpton protest and Jew killing spree.
This leads me to Bill Clinton. It is no secret that the Clintons know how to play dirty politics. For all their crying and whining about Republican dirty tricks, the Clintons sure know a few themselves. The Clinton campaign, and particularly Bill, has been engaged in covert racism with regard to Barack Obama. Now they can say that they meant something else and all that but their pattern is to put it out there and apologize after it has had a chance to fester. When Hillary got her head handed to her in South Carolina Bill compared Obama to Jesse Jackson and though it was reported to be an off-the-cuff remark, it appeared as if he was saying; “It was just a brother getting support from the other blacks.” It was seen as minimizing Obama. Before anyone takes me to task, I don’t care what they say and I am happy that Democrats are finally getting a taste of how it feels to be accused of being a racist for a minimal or harmless remark.
Having said that, I also know that perception is often reality and the black community found the comments offensive. Don Imus made a great point when he said that if he had made the Jackson comment he would be before Sharpton again. That is a true comment. If Imus, or any other white person (especially a Republican) had made the Jackson comment Sharpton would be out inciting riots and getting Jews killed. But since Bill Clinton said it, it is ignored by the race baiter.
If Sharpton were consistent (he is in it for the money and nothing else) he would be demanding that Bill Clinton be removed from the campaign and then demand that Hillary drop out. He would threaten her donors (sponsors, if you will) with all kinds of ugly things and he would be telling us that there would be blacks protesting in all states to keep Hillary from winning. In short, he would be giving them the same treatment he gave the reporter and Imus.
Instead, it is ignored or if Sharpton had an opinion he expressed it and moved on. He did not make the demands that he makes of others who dare to offend him and his black sensitivities.
On ABC’s “The View,” Sharpton said voters are hearing “race charges, race-tinged rhetoric” in the Democratic primary campaign, and called on the former president to cease.
~snip~
Sharpton didn’t say which comments in particular bothered him. But many Democrats were particularly upset that the former president made an explicit comparison of Obama’s campaign to Jesse Jackson’s victories in South Carolina in 1984 and 1988, in an apparent attempt to explain why his wife didn’t win the South Carolina primary on Saturday. ABC Political Radar
As this item from ABC shows, he was bothered by the racial part of it but he just told Bill to shut up. He did not give Imus that rebuke. Instead he helped get him fired.
Maybe Sharpton has left Bill alone because Hillary is constantly on his case and riding his butt hard about every little thing. Maybe Bill gets a free ride because his wife is a nagger…
Tags: Clinton, Imus, race baiting, sharpton
It Depends on the Meaning of Campaigning
Jan 28, 2008 Political
The Democrats had an agreement not to campaign in Florida after the DNC stripped that state of its delegates because it moved the primary to before February 5th. Hillary is way in front in Florida but it does not matter because the delegates will not count even though Hillary is trying to get a new decision on this so they will. I am sure that she would not do that if Obama were ahead there.
Despite the pledge not to campaign, Hillary Clinton is in Florida and she is skirting the rules to have a presence there. After her stinging defeat in South Carolina she decided to visit the Sunshine State and make sure people knew who she was. Now there are no rules against fund raising there and Hillary supporters would point out that she is only doing just that. Perhaps, and if she is it would be kind of disingenuous because the message is, “I can’t have a real presence here and the DNC says your delegates will not count but your money is still good.”
The news reports are indicating that Clinton is there with a *wink* and that her presence constitutes campaigning. I guess that it all depends upon what campaigning actually means. Anyone who has a husband who can argue the meaning of “is” can certainly skirt the issue and argue the meaning of campaigning.
If the DNC has taken the delegates away then it should stay that way. A rule is a rule and a sanction is a sanction. I also think that if Hillary broke her promise not to campaign people should ask what other promises she would break.
Maybe folks will realize that the Clinton’s words mean nothing to them. Integrity is not a word in their vocabulary.
Sources:
Yahoo News
My Way News
Tags: broken promises, campaigning, Clinton, florida