Mish's RANT (i just did 2 on Oped News myself) EXCELLENT !!

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Amazon Drops WikiLeaks on Request of Sen. Lieberman; Lie of the Day from Hillary Clinton; How NOT to Stop Leaks; Why we have Leaks Posted: 01 Dec 2010 04:29 PM PST WikiLeaks just gave Senator Joe Lieberman, Amazon, and the Department of Homeland Security what I consider to be a well deserved finger. Amazon dropped WikiLeaks from its servers but is now back up on servers in Sweden athttp://www.wikileaks.org/ Let's tie this all together starting with the Wall Street Journal Report WikiLeaks Site Kicked Off Amazon Servers Amazon.com Inc. has stopped hosting WikiLeaks from its Web servers, prompting the controversial group to move its website to a European provider. Wikileaks said in a Twitter message that it had been "ousted" by the Seattle company, which sells Web services and storage in addition to being an online retailer. In its message, Wikileaks said its money is "now spent to employ people in Europe." The organization recently released a trove of sensitive U.S. State Department documents, and turned to Amazon's Web services after it claimed its servers in Sweden were targeted by computer attacks. White House Seeks New Ways to Hide Damaging Data Political HotSheet reports White House Moves to Change Classified Information Procedures in Response to WikiLeaks President Obama's national security team is coordinating new interagency efforts to review and improve the way the government handles classified information, in the wake of the latest WikiLeaks release of secret information. The White House announced today that Russell Travers, a deputy director at the National Counterterrorism Center, will lead a comprehensive effort to identify and develop the structural reforms needed to prevent future leaks. The State Department and Defense Department are also conducting their own security reviews. Meanwhile, Congress is set to pass whistle-blowing legislation to help government employees report corruption or mismanagement so they do not feel compelled to turn over secret information to outside groups like WikiLeaks. The Senate is expected to pass the bill this week, followed by the House. Whistle-Blower Bill Gains Steam The response from the administration is not to crack down on abuses but rather to provide new ways of ignoring abuses. Just ask yourself, has anyone outside of Bernie Madoff ever been prosecuted, fired, or even reprimanded over fraud, torture, kickbacks, or anything else? Here's the bonus-point followup question: How many times did the SEC fail to act on information that proved Bernie Madoff was a crook? The answer to those questions help explain this pathetic response: After WikiLeaks, Whistle-Blower Bill Gains Steam Following the latest baring of U.S. secrets on the Internet, Congress is poised to pass legislation giving employees in the most sensitive government jobs a way to report corruption, waste and mismanagement without turning to outside organizations like WikiLeaks. President Barack Obama is expected to sign the bill, which supporters say will discourage leaks of classified information. The legislation would allow intelligence agency whistle-blowers to raise concerns within their agencies instead of giving classified materials to WikiLeaks or other outlets, which is illegal. Without protections spelled out in law, whistle-blowers risk being fired or demoted for informing their chains of command about misconduct, according to Tom Devine, legal director at the Government Accountability Project. That leaves no alternative to anonymous - and potentially damaging - leaks unless whistle-blowers are willing to jeopardize their careers, he said. Anyone who believes that propaganda has holes in the head. The WhiteHouse is not interested in acting on anything, the WhiteHouse is interested in stopping leaks. So now we will get legislation that will allow whistle-blowers to submit reports to some undefined administration hack who will promptly throw the whistles into the ashcan. Lie of the Day from Hillary Clinton Inquiring minds are reading a statement from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that WikiLeaks Won't Hurt U.S. Diplomacy The recent leak of thousands of sensitive U.S. diplomatic cables will have no adverse effect on America's international relations, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton declared Wednesday at a security summit. "I have certainly raised the issue of the leaks in order to assure our colleagues that it will not in any way interfere with American diplomacy or our commitment to continuing important work that is ongoing," Clinton said. "I have not any had any concerns expressed about whether any nation will not continue to work with and discuss matters of importance to us both going forward," she added. "I anticipate that there will be a lot of questions that people have every right and reason to ask, and we stand ready to discuss them at any time with our counterparts around the world," Clinton added. Series of Lies How's that for a series of lies? If people have every right to ask questions, how the hell can questions be asked if the US government classifies everything it does not want anyone to know? The US has no interest in discussing waterboarding, torture, the killing of innocent civilians with our allies or anyone else. The US wants to and is going to do everything it can to suppress that information. If WikiLeaks has damaging information about Bank of America, we should all want to see it. We should all stand up for the rights to make that data public, not sweep it under the rug. We do not have a Department of Homeland Security, we have a Department of Homeland Insecurity putting on a pathetic parade of pomp with full body scanners and pat downs that will not do a damn thing. Why We Have Leaks No one has bothered to tackle the question why we have security problems and leaks. I will tell you why: The US has troops in 140 countries around the world, we arrogantly go where we have no vested interest going, we support corrupt regimes when it suits our purposes, we follow the asinine creed "the enemy of our enemy is our friend", and we believe we - and we alone - act as the moral authority to be the world's policeman. When you do that you make enemies. When you make enemies you create security problems. Instead of addressing WHY we make enemies, we setup sham terrorist organizations like the Department of Homeland Security whose efforts make us less secure. Running List of Needed Criminal Investigations Instead of addressing fundamental problems we want to stop leaks. I will tell you how to stop leaks: Don't do stupid things! Stop trying to be the world's policeman. Prosecute fraud. I have a running list of things we have ignored in FDIC Authorizes $1 Billion Lawsuits Against Failed-Bank Executives; Token Search for Low-Profile Scapegoats It's time to update my rolling list of who should be criminally indicted and why. April 29, 2010: Barofsky Threatens Criminal Charges in AIG Coverup, Goldman Sachs Abacus Deal, TARP Insider Trading; New York Fed Implicated April 16, 2010: Rant of the Day: No Ethics, No Fiduciary Responsibility, No Separation of Duty; Complete Ethics Overhaul Needed March 2, 2010: Geithner's Illegal Money-Laundering Scheme Exposed; Harry Markopolos Says “Don’t Trust Your Government” January 31, 2010: 77 Fraud, Money Laundering, Insider Trading, and Tax Evasion Investigations Underway Regarding TARP January 28, 2010: Secret Deals Involving No One; AIG Coverup Conspiracy Unravels January 26, 2010: Questions Geithner Cannot Escape January 07, 2010: Time To Indict Geithner For Securities Fraud October 20, 2009: Bernanke Guilty of Coercion and Market Manipulation July 17, 2009: Paulson Admits Coercion; Where are the Indictments? June 26, 2009: Bernanke Suffers From Selective Memory Loss; Paulson Calls Bank of America "Turd in the Punchbowl" April 24, 2009: Let the Criminal Indictments Begin: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis How NOT to Stop Leaks Fools like Lieberman think we can stop leaks by legislation. We can't. We can only stop leaks by fostering an attitude from the top that will prosecute fraud and corruption instead of looking for scapegoats, and instead of pursuing policeman policies that "the end justifies the means" President Obama is a blatant liar. He promised to release details of US torture of prisoners. He failed to do so. I praise WikiLeaks or anyone else who is willing to disclose the hypocrisy of this president and this administration. I am not a Republican. I am an independent. I praise WikiLeaks or anyone else who is willing to disclose the hypocrisy of Republicans as well. I fear for our country and the path it is taking. We need to elect someone willing to stand up TO the banks, stand up TO our bloated military, stand up TO public unions, and stand FOR less government spending, stand FOR prosecuting fraud wherever it takes, stand FOR smaller government. President Obama is not that person, nor was President Bush. We need a Ron Paul, or someone like him, willing to do what is needed before we destroy ourselves. Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Update on Peter F. Paul (Scott McClellan book update)

McClellan Gives Up Bush vs. Wolfson Covers For Hillary’s Illegalities


Scott McClellan’s revelations about his experiences as White House Press Secretary with Bush Administration duplicities are in stark contrast with Hillary Clinton’s spokesman, Howard Wolfson’s role (hidden in plain sight on the public record) in aiding and abetting Hillary Clinton in serial campaign and obstruction illegalities.

Hillary has protested her unequal treatment by the media. We agree wholeheartedly that the media should treat her and her relationship with her Press Secretary Howard Wolfson with the same enthusiastic analysis as it is treating George Bush and his press secretary, Scott McClelllan. . This might help….

Yesterday the press began a frenzied dissection of all of the intimate details of Bush Administration officials’ duplicity as exposed by Scott McClellan in his just released book. McClellan’s disingenuousness in aiding Bush propaganda and deception of the public by McClellan and his administration bosses, poses ethical problems for McClellan, but does not appear to rise to the level of a criminal violation of the public trust.

Yet the media has shown no interest whatsoever in exposing the role Hillary’s personal and campaign spokesman, Howard Wolfson, played with Hillary Clinton in illegally soliciting, coordinating and then covering up the $1.2 million plus campaign contributions made by Peter Paul that Justice Department Prosecutors and the FBI have stated in federal court that Paul personally made to Hillary’s campaign in 2000.

The media appears concerned that Mr McClellan is trying to cash in on a very belated sense of ethics and concern for the very public deception he himself facilitated for members of the Bush administration he worked with as their spokesman. His failure to protest in any way what he allegedly witnessed and how he was misled during his ten year tenure with Bush is being used by the media to impugn the truthfulness of his allegations.

In the case of Hillary Clinton’s long term spokesman, Howard Wolfson, who has worked with Hillary since she began her political career with her 2000 Senate race, the media refuses to mention, let alone dissect, the abundant evidence in the public record that Wolfson facilitated felonious illegalities by both Clintons in the course of Hillary winning the 2000 Senate election, and then in obstructing all federal investigations into those illegalities ever since.

The Washington Post articles on August 15 and 17, 2000 contain quotes from Wolfson speaking on behalf of Hillary Clinton- in response to direct questions posed to Mrs Clinton by reporter Lloyd Grove-that evidence two crimes committed by Mrs. Clinton.

The quotes in those articles (found here and here) confirm that Hillary Clinton, in cahoots with Howard Wolfson (who was privy to a conference call he participated in with Hillary’s top donor about the $1 million budget for the Gala) intended to deny the public’s right to know that Peter Paul personally gave $1.2 million plus to Hillary’s Senate campaign. Both Hillary and Wolfson knew that the Gala produced by Paul “cost more than $1 million and was an in kind contribution” to Hillary’s campaign after they solicited the money and coordinated its expenditure with him.

The significance of these two statements and omissions by Hillary through Wolfson, unlike McClellan, a supposed dupe of the Bush duplicity, is that the denial of the public’s right to know that Paul made the contribution solicited and coordinated by Hillary and Wolfson was a felony.

The knowledge that the Gala Paul produced cost more than $1 million when the Post article was published in August, 2000 evidences an effort to hide the cost by Hillary and Wolfson in false FEC reports that were made by Hillary’s campaign in October, 2000, January, 2001 and July, 2001 stating the Gala cost $366,000.

Knowing in August, 2000, that the cost of this fundraiser was in excess of $1 million meant that Hillary’s finance director, David Rosen, who was indicted and tried in federal court in 2005 for hiding the true $1 million plus cost of the event from Hillary’s campaign , was wrongly indicted and forced to defend a federal criminal trial!

The prosecution of Rosen for causing false FEC reports understating the cost of the Gala, with knowledge by prosecutors of Wolfson’s quotes on Hillary’s behalf in the Post, was a vast obstruction of justice intended to hide the government’s knowledge of a conference call that Wolfosn participated in with Hillary Clinton White House staffer Kelly Craighead and Peter Paul that detailed the budget for the event- and provided knowledge to Hillary long before the first media and FEC reports were made.

So in an appeal to the media to treat Hillary equally in the press, why not look at the record available on the www.paulvclinton.com web site to view the public record linked there that clearly shows Hillary’s spokesman deceived, on Hillary’s behalf and behest, the voters of New York about Peter Paul’s contributions to Hillary’s Senate campaign, and then hid the knowledge of the cost of the Gala Paul produced from the Department of Justice and FEC so that David Rosen would take the rap for Hillary’s false and illegal FEC reports!

Wednesday ~ May 05, 2008 by Intermeddler Posted in "Ed Rendell", "hillary uncensored", DNC, Hillary, Rezko, bill clinton, bush, current affairs, david rosen, democrats, election, entertainment, george bush, hillary clinton, obama, peter paul, politics, race, tony rezko, washington|

<> Follow the money link for the day <>

McCain-linked Swiss bank warns some former employees not to travel to U.S.

• May. 28th, 2008 at 9:12 AM

Educated readers will recognize the UBS Warburg-Rothschild-Hillary Clinton links with ease.

Related
Swiss bank paid McCain co-chair to push agenda on U.S. mortgage crisis: Olbermann
Former UBS employee assists US in tax probe
UBS may face scrutiny in German tax evasion probe
When John McCain even bothered to show up in the Senate and do his job, he voted with George Bush 100% of the time in 2008. he never deviated from Bush's position. Not once

UBS to staff: Don't visit U.S.

In the midst of a tax evasion scandal in the U.S., UBS has reportedly told some of its staff not to travel there for fear of being arrested by U.S. authorities. Stephen Beard explains why the request was made.

Listen to this Story

UBS sign in Geneva, Switzerland (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP/Getty Imag

Chelsea Clinton: President by Inheritance?

Irina Andreychenko

Pravda

"At the Senate’s pre-election meeting in New York, Hillary appeared wearing a button saying “Chelsea in 2016”

Translated By Elena Aranovych

In the United States a presidential dynasty begins to take shape. "Chelsea for president". The “first daughter” has a political future, ensures the former American president Bill Clinton, who nominates his daughter as a candidate in the next decade’s presidential elections.

The twenty-eight-year old Chelsea didn’t gain the minimum experience required for candidacy yet, but she is working on it by participating in the election campaign of Hillary Clinton, the former First Lady of the state and the wife of Bill Clinton. “The rising star” helps her mother to win the votes of American youth and as it turned out, has absolutely nothing against continuing her political career.

According to Bill Clinton himself, at some point Chelsea realized that the cause for Hillary’s loss in Iowa was the lack of interest of the American youth, which is why Chelsea entered the battle to strengthen her mother’s support on the part of the young voters. According to the Italian “La Stampa”, Clinton admits that his daughter is doing quite well and is capable of following in the footsteps of her parents.

In fact, Hillary’s isn’t the first election campaign that Chelsea has taken part in. The first time was when the 12-year-old Chelsea was telling the Americans in a taped commercial how great her father Bill Clinton was. When Ms. Clinton for the first time ran for the Senate, her 20-year-old daughter was traveling along with her mother in the State of New York holding meetings with voters. It seems, that at about that time Hillary began to think about her daughter’s political future. At any rate, at the Senate’s pre-election meeting in New York, Hillary appeared wearing a button saying “Chelsea in 2016”.

Chelsea Clinton truly enjoys her role as a slightly glamorous political princess. According to “The New-York Times”, Jill Kargman, a friend of Ms Clinton said "This is The Truman Show” referring to the movie about a person whose whole life was a reality show. Chelsea competes for the title of the World's Sexiest Vegetarian; goes to Philadelphian gay bars reminding the guests whom they should vote for; criticizes the current president; gets ready for the upcoming marriage with her boyfriend Mark Mezvinsky and looks forward to having children.

By the way, there were rumors that a member of the municipal corporation of a small Kenyan town, Nakuru Godwin Kipkemoi Chepkurgor, were making a pass at Chelsea Clinton. In 2000 he sent a letter to the Clintons in which he admired the presidential family and vowed to love and cherish their daughter. There was no reply to the letter, but the African man didn’t despair and during Bill Clinton’s visit to Kenya, he gave the president another letter offering a bride price of 40 goats and 20 cows. Needless to say, not having bothered to think about the young girl’s opinion of his proposal, the African gained nothing from this incident; although, considering the current rivalry between Hillary and the black Obama, this kind of a black and white alliance could increase the Clinton’s chances to be elected.

But Chelsea has chosen a banker of Jewish origin whose parents Marjorie Margolis and Edward Mezvinsky, are former sitting members of the United States Congress. It’s unlikely though that there won’t be any surprises in this relationship either. In 2002, Mezvinsky was suspected of swindling millions of dollars and turned into an antihero of a serious scandal.

Anyway, we can talk about the formation of presidential dynasties in the USA, which is of course the Bush family. Moreover, some biographers assert that George Bush Sr. is a descendant or a relative of Franklin Pierce, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln and Gerald Ford. Other examples: The president James Madison was a close relative of George Washington. Zachary Taylor was Madison’s first cousin. John Quincy Adams was the son of John Adams. Grover Cleveland was a distant relative of Ulysses S. Grant. Benjamin Harrison was the grandson of President William Henry Harrison. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a cousin of Martin Van Buren, the second cousin of Ulysses S. Grant, the third cousin of Zachary Taylor and the fifth cousin of Theodore Roosevelt. Harry S. Truman was a distant relative of John Tyler. Richard Milhouse Nixon was William Taft’s and Herbert Hoover’s distant relative.

© 2008 Irina Andreychenko

SOURCE: http://watchingamerica.com/News/1106/president-by-inheritance-in-2016-chelsea-clinton-will-head-the-usa/

URL: http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2008/05/27/chelsea_clinton_president_by_inheritance

The Five Mistakes Hillary Made

For all her talk about “full speed on to the White House,” there was an unmistakably elegiac tone to Hillary Clinton’s primary-night speech in Indianapolis.

And if one needed further confirmation that the undaunted, never-say-die Clintons realize their bid might be at an end, all it took was a look at the wistful faces of the husband and the daughter who stood behind the candidate as she talked of all the people she has met in a journey “that has been a blessing for me.”

It was also a journey she had begun with what appeared to be insurmountable advantages, which evaporated one by one as the campaign dragged on far longer than anyone could have anticipated. She made at least five big mistakes, each of which compounded the others:

1. She misjudged the mood
That was probably her biggest blunder. In a cycle that has been all about change, Clinton chose an incumbent’s strategy, running on experience, preparedness, inevitability - and the power of the strongest brand name in Democratic politics. It made sense, given who she is and the additional doubts that some voters might have about making a woman Commander in Chief. But in putting her focus on positioning herself to win the general election in November, Clinton completely misread the mood of Democratic-primary voters, who were desperate to turn the page. “Being the consummate Washington insider is not where you want to be in a year when people want change,” says Barack Obama’s chief strategist, David Axelrod. Clinton’s “initial strategic positioning was wrong and kind of played into our hands.” But other miscalculations made it worse:

2. She didn’t master the rules
Clinton picked people for her team primarily for their loyalty to her, instead of their mastery of the game. That became abundantly clear in a strategy session last year, according to two people who were there. As aides looked over the campaign calendar, chief strategist Mark Penn confidently predicted that an early win in California would put her over the top because she would pick up all the state’s 370 delegates. It sounded smart, but as every high school civics student now knows, Penn was wrong: Democrats, unlike the Republicans, apportion their delegates according to vote totals, rather than allowing any state to award them winner-take-all. Sitting nearby, veteran Democratic insider Harold M. Ickes, who had helped write those rules, was horrified - and let Penn know it. “How can it possibly be,” Ickes asked, “that the much vaunted chief strategist doesn’t understand proportional allocation?” And yet the strategy remained the same, with the campaign making its bet on big-state victories. Even now, it can seem as if they don’t get it. Both Bill and Hillary have noted plaintively that if Democrats had the same winner-take-all rules as Republicans, she’d be the nominee. Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign now acknowledges privately:

3. She underestimated the caucus states
While Clinton based her strategy on the big contests, she seemed to virtually overlook states like Minnesota, Nebraska and Kansas, which choose their delegates through caucuses. She had a reason: the Clintons decided, says an adviser, that “caucus states were not really their thing.” Her core supporters - women, the elderly, those with blue-collar jobs - were less likely to be able to commit an evening of the week, as the process requires. But it was a little like unilateral disarmament in states worth 12% of the pledged delegates. Indeed, it was in the caucus states that Obama piled up his lead among pledged delegates. “For all the talent and the money they had over there,” says Axelrod, “they - bewilderingly - seemed to have little understanding for the caucuses and how important they would become.”

By the time Clinton’s lieutenants realized the grave nature of their error, they lacked the resources to do anything about it - in part because:

4. She relied on old money
For a decade or more, the Clintons set the standard for political fund-raising in the Democratic Party, and nearly all Bill’s old donors had re-upped for Hillary’s bid. Her 2006 Senate campaign had raised an astonishing $51.6 million against token opposition, in what everyone assumed was merely a dry run for a far bigger contest. But something had happened to fund-raising that Team Clinton didn’t fully grasp: the Internet. Though Clinton’s totals from working the shrimp-cocktail circuit remained impressive by every historic measure, her donors were typically big-check writers. And once they had ponied up the $2,300 allowed by law, they were forbidden to give more. The once bottomless Clinton well was drying up.

Obama relied instead on a different model: the 800,000-plus people who had signed up on his website and could continue sending money his way $5, $10 and $50 at a time. (The campaign has raised more than $100 million online, better than half its total.) Meanwhile, the Clintons were forced to tap the $100 million - plus fortune they had acquired since he left the White House - first for $5 million in January to make it to Super Tuesday and then $6.4 million to get her through Indiana and North Carolina. And that reflects one final mistake:

5. She never counted on a long haul
Clinton’s strategy had been premised on delivering a knockout blow early. If she could win Iowa, she believed, the race would be over. Clinton spent lavishly there yet finished a disappointing third. What surprised the Obama forces was how long it took her campaign to retool. She fought him to a tie in the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday contests but didn’t have any troops in place for the states that followed. Obama, on the other hand, was a train running hard on two or three tracks. Whatever the Chicago headquarters was unveiling to win immediate contests, it always had a separate operation setting up organizations in the states that were next. As far back as Feb. 21, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe was spotted in Raleigh, N.C. He told the News & Observer that the state’s primary, then more than 10 weeks away, “could end up being very important in the nomination fight.” At the time, the idea seemed laughable.

Now, of course, the question seems not whether Clinton will exit the race but when. She continues to load her schedule with campaign stops, even as calls for her to concede grow louder. But the voice she is listening to now is the one inside her head, explains a longtime aide. Clinton’s calculation is as much about history as it is about politics. As the first woman to have come this far, Clinton has told those close to her, she wants people who invested their hopes in her to see that she has given it her best. And then? As she said in Indianapolis, “No matter what happens, I will work for the nominee of the Democratic Party because we must win in November.” When the task at hand is healing divisions in the Democratic Party, the loser can have as much influence as the winner.

View this article on Time.com by karen Tumulty

HiLIARy jab for the day plus Obama hit for the day

Totally tasteless and IMMENSE FUN.




Too long, but funny for awhile.




I noticed a few similarities between Barack Obama and another well-known orator from the past,thought I'd make a video to point them out.
Seems there's almost a mass hysteria surrounding Obama,even Rev.Wright's comments don't appear to have any affect on his momentum.Of course,said comments didn't preclude him throwing Wright under a bus to save his presidential aspirations.
Dude's been your pastor for over 20 years,performed your marriage,baptized your children,and he's THAT damn disposable?What kind of man IS Barack Obama?

Need some killer Special FX for your vids?These folks have some really awesome stuff for free:
http://www.detonationfilms.com/free_s...

You'll need some of these to go with'em!:
http://www.ilovewavs.com/Effects/War/...

South Park Sound Bites:
http://www.southparkstudios.com/crap/...

Movie bites:
http://www.moviesoundclips.net/movies...

And the best for last!:
http://www.hitthebongo.co.uk/videofx/

The Hill's report on the 2008 dem candidates as fo today

Backs turn on Clinton

By Alexander Bolton, Manu Raju and Sam Youngman

Posted: 05/07/08 07:57 PM [ET]

The tide turned against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) on Capitol Hill Wednesday, as even some of her supporters said she should consider ending her White House bid. Some uncommitted Democratic superdelegates refused to meet with the beleaguered candidate when her campaign approached them in the hope of wooing them. Reps. Brad Miller (N.C.) and Lincoln Davis (Tenn.) said they were invited to meet Clinton but declined to attend.

Nevertheless, Clinton’s campaign pushed back hard against growing sentiment that she cannot win the nomination.

The senator scheduled meetings to woo superdelegates and at least forestall them from endorsing Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

Most pro-Clinton lawmakers clung to the disappearing hope that she could pull off a come-from-behind victory.
One, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), invoked the image of a quarterback with just enough time for a final 90-yard drive for the winning score, saying, “We’ve got to play the fourth quarter.”

But uncommitted superdelegates such as Miller say they now expect Obama to win the nomination.

The sense of inevitability led some Clinton backers to question her continued resistance.

Rep. Dale Kildee, a Clinton supporter from Michigan, which Clinton won with 55 percent of the vote, said she should halt her campaign and carefully consider whether it makes sense to keep going.

“I urge her to take the day off and think very seriously about doing what’s best for the country and best for the party,” said Kildee.

He added, “I got straight A’s in math,” implying that Obama’s delegate lead is impossible for Clinton to overcome in the few primaries left.

Clinton is expected to fall even further behind Obama in the delegate race after losing North Carolina by 14 percentage points and only just winning Indiana by a few points.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a prominent supporter from California, which Clinton also won, said Clinton needs to explain how the nomination remains within reach and why her presidential ambition has not now become damaging to the party.

“I, as you know, have great fondness and great respect for Sen. Clinton and I’m very loyal to her,” said Feinstein. “Having said that, I’d like to talk with her and [get] her view on the rest of the race and what the strategy is.

“I think the race is reaching the point now where there are negative dividends from it, in terms of strife within the party. I think we need to prevent that as much as we can.”

The next primary contest will take place May 13 in West Virginia, where senior advisers to Clinton say she will do very well. Kentucky and Oregon will follow with primaries on May 20; Puerto Rico votes on June 1; and Montana and South Dakota hold their primaries on June 3.

Feinstein said Clinton has not yet responded to a phone call to discuss the campaign.

Members of Congress supporting Obama seized on Tuesday’s primary results to call for Clinton to end her candidacy.

“It’s obvious that the nomination process is over,” said Rep. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.), who has endorsed Obama. “I hope that she and her campaign will move forward and wrap this up.”

Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-N.H.), another Obama backer, said, “I hope she is considering it. I think it’s time for us to stand together and start attacking the position that the Republican nominee has taken.”

But there was no unanimity among undeclared superdelegates, a bloc of lawmakers whose votes have become putatively crucial to the party’s choice.

Miller stopped short of advising Clinton to drop out. But he said Tuesday’s results convinced him that Obama will be the nominee: “I expect that more strongly today than yesterday.”

Obama’s growing delegate lead means Clinton needs an overwhelming majority among superdelegates — members of Congress and other party officials — to win the nomination. Obama aides estimate that Clinton will have to win the backing of more than two-thirds of pledged delegates and undeclared superdelegates, which would be difficult.

Clinton’s allies sought a meeting late Wednesday between the candidate and neutral Democrats such as Rep. John Spratt (S.C.) and Rep. Zack Space (Ohio). But other uncommitted superdelegates such as Reps. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.) and John Olver (D-Mass.) were not aware of any effort by Clinton to contact them.
Prominent Clinton supporters who declined to call for her to re-evaluate her candidacy nevertheless acknowledge she faced a tough road to the nomination.

“It’s an uphill battle,” said Rep. John Murtha (Pa.), one of the most influential Democrats in the House.

“She has to win the popular vote to convince the superdelegates to vote for her,” said Murtha, who gave Clinton crucial support before Pennsylvania’s primary. “Superdelegates will decide on the popular vote.”

Obama leads Clinton nationwide by about 700,000 votes, not counting Michigan and Florida, according to RealClearPolitics.com , a website that tracks election results. National Democratic officials invalidated the results of the Michigan and Florida primaries because they held contests on dates that violated party rules.

Counting the results from Michigan and Florida, Clinton trails Obama by only 85,000 votes or so, giving her a chance of catching him in the remaining primaries.

Several Clinton supporters said that every state deserves to vote in the primary and that withdrawing from the race now would not provide much benefit to the party.

“We should allow these primaries to be held,” said Rep. Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.).

Several neutral superdelegates agreed with these Clinton allies.

Rep. Marcy Kaptur, an uncommitted Democrat from Ohio, said her constituents have urged her to let every state finish voting.

Crystal Strait, an uncommitted superdelegate who represents the Young Democrats of America for the Democratic National Committee, said she was not moved any closer to a decision Tuesday night because she has been encouraged by the level of Democratic participation she has seen in other states.

“I want to let it play out,” Strait said. “I don’t understand the people who say that this is a problem for the Democratic Party.”

Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) who was previously uncommitted, is backing Clinton because she won his district on Tuesday.

J.Taylor Rushing contributed to this report.

Hasn't this woman done enough damage to the planet yet? What's it gonna take?

Be gone, HiLIARy, be gone! The US electoral system sure does not work in this modern age!! The Mainstream media sure SUCKS.

The Night the Old Politics Died By Brent Budowsky May 7, 2008

Editor’s Note: Often it’s hard to assess genuine turning points. Sometimes what looks important one day fades into irrelevance a week later; other times, history-changing events occur and are missed in the rush of daily events.

In this guest essay, former congressional staffer Brent Budowsky – a backer of Barack Obama – argues that the May 6 results marked a crushing defeat for a long-running era of political negativity and manipulation:

The old politics died on May 6, 2008 as the predictable and inevitable happened and the voters said no to business as usual.

The voters said no to the most phony and fraudulent proposal in memory for a gas tax cut that would never happen, that would profit the oil companies that Senator Clinton falsely said she was fighting with it, that would do nothing for the people she falsely claimed she was helping with it.

The most reprehensible and shameful aspect of this gas tax fraud was that it was the cheap exploitation of people who are hurting, and fearful. There is nothing lower in politics than exploiting people who are hurting, trying to deceive them. The voters said no.

The voters said no to the politics embodied by the shameful ABC debate of Gibson and Stephanopoulos that was nothing more than an oppo research festival.

Voters said no to the Tim Russert “Meet the Press” that insulted them last Sunday, that wasted time with more than a dozen questions about Jeremiah Wright rather than a serious discussion of national issues. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “US Media Trivializes Campaign 2008.”]

The voters said no to the insider pundits who pontificated about what a brilliant and clever tactic the gas tax fraud was, about how Hillary is on a huge roll and Barack looked broken and on his heels only hours before he won a crushing and devastating victory.

Soon, as I predicted some time ago, Hillary will withdraw and the superdelegates surge will reach a juggernaut pace that has already begun.

Soon, there will be new talk about 2 million Obama donors that will rise to 3 million. There will be talk of a historic voter registration program that has already been approved and will exponentially strengthen democracy and build even more voter turnout, voter excitement and voter enthusiasm.

Soon, there will be talk about a Democratic landslide throughout the Congress as Democrats come together and coordination begins between the presidential and the congressional Democrats.

Soon, there will be talk about the outpouring of enthusiasm around the world from good people everywhere ready to begin a new day of American world leadership based on the great role we have played in the past.

It was the night they drove old Dixie down, the night the old politics ended, the night a great new era in American politics truly began.

The battle now begins in earnest. On Tuesday, May 6, 2008 the Rubicon was crossed.

Brent Budowsky was an aide to former Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and to Bill Alexander, then the chief deputy whip of the House. A contributing editor to Fighting Dems News Service, he can be read on The Hill Pundits Blog and reached at brentbbi@webtv.net.

To comment at Consortiumblog, click here. (To make a blog comment about this or other stories, you can use your normal e-mail address and password. Ignore the prompt for a Google account.) To comment to us by e-mail, click here. To donate so we can continue reporting and publishing stories like the one you just read, click here.

PETA Writes to Clinton About Eight Belles

PETA Writes to Clinton About Eight Belles- ABC News

Mon May 5, 2008 8:47 am (PDT)

http://blogs. abcnews.com/ politicalpunch/ 2008/05/peta- writes-to. html


May 05, 2008 10:16 AM

In light of the tragic death at the Kentucky Derby of Sen. Hillary Clinton's Derby pick Eight Belles -- the first filly to run in the Derby since 1999 -- Ingrid E. Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, has written a letter to Clinton protesting her placing a bet to begin with, and asking to enlist her in PETA's campaign against horseracing.
"Horse racing is as indefensible as dog fighting, and Sen. Clinton must step up immediately and condemn it as animal abuse," says Newkirk. "Eight Belles and countless other horses abused in the racing industry suffer horrendously and die just so that people can bet on them as though they were poker hands."
The full letter is below.

"Dear Senator Clinton:
"As a high profile political figure with the esteem of many women, I regret to say that your public support of horseracing—and specifically betting on Eight Belles—makes you culpable in her destruction. I ask you now to publicly condemn races like the Kentucky Derby. Eight Belles ran for her life and was fiercely whipped as she came down that final stretch when she was no doubt in a great deal of pain. We cannot call ourselves a civilized nation if we allow any living being to endure such abuse.
"Races like this are the equivalent of child sweatshops. These are not even seasoned horses: They are young fillies and colts whose joints are not formed enough to endure such a grueling race. Despite this, they are pushed beyond their limits. The Triple Crown and other major horse races have become the graveyards of too many horses who were called champions. For example, Go For Wand, who went down in the 1990 Breeders' Cup Distaff and then stumbled up and tried to keep running with her broken leg dangling; Union City, who fractured a leg in the 1993 Preakness and was destroyed; Prairie Bayou, who that same year suffered a compound fracture in the Belmont Stakes and had to be destroyed; George Washington, who was euthanized after breaking his leg while running the Preakness last year; and of course Barbaro, the 'poster horse' of the racing industry's failures and excesses, who despite efforts could not be saved from the injuries sustained during the 2006
Preakness. Barbaro's injuries were terrible fractures of his canon bone, sesamoids, and long pastern as well as the dislocation of the fetlock joint. These are just a few of the horses we hear about—they are the winners, the horses who run the big races. Hundreds of horses meet the same painful, deadly fate every year in the horseracing industry.
"A race track is not a place for a fun day out, and we are writing to Chelsea on that score. Attending the Derby is as despicable as attending a dogfight. For most,not a fewm of the horses you see will not end up put out to pasture on a beautiful ranch but will be sent overseas to be slaughtered for someone's dinner plate. At some point, all horses stop winning.
"PETA takes no position on whether you win or lose the race you are in, but we call on you to publicly reject betting on such hideous spectacles of domination over wonderful animals who deserve more than pain and death for human profit and amusement.
"Very truly yours,
"Ingrid E. Newkirk
"President"
- jpt

The World According to Monsanto back online (for now)

The World According to Monsanto

The World According to Monsanto - part 2
The World According to Monsanto - part 3
The World According to Monsanto - part 4
The World According to Monsanto - part 5
The World According to Monsanto - part 6
The World According to Monsanto - part 7
The World According to Monsanto - part 8
The World According to Monsanto - part 9
The World According to Monsanto - part 10
The World According to Monsanto - part 11
The World According to Monsanto - part 12

A

On March 11 a new documentary was aired on French television (ARTE – French-German cultural tv channel) by French journalist and film maker Marie-Monique Robin, The World According to Monsanto - A documentary that Americans won't ever see.

The gigantic biotech corporation Monsanto is threatening to destroy the agricultural biodiversity which has served mankind for thousands of years.

700 mb bittorrent download here

How to Order "The World According to Monsanto/Le Monde Selon Monsanto"

• Organic Consumers Association
  Straight to the Source
  
  

Everyone in the organic and anti-GMO movement has been raving about the film "Le Monde Selon Monsanto/The World According to Monsanto," by Marie-Monique Robin.

But recently it was taken off of YouTube and Google Video with the explanation that the Film Board of Canada's copyright was being violated. Anybody feel kind of funny about that?

Anyway, sites keep popping up where you can watch the film, sometimes whole, sometimes in pieces. The latest place to view the film is here, but this might not last too long.

In order to not break any laws, and to support the film's makers, the best way to get to see this film is to order it. And here's how:

Click here to visit ARTE Boutique, a French website. This is the only place to buy this film. This website is in French and you will be ordering in Euros. The film costs 14,99 euros, or around $22. This seems a little daunting if you don't know how to speak French, but it's really not too hard.

Once you have found the film on this site, click on the button that says "Ajouter au Panier." This means the same as "Add to Cart" on English-speaking websites. This will take you to your shopping cart. You will have to choose the country you want it delivered to. "Etats-Unis" is United States. "Royaume-Uni" is United Kingdom. Then you must click the button that says "Terminer ma Commande" for checkout.

This takes you to another page. You are most likely a new customer on this site, so select "Je suis un nouveau client" and hit the button "m'inscrire."

This will take you to a registration page. This is pretty similar to an English-language website, so you can figure it out pretty easy.

"Nom" means name, specifically your last name. "Prenom" is your first name. "Votre courriel" is your email. "Mot de passe" is your password, and you have to confirm both. Everything else should be pretty self-explanatory.

"Adresse de Facturation" is your billing address. "Adresse de Livraison" is delivery address.

You probably don't want to subscribe to their newsletters unless you know French, so don't check the boxes at the bottom of the page.

The next page will be where you enter your credit card information.

Good luck! This may seem like a lot of work to buy a film, but we assure you, it is completely worth it. This film is highly educational, and showcases many of the hardworking folks in our movement who have been campaigning for years against Monsanto. The OCA isn't specifically mentioned, but every time Marie-Monique does an internet search we are listed in the results she is finding because we have such a huge compilation of articles on our website.

Hillary watch!! she want s$2 bn in '09 pork

Clinton: $2b in '09 pork

By Manu Raju and Kevin Bogardus
Posted: 04/28/08 08:08 PM [ET]

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has requested nearly $2.3 billion in federal earmarks for 2009, almost three times the largest amount received by a single senator this year.
The Democratic presidential candidate’s staggering request comes at a time when Congress remains engaged in a heated debate over spending federal dollars on parochial projects.
LinkHere

Excerpt from The Hill report

The money is needed for homeland security, emergency response and health projects throughout New York, according to documents provided by her office.

That's right, Hills! We want to pay money and starve so that you NWO agenda can be pursued. Yeah, right!! Nothing like paying for depopulation, the police state .. for the benefit of your Bilderberger friends!!

HiLIARy updates for today (!!!!)

From NBC/NJ's Mike Memoli and NBC's Mark Murray
At the Jewish Community Center in Pittsburgh this morning, Bill Clinton took questions from local press after shaking a lot of hands. NBC/NJ asked him about the WHYY radio interview in which he said the Obama camp was playing the race card.



Below is full transcript of the back-and-forth:

NBC/NJ: “Sir, what did you mean yesterday when you said that the Obama campaign was playing the race card on you?”

CLINTON: “When did I say that, and to whom did I say that?”

NBC/NJ: “On WHYY radio yesterday”

CLINTON: “No, no, no. That’s not what I said. You always follow me around and play these little games, and I’m not going to play your games today. This is a day about election day. Go back and see what the question was, and what my answer was. You have mischaracterized it to get another cheap story to divert the American people from the real urgent issues before us, and I choose not to play your game today. Have a nice day.”

NBC/NJ: “Respectfully sir, though, you did say …”

CLINTON: “Have a nice day.” [continues shaking hands with supporters]. I said what I said, you can go and look at the interview. And if you’ll be real honest, you’ll also report what the question was and what the answer was.”

NBC/NJ: “They asked you if you regretted your comparing Jesse Jackson to Barack Obama on the day after the South Carolina primary.”

CLINTON: “And I pointed out that I did not do that, and that I complimented them both. And that Jesse Jackson took no offense. And I called him myself, I said, ‘Did you find that offensive?’ And he said no.

Again, here is what Clinton told WHYY.

INTERVIEWER (RE: Jackson comment): “Do you think that was a mistake, and would you do that again?"

CLINTON: "No. I think that they played the race card on me. And we now know, from memos from the campaign and everything, that they planned to do it along.

If you need comic relief or TRUTH today, read the COMMENTS:
http://mparent7777-1.blogspot.com/2008/04/bill-clinton-being-himself-bald-faced.html

Is the Criminal Justice System racist? Heather MacDonald

Heather Mac Donald
Is the Criminal-Justice System Racist?
No: the high percentage of blacks behind bars reflects crime rates, not bigotry.

The race industry and its elite enablers take it as self-evident that high black incarceration rates result from discrimination. At a presidential primary debate this Martin Luther King Day, for instance, Senator Barack Obama charged that blacks and whites “are arrested at very different rates, are convicted at very different rates, [and] receive very different sentences . . . for the same crime.” Not to be outdone, Senator Hillary Clinton promptly denounced the “disgrace of a criminal-justice system that incarcerates so many more African-Americans proportionately than whites.”

Continue reading . . .

Interesting article but she begs questions about poverty, incarceration of thos who are at the drug chain (like the CIA, etc.)

Ted Turner on overpopulation

Ted Turner Calls for Population Control, Wants Limit of Two Children Per Family

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
April 3, 2008

Atlanta, GA (LifeNews.com) -- Ted Turner, the eccentric pro-abortion billionaire and founder of CNN, wants more global population control. He believes the world's population is getting out of hand and that it will result in environmental problems -- and his solution is to ask people to voluntarily limit themselves to two children.

His comments came during an interview with PBS's Charlie Rose that aired Tuesday.

"We're too many people; that's why we have global warming," he said. "Too many people are using too much stuff."

Turner suggested that "on a voluntary basis, everybody in the world's got to pledge to themselves that one or two children is it."

Should the world not cave in to his demands, he worries global catastrophe will ensue.

"Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals," said Turner. "Civilization will have broken down. The few people left will be living in a failed state -- like Somalia or Sudan -- and living conditions will be intolerable."

Turner's call for a limit on the number of children reminds many of the one-child family planning policy in China that has resulted in serious human rights abuses for violators.

Those who run afoul of the population control policy have been killed, assaulted, imprisoned and become victims of forced abortions and sterilizations occurring as late as days before birth.

Despite Turner's claims, research shows many areas of the world, including Europe, Japan and nations like Canada and the United States, suffer from underpopulation.

European nations are seeing births at below replacement rate, abortion has decimated the population of Russia and nations like Japan may be unable to support an aging population.

Several organizations, including the Heritage Foundation, Family Research Council, World Congress of Families, and the Latin American Alliance for the Family have unveiled a new film called "Demographic Winter" that profiles the underpopulation problems.

"Worldwide, birthrates have declined by 50% in the past half-century," the groups say. "There are now 59 nations, with 44% of the world's population, with below replacement birthrates."

A birthrate of 2.1 is needed to replace current population, but the European Union has a birthrate of just 1.3. By 2030, the group's estimate, Europe is expected to have a shortfall of 20 million workers.

Meanwhile, in Russia, where abortion has been used for decades as a method of birth control, the nation is expected to lose one-third of its current population by 2050.

"In nations with declining populations, who will operate the factories and farms?" the groups said. "Who will guard the frontiers? With a graying population (a declining birthrate combined with growing longevity), who will support pension systems and otherwise care for the elderly?"

Related web sites:
Demographic Winter - http://www.demographicwinter.com

Bilderberger Ted Turner Repeats Call For Population Curb
Says diminishing farmland will lead to food riots, despite being behind corn-based ethanol push

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=924_1209392846&p=1

Global Gorby

STATE OF THE WORLD FORUM 1996

[Conference for Global Governance]

New World Order

A Clear Look by by William F. Jasper

(Comments by Jim Searcy)

(This is the New World Order crowd, the people behind Bill Clinton and Hillary.... Can you understand that world depopulation to 10-25 % of what it is now, (kill 75-90%) is part of the Globalist agenda? In Heaven's name, please realize what we are up against! Why does Clinton still have an approval rating of the voters?? Or does he?

Strange that the "State of the World Form" gets so little attention and media coverage. The Conference for Global Governance is a very big deal. It lets us know what the little gods of this world are planning. It really is the news that the talking heads heads, who fabicate what is called news, work so hard to keep the sheeple from knowing. It also has very grave consequences. It got so little coverage it is good for us to look at the notes once in a while.

Amazing how the one true God told us about these pale horse riders who like to play god. They worship lucifer and/or mother earth.

The notes let us "not authentically humans," or "defective seeds," understand the antichrist war on the saints. Saints fear God, and beleive the Holy Bible, and profess the name of Jesus or Yeshua, and regard the 10 commandments. Saints know what we are dealing with from Lucifer's New World Order.

These fools, who say in their heart that there is no God, proclaim themselves to be wise. Most worship lucifer, all love money, and lust for power and control. These muckey mucks are greedy dogs, one and all.)

"The State of the World Forum," is a planetary confabulation sponsored by the Gorbachev Foundation. Held atop the city's famed Nob Hill at the luxurious Fairmont Hotel, the forum brought together a glittering constellation of global notables representing the epitome of worldly power, prestige, fame, wealth, and influence: presidents, princes, potentates, philanthropists, poets, philosophers, and poohbahs. (They met again in --1998, and will meet again in 2000 /btw)

Who's Who:

"The weighty seriousness and ambitious reach of the conference indicated by the title of the event -- "Toward a New Civilization: Launching a Global Initiative" -- were underscored by the list of attendees, a veritable Who's Who of Wall Street, the Trilateral Commission, the World Economic Forum, the Aspen Institute, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Club of Rome, the Bilderbergers, the Politburo, the Commission on Global Governance, the World Future Society, and other Insider bastions of power.

Among the 400-plus eminent personages from 50 countries who flocked to the five-day affair (September 27th-October 1st) were former Secretaries of State James Baker and George Shultz (both co-chairs of the forum), former President George Bush, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, President Askar Akaev of Kyrgystan, former President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica, Prime Minister Tansu Ciller of Turkey, Czech Republic President Vaclav Havel, former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, and South African Vice President Thabo Mbeki.

Additional participants included: Worldwatch President Lester Brown; New Age gurus Fritjof Capra, Jeremy Rifkin, Willis Harman, Deepak Chopra, Robert Muller, and Matthew Fox; Marxist poetess Rigoberta Menchu; Earth Council president and billionaire eco-warrior Maurice Strong; Microsoft wizard Bill Gates; media mogul Rupert Murdoch; futurists Alvin Toffler and John Naisbitt; Senator George Mitchell; Archer Daniels Midland CEO Dwayne Andreas; computer tycoon David Packard; Esalen founder Michael Murphy; motivation superstar Tony Robbins; Men's Wearhouse CEO George Zimmer; chimpanzee expert Jane Goodall -- not to mention Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carl Sagan, John Denver, Shirley MacLaine, Dennis Weaver, Ted Turner, Jane Fonda, Theodore Hesburgh, Timothy Wirth, Max Kampleman, Milton Friedman, Randall Forsberg, Saul Mendlovitz, and Alan Cranston.

Overseeing the entirety of this summit of the anointed was, of course, Mikhail Gorbachev himself. The purpose of the convocation, he proclaimed, was to "launch a multi-year process, culminating in the year 2000, to articulate the fundamental [world] priorities, values,and actions necessary to constructively shape our common future."

And who better to kick off an ostentatious extravaganza of that sort than global media titan and former "Humanist of the Year" Ted Turner. Identifying himself as a "great student of history" and a long-time friend of Gorbachev, Turner praised the "ex-Communist" and former dictator for ending the Cold War, which he acclaimed as "the greatest accomplishment in the history of humanity." "Now, with the Cold War behind us," said Ted, "this forum's job is to help chart the way for humanity."

. . .But drastic measures are needed, says Gorby. The traditional political structures "no longer respond to the needs of an interdependent world. The political culture that we inherited from the past stands in the way of efforts to unite mankind's resources in the face of global challenges." Mere transformation of political structures, however, is far from adequate. "We are in dire need of redefining the parameters of our society's economic, social, political, and spiritual development," the Soviet seer told his worshipful votaries. "Indeed, we have to reinvent the paradigm of our existence, to build a new civilization." It was a rehearkening to other familiar themes Gorbachev has sung: "developing a global consciousness," "embracing the task of spiritual renewal," launching "the next phase of human development." An awesome undertaking, to be sure. Fortunately for us, he is graciously willing to enlighten and minister to our darkened souls as well as our sick body politic. How does he propose to do this? Comrade Gorbachev proposes to "set up a kind of United Nations Council of Elders."

It was in this "Elder" capacity that Gorbachev offered the next part of his lecture. "Civilization will shift and new values and new ways of life will be needed to find real solutions to the problems of our environment, a way out of the ecological crisis," the sage of Moscow told his San Francisco gathering.

Then came the punch line:

"Gradually we will have to achieve a change of emphasis in the archetypal dilemma: to have or to be; to change the nature of consumption." "Perhaps it is a little risky in this country to speak about that," he beamed to a titter of audience chuckles. "We have to change the nature of consumption. And I have much to say about that here."

Compassion Con

He certainly did have much to say on the topic, as did many of the other participants during the course of the forum. What was most amazing was that no one gagged or guffawed at the brazen effrontery and hypocrisy of the sainted one's sermonizing on conspicuous consumption while his rapt audience feasted on a sumptuous array of epicurean comestibles fit for royalty: smoked trout salad, filet of beef in shashlik marinade, and a dessert of panna cotta with autumn fruit. . . Getting to the crux of the matter, Gorbachev pontificated: "We have to, I believe, gear consumption more to people's cultural and spiritual needs. Also, through culture and education and within the framework of laws we shall have to address the problem of controlling the world's population." And control, of course, as always, is the key word and concept here. Control. Power. . . . .

But according to these cognoscenti, there are too many people on this "one planet." Willis Harman's [of Tavistock Institute at Stanford, where mind control is taught to intelligence agencies--btw] essay grapples with the "dilemma.": "In the economy-dominated world, as the outspoken anthropologist Margaret Mead once put it bluntly, 'The unadorned truth is that we do not need now, and will not need later, much of the marginal labor -- the very young, the very old, the very uneducated, and the very stupid.'"

(Is this genocide, aborticide, and agicide, or what?---btw )

"This dilemma is perhaps the most basic one we face," said Harman. Society can't afford "from an environmental standpoint, or from the standpoint of tearing apart of the social fabric -- the economic growth that would be necessary to provide jobs for all in the conventional sense, and the inequities which have come to accompany that growth. This dilemma, more than any other aspect of our current situation, indicates how fundamental a system change is now required."

In the closing plenary session of the forum, philosopher/author Sam Keen summarized the consensus of the learned ones. Among the conference participants, said Keen, "there was very strong agreement that religious institutions have to take primary responsibility for the population explosion. We must speak far more clearly about sexuality, about contraception, about abortion, about the values that control the population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the [world's] population by 90 percent and there aren't enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage."

(Understand the goal of the New World Order is to exterminate or kill 75 to 90% of the lower class humans. If you happen to be a bible believing, commandment observant, Christian, you are the most "not authentically human" "defective seeds" and extermination target #1).

How do we "cut" the planet's population by 90 percent? Even genocidal mass murderers Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao combined did not come close to attaining such a "lofty" goal. As always, the devil is in the details. Forum participant Barbara Marx Hubbard may already have provided some of the devilish answer.

In The Book of Co-Creation she writes: "Out of the full spectrum of human personality, one-fourth is electing to transcend .... One-fourth is destructive [and] they are defective seeds. In the past they were permitted to die a 'natural death.' ... Now as we approach the quantum shift from the creature-human to the co-creative human -- the human who is an inheritor of god-like powers -- the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from the social body .... Fortunately, you are not responsible for this act (of course like Jesus says in John 16:2 these fools think they are doing God service by killing the "defective seed," "not authentically humans.") We are. We are in charge of God's selection process for planet Earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death."

Lord help us all if this de facto "Brain Trust" of diabolical misfits, murderers, megalomaniacs, terrorists, and tyrants succeed in establishing their "new world order," their "new global civilization." It should become evident that behind all the seemingly logical and "caring" words of Bill and Hillary Clinton, there may be a dreadful purpose…

Quoted from "THE NEW AMERICAN" by Wm. Jasper 1996

Psalm 2

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,

Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.

Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

http://www.dccsa.com/greatjoy/Illumin7.htm

Judicial Watch Calls on FEC to Investigate McCain Presidential Fundraising

So who's to know the truth about ANYTHING.

They're all lieing scumbags. Some are richer than others, but all are RICH. No one's upholding the good of the common people. On the other hand, The Play's getting richer and richer as we enter Act II, scene whatever, eh?

Who gets offed soon? The US royal court is having its problems!! Somebody's gotta have a poisoning or heart attack soon. Otherwise, the servants will be turning off their plug-in drug heart attack machine TVs and figure out what has REALLY been going on.

I still firmly believe that HiLIARy is going to end up with that tiara on her ruthless little head, NO MATTER WHAT. The unthinkable will lead us further down the apocolyptic path. No one, no one at all thought a WOMAN could be president in 1930. But just watch how clever she really is. She set up Spitzer; McCain was a Real Ass to think he could get away with this one. He was too old to be president anyway.

No way Hills was gonna let little Ms. McCain and her Cindy doll world remodel the White House. That's where HiLIARy intends to hold court once again. And you won't see her baking cookies while she is there either.

Obama is tiring on the campaign trail. HiLIARy will be all over him again like a dirty shirt.

Stay tuned.
Love,
Madame Defarge

Category: Article, Candidates, Election 2008, Election Update, John McCain, Media Coverage, National News, News |

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it filed a formal complaint, dated April 22, 2008, with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) related to a fundraising luncheon held at London’s Spencer House to benefit Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign. The venue for the event was apparently donated to the campaign by foreign nationals, in violation of federal campaign finance laws.

“Recent news reports suggest that Sen. John McCain and John McCain for President may have accepted an in-kind contribution from foreign nationals Lord Rothschild OM GBE and the Hon. Nathaniel Rothschild of Great Britain in contravention of federal election laws,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton wrote in a complaint letter dated April 22, 2008. “On behalf of Judicial Watch and its supporters, I hereby request that the FEC investigate the matter.”

The McCain fundraiser was held on March 20, 2008 at London’s Spencer House, billed as “London’s most magnificent 18th century private palace.” The McCain campaign distributed an invitation indicating that the site for the luncheon had been provided “by kind permission of Lord Rothschild, OM GBE and the Hon. Nathaniel Rothschild,” who are both foreign nationals. In statements to the press, the McCain campaign referred to the luncheon as a “fundraiser.”

While it is, as yet, unclear how much money was raised during the luncheon, had the venue not been donated to the McCain campaign, the net profit from the event would have been significantly reduced. The donation of the venue, therefore, represents an illegal in-kind campaign contribution.

According to 2 U.S.C. § 441e, Contributions and donations by foreign nationals, it is illegal for any foreign national to “make a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value” to a Federal, State or Local election. (Judicial Watch filed a similar complaint on April 14, 2008, concerning a fundraiser by Elton John for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.)

“The Clinton campaign recently accepted an in-kind contribution in the form of a fundraising concert by Elton John. And now the McCain campaign has apparently run afoul of federal election laws with this foreign fundraiser. The FEC must treat these incidents seriously, and hold any campaign that accepts contributions from foreign nationals accountable. We cannot allow these presidential campaigns to play fast and loose with the law,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/files/2007/0408FECComplaintMcCain.pdf