Sunday, April 27, 2008

Hillary's Problem Ahead....The Weather !

I just checked the forecast for the next 2 weeks in Indiana and N. Carolina and noticed that Hillary may have one major problem ahead....The Weather ! For the next 2 weeks you will notice that all of Hill and Bill's rallys will be in outdoor venues....parks...back yards...parking lots...etc.. The reason? She's so broke she can't afford to rent halls anymore for her appearances. So they are forced to holding their rallys in 'free' outdoor venues. Problem's supposed to rain alot in both Indiana and N. Carolina over the next couple weeks. So what will they do ? They can't afford to go indoors....they can't cancel...And now that she has been known not to pay her bills the halls want their money up front.That's where the Hill supporters come in. If you are a true, strong supporter of Hillary....she needs you all to do an Indian...'Hope it DON'T' raindance ! Seriously....she needs your help. Just stand in the mirror and start your don't raindance jig...but then stop....look in the mirror....and ask yourself.... Is this REALLY who you think should be running America !
Visit: Blacks4Barack OFFICIAL SITE
(A Multi-Racial Grassroots Org...Dedicated To Truth)

If Clinton can't run campaign,
can she run White House?
By David Lightman McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — Despite Hillary Clinton's big win in Pennsylvania last week, the story of her campaign is often one of mismanagement and missed opportunities, and it raises questions about how she'd organize and run the White House.

"There's a certain style to the campaign, and it shows what we might expect in a Clinton presidency: a lot of viewpoints and a messiness," said James McCann, a political science professor at Purdue University in Indiana.

Whether that's a good or bad trait is in the eye of the analyst. McCann called it "policymaking through trial and error," similar to how Bill Clinton ran his administration, which to many was a big success.

But her campaign tumbled from riches to rags to rebounds — and now to hanging on for dear life. It wasn't supposed to be that way.

Not many months ago, Clinton was the consensus front-runner, with a 30-point lead in national polls, $118 million raised in 2007 and the backing of most Democratic power brokers.
Today she trails Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in convention delegates, campaign cash and the popular vote.
How'd that happen?
Obama proved to be a phenomenal opponent — that's surely one answer. But some critics see Clinton's campaign as a runaway truck that careened from primary to primary in search of a structure that works.
From the time the former first lady announced her White House bid 15 months ago, her strategy was driven by three ideas: Clinton was the inevitable Democratic nominee so everyone should jump on her bandwagon; she had a seasoned team adept at finding and appealing to wide varieties of voters; and she could outraise and outspend all rivals.

"The bottom line is that she went in with a set of assumptions that proved to be false," said John Geer, the editor of the Journal of Politics.
The notion that she was the inevitable winner left a lot of activists cold.
"You got the sense that her attitude was, 'I'm the nominee, so what else are you going to do?''' said Gordon Fischer, a former Iowa Democratic Party chairman.

As the Des Moines lawyer tried to decide on a candidate last year, Clinton would call him occasionally, but when he said that he wanted to go out on a campaign bus for a day, he said, "No one ever got back to me."

Obama's campaign did. Fischer spent a day going to a barbecue with 15 people and six other events. He signed up with Obama in late September.
"No rookie candidate can claim inevitability," said California political strategist Bob Mulholland. "Only a president can."
Clinton's second stumble was trusting advisers who not only bickered openly, but also seemed to lack the strategic vision that a presidential campaign requires.
Until recently, Clinton's top strategist was Washington pollster Mark Penn, the author of last year's book "Microtrends: The Small Forces Behind Tomorrow's Big Changes."
However, 2008 has become the year of the big trend.
Since October, the AP-Ipsos poll has found that roughly 70 percent of Americans think that the country is on the wrong track, thanks largely to frustration over Iraq and the economy. Americans want big change, not micro-measures.
Compounding Clinton's problem was Penn, who's widely perceived as arrogant and awkward with people. "He has the social skills of a mollusk," said William Curry, a former counselor to Bill Clinton.
Kathy Sullivan, a former New Hampshire party chairwoman, agreed: "Every time I saw him on TV, I thought he was losing us voters."
Penn didn't respond to requests for comment.

As the campaign progressed in 2008, Clinton faced a third problem: Her team had expected her to sew up the nomination on Feb. 5, Super Tuesday. It burned through more than $118 million trying to make that happen, spending so furiously that Clinton even lent herself $5 million at the end of January.

But when Obama fought her to a draw that day, Clinton seemed to have no Plan B.
Campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle, a longtime loyalist who'd never run a campaign before, left after Super Tuesday. She was replaced by Maggie Williams, another longtime loyalist who'd never run a campaign.
Meanwhile, Obama ran off 11 straight victories in February, most in races Clinton barely contested, which is how he rolled up his lead in delegates.

In March, chief strategist Penn was forced to step down after he met with Colombian officials to tout a free-trade agreement that Clinton opposed.
Along the way Clinton presented a number of shifting personas. When she was trying to appear inevitable, she ran as the steely would-be commander in chief. After she lost to Obama in Iowa, she turned misty-eyed and emotional just before the New Hampshire primary and won. More recently, she's presented herself as the reincarnation of Rocky, the plucky prize-fighter who never gives up.

"She's had more incarnations than the Dalai Lama, and she's not as well-liked," Curry said.
Still, she managed to rebound and win crucial primaries in Texas and Ohio on March 4, and in Pennsylvania by 9.2 points on Tuesday.
Clinton backers dismiss the February free-fall as ancient history, citing her Pennsylvania win as evidence that she's on the path to the top. While her campaign aides declined requests for comment for this story, her surrogates made her case publicly.

"It was an awesome victory, a landslide in so many different ways," said Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell. "You can see the dynamic changing."
Still, the history of campaign turmoil suggests that a Clinton White House might not be a smooth operation.

"Plan B seems to be, 'Fire staff,'" said Craig Allen Smith, a professor of communication at North Carolina State University.
"She's done what many thought was impossible," Curry said. "She's raising her negatives."

(Greg Gordon contributed.)
McClatchy Newspapers 2008


(A Multi-Racial Grassroots Org...Dedicated To Truth)

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Rev. Jeremiah Wright Sets
Record Straight In Powerful PBS Interview
Shows how media manipulated and mislead America ! PITIFUL !!!!!!!!!!!!
Visit: Official Site
(A Multi-Racial Organization....Dedicated To Truth)

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Regarding NEW STRATEGY !

Just Stress THE FACTS to
DNC & SuperDelegates !

It is absolutely amazing how the media is spinning the Clinton victory in Pennsylvania.....regardless of the facts. First of all, although she was leading in the polls by over 22%, she won by 9.4%....not 'double digits' which sounds so much more like a blowout. Secondly, unless Hillary wins every remaining primary by 76% or more, it is absolutley mathematically impossible for her to catch Obama in the pledged delegate count. That's just a fact. Obama is leading in delegate count, number of states won and popular vote, even though now she has convinced some in the media to count the votes in Michigan and Florida to claim a lead in popular vote, although the fact is.....those states don't count.

While the media is dissecting the demographics, for some reason they keep leaving one verrrrry important statistic out of their breakdown. The Major Fact Is.....BILLARY HAS ALIENATED AND LOST THE ENTIRE BLACK VOTE ! Where's THAT fact ? And they have the gall to think that they can claim her to be more electable to superdelegates.......with close to zero black support......ARE THEY NUTS ???????? Hillary Clinton is the first democratic presidential nominee in modern day history to lose the entire black vote ! That, too, is a fact !


It is time for EVERYONE to contact the DNC and every superdelegate that we can trace and remind them that due to her own actions HILLARY HAS LOST THE ENTIRE BLACK VOTE ! How in the world could she and Bill have the nerve to claim more electabilty when they have lost an entire race of people....the very group that the Democratic Party has always been able to count on.



Call The DNC TODAY at 202-863-8000 or contact them at

This is in no way meant to be racial. We are all in this together....blacks, whites, young, old, rich and poor......working together for a better America. But the fact that the Clintons (formerly known as The First Black President)have lost the support of an entire race of not only pitiful.....but should be made....a very well known FACT !

(A Multi-Racial Organization Dedicated To Truth !)

Monday, April 14, 2008

Hillary/Media's 'bitter' tactic
against Obama
desperately PITIFUL !
By Greg Jones

Here we go again ! When the campaign started in 2007 Obama was said to have not been 'black enough' as per the media as they touted Hillary's 82% support from Black Americans. The Clinton camp scrounged and dug as deeply as they could to find some kind....ANY kind of smut they could use against Obama, even searching as far back as his kindergarten writings. Couldn't find a thing. Then as Americans of all races learned more about the real Clintons, while learning more about the great qualities and capabilities of Obama, the inevitable was no more. So the Clintons (and the media) decided if they couldn't find anything negative on Obama, why not search through video tapes of Obama's preacher. Yea ! That's the ticket. So they scrounged and searched through years and years of video taped sermons and found a few somewhat harsh statements from the preacher....looped them all together....played them on the news 1 or 2 million times, in hopes that they could paint Obama as this anti-American-black militant type person....exactly what he is not (maybe they forgot he's also half white). But, polls showed their masterminded plot to be ineffective. Now what ? Ahhhhh. Obama makes a statement discussing how many Americans are fed up with government failures and are 'bitter'. The Clintons....McCain....the media....ALL's something we can jump on top of.....Obama called Americans 'bitter' ! So he's an elitist out of touch with real America!

This is the weakest attempt so far. How in the world can they try to claim that a little black boy who's father left at age 2....raised by a single white broke at times that she was on food stamps....a boy who grew up and went to college through grants and scholarships....riding to school daily in a ragedy jalopy.....just recently paying off his student loans thanks to proceeds from a book he wrote....(entitled 'The Audacity of HOPE') who's entire life has been devoted to helping the disadvantaged....the poor....sick....the struggling....THIS IS AN ELITIST ?

Hillary, McCain and the entire media should be ashamed of themselves for this weak, pitiful attempt to literally make-up truth. They should be concentrating on REAL facts such as the 109 million the Clintons have made during the last few years...or the 300 mill McCain's wife is worth.....or what about Hillary's secret religion known as 'The Family' which CNN didn't ask a single question about in the so-called religious forum...or what about her election fraud case going on right now in California? Did we mention McCain's wife's stealing of drugs and her rehab stint ? There's so much's pitiful !

The fact is.....Obama is about as elitist as Hillary ducked sniper fire in Bosnia....Stay focused people. They are all (Hillary, McCain and the media) getting more and more desperate everyday. That's a real good sign !
Greg Jones is National Director of Blacks4Barack (A Multi-Racial Organization)
Visit: BLACKS4BARACK Official Site

Wednesday, April 2, 2008

Hillary fired for lies, unethical behavior
from Congressional job: former boss
by Ed Morrissey

Dan Calabrese’s new column on Hillary Clinton’s past may bring the curtain down on her political future. Calabrese interviewed Jerry Zeifman, the man who served as chief counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, has tried to tell the story of his former staffer’s behavior during those proceedings for years. Zeifman claims he fired Hillary for unethical behavior and that she conspired to deny Richard Nixon counsel during the hearings:
As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.
Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.


“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”
This isn’t exactly news. When her lachrymose performance arguably won her New Hampshire, Zeifman tried to tell people about Hillary’s duplicity. Patterico noticed the effort, but few others picked it up. Zeifman wrote at his website:

After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader “Tip” O’Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O’Neill’s statement that: “To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series.”

Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixonrepresentation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee’s then most recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.

I had also informed Hillary that the Douglas impeachment files were available for public inspection in the committee offices. She later removed the Douglas files without my permission and carried them to the offices of the impeachment inquiry staff — where they were no longer accessible to the public.

Hillary had also made other ethical flawed procedural recommendations, arguing that the Judiciary Committee should: not hold any hearings with – or take depositions of — any live witnesses; not conduct any original investigation of Watergate, bribery, tax evasion, or any other possible impeachable offense of President Nixon; and should rely solely on documentary evidence compiled by other committees and by the Justice Departments special Watergate prosecutor .

The right to counsel is considered one of the inviolable tenets of our justice system. It doesn’t speak well of ambitious attorneys working on a highly-charged political investigation that she wanted to deny someone the right to an attorney. Small wonder Zeifman questioned her ethics.
If all she did was to propose that as a tactic, that would not make it terribly concerning — but she did much more than just spitball ideas. When informed that public evidence showed a precedent for the right to counsel, she absconded with the files to eliminate the evidence. Does that remind anyone of later incidents in the Clinton narrative, such as the billing records for the Rose Law offices and the 900+ raw FBI files on political opponents of the Clintons?

Hillary’s advocates could accuse Zeifman of conjuring up these stories in order to draw attention to himself in the middle of a presidential campaign. However, Calabrese reports that Zeifman kept diaries during this period, urged on by friends mindful of the historical nature of the Watergate investigation. No one would have known at the time that this 27-year-old barracuda would have any sort of national significance — which makes Zeifman’s testimony all the more compelling.

We know that the Tuzla Dash covered for something much more significant in Hillary’s character. Zeifman shows that all of this forms a pattern of lies, obfuscations, deceit, and treachery. Don’t miss a word on either site.
Update: Not Senate, but the House. I changed the title to Congressional, but Zeifman worked for the House Judiciary Committee.


Tuesday, April 1, 2008

WOW ! Hillary's Religion (cult?)
'THE FAMILY' Very Scary !
Prays To Jesus For The Elite To Rule The World !
The media has repeatedly aired the short clips of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's rhetoric in attempt to discredit and smear Barack Obama. But what's even more interesting is the fact that the media never discusses Hillary Clinton's religion, which is extremely telling and even frightening. A closer look into her 'religion' gives one a clearer picture of why she is the way she is.In a recent article by Steven Brandt many truths about Hillary's religion, called ' The Family' will make you shudder. The question is....where's the media on this one ?

Brandt writes, "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend." said Hillary Clinton, to reporters and editors of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on Tuesday the 25th. This is an interesting choice of words, since -- while we mostly hear about her Methodist upbringing -- Hillary Clinton has chosen to associate herself with The Family (also known as the Fellowship), a very conservative, fundamentalist organization started by Abraham Vereide...
" immigrant preacher who in 1935 organized a small group of businessmen sympathetic to European fascism, fusing the Far Right with his own polite but authoritarian faith. From that core, Vereide built an international network of fundamentalists who spoke the language of establishment power, a "family" that thrives to this day. In public, they host prayer breakfasts; in private they preach a gospel of "biblical capitalism," military might, and American empire. Citing Hitler, Lenin, and Mao, Doug Coe, the Family's current leader, declares, "We work with power where we can, build new power where we can't."
This quote is taken from the book on The Family by the same name which will be published in May... a book which claims to
"...dramatically challenge conventional wisdom about American fundamentalism, revealing its crucial role in the unraveling of the New Deal, the waging of the Cold War, and the no-holds-barred economics of globalization. The question Sharlet believes we must ask is not "What do fundamentalists want?" but "What have they already done?"
A long article was written about Hillary Clinton's participation in this organization last September in Mother Jones, and The Family, itself, was the subject of an extensive article in Harper's in March of 2003. And on March 21st, The Nation published an article on Hillary and The Family by Barbara Ehrenreich that was published on The Huffington Post and CBS News' web site.
The Family avoids the word Christian but worships Jesus, though not the Jesus who promised the earth to the "meek." They believe that, in mass societies, it's only the elites who matter, the political leaders who can build God's "dominion" on earth. Insofar as The Family has a consistent philosophy, it's all about power - cultivating it, building it and networking it together into ever-stronger units, or "cells."...wrote Ms.Ehrenreich.
Is it possible that Hillary's participation in this fundamentalist group -- which apparently preaches the "gospel of military might" -- would help explain her vote in favor of authorizing President Bush to attack Iraq? Is it possible her pro-NAFTA stance during her husband's administration comes from its embrace of "the no-holds-barred economics of globalization"? Is it possible that the sense some get that Hillary feels entitled to be president comes in part from this group's belief that "it's only the elites who matter"?
I encourage any reporter covering Hillary's campaign to ask her about all this.

At a time when so many people are wondering what sort of effect the Rev. Wright's sermons may have had on Barack Obama, I think it's only fair to ask what sort of effect The Family's fundamentalist mission has had - and continues to have - on Hillary Clinton. We know that George Bush engages in truly fundamentalist thinking. There is no person or new information capable of challenging his belief that what he already knows is right. Is Hillary Clinton like this in some way? I am not sure.

But the opinion I have formed from this is that - while Hillary Clinton may be considered a Liberal by many - on the inside she is a deeply Conservative person... possibly as close to being a Republican today as she was when she was a young woman supporting Senator Goldwater. This helps explain, to me, why she and John McCain are such good friends. They are both drawn to the use of military power and free market capitalism... and to taking money from lobbyists. The other opinion I have formed is that those who say there are no policy differences between Hillary and Barack haven't taken into account how their religious differences might impact the policies they would actually seek to implement as president.
(end of article)

So now a few things make more sense about Hillary. In review, she's in a kinda power-hungry cult which is actually run by her fellow Republicans which she is secretly one of ! It also makes sense why she could care less about detroying the Democratic Party. Also, beware of her claim to work toward ending the Iraq war. That is another great lie that she is telling. If you listen to her claims she commonly repeats ' I will start getting troops out within my first 60 days '.....How many ? 3....1000...10,000 ? Don't be fooled. Hillary has no desire to end the war. She'll bring 5 troops home then say that she kept her word.

The media should be called out for not exposing this cult. Problem is, they would also be revealing the truths about their fellow Republican's plan and prayers to 'rule the world' by any means. So it's up to us, regular Americans like you and I, to help spread the truth in spite of the media.....For The Re-Birth of America !

Greg Jones
Visit: Blacks4Barack Official Site