Defend Israel

The Patriots Call
The Black Robe Regiment - The Patriots Call

Democrats party of Racism
Racism of the Democrat Party
Herman Cain - The DNC has BRAINWASHED most of the Blacks of this Nation
Racism - the Nemesis of the Democrat Party
Democrats invented racism and democrats HATE all blacks
The Snooper Report articles on Democrat invention of racism

The March on DC
Callin’ All the Clans Together
Sick and tired - marching towards the Constitution of the United States
We. Are. Finished. With.  DC.
We. Are. Finished. With. DC. - Addendum Part 1

Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It
Civility: The Leftinistra Own None Of It Part 2(?)
Civility: Leftinistra Own None Part Three
Obama, Civility and The Clansmen of Dumb
Brain Dead Leftinistra: Their Stoic Civility
Libtards Have No Class - Civility Escapes Their Brain Deadness
The States Will Be the Next Battlefield in the Fight Over ObamaCare
War Is Coming: Blood On Our Own Streets - Thanks Democrats
Civil War…
We Are In The Midst of Chaos and Civil War
Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die Trying
State’s Sovereignty or Live Free Or Die
Live Free Or Die - The Movement Marches On
The Country Surrounds The City

When They Came
Is The Left Still “Proud To Be a Left-Wing Extremist”?
Be It Known - Attention Unconstitutional Congress
Obama: One Big Ass Mistake America
Do Birthers Rock and Roll or Stop and Drool?
Good vs Evil…It Is Your Choice
I Apologize For My Nation
Obama’s Civilian National Security Forces (CNSF)
Obama’s Brown Shirts - Civilian National Security Forces
What Is It About The American Liberal?
The Plan To Destroy America
Another Soldier Has Been Given the Haditha Treatment!
Callin’ All The Clans Together
Callin’ All The Clans Together Show
A History of the List of 45
Constitutionality: The Movement
Vindication: Iraq’s Saddam and Al Qaeda Links Revealed
Redefining The Center or the Moderate
The HIC (Hoax In Charge) Going To Copenhagen
We Didn’t Start This Goddamn War!

Copy Cat Frauds of the IAVA

Contract With America
Snooper’s Declaration of Independence
Thanks Obama

Contract From America

Timothy McVeigh
Thoughts To Ponder and Reflect Upon
Snooper Report Vindication: Al Qaeda, TWA Flight 800 and OKC Bombing
Clinton alludes to 1995 bombing, says words matter

Missing 13th Amendment
TITLES OF “NOBILITY” AND “HONOR” - The Missing 13th Amendment

The Coup
Military Coup Against Obama

The United States Constitution
Our founding document wasn’t set in stone for a reason

Deepwater Horizon
Did Hugo Chavez Sink the Deepwater Horizon Oil Platform?

The New Right

Arizona Rising

Texas Wars

Editor's Choice


Powered by Squarespace



Wake Up GOP


Come On Hillary! Fess Up!!

Or vanish into obscurity...that is where you will be found shortly anyway!  How's that trial date going for ya, Hillary?


Hillary = Toast Soon.




For Immediate Release

August 15, 2007

Contact: Joe Turman

Shirley & Banister Public Affairs


What is Hillary Hiding? Demands Sen. Clinton Release Secret Documents


Washington, DC – Richard Collins, founder of, today called on Sen. Hillary Clinton to release nearly two million pages of documents located at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, AR.  The documents detail her tenure as first lady and are said to contain memos, diaries, telephone logs, appointment logs, calendars, daily planners, and schedules.  The library's chief archivist does not expect the documents to be released until after the '08 Presidential Election.

"If Hillary Clinton is going to run on her experience as first lady, she cannot keep related documents under lock and key at the Clinton Library.  What is she hiding and why?  America needs to know now," said Richard Collins.

Collins continued, asking how Sen. Clinton expects the voters to make an educated decision in the '08 election when she is hiding this information from the public.

"Sen. Clinton has continuously chastised the Bush administration for not releasing documents and called for a more transparent government.  If this is her idea of transparency, one can only guess the level of hypocrisy she will achieve if she is elected President," said Richard Collins.

In addition to the two million documents, there are also said to be more than 1,000 relating to Sen. Clinton's efforts to enact Hillary-Care.

The Los Angeles Times reported that Rosalynn Carter, Nancy Reagan and Barbara Bush all have their records open to the public at their husband's presidential libraries. is an organization of concerned citizens that is dedicated to spreading the truth about Hillary Clinton and her dangerous ideas and plans for the country.


To schedule an interview with Richard Collins, please contact Joe Turman with

Shirley & Banister Public Affairs at (703) 739-5920 or



Stay Tuned For A Big Surprise...Until Then...(UPDATED)



The Elections of 2008 are turning out to be quite funny, as in HAHA and odd at the same time.

We have Pretty Boy Breck Girl that has a difficult time defining what a rich person "IS". We have Barack I'm In A Jihad Obama saying he is going to pull out of a war against terror to fight another war on terror while "invading" an ally to do so. We have Hillary the Czarina, a closet Communist/Leninist that is so proud of her record as a former First Lady that she is hiding her documents.

As diverse in attitude as these are, I hate to say this but, Hillary is by far the most together. However, they all have a common flaw. For some reason, they seem to think that GWB will be running for re-election in 2008. How odd is that? I suppose the fact that GWB won two Presidential elections has them in a fog and they'll be DAMNED if they will let GWB beat them again!! it not? Don't they know that presidents are limited to two terms? And these "liberals" are said to Like the GEICO Cave men? LOL!! Amazing!

Hillary's performance in "Invisible" should at least get her a nomination for one of those retarded OSCAR things. Did they pay the participants in this little "me-show" and "elect-me" show? Truly, Hillary is The Queen of Pander. After all, Bill and she did have that 20-Year Plan thing gpoing and they pretty much have it socked in.

I guess we shall see what comes of the upcoming Campaign Fraud Trial soon approaching and IF(?) Hillary gets named as a Defendant (which she "IS"...there's that damn word again), it will sink her canoe for the presidency. Of that there "IS" no doubt. Well, I do suppose that it all depends on what your definition and interpretation of "no doubt" "IS".

Check out the YouTube a friend sent to me and you will see for yourself what an intellectual fraud Hillary "IS". I wonder if she takes sleeping pills to drown out the demons she must face every day of her life.




And "We The People" are invisible to the government? What? The government is supposed to know the entire populace by their first names? Please. Without knowing it or, knowing it and pretending not to, the "invisibility" the American People feel is as so: we ARE invisible because over the last 6 decades (about 60 years for you moonbats), the Socialists have worked very hard to say one thing and having bewitched the masses, do something totally different and if anyone calls them on their crap, they are all of a sudden a member of some vast Conspiracy.

This liar and fraud known as Hillary stated today that she has NEVER supported or EVER wanted to have socialized medicine in the United States. Hello? Is she talking to folks that have ZERO memory or to the "too young to know any differently"? Great Caesars' Ghost!! I swear. Some people's kids.

I especially like the part where she proclaims that everyone in the known universe is "invisible" to President Bush but no one is "invisible" to her. Well? Naturally! That is what Good Communists do, isn't it? Knowing what everybody is doing so they can dictate every aspect of your life? Did no one catch that but me?

The Daily Slant has a special message to the fools in this pathetic scene:
It’s a Kodak moment.

The only thing that is apparently "invisible" to the masses is Hillary's communism all wrapped up, gift wrapped and pretty in socialist garb. Some folks call it Progressive. I often ask what they mean by Progressive and as Hillary calls it...Modern Progressive...but can never get a straight answer. The straight poop on "progressive" is the politically correct way to say "communism".

I have been reading ALL day about this "Invisible" travesty of lost intelligence and NO ONE caught the subliminal nuance. Well, it was NOT missed by me and now, YOU know as well.

Regardless of Hillary's claims, she is a Big Government Politico and the ONLY way to actually to put into place her plethora of "for the betterment of society" crap is by raising the HELL out of the taxes and totally stripping down the military to bare her idiot husband did.

Here is another home-run gathering of words from the Daily Slant:

What’s most interesting about Hillary’s video is how it underscores the Democrats’ latest election strategy. Ever since Bush took office and became the main stream media’s clown-cum-scapegoat-cum-fascism-poster-boy, Democrats couldn’t help but play on media-slant and tell us not what they will do – but what our president isn’t doing. The question is: What will Democrats do once Bush leaves office?

Now that is a loaded for bear question at the end. "IS"n't it?


President Bush Weighs In On Hillary's Stupidity and Arrogance:

August 15, 2007 -- WASHINGTON - The White House yesterday slammed Hillary Rodham Clinton's new Iowa TV ad, in which she claims that single mothers, soldiers and the uninsured are "invisible" to President Bush.

"It's outrageous," scoffed White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Perino accused Clinton of stooping beneath her office as a United States senator - not to mention her role as a former first lady - to suggest troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan are "invisible" to the commander-in-chief.

"That is absurd and that is unconscionable that a member of Congress would say such a thing," she told reporters in Crawford, Tex., where Bush, who vowed last week to stay out of the campaign debate, is vacationing at his ranch.

In the 60-second ad - which began airing statewide in Iowa yesterday - Clinton attacks Bush for a host of sins Democrats hold against him.

"You know, if you're a family that is struggling and you don't have health care - well, you are invisible to this president," she tells a town-hall crowd of Iowans in the commercial.

"If you're a single mom trying to find affordable child care so you can go to work - well, you're invisible, too."

Clinton's attacks are interspersed with gauzy footage of her walking with a farmer through a field and tending to a child in a doctor's office.

"And I never thought that I would see that our soldiers who serve in Iraq and Afghanistan would be treated as though they were invisible as well," she says.

"Americans from all walks of life across our country may be invisible to this president, but they're not invisible to me and they won't be invisible to the next president of the United States," Clinton says in her ad.

In her scathing defense, Perino said it was "outrageous" to claim Bush doesn't care about the sick and uninsured, noting his support for the government-run prescription-drug program begun in 2003.

"This is a president who, first and foremost, has helped millions of seniors across the country have access to prescription drugs at a much lower cost," she said.

That system, Perino said, "is helping millions of people and working better than anyone would have expected."

Just before shredding the ad for reporters yesterday, Perino referred questions about it to the Republican National Committee, which usually handles such political matters.

RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt, delighted to pile on, added: "Unfortunately for Hillary Clinton, her record of failure is far from invisible."

Schmitt claimed Clinton "failed on health care and voted against tax cuts that would have helped the middle class, but she voted against funding the troops."


Clinton wasn't shying away from the ad or the Bush administration's response.

"Apparently I've struck a nerve, the White House just attacked me a few minutes ago," she said while campaigning in Iowa.

"Not only have I said it and am saying it, I will keep saying it because I happen to believe it."



Do You Smell What I Smell?

What EXACTLY "IS" Hillary Hiding?

(cross-posted by Take Our Country Back)


And why? If Hillary aspires to be First Czarina of the United States, and she self-applauds her self-vaunted Good Deeds accomplished as First Lady, why, then, has she had her "records of achievements" locked up until AFTER the 2008 Presidential Elections?

I will tell you why. She is a closet communist. Her aspirations are to have a "Communal Society". Her goal is to have a federally sanctioned Robin Hood dictatorship dressed in Touchy-Feely Rhetoric. Ever hear of Karl Marx?

In a previous post on this blog yesterday, I outlined The List of 45 as presented to the CONgress in 1963 as one can so read in the book, The Naked Communist. There are other posts on this which can be found in the Tags section of the blog. Just look for "List of 45". Therein, one will find links galore to read and study.

Apparently, seeing that her thesis on her hero Alinsky has recently been made available for all to see, she is worried that her now "secret" documents will shed further light on the extension of her and Bill's 20-Year Plan. If the links in the post in regards to the Alinsky Thesis "no longer work", fear not and let not your heart be troubled...I have the pdf file.

More on Hillary's socialistic and communistic tendencies can be located all over the internet but there is no need to search. I, and others, have already accomplished the research. Naturally, you will want to substantiate these facts on your own which, by the way, is indeed commendable. For in-depth coverage and the exposure of the would-be Czarina, check out the Hot Rodham Blog which, is associated with the web site, Stop Her Now.

Clear and Present Danger
Communist In Liberal Garb
Dubious Character
Socialist Ties

The above are merely a scratch in the surface at the Hot Rodham Blog. There are links therein. Prove me wrong. The gauntlet has been tossed.

Also, in the VODPOD at the Hot Rodham Blog, there are videos galore where Hillary herself as subliminally exposed her true calling to be Czarina. The problem "IS", she doesn't know it. To the keen eye and the sharp mind, it "IS" all too clear.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton cites her experience as a compelling reason voters should make her president, but nearly 2 million pages of documents covering her White House years are locked up in a building here, obscuring a large swath of her record as first lady.

Two million? She isn't all that Green Friendly to trees, "IS" she?

"IS" anyone buying into this garbage?

Before documents are released, archives staff must read them and, by law, must redact material that they determine contains classified information, invades a person's privacy, reveals trade secrets, reveals confidential advice from presidential advisors or raises other concerns specified in the records law.

Asked how long it might be before Hillary Clinton's records are released, the library's chief archivist said it could take years.

Yeah. Sure. Like they haven't ALREADY been read, cataloged and sorted. If you believe that lie, I'll introduce to you an intelligent Cindy Sheehan.

For an additional "ha-has" and another "OH MY GOD!", please check this out.

One more post of note and relevance: Hillary The Budding Leninist

By the way...I ain't the ONLY one buzzing....

Peter Nicholas / Los Angeles Times:

Clinton's first lady records locked up — Archivists say the former first lady's documents at her husband's presidential library won't be released until after the '08 vote. — LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton cites her experience as a compelling reason voters should make her president …

Link Search: Google, Ask, Technorati, Sphere, and IceRocket


Discussion: Heading Right, Captain's Quarters, MSNBC, TIME, Classical Values, Althouse, JammieWearingFool and New York Times


Edward / Heading Right: What's Hillary Hiding?

Ed Morrissey / Captain's Quarters: She's Got 2 Million Little Secrets

Domenico Montanaro / MSNBC: Oh-eight (D): Locked up in Little Rock

Justin Miller / TIME: The Daily 2008 — The company that gave Mitt Romney his start …


Ann Althouse / Althouse: "The mother lode of opposition research" on Hillary Clinton...

JammieWearingFool: What Is She Hiding? — It seems Mrs. Clinton has some secrets …

Patrick Healy / New York Times: 'Not Invisible to Me' — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton …


Two Pieces of Note

I am going to post snippets of two authors here and editorialize at a later date. I want the full force of their words to sink in and perhaps get some feed-back from some readers before I place my two-cents in. I can't begin to match the wealth of knowledge these two have; and I have quite a bit.


Among certain Arab elites, there is considerable interest in how a Democratic administration would differ from the eight years of George W. Bush. It's a good question. Most Democrats, at least those running for president or sitting in Congress, have spent more time attacking Bush than explaining what Democrats would do if they were making foreign policy. But the Middle East seriously wounded, if not disgraced, the last two Democratic presidents. The candidates' reticence on the subject is understandable. Yet sooner or later, Hillary Clinton and company have to tell us what they think about Islam, Sunni Islamic extremism, al Qaeda, the religious dynamics of Iraq, clerical Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, rendition (Bill Clinton, if we recall, established the practice), close intelligence liaison relationships with torture-fond foreign security services (again, President Clinton had no insurmountable problem with this), and the appropriateness of preemptive U.S. military strikes against terrorist targets.

Click the link for the above piece and read the rest.



Not because of what they perceive to be her adequate qualifications for the office, but because of how she could galvanize a Republican base which loathes the Clintons:

They say the former first lady may be too polarizing for much of the country. She could jeopardize the party’s standing with independent voters and give Republicans who otherwise might stay home on Election Day a reason to vote, they worry.

In more than 40 interviews, Democratic candidates, consultants and party chairs from every region pointed to internal polls that give Clinton strikingly high unfavorable ratings in places with key congressional and state races.

“I’m not sure it would be fatal in Indiana, but she would be a drag” on many candidates, said Democratic state Rep. Dave Crooks of Washington, Ind.

Unlike Crooks, most Democratic leaders agreed to talk frankly about Clinton’s political coattails only if they remained anonymous, fearing reprisals from the New York senator’s campaign. They all expressed admiration for Clinton, and some said they would publicly support her fierce fight for the nomination — despite privately held fears.

The chairman of a Midwest state party called Clinton a nightmare for congressional and state legislative candidates.

A Democratic congressman from the West, locked in a close re-election fight, said Clinton is the Democratic candidate most likely to cost him his seat.

Click the link for the above article and read the rest.

While you are at it,  join the buzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...


Any Doubts?

If there are still some doubters out there as to Hillary's True Plan, here are some Heavy Hitters that are RIGHT sure positive in their assessment of the would-be Czarina.


Bye-Bye Adam Smith, Hello Marx?

Steve Forbes, former presidential candidate and president/CEO of Forbes magazine had some interesting thoughts on my interview with Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson on last night's Kudlow & Company.

KUDLOW: Steve Forbes, you heard Mr. Paulson on the question of corporate taxes and trade. Steve, as you know, the Democrats are debating again this evening. What do you expect to hear out of that debate?

STEVE FORBES: Well, I'm afraid you asked the right question, and obviously, the secretary had to duck it, about being double-crossed by the Democrats in Congress. Even [House Ways and Means Chairman Charles]Rangel couldn't get around the leadership and the labor union bosses who are against any kind of free trade agreement. So I'm not optimistic on it. I wish we could get these things through. They'd be good for us, good for the world.

KUDLOW: What do you think of this, Steve? I know you're a Giuliani man, I think you're one of the chairmen of his campaign. But Governor Mitt Romney teed off. He talked about the Democrats. He said, quote, "Their solutions are big brother, big taxes and big government. That's not the right answer for America." And he went a little further and he said--describing Senator Clinton--he said that's out with Adam Smith and in with Karl Marx. That's pretty tough stuff, Steve. Your comment?

STEVE FORBES: I think it's right on target. I think the Democrats miss it entirely on the economy. They still think in the 1990s the economy boomed when they raised taxes. Actually, as you know, it slowed economic growth. It wasn't until the Republicans took over that the economy took off. They haven't learned it yet. And unfortunately, we the people, if they get in [in 2008], are going to pay a huge price for their education.

As moonbats so often do,  their ignorance of facts are evident in the comments section of the above post.   It seems like some of those same moonbats appear here from time to time.  It must be that Moonbats In Training degree they are after.


And this is from a research analyst that posts at Townhall:

"...they are driven by lust for money and power."
Source(s): From the NWO Dictionary (un-revised version), CFGS Dictionary (under revision) and the Encyclopedia of World Domination (Police State Edition).

Clintons: [klin-tn or klin-tons or (klin'tons)] 'im'-proper noun, plural, more than one. Synonyms: disgraceful, disgusted, scandalous, shameful, dishonorable, appalling, discreditable, dreadful, reprehensible or anything denoting the worst imaginable character traits as opposed to that which represents the good in the nature of humankind.  Of or relating to Godlessness or blasphemous. An adjective, as in:"You clintonized my religion by receiving communion without the blessing of the sacraments." (in refrence to Bill Clinton receiving communion at a Catholic church.)

Meaning: Turn of the century anti-American politicians who launched one of the most successful political deceptions in the history of the world. 
In general, they are driven by lust for money and power.   Their Godless minds have no conscience; therefor they have no Higher Authority to answer to.  They have clearly made an end-run around the American people in order to achieve personal goals that, in many cases, are diametrically opposed to U.S. interests. If the American people fully understood the magnitude of the deception and power-grab, they would immediately and totally repudiate these individuals and their self-serving global schemes.

And, from Three World Wars, we find The Plan.  In short form...


Their Plan:

"There will be no middle class, only rulers and the servants. All laws will be uniform under a legal system of world courts practicing the same unified code of laws, backed up by a One World Government police force and a One World unified military to enforce laws in all former countries where no national boundaries shall exist. The system will be on the basis of a welfare state; those who are obedient and subservient to the One World Government will be rewarded with the means to live; those who are rebellious will simply be starved to death or be declared outlaws, thus a target for anyone who wishes to kill them. Privately owned firearms or weapons of any kind will be prohibited."

The above Plan (notice there is no mention of God nor religion) is an excerpt from their Master Plan which can be found here: (click on the link)


On Hillary and Nukes

Thank GOD above that Al Gore invented the internet and us Vast Right Wing "Flakes" are to exploit it.


The tide is turning folks...for the good for the Strict Constitutionalists and for the bad for the moonbat fruit loops that support the likes of Queen Commie Hillary. (Have I mentioned that we have proven Hillary is a communist?)


As Hillary so ...AHEM!...(really hate to say this)...RIGHTFULLY chastised Barack for his emotional outbursts which nearly cascaded Pakistan into a National Crisis (another one), we find this Double Standard of the woman(?) that would be Czarina of The United Socialist States of the American Continents:


Beth Fouhy / Associated Press:

Clinton Discussed Use of Nukes Last Year — NEW YORK — Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, who chastised rival Barack Obama for ruling out the use of nuclear weapons in the war on terror, did just that when asked about Iran a year ago. — "I would certainly take nuclear weapons off the table," she said in April 2006.

Link Search: Google, Ask, Technorati, Sphere, and IceRocket



Discussion: CNN Political Ticker, Hot Air, The Carpetbagger Report, Sister Toldjah, Taylor Marsh, Captain's Quarters, MSNBC, and Macsmind


CNN Political Ticker: Poll: Edwards, Clinton tied in Iowa

Allahpundit / Hot Air: Hillary: We must take nuclear weapons off the table — wait, Barack said what?

Carpetbagger / The Carpetbagger Report: Clinton, Obama, and nukes ... oh my

Sister Toldjah: Confronting media-aided myths: Barack Obama is no political …

Taylor Marsh: Clinton on Nukes — Taking Obama to task for not leaving nukes …

Ed Morrissey / Captain's Quarters: Do As I Say, v2.0 — The naivete sweepstakes continue …


Michael Cohen / Hillary's Hypocrisy — On the heels of my last post - this is truly classic.

Macranger / Macsmind: Hillary's continual gafts show she is unqualified to be President



Click any of the above and make your own determination.


The DNC is toast come 2008 and we know it...they know it...and now? YOU know it.


Have fun and enjoy!


And Hillary and Bill haven't even given their dispositions yet into that quagmire of campaign fraud yet.


This is getting better and better for America!


We Made Huff and Puff Take Notice!

The inane and ineffective socialist rag Huffington Post with Arianna "The Plane Was Going That Way Anyway" Huffington, the DNC Double Standard Champion and Proponent has given us a shot in the arm at Stop Her Now and the GREAT blog of that GREAT web site, Hot Rodham Blog!

Thank you Arianna!

As Rush Limbaugh has so eloquently stated and "IS" so true:

Rush said it best...


Simply put, those who hate us and attack us are our greatest strength.

Moonbats hate us because we are successful - according to Limbaugh, measure success by the amount of hatred and how much we are despised. That being the case, we can't be surprised by our growing success. Our conservative friends online who have also been attacked by the moonbat left can take comfort and strength from Limbaugh's words as well - because you too are being attacked for posting the truth.


Can I get an AMEN?  AMEN!  Thank you!


Thanks Chris Kelly and keep up that inane style of yours!  Good job!





OKStop The World!  I Want To Get Off!

Get this from yet another Ostrich Syndrome dweeb!

HILLARY vs. HITLERY....Over at National Review, Kathryn Jean Lopez comments on Hillary Clinton's performance at tonight's Democratic debate;

In response to more than a few answers tonight — on Iraq, on China — I've said, "she sounds reasonable." If I were a normal America, I think I'd really think that. That's really hard to admit.

Now, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking that I'm going to unleash some snark about Lopez not being normal. And sure, that's tempting. But not tonight.

Instead, I want to make a serious point: she's right. The audience for presidential debates is still small, but obviously it's growing as we get closer to the primaries. And a lot of people who have vague, media-fueled recollections of Hillary as a conniving, ball-busting uber liberal, are starting to watch these debates and realize that.....she seems pretty reasonable. Pretty normal. Not at all the Hitlery of wingnut fame. What was all that nonsense about, anyway?

Anyway, I've mentioned this before. Just thought I'd repeat myself. An awful lot of people are effectively seeing Hillary for the first time ever following a very long hiatus, and they're not likely to see any resemblance to the fever swamp creation of Rush Limbaugh ravings from the 90s. Her negatives are never going to be as low as, say, Obama's, but I betcha they go down five or ten points by the time this is all over.

This is  pure and un"adulterated" nonsense.  These people have been living in La-La-Land for so long, their heads are full of inanities!  Have they not read the Long Suppressed Thesis of one Hillary Rodham?  There is no way on God's Green Earth that anyone which has actually read The Thesis would say driveling nonsense as Goober above has.

Page 97 is interesting.  Paraphrasing: "Government will bring about the changes required".

Where have we heard this before?

background image




Truth Boating Hillary

Via an email from John Stephenson from Stop the ACLU. (Copied from Stuck on Stupid)

In the following timeline, we will see apparent evidence of Hillary Clinton’s Senate campaign understating over $750,000 in contributions to her 2000 Senate campaign, from one Peter Paul.

Evidently, Hillary’s campaign initially denied even knowing Peter Paul, and then later, admitted meeting him but never had a conversation regarding his contribution to her campaign.

Hillary Clinton will finally be under oath in the historic civil suit, Paul v Clinton in Los Angeles Superior Court. Voters are going to see the details of the greatest campaign finance fraud in history and the Clinton role in the collapse of Stan Lee Media.

It is going to take an army armada of bloggers to break the media blockade that has protected Hillary. It is time for TRUTH BOATING HILLARY.

Here is the TIMELINE that even the mainstream media can understand:


Feb. 2000 - Peter Paul is induced to support Hillary’s 2000 Senate campaign with the promise of access to Bill Clinton to be able to make a proposal to come aboard Stan Lee Media as a rainmaker when he left the WH

June 9, 2000 - Paul pays for two Hillary Clinton fundraisers at Spago and the home of Cynthia Gershman … the costs are never declared by the campaign (note: a previous fundraiser through Rendell for Al Gore, paid for by Paul, was also never declared; Rendell also never declared a 150K stock pledge) … at the Spago lunch, Paul spent considerable time with Hillary and discussed his plan for her husband’s employment… see the 20/20 report from 2001…Amazingly, in her declaration of 4-7-06, Hillary acts as if she barely knew Peter Paul and claimed she couldn’t remember anything they might have said. Besides the email comments, Paul has video of her going on and on about how Stan Lee was a genius for hiring Paul. She is really excited about Paul’s idea of a cartoon character of Al Gore, and she wants to talk to Tony Coehlo and Terry McAuliffe about it. Her failure to remember is simply a lie.

June 23, 2000 - Kelly Craighead (a White House employee, not part of any joint funraising committee), Jim Levin, David Rosen (all agents of Hillary and Bill) meet with Aaron Tonken (agent of Paul and fundraiser for Ed Rendell) to originate the idea for a major fundraising event for Hillary as part of the Aug. 14-20 DNC Convention in L.A.

July 11, 2000 - conference call between Peter Paul, Tonken, Craighead, Wolfson, Levin, and Rosen in which Paul is solicited to pay for the Hollywood Gala….he is asked to pay $525K, and it is expected that Cynthia Gershman will pay a like amount….it was acknowledged by all that the fundraiser would cost over a million dollars

July 17, 2000 - Paul films the SMOKING GUN VIDEO. This video was withheld by an assistant US ATTY while investigations were proceeding. Hillary is shown soliciting and coordination the $1.6 mil in-kind, hard money donation. Kelly Craighead kept her completely briefed and she offered any help she could. David Kendall’s claim that this was a joint fundraiser, and thus hard money, won’t fly. Craighead was a White House employee who solicited the money on July 11. Hillary was part of closing the deal on July 17.

Aug. 12, 2000 - Hollywood Gala… it raises a million dollars for Hillary, but it cost over a million dollars…Paul spent several hours with Bill Clinton… here they are putting the final touches on the deal at the after concert dinnerLook at all the photos of the gala… Hillary actually said in her declaration of 4-7-06, “I remember Mr. Paul attending the event…” How insulting was that? Actually, she spent hours near him and publicly thanked him from the stage for all he did.

Aug 13 - Paul and his wife Andrea are at the home of Barbra Streisand for Clinton Library donors…when Hillary sees Andrea, she runs over to her, brings her over to Streisand, and introduces her as “the wife of the man who funded last night’s event…my new best friend”… Streisand’s testimony should be interesting… Chelsea came up to the table with Paul, Andrea, Tendo Oto, Oto’s interpreter Jonathon Rogers, Jim Levin, and Haim Saban. Chelsea discussed for at least a half an hour how excited she and her parents were about her dad coming to work for the creator of Spider Man… Hillary sets up her daughter for perjury

Aug. 13 - Tendo Oto and SLM make their deal for Asian partnership - Oto gives $5 mil and promises another $5-7 mil in November for the American joint venture…On Aug. 12 he had paid $27K to attend the federal fundraiser gala. Giving money was illegal. Attending was illegal. Since Oto had no social security number to check out when he showed up at the event with his camera crew, the Secret Service said no way. Clinton had the Secret Service stand down, and Oto sat directly behind the president and first lady.

Aug 14 - Ed Rendell calls Peter Paul in a panic. Lloyd Grove is preparing a story for the WASHPOST about Paul’s felony record for “The Cuban Coffee Caper” two decades previous when he was an international attorney in Miami. Rendell tells Paul to deny he gave any money and just play along. Shortly after the warning call, Grove called. Here is the callsheet from SLM, certified by the government as evidence.

Aug 15 - Lloyd Grove writes the story in the WASHPOST about Paul’s felony past from two decades previous involving the Cuban Coffee Caper and defrauding Fidel Castro of $8.7 million … Howard Wolfson vows that they would never take any money from Peter Paul

Aug 17 - Grove writes a second story about $2,000 given by Paul at Spago … Wolfson says they will return the money, and a check is immediately cut and sent to Paul … Wolfson actually admits that the gala cost a million dollars but says it was in-kind and not a check. (Ummm, in-kind is hard money, Howard)

Aug 18 - behind the scenes, while disavowing him in public, the Clintons write personal notes to Paul, dated Aug 18, espressing their gratitude … Hillary: “We will remember it always”Bill’s noteEven Chelsea got into the act.

Aug 24 - Campaign Finance Chairman David Rosen is directed to send a fax to Paul asking for another $100,000 (actually, one of several faxes) … Hillary had promised the money for the Working Families Party in New York … Paul will send no more money until he hears it face to face from Bill Clinton that they still have a deal (second document shows Gordon’s acknowledgement that it was “done”)

Sept. 22, 2000 - Clinton steps off AF-1 in Los Angeles (we have photo) and assures Paul that the deal is still a go … Paul has Steven Gordon send a stock transfer of $55K to the Working Families Party for Hillary… we can find no evidence that they ever declared that donation. If the Clintons were disavowing Paul in public, claimed he gave no money, and had no business arrangement with the President as claimed by Hillary, why would the President of the United States be meeting Paul in public as he stepped off AF-1? For what possible purpose? That’s not hard to figure out, is it?

Nov 7 - Hillary is elected

Nov 13 - just six days after Hillary’s election, an agreement for Venture Soft USA Inc is recorded in Illinois between Jim Levin, Clinton’s business adviser, and Tendo Oto … Levin was Clinton’s “eyes and ears” in dealing with Paul, got proprietary business information, and stole the Japanese partner for their own deal

Dec 2000 - Stan Lee Media collapses … the additional $5-7 million promised in November from partner Tendo Oto was not received due to the Clinton/Levin interference In Paul v Clinton, it will be proven that Oto’s money would have kept the company solvent until Clinton came aboard as he had promised Peter Paul.

Early 2001 - Paul discovers that the campaign has filed two fraudulent FEC reports, only reporting 366K for the cost of Event 39 … he spent over a million dollars on it

June 18, 2001 - Paul files initial lawsuit against the Clintons and several others for business fraud

July 3 - Treasurer Andrew Grossman is served with the lawsuit that includes documentation for $1.6 million spent by Paul

July 11 - David Kendall accepts service for Hillary along with the $1.6 million documented expenses

July 18 - press conference at National Press Club . Paul has messenger hand deliver a demand letter to Hillary’s senate office

July 30 - despite Paul’s demand and all of the documentation, a third false FEC report is filed … this time they declare $401K for Event 39 … still no mention of Paul as the real donor

Jan 2005 - criminal indictment of David Rosen is unsealed

May 2005 - Rosen acquitted in criminal trial in Los Angeles…the perjury in this trial was astounding…the judge and prosecutor went out of their way to condemn Paul and claim that Hillary had nothing to do with it is also astounding… FBI affidavit during the trial documenting $1.2 mil from Paul that was not declared. The prosecution does not call Paul, Aaron Tonken, or key witness Kelly Craighead (Craighead was also never called by the FEC - she will be a key witness in Paul v Clinton)…. The prosecution does not use damaging evidence against Rosen obtained while Ray Reggie (brother in law of Ted Kennedy) was wearing a wire. In Tonken’s book, KING OF CONS, he tells how he sat in a van with Hillary detailing all of the money that was being spent on her.

Dec 2005 - FEC determines that the campaign deliberately underreported $721,000, fines the campaign a mere $35,000, and orders a new filing…treasurer Andrew Grossman signs conciliation agreement with the FEC, the equivalent of a nolo contendre plea

Jan 2006 - thefourth fraudulent FEC report is filed … among the problems are Stan Lee (whom we have on tape in a deposition swearing that he gave no money) is credited with a 225K donation and Paul is still never named personally as the donor as he has demanded

April 7, 2006 - Hillary removed as defendant but judge made clear to Kendall that she would be testifying … the declaration turned into the court by Kendall for Hillary can only be described as a work of fiction … no reporters attended the hearing and not one mainstream media source wrote that a trial date had been set for defendant Bill Clinton (trial date postponed until appeal is heard to bring Hillary back in as a defendant) … Chelsea will be one of the witnesses called … although her mom claims no knowledge of the business deal, if Chelsea testifies honestly, she will tell how the family stayed up late after the gala playing scrabble and discussing the excitement of daddy going to work for the creator of Spiderman … from a private fundraiser at Zev Braun’s house in early 2000, Paul has home video of Hillary laughing and discussing with him how he had arranged in 1993 for Fabio to chase her around the room and pick her up in a romance pose…the president referenced that event the next year at the Italian-American Foundation Dinner…. her declaration claiming that she met Paul in early 2000 is simply a lie

June 2006 - Senate Ethics Committee announces it will not investigate Hillary and simply relies on the flawed FEC procedure … subsequently, they refuse Paul’s offer to appear and testity

Oct. 18, 2006 - new demand letter for return of over a million dollars is delivered to Hillary’s DC office with copy delivered to Sen. Voinovich, chair of the Senate Ethics Committee

Jan. 10, 2007 - Paul counsel files Appellate Brief to bring Hillary back into the case as a defendant (that delays the trial date for Bill, set for March 27, 2007…it also delays depositions)….no mainstream media source had reported that defendant Bill Clinton had a trial date in a case involving the collapse of Spiderman Stan Lee’s company)

April 2007 - after a two-year battle for the return of evidence, including home videos, an assistant US atty provides Paul with a list of items they will return to him…..included was the “smoking gun video”: July 17, 5-minute conference call, Hillary Clinton….. when the numerous pieces of evidence were finally sent, the shipment did not include that video…..Paul’s counsel argues vehemently for that to be sent….Paul believes that a low-level functionary screwed up by putting that piece of evidence on the manifest — Hillary never thought it would see the light of day…that video was finally sent because they could not deny its possession

June 20, 2007 - look at this page under “Latest Filings” for June 20 briefs and declarations

July 27, 2007 - court notification that oral arguments are set for Sept. 7 before the California Court of Appeals…. a decision on whether Hillary is brought back in as a defendant is expected within 10 days thereafter…. then, it is time for depositions…. if David Kendall loses, he may appeal to the California Supreme Court…..that court had earlier refused to hear the argument about removal of Bill Clinton from the case…. Kendall may be able to delay it for a short time, but depositions are expected to begin this year.

















This "IS"...


 And we KNOW what "IS" is. 


Michelle Malkin Does It Again!

The Kossification of the Democrat Party is complete.

Michelle writes:

Pay attention as Hillary adopts Kos-ese while praising the nutroots for “standing up to the right-wing Republican noise machine,” jokingly blames the “vast right-wing conspiracy” for a microphone glitch, and claims credit for helping establish Media Matters and the Center for American Progress.

Click the link and read the rest.

Listen as Hillary grovels:



Then read the Hillary Thesis.

Then, again, CONgress just needs to do their damn jobs.


VP Dick Cheney Protects Us Against Hillary

And she is hopping mad!  Maybe if she hadn't written about her true political underpinnings, she wouldn't be the target that and her wanna-be First Man(?) are.


From News Max:

Presidential hopeful New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is hopping mad at Vice President Dick Cheney for charging her with "reinforcing enemy propaganda."

In a letter to supporters, Clinton recalls that after she wrote a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates asking him to "provide Congress with briefings of contingency plans for withdrawal -- or an explanation of why no such plans exist," she got a response from Under Secretary of Defense Eric Edelman who told her that discussing plans for withdrawal of our troops from Iraq "reinforces enemy propaganda."

That, fumed Clinton, "was an outrageous response -- and a dangerous one. Planning for withdrawal isn't just common sense. It is vital to ensuring our troops return home safe."

As long as this idiot Hillary rambles on about troops withdrawal,  she and her kind put our troops further  into harms way by enabling the enemy, plain and simple.

And her "candid concern" about the troops is laughably a criminal act in this DAV's opinion.


Go Publius!!

Czarinas' Thesis Is Now Made Available

Go Publius posted a link at the Hot Rodham Blog that presents a copy of the long suppressed Alinsky Thesis.

Freedom Underground has the PDF as well.

Go download the PDF file and read it. Or, got to Go Publius and read one page at a time.

Future posts on this WILL BE forthcoming.


For Hillary The Presidential Aspirant...

...she sure has quite a bit of 'splainin to do.

Wasn't it not too long ago that she was whining about "the rich exploiting the poor"?  As she is bankrolling millions at the same time?


Why is it that only the conservatives recognize this as a double standard?  Or,  so it seems.

But wait!  What do we have here?

One of Hillary Clinton's most important courtships began early last year, around a formal dinner table at Georgetown's Four Seasons Hotel. Her targets were Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack and his wife, Christy. Mack was already active politically - but on behalf of Clinton's political opponents. A Bush "Ranger," he had raised at least $200,000 for the President's reelection bid and was one of the most prominent business names on GOP donor lists. At one time his name had circulated as a potential Bush Treasury Secretary.

And here...

More and more Wall Streeters - especially those new-money hedge fund and private equity managers with net worths stretching toward and beyond the billion-dollar mark - are throwing their considerable moneyed weight behind Democratic candidates. So far, presidential contenders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have managed to charm these masters of Manhattan with their policy smarts and scent of potential victory, even while decrying the country's "highest concentration of wealth...since 1929," as Clinton puts it.

Things like this never cease to amaze me.  You?

In one hand,  Hillary bemoans and decries the rich all the while being one of them and in the other hand she is "reaching out across party lines", evidently as bribe money or a hand out.  Take your pick.

After successfully getting Barack's goat stemming from the exchange at the Yawn Tube debate, Barack imploding by telling the world he was going to invade a sovereign nation that is an ally of the USA and that same country has nukes and a plethora of terrorists in-country.  She must be gloating and Barack must be crying.

She is a shrewd on Mr Finch!

I for one, among the VAST majority of Conservatives in this country,  am pleased that The Rodham is attending the Kos Fruit Loop society and will pandering to the minority of American representatives in the moonbat realm.  This can only further our cause for an "udder" defeat of Czarina.  We feel that Czarina, Queen of Pork, will get the DNC nod.

With her disapproval numbers very close to her approval numbers, swing voters WON'T be going her way.  They will either go with the other team or stay home.  Good.

Like the SoH,  the FIRST female to attain the Vaunted position, Hillary, too,  will make history as being the first female to be nominated by a political party to run for the highest office on the planet.

And lose like Mondale lost to Reagan.

Don't be nervous folks.  The winds are changing.  The GREAT news coming out of Iraq has the moonbats VERY silent these days and the DNCers are NERVOUS as hell.  VICTORY in Iraq equates to DEFEAT for the DNC for decades to come.

Actually,  that should make then very happy.  After all, they DO own defeatism.

Thanks for sharing.



In a July CBS News/New York Times poll, fewer than half the registered voters interviewed (42 percent) said they had confidence that Hillary Clinton could handle an international crisis. Fifty-two percent said they were "uneasy" about her approach. Men were more likely than women to say they'd be uneasy about Clinton in a crisis. They also were more likely to say that they did not think it was likely that Clinton could be an effective commander in chief.


I wonder why that would be....


Lawyers Buying Favors

So, what else is new?  And what is the hub-bub about?

Newsmax: Ken Starr's Law Firm Gives More to Hillary Clinton

Attorneys at the law firm Kirkland & Ellis home to Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr  have donated more money to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign than to all the top Republican candidates combined.

Lawyers at Chicago-based Kirkland also home to Bush administration official Jay Lefkowitz have contributed $111,950 to Clinton and another $82,651 to fellow Democrat Barack Obama. Donations to Republicans Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain total $84,750.

Kirkland attorneys gave 28 percent more to George Bush than to Al Gore in 2000, and 34 percent more to Bush than to John Kerry in 2004, reports.

In an even more glaring example of politics making for strange bedfellows, lawyers at the firm Jones Day, which represents the Republican National Committee, have contributed more than three times as much to Clinton, Obama and John Edwards than to GOP candidates.

 So,  the status-quo is quid-pro-non?


Blog Talk Radio

Greetings from the celebrity Snooper. There is going to be a series on Blog Talk Radio hosted by A Newt One called 'American Truth Warriors'.

We had 2 shows the other night and the archive audio can be found here and here.

We will discuss issues surrounding the 2008 elections and how Hillary just might make the DNC nomination but doesn't have a chance at obtaining her goal as the First American Czarina.

I will update the dates of the programs as we line up our guests.



Hillary may get the nod from the DNC and this will be a good thing IF the GOP has a viable candidate.

I ran across 4 articles today that are well worth the read no matter your political trends.

MSLSD/Newsweek is always good for a laugh:

Does Barack Obama have have enough experience to be president? This is the question Hillary Clinton would like to spend the next seven months debating. Her slogan is that she's "ready to lead"; she cites her extensive foreign travel and sessions with world leaders. For his part, Obama prefers to talk about living overseas and the good judgment he displayed in opposing the Iraq War from the start. For months, Clinton and Obama have taken subtle digs at each other's résumés. But there's nothing subtle about it now.

The article rambles on but it is interesting to "hear" what they leave out. Like Hillary's "experience". Sure she traveled a lot and met some folks but what is her claim to fame? Whitewater scandals? Campaign fraud scandals? Rose law Firm scandals? What exactly has she accomplished as a Senator other than being Queen of Pork?

I imagine, the Chicago Sun-Times inadvertantly exposes the racism involved withini the candidacy of the leading DNC contenders.

More than any other debate thus far, the National Urban League's presidential forum illustrated how sharply the Democratic primary is dividing the African-American community's political allegiances. Although the National Urban League doesn't endorse political candidates, the presidential forum gave the front-runners -- Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and his closest rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) -- their best chance yet to compete head-up for the urban black vote. There were a lot of signs that many of the Urban Leaguers -- who tend to be solidly middle-class entrepreneurs and professionals -- haven't made up their minds about whom they will support in 2008.

Imagine that.

CNN/Time displayed how Barak seems to think he is Kennedy...John, Bobby or Ted?

When he was good, he was very, very good. When he wasn't, he was dangerously close to ordinary. Spoke movingly — even/almost presidentially — about America's troubled history with race, his favorite teacher and how hard he would fight for universal health care. (Obama even drew an approving nod from Elizabeth Edwards in the audience on that last one). Took occasional soft shots at Clinton on Iraq and her questionable ability to fight for change (his main theme), but never made a decisive impact. He began many more sentences with, "When I am president" (without the conditional) than he has in past debates, but his own video (all the candidates made them, and they were sprinkled throughout the telecast) hit more Kennedy chords than the live Obama did. Still, his best performance to date, positioning him to return in later forums to the change-change-change contrast he wants (and needs) to define his candidacy.

I often wonder why these people find it so hard to be themselves. Then again, honesty is not their best policy not is the term in their actual vocabulary.

Recently, the NY Post has it the closest in The Kow-Tow Club.

The Democratic presidential race has devolved into a no-holds-barred battle between the two front-runners on an utterly bizarre point: Should the next president personally sit down with the world's worst despots?

Of course not. That would be absurd.

But Sen. Barack Obama last week displayed an astonishing lack of depth - giving Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton a chance to show again that she's capable of taking five positions on just about every issue.

Too bad for Clinton that she missed a perfectly good opportunity to show her relative experience and intelligence - given that she was correct in her reaction to Obama's verbal miscue.

It all happened during Monday night's debate, when the candidates were asked whether, as president, they'd be willing to meet personally - and without preconditions - with the leaders of Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea and Syria.

Obama's response: Absolutely.

Indeed, he added, "it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them."

Clinton, ever the instinctive pol, recognized a gopher ball when she saw one - and proceeded to lift it out of the park.

Obama's response, she maintained, was "irresponsible and, frankly, naive."

"I don't want to be used for propaganda purposes," said Clinton. "We're not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and, you know, the president of North Korea, Iran and Syria until we know better what the way forward would be."

She's right, of course: Such impulsive acts can wind up backfiring - emboldening enemies and embarrassing America (as they have in the past).

Indeed, Obama's apparent willingness to rush into sitdowns with America-bashing tyrants like Mahmoud Ahmadenijad and Chavez makes us wonder if he knows just what it is a president does for a living.

For his part, Obama quickly backtracked: "I didn't say these guys were going to come over for a cup of coffee some afternoon," he said.

And then he hurled what for Democrats is the ultimate insult: Clinton's position, he said, is just like President Bush's.

Which is nonsense, of course.

But here's where it gets complicated.

Even while ridiculing Obama's position, Clinton repeatedly has ripped the president for saying "he will not talk with bad people." Indeed, she complained, "you don't make peace with your friends - you have to do the hard work of dealing with people you don't agree with."

She's even admonished Bush for refusing to deal directly with the leaders of Iran.

Even though, as president, her own husband never spoke directly with the leaders of any of those five countries either - and for good reason.

Clearly, both candidates need to do a little more homework if they have any hope of being taken seriously on the foreign-policy front.

Seeing that NEITHER on has ANY experience in this regard, how can they EVER be taken seriously?

UPDATE: Hugh Hewitt weighs in...


Hillary Must Be Proud

This day in history:

Bill Must Be Proud

This Day In History

1998 Monica Lewinsky was given blanket immunity from prosecution in exchange for grand jury testimony in the investigation of her relationship with President Bill Clinton.


An American Communist: Hillary Clinton & The Democrats

Call them liberals, progressives or Democrats, it is all the same thing. I once penned a piece, listed under my "featured posts" in the sidebar, called "Liberal Communist Manifesto", where I showed my readers the comparisons, if fact, some of the exact wording from the Communist Manifesto stated today by our "progressive, liberal democrats".

The NYT has a piece today showing us the exact time in Hillary Clinton's life where she made the transition from being a conservative to a communist. (Via memeorandum)

Before I continue, go read the Communist Manifesto, in its entirety, make the comparisons yourself to what you read from the document, written in 1848, to what the Democrats/liberals/progressives have to say today.

Specifically when they refer to "common good", "taking from the rich to give to the poor", and what they call "progressive or graduated taxation", definitely keep those terms in mind when reading the Communist Manifesto. (You will learn where the "progressives" of today GOT those talking points, and how they are simply the Communists of yesterday, using another name)

Now the definition of Communism, defined from the dictionary, I am using, but most all dictionaries use the same definition is:

1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.

2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.

3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.

Now that we have shown you just three simple examples of how the Democratic party, call them liberals or progressives if you prefer, the "label" doesn't matter as much as the philosophy does, how the democratic party is trying to bring Communism into America.

It is said in the Principles of Communism that all the measures to ensure communism cannot be brought about at once and it must be introduced into a country gradually, as we can see the progressive liberal democrats trying to do today.

It is impossible, of course, to carry out all these measures at once. But one will always bring others in its wake. Once the first radical attack on private property has been launched, the proletariat will find itself forced to go ever further, to concentrate increasingly in the hands of the state all capital, all agriculture, all transport, all trade. All the foregoing measures are directed to this end; and they will become practicable and feasible, capable of producing their centralizing effects to precisely the degree that the proletariat, through its labor, multiplies the country’s productive forces.

Finally, when all capital, all production, all exchange have been brought together in the hands of the nation, private property will disappear of its own accord, money will become superfluous, and production will so expand and man so change that society will be able to slough off whatever of its old economic habits may remain.

Please keep that definition in mind also as you read this post.

Our country has fought against Communism for decades and the history of Russia should have taught us what Communism can and will do to a country.

One of the first measures of War Communism was the nationalisation of land. Banks and shipping were also nationalised and foreign trade was declared a state monopoly. This was the response when Lenin realised that the Bolsheviks were simply unprepared to take over the whole economic system of Russia. Lenin stressed the importance of the workers showing discipline and a will to work hard if the revolution was to survive. There were those in the Bolshevik hierarchy who wanted factory managers removed and the workers to take over the factories for themselves but on behalf of the people. It was felt that the workers would work better if they believed they were working for a cause as opposed to a system that made some rich but many poor. The civil war had made many in the Bolsheviks even more class antagonistic, as there were many of the old guard who were fighting to destroy the Bolsheviks.

On June 28th, 1918, a decree was passed that ended all forms of private capitalism. Many large factories were taken over by the state and on November 29th, 1920, any factory/industry that employed over 10 workers was nationalised.

War Communism also took control of the distribution of food. The Food Commissariat was set up to carry out this task. All co-operatives were fused together under this Commissariat.

War Communism had six principles:

1) Production should be run by the state. Private ownership should be kept to the minimum. Private houses were to be confiscated by the state.

2) State control was to be granted over the labour of every citizen. Once a military army had served its purpose, it would become a labour army.

3) The state should produce everything in its own undertakings. The state tried to control the activities of millions of peasants.

4) Extreme centralisation was introduced. The economic life of the area controlled by the Bolsheviks was put into the hands of just a few organisations. The most important one was the Supreme Economic Council. This had the right to confiscate and requisition. The speciality of the SEC was the management of industry. Over 40 head departments (known as glavki) were set up to accomplish this. One glavki could be responsible for thousands of factories. This frequently resulted in chronic inefficiency. The Commissariat of Transport controlled the railways. The Commissariat of Agriculture controlled what the peasants did.

5) The state attempted to become the soul distributor as well as the sole producer. The Commissariats took what they needed to meet demands. The people were divided into four categories – manual workers in harmful trades, workers who performed hard physical labour, workers in light tasks/housewives and professional people. Food was distributed on a 4:3:2:1 ratio. Though the manual class was the favoured class, it still received little food. Many in the professional class simply starved. It is believed that about 0% of all food consumed came from an illegal source. On July 20th 1918, the Bolsheviks decided that all surplus food had to be surrendered to the state. This led to an increase in the supply of grain to the state. From 1917 to 1928, about ¾ million ton was collected by the state. In 1920 to 1921, this had risen to about 6 million tons. However, the policy of having to hand over surplus food caused huge resentment in the countryside, especially as Lenin had promised “all land to the people” pre-November 1917. While the peasants had the land, they had not been made aware that they would have to hand over any extra food they produced from their land. Even the extra could not meet demand. In 1933, 25 million tons of grain was collected and this only just met demand.

6) War Communism attempted to abolish money as a means of exchange. The Bolsheviks wanted to go over to a system of a natural economy in which all transactions were carried out in kind. Effectively, bartering would be introduced. By 1921, the value of the rouble had dropped massively and inflation had markedly increased. The government’s revenue raising ability was chronically poor, as it had abolished most taxes. The only tax allowed was the ‘Extraordinary Revolutionary Tax’, which was targeted at the rich and not the workers.

War Communism was a disaster. In all areas, the economic strength of Russia fell below the 1914 level. Peasant farmers only grew for themselves, as they knew that any extra would be taken by the state. Therefore, the industrial cities were starved of food despite the introduction of the 4:3:2:1 ratio. A bad harvest could be disastrous for the countryside – and even worse for cities. Malnutrition was common, as was disease. Those in the cities believed that their only hope was to move out to the countryside and grow food for themselves. Between 1916 and 1920, the cities of northern and central Russia lost 33% of their population to the countryside. Under War Communism, the number of those working in the factories and mines dropped by 50%.

In the cities, private trade was illegal, but more people were engaged in this than at any other time in Russia’s history. Large factories became paralysed through lack of fuel and skilled labour.

Small factories were in 1920 producing just 43% of their 1913 total. Large factories were producing 18% of their 1913 figure. Coal production was at 27% of its 1913 figure in 1920. With little food to nourish them, it could not be expected that the workers could work effectively. By 1920, the average worker had a productivity rate that was 44% less than the 1913 figure.

Even if anything of value could be produced, the ability to move it around Russia was limited. By the end of 1918, Russia’s rail system was in chaos.

In the countryside, most land was used for the growth of food. Crops such as flax and cotton simply were not grown. Between 1913 and 1920, there was an 87% drop in the number of acres given over to cotton production. Therefore, those factories producing cotton related products were starved of the most basic commodity they needed.

Read the rest and remember, this is just one example of what Communism does to a country.

I once read a quote from Hillary Clinton and it infuriated me because it proved what I had thought for a very long time, she wishes to bring communism to America and makes no bones about it.

At a San Francisco fundraiser in 2004- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., told wealthy supporters the government will need to take money away from them for the "common good."

Clinton headlined an appearance with other women Democratic senators in San Francisco, where donors gave as much as $10,000 to California Sen. Barbara Boxer's campaign.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Clinton said, according to the Associated Press. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you.

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Link to the story here.

I said on that post linked above:
The common good be damned if that is how they are going interpret it. Since when is it acceptable to "punish" people that have worked hard to earn good money, for the common good? Since when is it unobjectionable to take from the rich by simple virtue of them BEING rich or well off? Since when has any Democrat ever, ever cared about the common good of the people, except when it benefits them politically? To top it off, she dared say that to people that were taking their hard earned money and donating to her.... the woman must have borrowed her husbands balls for that speech.
The term is "common good," and it's catching on as a way to describe liberal values and reach religious voters who rejected Democrats in the 2004 election. Led by the Center for American Progress, a Washington think-tank, party activists hope the phrase will do for them what "compassionate conservative" did for the Republicans.

"It's a core value that we think organizes the entire political agenda for progressives," said John Halpin, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. "With the rise of materialism, greed and corruption in American society, people want a return to a better sense of community — sort of a shared sacrifice, a return to the ethic of service and duty."

So, the basic concept here is that "materialism" is bad, people earning the wealth to enjoy some of the finer things in life is "bad", they object to "greed", but in their self righteous world, greed is defined as those that work their asses off to EARN MONEY, wow, wanting to earn more money is a BAD thing again...ok so I am bad!!!! "Shared sacrifice", what the hell does that mean? Does that mean that if I am capable of earning a good living, because I am good at what I do for a living, the "Democratic Government" should be able to take more from me? How the hell do they justify THAT?????? For the Common Good be damned and so should the Democrats.

To be fair, the people that originally created that phrase many decades ago, did so with good intentions, but the way the phrase has been corrupted by the Democratic party is disgusting.

To use the catchphrase, "common good" to justify atrocities, is beyond comprehension. To think the American people will sit still for it, bend over and take it, is sheer stupidity.

The Democratic party and their definition of "Common good" can go to hell.

Pure and simple, Hillary Clinton is a communist.

I am a capitalist and damned proud of it, Capitalism is a good thing.

Capitalism as defined in the dictionary:

an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

Capitalists produce, manufacture, employ millions, provide healthcare to millions, they expand and hire more employees, the money those employees make gets spent and helps economic growth throughout our country.

There is one thing that Democrats/progressives/liberals do not account for.

What if the Capitalists of this world do not wish to be punished for producing, manufacturing, employing millions and providing healthcare for those millions and helping the economy?

What if they stood as one and said, "SCREW YOU"?

What if these capitalists got tired of being punished for their ability?

What if they drained their bank accounts, moved their money overseas where the vultures/Democrats could not touch it and just went to live on some island somewhere, where they could live quite comfortably on the billions or even millions they already have?

Millions of Americans would be out of a job and on welfare, millions of Americans would be on medicaid or other government programs where the rest of us would be paying for their insurance. Unemployment would jump to increasingly unacceptable and unmanageable rates.

The snowballing effect of such a "strike" , for lack of a better word, would take America from being one of the healthiest economic countries to one of the weakest, poorest countries in a matter of decades if not before.

What incentive would our millionaires and billionaires have to keep their businesses thriving should the Democrats/liberals/progressives force their communistic agenda upon us?

Name one.

We have fought communism for decades in other countries and it is time we looked at ourselves and started fighting against communism in our own country.

To be continued....

Cross Posted from Wake up America

Page 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... 17 Next 20 Entries »