FORTUNE uses list of rich liberal donors to substantiate claim corporate America is betting on Hillary

June 25, 2007

After reading all 3,500 words from the July 9 Fortune magazine cover story, â€œWho business is betting on,â€ you might think itâ€™s Democratic Presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.)

According to the story, the liberal Clinton (who has a 95 percent liberal rating from the leftâ€™s Americans for Democratic Action) has assembled a parade of CEO endorsements â€“ even from Republicans. Based on that, readers are supposed to believe Clinton is good for corporate America.

Reporter Nina Easton was spinning just a bit.

The story claimed one of Clintonâ€™s biggest coups was securing the support of Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack and his wife, Christy Mack. â€œA Bush â€˜Ranger,â€™ he had raised at least $200,000 for the Presidentâ€™s reelection bid and was one of the most prominent business names on the GOP donor lists,â€ wrote Easton.

But John Mack has never been dedicated to solely to Republican Party candidates. Dating back as far as 1994, Mack has contributed to both Republican and Democratic candidates, according to Opensecrets.org. Those included candidates anywhere on the political spectrum from Sen. Charles Schumer (D.-N.Y.) (who has a 100 percent liberal rating by the ADA) to Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R.-Ga.) (who has a 0 percent liberal rating by the ADA).

Also, the Macks founded the Bravewell Collaborative, an organization that â€œwas established as an operating foundation dedicated to transforming the culture and delivery of healthcare by returning the soul to medicine.â€ Easton hinted their interest in Clinton was health care related â€“ â€œThe conversation that night [at a dinner meeting the Macks held with Clinton] ranged widely, but always returned to one subject: health-care reform.â€

Clinton actively campaigned for a comprehensive plan to provide universal health care for all Americans in 1993. The plan was soundly defeated in 1994, but she is still associated with promoting an overhaul of the American health care system.

Written by Hillary · Filed Under Editorials/Opinion, Hillary Clinton

Witnessing a cover-up involving the largest campaign finance fraud in U.S. history

June 25, 2007

[flash #8217;s attorneys at the US Justice Foundation on April 11, 2007.

Hillary has come a long way, but not far enough: “V” Is Not for Victory

June 25, 2007

Hillary Clinton
By Suzanne Fields

Scratch a liberal and you may find a Hillary hater. A lot of men and women on the left can’t stand her. The attitude of these women is both visceral and intellectual. They despise her pretense of being a “feminist” because she so compromised herself in her relationship with Bill. More important, they can’t bear her tortuous explanations of why she voted to go to war in Iraq.

Men are less concerned with her personal life; many of them like the idea that a wife can forgive a philanderer. They couch their criticisms in the language of pragmatic politics: “She can’t win.” Both men and women joined in booing her at the Campaign for America’s Future, a far-left fringe meeting in Washington last week.

Nation magazine put her on the cover, asking readers the polling question, “Does Hillary have a woman problem?” The magazine noted that she outpolls both Barack Obama and John Edwards among likely single female Democratic primary voters, but she does poorly among married women.

The Nation reprises some of the most vulgar vitriol poured on Hillary by women: “The right’s favorite ‘femi-nazi’ now has to contend with Jane Fonda, comparing her to ‘a ventriloquist for the patriarchy with a skirt and a vagina.’” Nora Ephron writes that “women can’t stand her position on the war . . . don’t trust her as far as you can spit.” Jen Moseley, on the blog Feministing, speculates that women aren’t joining up to work for her because being a woman doesn’t automatically get a woman’s support: “There’s no vagina litmus test, people.”

Feminists who have railed against the idea of identifying women by their body parts are nevertheless eager to use the “V word” to make points against Hillary. If feminist artist Judy Chicago can depict representations of female genitalia in her infamous sculpture “Dinner Party,” political feminists can throw around graphic references to female sexual anatomy that most men still won’t use in mixed company.

Written by Hillary · Filed Under Editorials/Opinion, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton Make Overs

Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton: Just how stupid do they think we are?

June 25, 2007

By Jeremy Meister, The Conservative Voice

So Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton are rumored to want to “rein in” right wing radio. They’re quoted as saying there needs to be a “legislative fix” for the one outlet of the media not solidly in the hands of wacko leftists.

For most of us, this story is completely believable even though both Senators are now denying it. Hillary Clinton back in the 90’s blamed a “vast right wing conspiracy” (which included talk radio) for the failures of her husband. (Of course, if talk radio was so powerful we can’t help but wonder how President Clinton and her husband got elected twice and how St. Hillary won two terms as a Senator from New York.) Wasn’t it just last fall that the “honorable” Senator from New York tried to bully ABC from running a movie about her husband failed to get terrorists when they had the chance? Her and her friends in Congress were rather open about their threats to “investigate” ABC. She also lied to the people of New York when she told them she would serve her terms as Senator without seeking the Presidency, so her retraction now is a joke.

Senator Boxer is a double talker with an almost equally filthy past. Just a few months ago there was a story about how she was using her position in the Senate to get high priced government contracts for her husband’s companies. Naturally the unbiased, non partisan press didn’t feel that particular story was worth any heavy reporting outside of AM talk - which is one of the reasons they’re focused solely on talk radio. Cause the regular press gives them passes.

Written by Hillary · Filed Under 2008, Editorials/Opinion, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Lies

Hillary’s Sopranos Ad: Is It Too Close to Home?

June 25, 2007

By Margaret Carlson

Everybody seems to love the Hillary Clinton campaign advertisement that parodies “The Sopranos.” I’m nearly alone in thinking that while it’s clever, it’s completely wrong for drawing attention to a curious marriage and injecting her husband prematurely into the campaign.

You can understand the temptation to play off the finale of the HBO series everyone was talking about. The ad opens with the senator flipping through jukebox titles at a diner. Her husband — that would be Bill, dressed in an untucked shirt — walks in and asks, “So what’s the winning song?” — a reference to the contest to see what her presidential campaign theme song should be.

True to Tony Soprano’s preferences and his own, Bill wants onion rings. She says she’s ordered carrots for the table. (Message: She’s in charge and still worried about health care.)

Like Meadow Soprano, Chelsea is late because she can’t “parallel park.” A menacing figure — an actor from the real show — gets off his stool and walks toward the bathroom. The screen goes black.

We never find out what happens to the fictional Sopranos. We do find out what happens to the real candidate’s theme song. It will be “You and I” by Celine Dion, a star in Las Vegas. The song used to be an Air Canada jingle. It’s one play away from elevator music. It will offend no one.

Connected to Zeitgeist

If attention is what Clinton wanted, she got it. The campaign didn’t need to spend a cent to get a week of exposure. It showed that Hillary could be playful (since she calls herself “Hillary” in all her campaign materials, I’ll take the liberty here, especially useful in a two-Clinton column). It showed her to be in touch with the zeitgeist and identifying with ordinary Americans. Nothing screams “everyman” like the formica tables and linoleum of a diner.

Yet the Clintons have too much in common with the Sopranos to risk parodying them. Through eight seasons of mob life in New Jersey and eight years in the Clinton White House, America has been gripped by these two couples. Much of the fascination is with the wives: How much does she know? Why does she stay?

Written by Hillary · Filed Under 2008, Editorials/Opinion, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Lies, Scandals

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Against Hillary Clinton Where the facts are - Hillary Clinton News

FORTUNE uses list of rich liberal donors to substantiate claim corporate America is betting on Hillary

Witnessing a cover-up involving the largest campaign finance fraud in U.S. history

Hillary has come a long way, but not far enough: “V” Is Not for Victory

Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton: Just how stupid do they think we are?

Hillary’s Sopranos Ad: Is It Too Close to Home?

Angry Clinton Supporter Declares McCain Will Be Next President

Advertisement

Never Forget

Latest Headlines

Categories

Archives

Related Sites

Referrers

Admin