The Arnold Palmer
46 minutes ago
For 15 years, Hillary Clinton has been part of a secretive religious group that seeks to bring Jesus back to Capitol Hill. Is she triangulating--or living her faith?...Here is the Mother Jones link. More on this group's leader, Doug Coe, from Harper's via a DKos diary. Honestly, I felt like I was reading about a cult.
The Fellowship's long-term goal is "a leadership led by God--leaders of all levels of society who direct projects as they are led by the spirit." According to the Fellowship's archives, the spirit has in the past led its members in Congress to increase U.S. support for the Duvalier regime in Haiti and the Park dictatorship in South Korea. The Fellowship's God-led men have also included General Suharto of Indonesia; Honduran general and death squad organizer Gustavo Alvarez Martinez; a Deutsche Bank official disgraced by financial ties to Hitler; and dictator Siad Barre of Somalia, plus a list of other generals and dictators.
"This letter is inappropriate and we hope the Clinton campaign will reject the insinuation contained in it. Regardless of the outcome of the nomination fight, Senator Obama will continue to urge his supporters to assist Speaker Pelosi in her efforts to maintain and build a working majority in the House of Representatives," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.Speaks for itself.
We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August. We appreciate your activities in support of the Democratic Party and your leadership role in the Party and hope you will be responsive to some of your major enthusiastic supporters.What does that language mean? It isn't limited to superdelegates, that's for sure. The letter says "each of the delegates." That is significant. Keep in mind that the super rich contributors are upset with Pelosi for saying last week:
"If the votes of the superdelegates overturn what's happened in the elections, it would be harmful to the Democratic party"Now, of course, Pelosi is right. That would be harmful to the Democratic Party. But, Hillary and her rich supporters care about Hillary, not the Democratic Party. And, this isn't just about superdelegates. Clinton's donors are directing Pelosi to go public and endorse Hillary's comments from a few days ago, when Hillary said that the elected delegates, the ones YOU voted for already, don't have to support Obama even though YOU voted for him. In their world, those delegates can just vote for Hillary anyway. That's what this letter is about. It's about extorting Pelosi to hand Hillary the election by stealing Obama's delegates. It's about Hillary doing something that a month ago she promised she wasn't going to do - try to steal Obama's delegates. (To be clear, I don't think there is any way Clinton could win over any of Obama's delegates. I have no doubt his delegates will stick with him. But, the Clinton campaign has reached the point of desperation that they are willing to try. Actually, Clinton should be more worried about her delegates ditching her for the candidate who is going to win the nomination -- and be the next President.)
Knowingly violating the spending limit is a criminal offense that could put McCain at risk of stiff fines and up to five years in prison.Now, based on McCain's latest campaign finance report, we know the GOP nominee has violated the spending limit. So, it's time to take it to the next level. Yesterday, Jane delivered a complaint about McCain's criminality to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) -- and gives the background:
We decided that McCain shouldn't be allowed to get away with this without questions -- lots and lots of questions -- being asked. The hypocrisy of the so-called "maverick" violating a law which he championed because it suits his purposes this time around is horrifying. Even worse is the relative silence of the press on this, given the rank hypocrisy of violations of McCain's "signature" issue and all. Does it get to be your signature issue if you are blatantly violating it in an in-your-face maneuver after being warned not to by the head of the FEC? I think not.For shame indeed.
If the press isn't going to ask the necessary questions, then we have to do it ourselves. You can join in, too -- sign your name to the complaint here. At that link, you'll find a copy of the FEC filing and a list of signatories thus far. And help us get the word out on the need for McCain to be held accountable for any violations of the law that has his own name on it....and any other laws of which he may be in violation.
For shame...
Legislation that makes you a "liberal" according to the National Journal (and apparently Hillary):Read More......
Establish a Senate Office of Public Integrity to handle ethics complaints against senators. (So now ethics is liberal?)
Table an amendment that would require the Homeland Security Department to screen 100 percent of cargo containers entering the country within five years. (Is screening for Osama's nukes liberal or conservative?)
Approve the fiscal 2008 budget resolution.
Create a national action plan for reducing oil consumption by 35 percent by 2030. (Bush has advocated decreasing our dependence on foreign oil.)
Limit debate on an energy bill setting higher fuel standards for vehicles. (John Dingell, Democrat, is the lead member of Congress opposed to this.)
Increase financial aid for college students and reduce subsidies for student-loan lenders. (Student aid is liberal?)
Approve legislation reauthorizing and expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program. (This legislation was bipartisan and I seem to recall Hillary saying she created this program (which is a lie)).
Approve fiscal 2008 appropriations for the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education departments.
Limit debate on a measure expressing no confidence in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. (That's partisan, not liberal.)
Block individuals from serving on Food and Drug Administration drug advisory panels if they have conflicts of interest. (Again, ethics is liberal?)
A week after Starbucks was ordered to refund more than $100 million to baristas in California over a tip pool controversy, the coffee giant was hit Tuesday with a similar lawsuit in Massachusetts.Read More......
And a Boston lawyer said more lawsuits could be filed in Washington, New York and Minnesota over whether shift supervisors can share baristas' tips.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
© 2010 - John Aravosis | Design maintenance by Jason Rosenbaum
Send me your tips: americablog AT starpower DOT net