Halloween is that special time of year when we celebrate our ancient and irrational fears –zombies, vampires, werewolves, monsters, ghosts and the undead. At least that’s what it was before Hollywood turned it into a holiday to glorify murder, gore, torture, sadism and the other sadly mundane evils of mankind.

I greatly prefer the Halloween of my youth — a nice combination of a children’s carnival and a good ghost story. But in the spirit of the modern perversion of Halloween, let’s take a moment to focus on one of the scarier possibilities of human evil — Hillary Clinton becoming the next President of the United States just 12 months from now.

President Hillary offers us a true nightmare scenario — the return of the Clinton administration’s rogue’s gallery of bad characters and steady triangulation leftward, without any of the personal skills of Bill Clinton. Nope, this is going to be bad policy, bad personnel and bad personality all at once.

Now that’s scary. That’s the coming prospect of “Hill-o-ween” — a 4 to 8 year curse filled with a host of political poltergeists and technocratic terrors. Here are just a few of Hillary’s haunts and horrors to consider this coming fright night…

Dr. Federal-stein — The government, the same people that brought you the DMV, the tax code and have been responsible for the rapid technological advancement of the school bus, will now be in charge of your health care in the name “universal coverage” and reform. What happened to “keep your laws off my body” — or is that just a cry of freedom for those wanting an abortion? Unable to take control of the health care system in one fell swoop back in the Clinton’s first reign in 1992, Hillary now has her sights set on piecemeal creep of central control in the health care sector.

Health care is expensive, so Hillary proposes to have that noted efficiency expert, Congress, get more involved. Innovation is needed, so Hillary will have that noted catalyst to change, bureaucracy, whip things into shape (just as soon as your paperwork is approved by the central processing facility.) And patients need their rights respected, so Hillary wants to turn things over to that great protector of civil liberties and individual needs, the State Monopoly. Frightening.

Miss Judge — Hillary has, by many accounts, already made one appointment to the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsberg. An ACLU radical now sits on the highest court in the land for life, attempting to issue law from the bench. It is only a wobbly 5-4 conservative/moderate majority that stops this from occurring constantly. With a President Clinton, part 2, we will get a Ruth Bader Ginsberg, part 2 and probably part 3. Bye, bye, rule of law. Hello rule of lawyers. Terrifying.

Night of The Longstockings — Sandy “The Sanitizer” Berger (AKA the Pant-a-loon AKA Bill’s Sock Puppet AKA Redactula) plead guilty to stealing classified documents from the national archives, the purpose of which had to be to hide from the 9/11 Commission some unknown embarrassment to the Clintons. The man actually admits using his special access as a member of the Clinton administration to enter the national archives, then stuff secret government records into his socks and pants and smuggle them out for destruction. Not only is Berger corrupt and nefarious, but he is incompetent — archive employees witnessed some his bungled thefts and alerted authorities.

Hillary Clinton announced just two weeks ago that Sandy Berger has been rehabilitated and is now a national security advisor to Clinton’s campaign. If there was any doubt who Berger was protecting when he stole and destroyed evidence, it was removed by this appointment. When John Kerry found out what Berger was accused of doing, he fired him as an advisor from his campaign. Now that he’s pled guilty, Hillary wants to get him back into the White House with a new security clearance. Horrifying.

The Undead Amnesty for the “Undocumented” — Much like Sandy The Sanitizer, there are 12-20 million illegal aliens in the country that just can’t seem to find what they did with those darned documents, and Hillary has a job for them too — voting for her as soon as possible. Unlike dimmer politicians, such as George Bush, the Clintons realize that unskilled, uneducated, unassimilated law-breakers are a core constituency for the Democrat party. That’s why they arranged for mass swearing-in ceremonies for aspiring citizens before the 1996 and 2000 elections — without a lot of regard for little things like eligibility and criminal records. If you think Bush pushed hard for amnesty, wait for the Clinton’s to get a second shot at it — or just elect John McCain for that matter. Chilling.

Hillary’s Foreign Legion (of illegal donors) — Whether it’s giant donations from Chinese busboy strawmen, a Pakistani businessman on the run from the FBI, officers of foreign corporations, or Buddhist monks who may have taken a vow of poverty but can all write big checks on the same day for the same candidate, the Clinton/Gore/Clinton fundraising machinery always seems to be returning illegal foreign donations they accidentally accepted — or at least accidentally got caught accepting. But don’t worry, I’m sure the unknown sources of all these laundered donations have America’s best interests at heart and do not expect anything in return for the money. Spooky.

Read the rest of this entry »

Last night’s Democratic presidential debate in Philadelphia proved Hillary Clinton’s vulnerability. Will she be the candidate to beat in the 2008 presidential election or will her bad showing last night leave her vulnerable not only in the general election but in the primaries as well?  

Not that any of the others did better. Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich was asked in the closing minutes about actress Shirley McLain’s book in which she says that Kucinich had a UFO encounter which affected him deeply.  Nothing more need be said about Kucinich’s night on the podium than he confirmed what McLain’s book says.  Clinton sighted no UFOs, but her claim that Republicans are obsessed with her was on the Kucinich plane.

A significant portion of the first hour was given to discussion of Iran and the recent Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, which endorses presidential action to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Force a terrorist organization. Clinton, the only candidate who voted for the amendment, was blasted by almost all the others on the grounds that she was endorsing the Bush administration’s supposed path to war with Iran. 

Clinton argued that her vote was nothing more than “expression of support for economic sanctions” as a part of “vigorous diplomacy” that will “stop George Bush and the Republicans from doing something on their own to take offensive military action against Iran.”

John Edwards called it "saber rattling" and others followed his lead. Edwards claimed the measure was “literally written in the language of the neo-cons” and would “enable this President to do exactly what He wants to do.”

Chris Dodd asserted it was a step towards war while Kucinich used his answer period to recommend impeachment of President Bush – the first of two occasions he would do so.

Barack Obama was in weak form, calling himself a “uniter” who can “get people to work together to get things together even when they disagree.” He said the last six years have been “governed by a fear” and because of that, civil liberties have been undermined and America’s reputation has been tarnished worldwide. He spoke extensively of diplomacy and said as President he would arrange a meeting of Muslim leaders to show “we are willing to listen.”

Joe Biden said the resolution “emboldened” President Bush and scolded Bush’s
talk of world war three.” He said that even if America’s stops now with the resolution, “actions have consequences…big nations can’t bluff.”

Read the rest of this entry »

PS: Last night, I suffered through another hideous Democratic debate which featured 2 hours of socialists talking about how rotten everything is in this country, followed by each of them blaming every bad thing that’s happening on Bush — and then they all promised to fix each problem with either massive new spending, a huge increase in government power, or some combination thereof.

After the debate, I took a little tour around the National Review blogs and was absolutely amazed to find them saying that Hillary won the debate. In my opinion, she delivered the single worst performance of any top tier candidate, on either side, so far this year.

What happened time and time again throughout the debate was that Tim Russert would ask Hillary a question, she would parse her answer to lead you in a certain direction, but leave herself enough wiggle room to do a 180 on the subject if the polls change, and then Russert would call her on it.

After watching her performance, you couldn’t help but think back to Bill Clinton saying, "It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is," during his grand jury testimony and think, "that’s exactly what she’d be like." Maybe political junkies are impressed with her deceptive wording, but it’s hard to imagine any ordinary person, conservative, liberal, or moderate, watching Hillary’s performance last night and thinking, "That’s what I want in a President."

So, huge, huge, loser: Hillary. The winner? I’m going to say Obama with Edwards and Richardson close behind, but I’m not sure that anyone came out of that debate looking better than they did going in.

PS #2: Here’s Hillary’s "all over the place" answer on driver’s licenses for illegal aliens,

Great post by John Hawkins at Right Wing News and Conservative Grapevine - visit these sites daily!

When Russert is asking his question in the beginning of this clip can’t you just see Hillary going through a laundry list something like this:

Ft. Marcy Park?
Suicide without a note?
Single Car Accident?
Does he fly often?
Falling asleep on the train tracks?
Dying due to not being able to get to his medicine?
Drowning?
Hmm death by Secret Service Agent???

It’s too soon to characterize Hillary’s Dervish-like spin on licenses for illegal aliens as the end of her campaign, but it’s certainly the end of her comfortable ride in the campaign. After last night’s debate, HRC advisor Mark Penn found himself surrounded by reporters who asked him to revise and extend, or at least make sense of, Hillary’s yes-no-maybe-I don’t know answer to whether illegals ought to be able to get drivers licenses. Penn doesn’t answer the question any better than his boss did. He did attempt the one foolproof gambit: Blame Bush! Even that doesn’t work.

The problems with Blame Bush! are that
a) Bush’s stance isn’t the GOP’s stance,
b) Hillary herself agreed with Bush’s stance, and
c) it’s unpopular with the American people.

So is the Spitzer plan. Clinton and her campaign can’t answer the question satisfactorily because it requires taking a principled stand on an issue that divides Democrat interest groups, and that divides some of those groups from the majority of the American voters. Like Spitzer, Clinton may soon find herself feeling the wrath of just about everyone.

Which is fine with me.

Source: Hot Air

The story has taken on a life of its own. As evidence of Hillary’s campaign finance skulduggery continues to surface — from fugitive Norman Hsu to scores of impoverished Chinese dishwashers — the stink of her original Senate campaign still remains.

Financier Peter Paul’s Hollywood fundraising gala cost — by some accounts — nearly 1.5 million dollars to benefit Hillary’s 2000 Senate run. Hillary’s campaign has allegedly underreported it or misreported ever since. In fact, her campaign manager, David Rosen, was indicted in 2005 for filing false reports with the Federal Election Commission.

Election law experts have termed this event — and Hillary’s 2000 Senate run — "the largest election law fraud in history."

Read more here at Doug Ross @ Journal

Right out of her playbook, if the boys touch me - cry loud because she’s a victim.

Never mind that Hillary plays dirty by using the skills taught to her by Saul Alansky

All this show is that the liberal media has never really pushed hard questions on Queen Hillary - now that she is feeling some pressure - she is crying foul.

I’m sure this strategy will work really well with this countries enemies.

A major sex scandal story involving one of the leading presidential candidates is believed to be soon published by the LA Times, Big Head DC has learned. Details are slowly trickling in through people who’ve heard about the story, and with Larry Flynt saying he’s set to reveal a “huge” sex scandal story involving a sitting senator in the coming days, the rumors seem to be gathering traction.

“So I was down in DC this past weekend and happened to run into a well-connected media person, who told me flatly, unequivocally that ‘everyone knows’ the LA Times was sitting on a story, all wrapped up and ready to go about what is a potentially devastating sexual scandal involving a leading presidential candidate,” reports Pajamas Media’s Ron Rosenbaum. “‘Everyone knows’ meaning everyone in the DC mainstream media political reporting world. ‘Sitting on it’ because the paper couldn’t decide the complex ethics of whether and when to run it. The way I heard it they’d had it for a while but don’t know what to do. The person who told me is not an LAT person and knows I write and didn’t say ‘don’t write about this.’”

Several commenters on Rosenbaum’s article strongly believe that Hillary Clinton will ultimately be revealed as a lesbian, and that the recent GQ story her campaign helped kill by threatening to withhold a Bill Clinton interview may have gone into some shocking details into her sex life.Rumors of a close Hillary relationship with one of her top aides Huma Abedin, shown above, have long been swirling. Hillary has long denied being a lesbian.

Earlier: Lesbian Rumors Getting Under Hillary’s Skin

Also: Halloween, Hillary, Huma and Hidden Sex Affair Story

Source: Big Head DC

By: Amanda Carpenter 

The usual flood of editorials and blog posts after a major presidential debate were particularly harsh on Hillary Clinton this morning following Tuesday night’s Democratic debate at Drexel University.

Opinion leaders said her performance reinforced negative stereotypes that Clinton is shrill, calculating and evasive.

Here’s a round up of what some of those opinion leaders are saying:

Mark Halperin, Time Magazine - [She] fell off the tough-shrill balance beam onto the "shrill" side — with a THUD. More defensive than usual, and at times too political and too hot tempered. Borderline disastrous moment at the end when she gave an equivocal answer about drivers licenses for illegal immigrants in New York; it opened the door for her opponents to pounce by turning it into a character issue — and pounce they did. The failure of her performance was cumulative, however, so only those watching the whole debate would see how weak her evening was. If she loses the nomination, tonight will go down in history as the first step to her defeat — no fatal "Dean Scream" catastrophe, but far from her finest moment, to say the least.

Nedra Pickler, Associated Press -Gone was the Clinton who laughed off their answers and joked about how she’s lucky to be getting so much attention from all these men at her age. Clinton clearly had decided she must defend herself from rivals who are right on her heels in the leadoff voting state of Iowa and who pose a real threat to her winning the Democratic nomination. Still, she continued her strategy of avoiding direct answers to questions: She wouldn’t say how she would address Social Security; she declined to pledge whether she would stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, or say whether she supports giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrant. Instead she tried to tried to turn every issue into an argument against President Bush. She said Bush’s name 25 times, more than all six of her rivals combined.

David Yepsen, Des Moines Register - Near the end of the event, she stumbled on a simple question of whether she supported or opposed a plan by New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer to give drivers’ licenses to undocumented immigrants. Clinton danced around the question, clearly didn’t answer it, and is now likely to see clips of that meandering response show up in attack ads for the rest of the 2008 race. Clinton’s performance will do little to excite her supporters and nothing to quiet the reservations many Democrats have about the senator from New York.

Read the rest of this entry »