Ever since Senator Hillary Clinton was the first lady in the White House, she has talked about “universal health care for all”. It seems every other word out of her mouth is healthcare, healthcare, healthcare. She makes false promises of lower costs and higher quality, but does she really understand how much it will cost Americans? To give “affordable” health care to everyone, she will have to raise taxes and she has already promised that she will raise taxes if elected. If she wasn’t able to accomplish a better system for health care during the eight years she spent in the White House, why in the world would we believe she could make it happen as our President. Seriously, she had eight years!

Americans aren’t quite in a recession yet; however, we are quickly nearing one. Economics and the war are the two most serious issues Americans need to think about when voting this year. With the promise that Hillary Clinton will raise our taxes, will put us further into a recession. Taking more money out of our pockets gives us less money to put back into businesses. We need to have disposable income to spend on businesses so they can hire employees. It’s really pretty simple, and yes it is Reganomics, but it makes sense to vote for someone that will lower taxes to give Americans more disposable income to put back into the economy.

While in Pennsylvania, she is attacking Senator John McCain for supporting Bush’s economic policies, but she is a fool to believe that her strategy will do any better than her opponents, and in fact, she has the worst economic plan of all.

She talks about manufacturing companies such as steelworkers going bankrupt, but what she doesn’t understand is that jobs evolve over time. If manufacturing companies are going bankrupt it means there isn’t a need for them anymore. Yes, there is the problem of companies outsourcing to other countries, which is a problem and all candidates need to find a way to keep jobs here if they can, but she doesn’t understand that when the door has closed on a business, the market is saying it doesn’t want it anymore. It’s economics 101– the law of supply and demand. Why would you fight to keep a plant open when we have found a more efficient way of operation? For her, it’s to get votes from the blue collar sect. They want to believe they will have a job doing what they are doing, but the sad fact is there may not be a need for manufacturing plants like there was 30 even 40 years ago. Hillary needs to look to the future of jobs rather than the past and realize the internet, hybrid and economic friendly businesses are the way of the future. People have to adjust their skills with the changing market and we need a president that understands this.

Share This

In an effort to hit the religious sector last Sunday in Pennsylvania for the upcoming primary Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton stated the following:

I believe the potential for life begins at conception. For me, it is also not only about a potential life. It is about the other lives involved. … I have concluded, after great, you know, concern and searching my own mind and heart over many years …that individuals must be entrusted to make this profound decision, because the alternative would be such an intrusion of government authority that it would be very difficult to sustain in our kind of open society.

The Senator makes no qualms against invading our homes by taking our tax dollars, deciding how our health care should be governed for us by socializing it and her infamous statement of it takes a village [to raise our children], but in the delicate issue of abortion, this is where she chooses to step out and let Americans make their own decisions? So, it takes a village to raise our children, but she doesn’t have the guts to stand up for children. Admittedly, she acknowledges that life begins at conception. If she really cared about children, she would stand up for them but not allowing the mother to kill him/her.

If elected, she will continue to support abortion by upholding Roe v. Wade. She also wants to ensure it is safe as well as rare. Why would she want it to be rare if she supports it?  The rarity statement indicates that some part of her thinks it’s wrong. She would rather win votes than admit to the horrific nature of allowing abortions.

Hillary Clinton further stated that she makes tough decisions after study, prayer and contemplation [not a quote]. However, she is a Methodist, and the Methodist church believes abortion is a moral horror according to the United Methodist bishop. Not only is she willing to allow children to be killed, she isn’t following the teachings of her claimed religion. Every presidential candidate has a right to make decisions as they feel necessary, but she geared her speech towards the religious sect of Pennsylvania. If Pennsylvanians decide to do their research on just how religious Hillary Clinton is, they might be surprised to find the contradictions with her personal beliefs and political decisions.

In all fairness, at the end of Senator Hillary Clinton’s speech she did state, “I don’t pretend to even believe that I know the answers to a lot of these questions, I don’t.” But what else is she going to say that about if she becomes president? With so many tough issues involved with the 2008 election, she should be willing to take a stand not only on abortion, but also on the housing/mortgage crisis, the war in Iraq. She can’t say “I don’t know” to important and critical issues. Abortion will always be controversial, but she can admit that life begins at conception and should, therefore, take a stand and defend defenseless children.

Share This

If so, go ahead and vote for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for president in the 2008 election. The deadline has just passed for filing your taxes, and if you took a long hard look at how much you are already paying, the thought of paying more if Clinton is elected will devastate the American people’s pockets. We usually don’t think about how much we pay because it’s automatically deducted from our paychecks for most people. We think of our incomes as how much we actually put in the bank. I’m sure if we were paid everything up front and then had to write out a check for what we owed in taxes, it would make it a lot harder to pay them. Seeing how much is deducted should make us all sick.

There is no doubt, if Hillary is elected, she WILL raise your taxes. America can’t afford the plans she has laid out. If you think healthcare will be free, you better take a second look. It is coming out of your pocket whether or not it’s from your taxes, deducted from your paychecks, or purchased as a private policy. If Hillary gets to decide, it will come from taxes and then you won’t even get a choice of which doctor you want to see. It will be like having HMO’s all the time! If you know anything about HMO’s, you know this is not quality care. We’d be better off getting medical care in Mexico.

She already has plans to “…let President Bush’s tax cuts for top earners expire.” So what does that mean to those who earn $200,000 or more per year? It means take from the rich and give to the poor! From those who earned it, to those who didn’t. When you do that, it takes away from the capitalistic incentive that this country is based on. We were always taught to work hard and you’ll be rewarded, but when you take more of peoples money away from them, it gives them less incentive to make it, which ultimately hurts the economy as a whole.

Capital gains tax will be increased from 15 to 20 percent, minimally and could even go up to 30 percent. There is rumor that she will eliminate capital gains tax completely and take it out as a part of your normal income.

As far as estate tax is concerned, she will support continued taxation, even though people have already paid taxes on that money. Those who earned and saved it in the first place paid taxes on it, then the person that inherits it, pays taxes on it again! The United States government is the only winner in this scenario. They get paid twice for doing nothing.

Social security (FICA) taxes will increase. She has plans to raise the limit from $97,000 to almost double. We already pay at least 12% in FICA taxes and if Hilary is elected, it will go higher.

With the dollar shrinking in value every day due to inflation, we can’t afford to pay the United States Government any more of our hard earned money. We earn our money, and we know how best to spend it ourselves. I don’t think most people mind paying taxes, but we can’t be paying an unlimited amount. With tax increases the middle class will virtually be non-existent. It will be rich and poor only.

She will claim that she is just redistributing the taxes, rather than raising them, but this is simply not true. It would actually increase tax revenues for our government by revamping the tax codes.

In 2004, she stated, “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” Well that’s great for the poor people who don’t get out of their trailers, but what about the people out there working every day and earning every dollar they get? Why should that money be taken away from them? The only thing that does is give people on welfare incentive to make more children out of wedlock so they can continue to be on welfare and have more people asking for food stamps and other government handouts. It turns our country into a socialistic one, rather than capitalistic. In 2007, she further stated she would “raise taxes on upper-income Americans and eliminate tax breaks for corporations.” Again, people who work hard take the risk of opening a business in order to generate more jobs, and she wants to punish them! Great thinking Hillary.

Her belief is, “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few by the few, and for the few. Time to reject the idea of an ‘on your own’ society and to replace it with a shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a ‘we’re all in it together society.” No one disputes working together, but we do have a problem sharing the money we worked so hard for.

The democrats currently control the House, and if Hillary is elected, the House will support her in her tax increases. It is urgent that you get out and vote in the 2008 election in order to stop this. We can’t afford Hillary’s plans. They are not practical and they go against the American way.

Share This

Hillary Stinks at Bowling!

Is this really how we’re supposed to determine who to elect, by a bowl off? Ok, so it was an April Fool’s joke, yet still a challenge to Barack Obama. Its obvious Ms. Clinton is going about a weak attempt to look like a normal, working class person. Unfortunately for her, it was pretty obvious she doesn’t go bowling too often because she didn’t even hit one pin on her first try on the Ellen DeGeneres show, and they were huge pins! Hillary did state that they had a bowling alley in the White House and has not been bowling since her husband was in office; therefore she hasn’t bowled in over seven years. Her opponent, Barack Obama probably hasn’t spent too many hours in a bowling alley himself so the two would produce a good match of terrible bowling.

During her press conference announcing the bowl-off challenge, she even stated she would give Barack an extra two frames. It is quite doubtful he would take such a handicap as it would serve as a message that he was somehow weaker than Hillary.

She stated she wanted to bowl for delegates. Another lousy attempt at a joke. Is this what it has come down to? They are both getting so desperate for the nomination it is time to pull out emergency strategies.

Of course Ellen DeGeneres would support Hillary as a white, lesbian woman. She even said on her show that people are telling them to get out of the way. Who are you talking about Ellen? Everyone has a right to vote and everyone does get to choose who our president is.

The bottom line is, both Hillary and Barack lack any skill in bowling so there isn’t much of a championship to be had. They are both people of wealth and privilege, and wealthy people generally don’t go bowling. Hillary is trying to be seen as a “regular person” who can identify with the poor people in an attempt to get their vote, but she has no idea what its like to not be able to afford groceries or pay rent to a landlord at crappy apartment. Her and her husband cleared $60 million last year that wouldn’t exactly qualify them as struggling.

Does she think people are so stupid that we can’t see right through her? She’ll have more time to practice her bowling technique when she doesn’t get the nomination.

Share This

They say politics does make for strange bedfellows…and this has never been more true, now that the Clintons are all tangled up with Richard Scaife.

Scaife is the owner of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, a newspaper whose editorial offices Hillary visited, just for the fun of it. Well, those weren’t exactly her words, the word she used to describe the visit was “counterintuitive.” Calculated is more like it. Clinton is desperate to improve her chances in the upcoming Pennsylvania primary and she’ll do anything.

If you didn’t know, Scaife is not just the owner of a newspaper, he is also the sleazy billionaire who spent millions in the 1990s to discredit the Clintons. He dug up dirt on them and published vile (and not necessarily truthful) accounts of their misdeeds. Scaife was not shy as he tried to push the notion that the Clintons were not innocent bystanders in event surrounding the death of Vince Foster. He made it his mission to take down the Clintons, but now is appears he and the would-be First Couple have kissed and made up.

Recently, Scaife published an op-ed in which he says he was wrong about Hillary. In opening up his editorial meeting as a Hil for Prez forum, Scaife likely wants to divert attention from his scandalous divorce, while Hillary was looking for an outlet she could use to hit Obama below the belt on the Wright controversy.

Sounds like a match made in heaven.

Share This

Really, what is it about Hillary Clinton that makes her so polarizing? Just mentioning her name engenders heated discussion, and a lot of what is said isn’t complimentary.

Her candidacy is even widening rifts within her own party. Recently, some of the donors to her campaign sent a very strongly worded (read: threatening) letter to Nancy Pelosi that basically told the House Speaker to keep quiet and refrain from inserting her opinion into the public discussion of superdelegates.

Umm…what happened to free speech? Since when does the House Speaker have to remain quiet about election matters?

And why did this letter come from Hillary’s campaign donors? Once again she is getting other to do her dirty work for her. If she wants to talk to Pelosi or make a public statement about Pelosi’s remarks, why doesn’t she do so herself?

Trying to muzzle the House Speaker is bad form. Even if by some stretch of the imagination, we could be believe that Hillary is not involved and disagrees with the letter, this still adds to the aura of desperation that surrounds her campaign.

Share This

Recently New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a former presidential candidate and a former Clinton ally decided to publicly support Barack Obama. Despite his history with the Clintons, despite the fact that they are known to be vindictive, he made a very bold move.

He was quoted as describing Clinton’s campaign tactics at “gutter.”

Wow, Bill, we couldn’t have said it better ourselves. Politics is politics and all politicians try to discredit their opponents, but what the Clintons have done goes beyond politics as usual.

The most blatant example is how they’ve tried time and again to bend electoral rules to their liking. Hillary has fought a losing battle to get two states to go through the primary process again, after these state themselves broke the rules that he party set forth.

They’ve used the basest means to discredit those they think are against them—belittling Obama’s success and more recently trying to say that Richardson’s endorsement isn’t significant.
They’ve tried to scare the American people into voting for Hillary using fear tactics.

Notice the use of the word “they” because you’d better believe that Hillary is not in this alone. Just as she leans on her husband’s time in elected office to pad her resume, she is no doubt leaning on him now.

Share This

Last week we wondered if Hillary Clinton has stretched the truth in other areas after it was revealed that she had actually been in favor of the NAFTA agreement she now claims that she always opposed.

Now even her campaign has had to try and put a benign spin on some of Hillary’s tall tales. According to the Clinton campaign, the candidate “misspoke” in saying that she’d been under the threat of sniper fire when she arrived in Bosnia on a trip she took as first lady in March of 1996.

Even her book, “Living History” she described the incident as an abbreviated welcome ceremony. This is a far cry from the yarn she spun last week about having to run for her life.

News reports from the time don’t have any indication of the danger she spoke of last week. And a comedian who accompanied her on the trip told reporters that he did not remember the harrowing incident Clinton recently described.

Her campaign maintains that Hill “misspoke” just the one time and that she has told the story truthfully in the past. Why does Clinton think she can “misspeak” her way to the White House?

Share This

There are even more startling revelation from Hillary’s First Lady Diaries…and no we’re not talking about where Hillary was when certain offenses took place…we’re talking about information that blows some of her most ardent campaign points right outta the water.

Hillary Clinton has gone about declaring that she was strongly against NAFTA from the  very beginning, especially when she was campaigning in states that felt the pain of losing jobs to people in other countries.

Oh really?

Then why do the schedules from her days as First Lady record that she spoke a meeting where the sole purpose was to convince members of congress to pass NAFTA. NAFTA…an agreement that has taken away jobs, crippled community and added to the country’s trade deficit. News reports show that Ms. Clinton’s remarks at this closed-door session were very much in favor of NAFTA. But now she claims to have been against it from the start.

Everyone makes mistakes and all politicians support policies they regret later…so why lie? Why go around the country saying you were against something that you so obviously supported?

It makes you wonder where else she had stretched the truth…

Share This

The papers from Hillary’s days as first lady have finally been released and the commentary surrounding them is just as muddled as any other rhetoric we’ve heard from the Clinton campaign. It should be noted that they were only made public because an advocacy group had threatened a lawsuit. In other words, there is something in there that Hillary does not want made public. But what could it be?

According to reports, the papers show that Hillary played an active role while she was attempting to get  health care reform enacted and that she was much less visible after that. One the health care initiative was shelved, she was involved in more “traditional” activities—teas and such and perhaps the baking of cookies that she once ridiculed.

Today, a spokesperson for her campaign was careful to note that the papers are only a “guide” and that there is a lot that they don’t cover. The Clinton campaign needs to maintain an “aura of responsibility” since Hil has repeatedly stated that the experience she gained during Bill’s years as president are what make her fit for the Oval Office. If it were to be revealed that she was on the sidelines, this would blow her experience claims right outta the water.

Doesn’t she know that a First Spouse is NOT supposed to getting that much “experience?” The country elected Bill, not her. If she did help run the country then they both were in the wrong. And that only fuels the fears that electing her would mean we’d have yet another Clinton co-presidency…

Share This