Rebecca Traister of Salon.com writes an interesting piece on how the anti-Hillary rhetoric of (male) Obama supporters is beginning to turn off fmale Obama supporters.

OK, it is an interesting hypothesis, one that I'd love to see backed by more than anecdotal data.

But the scary thing is Traister's revelation about herself -- and what it tells us about the institutional mindset at Salon.

I began reporting this story in part because, as a 32-year-old woman who is more liberal than either candidate, and who was quite torn until Super Tuesday, I had found myself increasingly defensive of Clinton in the face of the Obama worship that rules the mostly white, liberal, well-educated circles in which I work and travel.

MORE LIBERAL than Obama, who is rated as one of the most liberal members of the US Senate by liberal groups? More liberal than Hillary, who is not far behind him in those ratings? That certainly explains the absurd biases we see at Salon.com!

And interestingly enough, we discover just how lacking in diversity Salon.com and the circles liberal opinion leaders travel in really are, with the description of her co-workers and friends as "mostly white, liberal, well-educated" -- and clearly out of touch with large segments of the American people.

Many of us involved in the conservative movement count among our colleagues, friends, and loved ones a great many individuals who hold different political views from us, are of different ethnicities, with different educational levels. Yet somehow we are teh ones tagged as enemies of diversity. maybe we need to look much more closely at the liberal opinion leaders instead, and call them on their lack fo commitment to diversity in their day-to-day lives.

Posted by: Greg at 10:14 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

Because Marylanders have cried out "Not In My Back Yard!"

Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) announced yesterday morning that he will bar commercial wind turbines from state-owned land, satisfying Western Maryland opponents of the turbines but disappointing supporters of the wind energy industry.

Speaking at a scenic overlook in the Savage River State Forest in Garrett County, O'Malley said the state remains committed to exploring renewable energy sources but said the wind energy industry should look to other land for large-scale wind farms.

"While we must continue to explore and make progress on creating a more sustainable and independent energy future for Maryland, we will not do so at the expense of the special land we hold in the public trust," he said.

The decision primarily affects one project, a proposal by Pennsylvania-based U.S. Wind Force to build 100 wind turbines, each 400 feet tall, in two state forests in Garrett County. The company had asked to lease state land for the project.

Clean, renewable energy is what liberals cry for -- until it might inconvenience them by cluttering their view. Energy independence is a burden for someone else to bear, they argue, because it will require building roads to get to the best available sites. In one case, Ted Kennedy and his fellow fat-cats got a project side-tracked for years because they might be able to see the towers from their vacation homes -- as a smudge on the horizon five miles away.

Just wait -- next they'll be looking to ban the projects on private lands on the argument that the turbines make noise, kill birds, or are unsightly. Those have been the tactics of the anti-wind NIMBYs elsewhere.

Posted by: Greg at 01:17 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 294 words, total size 2 kb.

My darling wife, a Democrat, and I were both seized with the same thought when we heard the latest bit of inanity to come out of the mouth of Barack Obama (and his attempts to justify and explain his words) -- much of what he has to say describes himself more than your average small town American.

You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothingÂ’s replaced them. . . . And itÂ’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who arenÂ’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Why do I say that he is describing himself (I won't speak for my wife here)? Let's look at what he said.

Clinging to religion? You mean like refusing to dissociate yourself from a string of ministers -- including your own pastor -- when it is disclosed that they frequently make racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, and anti-American comments from the pulpit and in their speeches and writings?

Antipathy to people who aren't like them? You mean like the comments preached from the pulpit of your very own church while you lacked the testicular fortitude to denounce them or go elsewhere?

Anti-trade? Like opposing NAFTA or the free trade agreement with Columbia?

Anti-immigrant? Like opposing Asian business owners who open stores in black neighborhoods?

Indeed, the only thing that doesn't describe Barack Obama, his wife, and his closest associates is the comment about clinging to guns -- but then again, they really don't give a damn that this has been an American characteristic since the founding of our country, and that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual liberty enshrined in the Bill of Rights itself. So except for fidelity to the Constitution itself and exercising the rights guaranteed by that august document, the candidate and those closest to him display every one of the pathologies he diagnosed "small town" Americans as suffering from.

Oh, and by the way -- since it seems implicit in the context of this comment that he is referring to small town WHITE Americans, this would make it simply another example of the bigotry that Obama has publicly espoused in the weeks since his infamous "race speech"

This leads me to ask an important question.

Will the Democrats return to their roots in 2008, nominating yet another racist for President, this time one named Barack Hussein Obama

H/T The Caucus Blog, Michelle Malkin, Hot Air (multiple times), Stop the ACLU

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, Rosemary's Thoughts, WayWard Fundamentalist Christian, Right Truth, DragonLady's World, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, InvestorBlogger, A Newt One-punking the global warming cult, Adeline and Hazel, Pursuing Holiness, Chuck's Place, D equals S, Woman Honor Thyself, A Newt One- Coverage of Vets on the hill!, Pirate's Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, A Newt One- Don't miss this show!, A Newt One, Dumb Ox Daily News, Rant it Up, Stageleft, Right Voices, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, Maggie's Notebook, The Christian Nationalist, Cao's Blog, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Nuke Gingrich, Allie is Wired, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Oblogatory Anecdotes - Photoshop Montage/Open Trackbacks, Beagle Scout, Tilting At Windmill Farms, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 594 words, total size 9 kb.

Incredible, isn't it, that the local Democrat bloggers have remained so silent about this story. Could it be that they are trying to cover up the evil and corruption in their midst? After all, the saga started on April 2, with this article in the Houston Chronicle.

City building inspectors on Wednesday issued several safety citations against an East End apartment complex owned by state Rep. Hubert Vo.

The citations to the Courtyard Apartments on Villa de Matel allege eight structural and electrical problems, including rotting wood, missing balcony railings, loose boards and broken windows, city officials said.

"There were the kinds of things you'd see in a building that has not been well-maintained," said Susan McMillian, a senior staff analyst in the city's Public Works and Engineering Department. "It needed more intense maintenance than what had been done."

Homeowners in the nearby County Club neighborhood have complained about the property for years, calling it a visual blight and a magnet for crime.

"It's really a deplorable situation, and the sad thing is that people are actually living there," said Charles Mayfield, a member of the area's Super Neighborhood Council. "It's really disheartening to see, and surprising, to say the least, that anybody — no matter who they are — would let the property get into such a condition."

Vo, a Democrat running for re-election to his southwest Houston seat in the Texas House, has owned the four-building, $2.8 million property under one of his companies, Newlink Investments, Inc., since 2002.

His campaign issued a statement late Wednesday:

"At the property in question, work was started a month ago to correct items the city has concerns about," the statement read.

"The city understands I will make all the necessary repairs because I want my properties to be a safe place for my tenants and an asset to the neighborhood."

Interesting, isn't it, how one four-building complex could get so bad, especially with an "upstanding citizen" like Vo -- a Democrat lawmaker and all that -- as teh owner. After all, he would certainly be quite concerned about the welfare of the "little people" who live in his property, wouldn't he? After all, he's part of the so-called party of the little guy, standing against all of us mean-spirited Republicans. Certainly he couldn't be a slumlord.

But then the story went a little bit further earlier this week, when it came out that it isn't just one complex -- it would appear to be many of the apartment complexes owned by the Houston Democrat.

Residents in local apartments owned by state Rep. Hubert Vo live in conditions that appear to violate numerous health and building standards, a Houston Chronicle review of the properties has found.

In recent days, the Houston Chronicle documented exposed electrical wires, rotting wood, broken and boarded-up windows and other potential violations of the city's "minimum standards" for occupied buildings.

After seeing the Chronicle's photographs, inspectors from two city departments pledged investigations into properties owned by Vo, D-Houston, saying the conditions could lead to misdemeanor criminal citations.

"There was nothing in those pictures that wasn't a violation," said Jodi Silva, a spokeswoman for the Houston Police Department's neighborhood protection division. "You have to keep your property to certain minimum standards, and that's what these are falling under."

The Chronicle's inquiry began last week after city inspectors, acting on complaints, cited Vo for conditions at an apartment complex he owns in the East End. There, inspectors found open electrical boxes, loose wiring and inadequate balcony railings — all misdemeanor violations.

Vo's other properties, in varying degrees, showed similar problems, though one complex was outside the city limits and not subject to post-construction inspections.

Among other potential city violations at three complexes were overflowing Dumpsters, damaged parking lots and an algae-filled swimming pool — all conditions that could prompt criminal fines.

Vo, who has owned the properties for years, took blame for the problems Wednesday, saying he had not done enough to ensure the complexes were maintained. He said he would improve the conditions, pledging personal inspections of individual units, cooperation with city officials and outreach to residents to encourage them to report concerns.

"It's not my intention to have those apartments like that," said Vo, a 51-year-old Vietnamese immigrant who founded a computing business and became a millionaire before seeking public office. "I don't want to blame anybody. I take full responsibility."

Now please note that quote that I highlighted. "It's not my intention to have those apartments like that." He did, of course, have them like that and profit off them like that for years -- including his entire tenure in the Texas House of Representatives. But he's getting them fixed up, don't you know - so that makes it all better, right. But somehow it doesn't explain how most of his properties unintentionally became slum properties that are unsafe and unfit for human habitation. Any explanation for that, Hubert? Nah -- I didn't think so.

And the city took even more action against Vo the next day.

City inspectors on Thursday ordered structural and electrical repairs at an apartment complex owned by state Rep. Hubert Vo, the latest action against his properties in recent days.

The city issued a notice giving Vo a month to make the changes, except for a few electrical issues that must be fixed immediately, said Tony Balay, a code enforcement chief inspector.

Vo, who had one of his East End complexes cited last week for similar issues, hired contractors to address the problems, many of which were documented Wednesday in the Houston Chronicle.

Misdemeanor citations could result if the work is not completed, but Balay said Vo appeared serious about the work.

"I'm convinced Mr. Vo is trying to get this done," he said. "To me, he's working in good faith."

Vo, who is seeking re-election to a third term this fall, could not be reached for comment on Thursday, but his campaign issued a written statement.

"I have talked to the city officials, and we are working to correct all the issues they pointed out," the statement said.

Vo, D-Houston, has owned the property, the Northpoint Apartments on Lyerly, since 1996. Residents interviewed by the Chronicle said poor conditions have been a chronic problem.

"Working to correct all the issues." That is great -- though the properties should never have gotten into that condition in the first place. And city officials are even being very careful to indicate that Vo has been cooperative with these efforts. That's good -- after all, one would hope that a lawmaker would make a good-faith effort to stop being a lawbreaker, especially when his violations of the law jeopardize the lives and safety of his tenants. Never mind the possibility that management of one of Vo's complexes appear to have engaged in retaliation against one of those who complained about the problems -- another violation of the law, I might add.

So what we have is Hubert Vo, a Democrat elected official, unaware for years that his properties were a shambles and that he was making profits while endangering his tenants -- but he's going to make everything right. After all, now that he knows about the problem he is on the case.

Not so fast. Read this letter from Vo -- written weeks ago, on his official legislative letterhead, seeking to intimidate the Houston Police Department for harassing the management of one of his complexes over non-structural violations of city ordinances!

A month before complaints about problems at his apartments were disclosed publicly, state Rep. Hubert Vo used his government letterhead to complain to Houston police commanders about the department's scrutiny and accuse officers of harassment.

"What I am concerned with is the appearance that the NPC officers are using their authority to harass and issue tickets instead of working with the apartment managers to remedy any deficiencies," he wrote in the Feb. 25 letter to Assistant Chief Dorothy Edwards, who heads the Houston Police Department's Neighborhood Protection Corps.

"The word 'harass' is a very strong word and I use it very cautiously, but the conduct of the officers involved in this situation leads me to no other conclusion."

The three-page letter, which goes on to complain that the manager at the Villa De Matel apartments was not treated fairly and "taunted," was obtained from HPD by the Houston Chronicle late Friday under the Texas Public Information Act.

Vo's campaign manager, Karen Loper, said he was not available for comment.

A spokeswoman for the corps, which issues citations for blight such as illegal trash dumping, graffiti and nuisances on private property, but not structural problems handled by city code inspectors, denied any mistreatment.

Interesting, isn't it, that "Mr. Responsibility" is unavailable for comment when he has been caught trying to avoid responsibility for the conditions of his apartment complexes? Especially when he is engaged in what is clearly unethical behavior in using his official position to cover his personal ass in this manner.

So what do we have here? A Democrat slumlord seeking reelection using his office to get preferential treatment form those charged with enforcing the laws that protect his tenants. And interestingly enough, the local Democrats are all notoriously silent about this situation. Could it be that they are more interested in holding on to the legislative seat in question than the protection of the residents of Hubert Vo's personal ghettos?

Oh, and there are a couple of questions I'd like the Houston Chronicle to report on:

1) What percentage of the resident's of these properties are receiving federal housing aid (Section 8) to pay for their apartments, and how much money has Hubert Vo been paid over the years from these programs?

2) Given the amount of government assistance given to our permanent guests from New Orleans , how much money has Hubert Vo received for housing victims of Hurricane Katrina in his slum properties?

After all, if Hubert Vo is willing to rip-off and endanger his tenants by renting them apartments in such deficient properties, doesn't it also stand to reason that he would have no scruples against ripping off the taxpayers while doing so?

UPDATE: I just found one Democrat blogger who dares to speak out on this issue -- and even he notes his own silence and that of his fellow Democrats.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, Rosemary's Thoughts, WayWard Fundamentalist Christian, Right Truth, DragonLady's World, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, InvestorBlogger, A Newt One-punking the global warming cult, Adeline and Hazel, Pursuing Holiness, Chuck's Place, D equals S, Woman Honor Thyself, A Newt One- Coverage of Vets on the hill!, Pirate's Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, A Newt One- Don't miss this show!, A Newt One, Dumb Ox Daily News, Rant it Up, Stageleft, Right Voices, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, Maggie's Notebook, The Christian Nationalist, Cao's Blog, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Nuke Gingrich, Allie is Wired, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Oblogatory Anecdotes - Photoshop Montage/Open Trackbacks, Beagle Scout, Tilting At Windmill Farms, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 11:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1876 words, total size 16 kb.

Why on earth would anyone give the original "story" any credence whatsoever?

he Virgin Mary on a grilled cheese and the Illinois-shaped corn flake appear to have new competition for webbies' fascination: Dick Cheney's mysterious sunglasses.

An undated photo of the vice president on the White House Web site has caused a stir on the Internet, causing some people to wonder if he's in eyeshot of an unclad female.

The White House says it's just someone holding an innocuous fishing rod (the veep -- allegedly -- is fly fishing in Idaho).

Image analysis of the photo shows that the image is, in fact -- a hand holding a fishing rod.

Just one more example of deranged Cheney-haters wanting to find something -- anything -- nefarious in the deeds of the VP.

I'm curious, though -- given the Left's defense of Bill Clinton and his lies regarding Monica Lewinski, why would Cheney looking at a nude woman even be a matter for public concern?

Posted by: Greg at 04:34 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.

I've always been struck by the credulous nature of the left-wing extremists who embraced David Brock following his conversion to their side of the political divide.

After all, how can you trust a man whose main credential to bolster his credibility s his own admission that he is a political/journalistic whore who is willing to lie for the highest bidder?

And now left-winger George Soros, a Jewish collaborator with the Nazis during WWII and convicted financial swindler, is putting Brock in charge of his high-dollar smear campaign against John McCain -- an American hero and the Republican nominee for President.

Wealthy Democrats are preparing a four-month, $40 million media campaign centered on attacks on Sen. John McCain. And it will be led by David Brock, the former investigative reporter who first gained fame in the 1990s as a right-wing, anti-Clinton journalist.

The planned campaign is the product of a shakeup in the top ranks of the struggling independent Democratic groups. Brock, now best known as the ex-conservative founder of the liberal group Media Matters, last month quietly assumed the chairmanship of what's expected to be the main vehicle for independent Democratic attacks on McCain, now called Progressive Media USA.

The move comes after the groups that had been expected to spearhead attacks on McCain — the Fund for America and Progressive Media USA's previous incarnation, the Campaign to Defend America — failed to raise the money needed to dent McCain's armor.

"We're a little behind where we need to be," he said.

But after a dinner Tuesday night at the Manhattan apartment of liberal megadonor George Soros, at which Brock and consultant Paul Begala laid out the group's plans, Brock said his group now has commitments worth $7.5 million — almost twice what the Fund for America is expected to report raising in the first quarter of this year. He said the group would begin running ads before it meets its $40 million goal.

So let's see -- we have the uniting of two of the greatest scumbags of the Left in an effort to destroy a man of high moral character who has served the country well for over half a century. A confessed liar and a larcenous kapo teaming up to destroy a war hero. That the Left will stand by and support this effort after attacking those who served honorably with John Kerry for daring to speak out against him shows how unfit the Democrats are for any elective office in this country.

Posted by: Greg at 10:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 432 words, total size 3 kb.

Yes, I know.

It is still early.

It is only a snapshot of now.

And the only poll that counts happens in November.

But for McCain to close the gap on the singularly unqualified junior senator from Illinois is a good sign that the GOP may retain the White house this year.

Republican Sen. John McCain has erased Sen. Barack Obama's 10-point advantage in a head-to-head matchup, leaving him essentially tied with both Democratic candidates in an Associated Press-Ipsos national poll released Thursday.

The survey showed the extended Democratic primary campaign creating divisions among supporters of Obama and rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and suggests a tight race for the presidency in November no matter which Democrat becomes the nominee.

And with plenty of time for the Democrats to continue bloodying each other -- and an increasing number of embarrassing revelations about Obama, his associates, and his absurd stances on the issues -- this trend is likely to continue.

The Dems may find, once they wake up with a hangover, that they have entered into the political equivalent of a drunken Vegas wedding in selecting the Obama over Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Greg at 10:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 200 words, total size 1 kb.

I guess he really doesn’t give a rat’s ass about human rights after all – you know, like a true believer in freedom and liberty would.

The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution Wednesday calling on China to end its crackdown on Tibet and release Tibetans imprisoned for "nonviolent" demonstrations.

The vote was 413-1. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who recently dropped out of the presidential race, was the lone congressman voting against it.

I guess that the disgrace from CD14 is of the belief that Jefferson got it wrong, and that the people of Tibet were not endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. After all, upon what basis – constitutionally or morally – could one oppose a resolution calling upon the Communist slave masters of Red China to respect the human rights of the people of occupied Tibet?

H/T Hot Air

Posted by: Greg at 10:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.

Maybe.

Or maybe not.

If she is, it is news to John McCain.

Is Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice campaigning to be John McCainÂ’s running mate? If so, Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, said on Sunday that he had not noticed.

“I missed those signals,” Mr. McCain told reporters on his campaign plane en route to Kansas City.

Nonetheless, Mr. McCain took a few moments to compliment Ms. Rice. “I think she’s a great American, I think there’s very little that I can say that isn’t anything but the utmost praise for a great American citizen, who served as a role model to so many millions of people in this country and around the world,” Mr. McCain said, adding that “her overall record is very, very meritorious.”

Frankly, I think that Condoleezza Rice would be a superb choice. She is a well-qualified, acomplished woman who has served this nation well.

But while I have the opportunity, let me take the NY Times to task about what Ihope is an unintentional slight of the Secretary of State.

To refer to her as "Ms. Rice" is incorrect.

Given her office, Secretary Rice would be appropriate.

Given her academic accomplishments and earned degrees, Dr. Rice would be appropriate.

I'm sure the slight is unintentional, but the editors of the paper should know better.

Posted by: Greg at 10:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 230 words, total size 2 kb.

What the rest of the world calls a LIE.

Over the last five weeks, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has featured in her campaign stump speeches the story of a health care horror: an uninsured pregnant woman who lost her baby and died herself after being denied care by an Ohio hospital because she could not come up with a $100 fee.

The woman, Trina Bachtel, did die last August, two weeks after her baby boy was stillborn at OÂ’Bleness Memorial Hospital in Athens, Ohio. But hospital administrators said Friday that Ms. Bachtel was under the care of an obstetrics practice affiliated with the hospital, that she was never refused treatment and that she was, in fact, insured.

“We implore the Clinton campaign to immediately desist from repeating this story,” said Rick Castrop, chief executive officer of the O’Bleness Health System.

Interestingly enough, the Clinton campaign freely admits that it didn't even bother to find out if the story in question was true -- that they simply began including it in speeches and Hillary Clinton began using it.

A Clinton spokesman, Mo Elleithee, said candidates would frequently retell stories relayed to them, vetting them when possible. “In this case, we did try but were not able to fully vet it,” Mr. Elleithee said. “If the hospital claims it did not happen that way, we respect that.”

If they "were not able to fully vet it", I'd like to know what parts they did check out in regard t the story? My guess -- that Trina Bachtel and her baby both died last summer. All the rest were irrelevant details to them, once they had a putative victim (since the baby was unborn, Clinton would not consider it a person or a victim -- Roe v. Wade, don't you know).

After all, they didn't need to check out the insurance question -- after all, that would have ruined the story. Ditto the refusal to treat question -- especially since federal law would probably have required treatment of a pregnant woman in distress at any emergency room regardless of insurance or ability to pay, and there are usually signs posted in the lobby of every hospital to that effect.

No, the story was just too good to check out closely -- and so they didn't.

Time for the Hillary Campaign Theme Song again!

UPDATE: Over at Hot Air, AllahPundit supplies us with the video of Hillary lying to the American people again.

AP also reminds us of other problems the junior Senator from new York has had with those pesky facts.

I particularly like the comment from a nurse that backs up my statement above.

As a nurse who worked in hospitals and with Insurance companies (and Medicare), IÂ’m so sick of people saying that theyÂ’re refused care because they donÂ’t have insurance. Those morons clearly donÂ’t know about the anti-dumping laws that have been in place for years now to insure that people get care regardless of their insurance. If they are refused care based on their lack of insurance, one word: Lawyer. Other words - Hospitals can get shut down for that crap.

What is it with the Clintons and the truth?

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 540 words, total size 4 kb.

When I first heard that the couple had an income of $109 million since leaving the White House, I wasn't shocked. Even though book deals are illicit when entered into by Republicans, the Clintons made a bunch of book royalties. Ditto speaking fees -- the first president Bush was lambasted for giving expensive speeches, but it is clear that the draft-dodging Bill Clinton has shown WWII hero Bush to be a piker in that regard.

But at least, I thought, the couple gave nearly 10% to charity.

Well, sort of.

Hillary ClintonÂ’s presidential campaign released their tax forms from 2000-2007 Thursday, which showed the Clintons earned more than $100 million in that time period and donated $10 million of that to their own charity.

The Clinton campaign reports donating $10,256,741 to the CFF between 2000 and 2006. During that time, CFF dispersed $2,530,100 in money to other charities and causes.

The names of other persons who donated to the CFF are not required to be disclosed.

Over the years, the CFF gave $80,000 to the Clinton Birthplace Foundation Inc., $20,000 to the Shakespeare Theatre, $40,000 to the School of the American Ballet, $5,000 to the YMCA of MarthaÂ’s Vineyard, $10,000 to Amnesty International.

The CFF also donated money to the Immanuel Baptist Church in Shackelford, Arkansas, Georgetown and Yale each year.

CFF lost a significant amount of money in the last two tax reporting years. CFF claimed $4.3 million assets on their 2005 IRS 990 forms. CFF reported much less, $255,890, on their most recent 2006 tax forms. It is not immediately clear from reading the forms where the money went or why assets were lost.

Now for those who are wondering, the CFF is the Clinton Family Foundation -- and the New York Times notes this regarding that "charity".

During that time, the Clintons paid $33.8 million in federal taxes and claimed deductions for $10.2 million in charitable contributions. The contributions went to a family foundation run by the Clintons that has given away only about half of the money they put into it, and most of that was last year, after Mrs. Clinton declared her candidacy.

Only given away half the money? Where did the organization get the where withal to do that if they had depleted their assets so low that in 2006 they had only $250K in assets? And why wait until after Hillary Clinton started campaigning to give it away? I think there is clearly something there that needs to be looked at -- is the Clinton Family Foundation actually a tax-free slush-fund for Hillary's campaign?

And am I alone in being disturbed that the charitable giving -- which, in the end, only amounts to, at most, half of the amount of their claimed contributions -- was to a fund that the Clintons controlled?

UPDATE: A Commenter on the Amanda Carpenter piece makes the following comments. Anyone with an accounting or tax background want to comment upon the issue?

Greg writes: Saturday, April, 05, 2008 9:16 AM

Carpenter (and Tinsldr2) are WRONG

We have a new "urban legend" here! Carpenter's facts are wrong. The 2006 Form 990-PF for the Clinton Family Foundation shows $4.3 million in assets at the end of the year. There is NO payment to Gloria Clinton -- or anyone else. And Tinslder2 is wrong on his facts, too. The CFF, as a private foundation, is only required to distribute 5% of its assets each year. There are lots of things to criticize the Clintons about, but this foundation is entirely legit.

**********

Greg writes: Saturday, April, 05, 2008 9:24 AM

here's the link for the 2006 return:

copy-and-paste the following link into your browser, then click the "2006" link near the bottom of the page, under "990-PF" --

http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/ffindershow. cgi?id=CLIN040

I'd rather be factually right here -- though the timing issue is STILL rather interesting, even if my source on the assets issue is wrong.

Posted by: Greg at 01:20 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 664 words, total size 4 kb.

And if he wonÂ’t, it is time for all Republicans to throw money at his Democrat challenger in the fall.

The California congressman who called the Sept. 11 attacks "simply" a plane crash ran for cover Wednesday under a barrage of ridicule from fellow Republicans, first responders and victims' families.

San Diego GOP Rep. Darrell Issa was under siege for suggesting the federal government had already done enough to help New York cope with "a fire" that "simply was an aircraft" hitting the World Trade Center.

"That is a pretty distorted view of things," said Frank Fraone, a Menlo Park, Calif., fire chief who led a 67-man crew at Ground Zero. "Whether they're a couple of planes or a couple of missiles, they still did the same damage."

"New York was attacked by Al Qaeda. It doesn't have to be attacked by Congress," added Long Island Rep. Pete King, a Republican.

"I'm really surprised by Darrell Issa," King added. "It showed such a cavalier dismissal of what happened to New York. It's wrong and inexcusable."

Now I might give Issa a pass for having simply having made his point in an inelegant fashion were it not for his past statements on behalf of Hezbollah and assorted Arab dictators and supporters of terrorism. He is a disgrace to the GOP and the nation, and needs to be urged to get out of Congress by every Republican in a position of political prominence. As Debbie Schlussel points out on her site today, we disassociated our party from racist scumbags like David Duke (interesting, isn’t it, that the Democrats still keep reelecting a mummified Kluxer like Robert Byrd) – it is now time to do the same with a terrorist shill like Issa.

Posted by: Greg at 10:50 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 298 words, total size 2 kb.

Edwards preemptively declines vice presidency.

Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards said on Thursday he would not accept the nomination for U.S. vice president as he did four years ago.

Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, dropped out of the 2008 race that is still being contested by the two remaining Democrats, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, to see who represents the party in the November 4 general election.

Edwards was picked as running mate with Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry in 2004 but the two were defeated when President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were re-elected.

After his keynote speech at CTIA, the annual U.S. wireless industry showcase, Edwards was asked in a question-and-answer session if he would accept the nomination for vice president.

"No," said Edwards, who also declined to say whether he would endorse Clinton or Obama.

John Edwards, a whacked-out, pretty-boy ambulance chaser with only a single term in the US Senate, was among the least qualified candidates to make a national ticket in my lifetime – even more than Jimmy Carter. Heck, he makes Barack Obama look qualified for the presidency, which is a neat trick given his thin resume. To know that he will not be on the Democrat ticket this year is therefore comforting to me.

Posted by: Greg at 10:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 221 words, total size 1 kb.

Including, in many cases, defense related stocks.

And some observers want to raise conflict-of-interest issues regarding that.

Members of Congress have as much as $196 million collectively invested in companies doing business with the Defense Department, earning millions since the onset of the Iraq war, according to a study by a nonpartisan research group.

Not all the companies in which lawmakers invested are typical defense contractors. Corporations such as PepsiCo, IBM, Microsoft and Johnson & Johnson have at one point received defense-related contracts, notes the report by the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics.

The center's review of lawmakers' 2006 financial disclosure statements suggests that members' holdings could pose a conflict of interest as they decide the fate of Iraq war spending. Several members earning money from these contractors have plum committee or leadership assignments, including Democratic Sen. John Kerry, independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman and House Republican Whip Roy Blunt.

The study found that more Republicans than Democrats hold stock in defense companies, but that the Democrats who are invested had significantly more money at stake. In 2006, for example, Democrats held at least $3.7 million in military-related investments, compared to Republican investments of $577,500.

Overall, 151 members hold investments worth $78.7 million to $195.5 million in companies that receive defense contracts that are worth at least $5 million. These investments earned them anywhere between $15.8 million and $62 million between 2004 and 2006, the center concludes.

Frankly, I'm less troubled by this than the authors of this study want me to be. In 2008, how do you avoid investing in Microsoft if you have a large portfolio? Good grief -- it is one of the most reliable stocks for someone to put their money in -- and there is no question that Microsoft does business with the government. Ditto PepsiCo -- heck, I would imagine that the procurement folks at the Pentagon buy quite a bit of bottled water and soft drinks for troops. And as is later noted regarding Hillary Clinton, Honeywell, Boeing and Raytheon are all stocks often found in a diversified portfolio -- though the questions she raised about the recent Airbus contract could be spun by a cynic into a sinister attempt to safeguard her investment.

In other words, nothing to see here -- despite efforts to create a story.

Posted by: Greg at 10:19 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 398 words, total size 3 kb.

For using insulting language towards an elected official.

Air America host Randi Rhodes called both Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton "whores" in a recent appearance, seen below. Rhodes, who hosts a weekday radio show on Air America, said to the cheering crowd, "What a whore Geraldine Ferraro is! She's such a fucking whore!" She then proceeded to say, "Hillary is a big fucking whore, too" to a mixed audience reaction. "You know why she's a big fucking whore? Because her deal is always, 'Read the fine print, asshole!'"

The networkÂ’s reasoning?

Air America has suspended on-air host Randi Rhodes for making inappropriate statements about prominent figures, including Senator Hillary Clinton, at a recent public appearance on behalf of Air America in San Francisco which was sponsored by an Air America affiliate station.

"Air America encourages strong opinions about public affairs but does not condone such abusive, ad hominem language by our Hosts," said chair Charlie Kireker.

UhhhhhhhhhÂ…Â…

Yeah.

Right.

Sure.

Especially when one considers history.

Randi Rhodes, the leftist talk-radio host who found herself in hot water yesterday for airing a skit that warned President Bush with gunfire, has joked about assassinating the commander in chief before.

Last May, Rhodes, who hosts a show on the struggling Air America network, imitated the sound of gunfire while saying somebody ought to take the president fishing and then shoot him.

On May 12, New York Daily News columnist Michael Goodwin wrote a piece criticizing Air America, saying he had listened to the liberal radio network one day for 10 hours.

"The queen of venom, Randi Rhodes, followed [Al] Franken in the host slot," Goodwin wrote. "Her imitation of a cracker military type telling a soldier to 'insert this fluorescent light bulb into that man's buttocks' was revolting. She compared U.S. prisons in Iraq to the 'Nazi gulag' and said, 'The day I say thank you to Rumsfeld is the same day I'll say thank you to the 12 people who raped me.'
Goodwin then notes Rhodes compared Bush and his family to the Corleones in the "Godfather" saga.

A review of the show's recording reveals Rhodes said the following in a discussion with a caller:

"The Fredo of the family is the president of the United States, so why doesn't his father or his brother … take him out for a little fishing, and let him say some Hail Marys – he loves God so much. … You know, Hail Mary, full of grace, God is with thee – pow [gunshot sound] – works for me."

Now let’s see here. You can revile the troops and compare them to soldiers of Adolf Hitler, one of the three most murderous left-wing dictators of the twentieth century. You can suggest the murder of the President of the United States REPEATEDLY on your show. None of this will get you suspended, or even disciplined – even if you do them on the air.

On the other hand, direct a couple of curse words towards a liberal politician off-air event and you will be suspended. But then again, maybe Air Hypocrisy executives are a little bit touchy about whores at the moment

So much for the notion that Air Hypocrisy has a consistently applied policy on ad hominem insulting language – and as such, this (well-deserved) suspension of Rhodes is an act of gross hypocrisy on the part of the failing radio network. Indeed, the only way for Air Hypocrisy to redeem itself in this instance is to immediately reinstate Randi Rhodes with an abject apology to her – or else fire her for her cumulative record of repeat violations of the policy for which she has been suspended, and put the rest of the network’s on-air “talent” on notice that they will face sanctions for similar offenses in the future.

But we won’t see either happen – after all, Air Hypocrisy is in the tank for the Democrats.

H/T Hot Air, The Caucus

Posted by: Greg at 11:23 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 667 words, total size 5 kb.

Hillary or Obama?

According to one email making th rounds, Obama.

According to FactCheck.org, Hillary by a hair.

A misleading e-mail has been making the rounds, alleging that Clinton has fewer legislative accomplishments than Obama, and that they are less substantive. We've had questions about it from a number of readers, and blogs have jumped into the fray. So what's the real story on the Senate careers of the Democratic presidential candidates?

We find that the e-mail is false in almost every particular:

It sets up a face-off between apples and, well, broccoli, comparing only the Clinton-sponsored bills that became law with all bills sponsored or cosponsored by Obama, whether they were signed into law or not.

It includes legislation Obama sponsored in the Illinois state Senate, a very different legislative body.

It tells us that Obama has sponsored more legislation than Clinton, when in fact he has sponsored less.

It implies that Obama has passed more bills into law than Clinton, when the opposite is true.

Contrary to the e-mail's assertions, Clinton's and Obama's contributions are not qualitatively different, and quantitatively, Clinton has the edge.

What would be really interesting, though, would be to add John McCain to the mix. The results would be a heavy advantage to the GOP nominee. After all, he has made more substantive contributions legislatively than both of the Pants Suit and the Empty Suit combined.

Posted by: Greg at 10:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 242 words, total size 2 kb.

Kay Bailey Hutchison is almost certainly to be a candidate for Governor in 2010.

More reports that Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison is running for governor. It's not like the senior senator has tried to tamp down speculation or anything. On an airplane with John McCain this month traveling between Houston and Austin, Hutchison came back to chat.

I greeted her with, "Governor, good to see you."

"I like the sound of that," she said, smiling broadly.

There was speculation she would run in 2006 – and I urged against it. I’ve come to regret that position, given the particular lousy performance of Rick Perry as governor over the last 18 months. If he were my available choice, I’d be inclined to vote for Kinky Friedman, just for the entertainment value – after all, the singer/author/funnyman actually intends to make a fool out of himself much of the time – Perry does so unintentionally.

Which leads us to other possible candidates. Other than the possibility of Perry himself running, we could see Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst seek the office after biding his time for the last decade. I canÂ’t see him sparking much more enthusiasm than Perry, though, among the GOP base, most of whom at least like Hutchison even when we disagree with her. On the other hand, there are frequent rumors about a hard-right bid from State Senator (and radio personality) Dan Patrick, given his available media footprint that covers close to half of the stateÂ’s population.

And if Hutchison runs and resigns from the Senate (not a requirement, but a strong possibility), who would replace her?

Mentioned as the top front-runners are Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst (who also has indicated that he plans to run for governor), former Secretary of State Roger Williams, Texas Railroad Commission Chairman Michael Williams and, if he so chooses, Perry himself.

Now Perry states he isn’t interested in a national position – but if his option is having his head handed to him by Hutchison in the primary, I could see naming himself as a real possibility. I sort of like the Michael Williams possibility myself.

Am I ready to slap a KBH bumper sticker on my car? Not yet – but at this point, I don’t see anyone on the gubernatorial horizon who I believe is better situated to win on 2010.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Maggie's Notebook, Adam's Blog, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, D equals S, third world county, Allie is Wired, DragonLady's World, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, , Tilting At Windmill Farms, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 12:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 460 words, total size 5 kb.