-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2008/03/what-you-say-by-not-saying-anything-at.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
for example, lots of chinese names. how do you think Hillary Clinton (on a Senator's salary) can afford a 5 million loan and not blink an eye? Sure she wrote a book, but that was a long time ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc
(Spoiler: Watch the guy behind her get his head blown off when she hugs the girl.)
Believe your eyes; HRC's flinty piratical exhaustion personifies a campaign alive only thru unprecedented aggression and deception.
Clinton stocks are selling low at 19.5.
The market has spoken.
http://www.intrade.com/
regardless... Its over, and she can not win.
so Hillary toss the sink filled with dirty dishes and cock roaches.... it isn't going to help.
The Clinton's and McStain are all fucking crooks.
I want a law that prohibits people who leave government from doing business with the government for 10 years. No more $1 million speaches for alan greenspan.
I am not sure what people expect to see. But maybe that's just me.
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id...
New Poll out :Shillary's Neg number is UP! to 48%.... she is going down faster then a Spitzer hooker
---
but not as fast as monica?
good poll news
Have you any thoughts ‘bout Daddy’s lie?
Bring out all the pain you hide,
And you’ll be the news today,
On talk shows.
Hey there Chelsea girl,
Did you notice interns floating by?
Could it be that Dad was high
When snared in Lewinsky’s hair?
Your always giving cover
But never catching Dad’s eye
Come whack that fat slut intern and cry,
For Mother’s sake.
Hey there Chelsea girl,
What’s the deal with Monica deep inside?
Bring out all the pain you hide
And make me page 1 today.
Don’t be so scared of trying
To replay family lies
This time the news is staged by yourself,
So you’ll be
A new Chelsea girl,
Talk up Chelsea girl.
She told this fish story, and thought we would buy it, hook, line and sinker. She mis-spoke?? that is to funny.... and why in hell would you have your child with you, standing there if there were bulets flying??
be very honest, i have no idea why she made this whole thing up.... nuffin to gain. If she can not remember that day.. she sure as hell can NOT be Prez.
Hillary's approval rating is the lowest.
Looks like her kitchen sink politics are harming her!!!
NBC-WSJ poll: New Clinton lows
Posted: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 6:30 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: Democrats, 2008, Clinton, Obama, Polls
From NBC's Chuck Todd
As expected, one of the two major Democratic candidates saw a downturn in the latest NBC/WSJ poll, but it's not the candidate that you think. Hillary Clinton is sporting the lowest personal ratings of the campaign. Moreover, her 37% positive rating is the lowest the NBC/WSJ poll has recorded since March 2001, two months after she was elected to the U.S. Senate from New York.
The poll was conducted Monday and Tuesday this week by Hart-McInturff and surveyed 700 registered voters, which gives the poll a margin of error of +/- 3.7%. In addition, we oversampled African-Americans in order to get a more reliable cross-tab on many of the questions we asked in this poll regarding Sen. Barack Obama's speech on race and overall response to last week's Rev. Jeremiah Wright dustup.
On that issue specifically, 32% of folks said he "sufficiently addressed the issue," while 26% of those folks believe he needs to address the Wright controversy further; 31% of voters surveyed did not see the speech or had no opinion. Interestingly, of those voters who said they saw the speech, 47% said Obama sufficiently addressed the Wright issue while 37% said he needs to address it further. Among whites, 45% were satisfied with Obama's explanation, 38% were not; Among blacks, 67% said the speech was sufficient while 25% want him to address it further.
Overall, 55% of voters told us that they were "disturbed" by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright videos that circulated so widely on cable TV and the Internet.
As for the damage this controversy did or didn't do to Obama, it's a mixed bag. Yes, Obama saw some of his numbers go down slightly among certain voting groups, most notably Republicans. But he's still much more competitive with independent voters when matched up against John McCain than Hillary Clinton. And he still sports a net-positive personal rating of 49-32, which is down only slightly from two weeks ago when it was 51-28. Again, the biggest shift in those negative numbers were among Republicans.
On one of the most critical questions we've been tracking for a few months, Obama showed resilience. When asked if the three presidential candidates could be successful in uniting the country if they were elected president, 60% of all voters believed Obama could be successful at doing this, 58% of all voters said McCain could unite the country while only 46% of voters said the same about Clinton. All three candidates saw dips on this issue, by the way. In January, 67% thought Obama could unite the country; 68% thought McCain could do it; and 55% said Clinton would be able to pull it off.
The fact they all three dropped equally in the last three months is a sign that the campaign is becoming more ideological and partisan.
In the head-to-head matchups, there weren't huge shifts in the numbers with Obama and Clinton dead even at 45% in the national Democratic primary matchup (a slight increase for Obama from early March). In the general-election matchups, Obama led McCain by 2 points and McCain led Clinton by 2 points; all margin of error results and nothing to get too excited over.
One thing about these head-to-head matchups: our pollsters found that for the second poll in a row, more than 20% of Clinton and Obama supporters say they would support McCain when he's matched up against the other Democrat. There is clearly some hardening of feelings among some of the most core supporters of both Democrats, though it may be Obama voters, who are more bitter in the long run.
Why? Because among Obama voters, Clinton has a net-negative personal rating (35-43) while Clinton voters have a net-positive view of Obama (50-29). Taken together, this appears to be evidence that Obama, intially, should have the easier time uniting the party than Clinton.
Considering the doom-and-gloom some predicted for Obama with regard to the Wright controversy, the overall tenor of the electorate appears to still be favorable for him. He's mortal, but he's survived... for now. It's not clear whether he'd be this resilient if another controversy exploded as big as Wright, but it appears that voters are giving him the benefit of doubt. There's lots of evidence inside these numbers that voters still would like to know more about Obama, and that is both an opportunity and a potential obstacle.
I must have done something wrong.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Time_Cheery_unapo...
Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton vowed to fight all the way to the Democrats' August convention in her bruising battle against Barack Obama for the White House nomination.
In an interview with Time magazine published Wednesday, the New York senator said even pledged delegates would be up for grabs as she vies to overhaul Obama's seemingly impregnable lead in the 10 remaining nominating contests.
"We talk a lot about so-called pledged delegates, but every delegate is expected to exercise independent judgment," she said, staking out a position on elected convention representatives that is hotly contested by the Obama camp.
As expected, one of the two major Democratic candidates saw a downturn in the latest NBC/WSJ poll, but it's not the candidate that you think. Hillary Clinton is sporting the lowest personal ratings of the campaign. Moreover, her 37% positive rating is the lowest the NBC/WSJ poll has recorded since March 2001, two months after she was elected to the U.S. Senate from New York.
In the head-to-head matchups, there weren't huge shifts in the numbers with Obama and Clinton dead even at 45% in the national Democratic primary matchup (a slight increase for Obama from early March). In the general-election matchups, Obama led McCain by 2 points and McCain led Clinton by 2 points; all margin of error results and nothing to get too excited over.
One thing about these head-to-head matchups: our pollsters found that for the second poll in a row, more than 20% of Clinton and Obama supporters say they would support McCain when he's matched up against the other Democrat. There is clearly some hardening of feelings among some of the most core supporters of both Democrats, though it may be Obama voters, who are more bitter in the long run.
Why? Because among Obama voters, Clinton has a net-negative personal rating (35-43) while Clinton voters have a net-positive view of Obama (50-29). Taken together, this appears to be evidence that Obama, intially, should have the easier time uniting the party than Clinton.
"Yeah, so, no evasive maneuver. I gotta tell ya, I will give it to the commander of Air Base Eagle. He had that place - you know, not only were there no bullets flying around, there wasn't a bumblebee flying around."
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/68124.html
Luna -36
Rusty - 24
Cheater :)
The writing has been on the wall for long enough.
.. and yes Luna, you have a winning personality... But its nice ticking off all the BillaryBotz.
Please login to rate.
Hi Luna....
Luna -36
Rusty - 24
Cheater :)
----
The Hillbots have been busy, huh?
by Tom Hayden, Bill Fletcher, Barbara Ehrenreich, and Danny Glover
Clinton’s most bizarre claim is that Obama is unqualified to be commander-in-chief. Clinton herself never served in the military, and has no experience in the armed services apart from the Senate armed services committee. Her husband had no military experience before becoming president. In fact he was a draft opponent during Vietnam, a stance we respected. She was the first lady, and he the governor, of one of our smallest states. They brought no more experience, and arguably less, to the White House than Obama would in 2009.
We take very seriously the argument that Americans should elect a first woman president, and we abhor the surfacing of sexism in this supposedly post-feminist era. But none of us would vote for Condoleeza Rice as either the first woman or first African-American president. We regret that the choice divides so many progressive friends and allies, but believe that a Clinton presidency would be a Clinton presidency all over again, not a triumph of feminism but a restoration of the aging, power-driven Wall Street Democratic Hawks at a moment when so much more fresh imagination is possible and needed. A Clinton victory could only be achieved by the dashing of hope among millions of young people on whom a better future depends. The style of the Clintons’ attacks on Obama, which are likely to escalate as her chances of winning decline, already risks losing too many Democratic and independent voters in November. We believe that the Hillary Clinton of 1968 would be an Obama volunteer today, just as she once marched in the snows of New Hampshire for Eugene McCarthy against the Democratic establishment.
http://blog.pdamerica.org/?p=1815
http://www.thememlingindex.com/hillary_clinton_...
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/polit...
Bill also owns as much as $20 million in stock in Yucaipa Corp which does business with the United Arab Emirates such as Dubai.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB12009742...
Anyone (who hasn't responded to one of your comments) can rate your post whether you are online or not. There also seems to be a number of idiot posters who gain pleasure in messing with peoples individual rating. Albeit these ratings are the most idiotic and infantile form of communication, but it seems that John likes DISQUS and this goes along with the program, as unfortunate as that may be.
Hope I was able to help a bit...
btw, good post... wish that would all come out sone.... its shows what the Clintons are all about.
Hillary Clinton (D-NY) - 2006 Politician Profile Net Worth: From $10,360,009 to $51,021,998 Ranks 9th among all members of the Senate. Assets: 10 totaling $10,460,009 to $51,052,000. Liabilities: 2 totaling $30,002 to $100,000.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/candlook.php?tx...
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/CIDsummary.php?...
http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/candlook.php?ca...
A senator's salary for 2006, more if a senator occupies a leadership position, is approxiamately $165,200. Family Obama's total income for 2006 is $991,296, (from the 1040 form releasedhttp://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/obama_2006_tax_return.pdf) so Obama's senate salary represent prox 16% of the family income. (It will be worse for the Clinton family - maybe 8% or less)
Rich people, or million dollar per year earners, are different than most of us. Look through the whole form, but the bottom line is, Obama got a $40,856 refund. Again, Clinton's will be worse.
But think about the whole situation. Michelle Obama recieves a ~$50k salary for sitting an a food company board. Where does the rest of the money come from? Obama declares self employment, and that's where the rest comes from. Add up the itemized deductions and those are about $152,000.
The family deducted nearly the entire amount vthat Obama earned as a senator. Again, Clinton will be worse in this regard.
So my point is big deal on these tax returns UNLESS! You realize that if you're not a million dollar per year earner, you are screwed.