Monday, 04 February 2008
PEACE PARTNER UPDATE
Here, courtesy of the Associated Press, is the latest on how "the peace
process" is going between Israel and the people who want to annihilate it.
The bold print is mine:
3 dead in
Israeli airstrike kills leading
militant in northern Gaza Strip
The Associated Press
6:35 a.m. ET, Mon., Feb. 4,
JERUSALEM - A suicide
bomber on Monday blew himself up in the southern town that houses Israel's
secretive nuclear reactor, killing at least three other people and wounding
five, Israeli rescue officials said.
Police said there were two
attackers, though only one managed to detonate his explosives belt, but it was
not immediately clear whether the Dimona nuclear reactor was their target. The
blast, the first suicide attack in Israel in more than a year, took place in an
industrial area about six miles from the reactor site.
Separately, an Israeli
aircraft attacked a car traveling in the northern Gaza Strip on Monday, killing
one of the most wanted militants in Gaza, The Associated Press quated
Palestinian officials as saying.
The Popular Resistance
Committees said Abu Said Qarmout, its leader in northern Gaza, was killed in the
airstrike. The PRC has fired hundreds of rockets into southern Israel,
frequently sparking Israeli airstrikes and military reprisals. The group, which
has close ties to the ruling Islamic militant group Hamas, said Qarmout
had previously escaped four other Israeli attempts to kill him.
The Israeli army confirmed it
had attacked a "PRC activist."
"We heard a large explosion and people started to run. I
saw pieces of flesh flying in the air," a witness of the attack in southern
Israel, identified only by her first name, Revital, told Army
The Haaretz daily reported
that the second attacker was shot dead before he could explode
Southern Israel has been on
alert against militant attacks since the Gaza Strip's Islamic Hamas rulers
breached the border with Egypt on Jan. 23. Egypt managed to reseal the border
only on Sunday.
The breach made
Israel's Negev desert, where Dimona is located, more vulnerable to
penetration by Palestinian militants who could enter through Egypt's
Sinai desert. Dimona is about 40 miles northeast of the porous Egyptian border.
Last week, Israel closed a number of popular hiking areas in the south for fear
of militant attacks.
There was no immediate claim
of responsibility for Monday's attack.
In Gaza, Hamas
spokesman Ayman Taha said he did not know whether his group was involved but
that the attack was justified. He also rejected suggestions that the
bombing would hurt Hamas' chances of reopening the border with Egypt.
"The suicide bombings
were there before the closures and the resistance used every opportunity to make
these glorious acts," he said. "They show the Palestinians can respond
to the enemy and their crimes."
The last suicide bombing in
Israel occurred on Jan. 29, 2007, when a Palestinian attacker killed three
Israelis at a bakery in the southern Israeli city of Eilat. Before that blast,
there had been no suicide bombings in Israel for nine months, though Israel says
it has foiled numerous attempts at carrying out such attacks.
After the breakdown of
Israeli-Palestinian peace talks in 2000, Palestinian militants carried out
dozens of suicide bombings that killed hundreds of people. Last November, peace
negotiations were resumed between Israel and the moderate, West-Bank-based
government of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
-Israel was attacked by two suicide/homicide bombers
(one of whom they were able to stop in time). Innocent civilians were
killed and injured.
-Israel killed a terrorist leader responsible for
"hundreds" of attacks on Israel by his own group's reckoning.
-The group he belonged to - the one responsible
for the hundreds of attacks - has close ties to hamas, which governs
Gaza. (Note: Hamas won a parliamentary majority in Gaza, which
means its people wanted them to be in charge and got what
they wanted. Hamas then violently removed all elected officials from al
fatah, the other terrorist group elected to govern palestinian Arabs).
-The likely reason suicide/homicide bombers were able
to get into Israel was that Egypt's border fence was blown up by
hamas. This enabled them to end-around the Israeli border
fence. Until then, Israeli's border fence had prevented the
Anyone who thinks there is any "peace process" here needs
immediately psychatric attention. You cannot make peace with people who
want your country obliterated, you dead, and who consider blowing up civilians a
Personally? I wait for
the time that Israel finally has enough. I
want to see Israel give Gazans a few days to vacate their
villages along the Gaza/Israel border, blow those villages to kingdom come, put
in a second fence and electrify the distance between the two fences.
Israel is 100% justified in doing so for the protection
of its own citizens.
Then let the murderers of civilians only dream about their
SUPER TUESDAY IS UPON US
Tomorrow is Super Tuesday. 22 states will have primaries.
Until now I have put up final polling data the day before primaries and
talked about how it compared to actual results the day after. That is
pretty impractical to do when almost half the country is in play.
So bear with me through tomorrow and I'll try to hit the high - and low -
spots on Wednesday.
THE REAL VIETNAM QUAGMIRE
Fred Schwarz has written a terrific piece in the latest issue of National
Review. In it, he explains how Democrats Clinton and Obama are trapping
themselves by lying about the successes that have become so obvious in
Iraq - even to many of their fellow Democrats.
With that, I pass Mr. Schwarz's article along to you:
Vietnam Cost the Democrats the White House -- Again?
Selling defeat is not a path to
A year after the
American troop surge in Iraq began, its success is clear, even to
Post, and Rep. John Murtha. As Wesley Morgan details in the current issue of National Review,
violence is way down, American troop levels are decreasing, tribal leaders are
casting their lot with America, and a tattered al-Qaeda is on the run. Yet most
leading Democrats sound like they havent heard the news.
On the anniversary of the surge, Harry Reid wrote that as President Bush continues to cling
stubbornly to his flawed strategy, Al Qaeda only grows stronger. After Bushs
State of the Union Address last week, Hillary Clinton said, President Bush is not satisfied with failure after
failure in Iraq; he wants to bind the next president to his failed strategy . .
., while Barack Obamas assessment was: Tonight we heard President Bush say
that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know thats just not true. During
Thursday nights debate at the Kodak theater, conservative radio host Michael
Graham asked in frustration,
Do these two U.S. senators have any idea whats actually happening in
Are they simply clueless? Maybe, though you have to suspect that
they do actually know the surge is working. Unpatriotic? Call it what you will;
theres nothing like amplifying every failure and minimizing every success to
show the troops in the field which side youre rooting for. But as the French
say, Its worse than a crime; its a blunder. Insisting that America is losing
in Iraq is not only wrong factually and morally; its poor strategy.
can win an election on bad news if its obvious, but not if you have to sell the
voters on it first. Hope is a powerful emotion, and given the choice between a
candidate who says were doomed and one who says were winning, most voters will
prefer to believe the latter, particularly when the facts bear him out. Why
choose to feel dismal? Moreover, suppose you think that Americas mission in
Iraq is imperiled but not lost. Which side are you going to vote for the one
that wants to fight things out or the one that wants to quit? The doomsaying
strategy works only on voters who are naturally inclined to despair, and
thankfully, they make up a small part of the electorate.
In any event,
its unnecessary. History shows that its entirely possible to win a war and
then lose an election. Bush 41 is the most recent example (Hillarys husband
could tell her about that), but there are many others. After World War II,
voters in both Britain and America strongly repudiated the parties that had been
in power. In World War I, American troops surged into Europe and changed a
static slaughterhouse into an Allied victory that was all but complete by the
fall of 1918. On the eve of that years congressional election, Woodrow Wilson
appealed to voters to support his fellow Democrats. The result: The Senate
changed from 54-42 Democratic to 49-47 Republican, and the House from a narrow
Democratic majority to a 50-seat Republican edge. You can even go all the way
back to John Adams. For most of his single term as president, he fought an
undeclared naval war with French terrorists; then in September 1800 he
triumphantly announced a peace treaty. The nation rewarded Adams by tossing him
out of office in favor of Thomas Jefferson.
Turning the page and moving
on sounds much better to voters than switching horses in midstream, especially
when the stated plan is to turn the horse around and retreat. So why are the
Democrats so stuck on denying the facts? Why cant they admit the surges
success while criticizing the wrong turns that preceded it, and fight the
election on other issues? The answer lies in the lingering illness that the
party has been unable to shake for 40 years: McGoverns Disease, popularly known
as Vietnam Syndrome.
In its simplest form, VS causes its sufferers to
view every military action through the template of the Vietnam War. In its
advanced stages, they take this tendency a step further, seeing everything that
occurs in politics and government as a rerun of the 1960s and 1970s. Its like
that game where you cast your friends as characters on Gilligans
Island. Victims of VS remember that Richard Nixon won in 1968 by suggesting
that the war was going badly, even though the situation had stabilized by that
summer. In 1972 he was reelected in a landslide after Henry Kissinger said,
Peace is at hand; three years later, helicopters were picking Americans off
Saigon rooftops. Since, in the VS mindset, everything that happens at any time
is simply 1968 coming around again on the guitar, this means the only way to win
a wartime election is to out-trick Tricky Dick by denying any positive military
Of course, 1968 was an extraordinarily turbulent year, and four
years later George McGovern was breathtakingly inept, and there hasnt been a
draft in decades, and casualties are way below the level of Vietnam. Besides the
fact that theyre both wars, theres no particularly close parallel between
Vietnam and Iraq. But that wont stop Hillary and Barack from vying to see who
can make it look more like a catastrophe and when theyre talking to a mostly
Democratic audience, that makes sense. If theyre smart, though, once the
primaries end, the Democrats will shake off their VS, stop pitching defeatism,
and say they were behind the surge all the way (Hillary would have an easier
time pulling this off, which is another reason for Republicans to root against
her). But most of all, the Democrats need to find some new problems to complain
about (which wont be too difficult), preferably ones that voters wont have to
be laboriously convinced of first. .
To appeal to the moveon.org base of their party, Ms.
Clinton and Mr. Obama (along with reid and pelosi) are working dillgently to
"prove", against all facts and logic, that Iraq is a hopeless,
Vietnam-like quagmire. It is making them look more and more
ridiculous every day.
Listening to this quartet try and spin
the past half-year's successes in Iraq into failures, I have
repeatedly asked: "who are they rooting for"?
If Fred Schwarz is correct, maybe the answer- without any of them realizing it
- is "The Republican candidate".
A LITTLE BITTY TEAR
When you said you were leaving
That today was our last day
I said there would be no sorrow,
That I'd laugh when you walked away.
But A little bitty tear let
Spoiled my act as a clown
I had it made up not to make a
Oh, but a little bitty tear let me
That was sung by Burl Ives sang many years ago. It
was a big hit for him.
But this is the day before Super Tuesday, 2008. And tomorrow it is possible that either Hillary Clinton or Barack
Obama may be a lot closer to walking away. Will Ms. Clinton's latest
little bitty tear (the second in a series) put the finishing touches on
Mr. Obama tomorrow? Or on herself?
Here are the particulars, courtesy of Jason George writing for www.swamppolitics.com:
by Jason George
NEW HAVEN, Conn. Sen. Hillary Clinton teared up
this morning at an event at the Yale Child Study Center, where she worked while
in law school in the early 1970s.
A doctor, who was introducing Clinton, began to
choke up, leading Clinton's eyes to fill with tears, which she wiped out of her
left eye. At the time, the doctor was saying how proud he was that
sheepskin-coat, bell-bottom-wearing young woman he met in 1972 was now running
"Well, I said I would not tear up; already we're
not exactly on the path," Clinton said with emotion after the
Clinton is holding a roundtable discussion with
Connecticut women to talk about childcare and healthcare.
When Clinton got misty-eyed at an event in New
Hampshire on Jan. 7, politicos and pundits filled hours discussing if it helped
her, and Clinton eventually pointed to the moment as when she "found her voice"
and turned the corner in the Granite State.
At the time, there was much
debate if the candidate's emotional response to a question -- "How do you do
it?"" -- was genuine or calculated.
Let the conversation begin
Hooboy. It's deja vu all over again, isn't it?
The last time Hillary Clinton cried publicly I wrote that, despite how
little I trusted her and how opportune the timing was, it appeared to be
Well, fool me once and shame on you. Fool me twice and shame on me.
This is the second perfectly timed tear-fest for Ms. Clinton. I now
officially assume that she is full of what your digestive system produces after
Further, even if the crying were sincere, do you want to elect a President whose
reaction to stressful situations is to cry?
Isn't that what Kathleen Blanco, the former governor of New Orleans, did after hurricane Katrina?
She cried and asked people to pray. If it was poignancy you
wanted Ms. Blanco gave you a tidal wave of it. If it was effective governance you
wanted, she was completely useless and pathetic. Louisiana needed effective
Useless and pathetic was
bad enough when restricted only to Louisiana. Do we want it for
the entire country? Do we really want Clinton the Cryer to
sit in our oval office?
Do we want Clinton the Cryer to try dealing with Putin or ahmadinejad or
assad or the hate-USA bloc at the UN by putting on her patented sob-fest?
What do you think will happen? Will they say "oh, I'll give
you everything you want, I just can't stand seeing a lady
I know I don't. Tomorrow we'll see how Democratic
primary voters feel.
HUMAN TURD UPDATE: JAY GRODNER GOES TO COURT
A couple of weeks ago I blogged about a human turd named jay grodner.
grodner happened upon a car with U.S. Marine license plates which he then
decided to key ($2,400 of damage).
The owner of the car, Marine sergeant Mike McNulty, observed him doing
it. When grodner was confronted he lied about what he had done and whined
that he was being picked on because he is Jewish.
I ended the blog this way:
Point of order: I'm Jewish. I've
never been ashamed of that for one second. But a "man" like this tests
my attitude to the limit.
He makes me sick.
Well, apparently this incident was resolved a couple of weeks ago - January
18th to be exact. There was even a link to its resolution in the article I
posted at that time. I'm sorry to be so late in reporting what happened, but I
didn't follow that link and just found out that the grodner situation was
taken care of. My oversight.
Here is what happened, courtesy of Michelle Malkin and Beverly Pearson (one
of her readers who witnessed the proceedings):
Jerk update: Guilty troop-hating lawyer Jay
Grodner to serve probation, donate to Semper Fi Fund
I mentioned this morning
that lawyer Jay Grodner, accused of keying a Marines car on the eve of his
deployment, was scheduled to appear at a hearing today. The hearing took place
and reader Beverly Pearson e-mails an account of what happened:
It was awesome. There were probably 15 folks who
showed up in support of Sgt. McNulty. Big guys with Marine Corp. jackets on!
The creepy attorney was late again! His lawyer got up and told the judge
Attorney Grodner was late because he wanted to let the press clear out! The
judge was really mad then and ordered a warrant immediately. Then the lawyer
says Grodner is coming and will show up within 30 minutes. The judge says he
will be arrested when he gets here. Sure enough, Grodner walks in and two cops
take him out and cuff him.
Sgt. McNulty did not have an attorney but the
[States] Attorney was there for him. They all went into a side room to work a
deal. Then they all come out and the judge orders a continuance. So we all
leave and about 20 minutes later a Policeman came out and got those of us who
were still there and told us they were going to settle and we could come back
in. It was obvious the judge wanted us in the Courtroom.
Long story short, he has to pay $600 to a Semper
Fi Fund (Marine [Corps] fund for the wounded) and he has to report for Social
Services probation once per month for a year. Judge told him if he screws up
and misses any he will be arrested and will serve 364 days in jail! He told
Grodner that the reason the courtroom was so full was because Sgt. McNulty
belongs to The Band of Brothers and this is what he can expect when he
mistreats a Marine (not his exact words but the same meaning)
He really admonished him and the part I really
liked was when the judge made Grodner admit he keyed Sgt. McNultys car. He
also explained to him about military plates and how people pay extra because
the monies go into a fund for scholarships. I cried but they were tears of
Sgt. McNultys damages were $2400 but his car is
fixed and just like The Band of Brothers, he asks that this creep give $600 to
a fund for his Brothers. God Bless The Band of Brothers. This is a story the
whole world should read about.
God bless that judge.
The one and only thing I take issue with here is Ms. Malkin calling grodner a
jerk. That is too complimentary.
Come to think of it even human turd is too complimentary.
IS MCCAIN A SHOO-IN FOR THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION?
In a word: no.
I've been blogging about the surge for Mr. Romney over the past couple of
days. But Michelle Malkin has a very nicly detailed overview that adds
considerably to what I've been saying.
So here it is:.
If theres one thing weve learned in this
presidential season so far, its that nothing is a sure thing. John McCain says
hell get the nomination and that hell have it wrapped up
by Super Tuesday.
I wondered over the weekend whether the Rasmussen
poll showing McCain and Mitt Romney in a dead heat was an anomaly.
Well, heres Zogby putting Romney 8 points ahead in California:
Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, led
McCain 40 percent to 32 percent in California, where the margin of error was
3.3 percentage points. A win in California, the most populous state, could
help puncture McCains growing momentum in the Republican nomination
McCain won the last two contests, in South
Carolina and Florida, to seize the front-runners slot in a hard-fought
Republican race despite qualms among some conservatives about his past views
on taxes, immigration and campaign finance.
Romney is widening his lead in
California and has a really big advantage with conservatives, Zogby said.
Romney winning California would give some Republicans pause when they look at
McCain as the potential nominee.
Romney said he would cut short a scheduled trip
to Georgia and fly back to California on Monday for a last-minute campaign
People there are taking a real close look at
the race and it looks like Ive got a good shot there, Romney told
Look for McCain and Huck to increase their
class warfare attacks and
continuing to coo to each other about their civility.
Paul Mirengoff at Power Line explains why
hell vote for Romney:
The McCain I saw in the California debate last
week didnt look particularly electable. With the economy emerging as the
overwhelmingly central issue in the campaign, with McCains nasty streak
increasingly on display, and with his reputation for straight-talk diminishing
before our eyes, Im not prepared to base a vote for the Senator on
The decision thus comes down to policy and
effectiveness. I give Romney the edge on both counts.
Rick Santorum says that when he was in the
Senate, there were three parties the Democratic party, the Republican party,
and the McCain party. This is an exaggeration, but it contains some truth.
Think of McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Byrd (the gang of 14 deal),
and now McCain-Lieberman. On some of the most important issues of our time
political speech, immigration, judicial nominations, taxation, and now climate
change McCain has been more comfortable with liberal or centrist positions
than with conservative Republican ones. Lets not deceive ourselves into
believing that this will change if McCain gains the highest office in the
land. Its far more likely that well actually have a McCain party instead of
just a McCain faction.
By the same token, we should not believe that,
as president, Romney would be the same across-the-board conservative hes
running as. But nothing in Romneys record as governor (as opposed to his
record as a candidate for office in liberal Massachusetts) suggests that he
wont govern as a reasonably reliable conservative. At a minimum, Romney will
understand that there can be no Romney party any attempt by him to forge a
third way by allying with the Democrats ultimately would leave him
hopelessly isolated. McCain may be willing to accept that risk, but Romney
Meanwhile, McCains champions continue their
efforts to deride and marginalize opponents. First, they were deranged and
Kossack-like. Now, they need to grow up
(Barnes invoking Barry Goldwater) and get over their dyspepsia
(Kristol in the NYT).
Translation: Dont worry, be happy, shut
The GOP race in Georgia is tightening up
The latest InsiderAdvantage / Majority Opinion
Research poll shows the Republican presidential race tightening in Georgia
while Barack Obama maintains a strong lead over Hillary Clinton on the
Democratic side. The polling was conducted Saturday.
(Sample size: 388; margin of error: plus or
minus 5 percentage points. Weighted for age, race, gender and political
The GOP race in Missouri is a toss-up:
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey
shows John McCain narrowly on top at 32% followed by Mike Huckabee at 29% and
Mitt Romney at 28%.
looks at the delegate count:
Winner-take-all states that lean McCain: New
York (101), Missouri (58), Arizona (53), New Jersey (52) Connecticut (30), and
Winner-take-all states that lean Romney: Utah
(36) and Montana (25).
Winner-take-all states that lean Huckabee:
States dividing delegates Tuesday on
West Virginia: 30
North Dakota: 26
Possible scenario: If Romney takes Utah (36) and
Montana (25) and wins in California (largest Super Tuesday state), Georgia
(third-largest Super Tuesday state), Missouri (fifth-largest), Massachusetts,
and a smattering of small states (e.g., Tennessee, Montana, Alabama), he could
still be in contention.
It aint over.
Senator McCain is doing a lot of swaggering these days. I suspect it is strategic in nature
-- i.e. if he acts as though his nomination is a foregone conclusion in the
days leading up to Super Tuesday, it might cause some voters to jump on
his bandwagon and might discourage some Romney supporters enough for them
to become disheartened and not bother to vote.
Isn't this the same kind of intimidation strategy the New England
Patriots tried against the New York Giants in the days leading up
to yesterday's Super Bowl?
How'd that work out?
THE CLINTON MONEY EXPRESS
When do media talk about the insanely large - I don't mean big, or very big
or huge, but insanely large - amounts of money given the the Clintons in return
for the benefits Bill and Hill provide?
Why do media pretend they do not exist? They do. And if media
treated what the Clintons have done with even a small fraction of the
investigative journalistic efforts they put against trying to find out if
President Bush missed a national guard meeting in 1972, voters would know all
But readers of this blog have been told over and over
again. You know all too well what so many of your friends and relatives
don't -- the friends and relatives who assure you that everyone picks on the Clintons,
that they are wonderful and it's all about a blow job. The ones who actually
believe this BS.
Here is the latest outline of just how deep the corruption goes and just how
much money is involved. It comes to use from A. J. DiCintio, writing for
|Bill and Hillary
|The Fifth Column A.J. DiCintio, Featured
February 4, 2008
I cant for the
life of me understand why, but the Obama campaign hasnt thought it
important to expose the financial shenanigans in which the Clintons
have immersed themselves both during and after Bill Clintons
presidency. After all, telling the truth that another Clinton in the
Oval Office will guarantee scandals of proportions not seen since
the age of the Robber Barons will surely be the straw that breaks
the backs of a slew of Hillarys already Clinton-fatigued
So, beginning with the latest news and
working backward, heres a little help not just for Barack but for
every American who heeds George Washingtons advice to beware
the dangers of that love of power, and proneness to
abuse it, which predominates in the human
Its a long story
that Jo Becker and Don Van Natta tell in the New York Times;
happily, however, just a few details reveal how it relates to
2005, Canadian Frank Giustra, head of a fledgling uranium mining
company, privately jetted to Kazakhstan, seeking to buy into three
uranium projects controlled by Kazakhstans state-owned uranium
Giustra didnt jet alone. With him was a person who had zero
experience in uranium mining but a lot of other kinds of experience,
explaining why upon landing, the two men were whisked off to share
a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstans president, Nursultan
A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but
quashed political dissent.
You guessed right
if you guessed Mr. Giustras mystery guest was Bill Clinton.
However, to know
the full story about Bill and Franks wonderful voyage, you have to
know the following:
▪ Bill Clinton claimed he traveled to
Kazakhstan to buy discounted AIDS
▪ While in
Kazakhstan Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the
Kazakh leaders bid to head an international organization that
monitors elections and supports democracy. (Even chutzpah cant
do justice to Clintonian gall.)
▪ After Mr.
Nazarbayev won re-election in a process condemned for [an]
atmosphere of intimidation [and] ballot-box stuffing, Mr. Clinton
congratulated him by gushing, Recognizing that your work has
received an excellent grade is one of the most important rewards in
life. (Would have used the term, but vomitive comes up short when
applied to Clinton style praise.)
▪ Mr. Giustra got
the contract, thereby shocking the worlds big uranium players and
making himself filthy rich.
▪ Months after
the deal was finalized, Giustra contributed $31.3 million to the
William J. Clinton Foundation.
▪ Later, he
promised the Foundation an additional $100
▪ In February,
2007, his uranium company was acquired for $3.1 billion.
▪ Very soon
after that deal, Giustra arranged for the head of Kazakhstan uranium
mining to take a trip to Chappaqua, NY, where he and Clinton
listened to the mans pitch for Kazakhstan to buy a 10 percent stake in Westinghouse, a United States
supplier of nuclear technology
(Remember that a
year earlier Mr. Clinton had advised Dubai about how to respond to
the outcry over a Dubai companys plan to run American
▪ Mr. Clinton
turned down the opportunity to lobby for the Westinghouse
▪ The Kazakh
representative, however, announced he was pleased by the chance to
promote his nations proposal to a former president and quoted Mr.
Clinton as saying, This was very important for
▪ Both Mr.
Clinton and Mr. Giustra denied that [the] meeting
▪ Mr. Giustra
also denied ever arranging for the Kazakh official to meet Mr.
confronted with evidence by The Times, both men admitted the
apologizing that the meeting had escaped [his] memory until [The
Times] raised it, Mr. Giustra also admitted that he asked
[Clinton] to meet with the head of Kazatomprom [the Kazakh company]
to discuss the future of the nuclear energy industry.
As you think
about the entire significance of that wonderful excursion, keep in
mind that Mr. Clintons consulting work, his speech making, and his
talents as an investment adviser (not to mention his gifts as a
pardoner) have brought tens of millions into the Clintons joint
checking account and many hundreds of millions into the Clinton
Library and the Clinton Foundation.
lose sight of the fact that Bill Clinton had amassed a whole lot of
experience in working with billionaires before he met Mr. Giustra
explaining why he was thoroughly prepared to get to work for him on
Much of that
experience came from efforts as an investment adviser for
billionaire Ron Burkle, on whose personal (and lavish) 757 the
Clintons love to jet here and there, smugly nodding off into dreams
about the tens of millions Bills job has stuffed into Bills wallet
and Hillarys purse.
For doing what?
Well, for one thing, taking good investment care of Dubais billions
of oily dollars.
And dont forget
that one of Burkles funds figured out it could make good money
investing funds from state retirement systems (CALPERS, of
California, for example, has assets of $200 billion.)
Perhaps to get
ones very private hands on some of that very public money one might
hire a very well connected, very powerful former political figure
with very powerful contacts no need to go on, is
In addition to
flying high with Burkle, the Clintons have also done some serious
flying with Indias high tech billionaire Vinod Gupta, regarding
which the Washington Post has this to say:
...the Clintons have jetted around on Vinod Guptas
corporate plane, to Switzerland, Hawaii, Jamaica, Mexico -- $900,000
worth of travel. The former president secured a $3.3 million
consulting deal with Guptas technology firm. His presidential
library got a six-figure gift, too.
With regard to
the love Mr. Guptas lavished on the Clintons, you should know that
shareholders of one of his companies sued, claiming that the
largesse the company showered upon the Clintons was so obscenely
large it had a deleterious effect on their
From India, we
move on to (where else?) China. Remember James Riady of Lippo Group
and the Clinton Chinagate campaign fundraising scandal? (You will
recall that the scandal reeked not only of illegal foreign money
coming into a campaign from Chinas generals but also very highly
classified U.S. military technology flowing out to those same
Remember, too, that according to the
U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental
Affairs, Mr. Riady
and his father had a long-term relationship with a Chinese
Having done all
that remembering, consider that while in office, Mr. Clinton
designated as a federal preserve an area in Utah holding $1 trillion
(yes, $1 trillion) of rare low-sulfur coal, thereby taking that coal
off the U.S. and world markets.
Consider that the
only other huge deposit of such coal is found in Indonesia.
Then, consider that the Lippo Group has enormous influence in
Now, you are
prepared to think of a whole bunch of important (and frightening)
questions for yourself.
This piece ends,
but the story of Bill and Hillary Billions goes on and on and on.
Why? Because everyone knows that the public has no clue about all
the people and circumstances surrounding the Clintons personal
public will never get a look at every last contributor to the
Clinton Foundation, including a full explanation of each persons or
institutions connection to the Clintons.
Clinton openly says he will continue raising money for his
foundation during a Hillary presidency.
And because a
President Hillary is certain to imitate her husband in fulfilling
her desire to deposit some really big money into the family
checkbook not to mention her need for maybe a billion or so to
fund her own library and her own foundation.
Thats why Barack Obama ought to
expose the truth about Hillary Clintons candidacy for the worlds
most powerful office and not just regarding the love of money but
every other danger posed by that love of power,
and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human
Fortunately, if he wont do it, there are plenty of others
Pretty breathtaking, isn't it? And that's before we get to most of the
more recent $$$ scandals that Mr. DiCintio left out (probably for lack of
space). The ones involving people like Norman Hsu, Abdul Rehman Jinnah,
Sant Chatwal, the spate of oriental dishwashers and busboys magically coming up
with thousands of dollars of "their" money to contribute to Ms.
Clinton, etc. etc. etc.
These are the scandals that you
know about by reading this blog. Unfortunately, due to mainstream media burying them on
behalf of Hill and Bill, they are also the ones that get patronizing, "why
do I have to put up with this idiot" looks from
so many Clinton supporters you mention them to.
Why? Because people kept ignorant of these
scandals are then liberated to conclude that YOU don't know what
YOU'RE talking about, not them. That's what gets you comments
like "If these are real, I would have heard about them, right?"
But Barack Obama and his team knows all about every one of these
scandals. So where is he? Why is he not attacking her for it the way
she attacked him on Tony Rezko?
If Barack Obama loses the Democratic nomination to Hillary Clinton it will,
in no small part, be because he does not have the intestinal fortitude to fight
them by exposing their own sordid, money-grubbing, corrupt activities over these
And if Mr. Obama can't do that, he probably
deserves to lose the
nomination. Do you want someone without the guts to expose Bill and
Hill sitting across the negotiating table from an adverserial head of state during a