Terry McAuliffe, campaign chairman for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), said Tuesday that the former first lady is hamstrung by a biased media. “Clearly it has been a biased media, no question about it,” McAuliffe said on Fox News. When asked how much of the mainstream media is “in the tank” for Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), who leads Clinton in the race for the Democratic nomination, McAuliffe estimated that about 90 percent of the media favor Obama.
“It is what it is. We’re not complaining,” he stated. “We have to deal with the hand we’re dealt with.”
McAuliffe added that “every independent study has said that this is the most biased coverage they’ve ever seen in a presidential campaign.”
He also praised Fox News, which is often viewed as a conservative media outlet, as “one of the most responsible in this presidential campaign.”
The US , which until two weeks ago had never provided any proof for its allegations, finally handed over its “evidence” of the Iranian origin of these weapons to the Iraqi government. Last week, an Iraqi delegation to Iran presented the US “evidence” to Iranian officials. According to Al-Abadi, a parliament member from the ruling United Iraqi Alliance who was on the delegation, the Iranian officials totally refuted “training, financing and arming” militant groups in Iraq . Consequently the Iraqi government announced that there is no hard evidence against Iran.
In another extraordinary event this week, the US spokesman in Iraq, Maj. Gen. Kevin Bergner, for the first time did not blame Iran for the violence in Iraq and in fact did not make any reference to Iran at all in his introductory remarks to the world media on Wednesday when he described the large arsenal of weapons found by Iraqi forces in Karbala.
I commend the Democrats on saving their attacks for the general election, as they will be so much more effective....they are going to show all of you hate monger scare monger republicans that you can't even trust your own candidate...
Liberals are stupid. What white man alive today had anything to do with slavery? And besides, do you think obama will end affirmative action if he became the president? After all, if a colored gets the highest office in the land, that shows me that white America is no longer racist. Blacks, on the other hand are still the most racist people in America, including obama! And need I mention, they're all democrats?
And whats more, liberals can never answer the simple question of, what has hussein obama ever done? So, he ran UNOPPOSED in Illinois less than four years ago. And he's spent most of that time running for president!
They say "well the jails are over crowded" and I'm sure they are, but what are the majority in there for? This is the part that will have you at very least PISSED!
I done a study of this and found that almost HALF were in the for trival things. Things such as trespassing (one guy was sitting on a sidewalk of a business that was closed (if that officer was that worried about where the guy was sitting, perhaps he should have taken him to his house and let him sit instead of costing the taxpayers $100.00 a day), probation violation, one lady I talked to lost her job and had not gotten back to work so she was violated and has to serve 30 days (that bright probation officer just cost us $3000.00 in a state where $2000.00 a month is good money), oh and heres a good one, driving on a revoked license, a guy had his license revoked over unpaid tickets and was given 10 days (thats a $1000.00 it costs us). The total cost to get his license back is about $1500.00, he makes or made $7.00 an hour (of course now he is out of a job over this and will be filing for unemployment)so he barely is able to live, let alone give the state anything to get his license back. This is the 2nd time he has been arrested in one year for this and both times got 10 days (for a total of $2,000.00 to the sheriffs department) and both times lost his job. Now the states money is OUR money because they dont produce anything and the only way it has to make money to stay in business is to have us send them money, but a 3rd grader could figure out that it would be cheaper for the taxpayers to just give the guy back his license. We would have a net savings of $500.00, this guy would be able to get insurance, keep his job and avoid un-employment (which by the way costs us as well). Perhaps that is what the whole problem here is.... some people have so much education the first thing they lose is COMMON SENSE! The ability to do basic math is normally what goes first I guess?
Solution - Now if you feel bad for the courts then call them, e-mail them and tell them the first place they can find their 5% is to a) tell officers to stop arresting people for trival things, b) when they do just cut them lose. This will not only save money for the courts but will also save you and I a whopping (appox) $4,000.00 a DAY, $28,000.00 a WEEK, $121,240.00 a MONTH and are you ready???? $1,454,880.00 a YEAR!
Please I could rally use your Donations what ever you can spear every little bit helps so if you can help please do... I will not let the state or the people down.. Please I truly need your help to win!!!! Please feel free to go to my web site http://lisaleeds2008.com Please Help!!!! To Donate go to http://lisaleeds2008.com/new_page_3.htm and give as much as you can spear
O'Reilly and Hannity ask the hard questions and do not let the liberals off easy. More than once Ive seen democrats get up and leave in the middle of an interview.
If democrats cant handle O'Reilly or Hannity, how can we trust them to protect us against terrorism? Oh, that's right...democrats are OK with radical islam and terrorism...but Fox News and Rush Limbaugh must be stopped!
The nation’s top Democrats are suddenly rushing to appear on the Fox News Channel, which they once had shunned as enemy territory as the nemesis of liberal bloggers.
The detente with Fox has provoked a backlash from progressive bloggers, who contend the party’s leaders are turning their backs on the base — and lending credibility and legitimacy to the network liberals love to hate — in a quest for a few swing votes.
There was an article in the Wall Street Journal on Cindy McCain, John's wife. All I ever saw was this attractive woman standing beside John. I was surprised how talented and involved with world problems she is. This is a summary of the article. She graduated from Southern Cal and was a special-needs teacher.
After her Dad died she became involved with his beer distributing firm and is now the chairwoman. Sales have doubled since she has taken over from her father.
They have a marriage prenuptial agreement, her assets remain separate.
She is involved around the world clearing land mines - travels to these countries on a detonation team and service on their board.
They have a 19 year old serving in Iraq, another son in the Naval Academy, a daughter recently graduated from Columbia Univ., an adopted daughter in high school, and a son who is the finance guy at the beer firm.
Raised kids in Phoenix, Az rather than Washington DC.(better atmosphere) He commuted.
In 1991, Mrs. McCain came across a girl in an orphanage in Bangladesh. Mother Teresa implored Mrs. McCain to take the baby with severe cleft palate. She did so without first telling her husband. The couple adopted the girl who has had a dozen operations to repair her cleft palate and other medical problems. They have a Family Foundation for children's causes.
She's active with "Halo Trust" - to clear land mines, provide water and food in war ravaged and developing countries. She will join an overseas mission of "Operation Smile", a charity for corrective surgery on children's faces. She has had two back surgeries and became addicted to pain killers. She talks openly about it which she says is part of the recovery process.
I'm surprised the media is so quiet about her attributes. She sounds more capable than Hillary or Obama. We would really get two for the price of one. A person with business and international experience. John did work for the firm for awhile when he left the Navy. She, however, has the real business experience. Very interesting
INDIANAPOLIS — It's a story Hillary Clinton loves to tell, about how the Chinese government bought a good American company in Indiana, laid off all its workers and moved its critical defense technology work to China.
And it's a story with a dramatic, political ending. Republican President George W. Bush could have stopped it, but didn't.
If she were president, she says, she'd fight to protect those jobs. It's just the kind of talk that's helping her win support form working-class Democrats worried about jobs and paychecks, not to mention their country's security.
What Clinton never tells in the oft-repeated tale is the role prominent Democrats played in selling the company and its technology to the Chinese. She never mentions that big-time Democratic contributor George Soros helped put together the deal to sell the company, or that the sale was approved by the administration of her husband.
With all this new media, internet scrutiny exposing the corrupt policies of democrats, some people will STILL vote for them!
Something tells me you aren't too concerned about their lack of action on the war. Can you really be that upset about their failure to bring the troops home? Their lack of action works in your favor according to your beliefs, doesn't it?
"The title of Reverend Wright’s sermon that morning was “The Audacity of Hope.” He began with a passage from the Book of Samuel—the story of Hannah, who, barren and taunted by her rivals, had wept and shaken in prayer before her God. The story reminded him, he said, of a sermon a fellow pastor had preached at a conference some years before, in which the pastor described going to a museum and being confronted by a painting title Hope.
“The painting depicts a harpist,” Reverend Wright explained, “a woman who at first glance appears to be sitting atop a great mountain. Until you take a closer look and see that the woman is bruised and bloodied, dressed in tattered rags, the harp reduced to a single frayed string. Your eye is then drawn down to the scene below, down to the valley below, where everywhere are the ravages of famine, the drumbeat of war, a world groaning under strife and deprivation.
“It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks’ greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere…That’s the world! On which hope sits!”
And so it went, a meditation on a fallen world. While the boys next to me doodled on their church bulletin, Reverend Wright spoke of Sharpsville and Hiroshima, the callousness of policy makers in the White House and in the State House. As the sermon unfolded, though, the stories of strife became more prosaic, the pain more immediate. The reverend spoke of the hardship that the congregation would face tomorrow, the pain of those far from the mountaintop, worrying about paying the light bill… "
"One factor being blamed for the price hikes is the use of government subsidies to promote the use of corn for ethanol production. An estimated 30% of America’s corn crop now goes to fuel, not food."
Hey liberal, How many people are you starving with your ethanol?
Al Gore is a liar and a fucking idiot. So are the rest of you pathetic liberals.
“George W. Bush spent most of 2001 using legal maneuvers to delay the release of records that would likely have incriminated key members of his administration as well as his father in crimes that took place two decades earlier.”
– Niman
The place to start, Niman suggests, is with the release of tens of thousands of documents from the Reagan-Bush presidency that George W. Bush suppressed by fiat during his first year in office.
Until Bush countermanded it, the Presidential Records Act required that the records of every administration be made public after 12 years, which meant that the Reagan-Bush documents were due for release after January 2001. In the same executive order, Bush also included the records from his father’s two terms as vice president — which was undoubtedly Bush Jr.’s true purpose all along.
First some background on the Reagan-Bush records from Niman:
There were two big unfolding stories pre-9/11 that just sort of disappeared. One was the completion of the first full recount of the disputed 2000 Florida presidential election—which Al Gore won, albeit by a hair…
The second, possibly larger story, was the scheduled declassification of the first batch of sealed records from the Reagan/Bush White House. Those records promised to further document massive crimes against both humanity and the Constitution, as well as treason committed by our leader’s father and the now revered Ronald Reagan.
Historians expected that among the 68,000 documents scheduled for release in 2001 would be further evidence of Reagan administration support for and coordination of terrorist attacks aimed at destabilizing the economy and democratically elected popular government of Nicaragua, not to mention support for death squads in El Salvador, Columbia and Honduras (Battalion 316), and genocide in Guatemala.
Juicier still, given the current situation in Iraq, would be additional data about Reagan/Bush support for Saddam Hussein’s government at a time when it was gassing its own citizens (allegedly with US supplied materials), and support for the mullahs in Iran, who, it turns out, the Reagan administration covertly supplied with arms (remember Ollie North?), allegedly in exchange for the continued imprisonment of the American embassy staff in the run-up to the 1980 presidential election. The incident left US President Jimmy Carter appearing impotent, leading to the Reagan/Bush victory, which was immediately followed by the release of the hostages and US arms shipments to Iran’s criminal regime. Throw in a draconian domestic agenda and we would have been looking at an interesting read.
George W. Bush spent most of 2001 using legal maneuvers to delay the release of records that would likely have incriminated key members of his administration as well as his father in crimes that took place two decades earlier. Once the nation moved into the post-9/11 era, the political opening emerged for W. to issue an unquestioned executive order (Exec. Order 13233) on November 1, 2001, quietly thwarting the release of the Reagan/Bush papers in the name of “national security.”
To restore America after the disastrous Bush presidency, Niman says that these and other truths must be revealed:
The first step is to recognize where we are. Then we have to look at what other nations in similar positions have done to recover. We have to abandon the notion that we are somehow better than any other nation that lost control of its sensibilities for a generation. And we need to examine the established paths these nations have moved as they struggled in recovery.
The first step is to restore the reign of truth—to return meaning to language and return credibility to government. This is done with a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. More than 30 countries have convened various forms of such commissions in places ranging from South Africa and Rwanda to East Timor. The idea is that first comes truth, even sometimes at the cost of immunity from prosecution. Only with truth reestablished can a nation have reconciliation, and with its history in order, move forward into the future.
In the case of the Bush administration, there will be many questions to be answered. These will probably need to start with well documented electoral irregularities and widespread conspiracies to suppress voting in both the 2000 and 2004 elections, the latter of which has already resulted in criminal prosecutions in the election-deciding state of Ohio. If it turns out that one or both elections were corrupted, then we’ll have difficult questions to face regarding the legitimacy of enduring institutions such as the Supreme Court, which may have been affected by appointments put in place by an illegal government. Or maybe not. These are the kind of questions such a commission needs to sort out.
Chances that there will be a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, or anything like it, in the wake of the Bush era are slim, to say the least. For one thing, if polls that give him a 30 percent approval rating are accurate, almost a third of us remain in complete denial that Bush has done anything wrong.
Also notice that when he receives ANY sort of criticism or insult, he completely loses it. That last debate with hillary had him red faced and stumbling! How embarrassing!
Can you imagine what the hero and war veteran, John McCain, is gonna do to this boy?
that dumbass al gore
the skirt-chasing disgraced former president bill kkklinton
that terrorist-loving horse's ass jimmy carter
all the Kennedys, including the Drowner Himself, Teddy "I'll have another scotch beofre i drive Mary Jo home" Kennedy
the vast majority of Hollywood
every democrat in congress
john mccain
every last person you see on television, with the exception of bo derek, gary sinese and tom selleck.
every person who works for the vast majority of newspapers, magazines, and related print media in the US
hugh hefner
barbra streisand, and everyone who looks like her.
every baldwin ever born.
congressman james jefferson-d of louisiana--who had $90K stolen cash hidden in his freezer.
mayor nagin. jesse jackson. barney frank. nancy pelosi ( who hires illegals for slave wages, and then screams about how mexicans are mistreated in the US )
every Jew who mysteriously supports the left--while the left constantly shafts Israel.
...believe that government can play a positive role in the economic and educational well-being of the people..."
Whatya mean? Like unlimited free health care? unlimited foodstamps? Projects? failed public schools? Thats called socialism and that stuff aint working now. In fact its harming the ones its supposed to help.
"...and to be a force for good in the causes of international peace and human rights."
You mean like, fighting terrorism? Overthrowing Islamo-fascist countries that torture and oppress women and minorities? We've got that already and the liberals and democrats HATE IT!
Im not sure I understand how neo-libertarianism is gonna work.
Democrats and Republican be warned! There is a new political idea floating around out there or maybe its an old one and I'm just now hearing about it. But I tell you what, if it catches on, it will change everything for the better and get us back to a government by for and of the people.
NEO-LIBERTARIAN
James Leroy Wilson wrote an amazing article that sums up the idea of what it is to be a Neo-libertarian. Essentially, a neo-libertarian is a “moderate” who leans toward greater personal freedom (especially when it comes to sex) and greater economic freedom (less government taxing and spending, fewer regulations).
I couldn't agree more. I want the federal government to stay out of my life, stick to what it was intended to do pass laws that the people agree upon, collect taxes, protect us from our enemies foreign and domestic, and help conduct trade abroad. That's it! Everything else should be handled at the state and local level by those in the know.
That's why I feel that Neo-libertarism is so right for this country right now. It may not be THE future of American politics but what's going on now just isn't working and we need a change.
The Democrats' "Fake-Out America" adviser, Berkeley linguistics professor George Lakoff, must be beside himself. Despite Lakoff's years spent training Democrats to "frame" their language to stop scaring Americans, B. Hussein Obama was caught on tape speaking candidly to other liberals in San Francisco last week.
One minute Obama was bowling in Pennsylvania with nice, ordinary people wearing "Beer Hunter" T-shirts, and the next thing you know, he was issuing a report on the psychological traits of normal Americans to rich liberals in San Francisco.
Obama informed the San Francisco plutocrats that these crazy working-class people are so bitter, they actually believe in God! And not just the 12-step meeting, higher power, "as you conceive him or her to be" kind of God. The regular, old-fashioned, almighty sort of "God."
As Obama put it: "(T)hey get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
The rich liberals must have nearly fainted at the revelation that the denizens of small towns in Pennsylvania have absolutely no concern for the rich's ability to acquire servants from Mexico at a reasonable price.
We don't know much about Obama's audience, other than that four fundraisers were held on April 6 at the homes of San Francisco's rich and mighty, such as Alex Mehran, an Iranian who went into daddy's business and married an IBM heiress, and Gordon Getty, heir to the Getty Oil fortune.
It is not known whether any of Getty's three illegitimate children attended the Obama fundraiser -- which turned out to be more of a McCain fundraiser -- but photos from the event indicate that there were a fair number of armed (and presumably bitter) policemen providing security for the billionaire's soiree.
In 1967, Gordon sued his own father to get his hands on money from the family trust -- and lost. So Gordon Getty knows from bitter. It's a wonder he hasn't turned to guns, or even to immigrant-bashing. God knows (whoever he is) there are enough of them working on his home.
These are the sort of well-adjusted individuals to whom Obama is offering psychological profiles of normal Americans, including their bizarre theories about how jobs being sent to foreign countries and illegal-alien labor undercutting American workers might have something to do with their own economic misfortunes.
It's going to take a lot of "framing" for Democrats to recast Obama's explanation to San Francisco cafe society that gun ownership and a belief in God are the byproducts of a psychological disorder brought on by economic hardship.
It is an article of faith with the Democrats that they must fool Americans by simulating agreement with normal people. The winner of the Democratic primary is always the candidate who does the best impersonation of an American.
But then, after all their hard work making believe they're into NASCAR and God, some Democrat invariably slips and lets us know it's all a big fake-out. They're like a gay guy trying to act straight who accidentally refers to Brad Pitt as "yummy!"
The Democrats' last phony American (or perhaps I should say "faux American") was John Kerry, who famously said that if "you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Kerry claimed this was not an accurate reflection of his feelings about the troops, despite a four-decade record of contempt for them, including accusing American troops of being baby-killers during the Vietnam War.
Rather, he said, it was a "botched joke." (In Kerry's defense, he was the opening act for Randi Rhodes' stand-up comedy show at the time.) But as with his military records, Kerry refused to allow his joke-writer to release any of the jokes cut from that speech.
In case there was any confusion, other Democrats immediately clarified their position by going on television and saying -- as Rep. Charlie Rangel did -- that our troops are people who don't have the option of having "a decent career."
These Democrats can't even pull off attending a NASCAR race without embarrassing themselves. In August 2004, Kerry exclaimed: "Who among us does not love NASCAR?" And then, about six months ago, Democratic congressional staffers to Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., sent out a memo urging aides going to NASCAR races to get inoculated before attending.
Obama had been so careful until now, "framing" his message as "change" -- rather than partial birth abortion, driver's licenses for illegal aliens, tax hikes, socialized medicine and abandoning mandatory minimum prison sentences for federal crimes.
His message is "change" -- not that his wife has not been proud to be an American for most of her life.
He is for "change" -- and don't mind the crazy racist loon who has been Obama's spiritual mentor for two decades.
One can only hope that Obama got his shots before bowling in Altoona, Pa.
The first group strives to make themselves better and more valuable. They work hard to earn every gain they achieve. These people believe that it is their responsiblity to achieve success and can count on only what they earn. They believe in hard work, and they strive to raise themselves up to the upper strata of wealth.
The second group is also dissatisfied with their current position on the ladder of wealth. But rather than raising themselves up to the upper strata trhough hard work and betterment, they simply work to bring those in the upper strata down. The idea behind their 'progression' is to redistribute the vast amounts of money that 5% of the population currently holds so that everyone else can be a little bit higher on the wealth ladder.
What the second group doesn't realize, is that without the rich, there is no middle class. Without the wealthy (often read 'greedy') CEOs providing those mid-level jobs, there would be no subdivisions with cookie-cutter houses and 2.3 children we so often associate with the idea of 'the American Dream.'
In fact, if your true goal is to tax the rich more, and to prevent people from becoming so rich in the first place, then people will have no drive or desire to better themselves; there is no reward for hard work. This will drive the productivity down, the morale down, and ultimately will lead to a socio-economic system in which the government solely owns all means of production, and the people basically work as slaves simply to get by.
It was inevitable that the period of “Yes We Can!” deification would come to an end. It was not inevitable that Obama would now look so vulnerable. He’ll win the nomination, but in a matchup against John McCain, he is behind in Florida, Missouri and Ohio, and merely tied in must-win states like Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. A generic Democrat now beats a generic Republican by 13 points, but Obama is trailing his own party. One in five Democrats say they would vote for McCain over Obama.
Now onto the post at large, I agree with this. We need to shake up the two party system by voting for third party individuals. Many people vote one way because their parents vote that way. I personally have grown up past that and I vote in the way that seems to support the constitution. For example, I am a libertarian typically but in this primary, I voted for Ron Paul because he was the only true republican running. All of the rest of them took a neo-con stance in one form or another.
Now I hope that America is smart enough to figure out that a vote for McCain is more war mongering and a vote for either democrat would mean that you are paying all of your hard earned money to the government so the less fortunates of the country can sit back, soak up all your money and pop out babies. I heard one woman actually say she will vote for Hillary because she will give her money on the back end of wellfare. Thats not what our forefathers had in mind for this country.
As a country we have become fat, lazy and stupid. Only in America can people sit around and watch a show called "Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader?" Most of those questions highlighted on the show any citizen should be able to answer without hesitation. They are questions meant for 5th graders. But it amazes me how stupid the mass populous is as a whole, holding at just about a 4th to 6th grade education. In case you are wondering, thats just barely starting to hit the surface of algebra.
So in closing, when this country finds itself at the bottom of the proverbial bottle in the worlds standing, don't say no one saw it coming. In fact, all the people that saw it coming in the primary elections were criticized and turned into outcast "kooks" that the media laughed at and disregarded. Just remember, that when it hits that fan, all those people who were smart enough to see it coming will also be smart enough to prepare for it and they will be the ones to rebuild this nation. Not the wellfare class.