Archive for the ‘Hillary Clinton’ Category

Beginning of the end

July 25, 2011

Five points to ponder

1. You cannot Legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the rich out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

5. When half the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, THAT IS THE BEGINING OF THE END OF ANY NATION!


Hillary workers not getting paid

February 7, 2008

Because of cash shottages Hillary isn’t paying her staff. When asked if they were getting health insurance, she dodged the question.


Clinton would garnishing people’s wages

February 5, 2008

Read entire article here

In Health Debate, Clinton Remains Vague on Penalties

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton inched closer Sunday to explaining how she would enforce her proposal that everyone have health insurance, but declined to specify — as she has throughout the campaign — how she would penalize those who refuse.

Mrs. Clinton, who did not answer Senator Barack Obama’s question on the topic in a debate last Thursday, was pressed repeatedly to do so Sunday by George Stephanopoulos on the ABC program “This Week.” When Mr. Stephanopoulos asked a third time whether she would garnish people’s wages, Mrs. Clinton responded, “George, we will have an enforcement mechanism, whether it’s that or it’s some other mechanism through the tax system or automatic enrollments.”

She then added that the focus on enforcement clouded a more important point, that her proposal to cover the uninsured was superior to Mr. Obama’s because she would mandate coverage for all, while he would require it only for children.

What might seem a mundane debate over health policy has taken on outsized importance in the approach to Tuesday’s voting because it is one of the few substantive differences between the two leading Democratic presidential candidates.

Polling has found that health care is a top concern of Democratic voters, and that they rank covering the uninsured as more important than reducing health costs or improving quality.

Mrs. Clinton, therefore, has argued that her plan, because of its mandate, would achieve universal coverage while Mr. Obama’s would not. She has taken recently to calling universal coverage “a core Democratic value and a moral principle.”

Mr. Obama asserts that his plan, which is like Mrs. Clinton’s in its use of government subsidies to reduce the cost of insurance, would effectively guarantee coverage to anyone who wants it.

But about 20 percent of the uninsured have household incomes of $75,000 or more, according to the Census Bureau, meaning they presumably can afford coverage but prefer to take the risk. Mrs. Clinton argues that these “free riders” impose a hidden tax on the insured because their uncompensated care must be factored into medical charges and insurance rates.

Mr. Obama’s campaign has tried for months to move from defense to offense by pressing Mrs. Clinton to explain how she would enforce her mandate. A recent study published in the journal Health Affairs concluded that compliance with government mandates varied greatly, both in the United States and in other countries. But compliance is greatest, the authors wrote, when “penalties for noncompliance are stiff but not excessive.”

A group of doctors and health policy analysts, including a number of Obama advisers, pointed out in a letter released Thursday that Massachusetts, the only state with an insurance mandate, has thus far failed to enroll nearly half of its uninsured despite imposing a modest first-year tax penalty of $219 (the fine increases significantly this year). Because the Massachusetts program is less than a year old, it is not yet possible to fully judge the effectiveness of its mandate.

Mr. Obama raised the Clinton campaign’s ire late last week by charging in a voter mailing that “Hillary’s health care plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can’t afford it… and you pay a penalty if you don’t.”

Mrs. Clinton argues that she can make premiums affordable for low-income workers by spending $110 billion on subsidies and cost-saving devices. Like Mr. Obama, she would pay for her plan primarily by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for the wealthiest Americans. She would not allow exemptions from the insurance mandate, as Massachusetts does for those who cannot afford even subsidized premiums.

Aides to Mrs. Clinton had said previously that she would consider garnishing people’s wages, and that the uninsured could be automatically enrolled when they present themselves at hospitals or government offices. But Mrs. Clinton, who faced criticism in the 1990s for not adequately consulting Congress on her husband’s health plan, has typically said she would leave such details to negotiations with lawmakers.

She said Sunday she would not impose fines, as Mr. Obama has said he would to enforce his insurance mandate for children. “We want them to have insurance,” she said. “We want it to be affordable.”

The reason for the continuing vagueness is simple, said Robert J. Blendon, a Harvard professor of health policy and political analysis. “Whenever you talk about penalties, you lose some number of people who support the principle of universal coverage,” he said. “It’s the equivalent of candidates proposing new programs that may lead to a tax increase but never wanting to discuss it.”

The Obama campaign hopes to make Mrs. Clinton pay a price, not just on health policy but on the issue of character. Bill Burton, the Obama campaign’s spokesman, said on Sunday that Mrs. Clinton had “again refused to directly answer the question,” and added, “America needs a leader they can trust, not someone who will avoid hard questions.”

A good reason to fear John McCain: NYT, CNN, and Hillary likes him

January 26, 2008

Read entire article here

Bill Clinton: John McCain and Hillary are ‘very close’
Posted: 06:45 PM ET

Hillary Clinton and John McCain are very close, Bill Clinton says.
(CNN) — If Hillary Clinton and John McCain become their party’s presidential nominees, the general election race is likely to be a love-fest.

At least according to Bill Clinton.

Campaigning in Spartanburg, South Carolina, Friday, the former president brushed aside suggestions his wife would prove to be a divisive nominee for the Democratic Party, pointing out how she has successfully worked with Republicans in the Senate — including one of the current GOP presidential candidates.

“She and John McCain are very close,” Clinton said. “They always laugh that if they wound up being the nominees of their party, it would be the most civilized election in American history, and they’re afraid they’d put the voters to sleep because they like and respect each other.”

The comments may not be welcome by the McCain camp — which yesterday faced fire from several of its rivals for winning the backing of the New York Times — a longtime archenemy of conservatives.

Sens. McCain and Clinton last met publicly at an ABC debate earlier January, when presidential candidates of both parties shared the same stage. The two were seen exchanging pleasantries, and a Clinton side said she told the Arizona senator he’d done a “good job” staging a comeback in New Hampshire. He asked that she say hello to Bill Clinton for him.


January 25, 2008


Photo surfaces of smiling Clintons with Tony Rezko.

Read entire article here


Clinton injected the indicted developer’s name this week in debate with Obama: ‘I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago.’

Clinton tells NBC ‘TODAY’ show on Friday: ‘I probably have taken hundreds of thousands of pictures. I don’t know the man. I wouldn’t know him if he walked in the door.’

Who can believe this? DUH!

Judicial Watch Releases Records Re: Hillary’s Health Care Reform Plan

January 19, 2008

Read entire article here

To read about Judicial Watch’s pursuit of other Clinton era documents click here.

Judicial Watch has obtained White House documents from the 1993 HillaryCare debate. There is some truly amazing stuff, especially the memo in which Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) strategizes with the Clintons on how to make their socialized medicine scheme a reality. This is more proof of the sleazy, dirty ways the Democrats try to destroy their opponents.
» Judicial Watch: Judicial Watch Releases Records Re: Hillary’s Health Care Reform Plan

Pearl of Wisdom: “The Clinton, Inc., war room has no boundaries whatsoever and they will use the full force and power of the federal government against individuals who are not supporting what they want to do. Think 700 FBI files.”

Internal Memos Detail Creation of Government “Interest Group Database” to Collect Personal Data on Health Care Debate Activists

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released records obtained from the Clinton Presidential Library related to the National Taskforce on Health Care Reform, a “cabinet-level” task force chaired by former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton during the Clinton administration. Specifically, these documents come from the White House Health Care Interdepartmental Working Group.

Among the highlights of the documents released by Judicial Watch:

• A June 18, 1993 internal Memorandum entitled, “A Critique of Our Plan,” authored by someone with the initials “P.S.,” makes the startling admission that critics of Hillary’s health care reform plan were correct: “I can think of parallels in wartime, but I have trouble coming up with a precedent in our peacetime history for such broad and centralized control over a sector of the economy…Is the public really ready for this?… none of us knows whether we can make it work well or at all…”

• A “Confidential” May 26, 1993 Memorandum from Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) to Hillary Clinton entitled, “Health Care Reform Communications,” which criticizes the Task Force as a “secret cabal of Washington policy ‘wonks’” that has engaged in “choking off information” from the public regarding health care reform. The memorandum suggests that Hillary Clinton “use classic opposition research” to attack those who were excluded by the Clinton Administration from Task Force deliberations and to “expose lifestyles, tactics and motives of lobbyists” in order to deflect criticism. Senator Rockefeller also suggested news organizations “are anxious and willing to receive guidance [from the Clinton Administration] on how to time and shape their [news] coverage.”

• A February 5, 1993 Draft Memorandum from Alexis Herman and Mike Lux detailing the Office of Public Liaison’s plan for the health care reform campaign. The memorandum notes the development of an “interest group data base” detailing whether or not organizations “support(ed) us in the election.” The database would also track personal information about interest group leaders, such as their home phone numbers, addresses, “biographies, analysis of credibility in the media, and known relationships with Congresspeople.”

These records released by Judicial Watch were obtained from the approximately 13,000 records made publicly available by the Clinton Library. The National Archives admits there may be an additional 3,022,030 textual records, 2,884 pages of electronic records, 1,021 photographs, 3 videotapes and 3 audiotapes related to the Task Force that are being withheld indefinitely from the public. On November 2, 2007 Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the National Archives to force the release of all the Task Force records.

“These documents paint a disturbing picture of how Hillary Clinton and the Clinton administration approached health care reform – secrecy, smears, and the misuse of government computers to track private and political information on citizens,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “There are millions more documents that the Library has yet to release. The Clintons continue to play games and pretend they have nothing to do with this delay. The Clintons should get out of the way and authorize the release of these records now.”

Student describes how she became a Clinton plant

November 14, 2007

Read entire article here

From Chris Welch and David Schechter

GRINNELL, Iowa (CNN) — The college student who was told what question to ask at one of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign events says “voters have the right to know what happened” and she wasn’t the only one who was planted.

Student Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff said a staffer told her what to ask at a campaign event for Sen. Hillary Clinton.

In an exclusive on-camera interview with CNN, Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff, a 19-year-old sophomore at Grinnell College in Grinnell, Iowa, said that giving anyone specific questions to ask is “dishonest,” and the whole incident has given her a negative outlook on politics.

Gallo-Chasanoff, whose story was first reported in the campus newspaper, said what happened was really pretty simple: She says a senior Clinton staffer asked if she’d like to ask the senator a question after an energy speech the Democratic presidential hopeful gave in Newton, Iowa, on November 6.

“I sort of thought about it, and I said ‘Yeah, can I ask how her energy plan compares to the other candidates’ energy plans?'” Gallo-Chasanoff said Monday night.

“‘I don’t think that’s a good idea,” the staffer said, according to Gallo-Chasanoff, “because I don’t know how familiar she is with their plans.” Watch the student describe how she was approached »

He then opened a binder to a page that, according to Gallo-Chasanoff, had about eight questions on it.

“The top one was planned specifically for a college student,” she added. ” It said ‘college student’ in brackets and then the question.”

Don’t Miss
Clinton camp: Edwards acting like Bush
Clinton pledges caution on Social Security changes
Election Center 2008
Local coverage: Scarlet & Black
Topping that sheet of paper was the following: “As a young person, I’m worried about the long-term effects of global warming. How does your plan combat climate change?” Watch the student ask the planted question »

And while she said she would have rather used her own question, Gallo-Chasanoff said she generally didn’t have a problem asking the campaign’s because she “likes to be agreeable,” adding that since she told the staffer she’d ask their pre-typed question she “didn’t want to go back on [her] word.”

Clinton campaign spokesman Mo Elleithee said Clinton had “no idea who she was calling on.”

“This is not acceptable campaign process moving forward. We’ve taken steps to ensure that it never happens again,” she said in a written response to CNN.

Gallo-Chasanoff wasn’t so sure.

“I don’t know whether Hillary knew what my question was going to be, but it seemed like she knew to call on me because there were so many people, and … I was the only college student in that area,” she said.

In a separate statement in response to the campus article, the campaign also added, “On this occasion a member of our staff did discuss a possible question about Senator Clinton’s energy plan at a forum. … This is not standard policy and will not be repeated again.”

Gallo-Chasanoff may have some doubts about that one as well.

“After the event,” she said, “I heard another man … talking about the question he asked, and he said that the campaign had asked him to ask that question.”

The man she references prefaced his question by saying that it probably didn’t have anything to do with energy, and then posed the following: “I wonder what you propose to do to create jobs for the middle-class person, such as here in Newton where we lost Maytag.”

A Maytag factory in Newton recently closed, forcing hundreds of people out of their jobs.

During the course of the late-night interview on Grinnell’s campus, Gallo-Chasanoff also told CNN that the day before the school’s newspaper, Scarlet and Black, printed the story, she wanted the reporter to inform the campaign out of courtesy to let them know it would be published.

She said the “head of publicity for the campaign,” a man whose name she could not recall, had no factual disputes with the story. But, she added, a Clinton intern spoke to her to say the campaign requests she “not talk about” the story to any more media outlets and that if she did she should inform a staffer.

“I’m not under any real obligation to do that, and I haven’t talked to [the campaign] anymore,” Gallo-Chasanoff said, adding that she also doesn’t plan to.

“If what I do is come and just be totally truthful, then that’s all anyone can ask of me, and that’s all I can ask of myself. So I’ll feel good with what I’ve done. I’ll feel like I’ve done the right thing.”

The Clinton campaign’s acknowledgment that it planted a question re-enforces a widely held criticism of the senator — that she is not entirely honest, said Bill Schneider, CNN’s senior political analyst.

“It’s the same criticism often made of her husband,” Schneider said. “Most Americans never felt Bill Clinton was honest and trustworthy, even when he got elected in 1992 — with only 43 percent of the vote. His critics called him ‘Slick Willy.’ … Will her critics start referring to the New York senator as `Slick Hillary?'”

Asked if this experience makes her less likely to support Clinton’s presidential bid, Gallo-Chasanoff, an undecided voter, said, “I think she has a lot to offer, but I — this experience makes me look at her campaign a little bit differently.”

“The question and answer sessions — especially in Iowa — are really important. That’s where the voters get to … have like a real genuine conversation with this politician who could be representing them.”

While she acknowledged “it’s possible that all campaigns do these kind of tactics,” she said it still doesn’t make it right.

“Personally I want to know that I have someone who’s honest representing me.”

Gallo-Chasanoff’s story comes at a time when a second person has also come forward with a similar one. Geoffrey Mitchell of Hamilton, Illinois, a town located on the Iowa border, told CNN the Clinton campaign also wanted him to ask a certain question at an Iowa event in April.

“He asked me if I would ask Sen. Clinton about ways she was going to confront the president on the war in Iraq, specifically war funding,” said Geoffrey Mitchell, a supporter of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois. “I told him it was not a question I felt comfortable with.”

No questions were taken at the event. Elleithee said this incident was different than what happened with Gallo-Chasanoff in Newton. Elleithee said the staffer “bumped into someone he marginally knew” and during a conversation with Mitchell, “Iraq came up.” Elleithee denied the campaign tried to plant him as a friendly questioner in the audience.

Mitchell said he had never met the staffer before the event

Where does Hillary Stand?

November 3, 2007

Follow the link below and if you figure it out please tell me.

Please let me know.

Three Arkansas Surgeons

June 15, 2007

Three Arkansas Surgeons

Three Arkansas surgeons were playing golf together and discussing
surgeries they had  performed. One of them said, “I’m the  best surgeon
in Arkansas.  In
my favorite case, a concert pianist lost seven fingers in an accident,
reattached them,
and 8 months later he performed a private concert for the Queen of

The second surgeon said, “That’s nothing. A young man lost an arm and
both legs in an accident, I reattached them, and 2 years later he won a
gold medal in
track and field  events in the Olympics.”

The third surgeon said:  “You guys are amateurs. Several years ago a
woman was high on cocaine and marijuana and she rode a horse head-on
into a train
traveling 80 miles an hour. All I had left to work with was the woman’s
blond hair and
the horse’s ass.   I was able to put them together and now she’s a
senator from  New

It’s time to replace American society

June 2, 2007

Read entire article here

Who is saying this? Could Chairman Mao have returned from the grave? Maybe Karl Marx is alive and well? Castro maybe?

None of the above. This was said by our beloved Chairman Hillary. She’s even been wearing jackets with the Mao collar.

Hillary Clinton, essentially admitted she wants to replace American society.

This is really scary stuff and worthy of your reading.

A very short editorial

June 1, 2007

 Any acquired wealth should be up to the acquirer to spend in any way they see fit.

If you disagree, step up and lead by example. It doesn’t take a billionaire to make a difference.

OK Hillary, if you honestly believe in your re-distribution of wealth then get off your pile of millions and show us how its done. 

Thats what I thought.


To each acording to need. From each acording to ability.

May 30, 2007

What does Hillary (Karl Marx) Clinton really believe? Read on and see.

She says “Shared Prosperity Should Replace ‘On Your Own’ Society”. “And special privileges for none.   Does that mean she will go to the emergence room when she gets the sniffles? I don’t think so. After all we are all equal however she is more equal than others.

I am posting the entire article here so it won’t get deleted by some massive archive someplace.

Read entire article here

We Are All in It Together, Clinton Says
Tuesday May 29, 12:11 pm ET
By Holly Ramer, Associated Press Writer
Clinton: Shared Prosperity Should Replace ‘On Your Own’ Society

MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined a broad economic vision Tuesday, saying it’s time to replace an “on your own” society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an “ownership society” really is an “on your own” society that has widened the gap between rich and poor.

“I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together’ society,” she said. “I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none.”

That means pairing growth with fairness, she said, to ensure that the middle-class succeeds in the global economy, not just corporate CEOs.

“There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed,” she said. “Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies.”

Clinton spoke at the Manchester School of Technology, which trains high school students for careers in the construction, automotive, graphic arts and other industries. The school highlighted one of the nine goals she outlined: increasing support for alternative schools and community colleges.

“We have sent a message to our young people that if you don’t go to college … that you’re thought less of in America. We have to stop this,” she said. “Our country cannot run without the people who have the skills that are taught in this school.”

Beyond education, Clinton said she would reduce special breaks for corporations, eliminate tax incentives for companies that ship jobs overseas and open up CEO pay to greater public scrutiny.

Clinton also said she would help people save more money by expanding and simplifying the earned income tax credit; create new jobs by pursuing energy independence; and ensure that every American has affordable health insurance.