Does Ted Kennedy’s Endorsement Matter?
Jan 27, 2008 Political
The news has been indicating that Senator Ted Kennedy will endorse Barack Obama tomorrow. This is an endorsement that Hillary Clinton has been courting and deals a blow to her while giving more credibility to Obama. The endorsement comes a few days after the daughter of JFK, Caroline Kennedy, endorsed Obama as a man like her father (quite similar to the endorsement she gave John Kerry in 2004). In anticipation of tomorrow’s announcement the Clinton aides downplayed the endorsement:
“She has a great deal of respect for Sen. Kennedy and is very proud of all the endorsements she’s received from her Senate colleagues,†said Doug Hattaway, a Clinton spokesman. “At the end of the day, the voters are going to choose a candidate on their merits, not on their endorsements.†The Politico
I imagine that this might have some smattering of reality to it but the truth is that Hillary coveted the Kennedy endorsement and it is so important that the Clinton campaign had union chiefs and constituents calling Kennedy trying to stop his endorsement. Bill Clinton himself has been on the phone a few times with Kennedy in an effort to stop this from happening.
If, in the end, voters are going to choose candidates based on their merits and not their endorsements, why did Hillary try to get the Kennedy endorsement and why did her campaign work so hard to keep him from endorsing Obama? Perhaps it is because Kennedy, who has been in the Senate for 47 years, is a liberal icon and is loved by a lot of moonbats. His endorsement gives credibility to people within the moonbat community. Hillary wanted the blessing of Ted Kennedy.
I don’t care for Obama and he has his own issues but I like to see him doing well in the primary because it gives the Clintons fits and it makes them reveal their true selves.
The Kos kids were talking about the disarray in the Republican Party but it seems to me that the Democrats are the ones acting like a dysfunctional family.
Tags: Clinton, endorsement, kennedy, Obama
What Will Bill Clinton Do Now?
Jan 26, 2008 Political
The votes are being counted in South Carolina and the only question remaining is how badly will Hillary Clinton be beaten by Barack Obama? The race was called for Obama based on exit polling which is not usually done unless there is a very large margin of victory. As of this post 98% of the precincts have been counted and Obama has more than twice the votes that Clinton has. The Clinton campaign tried to downplay this before th election but they worked hard to win the state nonetheless. Why is she losing so badly when the difference was only about 12% on pre primary polling?
Exit polling shows that the electorate, by and large, was displeased with Bill Clinton’s style of campaigning. This was true among the black voters but also true in about 68% of the white vote. These voters indicated that they believed that Bill Clinton had unfairly attacked Barack Obama and they let him now it with their votes.
I wonder if Hillary Clinton will lose her mind and throw ashtrays at Bill since he is being blamed for the rout? It would be interesting if she does because she was more than happy to have Bill attacking Obama while she campaigned elsewhere. Regardless of how she feels about the affect of Bill this loss must be particularly stinging because in addition to the majority of the black vote Obama picked up about 25% of the white vote. Additionally, only about 20 people showed up at the place they booked for a post primary party. It will also be interesting to see if the Clintons hit even harder or if they switch tactics. She might have to muster up a few more tears. She certainly did not waste time leaving South Carolina for Tennessee…
I also if race will play into this even more. Bill made a remark that Jesse Jackson won the state as if it were no big deal that a black guy won it. I imagine if a white Republican had sad that Jackson would be gathering the Rainbow Coalition for an old fashioned protest and it is still possible that Clinton’s remarks will be seen as patronizing and incur backlash. Regardless, the Clinton campaign is going to have to be more careful because every word they utter now will be scrutinized for perceived racial content.
This might not mean much and Hillary will probably split the Tsunami Tuesday states with Obama. Since February 5th will not decide the candidate, the decision could come down to the Democratic Convention and there might be a real fire fight there.
I do wonder though, if these candidates will pick the other to be a running mate. Given how they have attacked each other it would seem to me they are less than credible in their beliefs if they picked each other. Of course Democrats wold not look at it that way so long as their party wins.
However, if Obama selected Hillary he would never have to worry about someone taking him out…
Sources:
MSNBC
CNN
Washington Post
Others with interesting posts:
Outside the Beltway, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Nuke Gingrich, A Blog For All, 123beta, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Stuck On Stupid, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Dumb Ox Daily News, A Newt One, Right Voices, Pursuing Holiness, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: billy blowback, blowout, Clinton, Obama, racial tension, rout, south carolina
Will MSM Give Hillary Same Treatment as Bush?
Jan 25, 2008 Political
Drudge is displaying a picture that has surfaced of Tony Rezko with the smiling Clintons, one on each side. This is important because Hillary Clinton mentioned Rezko in the last Democratic debate when she said to Senator Obama; “I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.” The photograph looks like one of the many that presidents and their wives have taken, photos that are often with people they do not know and have never met. Often though, these pictures are taken with people who have donated money to the president’s campaign. So the question now becomes, how did Tony Rezko get invited to whatever event this was and how did he get his picture taken with the Clintons? Another question would have to be did this “slumlord” donate money to them?
On the surface this might not seem like a big deal and many Hillary supporters will say that she has taken many photos with people that she does not know. Hillary was making that very case this morning on the Today show. In the glory days of the Clintons the media would be tucking this under the bed and if she were running against a Republican they would certainly make no big deal out of it. The media are not treating the Clintons unfairly as Bill claims, they are just giving Hillary the same scrutiny as other candidates. In other words, the playing field has been leveled and the Clintons are not used to that. Remember, it was Drudge who expose the Lewinsky affair when the media was keeping it under wraps.
As I stated though, the photo looks like one of many except the person in the middle is different so why is this important and why should Hillary be taken to task for this photo? There was a guy named Jack Abramoff who was a lobbyist. He ended up in jail and several Republicans ended up in legal trouble because of illegal dealings with Abramoff (Democrats ignored their dealings with Abramoff as did their partners in the MSM). After the Abramoff scandal broke there was word that the disgraced lobbyist had been tot he White House and that there were photos of him with President and Mrs. Bush. The Democrats and the media went nuts over this and said it proved that Bush was doing illegal things. The Chicago Tribune said that Mr. Bush had some explaining to do even as the President was saying that he took thousands of photos with people he did not know and that he did not know Abramoff (sound familiar?). Here is the Tribune take on it:
“However, now we know there are at least two visits by admitted felon Jack Abramoff that the White House must explain,’’ Fitton said. “What was Jack Abramoff doing at the White House? With whom did he meet? The public deserves to know answers to these questions.†Chicago Tribune
Since Rezko is from Chicago, let’s wait and see how long the Tribune waits to tell us that the public deserves to know about Rezko’s visit with the Clintons.
There is no doubt that Abramoff raised money for President Bush as he did for many politicians from both parties. Many of those politicians, including the President, have donated that money to charity. The point being, if Abramoff was able to get his picture with the President because of fund raising, what did Rezko do to get his picture taken with the Clintons?
This photo, which has to be an embarrassment to Hillary, is probably nothing more than a photo with someone they really do not know, as are the Abramoff/Bush photos. However, the media and the Democratic Party went absolutely nuts over the Bush photos and the words corruption and scandal were thrown around quite often. Therefore, the Clinton photo with Rezko demands the same attention and scrutiny as the Bush/Abramoff photos and that attention needs to be now, not six months after she is elected to the Presidency.
The media cannot drag its feet on this and they must start digging to see if Rezko gave the Clintons money or if there is another relationship between the parties. The media must start using words like scandal and corruption and the Clintons must allow access to all their records so a federal probe can begin.
While the investigators and the media are at it, they can look into Hillary’s ties to Abramoff as well. If she wants to be President then she should be held to the same standard that the Democrats hold President Bush to.
Of course, this could be photoshopped…
Others items of interest:
Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Right Truth, The Pet Haven Blog, Shadowscope, Cao’s Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Adeline and Hazel, A Newt One- The Truth Surge, Pet’s Garden Blog, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Allie is Wired, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Wolf Pangloss, A Newt One, CORSARI D’ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: abramoff, Clinton, investigation, photo, rezko, scandal
Clinton Pulls Ad That was Full of Lies
Jan 24, 2008 Political
I wrote earlier that the Clinton mantra is that it isn’t illegal until they tell you it is and a variation of that can be used for the way they run their campaign. To the Clintons it is OK or non offensive until someone says it is. This is the case with a recent ad that the Clinton crime family was running in South Carolina. The ad was full of lies and half truths with regard to Barack Obama. A lot of people were very unhappy with the ad and the outright lies in it and these people were Democrats. The ad was pulled earlier today not long after it started running.
The Clintons will continue this approach and hope that something they do sticks. They will sling mud and if it causes backlash their way they will wipe off the mud and sling some from a different direction. Eventually they will find a handful that will stick to Obama and get people to question his candidacy. The first tactics involved Hillary crying and Bill attacking Obama the night before and election. The MSM is reporting that this tactic has gotten old with the Democratic faithful and some are beginning to look at Bubba in a new light. In Nevada it was claims of voter irregularities leveled by Bill Clinton even though the real intimidation was the actions of Clinton people.
Now that Bill has been warned by the elder party statesmen, they had to devise a new plan and that plan involved spreading lies about Obama. Fortunately, many in the party saw this for what it was and pitched a fit forcing the Clinton gang to remove the ad.
This is not the end. Obama leads in South Carolina by nearly 20 points even though Hillary had a double digit lead as late as last November. She is playing down SC but her campaign is actively trying to win it because they have invested quite a bit in the state. Obama led by double digits in New Hampshire and lost to the beast and it is quite possible he can lose again. It all depends upon how many illegitimate votes the Clintons can muster.
Regardless of the outcome, the Clintons will continue to throw mud all the while hoping some of it sticks. I guess they are not aware that if you throw enough mud you are left in a hole.
Related item(s):
Washington Post
Clinton Crime Family Leaves Evidence
Jan 24, 2008 Political
Bill and Hillary Clinton have been in public life for decades and there have been allegations that they have broken the law. Unfortunately, the MSM never fully investigated any of the claims and the top bosses of the crime family were able to escape justice. I have made claims about Democratic voter fraud in the past (most recently in response to a few of the Kos kids) and I am challenged by those on the left to show the fraud. Despite the fraud being before their eyes they refuse to see it. Let a Republican sneeze at a polling place and Michael Moore is there with a camera to shoot another documentary.
It appears that the Clintons have turned their election stealing ways inward and are now using them in the Democratic primaries in order to ensure Hillary beats Barack Obama. Obama led by double digits in New Hampshire and then Hillary pulled out a 3 point win. There have been allegations that a large number of cars from neighboring states were at the polling places and in new Hampshire if one shows up and states he plans to move there, he may vote.
In Nevada the Clintons claimed that strong handed tactics were being used by the Obama campaign but in reality it was the Clintons who were intimidating voters and breaking the law. Whenever the Clintons accuse the other side of something it is a pretty good indication that they are the ones actually doing it. The Obama campaign has asked Nevada officials to look into more than 1600 complaints of voter intimidation by the Clinton crime family. Obama’s people are not challenging the results, they just want the allegations investigated.
Particularly interesting is an instruction sheet for the Clinton workers detailing how to get people to caucus for Hillary. The particularly telling line is one that reads:
“It’s not illegal unless they tell you so.”
This should come as no surprise since this is how the Clintons have always lived their lives. Bill’s sexcapades were not illegal unless he got caught, the land deals, Hillary’s law firm work, none of it was illegal unless they were told so. In reality though, to the Clintons personally, it is not illegal even when they are told that it is. She broke FEC rules regarding campaign donations and it was caught on film and yet she has not been taken to task.
The Clintons will say and do anything to get elected. They seek power and will do whatever it takes in order to attain it and they feel that whatever they do is legal so long as no one tells them otherwise.
Perhaps Michael Moore can start showing up at Democratic polling places and film the irregularities. There were plenty of them in Nevada and that was told by a member of Kos who was caucusing for Obama. I imagine I would have been arrested if I had been there…
It is important for people to see the Clintons as they really are and now that she is in a tight race with another Democrat the methods will be more widely scrutinized by the people on the left. They will finally see what we on the right have known all along.
You cannot trust the Clintons because they will do anything, legal or otherwise, in order to win.
As an aside, anyone want to bet Chelsea runs for office in the next few years? I know she makes good money but mommy and daddy got rich and never held a real job.
Source:
Breitbart