The Clinton political machine has changed its tune, literally. Last summer, with much fanfare, Hillary Clinton ran a contest to select her official campaign song. The hype became a major Hillary campaign event, including Hillary and Bill Clinton appearing in a YouTube video mimicking the Sopranos, as they await the results of the song contest. The winner of the Hillary songfest, we were all told, was “You and I,” sung by Celine Dion.

Now we are told by ABC News that Hillaryland has dropped this supposed winner as its official campaign song. The Clinton campaign would not answer ABC’s questions regarding the reason for using a different song, as the Iowa caucus race enters the home stretch.

What is the significance of this switch? If Hillary Clinton can be expedient in substituting a campaign song, ignoring the results of her own pick-a-song contest, how can the American people expect her to hold to any principles on more lofty matters as their president? Well, there is one principle Hillary Clinton is consistent on. She will say anything, change anything, and sing any song if it gets her the maximum political power that she has craved for so long.

Heaven help the American people if Hillary Clinton is elected the nation’s 44th president, because in that eventuality, we will all be singing the blues.

Sheldon Filger, Author
Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America’s Demise
www.hillary-clinton-nude.com

With exactly one month to go before the first votes in selecting America’s 44th president are cast, the next few weeks will be most instructive-for Republicans. They will get a sneak preview of how Hillary Clinton wages political warfare against her enemies. Right now, the target is Barack Obama, but this is merely a practice run for the Clinton political machine’s all-out assault that will be directed at the eventual Republican presidential nominee.

Having maneuvered Obama into attacking her, Hillary Clinton is now going after her nemesis, with both guns blazing. Hillary Clinton is now unleashing a preliminary barrage, attacking the very character of Obama. In the process, Senator Clinton is honing the techniques of jungle warfare she intends to unfurl at the GOP.

Many Republicans believe Hillary Clinton will be easy to defeat, due to all her negatives. Supposedly, the Republican attack ads are already in the can. What the GOP must plug into their calculations is that the Clinton political machine is expecting their attacks, in fact desires them. They will then be free to orchestrate their own version of political demolition derby.

Watch what Hillary Clinton does to Obama during the next several weeks. It is a Hillaryland training mission for the intense negativity they are dying to dump on the Republicans.

Sheldon Filger, Author
Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America’s Demise
www.hillary-clinton-nude.com

I’m becoming increasingly concerned about the stridency and inaccuracy of charges in Iowa — especially coming from my old friend. While I’m as hard-boiled as they come about what’s said in campaigns, I just don’t think Dems should stoop to this. First, HRC attacked O’s plan for keep Social Security solvent. Social Security doesn’t need a whole lot to keep it going – it’s in far better shape than Medicare – but everyone who’s looked at it agrees it will need bolstering (I was a trustee of the Social Security Trust Fund ten years ago, and I can vouch for this). Obama wants to do it by lifting the cap on the percent of income subject to Social Security payroll taxes, which strikes me as sensible. That cap is now close to $98,000 (it’s indexed), and the result is highly regressive. (Bill Gates satisfies his yearly Social Security obligations a few minutes past midnight on January 1 every year.) The cap doesn’t have to be lifted all that much to keep Social Security solvent – maybe to $115,00. That’s a progressive solution to the problem. HRC wants to refer Social Security to a commission. That’s avoiding the issue, and it’s irresponsible: A commission will likely call either for raising the retirement age (that’s what Greenspan’s Social Security commission came up with in the 1980s) or increasing the payroll tax on all Americans. So when HRC charges that Obama’s plan would “raise taxes” and her plan wouldn’t, she’s simply not telling the truth.

I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s. That’s because Obama’s puts more money up front and contains sufficient subsidies to insure everyone who’s likely to need help – including all children and young adults up to 25 years old. Hers requires that everyone insure themselves. Yet we know from experience with mandated auto insurance – and we’re learning from what’s happening in Massachusetts where health insurance is now being mandated – that mandates still leave out a lot of people at the lower end who can’t afford to insure themselves even when they’re required to do so. HRC doesn’t indicate how she’d enforce her mandate, and I can’t find enough money in HRC’s plan to help all those who won’t be able to afford to buy it. I’m also impressed by the up-front investments in information technology in O’s plan, and the reinsurance mechanism for coping with the costs of catastrophic illness. HRC is far less specific on both counts. In short: They’re both advances, but O’s is the better of the two. HRC has no grounds for alleging that O’s would leave out 15 million people.

Read the rest of this entry »

One of the most notorious liars in politics is Bill Clinton, former president and (unfaithful) husband of Senator Hillary Clinton. It seems Bill Clinton just can’t change old habits. He recently announced that he had always opposed the Iraq war. Unfortunately, as with his earlier claim about “not having sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky,” the evidence of his contradiction soon emerged. Video and other material has surfaced that plainly shows that Bill Clinton was originally in support of George Bush’s policies on Iraq, including the invasion. Hillary Clinton’s husband even wrote an op-ed piece for a British newspaper applauding Tony Blair for standing with George Bush on Iraq.

Hillary Clinton’s main claim for being “exceptionally” qualified for the presidency is that she leaned everything one must know while being at Bill Clinton’s side. Perhaps Hillary Clinton learned the art of contradiction, though possibly in a more nuanced manner than President Bill Clinton.

Sheldon Filger, Author
HILLARY CLINTON NUDE

Hillaryland is at war with Obama-mania. Even the body language of the two candidates, as viewed at the last Democratic candidate’s debate, reveals growing hostility. While Barack Obama’s supporters are cheering his increasingly frosty demeanor towards Hillary Clinton, they seem unmindful that this is exactly what the Clinton political machine has wanted to occur. From day one, Hillary has been enticing Obama to abandon his “politics of hope,” so he can be positioned as just another politician. Now that this goal has been largely accomplished, Hillary Clinton is now waging war on issues pivotal to the Democratic electorate.

The leading domestic issue in the emerging Democratic primaries is health care. Hillary Clinton recently attacked a campaign television ad Obama ran on his universal health care plan, demanding it be withdrawn. Normally, a candidate will only demand this of an opponent if he or she has been attacked. However, the Obama ad in question does not attack Hillary Clinton, or even refer to her. So why is Senator Clinton making a fuss about having the ad withdrawn? According to Saint Hillary, the ad falsely claims Obama’s health care plan would provide universal health coverage. Hillary Clinton, the supposed apostle of truth, claims Obama’s television ad in misleading and untruthful. This missile launched from the Clinton political machine is followed by Paul Krugmans’s column in The New York Times, attacking Barack Obama on health care on the same lines as Hillary Clinton.

It appears as the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary loom closer, the Hillary Clinton campaign is going to go out of its way to undercut Obama on the leading domestic issue. In the meantime, Obama’s original opposition to the Iraq war is forgotten, as with Hillary Clinton originally voting in favor of the war. Another example of the Clinton political machine at work.

Sheldon Filger, Author
www.hillaryclintonnude.com
Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America’s Demise

A man is holding two people hostage at the presidential campaign office for Sen. Hillary Clinton in Rochester, New Hampshire.

The man walked into the office with some sort of device strapped to him, claiming it was a bomb just before noon.

WBZ Radio spoke with the man’s son, who said his father had been drinking for two days. The son said his father had strapped two road flares to his chest and told his son Friday morning "to watch the news."

State Police said the man released a mother and a child from the office, moments after he entered. Another woman was released around 3 p.m. It’s believed there are now two hostages left inside.

Earlier, a young woman carrying an infant ran into a nearby store in tears, saying she had been in the campaign office when a man walked in, opened his coat and showed them what looked like a bomb strapped to his chest with duct tape. She said the man let her and her child go.

There are reports from the scene that the hostage taker is demanding to speak with Senator Clinton.

Read the rest of this entry »

Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America’s Demise

Hope everyone had a GREAT Thanksgiving weekend - visiting friends and family.

Playing catch up here - Weekend Round up links

SEC Opens Investigation of Company Headed by Key Supporter of Clintons

Hillary criticized for press strategy

Mrs. Clinton’s Real Campaign Weakness

Why Hillary Will Never Answer a Follow-Up on Guns

Hillary (Potty Mouth) Clinton For President?

Hillary On The U.S. Economy: What Does She Really Think?

The Experience Argument

President Bush Supports Hillary Clinton?

America hates Hillary Clinton and Co

The First Ladies’ Club: Mme Chirac backs Hillary

The Democrats’ ethical midgets

How Big Man In McAllen Bundles Big For Clinton

Hillary Clinton has only herself to blame

Is Hillary Clinton the Most Qualified?

CLINTON NEWS NETWORK

Snarls, smears and innuendo as attack dogs get ready for the fray - (HUMA)

Stumping for wife, Clinton can help, or hurt, anybody

Hillary Clinton continues to bash chief Democrat opponent Barack Obama for his inexperience. This tactic not only diminishes Obama, it also deflects voters from scrutinizing Hillary’s own lack of relevant experience. Ironically, her campaign is based on bringing about “change through experience.”

The massive Clinton public relations machine is seeking to convince the American public that Hillary Rodham Clinton is the epitome of presidential experience. Yet, objective scrutiny shows Senator Clinton as being experienced and highly competent in only one area: playing the nepotism card.

Hillary Clinton may not have made it to senior partner of her law firm without being married to then Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton. Ditto for the special help she received from the leading outside counsel of a major corporation that benefited from Governor Clinton’s policy, which contributed to Hillary receiving a $100,000 windfall in commodity trading on an investment of a mere thousand bucks.

From Arkansas to the White House, Hillary Clinton used her marriage and Clinton name to crate a national political image. Yet, despite her campaign rhetoric, there is not a single major accomplishment that occurred during her husband’s presidency that she can legitimately take credit for. However, she does get points for her clever attempt to cover-up Bill Clinton’s lies about Monica Lewinsky by falsely blaming conservative Americans through her diatribe about a “Vast right-wing conspiracy.”

Without being Mrs. Clinton, Hillary would never have stood a chance of being elected Senator from New York. And without all of the above, there would never be a Hillary presidential campaign.

Read the rest of this entry »

By: Joan Swirsky 

When I was studying to become a nurse in the late 1960s, I learned that the most important value in patient care, for both nurses and doctors, was safety. Not curing, which is often impossible, and not even empathy, although a high priority. That is because the patient who falls out of bed, or is given the wrong dose of medicine, or whose grievance is ignored, may pay with nothing less than his or her life.

As a mother of three, I already knew this – that all the love and support and education in the world meant nothing in comparison to keeping my young children safe: away from unprotected outlets, sharp table corners, a hot stove, automobile traffic, people with contagious diseases, and of course bad values.

Hillary’s Consistent Flip-Flops on Iraq

Does the date October 10, 2002, ring a bell? That was the date of the Iraq War Resolution, which Hillary voted for – without uttering a single syllable of reservation. In fact, in voting for President Bush’s initiative, she cited her husband’s invasion of Iraq and the “known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites” of Saddam Hussein as well as his “aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members." The over-400 cruise missiles the former president dropped on suspected WMD sites in Iraq must have been fresh in her memory.

But today, as she veers far left, the smartest woman in the world claims, disingenuously, to have been “mislead.” She does this to please – read, pander to – the anti-American branch of her party that is funded by George Soros and features such national embarrassments as Code Pink, Senate Majority leader Harry “the war is lost” Reid, House Majority leader Nancy "Iraq is not the war on terror" Pelosi, Sen. Dick Durbin (who compared our troops to Nazis), and the rest of this sorry lot.

Does the date January 26, 2007, ring a bell? That is the date that Hillary voted to confirm General David Petraeus to lead the surge in Iraq, again without even a token expression of doubt. Apparently this date is lost on Hillary’s conveniently sieve-like memory.

Read the rest of this entry »