4 posts tagged “democrat”

Evidently Hillary has been receiving donations from illegal aliens of the China-Town kind. She has sent back the high profile (i.e. big) donations if there a connection can be made to Asian barely speaking English political donors.

 

Apparently the media has been exposing the potential illegal donations to Hillary’s campaign. Hence Asian minority rights groups are beginning to clamor that to much attention has been focused by the media on minority Asian donors.

 

It is incredible! The racial card is being played to get scrutiny off of Hillary’s dubious campaign fund raising.

 

Here is something to think about. Democratic Presidential candidates are coming to Republican dominated States and raising funds for their national campaigns.

 

Here is the thought you supposed to contemplate: Candidates like Hillary Clinton are coming to States (in my case Oklahoma) that there is no chance of winning that State’s Electoral Votes.

 

JRH

***************************

The Hillary Factor

Gary Jones
Chairman, OK GOP
June 18, 2007 Email
OK GOP Website

It's June 18th, and this is my first post on Hillary Clinton. Something tells me it won't be my last.

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was in Oklahoma City last week for a fundraising reception where she took in over $282,000. That is a lot of money for a candidate with little to no shot of turning Oklahoma into a blue state in 2008.

 

That said, Republicans should be on notice. The Clintons have a well-oiled political machine that will stop at nothing in their pursuit of wealth and power.

 

It's hard to trust a candidate who said, "I can support the President, I can support an action against Saddam Hussein because I think it's in the long-term interests of our national security …" and then just a few years later votes against additional funds for our troops in Iraq. Even Democrats have questioned her vote. Sen. Biden said recently that Senator Clinton’s "no" vote "absolutely, positively, unquestionably" could have put U.S. troops at additional risk.

This is just one of many political votes Hillary has made in the Senate. She trusts polls, not the pulse of the American people. She's certainly out of touch with conservative Oklahoma voters on a number of issues, from abortion to socialized healthcare.

While Hillary Clinton may come to Oklahoma to fill her pockets with campaign contributions from the likes of Mike Turpin, she stands little chance of getting what really matters: the votes of the majority of Oklahomans come November 2008.

The Oklahoma Republican Party
4031 North Lincoln Blvd. | Oklahoma City, OK 73105
Not Authorized By Any Candidate Or Candidate Committee
© 2007 Oklahoma Republican Party

 

Here is something from the Patriot Post written by Mark Alexander about Hillary Clinton. This is something every Conservative Republican should read. For that matter if there are truly any moderate Democrats out there, they should be aware of fringe Left Hillary’s plan for America.

 

 

Below is just an excerpt of the Hillary exposé on the June first Patriot Post. There are many more nuggets of Conservative tidbits you would be interested in.

 

 

JRH

*********************************

 

Hilrya Rodhamovich Clintonov’s economic plan

 

Mark Alexander

The Patriot Post
Patriot Post Vol. 07 No. 22 | 1 June 2007

 

Demo-gogue presidential candidate

Hillary Clinton gave a little-noticed stump speech this week that should’ve sent up countless red flags.

 

By now, all of us know about Clinton’s re-warmed plans for socializing medicine, regulating healthcare services and providers and centralizing government control of about ten percent of the U.S. economy.

 

 

This week, however, Clinton went national with her classist “it takes a village” model, claiming that free-enterprise Capitalism is the root of all evil.

 

In a speech on “shared prosperity,” she proclaimed that it’s time to replace the conservative notion of an “ownership society” and economy with one based on communal responsibility and prosperity, alleging that the current system is really an “on your own” society that increases the income gap between “poor” and “rich” Americans.

 

Now, if Clinton is implying that individual initiative, self-reliance, responsibility and ingenuity—the very foundation of free enterprise—are the keys to creating wealth, then she is right. If she is implying that dependence upon the state and redistribution of income creates poverty, then she is right here, too—but that was not her message.

 

“I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together’ society,” she went on. “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.”

 

In a quintessential example of Clintonista doublespeak, Hillary outlined her economic fairness doctrine: “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. Fairness doesn’t just happen. It requires the right government policies.”

 

So, according to Ms. Clinton, free markets work best when they’re constrained by the right government policies. In other words, free markets work best when they’re not free.

 

Apparently Hillary has also been smoking Fidel’s hand-rolled cigars. How else are we to account for her failure to recall that centralized economies, like that of the former Soviet Union, are doomed to fail and have cost millions of lives along the way?

 

 

Of course, Clinton’s allusion to “rules” is Demo-code for taxation, which, as we know, is often the forcible transfer of wealth from one group to another. This taxation, in turn, creates reliable political constituencies for Democrats. As George Bernard Shaw once noted, “A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.”

 

Clinton’s economic plan is nothing more than a contemporary remake of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s class-warfare proclamation: “Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.”

 

In fact, Roosevelt’s “principle” was no more American than Clinton’s. It was a paraphrase of Karl Marx’s Communist maxim, “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”

 

Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev said of Roosevelt’s “New Deal” paradigm shift, “We can’t expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism.”

 

Echoing that sentiment was perennial Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas (the grandfather, incidentally, of Newsweek Assistant Managing Editor Evan Thomas): “The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

 

No irony was spared in another interview this week, when Hillary Clinton was asked about the enormous wealth that she and Bill have amassed since their co-presidency. Clinton replied, “My husband and I never had any money. Now suddenly we’re rich. I have nothing against rich people.”

 

“Never had any money”? Spare me. She and Bill were long ago cashing in on commodity futures and real-estate deals. Still, the wealth they have accumulated in recent years must make those good ol’ days seem Spartan by comparison.

 

Hillary claims that if elected, she will “hit the restart button on the 21st century and redo it the right way.” I checked, and the Clintons were in the White House the first year of the 21st Century. Did they push the wrong button then?

 

Only when the Clintons voluntarily surrender for redistribution all their assets to the U.S. Treasury will I then consider her economic views with at least the sincerity afforded one who is not a complete hypocrite. In the eternal interim, her Socialist “we’re all in it together” claptrap should be considered a perilous hazard to prosperity for all.

 

ABOUT: America's most widely read Internet-based publication, The Patriot Post, is a

highly acclaimed journal advocating individual liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values.

 

The Patriot Post is crafted by a

national editorial team headed by Mark Alexander and serves as a hard-hitting rebuttal to contemporary political, social and mainstream media protagonists on the Left. It is written for those who seek a brief, informative and entertaining analysis of the week's most significant news, policy and opinion. This comprehensive synopsis of reliable information is drawn from reputable media, research and advocacy organizations and published in three parts each week: Monday's Patriot Brief, Wednesday's Patriot Chronicle and Friday's Patriot Digest.

 

The Patriot Post's readers include high-level policymakers in the executive and legislative branches, leaders in state and local government, key thinkers in the community of conservative research and academic policy organizations, and, most important, ...MORE

 

The Patriot is a publication of Publius Press, Inc. Copyright

© 1981-2007 Publius Press, Inc.

 

 

 

I wonder what kind of (Democrat) lie Murtha told his constituents to keep them voting for him after the ABSCAM scandal showed he was prepared to take bribes from (pretending) foreign Arabs?

 

Ann Coulter wonders as well HERE.

 

Is Murtha the Prince of cut-n-run because of current Arab influence?