Like a child who has his first experience being surprised by the jack-in-the-box or the 'pop goes the weasel' game, voters never cease to be shocked and dismayed by the latest scandal in politics.
Monday gave voters yet another one of these shocks as Governor Eliot Spitzer (D-New York) was caught in a major prostitution ring, although Spitzer has made a career out of prosecuting call girls and their pimps to the fullest extent of the law.
But this should be nothing new to the electorate, and, contrary to the obvious bias of the mainstream media, it should be nothing new to Democrats as well.
Scandal knows no political party or ideological boundary.
Yet in all likelihood this is not going to be the last scandal of the 2008 Presidential Election.
Hillary and Bill have so many skeletons in the closet that at any moment one of them could draw new life and emerge from the closet to wreak havoc on her campaign.
And don't believe for a moment that the icon of 'change,' the Messiah himself, Barack Obama, is immune. Something simply isn't right about the candidate, his wife, and his campaign. We know of Michelle Obama's overt disdain for America. I highly suspect that Barack feels the same way, only he is able to hide his feelings very well.
This 'all-around nice guy' who causes infidels to get 'Obama religion' and become 'slain in the spirit' like Pentecostals without the Christianity, is an enigma of sorts. But a mere cursory reading of his record reveals at least part of the real truth.
In the Illinois legislature he voted against allowing medical care to be given to newborn babies who survive botched abortion procedures. He voted for every single gun control bill that was introduced, including making the statement that all handguns should be banned.
And then there is the tax problem. We need look no further backward that his present campaign to see the nightmare he would unleash on the American public.
It will take 300 BILLION DOLLARS in new taxes to pay for Obama's proposals.
This is 36% higher than what it would take to pay for that tax-and-spend liberal Hillary Clinton's proposals.
300 BILLION DOLLARS in new taxes. Boy, what a 'nice guy.'
As former Senate Majority Leader from the 60s, Everette Dirkson, R-ILL, used to say sarcastically about Democrats' spending, 'A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.'
There is no taxpayers' friend in this race on the Democratic side, my friends.
John McCain, on the other hand, ranks 6th in the Senate on tax issues, and this ranking is provided by the National Taxpayers' Union.
Yes, John McCain.
POP goes the weasel! It seems surprises in this campaign come from both sides.
Showing posts with label Clinton scandals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clinton scandals. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
The Ghost and Mrs. Clinton
One of the ghosts from the Clintons' past just keeps showing up at odd moments. Sandy Berger, the Clinton adviser who was convicted of destroying the only copies of top secret documents about the terrorism threat to this nation, is now a campaign adviser to Hillary Clinton.
Even as the 9/11 Commission was in the process of requesting and using the documents in question to prevent another major attack, Berger was observed repeatedly going into the archives in Washington to retrieve official documents which he hid in his briefcase, coat, pants, and shoes.
According to the Court and by Berger's own admission, these documents were shredded and destroyed.
Berger was originally charged with criminal cover-up but avoided felony charges by agreeing to a plea bargain in which he pleaded guilty to misdemeanors.
For this he received a slap on the wrist. A $10,000 fine and a 3-year suspension of his national security privileges was the extent of his 'punishment.'
Yet here is part of the original story in the Washington Post (hat tip to INDC Journal):
'Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, a former White House national security adviser, plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document about the Clinton administration's record on terrorism....
'The deal's terms make clear that Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them.
'He described the episode last summer as "an honest mistake." Yesterday, a Berger associate who declined to be identified by name but was speaking with Berger's permission said: "He recognizes what he did was wrong. . . . It was not inadvertent."
'Under terms negotiated by Berger's attorneys and the Justice Department, he has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine and accept a three-year suspension of his national security clearance. These terms must be accepted by a judge before they are final, but Berger's associates said yesterday he believes that closure is near on what has been an embarrassing episode during which he repeatedly misled people about what happened during two visits to the National Archives in September and October 2003. ...
'The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an "after-action review" prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration's actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration's awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil.'
Removing and destroying classified documents concerning what the Clinton Administration knew of the growing threat of Islamic terrorism is no insignificant matter. In fact, there was a day in this nation's bright history when such actions were considered treason and were subject to the harshest of penalties.
Yet this is one of the individuals who now provides counsel to Hillary's campaign.
That dripping, gurgling noise you hear is the ooze of sleaze.
Even as the 9/11 Commission was in the process of requesting and using the documents in question to prevent another major attack, Berger was observed repeatedly going into the archives in Washington to retrieve official documents which he hid in his briefcase, coat, pants, and shoes.
According to the Court and by Berger's own admission, these documents were shredded and destroyed.
Berger was originally charged with criminal cover-up but avoided felony charges by agreeing to a plea bargain in which he pleaded guilty to misdemeanors.
For this he received a slap on the wrist. A $10,000 fine and a 3-year suspension of his national security privileges was the extent of his 'punishment.'
Yet here is part of the original story in the Washington Post (hat tip to INDC Journal):
'Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, a former White House national security adviser, plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document about the Clinton administration's record on terrorism....
'The deal's terms make clear that Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them.
'He described the episode last summer as "an honest mistake." Yesterday, a Berger associate who declined to be identified by name but was speaking with Berger's permission said: "He recognizes what he did was wrong. . . . It was not inadvertent."
'Under terms negotiated by Berger's attorneys and the Justice Department, he has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine and accept a three-year suspension of his national security clearance. These terms must be accepted by a judge before they are final, but Berger's associates said yesterday he believes that closure is near on what has been an embarrassing episode during which he repeatedly misled people about what happened during two visits to the National Archives in September and October 2003. ...
'The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an "after-action review" prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration's actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration's awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil.'
Removing and destroying classified documents concerning what the Clinton Administration knew of the growing threat of Islamic terrorism is no insignificant matter. In fact, there was a day in this nation's bright history when such actions were considered treason and were subject to the harshest of penalties.
Yet this is one of the individuals who now provides counsel to Hillary's campaign.
That dripping, gurgling noise you hear is the ooze of sleaze.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Clinton Cats of Corruption--More Than Just 9 Lives
Had the cats of corruption--Bill and Hillary Clinton--been actual felines, they would have run out of lives years ago. But these are really big cats. They have more than just 9 lives. And they have decades of scandal to prove it.
Can any honest and sincere person think of a time, ever, when the name 'Clinton' was not synonymous with 'corruption'?
And yet not only have they survived it all but they have managed to flourish when under normal circumstances their political careers would have been long since dead and buried.
Despite the attempts of Democrats to paint the Clinton years as the most economically productive in the nation's history--in spite of the fact that the actual figures show that much of the so-called economic growth was based on fluff and doctored numbers, i.e., Healthsouth, Enron, Global Crossing, and many more--the two terms of Bill Clinton are much more synonymous with one scandal after another, a succession of sleaze that would embarrass the Harding Administration in the early 1920s.
Travelgate; the Vince Foster 'suicide;' Janet Reno's order to murder American citizens in Waco because they were members of a religious cult; Reno's use of jackbooted thugs to seize a little boy, whose mother had lost her life bringing him to freedom, in order to ship him back to a Communist dictatorship; China-gate (yet another campaign fundraising scandal involving Chinese Communists); Hillary's attempt to seize private healthcare in lieu of a nationalized system in which it would have been a felony to seek out a private-pay physician--all point to one big problem that spells graft.
And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Notice that we have not yet gotten to Monica and the President's lying under oath. There are far too many more damning scandals in which the Clintons were directly involved, such as the mysterious deaths of individuals who have had the goods on the Clintons dating all the way back to Arkansas.
It is no small occurrence that one of the Clinton's closest pals from Arkansas, Susan McDougal, spent years in prison because she refused to squeal on Bill and Hillary.
What, exactly, about the Clintons was so damning that a friend was willing to give years of her life in jail rather than talk?
Yet these and many other examples of the Clinton Cats of Corruption failed to bury the pair as a viable political force. None of it seemed to matter at all to the public, and the mainstream media, of course, successfully negotiated itself through these treacherous waters so as to promote Clinton without failing to report on the massive failures of his years in office.
Reagan was often called 'the Teflon President' because none of the scandal in his Administration seemed to stick to the President personally. There is good reason for that. None of it involved the President personally.
With the Clintons, however, it was all personal, yet somehow they got away with it and continue to do so today.
The growing scandal involving the illegal campaign scheme of a fugitive from justice who orchestrated millions of dollars going into Hillary's campaign coffers under the names of individuals who could not afford such lavish gifts is yet another example of the exceeding graft of the Clinton Cats.
Apparently Norman Hsu got away with breaking federal law on individual donation limits by spreading the loot around in the names of countless individuals, such as the Paws in California, who make a mere $49,000 per year and yet who are listed as having contributed $45,000 to Hillary's campaigns.
No doubt there is much more here than what meets the eye. A case that is presently tied up in court involves a video which shows Bill and Hillary engaging in violations of federal campaign finance laws.
The question is, how many more scandals, how many more broken laws and ruined lives, how much more corruption and sleaze will the Clintons foist upon the American public before the electorate says, 'ENOUGH!'?
Can any honest and sincere person think of a time, ever, when the name 'Clinton' was not synonymous with 'corruption'?
And yet not only have they survived it all but they have managed to flourish when under normal circumstances their political careers would have been long since dead and buried.
Despite the attempts of Democrats to paint the Clinton years as the most economically productive in the nation's history--in spite of the fact that the actual figures show that much of the so-called economic growth was based on fluff and doctored numbers, i.e., Healthsouth, Enron, Global Crossing, and many more--the two terms of Bill Clinton are much more synonymous with one scandal after another, a succession of sleaze that would embarrass the Harding Administration in the early 1920s.
Travelgate; the Vince Foster 'suicide;' Janet Reno's order to murder American citizens in Waco because they were members of a religious cult; Reno's use of jackbooted thugs to seize a little boy, whose mother had lost her life bringing him to freedom, in order to ship him back to a Communist dictatorship; China-gate (yet another campaign fundraising scandal involving Chinese Communists); Hillary's attempt to seize private healthcare in lieu of a nationalized system in which it would have been a felony to seek out a private-pay physician--all point to one big problem that spells graft.
And this is only the tip of the iceberg. Notice that we have not yet gotten to Monica and the President's lying under oath. There are far too many more damning scandals in which the Clintons were directly involved, such as the mysterious deaths of individuals who have had the goods on the Clintons dating all the way back to Arkansas.
It is no small occurrence that one of the Clinton's closest pals from Arkansas, Susan McDougal, spent years in prison because she refused to squeal on Bill and Hillary.
What, exactly, about the Clintons was so damning that a friend was willing to give years of her life in jail rather than talk?
Yet these and many other examples of the Clinton Cats of Corruption failed to bury the pair as a viable political force. None of it seemed to matter at all to the public, and the mainstream media, of course, successfully negotiated itself through these treacherous waters so as to promote Clinton without failing to report on the massive failures of his years in office.
Reagan was often called 'the Teflon President' because none of the scandal in his Administration seemed to stick to the President personally. There is good reason for that. None of it involved the President personally.
With the Clintons, however, it was all personal, yet somehow they got away with it and continue to do so today.
The growing scandal involving the illegal campaign scheme of a fugitive from justice who orchestrated millions of dollars going into Hillary's campaign coffers under the names of individuals who could not afford such lavish gifts is yet another example of the exceeding graft of the Clinton Cats.
Apparently Norman Hsu got away with breaking federal law on individual donation limits by spreading the loot around in the names of countless individuals, such as the Paws in California, who make a mere $49,000 per year and yet who are listed as having contributed $45,000 to Hillary's campaigns.
No doubt there is much more here than what meets the eye. A case that is presently tied up in court involves a video which shows Bill and Hillary engaging in violations of federal campaign finance laws.
The question is, how many more scandals, how many more broken laws and ruined lives, how much more corruption and sleaze will the Clintons foist upon the American public before the electorate says, 'ENOUGH!'?
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Al Gore Takes a Beating from a Scientist
Washington, DC (TLS). Conventional wisdom has maintained that Hillary Clinton will be the nominee of the Democratic Party to run in the 2008 Presidential election. Conventional wisdom has also maintained that Al Gore's stranglehold on the environmental issue is fast and secure.
So who still believes in conventional wisdom, anyway?
Certainly the Clintons believe that the Democratic nomination is rightfully hers and that the 2008 Democratic convention is nothing more than a coronation. Party loyalists and the elite old guard also believe that she will be the nominee.
And I don't really doubt them that much. In fact, this is the most likely scenario.
Yet, her securing the nomination is not yet in the bag. Hillary faces some landmines that have surfaced at a very inopportune moment in her rise to fulfill a lifelong dream. First, her negatives are actually growing in the polls, not abating. She is not perceived positively by a majority of the electorate, and a new poll suggests that at least 50% of likely voters state that they will NOT vote for her.
Such bad news is sure to create some nervousness on the part of Party operatives. They may well turn to someone else if Hillary's negatives continue to dog her campaign.
Second, Hillary faces a potential bombshell of a scandal involving illegal activity on the part of both Clintons. The centerpiece of the scandal is a videotape that shows the Clintons committing felonies with regard to receiving illegal contributions and making underhanded deals.
If she is indicted and goes to trial, she can kiss her political aspirations good-bye.
Enter Al Gore.
Gore has been waiting in the wings for an opportunity to take center stage and supposedly recapture what he has always considered his since 2000--the Presidency.
Should Hillary falter, it is a near-certainty that the Democrats will NOT turn to Barack Obama, since his polls numbers have plummeted faster than the speed of sound. Edwards has fared even worse. And none of the other Democratic candidates appear to be catching on.
Thus, Al Gore would be the Party's tenured star waiting in the wings to save the day...except the problem is that Gore is facing his own set of problems.
By making global warming the centerpiece of his public discourse over the past few years, Gore has thrown himself lock, stock, and barrel into the 'environmentalist movement'--which is actually a political movement that uses environmental issues to push an ideological agenda.
Gore has bought the propaganda of the movement without question--that mankind is to blame for global warming and that the only way to 'fix' it is to enact sweeping policy changes in society that will reflect a collectivist rather than a free market set of values.
In short, personal freedom of choice will suffer. Free market capitalism will be smashed. The only way the planet can be saved from the exceedingly wicked human beings who have trashed it and caused it to warm up is to put severe restrictions on those sinister human beings and their behavior in commerce and free enterprise.
The truth of the matter is that Al Gore is only listening to SOME of the scientists.
As we have repeatedly shown in countless articles on The Liberty Sphere, the scientific community is far from unanimous on the issue. In fact, with each passing month new evidence emerges that strongly suggests that the 'Al Gore hypothesis' which was born out of the environmentalist movement is totally wrong.
Americans are increasingly waking up to the scam. A poll just this week found that over 70% of Americans now believe that climate change is a naturally occurring phenomenon and not primarily a result of human activity.
The hard science supports their belief.
One scientist in particular has some sharp words for Mr. Gore and his film, 'An Inconvenient Truth.' Many of the assertions made by Mr. Gore and the film have been shown to be false. And this could spell real trouble for the Democrats in 2008 if they turn to Gore as their nominee.
Read the entire article here:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article
So who still believes in conventional wisdom, anyway?
Certainly the Clintons believe that the Democratic nomination is rightfully hers and that the 2008 Democratic convention is nothing more than a coronation. Party loyalists and the elite old guard also believe that she will be the nominee.
And I don't really doubt them that much. In fact, this is the most likely scenario.
Yet, her securing the nomination is not yet in the bag. Hillary faces some landmines that have surfaced at a very inopportune moment in her rise to fulfill a lifelong dream. First, her negatives are actually growing in the polls, not abating. She is not perceived positively by a majority of the electorate, and a new poll suggests that at least 50% of likely voters state that they will NOT vote for her.
Such bad news is sure to create some nervousness on the part of Party operatives. They may well turn to someone else if Hillary's negatives continue to dog her campaign.
Second, Hillary faces a potential bombshell of a scandal involving illegal activity on the part of both Clintons. The centerpiece of the scandal is a videotape that shows the Clintons committing felonies with regard to receiving illegal contributions and making underhanded deals.
If she is indicted and goes to trial, she can kiss her political aspirations good-bye.
Enter Al Gore.
Gore has been waiting in the wings for an opportunity to take center stage and supposedly recapture what he has always considered his since 2000--the Presidency.
Should Hillary falter, it is a near-certainty that the Democrats will NOT turn to Barack Obama, since his polls numbers have plummeted faster than the speed of sound. Edwards has fared even worse. And none of the other Democratic candidates appear to be catching on.
Thus, Al Gore would be the Party's tenured star waiting in the wings to save the day...except the problem is that Gore is facing his own set of problems.
By making global warming the centerpiece of his public discourse over the past few years, Gore has thrown himself lock, stock, and barrel into the 'environmentalist movement'--which is actually a political movement that uses environmental issues to push an ideological agenda.
Gore has bought the propaganda of the movement without question--that mankind is to blame for global warming and that the only way to 'fix' it is to enact sweeping policy changes in society that will reflect a collectivist rather than a free market set of values.
In short, personal freedom of choice will suffer. Free market capitalism will be smashed. The only way the planet can be saved from the exceedingly wicked human beings who have trashed it and caused it to warm up is to put severe restrictions on those sinister human beings and their behavior in commerce and free enterprise.
The truth of the matter is that Al Gore is only listening to SOME of the scientists.
As we have repeatedly shown in countless articles on The Liberty Sphere, the scientific community is far from unanimous on the issue. In fact, with each passing month new evidence emerges that strongly suggests that the 'Al Gore hypothesis' which was born out of the environmentalist movement is totally wrong.
Americans are increasingly waking up to the scam. A poll just this week found that over 70% of Americans now believe that climate change is a naturally occurring phenomenon and not primarily a result of human activity.
The hard science supports their belief.
One scientist in particular has some sharp words for Mr. Gore and his film, 'An Inconvenient Truth.' Many of the assertions made by Mr. Gore and the film have been shown to be false. And this could spell real trouble for the Democrats in 2008 if they turn to Gore as their nominee.
Read the entire article here:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article
Sunday, May 27, 2007
New Book Drops Bill and Hillary Bombshell!
Washington, DC (TLS). With the vast majority of Americans reporting in a nationwide survey in April that they have serious concerns about scandal in the event of a Hillary Clinton presidency, a new book that is hitting the shelves does nothing but magnify those concerns.
The book details yet unrevealed secrets regarding the soap-opera existence of Bill and Hillary Clinton, including the bombshell revelation that at one point Bill was ready to divorce Hillary over one of his many female dalliances.
Rather than casting Hillary as the poor female victim, the book shows a calculating Hillary who entered into a 'mutual understanding' from the very start of their marriage, that each would help the other win the White House, resulting in four terms for the Clintons--two for Bill and two for Hillary.
Thus, Bill's philandering was a small price to pay for winning the prize.
Read it all here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=457708&in_page_id=1811
The book details yet unrevealed secrets regarding the soap-opera existence of Bill and Hillary Clinton, including the bombshell revelation that at one point Bill was ready to divorce Hillary over one of his many female dalliances.
Rather than casting Hillary as the poor female victim, the book shows a calculating Hillary who entered into a 'mutual understanding' from the very start of their marriage, that each would help the other win the White House, resulting in four terms for the Clintons--two for Bill and two for Hillary.
Thus, Bill's philandering was a small price to pay for winning the prize.
Read it all here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=457708&in_page_id=1811
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)