Hillary Clinton's New Ad- Udated and Bumped... AD WARS!

[MAJOR UPDATE BELOW] AD WARS!!!!!

Hillary Clinton's campaign has a new ad out asking:

"It's 3:00am and your children are asleep," a voice over says in the ad entitled "Children". "There's a phone in the White House, and it's ringing. Something is happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call."

"Whether someone knows the world's leaders, knows the military, someone tested and ready to lead. It's 3am and your children are safe and asleep. Who do you want answering the phone?" the ad concludes.

Ad is up at YouTube, found here (Video doesn't show up to email subscribers)



The ad is generating some buzz in the blogosphere as seen on memeorandum.

I really hope John McCain uses that same ad because given the choice between Obama, Clinton or McCain, that answer is easy for me.

John McCain is the man I would want answering that phone.

Needless to say this ad is offending the far far left liberally unhinged, in a bad way.

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe is none to happy about this new ad and had this to say:

We don't think the ad is going to be effective at all. Senator Clinton already had her red phone moment -- to decide whether to allow George Bush to invade Iraq. She answered affirmatively. She did not read the National Intelligence Estimate. She still, curiously, tries to suggest that it wasn't a vote for war, but it most assuredly was...

"This is about what you say when you answer that phone. What judgment you show...She, John McCain and George Bush gave the wrong answer."

Obama is right, the question is not only who would be answering the phone but how they would respond which leaves Obama AND Clinton out in the cold.

I repeat.... out of the three choices available, John McCain is the man I would want answering that particular phone call.

The New Republic titles their piece on this ad " Hillary Cuts an Ad ... for McCain"

LOL

[UPDATE] In response to Hillary Clinton's ad above, Barack Obama's campaign has created his own. (Hat tip to The Caucus)

This is fun!



They are both like two little children...and they want to be president of this country?

More from NYT.

.

Ricin Poison Found in Las Vegas Hotel Room

[Update on this post found here]

On February 14, 2008, a man staying at a Las Vegas extended stay hotel called for help saying he was suffering from respiratory distress.

Managers of the hotel started eviction proceedings because the man was gone and not paying his rent and when one of his relatives came for his belongings, they discovered ricin in the room.

Tests confirmed it was ricin but authorities do not know it got into the room, as of now.

The man himself is still in critical condition and cannot tell the police where the ricin came from and he had also had animals in the room with him, two of which are fine and one was found dead although there is no evidence the animal died of ricin exposure.

Ricin, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), is a poison:

* Ricin is a poison that can be made from the waste left over from processing castor beans.
* It can be in the form of a powder, a mist, or a pellet, or it can be dissolved in water or weak acid.
* It is a stable substance. For example, it is not affected much by extreme conditions such as very hot or very cold temperatures.

Interestingly enough though, from that same CDC page we find out that it takes a "deliberate act" to make ricin and use it to poison people and accidental exposure to ricin is highly unlikely.

Ricin gets inside the cells of a person’s body and preventing the cells from making the proteins they need. Without the proteins, cells die. Eventually death may occur.

It only takes 500 micrograms of the toxin -- an amount the size of the head of a pin.

According to Capt. Joe Lombardo of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, "We did have enough ricin to be of concern."

There have been other reported cases involving ricin in the United States. In January 2005, the FBI arrested an Ocala, Florida, man with no known ties to terrorists or extremists after agents found ricin in the home he lives in with his mother.

Ricin was found in February 2004 in the mailroom of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington. The mailroom handles correspondence addressed to U.S. lawmakers

In this case, the FBI is treating the case as a criminal investigation and says that terrorism is not suspected.

So how did ricin get into the room and since it takes a deliberate act to make and poison someone, how did the man in the hospital get poisoned?

Questions that might not be answered if the man does not recover.

.

Jack the Ripper Returns To East End of London

The Museum in Docklands is returning to the scene of London's most infamous crimes with a Jack the Ripper exhibition which will look into the area, the era and delve into one of history's most infamous unsolved crimes.

The exhibition will open in London's Museum in Docklands on May 15 and run through November 2, 2008 and it will be the first exhibition to explore the Jack the Ripper murders and their enduring legacy.

The will have documents and the existing evidence that has survived from the original investigation into the infamous serial killings of the 19th century prostitute killer known as Jack The Ripper, as well as some of the surviving letters that he allegedly sent the police.

Full of objects attesting to the never-ending public appetite for this story, the exhibition will ask why the tale of the Whitechapel murders continues to resonate 120 years on and why this one unknown figure has become so iconic, and so much a part of London.

According to Julia Hoffbrand, the Museum in Docklands' exhibition curator, "We explore Jack the Ripper in the context of the East End and explain who lived there and what it was like to live there. The murders and the media interest they generated shone a light into a terrible conditions in the area which was riddled with prostitution, dirt, violence and crime."

(CLICK TO ENLARGE)--Letter to police purporting to originate from Jack the Ripper, dated Oct. 6, 1888.--Photo courtesy of Britannica--

It is generally accepted that Jack the Ripper was responsible for the brutal killing of Mary Ann Nichols on August 31, 1888, Annie Chapman on Sept. 8, 1888, Elizabeth Stride on Sept. 30, 1888, Catherine Eddowes on Sept. 30, 1888 and Mary Jane Kelly on November 9, 1888, this exhibition will show that authorities believed, at the time, up to 11 murders were committed by Jack the Ripper.

(CLICK TO ENLARGE)--Depiction of the discovery of one of Jack the Ripper's victims- From of Museum in Docklands--


Hoffbrand tells Reuters, "What emerges is the fact that an unknown number of women were actually murdered in the area at the time."

The exhibition will also include by a lectures and talks and guided tours down the streets where the Ripper committed his bloody deeds 120 years ago.

This exhibit follows in the footsteps of the conviction, last Friday, of another serial killer, Steve Wright, that killed five prostitutes in rural Suffolk.

Following Wright's conviction, Mark Dixie, was told he would spend at least 34 years in jail for murdering 18-year-old would-be model Sally Anne Bowman in a frenzied attack in her Croydon driveway. Dixie is also suspected of three unsolved murders in Australia.

.

Chemical Ali to Hang

Ali Hassan al-Majid, known as Chemical Ali and one of Saddam Hussein’s most notorious henchmen, was sentenced to death last June and the Iraqi lawmakers have paved the way for his execution.

Officials from Iraq’s three-member presidency council said on Friday that Mr. Majid will be turned over by his American jailers and executed shortly.

He was sentenced to death last summer after an Iraqi tribunal found him guilty of leading the so-called Anfal operation in the late 1980s that killed as many as 180,000 Kurds.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Snooper, over at A Newt One says:

Chemical Ali, the guy that used WMDs that Saddam didn't have to murder THOUSANDS of the citizens that were never annihilated with the WMDs that Saddam didn't have.

If you didn't detect the sarcasm in the above statement, you are very dumb.

Good point.

.

A Meeting with Karl Rove and an Interview with Bruce Herschensohn

The Tygrrrr Express has two incredible pieces up, one about his meeting with Karl Rove which is a must read as well as showing people who and what Karl Rove really is.

For those who see Rove as a puppet master pulling strings, Rove made it clear that he knew who the boss was, and it was not him. The President has nicknamed him “Boy Genius,” and “Turd Blossom.” In fact, when Rove would enter the room, President Bush would say to another subordinate, “That idea is so f-ing bad that it must be something Rove came up with.” Sometimes President Bush would say to Rove or one of his other staffers, when they would ramble in business meetings, “Y’all think this is worth wasting the President’s time over?”

Just a teaser...go read the rest.

His second piece is just as fascinating which is his interview with Bruce Herschensohn.

Bruce Herschensohn is a Professor at Pepperdine University.

Bruce Herschensohn has been a television and radio political commentator for the last two decades. After service in the U.S. Air Force he began his own motion picture company, and then was appointed Director of Motion Pictures and Television for the United States Information Agency. During his tenure the U.S.I.A. received more awards for film and television productions than all other departments and agencies of the U.S. government combined, including the Oscar from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

In 1969, he was selected as one of the Ten Outstanding Young Men in the Federal Government. He received the second-highest civilian award, the Distinguished Service Medal, and then became Deputy Special Assistant to President Nixon. He has traveled to over ninety countries, Herschensohn taught "The U.S. Image Abroad" at the University of Maryland, occupied the Nixon Chair at Whittier College teaching "U.S. Foreign and Domestic Policies" and was chairman of the board of Pepperdine University. He was appointed a member of the Reagan Transition Team.

Go read the interview at The Tygrrrr Express.

.

The Texas Democratic Party Says Clinton May Sue

In a never ending pattern to "change" the rules, once again we see reports that Hillary Clinton's campaign may be planning to pursue litigation against the Texas Democratic Party over the party's complicated delegate selection process.

How the Texas primaries and caucuses work:

Unlike other states, the Democratic Party in Texas has an unusual process which mixes primaries and caucuses, something Texas has done for decades.

Instead of allocating by congressional districts, Texas distributes 126 of its delegates among the 31 state Senate districts using a formula based on Democratic voter turnout in the 2004 and 2006 general elections.

The 31 districts contain from two to eight delegates. The March 4 primary vote in each Senate district will allocate that district's delegates.

In this particular race, that seems to favor Obama because the turnout formula assigns more delegates to urban centers with a lot of young or black voters and fewer delegates to the areas of poorer Hispanic voters which would tend to favor Clinton.

Here is where it gets tricky though, Texas also assigns 67 of their 228 delegates based on attendance at precinct caucuses, which Texas calls conventions, and those begin 15 minutes after the primary polls close at 7 pm.

Obama has done far better in caucuses until now than Clinton has, he has won 12 out of 15 caucuses against Clinton and in primaries he has only won 13 to her 9.

Which brings us to today's news, where we see reports that a Democratic official, privy to certain discussions, confirmed that representatives for Clinton had made "veiled threats" raising the spector of "challenging the process" and the formula used by Texas in awarding delegates.

The source, who asked not to be identified, said Clinton's political director, Guy Cecil, had forcefully raised the possibility of a courtroom battle.

Clinton's top Texas spokeswoman, Adrienne Elrod,said, "campaign and party officials had merely discussed election night procedures and that the campaign was merely seeking a written agreement in advance."

Despite that statement, we also see that Chad Dunn, the Texas Democratic Party lawyer, sent out a letter to both the Clinton and Obama campaigns warning that a lawsuit could ruin the Democrats' effort to re-energize voters just as they are turning out in record numbers.

According to that letter, Dunn wrote "It has been brought to my attention that one or both of your campaigns may already be planning or intending to pursue litigation against the Texas Democratic Party. Such action could prove to be a tragedy for a reinvigorated Democratic process."

Are Clinton and Obama, in their battle to win the presidential nomination for the Democratic party, prepared to disenfranchise voters, or worse yet, destroy the desire of Democratic supporters to even show up for the November elections?

Democratic sources said both campaigns have made it clear that they might consider legal options over the complicated delegate selection process, which includes both a popular vote and evening caucuses. But the sources made it clear that the Clinton campaign in particular had warned of an impending lawsuit.

"Both campaigns have made it clear that they would go there if they had to, but I think the imminent threat is coming from one campaign," said one top Democratic official, referring to the Clinton campaign. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity.

Changing the rules:

The reason this was referred to as a pattern, above, is because we have seen reports over the last couple of months of other rules that Clinton has sought to have changed, midstream, so to speak.

Nevada:

In what the New York Times called a "proxy" battle between Clinton and Obama, the Nevada State Education Association, whose top officials were supporting Hillary Clinton, filed a lawsuit (PDF) to prevent nine precincts that were established in casinos so that hotel workers that would not be able to leave their jobs would still be able to participate in the caucuses for their home precincts.

This lawsuit came after a 60,000 member group, the Culinary Workers Union, Local 226 in Nevada had endorsed Barack Obama. Those were primarily the workers that would be voting in those nine casino precincts.

The Nevada judge in that case refused to grant the teachers a temporary restraining order to stop those caucuses.

Michigan and Florida:

Florida and Michigan moved their primaries forward and the DNC decided to penalize them for it by stripping all their delegates from the convention.

After winning the states, Hillary Clinton then decided that she wanted the DNC to reinstate those delegates.

Recently Bill Clinton told an audience in Beaumont, Texas, "If she wins Texas and Ohio I think she will be the nominee. If you don't deliver for her, I don't think she can be. It's all on you."

Texas is a must win for Hillary Clinton and the recent polls show that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are running neck and neck there and as per Bill Clinton's statements, this may be Hillary's last chance to keep herself as a serious contender to become the Democratic nominee for president of the united States of America.

The question is how far will she go to win and to what degree is she prepared to harm the Democratic party to obtain that win?

Personally, I don't think Hillary Clinton cares about the party at all. Power is all she cares about.

.

Obama Double Talking to Americans and Canadians?

How far is a candidate willing to go to become President? Will a candidate say one thing to the American public and something else altogether to representatives from other nations?

During last Tuesday night's Cleveland, Ohio, debates, Barack Obama said that he felt that the North American Free Trade Agreement would be renegotiated if he's elected President, in response to Hillary Clinton's statement that she would "back out" of the agreement if it wasn't renegotiated to her satisfaction in six months time with her as President. Obama said that he thought the renegotiations could be conducted using the United States option to withdraw from the agreement.

But is that the whole of the story? According to Canada's CTV, it's not the story one of Obama's senior campaign members told Canadian Ambassador to the U.S., Michael Wilson.

The Obama insider reportedly told the ambassador, "Don't worry[/url] -- it's just campaign rhetoric, it's not serious," CTV reported.

CTV reported that the Obama campaign's message to Wilson was taken as "completely authentic" by the Canadian government.

What will this mean for the Obama campaign? Perhaps nothing, so long as there are faintings and awe-inspiring speeches of change. It does go to show, however, how far candidates can be willing to go in their pursuit for the power of the office of the President.


Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

Secret No More: Harry Deployed In Afghanistan Since December

Despite a months long media blackout, the word is now out: Prince Harry of England is in Afghanistan on deployment. Harry, 23, has been on deployment in the dangerous Helmand region of southern Afghanistan since December. This deployment came seven months after initial plans for his deployment were canceled due to threats to kidnap him made by Iraqi and Taliban contingents.

News of his deployment came out despite an agreement by British authorities and select members of the international media not to release the information that he was in Afghanistan until after the completion of his deployment, affording the young prince the opportunity to carry out his duties in the Royal Army.

Harry has been responsible for calling in air strikes against Taliban positions, has conducted foot patrols through villages and has fired on suspected enemy combatants, pool photographs and footage have shown.

Before he was deployed, Harry, the son of Prince Charles and deceased Princess Diana, told reporters that he sometimes wished he was not a royal as it made it difficult to do things that he enjoyed, including fighting in the army.

General of the army Richard Dannatt has issued a statement expressing his disappointment in the violation of the rare agreement with the normally "free-for-all" media, and he, his chief of staff, and operational commanders will evaluate whether Harry's deployment will continue. Dannatt also commented that Harry's military service had been "exemplary," and that Harry has been a "model soldier," garnering for himself no special treatment in his role as a soldier due to his position as third in line of succession to the British throne.

Give'em HELL, Harry!

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

Democrats in Congress "Openly Rebel" Against House Leadership on Ethics

These days outside observers, in fact, almost anyone that watches Congress at work, via C-Span, can tell you that Congress spends more time fighting over bills than they do passing them.

With that said however, it is usually Republicans objecting to bills proposed by Democrats or Democrats objecting to bills that are proposed by Republicans.

When Congressional Democrats and Republicans alike "erupt in applause" when a bill is pulled or postponed, it can be assumed it must have been a very bad bill to begin with.

This was the case yesterday, Wednesday, February 27, 2008, with an ethics measure that the "leadership" backed.

Members of the Rules Committee, who rarely break with their leaders, expressed deep dismay during a hearing Wednesday over a proposal to create an outside ethics office to judge complaints about members, and their opposition forced leaders to cancel an expected floor vote on the bill Thursday.

It went so far that Representative Dennis Cardoza, A Democrat from California, used the word “suck” to describe his feelings for the Democratic bill, as well as a GOP alternative.

Minority Leader John Boehner, Republican from ohio had gone so far as to beg Nancy Pelosi to not bring this particular bill to the floor and despite vocal Democratic opposition, Steny Hoyer who is the Democratic Majority Leader, predicted the House would back the creation of the independent ethics entity when it was brought up on Thursday.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) also made a rare appearance to speak out against the Democratic proposal, which had been spearheaded by an ethics task force headed by Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.). Boehner called on members to endorse the GOP substitute.

The Hill reports that the Democratic proposal would create a six-person board to oversee the new Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), with joint appointments if the Speaker and minority leader can agree on the choices.

Then the office would start investigations and make recommendations to the full ethics committee, and no members or lobbyists could serve on the board.

The republicans and Democrats alike argued against that proposal, saying that it wold enable partisan witchhunts.

The GOP made that argument clearly by creating a list of 10 Democratic targets of ethics allegations, showing exactly what leadership could expect if the proposal went forward.

The Republican alternative measure "would focus on making changes to the existing ethics committee by adding four former lawmakers to the panel and giving the House inspector general the responsibility of accepting allegations against members and forwarding them on to the full ethics committee. The chair of the committee would alternate between parties each Congress."

The proposal would provide monthly public reports on the status of the panel’s investigations, and if panel action becomes blocked by a partisan stalemate, after 90 days, the panel would pass along its findings as of that date to the Department of Justice for further action.

Democratic lawmakers expressed concern for that proposal, citing, "the GOP proposal would raise constitutional questions because it would allow people who are not current members of Congress to weigh in on determining a sitting lawmaker’s fate."

Representative David Dreier, a Republican from California stated that "he hadn’t seen a committee meeting so far this Congress in which both sides were dissenting against a Democratic leadership backed resolution with such a “thoughtful discussion."

It is good to see members of the United States Congress unite and agree for a change.... the problem for the leadership though, is they all untied against them.

Page one of The Hill article can be found here.

.

Situational Irony: Berkeley Protestors Call FOR Marines

Berkeley, California, has once again found itself in the headlines. This time, however, they're calling IN the Marines.

In what can only be seen as an ironic twist of fate, Code Pink, and none other than radical leftist Medea Benjamin, found themselves involved in an incident in which they saw the necessity of calling in the Marines for help.

It started at the usual place with the usual suspects involved. Members of Code Pink were barricading the Armed Forces recruiting center in Berkeley, California (where the city still gives them free parking and a free pass to protest uninhibited by normal legal procedures), when a man in a white volvo drove by and "spat upon Code Pink."

This is where the Marines come into play, in a first-hand, eye-witness account given by Eamon Kelly, a Marine recovering from back surgery, in an email sent to Melanie Morgan of Move America Forward:

Titter Meter: HIGH.

"While we were at the protest in Berkeley from 12 to 4 PM a white volvo drove by and a man spat upon code pink. They chased him down the street and got into a verbal altercation. The police were NO WHERE in sight. That's not the best part, ready for this? Medea Benjamin yelled and I quote "Marines!" she actually yelled for our help because this man had stepped out of his car. Lol. I even asked her if she was yelling Police and she told me "I said Marines" then put her arm around my friend Allen (the Marine vet) Ironic? Ok back to the emails!! "

Speaking of e-mails, Eamon has recieved hundreds and hundreds of letters of support from Americans all across the country after he was featured in my WorldNetDaily.com a couple of weeks ago, and the blogging from so many people, including Michelle Malkin, Pat Dollard, Spree at WakeUpAmerica, EaglesUp, Gathering of Eagles, Canada Free Press and dozens more.

Interesting how when the going gets tough, even leftist extemists know who they can count on to bail them out.

More interesting are the ties and connections that surround Medea Benjamin. According to FrontPage Magazine, some of these ties may very well involve financial contributions to terrorist networks in the Middle East:

Waxman has signed a letter allowing radical leftist Medea Benjamin and a dozen of her cohorts – some of whom had lost relatives in the Iraq War – to slip the $600,000 of cash and supplies into camps housing refugees from Fallujah, with less outside scrutiny of its contents. The letter was given to Fernando Suarez del Solar, an amnestied illegal immigrant from Mexico and antiwar speaker for the leftist organization Global Exchange, who lost his son Jesus Suarez in Iraq. Fernando Suarez lives near Waxman’s congressional district. Fernando Suarez distinguished himself as an emotional antiwar protestor. His son, Jesus Suarez (a.k.a. Victor Gonzalez), reportedly died after stepping on an American cluster bomb. Jesus Suarez, who also entered this country illegally, had been offered posthumous citizenship for his service in the military, but his father turned it down. (His wife reportedly accepted the offer in order to safeguard the legal status of their child.) At his son’s funeral, Fernando recalled that Jesus had always wanted to become a Marine and be remembered as a modern day Aztec warrior. However, Fernando soon began shilling for Medea Benjamin and protesting against his son’s lifelong wish.

More troubling than the fact that Waxman’s letter probably sped those supplies through military security is the remaining question: Who was the intended recipient of this collection of left-wingers’ philanthropy?

It says a lot, in my opinion, that Benjamin called upon the Marines for help when there was no available law enforcement. It says a lot about the reputation of the Marines in regards to character, honor, and valor. What speaks volumes more, to me, is that the Marines on sight at the protest did what Marines do best and like no others; they responded to the call of duty.

I don't know if this will make any sort of impact on the Code Pink crowd that was involved in the protest. I don't know that some spark of reason may be triggered in the backs of any of their minds that will give them pause to stop for a moment and think, "These Marines are willing to put themselves in harms way for me, what am I doing?" Perhaps not, but the possibility of it exists.

As for Medea Benjamin? It takes a lot of gall, a lot of unmitigated gall, in my mind, to call upon those whom you're protesting and working against and to undermine and ask them for their help.

God Bless the Marine Corps (and yes, I'm putting aside my service branch bias as an Army veteran to say that).

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

Limbaugh Wants Republicans To Vote For Hillary Clinton In Primaries

Update] 3/5/08- The primaries are over and Rush must be a very very happy man!! (Click that link to see why)

Back in early January, Daily KOS encouraged their readers to "cause mischief" in the Republican Primary in Michigan by saying Democrats "should vote for Mitt Romney, because if Mitt wins, Democrats win".

His logic:

And we want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us. We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan.

One of the Daily KOS readers (Andy Cobb) went as far as to create a YouTube video. (Found at YouTube, URL here)



That video received over 191,000 views and 33 blog reactions to that Daily Kos piece, according to technorati.

A little over a month has gone by and instead of the expectations shown by Kos himself with that previous post, the Republicans have a presumed candidate in John McCain and it is the Democratic candidates that are cutting each other's throats and infighting to the point of dividing their party.

Now we see that Rush Limbaugh has decided that Republicans should turn the tables on the Democrats in this 2008 election and perhaps return the favor.

His reasons?

During his No. 1 rated radio show and on his Web site, www.rushlimbaugh.com, the former Clinton archenemy has told listeners to “pimp themselves” for just one day vote by voting for Hillary to keep the Democratic Party “at war with itself.”

Citing a story in a Texas newspaper headlined “Many Republicans to Vote for Obama," Limbaugh told listeners this week: “I understand I've got a big challenge here to try to get Republicans to change their minds on this and vote for Hillary to keep her in the race, to keep that party at war with itself . . .

“It's clear that Republicans in Texas have been listening to this program where we have advised Republicans to pimp themselves for a day and go vote in the Democrat primary . . . I just think, at this stage, the longer Hillary can stay in this, the better for us.”

[...]

“I know I'm fighting an uphill battle . . . vote for Hillary to keep this campaign going, this 'uncivil war,'” Rush said.

You can read the whole transcript of that Limabugh show for yourself, right here.

What a difference a month makes.

Even more shocking, who would have thought that the ultra conservative Rush Limbaugh and the ultra liberal DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas would actually agree on political strategy?



OH MY GOD....For the second time in two weeks, I just saw pigs fly past my window!!!


(Question for Markos Moulitsas: Still think a little mischief is going to be fun?)

HEH.

.

Obama on Iraq: Two Disturbing Alternatives

Cross posted from Radarsite:
http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2008/02/obama-on-iraq-two-disturbing.html

1. The Terrorists On The Importance Of Iraq:
Osama Bin Laden: Baghdad Is "The Capital Of The Caliphate." (Text Of Bin Laden' 04)

Bin Laden: "The Most Important And Serious Issue Today For The Whole World Is This Third World War … Raging In [Iraq]." BIN LADEN: "I now address my speech to the whole of the Islamic nation: Listen and understand. The issue is big and the misfortune is momentous. The most important and serious issue today for the whole world is this Third World War, which the Crusader-Zionist coalition began against the Islamic nation. It is raging in the land of the two rivers. The world's millstone and pillar is in Baghdad, the capital of the caliphate." (Text Of Bin Laden's Audio Message To Muslims In Iraq, Posted On Jihadist Websites, 12/28/04)

Bin Laden: "This Is A War Of Destiny Between Infidelity And Islam." (Text Of Bin Laden's Audio Message To Muslims In Iraq, Posted On Jihadist Websites, 12/28/04)Bin Laden: "The Whole World Is Watching This War And The Two Adversaries; The Islamic Nation, On The One Hand, And The United States And Its Allies On The Other. It Is Either Victory And Glory Or Misery And Humiliation." (Text Of Bin Laden's Audio Message To Muslims In Iraq, Posted On Jihadist Websites, 12/28/04)

Ayman al-Zawahiri: We Must "Establish An Islamic Authority … Over As Much Territory As You Can To Spread Its Power In Iraq … [And] Extend The Jihad Wave To The Secular Countries Neighboring Iraq." ZAWAHIRI: "So we must think for a long time about our next steps and how we want to attain it, and it is my humble opinion that the Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals: The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq. The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or emirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate – over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq … The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq. The fourth stage: It may coincide with what came before: the clash with Israel, because Israel was established only to challenge any new Islamic entity." (Complete Text Of Al-Zawahiri Letter To Al-Zarqawi, 7/9/05, Available At: http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20051011_release.htm, Accessed 9/5/06)

Bin Laden: "The War Is For You Or For Us To Win. If We Win It, It Means Your Defeat And Disgrace Forever." BIN LADEN: "Finally, I would like to tell you that the war is for you or for us to win. If we win it, it means your defeat and disgrace forever as the wind blows in this direction with God's help." (Bin Laden Threatens New Operations, Offers 'Long-Term Truce,' Posted On Al-Jazirah Net, 1/19/06)

2. Barack Hussein Obama on Iraq War:

"There is no doubt that because we put American troops in Iraq, more American troops in Iraq, that they are doing a magnificent job. They are making a difference in certain neighborhoods. But the overall strategy is failed..."
Source: 2007 Democratic debate in Las Vegas, Nevada Nov 15, 2007

Q: If you get us out of Iraq and somehow al Qaeda takes over anyway, what will you do then?
A: Well, look, if we had followed my judgment originally, we wouldn't have been in Iraq. We're here now. And we've got no good options. We got bad options and worse options. The only way we're going to stabilize Iraq and make sure that al Qaeda does not take over in the long term is to begin a phased redeployment so that we don't have anti-American sentiment as a focal point for al Qaeda in Iraq. We can still have troops in the region, outside of Iraq, that can help on counterterrorism activities, and we've got to make sure that they don't establish long-term bases there. But right now, the bases are in Afghanistan and in the hills between Afghanistan and Pakistan; that's where we've got to focus.Source: 2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum Aug 8,2007

A short message from Radarsite:
Anyone who has read the captured correspondence of the Al-Qaeda leaders concerning the importance that they attach to Iraq, and the central role that Iraq plays in their scheme for a world-wide Caliphate knows how delighted they would be if we followed the advice of Barrack Hussein Obama, and shifted our focus and resources from the oil-rich center of gravity in Iraq, the universally acknowledged keystone to the Middle East, to the mountainous wastelands of Afghanistan. It is the opinion of this writer, that if we abandoned the Land of the Two Rivers to the enemy now, the long-term strategic consequences of this monumental blunder for our GWOT would be nothing less than disastrous. The idea that we could somehow return to the area if it at some point in the future it became infested with Al-Qaeda is at best naive and ludicrous, and at worst naggingly suspect.

Nothing would suit our enemies in Iraq better than a publicly proclaimed schedule of withdrawal of our troops and their eventual complete pullout.

To this particular observer the absurdity of this plan, which so obviously plays into our enemy's game presents us with one of two troubling alternatives: Either it was purposely designed to enhance the chances for our defeat in this crucial region of the Middle East and enhance the capabilities of our sworn Al-Qaeda enemies, or it is the dangerously delusional bumblings of a hopeless amateur.

Nancy Pelosi's Congress Responsible for John McCain being Trusted More on National Security

I added this as an update on yesterday's post about the New York Times article backfiring against the Times and actually helping put McCain ahead of Obama in the general election matchups according to Rasmussen.

But in looking at a couple of Rasmussen polls together, the bigger picture emerges and despite the media claim of "the downfall" of conservatives, the bigger picture actually shows the exact opposite.

First lets start wit the Democratic race for the nomination.

There is little change in the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. Obama now earns support from 47% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters while Clinton attracts 43%. Data from Rasmussen Markets shows that last night’s debate failed to slow Obama’s momentum. Recent polling data shows that Clinton’s lead is slipping in Ohio, it’s a toss-up in Texas, Clinton leads in Rhode Island, and Obama has the edge in Vermont.

Barring any extreme mistakes from Obama or some hidden aces up Clinton's sleeve, his momentum isn't slowing, he is ahead in delegates and it is more than just possible, and can be categorized as probable, that Obama will walk away with the Democratic nomination. (Note: Unless superdelegates end up being the determining factor or the Democrats ending up in a brokered convention---More on that here)

Running with that probability, we go to the next Rasmussen report. (PDF for that report here)

The title basically says it all.

"McCain Trusted More than Obama on National Security, Iraq, and the Economy."

With the general election campaign season coming soon, voters currently trust John McCain more than Barack Obama on issues of National Security, the War in Iraq, the Economy, and Taxes. Obama is trusted more when it comes to Reducing Government Corruption. The Republican hopeful has a slight lead over the Democratic frontrunner in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

McCain is trusted more by 55% of voters when it comes to National Security issues. Obama is trusted more by just 30% on this point. Just half (51%) of Democrats express more trust in Obama than McCain on national security. Unaffiliated voters prefer McCain by a two-to-one margin.

McCain’s advantage on other issues is far smaller.

On Iraq, McCain has a much smaller advantage—49% trust McCain while 39% prefer Obama. Democrats, by a 61% to 22% margin, prefer Obama. Republicans overwhelmingly prefer McCain (83% to 12%). Unaffiliated voters are more evenly divided—46% prefer McCain while 41% prefer Obama.

McCain is also trusted more on the economy and taxes and the only area that Obama is trusted more is reducing government corruption.

While Obama's momentum is building against Clinton, McCain's momentum is building against both the Democratic candidates for the general election.

It comes down to electability and who is trusted more on variety of issues and for conservatives and moderate Republicans as well as a significant share of unaffiliated voters, National Security is a very high priority and the Congressional Democrats are also not doing their candidate any favors, except with the far far left unhinged crowd by allowing the FISA amendments to lapse and failing to see to it that our country is protected to the best of our ability by having the tools needed to keep us safe.

The Senate passed a bipartisan bill with the vote of 19 Democratic politicians and because the Congressional Democrats, that bipartisan bill was not passed at all by Congress, to stop those protective tools from expiring and exposing us to the danger of terrorist attacks.

Bottom line here is that it is the Democrats that are letting our protections lapse and by simple virtue of being a Democrat, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will continue to suffer from the stigma of the Congressional Democrats, such as Nancy Pelosi who refuses to understand that she has endangered our country yet again, thereby giving the whole party the continued reputation as "weak on National Security".

Nancy Pelosi's Congress is partially responsible for the fact that John McCain is trusted so much more than any Democrat on National Security.

Nancy Pelosi and to a lesser degree, Harry Reid, might just be owed a huge thank you after the 2008 Elections, from the Republicans and Conservatives around the country, because their pandering to their far left base might just hand the White House to John McCain, lock, stock and barrel.

The Democrats insistence on helping aid the terrorists by making our nation weaker, will cost them. The numbers are already bearing that out.

Open Trackbacks:

Trackposted to Pirate's Cove, Leaning Straight Up, Cao's Blog, and A Newt One, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.



.

Are these the qualities of a Commander in Chief?

The President of the United States serves as the Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces. Army, Air Force, Coast Guard, Navy, and last but certainly not least, the Marine Corps are all under the united command of the individual who occupies the Oval Office. It has been said, for many years and I don't know who originated it, that no one wants peace more than the warriors.

That being said.

Warriors know this one simple little concept summed up nicely in a Latin phrase; sic vis pacem parabellem. It translates into English, "If you want peace, prepare for war."

Certainly there is much to be said for a CIC who desires to achieve peace for our nation, and indeed for the nations of the world. But the concept of peace by laying down your arms and leaving yourself vulnerable to attack is not the way, in my mind, to achieve peace.

What does Senator Barack Obama have to say about how he would go about working for peace? Let's take a look at his own words on it, with a hat tip to Jay at Stop the ACLU:

A far cry from Ronald Reagan's "peace through strength," and "trust, but verify."

Also check out Ace's thoughts on the matter here.

Just the thoughts of someone who is...

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man


.

Did The New York Times Article Help McCain?

Rasmussen says opinion of the New York Times has only a 24 per cent favorable rating. Even more interestingly, they point out McCain moved ahead of Obama in general election match-ups, only after the controversial New York Times article.

After a recent New York Times article that has been widely criticized for reporting innuendo and rumor as news, many have been asking if the article harmed John McCain or helped him overall.

Rasmussen polls opinions about the New York Times and finds that only 24 percent of respondents have a favorable opinion about the newspaper and 44 percent have an unfavorable opinion while 31 percent are not sure.

The Rasmussen results show more than just the favorable/unfavorable ratings for the paper though.

The Times recently became enmeshed in controversy over an article published concerning John McCain. Sixty-five percent (65%) of the nation’s likely voters say they have followed that story at least somewhat closely.

Of those who followed the story, 66% believe it was an attempt by the paper to hurt the McCain campaign. Just 22% believe the Times was simply reporting the news. Republicans, by an 87% to 9% margin, believe the paper was trying to hurt McCain’s chances of winning the White House. Democrats are evenly divided.

Following a link from that article that shows that McCain had trailed Barack Obama nationally prior to release of the New York Times article, we are led to the Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Report, which states "McCain has consistently held a modest lead over Clinton but he moved ahead of Obama only after publication of the controversial New York Times article last week."

As of that poll, released February 27, 2008, John McCain is now leading both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in general election match-ups. McCain now leads Obama 46 percent to 43 percent and Clinton 48 percent to 43 percent.

In the short time since the original New York Time article was published, many a writer has written about it, including many at Digital Journal, but as the Rasmussen report shows, it is quite possible that the New York Times attempt to influence public opinion worked splendidly, but perhaps not in the direction they wished to assert that influence.

It is likely, according to the recent numbers that their "agenda" driven article might have worked far better in John McCain's favor than it did in damaging him in any way.

The word backfire comes to mind here......

[Update] Rasmussen brings MORE good news for McCain..

McCain is trusted more by 55% of voters when it comes to National Security issues. Obama is trusted more by just 30% on this point. Just half (51%) of Democrats express more trust in Obama than McCain on national security. Unaffiliated voters prefer McCain by a two-to-one margin.

McCain’s advantage on other issues is far smaller.

On Iraq, McCain has a much smaller advantage—49% trust McCain while 39% prefer Obama. Democrats, by a 61% to 22% margin, prefer Obama. Republicans overwhelmingly prefer McCain (83% to 12%). Unaffiliated voters are more evenly divided—46% prefer McCain while 41% prefer Obama.

When it comes to the economy, 45% prefer McCain while 39% trust Obama more.

.

CBS News Team - Caliphate Broadcasting Services

~Snooper~

In a previous post, we brought to our readers the news that the Defeatocrats...

Senate Democrats have scheduled a vote Tuesday on a measure to end the Iraq war, interrupting their plans to emphasize their party's response to the housing crisis. Instead of turning immediately to the economy, the issue now dominating the presidential campaign, the Senate on Tuesday will hold procedural votes on a pair of bills by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) that would yank the military's funding in Iraq in 120 days and require the administration to send Congress a status report on the war against al Qaeda. [...]

Mitch McConnell was quick on the feet and decided to have it out with the defeatocrats because the measure was another pathetic attempt for the loser "majority" to once again pander and cater to a useless segment of our society...the moonbat anti-Americanists.

It was quickly seen that ReidCo wasn't all that happy about debating something that was a for sure certainty the measure would fail. ReidCo was Mitch Slapped again.

The Leftinistra were also quick to proclaim to the world that Republicans are now "agreeing" with the Democrats to "immediately" withdraw the troops. Such idiots and pathetic spinsters. Now, we have CBS doing the same thing. Simply pathetic.

Republicans Agree To Debate Anti-War Bill

Is that not comical? Grasping at straws is their way now, I suppose.

In a turnabout, Senate Republicans are agreeing with Democrats to advance an anti-war bill because they said the debate would give them an opportunity to praise the U.S. military's progress in Iraq.

The change of heart came after months of blocking similar measures. Unlike most of last year, however, security conditions in Iraq have improved, and Republicans say they now feel they have the upper hand in the debate.

"We welcome a discussion about Iraq," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell declared. [...]

Keep it up, Lame Stream Media. The more you try and sneak garbage like this through, the more we in the New Media will expose you for what you are...insignificant. The measure was expected to LOSE so the Leftinistra could proclaim that at least they tried but those big, bad mean Republicans voted it down.

Now, the measure will be debated and will be part of a Public Record. McConnell stated that they welcome this debate so the nation will see that the Democrats have been on the wrong side of this issue from the onset for political gain and he wants the Democrats to justify their lust for defeat. I am interested in this as well...FINALLY.

Nothing like the entire Defeatocrat Party getting Mitch Slapped in public.

Reid said...

[...] Reid said "a civil war rages" in Iraq and should not be the responsibility of U.S. taxpayers. [...]

Where has this poor fool been hiding? There never was a civil war waging in the first place and now, for the most part, a majority of the troops in theater are pretty much bored.

The WaPo:

[...] "There's been so much improvement in the situation in Iraq. Since [Democrats] are the ones who want to turn back to the subject, we'd like to spend the time talking about the dramatic improvements in Iraq," Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters moments before a preliminary vote on the withdrawal measure. [...]

Perhaps CBS should be paying more attention to details...

Hot Air has a pair of videos of the last fighting Democrat in the Senate.

.

Vets For Freedom- Pete hegseth Speaks From Baghdad

Via email:

Vets for Freedom Members:

Greetings from Baghdad!

I have embedded with fellow American soldiers and am witnessing the dramatic progress first hand. It is a very different Iraq from the one I once patrolled with my unit in 2005. Unfortunately our congress refuses to acknowledge this progress and this is made evident as yesterday, Senators Feingold and Reid introduce two bills whose ostensible goal is to force the administration to "re-focus on our top national-security threat - al-Qaeda and its affiliates. The Senate has now debated this over three dozen times since taking over Congress, demonstrating that they have completely lost touch with the reality of what's happening on the ground in Iraq.

I have addressed this issue in my piece in National Review Online.

"If only certain U.S. Senators truly understood the global nature of our vicious enemy in Iraq. ... Given the fact that today we are facing a determined al-Qaeda effort to destabilize Iraq, wouldn't any rational person include Iraq in their list of places where al-Qaeda must be defeated? Not Obama, Feingold, and Reid, who believe "we need to safely [i.e., immediately] redeploy U.S. troops from Iraq." Whatever misgivings these senators may have felt about the invasion of Iraq in the first place, today we are there. And so is al-Qaeda. Any "strategy to combat and defeat al Qaeda globally" must begin there." Read More.

Yesterdays comments made by Senator Reid, claiming that we need to "take care of Americans before Iraqi's" demonstrates how far from reality he has fallen. He continues to recite talking points from radical anti-war liberal front groups such as MoveOn.org and Code Pink on the floor of the U.S. Senate, I am embedded here in Iraq with American soldiers, witnessing first-hand the tremendous success of General Petraeus's ‘surge' strategy. With sectarian killings down 95 percent, suicide bombings down nearly 70 percent, and IED attacks cut nearly in half in the last year in Baghdad, it's about time that defeatists in Congress recognize that we are achieving success in Iraq, and that a safe, secure and free Iraq is critical to our security here at home.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

Call these five Senators and let them know that the costs of retreat are enormous so we must complete the mission in Iraq by defeating Al Qaeda.

These senators need to hear from Iraq & Afghanistan veterans, and those who support them about the importance of success in these missions and our national security.

Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) 202-224-6342
Susan Collins (R-ME) 202-224-2523
Norm Coleman (R-MN) 202-224-5641
Harry Reid (D-NV) 202-224-3542
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) (202) 224-2541

Now is the time to keep up the pressure-we are winning in Iraq, and the American people need to know it. Join us in supporting the brave troops in the field who are taking the fight to America's enemies.

Move out and Draw Fire!

Pete Hegseth

Executive Director
Vets for Freedom

Well everyone.... pick up the phone...lets start making those calls.

Then head over to the contact Senate page and start firing off emails.

Tomorrow....DO IT AGAIN.

.

ICE Criminal Alien Deportations Increases by 150 Per Cent

(ICE teams up with county sheriff, adult probation to target deportable criminals in Phoenix area - 02/14/08--Photo Courtesy of ICE)

U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) steps up efforts to deport illegal aliens focusing on those illegal immigrants that have come into contact with the criminal justice system.

ICE is reporting that it has placed 164,000 criminals in the deportation process as of the year ending September 30, 2007 and tells the Washington Post that they are estimating over 200,000 thousand for this fiscal year.

Federal immigration officials are scouring jails and reviewing years of criminal records to identify illegals that should be deport.

Assistant secretary of homeland security who heads ICE, Julie Myers, tells the Washington Post that when she first took the position in January 2006, ICE and federal agencies did not check federal detention facilities for immigration violators.

This is something she has corrected because she feels that it is a high priority to "make sure that people are not released from criminal institutions onto the street."

Since then, she said, the agency has studied the demographics of correctional facilities across the country and has assigned more agents to check facilities with higher numbers of foreign-born offenders. ICE's Criminal Alien Program created partnerships between immigration officials and jailers at nearly 4,500 detention facilities. Federal agents now frequently visit courthouses and jails to comb through court files. In 2006, the agency opened a division in Chicago that is responsible for screening federal inmates nationwide for deportation.

They go on to report that many police departments are now enrolling into an ICE training program which deputizes officers to enforce immigration law as well as probation officers and police tipping off immigration officials in cases where illegal aliens are suspected.

(Eleven fugitive operations teams made arrests in New York, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Missouri in a four-day operation- 02/26/08--Photo Courtesy of ICE)

A judge who asked to remain anonymous told reporters that "Cities are overwhelmed with the consequences and costs of illegal immigration. It's a concerted effort to get rid of them, get them out of their community." He also says he is seeing more accused of minor offenses being brought to the courts attention in that effort.

Vice president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, Denise Slavin, brings another detail to the public about the U.S. Congress, which has increased funding for immigration enforcement initiatives but "has not provided commensurate financial support to the immigration court system."

In Delaware, agents shut down a fraudulent documents operation. That operation resulted in the arrest of a arrest of a Mexican national on federal charges that he was producing and misusing immigration documents, such as phony immigration documents, Social Security cards and driver's licenses.

(Federal, state cooperation shuts down fraudulent documents operation- 02/26/08--Photo Courtesy of ICE)

This is not the only news from ICE though, as their recent news release page shows, they have recently cracked down on illegal aliens in a massive four day operation around the country which has resulted in 225 arrests in a four day Great Lakes operation:

Eleven fugitive operations teams made 225 arrests in: Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, New York, Wisconsin and Missouri. ICE's Detroit Fugitive Operations Team made 85 arrests, including 66 fugitives, and 21 aliens with criminal convictions. The arrests took place throughout Metro Detroit. Those arrested are from the following countries: Albania, Bangladesh, Cuba, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Lebanon, Lithuania, Mexico, Russia, Uzbekistan and Yugoslavia.

Those press releases are from February 26, 2007.

Stringent new laws, police and federal immigration cooperation and a series of ICE raids are all in response to the citizens of the U.S. and their demands that the laws be enforced and the illegal immigration problem be dealt with.

.

Majority of Clinton's Super Delegates Refuse To Back "Popular" Vote

House Democrats that are Hillary Clinton supporters and have "superdelegate" status are refusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's pleas to not overrule the choice of the people, should the final determination be put in their hands.

Recently I wrote a piece here and at Digital Journal that explained what a superdelegate is and gave the quick recap of them and their purpose, to which the bottom line was as follows:

Bottom line here, a super delegate is "check" against the "we the people" voters. Giving the party elites a chance to change the outcome for their party, should they not agree with the "peoples' choice" if a race is close.

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, told reporters before the House went on their Presidents Day recess: “I don’t think it was ever intended that superdelegates would overturn the verdict.”

Today we see that Clinton backers that spoke to The Hill, backers that represent districts that have already voted for Barack Obama, are rejecting that advice from Pelosi and are saying they are "not likely" to change their mind nor their vote should it come down to the 796 superdelegates being the determining factor.

One example named was Representative Diane Watson, a Democrat from California that states, "I am a delegate, I’m a supporter of Hillary, I’m supporting who I’m supporting."

She says this despite the fact that 62 percent of the Democratic voters, in her district, voted for Barack Obama.

Party officials are expressing concern about the excitement shown in record turnouts could "fizzle" if the voters feel their votes won't count.

The Hill reports that almost every Clinton supporter with superdelegate status echoes the attitude of the ones they quote, such as, Representative Shelley Berkley, a Democrat from Nevada who says, "Superdelegates are separate and apart and have minds of their own. I don’t see them as one and the same, so I think they should vote their conscience and if they think one candidate is better than the other they have just as much right [as a regular citizen] to cast their vote."

Despite the claim that Representative Berkley makes in that statement, that superdelegates are not any different that a regular citizen, the truth is they are.

"Regular citizens vote in the primaries and a state has a certain number of delegates that get split up between the candidates according to the Democratic party rules.

Superdelegates are not part of that process and they have a delegate vote of their own, making their vote, not like an ordinary citizen's vote, but far more powerful.

As The Hill explains it:

In many instances, one superdelegate’s vote is equal to the influence of an entire congressional district. For example, Obama won Connecticut’s 3rd district with 52 percent of the vote but captured only one delegate from the victory. Ten-point wins in Wisconsin’s 5th and 6th districts gave Obama only two more delegates than Clinton.

Because of these Clinton superdelegate's insistence on backing Clinton no matter who the voters in their district gave the popular vote to, thereby in some cases negating the voters almost entirely, the party has started discussing reforming the nominating process and perhaps getting rid of superdelegates altogether.

Although the majority of Clinton backers were determined to stand behind her no matter who the people of their district voted for, there were a few that stated that they would represent their constituents no matter what their personal preference was, The Hill reports.

One of which is Representative Ron Kind, a Democrat from Wisconsin who feels "compelled to go along with the majority of his Democratic constituents in the wake of last week’s Wisconsin primary."

If Barack Obama win in Ohio,Texas and Pennsylvania, the superdelegate vote might not end up being the determining factor since Obama has nearly 150 more pledged delegates than Clinton.

But if Clinton wins in Ohio,Texas or Pennsylvania, the superdelegates may just take on the role of "super citizens" in their districts, and have the ability to thwart the will of those that voted them into their respective positions.

If it comes down to a brokered convention, which is when there are not enough delegates obtained during the presidential primary and caucus process for a single candidate to obtain a majority for the presidential nominating convention, then many Democratic voters will be disenfranchised.

Since no candidate will receive enough votes on the first ballot to win the nomination, the convention is brokered through political horse-trading and/or multiple ballots.

Political horse-trading is often called "A Smoke Filled Room", and it is controversial because what happens when a convention is brokered is that there is a secret political gathering or decision-making process to which powerful or well-connected individuals meet privately to nominate a candidate or make some other decision without regard for the will of the public.

The last brokered convention to yield a nominee that went on to win the general election was the Democratic convention in 1932 that nominated Franklin Roosevelt.

In the meantime, Clinton's desperation shows.

.

Hillary Clinton Whines to Huffington Post

The reason Hillary is whining at Huffington Post is because the New York Times refused to publish the campaign response letter to the editor saying that "it was rejected on the grounds that they hold "valuable space" for "ordinary readers."

The letter to the editor was her attempt to whine via the NYT about an article we spoke about here at Wake up America the other day, that said her campaign was deteriorating.....ummmm... even though it is and in a spectacular fashion to boot!

According to a Clinton aide "This letter is a mere 218 words, and signed by 503 people - thirty three times as many people as the story cites, and all of them by name."

Hillary Clinton and her husband always did have a problem with the truth...telling it and admitting to it.

Flashback- The Clinton Legacy:

Number of times that Clinton figures who testified in court or before Congress said that they didn't remember, didn't know, or something similar.

Hillary Clinton 250.
Bill Kennedy 116
Harold Ickes 148
Ricki Seidman 160
Bruce Lindsey 161
Bill Burton 191
Mark Gearan 221
Mack McLarty 233
Neil Egglseston 250
John Podesta 264
Jennifer O'Connor 343
Dwight Holton
348 Patsy Thomasson 420
Jeff Eller 697

Huffington Post adds an update too:

NYT editorial page editor Andy Rosenthal responds, saying he didn't run the letter because it was a thinly disguised "press release." Citing the letter below, TPM's Greg Sargent talks to a Clinton insider about the campaign's apparent new strategy of running against the media.)

So Hillary cries on cue, lies at will, whines when she doesn't get her way, is spiraling downward in the polls while Obama rises against her and she is being called desperate in the media as well as "Down and Out of Touch."



Really sucks to be her these days huh?

.

Gennifer Flowers Auctioning Bill Clinton 'Affair' Tapes

Gennifer Flowers came forward during Bill Clinton's 1992 Presidential election campaign admitting that she had had a twelve-year relationship with him, to which Clinton denied. She is now auctioning intimate tapes she recorded of their conversations.

After Clinton denied the affair with Ms. Flowers, she held a press conference in which she played tape recordings she claimed were of secretly recorded intimate phone calls with Clinton.

Despite Bill Clinton's denials, two Arkansas state police officers who had formerly guarded Bill Clinton when he was Governor backed up Flowers' story. Clinton also apologized to Mario Cuomo for remarks he made about him on the tapes.

In his autobiography My Life, Clinton acknowledged testifying under oath that he had sexual relations with Flowers on one occasion only.(reference)

According to Vegas Confidential, Gennifer Flowers is now putting those tape recordings up on the auction block saying that since there has been a renewed interest in those tapes she has decided to part with them.

She also claims that in 1990 she was offered $5 Million for them by a Japanese collector.

When asked about the timing of this action since Hillary Clinton is in a tight race with Barack Obama, Ms. Flowers says "I don’t need to hurt Hillary. She is doing a fine job of that herself, along with her idiot husband. Karma is an interesting thing. If these two don’t get elected, and they are a team, it will be karma coming back to visit them. It's about time."

The timing can and will be called suspect for another reason and that is because according to her publicist Bruce Merrin, Flowers is exploring a new book with "explosive story additions to the Clinton affair." Additionally he added that this book "will contain a special item which must remain a protected secret until the book is published."

Flowers has already published one book called "Gennifer Flowers: Passion and Betrayal", in 1995 and posed for Penthouse Magazine where she was featured in the December 1992 issue along with her story "Gennifer Flowers Tells All, Shows All".

.

Infanticide In Germany Blamed On Communism

Mothers killing their children in Germany is a monthly occurrence and a state Governor, Wolfgang Böhmer, has caused massive controversy by publicly stating to a German newsmagazine Focus, it "may be the legacy of East Germany's communist rule."

Infanticide is the practice of someone intentionally causing the death of an infant.

Wolfgang Böhmer, the Governor that made that controversial statement, made it in response to recent research that showed that the risk of a baby being killed by its mother (infanticide) is three to four times higher in the east than it is in the west of Germany.

Böhmer further stated in that interview that "Statistics don't necessarily imply a causal link. But the accumulation cannot be denied. I think it can mainly be explained with a more casual approach to new life in eastern Germany."

These statements have caused people to call on Böhmer to resign as governor of the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt.

Today in Germany to obtain an abortion in the 12th week of pregnancy, women are required to receive professional counseling.

"Some came to us in the hospital and just said with a grin 'get rid of it' because they had booked a vacation on the Black Sea coast. That attitude to life has influenced today's attitude. I have the impression that child killings -- and there always been -- are a means of family planning."

Böhmer said "widespread fixation on the state during GDR times had led to the abandonment of individual responsibility."

The problem of infanticide in East Germany has gotten so bad that clinics have installed what they call "hatches" , which are heated boxes with an alarm that goes off when a baby has been deposited into them.

This allows mothers a way to get rid of their children without murdering them.

Wolfgang Böhmer did not say what was politically correct, but he said what was needed to be said and if his words and obvious observations are causing him this much flack, the Germany has not come as far as they think they have.

The article cites an example of one tragic case where a mother killed eight of her children and was found guilty of manslaughter back in 2006 for those killings.

The prosecutors wanted to charge her with murder but she claimed she was so drunk when each child was born, between 1988 and 1998, that she could not remember what had happened to them.

Those eight babies were found the summer before, in her parents' garden shed, buried in plant pots, an aquarium and an old bathtub.

That woman, Sabine Hilschenz, was sentenced to 15 years.

For more information on infanticide, Dr. Larry S. Milner, in 1998, wrote an article for The Society for the Prevention of Infanticide, which deals with history of infanticide throughout the centuries in many cultures and for a variety of reasons.

.

Antiwar Democrats Flailing-- Show Voting

"Show Voting"- Political bills that have no chance of passing, simply held as a public show.

With the recent good news from Iraq that even the NYT rag was forced to start reporting, and the political progress that has occurred over the last few months in Iraq, it is political suicide for the Democratic politicians to continue to try to force America to surrender in a battle that we are undoubtedly, finally winning.

Just to show readers how badly the Democratic politicians are reading the "public" by pandering to their far left extremists base, the latest CNN/Opinion Poll, conducted in February, asks this question:

"In general, do you think the U.S. military is or is not making progress in improving conditions in Iraq and bringing an end to the violence in that country?"

52% of the respondents said is, the U.S. military IS making progress and improving conditions in Iraq and bringing an end to violence in that country.

45% said is not.

Compare that to the same questions asked on 8/6-8/07 and you see that 49% had said is not and 47% said is.

The American public is seeing the progress and noticing it.... the Democratic politicians are also, but have allowed themselves to be owned by the far far left so they have to pander to them.

The Democratic politicians have a problem though, the anti-war base that they have pandered to for so long is demanding payment for their support and in what will be the fifth failed attempt at cutting off funds for American troops to withdraw in 120 days, the Democratic politicians will hold a vote today, Tuesday on a pair of bills by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) that would yank the military’s funding in Iraq in 120 days.

The reason I say failed attempt?

Because they already admit, before holding the vote, that it will fail.

Once again spending time and our taxpayer monies on a vote that has no chance, which they admit, to actually pass and become law. THAT is a "Show Vote".

Despite the unpopularity of the war, the votes will give Republicans and their presumptive nominee, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the opportunity to accuse Senate Democrats of trying to choke off funding when there are signs of military progress in Baghdad. McCain is making his support for the war a centerpiece of his presidential platform heading into November.

The withdrawal measure is certain to fail Tuesday, and would mark the fifth time it has been rejected by the Senate in the 110th Congress.

The hesitation in talking about Iraq marks a dramatic shift from last year, when Democrats held continual Iraq votes to put pressure on centrist Republicans to distance themselves from President Bush’s sagging popularity and back troops withdrawals.

The whole thing is nothing more than a "show vote", putting on a show, albeit a short one, for their Code Pink and MoveOn base to keep them happy and to offer a "claim" that they are still trying to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

It is a pathetic attempt and knowing it will fail they are already planning to take the vote and as quickly as possible to move on to the economy.

Even though Democrats are not shy about pointing to March 19, the five-year anniversary of the start of the war, they are not eager about holding this week’s votes on Iraq because they know they could be used by Republicans looking for more ammunition against their candidates, aides say. As soon as the votes end, the chamber will immediately turn to a bill aimed at easing the housing crunch, which — unlike the Iraq measures — Democrats plan to talk about at length this week, including after their policy luncheon Tuesday afternoon.

As the article in the AP points out, the Democrats are flailing and as they put it, "deliberating their next step in trying to rebuild anti-war momentum."

In there lies the problem.

Only the hardcore, bury their heads in the sand, Code Pink/MoveOn diehards, still obsess over the war in Iraq, but since reports have consistently shown amazing political and military progress in Iraq, the moderates, the blue dogs, the independents and the conservatives are all aware of the progress and the anti-war Democratic politicians feel the need to "rebuild anti-war momentum".

Another reason for this bill coming up and to be voted on before moving on to do their actual jobs, would be paying off a bribe or two.

According to aides, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who co-sponsored Feingold's proposal, agreed to stage Tuesday's vote in exchange for Feingold's earlier support of a defense policy bill. The measure is expected to fall short of the 60 votes needed to pass.

So, Reid bribed Feingold to get him to vote on the defense policy bill and is more than willing to have a "show vote" to pay off that bribe.

Thats our Democratic politicians, never letting us down in regards to showing us exactly how corrupt and incompetent they really are!!!

So, they will hold their "show vote", it will fail as they already knew before holding it that it would, and they move on to another strategy.

I will bring you the roll call of how badly they failed as soon as they hold the vote and it is put online.

(Hat tip to A Newt One)

.