White old hags for Hillary lose their mouth piece, Geraldine Ferraro quits

After defending herself for racist statements she made against Obama for a 24-hour news cycle, Geraldine Ferraro (the Democrat’s nominated VP from about 30 years ago), has stepped down from her position on Clinton’s finance committee. Is she, like Elliot Spitzer another Democrat super delegate? The mass media should look into that. But will they? Nah.

Yesterday, Ms. Ferraro stated that Obama would not be where he is today if he were not Black.

Opsie, that was racisit. The news is out. The Democrat party only wanted African-Americans to vote, not actually run for high office.

Would Hillary Rodham Clinton be where she is today, had she not been married to Bill Clinton?

Would the 61 year old be criss-crossing the nation in smelly pantsuits today without Bill Clinton?

And Ross Perot. If it were not for the angry old man, Perot, Bill Clinton would be an Arkansas lawyer in Little Rock, about as important today as Geraldine. And Hillary would probably be divorced and living with “a friend” in San Francisco.

The year 2008, 150 years after the Civil War, the Democrat party is exposed for the racists they have always been. Blacks are to be “cared for” by thier white masters. Isn’t that it? Where did Obama get the idea that he was to be president? The vice president slot was his for the reward of staying on “the plantation.”

Now we know that the white leaders of the Democrat party, you know them, abortion activisits, big on lawsuits with all the money going to the attorneys.

African-Americans, do you know that Planned Parenthood has been targeting black neighborhoods to encourge the abortion of black babies?

Planned Parenthood of Idaho officials apologized Wednesday for what they called an employee’s “serious mistake” in encouraging a donation aimed at aborting black babies.
They also criticized The Advocate, a right-to-life student magazine at the University of California-Los Angeles, for trying to discredit Planned Parenthood employees in seven states in a series of tape-recorded phone calls last summer.

The call to Idaho came in July to Autumn Kersey, vice president of development and marketing for Planned Parenthood of Idaho.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “White old hags for Hillary lose their mouth piece, Geraldine Ferraro quits

  1. Hillary and Bill Clinton have made a significant issue about how the press is treating Hillary unfairly in their hyper-critical reporting on her and their “softball” reporting on Barak Obama. Hillary maintains she has been fully investigated by the media and Barak hasn’t! As the Tony Rezko trial begins in Chicago, Clinton and her surrogates are linking Obama to Rezko and the media is speculating about whether Obama will be called to testify as a witness in the case. Obama has always admitted he received $85,000 in contributions from Rezko which Obama has now donated to charity rather than keep. Yet the civil fraud trial of Bill Clinton for defrauduing Hillary’s largest donor in 2000 into giving her campaign more than $1.2 million, pending in Los Angeles courts since 2003, is now preparing for a November, 2008 trial. The discovery that is now proceeding after a February 21 hearing, and the pending trial, have NEVER been announced by the mainstream media. Hillary was able to extricate herself as a co-defendant in the case in January, 2008 after years of appeals to be protected by the First Amendment from tort claims arising out of federal campaign solicitations she made. Her abuse of the intent of California’s anti-SLAPP law after the California Supreme Court refused to dismiss her from the case in 2004 is emblematic of her contempt for the Rule of Law. Hillary will be called as a witness in both discovery and the trial according to the trial court Judge who so-advised Hillary’s attorney David Kendall when he dismissed Hillary as a co-defendant in 2007. A subpoena is being prepared this month and will be served personally on Hillary, along with Chelsea, Pa Gov. Ed Rendell, Al Gore and other well known political and media figures. Yet the media has refused to report about this landmark civil fraud case- brought by Hillary’s biggest 2000 donor to her Senate race, regarding allegations that were corroborated by the Department of Justice in the criminal trial of Hillary’s finance director David Rosen in May, 2005. That indictment and trial was credited as resulting from the civil suit’s allegations by Peter Paul, the Hollywood dot com millionaire Bill Clinton convinced to donate more than $1.2 million (according to the DOJ prosecutors and the FBI) to Hillary’s Senate campaign as part of a post White House business deal with Bill. The media – except for World Net Daily- has also suspiciously refused to report on Hillary’s last FEC report regarding her 2000 Senate campaign, filed in January 30, 2006. In a secret settlement of an FEC complaint by the plaintiff in Paul v Clinton, Peter Paul, the FEC fined Hillary’s campaign $35,000 for hiding more than $720,000 in donations from Paul, and it required Hillary’s campaign to file a 4th amended FEC report. In that report Hillary and her campaign again hid Paul’s $1.2 million contribution to her campaign and falsely attributed $250,000 as being donated by Paul’s partner, Spider Man creator Stan Lee, who swore in a video taped deposition he never gave Hillary or her campaign any money. Lee did testify to trading $100,000 checks with Paul to make it appear he gave $100,000 to Hillary’s campaign (admission of a felony) but none of that has been reported by the “overly critical” media! Where is the outrage from Obama that the press is engaging in a double standard relating to his possible role in the Rezko trial and his refunding the $85,000 contributed to his campaign by Rezko- which Obama has always admitted taking. The media makes no mention of Hillary’s role as a witness in Bill’s fraud trial for defrauding Hillary’s largest donor- and Hillary’s refusal to refund the $1.2 million she illegally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000? Visit Hillcap.org for videos and info.

  2. Hillary and Bill Clinton have made a significant issue about how the press is treating Hillary unfairly in their hyper-critical reporting on her and their “softball” reporting on Barak Obama. Hillary maintains she has been fully investigated by the media and Barak hasn’t! As the Tony Rezko trial begins in Chicago, Clinton and her surrogates are linking Obama to Rezko and the media is speculating about whether Obama will be called to testify as a witness in the case. Obama has always admitted he received $85,000 in contributions from Rezko which Obama has now donated to charity rather than keep. Yet the civil fraud trial of Bill Clinton for defrauduing Hillary’s largest donor in 2000 into giving her campaign more than $1.2 million, pending in Los Angeles courts since 2003, is now preparing for a November, 2008 trial. The discovery that is now proceeding after a February 21 hearing, and the pending trial, have NEVER been announced by the mainstream media. Hillary was able to extricate herself as a co-defendant in the case in January, 2008 after years of appeals to be protected by the First Amendment from tort claims arising out of federal campaign solicitations she made. Her abuse of the intent of California’s anti-SLAPP law after the California Supreme Court refused to dismiss her from the case in 2004 is emblematic of her contempt for the Rule of Law. Hillary will be called as a witness in both discovery and the trial according to the trial court Judge who so-advised Hillary’s attorney David Kendall when he dismissed Hillary as a co-defendant in 2007. A subpoena is being prepared this month and will be served personally on Hillary, along with Chelsea, Pa Gov. Ed Rendell, Al Gore and other well known political and media figures. Yet the media has refused to report about this landmark civil fraud case- brought by Hillary’s biggest 2000 donor to her Senate race, regarding allegations that were corroborated by the Department of Justice in the criminal trial of Hillary’s finance director David Rosen in May, 2005. That indictment and trial was credited as resulting from the civil suit’s allegations by Peter Paul, the Hollywood dot com millionaire Bill Clinton convinced to donate more than $1.2 million (according to the DOJ prosecutors and the FBI) to Hillary’s Senate campaign as part of a post White House business deal with Bill. The media – except for World Net Daily- has also suspiciously refused to report on Hillary’s last FEC report regarding her 2000 Senate campaign, filed in January 30, 2006. In a secret settlement of an FEC complaint by the plaintiff in Paul v Clinton, Peter Paul, the FEC fined Hillary’s campaign $35,000 for hiding more than $720,000 in donations from Paul, and it required Hillary’s campaign to file a 4th amended FEC report. In that report Hillary and her campaign again hid Paul’s $1.2 million contribution to her campaign and falsely attributed $250,000 as being donated by Paul’s partner, Spider Man creator Stan Lee, who swore in a video taped deposition he never gave Hillary or her campaign any money. Lee did testify to trading $100,000 checks with Paul to make it appear he gave $100,000 to Hillary’s campaign (admission of a felony) but none of that has been reported by the “overly critical” media! Where is the outrage from Obama that the press is engaging in a double standard relating to his possible role in the Rezko trial and his refunding the $85,000 contributed to his campaign by Rezko- which Obama has always admitted taking. The media makes no mention of Hillary’s role as a witness in Bill’s fraud trial for defrauding Hillary’s largest donor- and Hillary’s refusal to refund the $1.2 million she illegally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000? Visit Hillcap.org for videos and info.

  3. Pingback: bill o'reilly

  4. The smartest woman in America once said, “It takes a village…” OK lets take that as the premiss.

    Then clearly it takes a village to raise a village idiot. I look to the village of Clinton-idots who raised Spitzer and Ferraro, as ask them why we should let any more Clintons (or Clinton-idiots) try to ruin America by electing them to public office?

  5. Mick, can we agree that some of this stuff goes way, way over the top?

    There are Democrats who are racists, as well as Republicans. Neither party or ideology has a monopoly on virtue or vice. Having worked in politics for many years, I also know many in both parties who are honest, hard-working people who are doing the best they can to govern honorably.

    I carry no water for Hillary Clinton. Like you, I voted for Obama in the recent Tennessee primary, even though I have the deepest personal respect for John McCain, although I disagree with him on many issues. We all have the right to disagree on the issues, but my take is that it is high time we put an end to the attack-dog politics of personal destruction that is tearing our country apart.

    We have a lot of challenges facing America today and it behooves us all to recognize that we are not dealing with any of them. Globalization. Immigration. War and foreign policy crises. A tottering credit market and shaky economy. Climate change. Declining oil supplies and rising energy costs. The list could go on.

    And yet there is one problem that transcends them all and prevent us from making any progress for America on any of these fronts. It is the relentless hyperpartisanship that has infected our politics like a virus, eating away at the fabric of our nation and destroying our ability to respectfully find common ground.

    Instead of working together to find ways to solve problems, the hyperpartisans among us use every issue as a cudgel to beat the other side over the head. It’s not about progress, it’s about gaining partisan advantage. This kind of partisanship is shrill, divisive, non-productive and designed to demonize those with who we disagree on the issues, not finding solutions to our problems.

    Hillary Clinton, herself a polarizing and hyperpartisan figure, isn’t going to solve this problem. Her whole campaign is based on how much of a fighter she is, how well she can eternally battle her political opponents. It has become politics as a blood sport and when the rules don’t favor you, you simply try to change them.

    The more John McCain is pulled to the right by the hyperpartisans, the more he is beginning to look like the next coming of a second George W. Bush presidency. His vaunted independence, which made him attractive to many moderates like me, is being severely damaged by his need to consolidate his base, which is the small slice of the electorate that still supports Bush. Although I believe he is an honorable man, the pandering forced upon him has diminished him both as a man and as a candidate in my estimation.

    Only Obama is talking the talk of bridging this great partisan chasm in our politics. He seems to recognize instinctively that there is a better, more productive way for us to do business in the political arena. Whether he can walk the walk remains to be seen.

    Yet my vote for him was a vote for hope, the hope that we can have a more grown-up discussion of the problems that face America. It was also a vote for change, a change from policies and attitudes that don’t seem wise or American to me. But more than anything else, it was a vote of confidence in America that we still have the collective wisdom, strength and character to triumph over the challenges we face if we can harness the power of Americans working together.

    Yes, for every Eliot Spitzer, there is a Larry Craig. For every Geraldine Ferraro, there is a Tim Hagee. These aren’t partisan political issues, they are personal failings of human beings with feet of clay. Most of us have probably done things we would prefer not be on the front page of the newspaper. So let’s all take a deep breath and decide whether the next election or the next generation are more important to us. Are we shedding light in our public pronouncements or just cranking up the heat. It is America that is important to me, the country I leave to my children, not the partisanship.

  6. Hey, Mick.

    How about a discussion on the Bear Stearns breakdown. The way I define a free market does not include bailouts and subsidies. You fail, you’re gone. Another more qualified corporation takes over where you dropped the ball and life goes on.

    But, we don’t have a true free market. We have deregulation and pretty much everything else in place, but if a company goes down, like Bear Stearns, there is always a surplus of taxpayer money to hand out. What’s $100-$200 billion, give or take.

    As Dana Perino said today when asked when the little guy in this country gets his/her “bailout” or help from the government when things go bad with their businesses, those big rebate checks are going out in May! Yeah, Dana, that is a good comparison. It all makes sense now.

    This country is speading towards an economic train wreck and it’s going to be very interesting.

  7. Mary, I agree with you about the Bear Stearns bail out. How many billions of dollars has the Federal Reserve handed out to banks the past year?

    Why was Enron allowed to collapse? At least they developed energy products and services. What do banks and investment brokers do? They buy smaller banks and charge more interest and points than they pay for their nearly free money from the Federal Reserve.

    This is amazing to me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s