The ACORN Obama Knows

By Michelle Malkin
June 25, 2008

If you don't know what ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is all about, you better bone up. This left-wing group takes in 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers -- you and me -- and has leveraged nearly four decades of government subsidies to fund affiliates that promote the welfare state and undermine capitalism and self-reliance, some of which have been implicated in perpetuating illegal immigration and encouraging voter fraud. A new whistleblower report from the Consumer Rights League claims that Chicago-based ACORN has commingled public tax dollars with political projects.

Who in Washington will fight to ensure that your money isn't being spent on these radical activities?

Don't bother asking Barack Obama. He cut his ideological teeth working with ACORN as a "community organizer" and legal representative. Naturally, ACORN's political action committee has warmly endorsed his presidential candidacy. ACORN head Maude Hurd gushes that Obama is the candidate who "best understands and can affect change on the issues ACORN cares about" -- like ensuring their massive pipeline to your hard-earned money. Let's take a closer look at the ACORN Obama knows.

Last July, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of Washington State. Seven ACORN workers had submitted nearly 2,000 bogus voter registration forms. According to case records, they flipped through phone books for names to use on the forms, including "Leon Spinks," "Frekkie Magoal" and "Fruto Boy Crispila." Three ACORN election hoaxers pleaded guilty in October. A King County prosecutor called ACORN's criminal sabotage "an act of vandalism upon the voter rolls."

The group's vandalism on electoral integrity is systemic. ACORN has been implicated in similar voter fraud schemes in Missouri, Ohio and at least 12 other states. The Wall Street Journal noted: "In Ohio in 2004, a worker for one affiliate was given crack cocaine in exchange for fraudulent registrations that included underage voters, dead voters and pillars of the community named Mary Poppins, Dick Tracy and Jive Turkey. During a congressional hearing in Ohio in the aftermath of the 2004 election, officials from several counties in the state explained ACORN's practice of dumping thousands of registration forms in their lap on the submission deadline, even though the forms had been collected months earlier."

In March, Philadelphia elections officials accused the nonprofit advocacy group of filing fraudulent voter registrations in advance of the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary. The charges have been forwarded to the city district attorney's office.

Under the guise of "consumer advocacy," ACORN has received money from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD funds hundreds, if not thousands, of left-wing "anti-poverty" groups across the country led by ACORN. Last October, HUD announced more than $44 million in new housing counseling grants to over 400 state and local efforts. The White House has increased funding for housing counseling by 150 percent since taking office in 2001, despite the role most of these recipients play as activist satellites of the Democratic Party. The AARP scored nearly $400,000 for training; the National Council of La Raza ("The Race") scooped up more than $1.3 million; the National Urban League raked in nearly $1 million; and the ACORN Housing Corporation received more than $1.6 million.

As the Consumer Rights League points out in its new expose, the ACORN Housing Corporation has worked to obtain mortgages for illegal aliens in partnership with Citibank. It relies on undocumented income, "under the table" money, which may not be reported to the Internal Revenue Service. Moreover, the group's "financial justice" operations attack lenders for "exotic" loans, while recommending 10-year interest-only loans (which deny equity to the buyer) and risky reverse mortgages. Whistleblower documents reveal internal discussions among the group that blur the lines between its tax-exempt housing work and its aggressive electioneering activities. The group appears to shake down corporate interests with relentless PR attacks, and then enters "no lobby" agreements with targeted corporations after receiving payment.

Republicans have largely looked the other way as ACORN has expanded its government-funded empire. But finally, a few conservative voices in Congress have called for investigation of the group's apparent extortion schemes. This week, GOP Reps. Tom Feeney, Jeb Hensarling and Ed Royce called on Democrat Barney Frank, chair of the House Financial Services Committee, to convene a hearing to probe potential illegalities and abuse of taxpayer funds by ACORN's management and minions alike.

Where does the candidate of Hope and Change -- the candidate of Reform and New Politics -- stand on the issue? Barack Obama, ACORN's senator, is for more of the same old, same old subsidizing of far-left politics in the name of fighting for the poor while enriching ideological cronies. It's the Chicago way.

---

Michelle Malkin is author of "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild." Her e-mail address is malkinblog@gmail.com.

HILLARY'S NEW END RUN

In a move that could only be considered daunting, Hillary Clinton has finally accepted the inevitable, she and Barack Obama will be sharing the stage on the campaign trail.

This is clearly the act of a woman who has come to grips with the fact that she has been beaten by a black African American male, and that to continue to remain with blinders on, only signs the death nell of Clintonism.

By joining with Obama on the campaign trail and assisting him in his run for office her strategy is clearly a break from Clintonism or is it? Hillary, at this point has nothing to lose, and everything to gain.

one; she satifies her party cronies who have been bugging her to DO SOMETHING !.

two; it will cool off all of those menopausal hot-flash women who were so angry at the Democratic Committee for pressuring her into stepping aside. More than 50 percent of them will see this move as Hillary's continuing effort to get to the top, and remain loyal to the NDP.

three; This will appear for the moment as if Hillary has sacrificed her own carrier for the sake of party unity.

It now seems as if Hillary has made up her mind that if she can't beat um, join um. It could very well be Hillary's guarantee, by appearing to be accepting a Vice Presidential slot, her legacy of instigating social welfare medicine is within her final reach. I can see no other reason for Hillary to begin running with Obama except for maybe one.

There is the possibility that Hillary has become wise enough to know since running against a black American, she has polarized the black voting community with those racial comments so subtlety uttered by her and her lack luster spouse during her campaign.

This joining at the hip with Obama now could lay the ground work for healing that rift, so that when she decides to run again which she will in four more years she can count on their vote.

It could also be, Hillary is convinced that no matter what happens between Obama and her, Obama won't win the election in November. So as I said earlier she has nothing to lose. OR DOES SHE? She stills has Bill around her neck.

If Obama loses, can Hillary disassociate herself with his stigma of change by accepting a position as his running mate now? I believe she thinks she can.

But if Obama wins Hillary could become tainted just as Al Gore did running for the Presidential ticket as an incumbent Vice President, who was mired by the shadow of Bill Clinto. She could suffer by the same of Obama (If Obama were to win I cannot see him ever going beyond one term). After all, that part of former President's wife did effect folks who might have voted for Hillary this time except for Bill and the possibility of him being back in the White House.

Have the Clinton's figured out that this is truly their only way back to getting close to 1600Pennsylvania Avenue. So this new Clintonosophy is a more humble and compassionate, kinder, gentler form. Sort of lets say, like, coming into the White House through the back door.

Doesn't the V.P. have a house or suite right next to the White House?

No matter what Hillary once again presents herself as a woman who just does not know the word "can't", but at what price and whose suffering?. For the moment this new approach may appear to be a breath of fresh air for the Democrats. They may think that if they have to put up with Hillary now at least they have finally gotten control of her but I don't see it that way.

If Hillary is thinking of seeking the V.P. spot (although I really don't believe this is the plan) this clearly tells me that she no longer feels that being a junior senator from N.Y. is worth it. In turn this will burn many bridges with her constituents back in the synagogue area of upper New Yorks suburbia. This can' be good for her in the long run or the Democratic party.

Even being on the ticket with Obama, could leave Hillary's dependence on healing the black vote without substance in the future. Blacks may just decide that they no longer want to support any white candidate and step out on their own to look for another Great Black Hope. Possibly breaking from the Democratic party and forming their own independant party.

If this were the case I am sure Hillary is thinking that "there's still the Hispanics" after her grand results down in Puerto Rico. Puerto Ricans unfortunatly are not where the votes count, they can't vote in a general election.

It is my prediction that no matter who wins the election there will still be a few years of economic downturn in new construction, and other industries that depend heavily on itinerant type labor which makes up over 50% of the Hispanic work force, both legal and illegal, but not Puerto Rican.

This ain't just about Puerto Ricans, who have been coming and going in the U.S. for many many years with no real national economic impact on the labor market,or the vote. Its more about the Mexicans, and to a smaller degree the other Latin American countries who's country men enter into the U.S. illegally in greater and greater numbers.

Believe it or not these are the people who Hillary is counting on to make a difference in the Hispanic vote. Nine months ago if one could actually have checked or verified how many of the Hispanic voters were legally registered to vote in the national elections, I think you would be surprised to find out that probably close to 40% percent of the active voters were not actually legal.

The voting checks and balances in most states up until then has been so lackadaisical that for years many many years past, people who shouldn't legally have a right to vote, have been voting.

Now since the ruling by the Supreme Court regarding Illinois' right to require a specific form of photo i.d. to prove who your are and, that you have the right to vote, many other states are enacting similiar legislation. Many more states will within the next four year term of the presidency. next election.

This is going to have a strong effect on the Hispanic vote and I predict this issue of I.D. voting will be a very hot item over the next four years or even more.

Why! would you say illegals would want the right to vote in a country that is growing more and more weary of them and the burden they place upon our already over loaded social system. Our social system is exactly the reason the illegal alien wants the right to vote.

Based on the utterances of all three (Hillary included) leading candidates in this election, signals have been sent that things might be made easier for illegals to settle here in America, despite it being unpopular. And in so doing Hillary and Obama's crys for "socialized medicine" strike a comforting tune to the illegal, and also the legal Hispanic population. Aside from Blacks, it is the Hispanics who are pumping out babies, in greater numbers, and continuing to having to settle for the low wage jobs. Who else would need socialized medicine more?

Rest assured if Hillary with her new found friend Obama is successful in making it to the White House on his coat tails. We are all going to be paying for our lettuce and gardeners in much more expensive ways than just tolerating their um pa pa music.

ANNOUNCING NEW BOOK

One Nation, One Standard
An Ex-Liberal on How Hispanics Can Succeed Just Like Other Immigrant Groups
(Sentinel, 2007)
By Herman Badillo
Foreword by Rudolph W. Giuliani
Why aren't Hispanics succeeding like Asians, Jews, and other immigrant groups in America?
The answer is as politically incorrect as the question.
Herman Badillo will tell it to you straight: Hispanics simply don't put the same emphasis on education as other immigrant groups in America.
Orphaned in Puerto Rico, raised in New York since childhood, and experienced in the political arena, he's not afraid of the "stereotyping" charge.
As the nation's first Puerto Rican-born U.S. congressman, the trailblazing Badillo supported bilingual education and other government programs he thought would help the Hispanic community.
But Badillo came to see that the real path to prosperity, political unity, and the American mainstream is self-reliance, not big government. Now Badillo's a Giuliani-style Republican and a champion of one standard of achievement for all races and ethnicities.
In this surprising and controversial manifesto, you will learn:
Why Hispanic culture's trouble with education, democracy, and economics stems from Mother Spain and the "five-hundred year siesta" she induced in Latin America.
What changed the mind of the man who drafted the first Spanish-English bilingual education legislation in Congress and made him realize that it hurt students more than it helped them.
Why "social promotion"-putting minority students' self-esteem ahead of their academic performance and then admitting them to college unprepared-continues to this day, despite the system's documented failures and injustices.
How self-identifying as "Hispanic" or "white" or "black" undermines achievement, and what lessons we can learn from Latin American countries, where one's race is irrelevant.
With Central and Latin America exporting a large portion of their poor, Hispanics are on the way to becoming a majority in the United States . . . but one with all the problems of a minority culture.
Badillo's solution to this problem relies on traditional values: hard work, education, and achievement. His lessons are important not only for Hispanics but for every American.
ABOUT AUTHOR
Herman Badillo was the nation's first Puerto Rican-born congressman. He also served as the borough president of the Bronx, deputy mayor of New York City, and chairman of the board of the City University of New York. Currently he is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and resides in New York City with his wife, Gail.
* * *
ADVANCE PRAISE
"The greatest lesson of Herman Badillo's story is that the genius of American life-the upward ladder of opportunity that American freedom at its best provides-is better at solving most any problem than any government program."
— Rudolph W. Giuliani, former mayor of New York City
"As an honest, accomplished Hispanic public servant, originally a Democrat and now a Republican, Herman Badillo has produced an enlightening discussion of the explosive growth of the Hispanic community and how best to promote its assimilation. Among other good advice, he warns against relying too much on government assistance while insisting on traditional values of hard work, thrift, and integrity. So doing, he provides nourishment for intelligent people who call themselves liberals and equally intelligent people who call themselves conservatives. I call him brilliant."
— Mario Cuomo, former governor of New York State

HMMMM

At almost 22 years of age, the Olsen twins remind me of two little boys Michael Jackson might be caught sleeping with.

When you study the face of Heath Ledger as "The Joker" in the most recent "Batman, the Dark Knight" release, you can't help but see the face of Mary-Kaye Olsen. What's that all about?

I'm sorry but those two little anorexic chimeras bring nightmares of encountering them standing on both sides of the not so pearly gates when I enter Dante's Inferno.

JESSE SPIKE JONES JACKSON

Clint is right and Spike is wrong.

If there were 1,000,000,000, black African American soldiers in World War II, just exactly how many of them were on Iwo Jima, at the moment the flag was raised on Mount Suribachi, and how many of them actually participate in raising that particular flag? I personally hold deep respect for anyone of any color who served in the capacity of combat soldier. I also hold out respect for anyone who has donned a uniform in support of those combatants.

Spike Jones is still living in the era of reverse apartheid or what was commonly referred to in the 70's in this country as "affirmative action", the second greatest failure of Lyndon Baines Johnson's "Great Society".

Since when does Spike Jones have a license to tell other directors how to make their films. Is he an executive producer to the project? If he were well then I would think he may have some say in how it is put together and directed. Other than that look who's calling the kettle black. No pun intended. His films have surely made a lasting impression in the public eye right?

Of all the people to come out and tell Clint Eastwood how to make a movie Jones is hardly a front row candidate. Lets see now lets take a review of the white people in Spikes movies. I think the only two I have seen were "I'm Gonna Get You Sucker" and "Do The Right Thing" . The former of the two is non remarkable, that's how much of an impression it made on me. And the latter embeds a memory of how racist Jones depicted the Italian American father and son owners of the local Pizza Parlor. Yeah so Spike I think there is an old saying that goes. If you can't say anything nice then "shut your face".

I don't see Clint making comments about Jones' strictly black oriented movies. Often Jones has taken license to stereo type the black urban experience far more than the Wynan brothers have ever conceived of doing, and in much a negative way. Now just because he portrays his idea of what its like to be black everyone including blacks are supposed to accept his point of view.

Well if he didn't try to put his opinionated non-seal of approval upon other director producers such as Clint Eastwood one might be able to approach Jones' movies with some what of an open mind. Instead he taints his celluloid appeal by overtly labeling their meanings through his own prejudiced point of view criticizing those not of his color or emotional radicalism.

Jones in his own movies portrays the idea that it is exclusively the black experience to call his own kind NIGGA! To prove my point, lets see how many white folks who go to see one of his flicks get away with high fivin a couple of black viewers and saying something like "Hey Nigga bad ass movie, right bro! on their way out of the theater. But its o.k to call us honky, whitey, cracker, white bread, marsh mellow, and other such slams and then cry prejudice when a noted director such as Eastwood does not put a black American in one of his movies that's not about blacks at all.

If anything Jones' movies insight anger and resentment, to his black audience, especially if they are younger. He fosters all the wrong images of his own race, and offers no resolve or hope to the black community except through violence or depiction of plain ole "dumb southern nigger, like the poor character who played in "Gonna Get You!"

Talk about exploiting his own kind.He's makin the bucks for it though. A real entreprenuer that Spike. Hey I've got an idea.

Spike could maybe do a remake of "Buffalo Soldiers", or some other story about black heroes of a war, any war. Just leave other producer movies alone, I'm sure that would draw a huge white crowd, based on his often outspokenness of his people's oppressed past, and how whites to this day still treat them.

Here in today's headlines we are about to see history made in a form of free speech and expression never before put forth in this magical country of ours, and Jones is pulling a "Jesse Jackson".

Wake up and smell the chitlens man, the times they is a changin, or do you prefer to call the present presidential candidate an "Uncle Tom" as well?

Oh yeah Jones fyi, Eastwood did leave one thing out about the flag raising in that scene. One of the original marines destined to raise that historical flag was shot in the groin a hundred yards or so from the top of the mount and was replaced by another of the currently honored raisers.

That marine lost one his testicle's in the assault but yet he was able to single handedly prevent a small pocket of Japanese resistors from stopping the flag raisers of reaching the top after he was felled. In escruciating pain he watched his fellow soldiers accomplish the task he had set out do with his squad only to be left along the way from his moment in history. He never once has complained.

I had the privilege of serving with this marine when he became a member of the United States Army Special Forces, 6th Group, Ft. Bragg, N.C.

His bravery and identity were not known until he was forced to partake in an I.G. inspection on post in the 1960's. He was directed to fall out in dress uniform wearing all of his service decorations, which he could not do for lack of space, having served in two branches of the military during three seperate wars up to that time.

Unwillingly he fell out for this inspection with some medals missing from his chest. To the surprise of the inspecting general comparing his DD214 to chested awards, his heroism was discovered after producing the additonal ribbons from his pocket. This man's accomplishments were so many that the general apologized for having to put him through such a trivial formality, and for not being able to resolve his uniform dilema before hand all in all this man had more awards than Audie Murphy, and damn he was white.

HATS OFF TO ANOTHER COURAGIOUS WOMAN

Recently I wrote a blog about a woman (this blog 5/28/08 Moxie) whose identity had been stolen by an illegal alien(notice I didn't say undocumented migrant worker), and took action to get her life back and prosecute the violator of our laws.

Now, Jessica Ceponis is another one of those special people who do not just ignore personal violation when exposed to it and merely become a victim. My hat is off to you ma'am for the courageous citizen that you are.

Jessica was abused while at work at a fast food drive through window in Florida, by two youthful offenders who then published their disrespectful deed on You Tube. Jessica did not just curse them out and go home mad. She fought back by pursuing the offenders and turning the tables on them.

She was able to find out who her assailants were by finding their published video on "You Tube" and using the very same video as evidence to gain a conviction of the boys in a court of juvenile law.

I am not much on day shows but I also compliment "NBC's Today" for running a piece on Jessica's brave stand and supporting her on the air. The youths of course were spared the indignity of having to publicly come on t.v. and apologized to this single mom, in front of millions of people. What the fuck is wrong with our system?

These brazen little assholes were astute enough to film their offense upon Jessica and publish it on one of the fore most sites of the modern media circuit, but yet after exposing themselves by choice to millions of viewers they were spared the embarrassment of having to be confronted by their victim/accuser and apologize publicly.

If Florida legislators have any balls whatsoever they will push for a law (not tomorrow but today) that fits the crime. It could go something like this.

If you choose to publish your act of personal violation on the air, through any form of public media, a part of your punishment when caught and convicted must include your public exposure to the same media or a greater form of media, in an act of repentance to your victim and or their family, plus a stiff fine against your parents.

To me this is a sure way of deterring other "stupid little adolescent children" who obviously have issues with respect toward their fellow citizens. After all adolescent narcissists only desire to be in the limelight when they are in control and would shy away from any public form displaying them as truly what they are. Selfish self-centered little children who have not yet learned the difference between existentialism and the "not my fault society" of today in America.

If any self respecting judge down their in Florida, or any other state for that matter, would pick up on this form of punishment, he would certainly gain much respect and support I am sure from the constituents that matter in his district.

Let's not get sentimental about Hillary now

GOD I LOVE THIS WOMAN, SHE SAYS WHAT I THINK AS A MAN OF THE 60'S
For different reasons, Kim, http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/xxfactor/archive/2008/06/07/family-fight.aspx, I too have been utterly mystified by the phenomenon of the Angry White Women, the "feminists" who appear to be upset by Hillary's defeat, and who interpret it as some sort of blow against women. Partly this is because, as I think I've said before, I've always thought Hillary an appalling role model for young women ("lesson number one: marry the right man"). More importantly though, the last few weeks of her campaign have been not so much feminist as pathological. Why did she keep going for so long, even after it was clear to everybody else that she would lose? Because she was fighting for all the young girls who want to grow up to be president? Or because she was trying to prove something about her odd marriage - or, more likely, prove something to her odd husband? It sure seemed to me that her unnecessarily prolonged campaign had a lot more to do with Hillary's psychological issues than the country's political issues.
Besides, as I hardly need to rehearse here, it was hardly the world's most enlightened campaign. The sly, sub-racist innuendos; the whiskey-drinking and allusions to a childhood fondness for guns; the attempt to get the Democratic Party to change its rules after the fact. What was all that about? Are Hillary's feminists pleased that their champion stooped that low? I suppose it's nice that she's decided to be generous and magnanimous now, but it's a bit late: She's done a lot of damage to Obama, as well as to her party. And it's not at all clear to me that her campaign did any good for women in politics, let alone women in general. The next female presidential candidate is going to have to struggle pretty hard to prove that she's not as divisive a political figure as Hillary.
Published Sunday, June 08, 2008 4:15 AM by Anne Applebaum

Not So Silent Thoughts: Rev. Pfleger show to return to St. Sabina with 'no restrictions' on ticket purchases.

Not So Silent Thoughts: Rev. Pfleger show to return to St. Sabina with 'no restrictions' on ticket purchases.

THE ART OF COMMITTING WITHOUT ANY BALLS

I just finished reading Richard Cohen's daily column in Slate news.
Perhaps if I really want to be a commentator which is what I would like to be when I grow up. I need to learn several more things in my old age.
One; learn how to write a column in 15 -30 minutes.
Two; learn how to state the obvious without stating the obviously opposite insight.
Three; learn to say what everyone else is thinking and continuing to say nothing.
Four; learn how to be a wishy washy commentator and I stay within the lines of politically correct conformity
Five; state an opinion without commitment as to how I really feel(that sells good press yet remains mediocre.
Six; apologize to whomever I might be criticizing in my column in such a way that my readers think I am attacking the poor slob, while I am really washing his ass to kiss.
Seven; ignore the fact that criticism is what gets noticed rather than conformity.
Eight; only really criticize those who glean their information from the art of actually studying the facts
Nine; never really take a position that could be declared as insane
Ten; figure out who is actually reading my blog and passing it on the syndicated news because it keeps popping up in the national media a couple of days after I write it.

One thing I really do have to give credit to Richard for, is that he is vastly more knowledgeable when it comes to vocabulary than I . Unfortunately while he was busy getting a much better education than me, I was busy killing the little bastards who were responsible for John McCain's hotel accommodations, during his stay in southeast Asia. Well at least thank god for Spell Check or I would be in even more sheet.Oh and by the way I hold those little bastards in much more deep respect than Richard, and his writings.

Rev. Pfleger show to return to St. Sabina with 'no restrictions' on ticket purchases.

He'll be back at St. Sabina, for two shows only but he has to stay out of little alter boys pants and presidential politics.

June 9, 2008


The South Side parish of St. Sabina exploded with shouts of joy and a standing ovation Sunday morning at the news firebrand Catholic pastor Rev. Michael Pfleger would be returning June 16. with his American Wigger show.

Cardinal Francis George temporarily removed the outspoken priest from his parish last week following comments Pfleger made about then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Pfleger had said Clinton believed she was entitled to the Democratic nomination because she is white. Pfleger is white, while most of his parishioners are African-American, and believe he is too.

Pfleger will return to St. Sabina June 16 th for two shows only. His road show will be opened by non other than "Black Sabbath", who are coming out of retirement just for the occasion.

At a three-hour Sunday mass filled with songs and dancing, pastoral associate Kimberly Lymore read a letter from Pfleger in which the priest wrote, "This has been a very painful time for me personally and for our church family."

"Let this time be a teaching moment for us to hear the Lord, to grow closer to him and become even stronger to build a kingdom on Earth as it is in heaven," Pfleger wrote.

Lymore said parish leaders were told by Cardinal George that Pfleger will continue as pastor of the church he has led for 30 years with "no restrictions" -- other than not being able to mention publicly the names of presidential candidates, his favorite little alter boys nor campaign for either of them. On hearing this, several parishioners called out "That's all right bro we gotcha behind"

Asked if it was fair that Pfleger was restricted from talking about the candidates, longtime parishioner Michelle Wong Scott said, "a lot of times, when you're a member, you have to follow your leadership and do what your leaders tell you to do." She said if Cardinal George had removed Pfleger permanently, the parish would have continued the work he started.

Two other parishioners, Rhonda Williams and Leslie Ross, who are not Catholic, said they would have left St. Sabina's and followed Pfleger to a new church if he had been removed, after all they said "you sure can't tell he's Catholic either".

"I'm here because of the pastor,he's done me spiritually,and in others ways too" Williams said.

"Father definitely challenges you," said Ross, noting that 79th Street near St. Sabina had a lot of drug problems before he came. She also credited Pfleger with closing down a house of prostitution he himself used to frequent in the early morning hours and ministering to gang members, at special smokin's sponsered by the parish.

"He's not a pastor that just talks and preaches and then goes in his little rectory, he goes for the whole rectum." He gets down for the community," Ross said. "He always puts out with an extra special whelp. He's not telling us to go out there and do anything he wouldn't do first or anybody first either. He's about change,loose change, panhandling, and violence."

Pfleger's comments on Clinton earned him national attention, because he made them as a guest at Trinity United Church of Christ and they ran on YouTube. The rhetoric of the church's retired pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, had already caused trouble for the presidential campaign of Barack Obama. Obama quit the church after Pfleger's remarks, and revelations of being a Wigger for the cause, and liking little alter boys. But like they say "birds of a feather don't mean you got a flocking thing in common".
BY MARY WISNIEWSKI Staff reporter mwisniewski@suntimes.com and edited by M.Bender

YA SHOULDA KNOWN BETTER

Here is an article origianlly posted in 1999 about Hillary. Who possibly could have thought after her most recent coverage that she had changed?

Hillary's blunders and bloopers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 17, 1999
1:00 am Eastern

Fortunately, for the state of New York, Hillary Clinton's political instincts don't match her reputed intellect. If she continues to blunder, that state (and the nation) may be spared her elevation to the Senate.
Hillary's repeated mistakes expose her as a brazen opportunist concerned not with New York but with finally building her own resume in the twilight of her productive years.

When the First Lady was preaching from her White House soapbox, she advocated the creation of a Palestinian state. Never mind that this gratuitous policy pronouncement was at variance with the First Husband's official position concerning Israel.

But shortly after launching her unannounced Senate campaign, she immediately reversed herself by declaring Jerusalem "the eternal and indivisible capital of Israel." In this transparent move to pander to the N.Y. Jewish constituency, she didn't even bother to acknowledge, much less reconcile, her prior inconsistent statement.

Then the Terrorist-Pardoner in Chief granted clemency to 16 Puerto Rican terrorists over the vehement objections of all law enforcement agencies and the emphatic condemnation of both houses of Congress. Such an outrageous abuse of presidential authority cannot reasonably be explained, apart from Bill's effort to enhance his wife's standing with the N.Y. Hispanic voters.

Hillary, it should be noted, publicly supported her husband's decision to pardon the unrepentant anarchists. But as soon as it became apparent that the move had backfired, Hillary switched gears again.

She made a public statement asking the president to withdraw his offer of clemency -- instead of just going into the other room and talking it over with him. That is, if you believe their insulting joint denial that they had colluded on the matter. With her about-face she not only alienated N.Y. Puerto Ricans, but also seriously offended certain N.Y. leaders by failing to consult with them before announcing her turnaround. N.Y. Rep. Jose Serrano said that another such misstep could be fatal for Hillary's campaign.

Hillary is also coming under fire from Democrats for relying exclusively on her small cadre of advisors and ignoring the leadership of the party structure. Said N.Y. Congressman Charles Rangel, "Nobody is so good they can make decisions by relying on one or two people and without communication with the leadership of the party."

Being an equal-opportunity offender, Mrs. Clinton has also managed to alienate the N.Y. African-American community. It seems that she has been unwilling to make herself available for a meeting with black community leaders of New York City.

In addition to her policy gaffes, the Clinton's home purchase in Chappaqua with the support of Democratic fund-raiser Terry McAuliffe, has drawn Hillary heavy fire on ethical grounds. And her flagrant abuse of public funds to subsidize campaign air travel convinced 46 Democrats to join 215 Republicans in voting to make her fully reimburse those expenditures.

The all-knowing Mrs. Clinton even unwittingly provided some comic relief this week by demonstrating her intimate concern for NYC's mosquito problem. She was responding to a question about lobbying her husband for federal funds for the city's mosquito-killing campaign. "I have been concerned about malaria for many years," said Hillary, revealing that she was painfully unaware that encephalitis, not malaria, is the problem.

Let's also not forget Hillary's foray into psychoanalysis when she blamed her husband's serial philandering on his being whipsawed between two battle-axes in his formative years.

Finally, in her Senate campaign, Mrs. Clinton is in the process of resurrecting the issue that led to the plummeting of her approval ratings in the past, universal health care. Happily for Republicans, Hillary subordinates even her political opportunism to her uncompromising socialistic passions.

So what's the net result of all this? A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows that 40 percent of Americans now have a negative view of Hillary, up from 25 percent at the start of the year.

Hillary should have listened to those of us who tried to tell her that she could only remain popular if she clings to her victim-status. When she delves into the policy-arena, whether from her Pennsylvania Avenue pulpit or as a senatorial candidate, she forfeits all sympathy lavishly bestowed on her by an anachronistic press still romanticizing the virtues of Marxism.

Exit this campaign Hillary, while your First Victimhood is still salvageable. Go Rudy!
By David Limbaugh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HILLARY'S ALREADY PLANNING FOUR YEARS FROM NOW!

Just as I have said in the past and reiterate again right now. The Clintons have lost their party power base. The Democratic Party has been carrying the albatross of Clintonism around their necks far too long. Finally they have a chance to cut the rope and let both of the Clintons and their separate entourages be carried away by the sea of change created by the "Ship of Changes'" new captain, Barack Hussein Obama, uuhh WRONG.

All this sounds great but guess what!.... It will happen.. but not until the Clintons and their racist elitist backgrounds thoroughly inflict lasting damage upon the new kid on the block, Obama.
Bill is bad enough and has no inclination to loose his control of the workings within the Democratic Party, not by a long shot. And now comes Hillary, talk about "the wrath of a woman scorned" ha!

Anyone who thinks that Hillary will not do everything in her power to "character assassinate" Obama is about as naive as a true virgin on her wedding night. We are dealing with power mongers here when it comes to both Bill and Hillary. She being worse than him. She has not put up with the shenanigans of Bill all these years to be rendored into submission by Mandingo !
No way in hell, the handwriting is on the wall.

Hillary will very subtlety attempt to destroy Obama in the eyes of the people and the party no matter what. Barack could appoint her to his cabinet, but I think even he can see that this would be placing the knife to close to the chest. In such a position he would be sharing the secrets of his inner circle with her only to be giving her more of a chance at establishing a future power hold over him. And what better way for her to learn where his Achilles heal is.

No ! Obama will offer her some type of remote unimportant position to satisfy Hillarys cronies within the party to massage the cry of unity, but a real position of power in not forth coming. They both at this very moment are trying to figure out ways of divesting themselves of each other and still grab control of the DNC, and all its allies in Congress.

I look to see Hillary returning as a junior Senator from New York and making her way back to a financial and a political power base to stabilize her position and run again in four more years. In the meantime what better way to subvert Obama than from the wings of the Capitol. Hillary will be hard at work, that is if she also is reelected to her position laying the ground work to destroy her so terribly astute opponent, from within the guts of his headquarters. She will be opportunistically using free press coverage and showing an even more example of how she "the female underdog" will have arisen from the ruins of failed campaign, just like the Phoenix of old rose from the ashes, to triumph as a key figure in Democratic politics.

She will focus on what she knows best, socialistic health care. She will take every opportunity to shoot down Obama when he balks at her future bills presented before Congress, and requested of him to sign. If by chance as I predict McCain is elected the same tactic can be used. None the less when Obama looses but retains control of the party, she will still be forthcoming with her attacks against him for not supporting her health plans, within the DNC.

She may also at the same time be seeking to see Howard "Scruffy" Dean deposed for the sorry as job he did in supporting her and thus sealing her fate to be thrown under the bus.
This guy really revealed his incompetency once again. I am not sure I remember where he comes from but in earnest that where he needs to go back too. Even Nancy Pelosi, scores better on my idiot chart compared to him.

TAKE IT TO THE BANK

Having won the delegate race and, with it, his party's nomination, Obama now has to figure out how to honor and soothe Clinton (and her supporters) without being tied down by her limitations as yesterday's news.
Here is what I believe, on very good authority, from two sources close to the Clintons who also have strong ties to the Obama campaign: Clinton absolutely does NOT want the job of vice president, no matter what others are saying about it. Been there, done that in a very real sense, as First Lady. Obama, for his part, does not want her to be his vice presidential nominee. No way. Neither do any of his major donors, supporters and advisers, say the sources, who asked for anonymity discussing sensitive matters.

But there is talk that Obama will tentatively offer, or make some kind of gesture in that direction of the VP slot to Hillary, but ONLY, ONLY on the understanding that she promise in advance (through intermediaries if not directly) NOT to accept! "She doesn't want it and would not take it," said one source very close to her. "But she would like to be asked and that is the Kabuki theater we are about to engage in." (Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson called the notion "silly," adding: "She has already said she would whatever she could to help the Democrats take the White House back.")
The Clinton forces also have another wish: whomever Obama ends up choosing, he NOT pick another woman, even after the kabuki ends. "Hillary's supporters, and Hillary herself, can't stand the idea that he would pick another woman," said another source who is personally close to the Clintons. Now that is what they call chutzpah!
And why does Hillary care so much about the idea that Obama not pick another woman? Perhaps because Hillary has spent the last several months turning herself into the tribune of millions of working women. She deserves a lot of credit and respect for doing so. She is still their candidate, and she doesn't want to cede that to another Democrat of the same gender.
Furthermore, Hillary's sites are already set on four years from now. She figures down deep that John McCain will pull this election out and win. That leaves her a genuine second chance at running for President again. If Obama losses this election and it is very likely he will, no matter what the polls say, he won't be coming back. He has used up all of the tricks in his bag so to speak and Hillary has learned from them.
Rest assured she won't make the same mistakes twice. At this present time in my conversations with my Hispanic neighbors, the word is that they will now be leaning towards McCain, seeing as their favorite candidate has gone down in flames. Yes folks racism in America has reached a new high, and Whitey is not in the mids of it.
So the next question is.... Who will Barack and McCain pick as their running mates?
Well if Obama's people are still using their heads the Governor Bill Blaine Richardson of New Mexico would be my first choice. Talk about catering to the Hispanic vote. There would be no better candidate. But in so doing this would not at all please the blue collar, lesser educated white factory and mine workers whom Hillary tauted so much about being in he camp. However if you weigh what states these Hispanic votes would be coming from it makes sense to brush concerns about white lower economic class folks aside in favor of wining the major electoral college votes like California and Texas, against those of Pennsylvania and Ohio. Tough choice but gotta be done.
Mc Cain on the other hand still needs to bring in the far right of the Republican constituency. If it were all about idealism,(which it is not) Colin Powell would be my choice, unfortunately he is not on the short list. So it looks like maybe Romney. I believe the stigma of Mormonism is behind him at this time. Another ideal candidate would be to anoint a woman, thus bringing over the elderly white Hillary voters and dissing the real Hillary at the same time. Somehow though I don't think John McCain has that type of meanness in him. After all history will show that thanks to Hillary's ego and tenacity he became the default Democratic vote, he owes her.
No matter who becomes our next President we can all bet on a sure thing. Just as much as
Big Brown is predicted to winner the Triple Crown this month in Belmont N.Y., Hillary Clinton will be running for the Presidency in 2012.