LETS KICK CLINTON TO THE CURB, SHE WILL TAKE MONEY FROM ANYONE OR ANYTHING... AND YES, I DO BELIEVE THIS STORY IS ACCURATE.

It's Chinatown Jake. The Anointed One comes with a Made In China label. Who will be the next Charlie Trie,Johnny Chung,Maria Hseh or Dr. Wu [who sounds like a Bond villian],to creep out from under the chow mein,I wonder?

What's this about the ability to campaign in 50 states?  I'm not a Clinton supporter, but this business that only Edwards can go to all 50 states is ridiculus.  Such racist statement by the Edwards campaign to appeal to voters that won't vote for a woman, a black or Hispanic is despicable.  He needs to stop thinking that the racists will vote for him, but not the non-traditional candidates. So much for the two America he talks about.  Sounds like he'll be happy to keep it that way as long as it benefits him.

I understand John's campaign needs something to stay in the news and the media has kind of been leaving him out lately, so this is understandable. The way the media tends to cover the horse race over the issues and the leading players to the detriment of the rest of the field, you have to practically set your hair on fire to get any coverage. His campaign knows that sadly, they will get more column space for attacking Clinton than for the many worthwhile programs and policies that he has put forth in the campaign.

We are going to send the republicans back to the stone-age, where they feel more comfortable!


Van


Van

I think it's time for the "also rans" in both parties to do 2 things:  1) discuss why we should vote "FOR" them rather than for them to try to convince us why we should vote "AGAINST" others, and 2) if they can't do that, get the hell out of the way!

BTW, of all the bloggers and commentators I've read over a long time on this network, VAN is the only one who insists on "facts" and Jerry, Corpus Christy is the most male chauvinist and stupidly emotional--he needs to either get a life or some reality check counselling--what an idiot!

This bunch of "ticky-tack" attacks over miniscule political differences is really getting boresome.  If the best you can do is to be snide and/or snarky, I suggest keeping it in your closet.  On the other hand, I really appreciate hearing from all sides--it helps me to see the entire prespectives (I just wish people like Jerry, who are simple-minded and are unable to be either pragmatic, objective, or mentally balanced, would just bow out of the conversations).

THIS ARTICLE IS MISLEADING!!!!!!  AGAIN  and AGAIN

CLINTON'S NEGATIVE NEWS IS BURIED INSIDE A DIFFERENT HEADLINE!!!!!!

Why is first read so afraid of printing a NEGATIVE headline title for HILLARY????

SHE MUST HAVE SOME GOOD STUFF ON THEM....LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO .......

Clinton Dealt a Bummer on Woodstock Museum

Busted!


Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and her Senate colleague Chuck Schumer thought they had safely placed a $1 million earmark for an upstate New York Woodstock Museum in a health and education appropriations bill-- but then the GOP pork patrol caught wind of it, and now the party's over.
Democrats today failed on a 42-52 vote to stop an amendment by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to cut the funding. Coburn's effort is now almost certain to succeed. Three of the six senators who missed the vote: Clinton's Senate Democratic rivals, Barack Obama (Ill.), Joe Biden (Del.) and Chris Dodd (Conn.).
Almost as a taunt to Clinton, who is heavily courting female voters, Coburn proposed shifting the money to"additional care for pregnant women, mothers, and infants." The Democrat is spotlighting women's issues on the campaign trail this week, including proposing new legislation to establish a paid family leave program.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), an avid pork foe, calledthe Woodstock earmark "a shining example of what's wrong with Washington on pork-barrel, out-of-control spending."
The museum, located in Bethel, New York on the site of the 1969 music festival, is the brainchild of billionaire Alan Gerry, a Republican who has donated heavily to both Clinton and to Senate Democratic coffers, which Schumer oversees.
In a press release in June, after the Senate Appropriations Committee approved the bill, Clinton said the funding would help the Bethel Woods Center for the Arts, as the museum is officially known, to "continue to promote education, the arts, culture and tourism in the region."
The Clinton release never referred to "Woodstock," but described the facility's focus as "the post-WWII period and cultural, political, social, and significant historic events during this period including, in particular, the period of the 1960's and its continuing legacy."
-- Shailagh Murray

Continuing my post...
SHE MUST HAVE SOME GOOD STUFF ON THEM....LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO Domencio as well as Mark and Chuck.

They are like the the three famous monkeys.
See no Evil(about Clinton)
Hear no Evil(about Clinton)
Say no Evil(about Clinton)
Keep My Job(Murrary, Domencio, Todd, First Read)

Too funny!!!!!  Where is Clark Kent, Lois Lane,Woodward/Bernstein we need some stand up journalists who will give you the whole truth!!!

'...is something that should be easy to police as YOU can see the email address attached to the offender's post.

Why don't you do your job?

...'

Don't worry, First Read......
I still like you....
(even if you are biased for Clinton)
;-)

'...Bonior also questions Clinton's electability and her ability to fix a "broken" and "corrupt" system."...'

Is David Bonior talking about the Clinton campaign machinery or the Clinton 'Army of Darkness' ?
The way the Clinton campaign brain washes bloggers is scary !!

Brain washing should be outlawed !!

Character counts
Honesty counts
How will we campaign against the Republicans with a corrupt, crooked and scandal plagued candidate ?

How will we campaign against Republicans with Clinton when her Iraq and Iran policies are identical to those same Republicans ?

Hillary sure isn't going to win any likeability contest.
And she keeps getting caught in campaign funding scandals.

DON'T NOMINATE AN INCOMPETENT CROOK !

Hillary Clinton, 15 years of dishonesty, scandal and divisiveness


PS thanks for the 'insight', Stu, Saginaw, MI !
Have you ever considered a career in 'philosophy' ?

(Stu is probably van praising himself)  ;-0

I agree with Van and especially Stu, Saginaw, MI.  That said, Edwards is grasping at straws if he thinks riding on the Hillary bashing band wagon is going to score him votes.  If there's one thing the Republicans got right when Reagan was running for office, was the invocation of the 11th Commandment - Thou Shall Not Attack a Fellow [fill in your own political party]. Hillary is heeding that rule by filling in the blank with democrat...albeit, not 100% of the time, and her attacks are not really attacks in the sense of the word that Edwards is doing.

Thank you Siera for making a valid point. MSNBC is another house of clinton machine. Guess what? If they failed to do their Job, I'll personally send the news to Fox News channel.

The blog's world has been infiltrated by the clinton's machine. The journalist are scared to report facts and some of the clinton's blogger want us to keep quiet on critical issue of character.

Before the election of George Bush, some people kept quiet but we all know what shape this country is today.

I can't stand another Clinton's dishonesty.  

Notice that Hillary discusses issues - while Obama and Edwards discuss Hillary?  That says it all.

The more these two guys do this, the more irrelevant they become.  It is not a tactic that works for anyone.  

The only way they will get attention is by coming up with some good solutions.

'...is something that should be easy to police as YOU can see the email address attached to the offender's post.

Why don't you do your job?

...'

Don't worry, First Read......
I still like you....
(even if you are biased for Clinton)
;-)

Sierra, SF (Sent Friday, October 19, 2007 3:14 PM)


Hypocrite.
When it happened to you, I defended you. You screamed bloody murder and blamed the, "Klinton Kabal", if memory serves.

Van

Hillary's fundraising says a lot about her - and it's not good. However, the Edwards flight of fancy in trying to run for President crashed and burned with his $400 haircuts.

Consider the source:  John Edwards, Phony in Chief.  Enough said.

Well - whether this story is true or not, there have been many, many examples of how Hillary will do anything to get elected.  She's completely insincere, and I really don't see how fellow Democrats can be falling for her act in such droves.  People, she was Bush's left hand in supporting the war!  Wake up!  She's the other side of the Bush coin - an ambitious amoral political opportunist who doesn't care a whit about the truth or what's good for America.  Yes, she's smarter than him, but so is my Chia-Pet, and you don't see him polling at 51%.  Plus, if she's elected, the next four years will just be more no-holds-barred political infighting with nothing getting done.
I loved Bill, but it's just not the same.  Gimme Edwards, or even Obama.

This is a transparent attempt to clean up/cover up Clinton's illicit campaign activities. Those "donors" in Chinatown were dishwasher. Most aren't even U.S. citizens! The money, an average of $2300 from each of these minimum wage earning people, was laundered through them, was simply a blatent attempt by Chinese companies and the Chinese government to **BUY** influence and reward Clinton. She has already taken millions from Indian companies in a similar scheme. In fact, three-quarters of her donations are max contributions, filtered in precisely the same manner. Get it right! Hillary CLinton is a crook. She's a radical feminist, a man hater, anti-labor, pro-outsourcing and pro-guest worker, crook. She and Bill actually own part of a firm that provides outsourcing services and H1-B guest workers and she is directly responsible for the loss of tens of thousands of American jobs. At a time when 30% of our own programmers and engineers are out of work, she wants to INCREASE the number of H1-B visas, displacing at least 1,000,000 more Amercian workers. The "Senator From India", as she was called by an Indian government official during a recent visit there, is a lousy choice for U.S. Senator and utterly insane as a Presidential candiate. I have never voted Republican, but I will this time and not just for President! I want the DNC and Democratic candidates to understand well ahead of the primaries, that I and every blue-dog Democrat is flat out furious that you would inflict this turkey on us and we WILL make you pay for it!

Mr Todd/Murray/Montanaro,
How come Clinton's fund raising mess as revealed by LA Times suggesting people without job/address, drunk people, very low income people are donating thousands of dollars to her? Now this is only from China Town. Who knows how many similar stories are out there? Can you move your back from the chair and instead of spinning "How flaw less campaign she ran" even with all kinds of fund raising scandal, do some investigation to uncover Clinton's crooked games and save the nation from another disaster for next 4/8 yeas. Isn't it what your job anyway, educate people, warn people, help people to make informed decision.
Seems like things turned around now. News readers now a days have to remind you every day what your job is.

NBC and MSnbc is running as fast as they can from the Clinton thug machine,and this story, they will not say anything that might get them in trouble with the annointed one
INVESTIGATE NOW  Special grand jury and prosecuter and put this thug away

As Edwards/Obama cracnk up their phony attacks on Clinton, her poll numbers go up. The more they attack, the more she conveys the real honesty and change that people want by sticking to the relevant issues. Anyone notice the correlation?

Edwards/Obama are becoming more and more desperate. Their artificial rhetoric for "hope" and "change" is drowned out in their hypocrisy. They will find any discrepency and exagerate it to question her ethics.

As Edwards/Obama cracnk up their phony attacks on Clinton, her poll numbers go up. The more they attack, the more she conveys the real honesty and change that people want by sticking to the relevant issues. Anyone notice the correlation?

Edwards/Obama are becoming more and more desperate. Their artificial rhetoric for "hope" and "change" is drowned out in their hypocrisy. They will find any discrepency and exagerate it to question her ethics.

what happened to the $750.000 from sho that she was going to donate to charity?

I would very much like for the first women president to be hillary clinton. she is the best  and smartest person in the race. If we can just get all those macho men to relax, face the truth. Hillary can make our country great again.

'...Thou Shall Not Attack a Fellow [fill in your own political party]. Hillary is heeding that rule by filling in the blank with democrat...'

What was the month-long campaign about Obama being 'naive'  ?
Hillary sent out Bill and her mouthpiece Wolfson to  attack Obama.
Then she flip flopped and adopted Obama's position.
What about Hillary's attack on 'irrespoonsible' to take nukes 'off the table'.
It turned out Hillary had said the same thing, herself.

Hillary has been gutter fighting the whole campaign.
There's talk that she was behind the Edwards haircut dust up.
There was talk that Hillary's campaign was trying to intimidate unions to prevent them from endorsing Edwards and Obama.

Other than that, she hasn't attacked ANYBODY !!


'...albeit, not 100% of the time, and her attacks are not really attacks in the sense of the word that Edwards is doing...'

So, it's OK when Hillary attacks (even though she doesn't attack).........

Thanks, pat, glad we got that straightened up

Sierra, SF:

Strange that you should mention philosophy because, ove the years, I have read almost all of the works of philosophy from Lao Tzu, Confuscious, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustin, St. Francis, Locke, Hobbes, Voltaire, and even the "Longshoreman Philosopher", Eric Hoffer, et al.

My degrees are in Political Science and History with a near minor in Finance and was voted by the faculty to be the Outstanding Political Science Graduate Award from my college.  

At 30 years old, I entered college in May, 1972 and was graduated in April, 1974 and was sworn in as an attorney in December, 1976--in other words, I busted my butt to go through college and law school in about 4 1/2 years, all with 3 children.

I have been a trial attorney ever since, that's why I totally agree with Van that "facts" are the most important things in any situation--"truth" means little because it's "subjective".

The poet Merritt Malloy said, paraphrasing, that "facts" are things that actually happened, but 'truth' is how you feel about the "facts"'.  The same is true about "morals"--they're totally "subjective".  Your "values" may differ from mine, yet they are "subjectively" our own.  E.g., abortion may be immoral to some, yet be moral to others--to each his/her own.  Just who the hell are any of us to judge the "morality" or the "truth" of others"

I don't often enter this blog, but mostly because of Jerry, Van and Sierra, I felt the need.

Hillary keeps talking about the issues because she keeps changing her stance and has to bring the latest one to the table.
The only thing she's good at is parroting back to the public what she thinks she wants you to hear.
Must have come from marriage therapy classes.

'..Hypocrite.
When it happened to you, I defended you. You screamed bloody murder and blamed the, "Klinton Kabal", if memory serves.

Van
vanreuter, NY NY...'

thanks, van
I wasn't aware that you defended me.
It's irritating, but after the second time, I took it to mean that I was getting to someone.
Almost flattery.

Don;t take yourself too seriously....

It's the secret of my success

;-0

Barack Obama addresses crowd of 6,000 at ASU
Paul Giblin, Tribune
Presidential candidate Barack Obama told nearly 6,000 people at Arizona State University Friday that the country needs a change of leadership.

“We don’t need somebody who knows how to work the system. We need somebody to change the system,” he said. “I’m not running to uphold conventional wisdom. I’m running to change the conventional wisdom.”

Obama spoke on a range of topics.

He called for withdrawing U.S. troops from the Iraq war, and said that if elected his first course of business will be to call for a meeting of the joint chiefs of staff to order them to remove Americans from the Middle East. He also promised to provide health care to every single person in the United States that is as good as health care U.S. senators receive.

He pledged to close what he termed the “achievement gap” in education by recruiting an entire army of new teachers. He also vowed to make college more affordable, which prompted rousing applause from the largely college crowd.

Obama said he would mandate increased fuel efficiency in cars in order to decrease U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

On immigration, he advocated securing the U.S. borders and providing a pathway to citizenship for foreign nationals already living and working in the United States.

“We are a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants — and those things are not contradictory,” he said.

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/99983

It is not an "attack" to criticize a candidate's positions, propensity to take questionable donations, methods of dealing with controversy, etc. As long as what is being criticized can be verified (and from what I have read, the story about the Chinatown donations is accurate). An "attack," on the other hand, is the Swift Boad ads, the smear against Max Cleland, and/or personal attacks on a candidate's "personhood." This would be something like flat out calling Hillary a liar or an ugly bitch, or calling Obama a jungle bunny or worse, and so on.

Can't people "get" the difference between a legitimate questioning of or criticism of a candidate's political stances or practices and an "attack"? Seems like anytime anybody says anything negative about George Bush or Hillary Clinton, it's an "attack." Sheesh! That's ludicrous.

Stu, Saginaw, MI: '...Strange that you should mention philosophy because, ove the years, I have read almost all of the works of philosophy from Lao Tzu, Confuscious, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustin, St. Francis, Locke, Hobbes, Voltaire, and even the "Longshoreman Philosopher", Eric Hoffer, et al....'
Another abrasive 'know it all'....

I'm impressed

Your friend, Sierra

Isn't this money laundering with campaign donations?

Re my last:

I mentionrd Eric Hoffer, but failed to mention the title of his book, THE TRUE BELIEVER.  If you've ever read it, you'll readily recognize Jerry.

Kudos to Jessica for trying to show that you CAN support your candidate without trashing the opposition.

Sierra-

It's just annoying. I have no difficulty getting into trouble MYSELF, without anyone's help.
While I agree about taking oneself too seriously, what exactly do you consider, "success"?

Keep up the good fight, albeit against my guy...:)


Van

Camille Paglia: Hillary Clinton can't win - and shouldn't.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070915.wcamille15/BNStory/specialComment/?query=

Camille Paglia: Hillary Clinton can't win - and shouldn't.
MARGARET WENTE

Globe and Mail Update

E-mail Margaret Wente | Read Bio | Latest Columns
October 18, 2007 at 12:46 PM EDT

Camille Paglia, writer and firebrand, is in a category of her own. She first made waves in the early 1990s with her book Sexual Personae and her denunciations of "political correctness," but in a unique way: As a feminist who hates affirmative action; an atheist who respects religion; a Democrat who thinks her party doesn't get it. She believes global jihadism is a threat to the West and also believes the invasion of Iraq was a reckless mistake. She is a bisexual who celebrates military ideals, heroic culture and manly men.

Named one of the world's "Top 100 Public Intellectuals" by the journals Foreign Policy and The Prospect in 2005, Ms. Paglia is speaking this week in the Grano lecture series in Toronto about American politics and Hillary Clinton's run for the presidency. Margaret Wente spoke with Ms. Paglia by phone at her office at Philadelphia's University of the Arts, where she teaches a full course load.

Let's start with Hillary. She's the first serious female candidate for president. She has proved she can play in the big league of U.S. electoral politics. She's very smart. Feminists should be rejoicing. But you once said, "That woman should not be anywhere near our government." Why?

Hillary is having trouble with educated women of her generation. We seem to be the hardest sell for her right now because we've observed her, admired her, embraced her - and then become disillusioned. There's a sense that she doesn't possess core values. One feels she's uncentred in some odd way. And the chaos of her domestic life is not reassuring.

Internet Links
The Grano Speakers Series  
On the campaign trail, she doesn't make an emotional connection with her audience because she's always parsing language. She's a rhetorician. You get these parsings of the Iraq war - "Well, if I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't have voted that way." What does she mean? That she wouldn't have voted that way if she'd known it would cost her politically?

There's an over-clever, over-conceptualized political personality there who has trouble being an ordinary person.

For someone with so much international exposure, she's not great on the stage. She's well prepared with her sound bites. But when she has to play outside her sphere of preparation, she seems taken by surprise. When someone asked her, "Do you think homosexuality is immoral?" she just shunted it off. She said, "I'll leave that for others to decide." She's essentially a policy wonk. She has no vision.

Then there's the sense of her espousing feminist ideals on the one hand, but also tolerating gross exploitation and insult from her womanizing husband. For me, the worst was her campaign of defamation against the working-class and lower-middle-class women her husband solicited. She has tremendous powers of denial to block out what is going around her in her own family life. But she's also able to perceive herself as an ethical, God-fearing, Bible-reading Methodist who is quasi-saintly for her commitment to ethical causes. She will not admit a mistake. She has no power of self-analysis. She thinks all her problems are due to her enemies.

And we don't want a situation when Bill Clinton is acting as proxy president in the White House.

Sierra SF - normally I don't respond to your comments because they are usually totally out there...your's today are not different.  BUT I stand by my prior posting.  Hillary did not attack fellow democrats with the politics of destruction, i.e. character assassination...that's what I'm talking about.  Edwards borders on that here.

Another campaign fund scandal?  I'm not surprised.  Does anyone care that Bill was fundraising for Hillary in the UK?  Shouldn't that be a scandal, like it was for previous Democratic candidates when it was revealed that China was funnelling money into their coffers?  Foreign money promotes foreign interests!  A presidential candidate for the United States of America should not be beholden to any foreign interests, only the people of the United States!

Hillary obviously is smarter, well informed, calculative, knows the terrain better than the others. They may be crying foul. They know that for sure. Let them focus on message rather than attacking hillary. After the election, they will still need to come together as a political team. Edward! take it easy. it is not do or die!

WOW! to get elected, Hillary will take money from anybody. The Clintons have done that before and the get away with it because the MSMs are scare to not invite to any write house party. So there is no news here.

Tom,

While I am not a Hillary supporter, it is perfectly fine for Bill to do fundraising in the UK from American's living abroad.  Michelle Obama was there not too long ago doing the same thing for Obama.

BionicWoman in all her ignorancy proclaims / 'Notice that Hillary discusses issues - while Obama and Edwards discuss Hillary?  That says it all.'


john edwards released his plans for everything from iraq to healthcare months ago where as hillary to this day has not made a firm commitmat on anything, you may think that hillary deserves a pass for her criminal activities because of her vaginal status, but most people think that strong arming poor chinese imigrants into coughing up money

Obama and Edwards are desperate and have to resort to groundless attacks.  They are as pathetic as their poll numbers.  In fact, they are almost as pathetic as Jerry and Sierra!

Hillary in 08!

John Edwards is a fool.  He doesn't know how to run his own campaign, let alone the country.  Keep attacking her John.  Her poll numbers just keep rising while yours go down the toilet.

I used to support John Edwards.  Now I don't have a favorite candidate.  John Edwards turned me off completely when he sent his wife out to attack Hillary Clinton.

I'm through with him.  

Hillary Clinton she just another good lessoner and learner from 8years in the white house, other than that she not qualified for this job.  If she become a president of the United State Of America, I get we going DOWN way DOWN....  ps.  God Bless America.

DOW  Mesquite TX  10/19/2007 nothing personnel

vanreuter, NY NY'...While I agree about taking oneself too seriously, what exactly do you consider, "success"?...'

I'm being ironic, Van
Nothing that any of us do or say here will change anything.
It's more amusement than anything.
But, I do hope a reformer will get the Democratic nomination.

'...BUT I stand by my prior posting.  Hillary did not attack fellow democrats with the politics of destruction, i.e. character assassination...that's what I'm talking about...'

She called Obama 'naive' and 'irresponsible' for taking positions that she had either already adopted or later adopted.
She had her whole campaign, including her husban and Wolfson attacking Obama for stands she later adopted.
That's attacking character.

'...Edwards borders on that here...' taking dirty money, repeatedly (from Peter Paul, Norman Hsu and now impoverished residents of Chinatown) shows a lack of ethics and character.
Character does count.
You're tyring to have it both ways.....
It's OK for Hillary to smear someone, but don't let anyone attack Hillary.

Sorry, this isn't a tea party.
Scandals always bubble up around the Clintons.
There's are reason, pat.

Character counts

  Reading this blog was about as informative and interesting as watching Fox News. Stop beating each other up for this nonsense. I'll support any current Democrat over any current Republican, and if the last 6 years hasn't convinced you to do the same, I don't know what will.

Am i the only one who remembers all the scandals from the last clinton presidency? Now it seems to be starting all over again.  I for one am not suprised.  But what is shocking is that she still gets all the support that she does.  she has only gotten this far by living off her husbands name and accomplishments, not because of anything she has done.  How will she improve this country when her ideas are the same ones that have been thrown around by others?  how does she unite this severely divided country when he negative ratings are off the charts?  I'm not sure which candidate at this point would be the best, but one that just less then half the country thinks is evil is certainly not the right choice.  I hope that democrats offer up someone who can help heal this country, not one who will only make things`worse.

Please HillaryHaters--Kepp It Comin! You haven't figured it out? The more they talk, the more money she raises! She's gonan take this lickin and keep on tickin. This Woman CANNOT BE STOPPED!

Hillary08

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):