Democrats in Congress have temporarily abandoned their plans to surrender the Iraq War by forcing a premature withdrawal of US troops. Basically, the Democrats don’t have enough votes to require American troops to leave or cut off funding, as everyone knew they wouldn’t, so they are taking a little break for now.

What’s interesting, however, is that even though Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards—the leading DFL candidates for the Democratic Party nomination—have all refused to pledge that they would withdraw troops before 2013 should they be elected, Democrats are still pushing forward with their Sabotage The War effort. But why?

It’s a disgusting political game, and nothing more. I’ll bet that if the Democrats actually had a chance at succeeding at withdrawing troops that they wouldn’t be pressing this issue. They know that they’ve got no chance, so they can be as absurd as they want to be.

But at least they get in good with their delusional, anti-war liberal supporters by pretending to be fighting for something they know they have no chance of winning. This way, they dampen the criticism of their vocal constituency and the political contributions keep rolling in. Liberals are so gullible!

I wonder if the anti-war lefties realize that they’ve got no one they can support who actually shares their viewpoint regarding the war.

Remember: a few months ago Hillary Clinton was demanding that American troops start leaving Iraq in 90 days and now she herself is refusing to commit to pulling out soldiers by 2013. Absolute fraud is what it is.

The battle for Iowa has taken a turn in Hillary Clinton’s favor. Mrs. Clinton has captured the lead from John Edwards and now has the support of 29% of respondents in a recent poll. Edwards dropped from 29% in May to 23% now. Barack Obama sits at 22%.

It has been known for many years that Hillary Clinton would be the nominee when she ran for President; it was known she would run for President, too. Well, we Conservatives and Republicans knew it. Perhaps the intellectually challenged people who comprise the Democrat voter base didn’t know it, but we did.

The 2008 election will be about the swing voters, as have the past few presidential elections. Will swing voters turn a blind eye to Hillary Clinton’s hypocrisy and support for the War in Iraq like her liberal supporters have? Will they overlook her numerous flip-flops? What will they think of Hillary’s demand that troops start being withdrawn from Iraq in 90 days, but her refusal to promise that she would withdraw troops by 2013?

By definition, 50% of the population is of below average intelligence. The vast majority of those dimwits vote for the Democratic Party. I have to hope that enough swing voters are smart enough to see Hillary Clinton for the lying, hypocritical fraud that she is. Otherwise, we are all doomed.

Add Rudy Giuliani to the latest list of people predicting a Clinton-Obama DFL ticket for the 2008 election.

This pairing does make sense given the anti-white male mentality of liberals, which comprise the most vocal component of the Democratic constituency. However, what possible benefit would it have for the DFL’s chances of winning in 2008? The Democratic Party already has a solid lock on the black vote, regularly capturing 85% - 90%. So there isn’t any benefit there.

There’s always the “rock star” aspect of Barack Obama that could be beneficial to Hillary Clinton among unthinking, star struck voters. Obama has a bigger following with Hollywood phonies than Hillary does and they love to stump for their causes.

But if we look at this logically, we find that Barack Obama is cleaner than Hillary Clinton. He doesn’t have the legacy of scandals and failures that Hillary has. He doesn’t have the phony marriage and constantly cheating spouse to drag him down. He didn’t vote for the Iraq War because he wasn’t around to, so he doesn’t need to lie and pretend he was mislead or claim to have voted for something entirely different.

And Obama is much more intelligent than Hillary Clinton, too, which really isn’t saying much. He’s a good orator, even if what he says is nothing but superficial fluff and unrealistic, unattainable promises.

If anyone should be the running mate in this pairing, it is Hillary.

But is it possible that some white male Democrats could feel excluded by such a ticket? Will Muslims and other male-centric cultures vote for a female president? Only time will tell.

The main reason that the Democratic Party has any support is because of their never-ending promises to steal money from the people who earn it and give it to the people who didn’t.

At a campaign stop in Illinois, Barack Obama claimed that the Iraq War is preventing America from addressing its “needs”. Everything is a need or a right to these DFLers. Obama then promised action on low wages, health care, affordable college education, and retirement security as if he’s some kind of Superman who can defy the laws of economics and make all these things magically happen.

But how much is this going to cost? How much will it cost the taxpayers? How much will it cost the economy in terms of lost economic activity and jobs? Why should a high school kid working a part-time job deserve a high wage? Why should any unskilled, uneducated Democrat-voting Neanderthal deserve a high wage?

Most Democrat voters aren’t very bright. It’s a fact. Democrat voting communities have the lowest academic achievement in the modernized world and those voters prove it every day. They aren’t going to be thinking about how their lives will be negatively impacted by the Democrats’ massive tax increases that will be required to pay for all the promises they are making. They won’t be thinking about this because they are either not smart enough to consider such things or they don’t care because they possess a “gimme gimme gimme” mentality whereby they deserve your money by virtue of their very existence.

Democrats pretend that all they will have to do is roll back the Bush tax cuts and that the additional revenue will be enough to pay for the hundreds of billions in new spending. The truth of the matter is that repealing the Bush tax cuts wouldn’t generate anywhere near enough money to cover the Democrat’s spending goals, particularly when you consider the negative economic impact tax increases have, leaving average, middle-class taxpayers and future generations on the hook for the bill.

After the Bush tax cuts federal tax revenues actually increased. Why? Because more money in the pockets of the people who earn it means more spending which means more jobs which means more earnings which are taxed.

But don’t try explaining that to a Democrat voter. Appealing to Democrats with simple logic is like trying to teach a dog how to talk; it just isn’t going to happen.

One more thing: if Democrats are so concerned about the high cost of college education, then why is it that the most liberal institutions of higher learning in this country have the highest tuition?

See how idiotic these Democrats are?

The only time a Democrat isn’t lying is when he or she isn’t saying anything. But even then, they are probably thinking about lying.

At yesterday’s Democratic presidential debate at Dartmouth College in Hanover, NH, Barack Obama said, “(When Hillary Clinton failed to socialize healthcare in the early 1990s) 80 percent of Americans already wanted universal health care…”

Oh really? Where does Obama get that figure? I don’t know a single person who wants government-controlled healthcare. The 85% of Americans who do have health insurance probably don’t want to trade in what they’ve got for an inferior Democrat-controlled system.

The only thing the Democratic Party has succeeded at in the past 50 years is to take peaceful, prosperous middle-class communities and transform them into welfare dependent hellholes of crime and violence. Well, they’ve also succeeded at destroying schools and dumbing down education, too. Let’s give credit where credit is due.

If given the chance, Democrats will destroy healthcare, too.

I think these Democrats make up their statistics on the fly. They do nothing but lie. You must be mighty gullible or mighty stupid to support the Democratic Party.

After years of phony political posturing to appease their gullible liberal base (that has money to give), the leading Democratic presidential contenders admit that they can’t guarantee that they would be able to completely withdraw troops from Iraq by 2013 if elected.

So, all along it looks like they’ve been trying to sabotage the Iraq War effort as part of a twisted political game. Just a few months ago Hillary Clinton was demanding that Bush start pulling troops out within 90 days. Now, it looks like she didn’t mean it.

Here’s an interesting passage from the article:

Edwards sought to draw a distinction between his position and Clinton’s, saying she had said recently she wants to continue combat missions in Iraq.

“I do not want to continue combat missions in Iraq,” he said.

Clinton responded quickly, saying Edwards had misstated her position. She said she favors the continued deployment of counterterrorism troops, not forces to engage in the type of combat now under way.

Who exactly does Mrs. Clinton think American troops are fighting in Iraq right now? They are fighting Al Qaeda terrorists, that’s who. Our troops are engaged in counter-terrorism operations now. Hillary is lying through her teeth and pretending that she’d do something different than what is being done now when, in fact, she would do exactly what is being done right now. She would be doing what Bush is doing!

Are Democrat voters smart enough to grasp that? Nope! Democrat voters are dumb as bricks. That’s why their communities have the lowest academic achievement in the modernized world.

Democrats be dumb.

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has promised to return $850,000 in donations raised by Norman Hsu, who is under investigation for violating election laws.

Hsu was a fugitive from justice who pleaded no contest to defrauding investors in 1991. He surrendered to authorities on August 31st, 2007. Prior to his surrender, he was frequently seen hobnobbing with prominent Democrats.

This is not the first time the Clintons have gotten all buddy-buddy with a fugitive who gave them big money. On President Bill Clinton’s last day in office, he issued a pardon to Marc Rich, whose wife was a huge Democratic Party donor.

It’s laughable to look at these dirty frauds and liars, the Democrats, whose hypocrisy is unmatched. Hillary Clinton has criticized the Bush administration for “cronyism” and ties to big money, then she turns around and actually does what she falsely accuses Bush of doing.

Hillary Clinton’s liberal base will, of course, over look this transgression. Liberals are, after all, nothing but frauds and liars themselves. Hillary’s frequent scandals shall not dissuade them from supporting her as long as she promises more welfare freebies and wealth redistribution. That’s all it is about for Democrat voters.

Just as everyone thought, Barack Obama is sinking in the polls, John Edwards is still DOA, and Hillary Clinton is widening her lead in the race for the Democratic nomination for the 2008 presidential race.

I sure hope Hillary wins the nomination. She’s going to get her butt kicked in the polls come election day!

Poll standings:

Hillary Clinton: 48%
Barack Obama: 26%
John Edwards: 12%

The only white male among the three is far behind. Liberals are tossing their white male counterparts aside like the garbage they are.

Hillary Clinton’s flip-flops, lies, and pandering are well documented. Her ever-changing positions will be detrimental to her among sensible voters, I’m sure. Hillary is a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry was.

Here’s to Republican victory in 2008!

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was booed by liberals at the annual Yearly Kos convention. Yearly Kos is a convention put on by radical extremist liberals from the liberal nutjob blog Daily Kos. Daily Kos is a blog by socialists (progressives, they call themselves) intent on destroying America’s capitalist economy by extreme wealth confiscation, high taxes, and cradle-to-grave welfare benefits for anyone and everyone unwilling to work to support themselves.

Interestingly, Daily Kos has some of the highest advertising rates for blogs around and has tons of advertisements on its homepage. They also have sponsors for their convention.

You see, liberals–all liberals–are frauds who preach wealth redistribution and scorn for the rich while attempting to make as much money for themselves as they can. Daily Kos (and the scumbag who founded it) is no exception.

Clinton was booed, according to news reports, because she would not pledge to refuse campaign contributions from lobbyists. Of course Clinton wouldn’t make such a pledge. If she did, she might have to dip into her own wealth (estimated at $50 million) to help finance her campaign. Rich liberals are great at taking and spending other people’s money, but they keep a firm grip on their own.

Daily Kos guru Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, said, “We may decide she’s not our first choice, but she’s not a bad choice.”

The fact that anti-war liberal nutjobs like the people at Daily Kos would ignore Hillary Clinton’s adamant support for the war and throw their backing to her was a given. Liberals have no guiding principles at all.

All these liberal nuts want is to feel powerful by seeing which presidential candidates will grovel before them the most. It’s funny to think how important these left-wing troglodytes must feel when the entire DFL presidential field flies in to grovel before them as they did at Yearly Kos. (And spewing massive amounts of “global warming” causing pollution into the atmosphere at the same time.)

Hillary will get on her hands and knees and pander to anyone at anytime. Hillary Clinton’s original support for the war is of no consequence. What matters is that she is on her hands and knees groveling before the liberal nuts; they are getting what they want.

If Hillary spent as much time on her hands and knees for her husband (Bill Clinton–remember him?) as she does for anti-war kooks and socialists, maybe her husband wouldn’t have cheated on her all throughout their phony marriage!

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards has received much of his financial support from lawyers. More than half of donors to Edwards who listed their occupations revealed that they were lawyers.

Of course! Democrat John Edwards is a greedy lawyer who got rich filing frivolous lawsuits. It only makes sense that other greedy lawyers are going to support the man who will most vigorously fight against Republican efforts to reform the tort system and make it more difficult to get rich filing frivolous lawsuits.

This is the way it works: many, if not the majority, of Democrat politicians are lawyers. They write the laws. To assist their profession, they can write laws as simple or as complex as they want to. The more complex and difficult to interpret, the more people will need to hire lawyers. Also, politicians are in a position to encourage or discourage the filing of frivolous lawsuits via their legislative activities, determine attorney’s fees, and influence monetary awards and thus the incentive to file lawsuits.

If you look at the Democratic Party objectively, you will see nothing but rampant greed, fraud and self-serving behavior. From environmentalist frauds like Al Gore charging $100,000 to give 75-minute presentations on the horrors of global warming, to movie makers who make fake documentaries full of lies, to multi-millionaires like Hillary Clinton who want to steal taxpayer money to help the poor while refusing to use her own wealth, all you will find is greed and fraud.

(Article)

The catfight between Hillary Clinton’s camp and the Barack Obama camp continues.

The origin of this typical Democrat silliness is the Youtube debate from a few nights ago where Barack Obama said that he would be willing to pander to leaders of hostile nations by meeting with them.

The Clinton camp is saying that Obama is naive for his willingness to meet with rogue leaders. The Obama camp snorted back that Hillary Clinton would maintain the Bush status quo with regard to international diplomacy.

John Edwards, meanwhile, is demonstrating his self-serving nature by using this spat to his advantage. Edwards said:

If you’re looking for what’s wrong in Washington, why the system is broken, one perfect example is what’s been happening over the last four days. We’ve had two good people, Democratic candidates for president, who’ve spent their time attacking each other instead of attacking the problems facing our country.

Perhaps these DFLers should get back to their master plan for America: the confiscation of more wealth from hardworking Americans and complete pandering to terrorists, life-long welfare recipients, and convicted felons.

(Article)

Democrats are shameless panderers, aren’t they? They’ve got no pride, no dignity, nothing–just bullshit and meaningless platitudes.

Barack Obama groveled before union members today (or will…), promising that he’ll stand beside them if he is elected president. Obama spewed more mental poison–the typical Democrat tripe: inequality, everybody is out to get you, I’m the only one who can save you, yada yada yada.

Let’s look at some of Barack Obama’s “genius”, shall we?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070721/ap_on_el_pr/obama_labor

We are facing a Washington that has thrown open its doors to the most anti-union, anti-worker forces we’ve seen in generations…

Despite record low unemployment, rising exports, and rising worker incomes, evil Georgie Bush be out to get you.

What we need to make real today is the idea that in this country we value the labor of every American.

Only I, Barack Obama, can give you strength for you are weak and powerless and incapable of being anything other than a peon on your own. You cannot live without me!

I stood on the picket line and marched with workers at the Congress Hotel in Chicago last week. I had marched with them four years earlier and I told them when I left that if they were still fighting four years from now, I’d be back on that picket line as president of the United States.

I stand beside you, lowly scum. Be thankful you have me because without me, Barack Obama, you are nothing!

When I talk about hope, when I talk about change, when I talk about holding America up to its ideals of opportunity and equality, this isn’t just the rhetoric of a campaign for me, it’s been the cause of a life — a cause I will work for and fight for every day as your president.

I will make sure equality exists…by taking all of your money and giving it to someone else! Only I can tell you what equality is and is not. I am your savior, your messiah, I am Barack Obama the Great!

Vote for me and I will make sure that your jobs are safe–by raising taxes so high as to make American production unprofitable and unrewarding. Then, you’ll really need me as your jobs fly overseas so fast all you’ll see is a blur.

Hmmm, I wonder what Barack Obama has to offer to intelligent, successful people. Oh, I already know: absolutely nothing but more wealth confiscation.

Yeah, I think I’ll support Barack Obama so he can steal more of what I’ve worked so hard for…

Intelligent, hard-working Americans have absolutely no use for the Democratic Party; the DFL is only a barrier to achieving your dreams.

It seems that DFL presidential candidate John Edwards has misplaced his testicles. Has anyone seen them???

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1313880.html

You’ve just got to laugh when it is the woman who is the strong one in the family and the husband is the weak one. Talk about role-reversal. John Edwards dispatches his wife to do the things he should be doing.

It doesn’t matter. John Edwards is toast. Nobody in their right mind could support such a blatant fraud and hypocrite. But then again, we are talking about Democrat voters… They tend to support anyone who promises more welfare freebies regardless of the true economic cost.

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards has slipped in a recent poll of New Hampshire voters. Edwards had a dismal 9% support of voters, compared to 14% in June.

Further, 24% of Democrat respondents said they would not vote for Edwards.

Edwards is toast!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/18/nh.poll/index.html

Maybe Edwards could boost his popularity by finding a new, more expensive hair stylist.

Oprah Winfrey is going to host a big-money fundraiser for Illinois Senator Barack Obama at her Santa Barbara, CA, mansion in September. The minimum price to get in is $2,300; if you can bring $50,000 in funds, you can stay for dinner.

So much for the Democrats being for the “poor and downtrodden”, huh? The fact is Democrats pander to the underclass because they need the votes to get elected. But Democrat elites shut out those poor, unclean Democrat voters every chance they get. The poor are nothing more than pawns in the big-money DFL machine.

All these Democrats are frauds. Barack Obama is nothing more than a whore to big money–Big Hollywood money, in particular. Obama will be happy to shuck ‘n’ jive for you, if you’ve got the money to donate, that is. And Oprah, you remember how she cried about racism because a store in France wouldn’t let her in after hours? She’s a crybaby fraud. Enough said about Oprah.

The entertainment industry is full of phonies. They are people who earn their livings pretending to be something they are not. So it isn’t surprising that this fraud carries over to their everyday lives. Their devotion to Barack Obama is puzzling to many. Obama is as lacking in substance as one can possibly get. He gives flowery speeches that appeal to unthinking idiots. But he never elaborates on how he is going to implement–or pay for–his massive social programs. Obama is style over substance, which is why he appeals to Big Hollywood frauds. Obama is an empty suit if ever there was one.

Oprah Winfrey is an uppity Oreo. She doesn’t want anything to do with her black brethren. She surely isn’t going to invite black ghetto dwellers to her fancy mansion, is she? No, of course not.

There may be some black faces at Oprah’s fundraiser. But they’ll be bussing tables and sweeping the floor.

By the way, how much “global warming” causing carbon dioxide is going to be emitted into the atmosphere by Oprah and her rich buddies in the course of this unnecessary fundraiser?

Yes, all these Democrats are dirty frauds and liars. Each and every one. You see, these wealthy Democrats are entitled to their money and have the right to pollute at massive levels. But you and I, the lowly working stiffs, we don’t. We must live our lives the way they tell us. Just ask Al Gore.

Democrat presidential contender John Edwards started a multi-state poverty tour a couple of days ago to shine a spotlight on poverty in America. Edwards is going to regale the impoverished with his $1,250 haircut.

Unbelievable! It’s unbelievable that any thinking human being can support a man who is such a blatant fraud and hypocrite. Every single time that I think a Democrat can’t sink any lower in the fraud and hypocrisy department, one exceeds my wildest expectations.

Judge a man not by his words, but by his deeds. OK, let’s judge John Edwards:

• He got rich by filing frivolous lawsuits against doctors
• He lives a lavish lifestyle of wealth and luxury, indulging his expensive tastes every chance he gets whether it is his 28,000 square foot mansion or $1,250 haircuts
• He says he cares about the poor, but doesn’t use his own riches to assist the impoverished

The verdict: John Edwards is a disgusting fraud and hypocrite.

John Edwards has reported assets of $30 million. He made $480,000 from a part-time job at a hedge fund (I didn’t know ambulance-chasing lawyers were financial experts). He also made $400,000 from giving speeches, mostly to college kids. (Recall that Edwards charged poor college kids $55,000 to give a speech about poverty. “Hey poor college kids: pay me, an already-rich Democrat, $55,000 and I’ll tell you about poverty for an hour!” )

Let’s say Edwards woke up one morning and decided that he was tired of being a hypocrite. Let’s say he decided to give the bulk of his wealth away to the poor. If he kept $2 million for himself, he could invest that in some high-quality corporate bonds and generate a pre-tax annual income of $100,000—enough for any family to live on and more than the majority of American families earn. Then he could donate $28 million to aid the poor he pretends to care so much about. If you assume a construction cost of $75,000 per housing unit for modest housing, enough units could be built with Edwards’ money to house over 370 impoverished families!!!

Don’t worry, Edwards will never use his own money to help the poor. Why not? Because he is a fraud, that’s why! He preaches one thing, and lives his life the exact opposite. Two Americas, Mr. Edwards? Which one are you living in? And in your world is everyone blind to your hypocrisy? Because in the real world we aren’t.

Forty-plus years of the War On Poverty has failed. Trillions of dollars have been stolen from those who earn it and given to those too lazy to earn it. What makes Edwards think that more of the same is going to do the trick?

Democrats never learn.

What causes poverty? Why are poor people poor? Democrats never discuss this. Most sensible people already know the answer, however. More on this later…

John Edwards isn’t worthy of being president. He is a slimy lawyer who will do or say anything to get what he wants. He is pandering to the poor because they are the easiest group to win support from. All it takes is promises of more welfare freebies and stick-it-to-the-rich policies and they line up behind you.

As most people expected, Hillary Clinton leads the Democratic field for the 2008 presidential nomination. This is according to a Washington Post poll taken from May 29th to June 1st. The numbers:

Clearly, John Edwards is getting his butt kicked in the race. This is despite tons of free publicity as a result of his wife’s cancer announcement a couple of months ago. Given that he was the 2004 Vice Presidential nominee, things are not looking good for Edwards. He has dropped 6% since the April poll.

So why is Edwards even running with numbers this bad? Is it so he can bill $400 haircuts to his campaign instead of paying for them out of his own pocket?

We wouldn’t expect a multi-millionaire, ambulance-chaser lawyer like Edwards to use his own money for personal grooming expenses, would we?
Maybe Edwards should drop out of the race and go back to giving speeches about poverty to poor college kids at $55,000 a pop? These Democrats are such frauds!
As for Al Gore, this poll seems to dash the hopes of the radical Environmentalists; Gore would have only 17% support to Clinton’s 35% if he joined the race.