Another Hillary Fabrication?
Oct 23, 2007 Political
Not to obfuscate any issues but it is well documented to people willing to open their eyes that Hillary Clinton has trouble telling the truth. She lied about when she knew about Bill and Monica, she lied about how she got the name Hillary and there are countless other lies that she has told as well documented in the numerous books about her. Hillary was addressing the fact that Obama and Edwards are pouring in on Iowa because she is running close there her dig at them was they have failed to break through nationally). She said this about the piling on:
She laughs: “I am well aware this is ‘pile on.’ I used to play touch football with my brothers and my friends, and I am on the bottom and they are piling on, and I’m thinking how am I going to get out of here?” Des Moines Register
Touch football does not involve tackling which is why they call it touch football. It is possible that since she was a girl they tackled her and piled on or that even though they called t touch they tackled however, candidate’s statements are open to much tighter scrutiny than most other people’s especially when they have a history of fabricating stories for political gain.
I imagine this was another of the Hillary trying to appear like a regular person but it falls short. The truth is, she is worried about Iowa because if one of the others wins it will give that campaign a serious boost. Hillary knows that her hubby ignored Iowa and that while the national polls look good for her, the local polls in other places are not as great and she still has a 50% negative rating to overcome. When 50% of the people polled say they will never vote for you is unlikely that you can win especially when you will not get all of the other 50%. She keeps a stiff upper lip but she is worried.
Failure would kill her. Success would kill the country.
But then again, maybe I am just piling on…
Tags: Hillary Clinton, national polls, Obama, obfuscate, political gain, scrutiny, touch football
Clinton Cat Fight?
Oct 21, 2007 Political
Will Hillary have to defend her extreme makeover to a softer image now that it has been reported that she gave away Socks the cat when she left the White House? The report is that Hillary got Socks to soften her image and make her look like a good mom while she was in the White House. When she and Bill left 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue it seems the only thing they did not take with them was Socks who they gave to Betty Currie. Is this another instance of Hillary using something for political gain and expedience and then discarding it when it no longer served a purpose? Probably not, but who knows.
Perhaps the Clintons decided that they could not care for a cat with their busy post White House lifestyle. Chelsea was off to college and work and there would not be staff members around to care for it. Given that Bill took Buddy with him one could make the argument that Socks the cat was just a convenient prop that was discarded when no longer needed. Given that Buddy ran in the street and was hit by a vehicle, it might be a blessing for Socks to have been given away.
I believe that Hillary Clinton is cold and calculating and that she does not do anything unless there is a political motive. Getting the cat was probably one of those calculated moves but giving it away might have been nothing more than giving it to someone who liked it and could care for it much better than the Clintons could. Betty Currie was an obvious choice because she had a history of cleaning up Clinton messes.
Socks is better off than Buddy and Hillary can always borrow the cat or get a new one should she feel the need to express her softer side.
Of course, if she wants to look soft she should get a porcupine. Even Hillary would look soft next to one of those.
Source:
Times On Line
Sometimes unrelated trackbacks to: Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson’s Website, , Stix Blog, Right Truth, The Populist, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Stageleft, Adeline and Hazel, , third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, A Blog For All, AZAMATTEROFACT, 123beta, Adam’s Blog, Inside the Northwest Territory, , Webloggin, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Nuke’s, Allie Is Wired, The World According to Carl, Walls of the City, Blue Star Chronicles, Republican National Convention Blog, High Desert Wanderer, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: Democrats, Hillary Clinton, Link Fest, President, Republicans, socks, white house
Get Rid of S-CHIP Altogether
Oct 19, 2007 Political
There was a big battle this past week after President Bush vetoed the huge expansion of the S-CHIP, a program designed to provide heath care coverage for the children of families who make too much to qualify for Medicaid and too little to afford private insurance. There were provisions that led us on the path to socialized medicine and they have been addressed so now I will focus on whether we need S-CHIP at all.
The argument made by those who support S-CHIP and its expansion is that people cannot afford 1200 dollars a month for insurance. We have to help the children and we have to help the poor. Now it has been shown that insurance can be obtained for around $500 a month but we can use the $1200 figure that the Democrats like to bounce around. I have come to the conclusion that we do not need the S-CHIP program and that it should be abolished because the poor can afford that amount of money. I have wondered about something for some time and Hillary Clinton’s supporters helped me to finally put the pieces together.
Let me explain. I have wondered how this country can be in the dire financial straights that the left likes to portray it. According to the left the economic numbers are bad and we have a terrible economy (despite numbers that are about the same as when the other Clinton held office). I knew this had to be wrong and I continually asked how it is that a country with such a bad economy could collectively donate so much money to political candidates. Look at the amount of money that has been donated to all of them combined and to Obama and Clinton in particular. How does a country with such a bad economy afford to give like this? Then I began to wonder about our poor and the S-CHIP.
My thoughts about S-CHIP started about the time the Hsu thing was breaking. In that story there were countless numbers of people who donated money to Hillary Clinton. These people donated $2300 despite circumstances that demonstrated that they should not have that kind of money to donate and yet they did! I mean, how could people who cannot afford $1200 for health insurance pony up $2300 for a candidate?
I thought it must be some kind of fluke but it evidently is not because today it was revealed that Hillary again received hundreds of thousands of dollars from people who make very little. This is the latest news:
Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers [sic] are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton’s campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser [sic] in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown. [LA Times]
The 2000 Census shows that the average annual income for that area is $21,000 or right at the poverty level. The Democrats, are pushing for an expansion of S-CHIP that would cover families that make three or four times the poverty level because they cannot afford the $1200 a month for private insurance. I think that the donations that Mr. Hsu collected from poor folks and the donations described in this article clearly show that people right at the poverty level certainly can afford health insurance premiums. Any individual or family that that has $1000-$2300 of disposable income to spend on a political donation can certainly afford to pay the measly cost of health insurance.
There will, of course, be skeptics who think I am way off base here and that I am once again bashing the poor because I am one of those cold hard Conservatives who does not care about anyone. People are entitled to that opinion but I offer this; there are only two explanations for these donations. The first is as I described and that people can afford them which means, as I stated, they can afford health care.
The second is that these are illegal donations to the Clinton campaign. Now I know that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid promised that this would be the most ethical and transparent Congress in history but that has not quite panned out and I also know that the Clinton’s have a long history of unethical and illegal behavior. However, Hillary will never admit to any wrong doing and her supporters and puppets in the media will not investigate or go after her for her ethical and criminal lapses even when video evidence of her illegal activities exists and has been introduced in court. There are a few folks in this story who say they did not donate and others who cannot be found, but it is unlikely the media will give this a real look. They have to protect mother Hillary.
Since they will not investigate, that only leaves us with the conclusion that poor people can afford their own health insurance. Unless of course Senator Clinton would like to refute that conclusion. So, having laid this all out I have this demand to make of Senator Clinton:
Either admit to your illegal behavior and withdraw from the presidential contest or introduce a bill to abolish S-CHIP. Either people need S-CHIP and you are a criminal or you are not a criminal and your poor donors, therefore, do not need the program.
The ball, as they say, is in your court Senator…
Sometimes unrelated trackbacks to: Stop the ACLU, The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson’s Website, , A Blog For All, AZAMATTEROFACT, 123beta, Adam’s Blog, Stix Blog, Right Truth, Inside the Northwest Territory, The Populist, , Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Nuke’s, , third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Republican National Convention Blog, Dumb Ox Daily News, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, Grizzly Groundswell, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: chip program, Congress, Democrats, help the children, Hillary Clinton, Hsu, medicaid, Obama, political candidates, private insurance, socialized medicine
Hillary Listens in but not on Terrorists
Oct 17, 2007 Uncategorized
It is not a surprise to many thinking people that Hillary Clinton is calculating and will say or do anything to get elected. She has flipped like a fish out of water on the war in Iraq depending upon who she is talking to. It should come as no surprise that Clinton is changing her tact to appease more of the conservative voters because she thinks she has the nomination wrapped up. An anonymous staffer indicated that Clinton has done just that
The former North Carolina senator [John Edwards] noted a recent New York Times story, in which unnamed Clinton backers explained the political reasons behind her Senate vote to label an Iranian military unit as a terrorist group. They said Clinton was switching from “primary mode,†to “general-election mode,†in which she would have to court more conservative voters. Des Moines Register
Now there are allegations that Hillary Clinton listened to illegally obtained recordings of her husband’s political opponents back in 1992 so that she could decide upon a course of action. The recording is reported to have involved another bimbo eruption and Hillary was all over how to put out the fire. If you have ever wondered how they managed to stay ahead of the allegations, this might be the answer.
The argument can be made that Hillary did not actually record the conversations and that she only listened to them. However, she had to know that they were illegally obtained and, as a lawyer, she was obligated to report the infraction of the law. What she did by listening and acting upon the information rather than reporting the illegal activity is no different than if she had looked over the money bags her friends had obtained in an armored car robbery and then used the information about the money robbery to plan armored car safety. She witnessed the breaking of the law and did not report it.
I read the book “Her Way” and I remember the passage that discussed this very thing. I remember thinking at the time that it was interesting that the Clintons would condone such a thing when their legal folks did everything possible to get Linda Tripp for recording her conversations with Monica Lewinsky. It is also curious that a couple of old folks intercepted and taped Newt Gingrich and turned the tape over to Democrat Jim McDermott so it could be used against Republicans. I don’t recall this ever coming to a conclusion.
Hillary must have thought it was OK to listen to her rivals discuss politics but she has been against our country listening in on the conversations of terrorists in order to protect our country. Hillary thinks that terrorists deserve more protection than do her political opponents. This is obviously another instance of do as I say and not as I do.
Here is an interesting video of this being discussed on MSNBC.
Tags: Her Way, Hillary Clinton, law breaking, Political Commentary, wire tapping