The Audacity Of Dope In The Age Of Fake

Big Media Obama enablers and lovers are scratching their heads questioning why Obama was gifted the Nobel even though he has done NOTHING – Big Media enablers and lovers did not question why Obama was gifted the Democratic Party nomination for having done NOTHING.

There is outrage and mockery about Obama gifted a now cheapened prize, but little outrage and mockery about Obama gifted the much more important and consequential Democratic Party nomination.

George W. Bush was renown for talking about the “soft bigotry of low expectations”. Bush was referring to those who are so prejudiced against African-Americans that they expect very little of African-Americans and yet reward chosen African-Americans with undeserved plaudits and rewards. Bush’s was an astute observation of well meaning white liberals who treat African-Americans as pets and those who expect so little from their African-American toys there is no bother to expect results before rewards.

Plenty of African-Americans have risen above prejudice and discrimination to achieve important positions in business and industry. The old racism of thinking African-Americans were inferior has been thrown into ridiculousness because of people like Frederick Douglass (and George Washington Carver) many years ago, Martin Luther King a few years ago, and the many achievers in all areas of endeavor in which African-Americans have excelled.

The new racism is the bigotry of white liberals who think those poor, dumb, ol’ black people need massa’s help to cheer them on as they repeatedly fail to do simple tricks to amuse. Barack Obama exploited and continues to exploit the new racism with his own new style of race-baiting to advance himself.

Obama did nothing but play on the prejudices of white liberals, much like Topsy in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and white massa applauds and laughs at the audacity of that boy. The latest trinket for audacity thrown Obama’s way is the Nobel prize.

Theodore Roosevelt, in his 1909 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech spoke to the issue of words versus deeds:

Moreover, and above all, let us remember that words count only when they give expression to deeds, or are to be translated into them. The leaders of the Red Terror prattled of peace while they steeped their hands in the blood of the innocent; and many a tyrant has called it peace when he has scourged honest protest into silence. Our words must be judged by our deeds; and in striving for a lofty ideal we must use practical methods; and if we cannot attain all at one leap, we must advance towards it step by step, reasonably content so long as we do actually make some progress in the right direction.

Obama has no deeds on his ledger account, only words.

Gay-Americans, betrayed by their leaders, know how empty Obama’s words are. The most horrid, stupid, vile, and dirty of Gay people, yes we mean Andrew Sullivan, fellated Obama during the election campaign and now Gay-Americans are asked to pay for the pleasure.

But the point of electing a president who pledged to actually do things is to hold him to account, and to see if he is willing to take any risk of any kind to actually do something. I had a few prior tests of his seriousness or signs that he gets it, a few ways to judge if this speech had anything new or specific or clear. He failed every test.

Sullivan, during the primaries loved on Obama because A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man—Barack Hussein Obama—is the new face of America. Now we know that “young Pakistani Muslim” does not care about the skin color of any American and he is not happy with Obama. Sullivan betrayed Gay-Americans for the non-existent “good will” of people who care not a whit about skin color but rather oppose American policies.

The Hillary haters who worshiped Obama at gay websites only now realize that Gay-Americans are lower than dogs in Obama world.

White liberal Michael Tomasky we used to respect, but now he moans about the Nobel, but cheered the gifted nomination. Tomasky urged his readers to enjoy how the Nobel would dispirit Obama opponents but instead Obama opponents have a new opportunity to discuss Obama’s complete lack of achievements – other than self-promotion. So lacking in achievement is Obama that Tomasky urged Topsy to not accept the prize nor go to Oslo for the presentation. Obama miss the Klieg lights and another publicity stunt? Never!

Big Media Obama cheerleaders at CBS said nothing about the outrage of Obama gifted the Democratic nomination but scratched their heads over the Nobel:

The sound you could hear this morning was of heads being scratched around the world.

Very quickly, the Nobel Committee found itself having not just to explain its choice of President Barack Obama for the Peace Prize, but to defend it.

There have been controversial selections before, but rarely one that caused this much puzzlement. [snip]

But to give him the most prestigious prize in the world for merely the aspirations of policy rather than for any results seemed unprecedented. [snip]

Certainly there was audacity in this selection.

There was “audacity in this selection” but not nearly as much audacity as gifting Obama the Democratic nomination. White liberals like Joan Walsh patted Topsy on the head and said the award was deserved because poor Topsy is trying and needs a patronizing white liberal pat on the head.



David Brooks and Ruth Marcus are scratching their heads in the above video, but why didn’t they scratch their heads when Obama decided to even consider running for president and when the Democratic National Committee along with Dean/Kennedy/Kerry/Brazile/Pelosi gifted Obama the nomination?

When Caroline Kennedy tried to weasel her way onto the United States Senate by reprising Baby Jane Hudson and trading on her father’s memory we knew this was The Age Of Fake.



Fake AIG, Fake Obama, Fake Chris Dodd, dragged us further into the Age Of Fake.

Now the ultimate Age Of Fake confirmation is the gifting of the Nobel Peace Prize to Fake Obama of the Fake, nay – nonexistent, achievements.

Like a pickpocket in a crowd Obama had the audacity to bamboozle the dopes for his own self-advancement.

In the Age Of Fake achievement does not matter, experience does not matter, results do not matter. It’s a lesson Hillary supporters learned during the primaries.

The Age Of Fake will be followed by The Great Reckoning.

Share

135 thoughts on “The Audacity Of Dope In The Age Of Fake

  1. When you throw away a prestigious Award that used to be the Nobel, you bring it down to the politcal rating of figure skating judges that had been encountered at the international compeitions.

  2. It’s my birthday today (47) so I tried to enjoy myself and not watch anything about “the one”. I would be remiss, however, in not thanking all of you, and the administrator in particular, for this site-the gift that keeps on giving to those of us who will never forget what happened to Hillary during the campaign, and as a consequence thereof, what a terrible position BO has put America and her allies into.

  3. I still wish that bambi had turned down the prize. I have zilch respect for him before. I never knew it could get any worse.

    ————————-
    jbstonesfan,

    Happy Birthday to you and many more! 🙂

  4. SL envoy summoned by State Dept
    PM’s remarks on Monica Lewinsky attract US Protest

    The United States has lodged a “strong protest” to Sri Lanka over remarks by Prime Minister, Ratnasiri Wickremanayake, on state radio that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has forgotten the “Monica Lewinsky episode” and should “put her house in order.”

    Sri Lanka’s Ambassador Jaliya Wickremasuriya, was summoned to the Department of State to be told of the US Government’s displeasure. Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary, South and Central Asian Affairs, had expressed ”great concern” over the remarks and wanted to know whether this was the official position of the Government of Sri Lanka.

    The call for the meeting had come on Thursday, just a day after Premier Wickremanayake had made the remarks. There was no immediate word on the official response of the Government.

    The US protest is the latest turn of events after US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who chaired the UN Security Council a week ago remarked, “we’ve seen rape used as a tactic of war before in Bosnia, Burma, Sri Lanka and elsewhere.”

    On Wednesday, the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation’s (SLBC) Subharti programme featured Premier Wickremanayake. He fielded questions on a number of subjects. According to a recording heard by the Sunday Times, when asked about Ms. Clinton’s remarks, he replied in Sinhala “Meka Maara Magulak ne. Clinton nonata Monica gena amathakawela. (This is a hell of a problem. Ms. (Hillary) Clinton has forgotten the Monica Lewinsky episode it seems). He said Ms. Clinton should put “her house in order without trying to live in a glass house and pelt stones at others.”

    The Prime Minister’s office later issued a statement based on Mr. Wickremanayake’s comments to SLBC. However, the references about Monica Lewinsky were left out. It only said that Ms. Clinton should put her house in order.

    Following angry reactions from Government leaders over Ms. Clinton’s remarks, three different US officials issued “clarifications.” The first came from US Ambassador Patricia Butenis who said Secretary Clinton’s remark “was to raise awareness of such brutality, not to implicate specific perpetrators.”

    Melanie Verveer, Ambassador at large for Global Women’s Issues, said in a letter to Foreign Minister Rohita Bogollagama that “in the most recent phase of the conflict, from 2006 to 2009,….we have not received reports that rape and sexual abuse were used as tools of war…”

    Later, P.J. Crowley, US Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, said the reference the Secretary made …. was to “very well documented reports of significant levels of rape that were documented (sic) through, I think, 2002 or 2003 in a variety of reports including State Department reports and also reports done by Amnesty International.”

    sundaytimes.lk/091011/News/nws_01.html

  5. Barack Obama ‘dashes Palestinian hopes’

    President Barack Obama has been accused of undermining the moderate Palestinian leadership with a series of policy errors that have damaged hopes of peace in the Middle East.

    By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
    11 Oct 2009

    In the space of three weeks, critics say the winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize has alienated much of the Palestinian public, jeopardised the political future of a vital American ally in the West Bank and unwittingly boosted Hamas, the radical Islamist movement.

    As a direct result of US pressure, Mahmoud Abbas, the moderate Palestinian leader, withdrew his endorsement of a report commissioned by the United Nations which accused Israel and Hamas of “war crimes” in Gaza. The backlash against Mr Abbas among ordinary Palestinians has been furious.

    Amid a barrage of criticism and calls for his resignation even from within his own Fatah movement, Mr Abbas has been forced to order an internal investigation into the matter. “Obama made a big mistake asking Abbas to do this,” said Mahmoud al-Ramahi, the secretary general of the Palestinian Legislative Council. “He has weakened Abbas and damaged his popularity.”

    This crisis has caused further ripples. Hamas has used it as a pretext to delay a reconciliation agreement with Fatah. Forced to try to divert attention, Fatah loyalists encouraged some of the worst Palestinian unrest in Jerusalem for several years last week when there was violence in the Old City. They also threatened a third Intifada, or uprising, against Israel.

    But Fatah’s call for a general strike went largely unheeded and even some of the demonstrators said they were angrier with Mr Abbas than with Israel. “There will be a third intifada,” one protestor said. “But it will be against Abbas not the Israelis.”

    Frustration among Palestinians is also being directed at Mr Obama after he appeared to retreat from his demands that Israel “freeze” the construction of all homes in Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem. Instead, the President carefully modified his language, calling only for “restraint”.

    Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, appeared overjoyed at the retreat, saying: “I understand English. Restraint and freeze are two different things.”

    But Palestinians accuse Mr Obama of betraying the sentiments he voiced in Cairo just four months ago when he tried to portray America as an even-handed mediator and spoke of how the Palestinians’ plight was “intolerable”.

    “We had more than a little hope that things would change with an Obama administration,” said Hassan Tabaja, a Palestinian rights activist. “Now the almost universal feeling among Palestinians is one of disappointment.”

    telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/6299764/Barack-Obama-dashes-Palestinian-hopes.html

  6. Oct 11, 2009

    US police explosive experts to touch down in Israel

    By YAAKOV LAPPIN

    Twenty American police explosives experts are due in Israel on Sunday for a five day conference with their Israeli counterparts.

    During their stay, the American officers will meet Israeli bomb squad commanders, visit the bomb squad police academy in Bet Shemesh, and tour Sderot.

    The Israel Police said it will “transfer our professional knowledge on terrorism and explosives” during the meetings to the US visitors.

    jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1255204771377&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

  7. At Dole’s Request, White House Tells DNC to Pull Health Care Reform Ad

    October 11, 2009

    The Democratic National Committee has agreed to pull a TV ad featuring former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, R-Kan., following objections Dole conveyed to the White House that the ad twists his support for a bipartisan compromise for health care reform legislation into something else entirely. The ad, which was set to launch Monday, features Dole and other Republican former officials advocating in general terms for health care reform.

    Dole is quoted saying, “I want this to pass. … We’ve got to do something,” and the ad attempts to contrast that attitude with that of current GOP congressional leaders, which the DNC describes as “siding with the insurance companies and just saying no to insurance reform.”

    “I wish they hadn’t done it,” Dole said of the DNC ad in a phone interview with ABC News on Sunday afternoon, saying that the ad’s depiction of current GOP leaders “is just not my view.” He found it a bit ironic that “all I’ve been doing is urging bipartisanship” and that was used for partisan purposes. “The ad doesn’t reflect what I was trying to do,” he said. “I just didn’t think it was fair when I’ve tried to be helpful in encouraging a bipartisan solution for the DNC to run an ad that I interpreted and I know others did as a backhanded comment about Republicans.”

    Dole also objected to any impression that the ad suggested he endorsed any specific legislation when he’s tried to keep what he’s supporting “pretty generic.” Dole conveyed as much to White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel yesterday, who told the DNC to pull the ad.

    “We have great respect for Sen. Dole and his commitment to reform,” a DNC spokesman told ABC News. “As soon as Sen. Dole’s concerns were communicated to us we immediately agreed to pull the ad.”

    President Obama cited the support Dole and other Republican former officials have expressed for health care reform in his weekly address Saturday, though some of those Republicans — former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., for example — have expressed misgivings about specific Democratic legislative proposals.

    Dole told ABC News, “My whole message is you can’t score unless you’re in the game. I still believe a compromise is there. No one I know is flatly against health care reform.” The 1996 GOP presidential nominee said that there’s “still plenty of time to get a bipartisan result. And that’s really going to start when bill gets to the floor” of the Senate and “amendments are offered.” “I was up there a long time and I learned it’s never over ’til it’s over,” Dole said. “I’m an optimist. I guess that’s my problem.”

    Rejecting the arguments of some Democrats that the current crop of Republicans isn’t as inclined to compromise as he was, Dole said, “there’s a lot of good men and women in Congress from both parties. And come crunch time they will think long and hard — depending on what’s in it –before they vote no.” “I’ll take some of the blame for the Clinton failure,” Dole said, referring to former President Bill Clinton’s failure to pass comprehensive health care reform legislation in 1994. The World War II veteran said he doesn’t think a failed bill can be used the same way to hurt Democrats in 2010 as it was in 1994. “It’s a different time,” he said, “and the whole issue has become much more important. It’s going to be drag on the economy if we don’t figure out some long term way to fix it.”

    Working with other former Senate majority leaders former Sens. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., Howard Baker, R-Tenn., and George Mitchell, D-Maine — before Mitchell resigned to serve as President Obama’s special envoy to the Middle East — Dole and others at the Bipartisan Policy Center have not only issued statements urging compromise, in June they suggested a framework for bipartisan health care called “Crossing Our Lines: Working Together to Reform the U.S. Health System.” “Some of the recommendations we made are in the Baucus bill,” Dole said, referring to the bill being offered in the Senate Finance Committee by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont. “I agreed on mandates which I don’t really like. Daschle, for example, yielded on the public option, something that he strongly believes in. We understood and I think members of Congress ought to understand, there aren’t any easy votes on this issue. Trying to avoid any political risk at all is going to be difficult.”

    Dole said if he were President Obama, he’d “want some of the other party on board for a couple reasons. It gives the president some protection if it’s bipartisan. Secondly, the American people will feel better about it if both parties are involved.” He suggested the president add tort reform measures to the legislation which “would bring some more Republicans around.” He said he doesn’t see the difficulties in voting for this bill as partisan, necessarily. “It’s a survival vote,” he said. “Members are seeing what their constituencies want — and right now they’re opposed to this. Eighty-percent like the health care they have.”

    “We’re getting down to the semi-finals,” he said. “I’m not convinced Republicans are against it. They may be opposed to the Baucus bill, but they’re not opposed to health care reform.” “My view for my Republican friends is to try to stay in the game,” Dole reiterated. “This will be the most important vote any sitting members of the House and Senate will have.”

    blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/10/at-doles-request-white-house-tells-dnc-to-pull-health-care-reform-ad.html

  8. jbstonesfan, Happy Birthday!! (47) Oh, how I remember that year, it was very good, it was a long time ago, LOL!

    Looks like the wheels of the peace prize is coming off in Israel!

    WTF, does Monica have to do with rape during wartime. Last I remember no on has been raped in the WH. I think it was consentual. THese idiots covering for there horendous behavior towards women.

    It does seem that Hillary is in the news more. I do like the one I read yesterday of her turning the limo around and talking on the phone to all three of them simultaneously. Sounds like shes married to Bill Clinton.

    Bill is putting electricity in India and the idiot in chief gets the Nobel Peace Prize, will wonders ever cease.

  9. OMG, Dole will take part of the responsiblity for screwing up our healthcare in 94′ is a freaking understatement. Bill Clinton says in the Clinton tapes that Dole said “he will fight against everything Bill will try to do” for the simple reason he lost the election. He is a pompous first grader that never grew up. He and the rest of his ilk are whats wrong with our government. They should be tarred and feathered and thrown out of Washington. Imagine folks, how many of these idiots are there on both sides, I might add in our government.

    Perfect example is Brazoid, she isn’t in the govt., but there are many like her. If the ruling party doesn’t play by her rules she tries to stomp it in the ground.

    Because of Dole, we could have had Hillary’s insurance reform, now we will have the “ONE’S”.

  10. jbstonesfan Says:
    October 11th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
    It’s my birthday today (47) so I tried to enjoy myself and not watch anything about “the one”. I would be remiss, however, in not thanking all of you, and the administrator in particular, for this site-the gift that keeps on giving to those of us who will never forget what happened to Hillary during the campaign, and as a consequence thereof, what a terrible position BO has put America and her allies into.
    ——————————
    Happy Birthday! Peace and security for Israel. President Hillary Clinton. I suspect those are two of your wishes. Mine too.

  11. I still say Daddy Soros bought that prize for Obama, because Soros needed to get the Olympics for Brazil. This was a peace offering. I find it unusual that Soros was in Copenhagen on Saturday. I bet Soros personally knows each and every person sitting on the selection committee.

  12. Where do the Republicans get leaders like Dole and McCain. Where do they find such pillars of strength, such visionaries, such whatever. It must be the seniority system because these two have no fire in their belly, and they are about as interesting as watching paint dry.

  13. WOW admin!

    I nominate YOU for the most fearlessly astute political post prize!

    Amazing connect-the-dots moment!
    ‘Big Media enablers and lovers did not question why Obama was gifted the Democratic Party nomination for having done NOTHING.

    There is outrage and mockery about Obama gifted a now cheapened prize, but little outrage and mockery about Obama gifted the much more important and consequential Democratic Party nomination.’

    BTW – HAPPY BD jbstonesfan! Enjoy your day. 🙂

  14. Hillary is working the weekend again, I wonder what the CIC is doing over the weekend?? Probably nothing.

    What I found watching all the shows today for the exception of Meet the Press and half of David Gregory (yuk), the overall view for the exception of Brazoid and Juan Williams is that Obama has done nothing while he’s been in office. Many wondered why he now talking DOMA, and DADT, when they say he could have done that the first day in office.

    It is too wonder what makes this idiot tick!

  15. confloyd,

    The media was all over obama and family going to church this morning. That’s about it.

    Oh and I did read that he is going to New Orleans this coming week regarding “Katrina.”

  16. “I still say Daddy Soros bought that prize for Obama, because Soros needed to get the Olympics for Brazil. This was a peace offering. I find it unusual that Soros was in Copenhagen on Saturday. I bet Soros personally knows each and every person sitting on the selection committee.”

    I agree, Confloyd. That’s what Liberals do for one another…find an award to make the loser feel better. From the days of no one ever loses in any elementary school sport, to the NPP, no one, I mean no one, can be allowed to fail in any way whether it be GM or 0zer0.

  17. Has anyone on this blog heard of Leo Haffey?

    Go here to read, it amazing!!

    h t tp :// citizen wells .word press .com/

    THose two needs to go to church. What church was it? Did it have a gargoyle on the roof?

  18. “Obama did nothing but play on the prejudices of white liberals, much like Topsy in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and white massa applauds and laughs at the audacity of that boy. The latest trinket for audacity thrown Obama’s way is the Nobel prize.”

    ~~~~~~~~~

    Oh yah, and he played the Affirmative Action programs like a virtuoso giving an encore performance at Carnegie Hall. Editor of the Harvard Review… and now, the Nobel Peace Prize… laughable if it weren’t so sickening.

  19. When you get the very best Birthday video (admin’s)

    All you can do is Play it again-

    HAPPY BIRTHDAY- jbstonesfan:

    youtube.com/watch?v=MjF1bG5LUcs

    please embed, admin-

  20. What was 0zer0 doing while Hillary was creating an historic peace agreement between the Turks and Armenians? Meeting with the Girl Scouts…both he and the mizzes.

    Not a thing against the GS, (I was once one)…just sayin’…there’s a bit of disparity between the faux American and the Honorable SOS from whom the DNC decided to steal the primary. Stuff like this makes me ill.

  21. Mark Lebovich of the New York Times, in a news story, whacks Obama:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/weekinreview/11leibovich.html?ref=weekinreview

    Is President Obama in trouble with his late-night comedy base?

    It’s likely he hasn’t noticed or doesn’t care. He is, after all, in the midst of his oft-invoked “full plate” of supposedly “defining moments” in his presidency — a “defining” decision on Afghanistan, “defining” legislative battle on health care, among other “defining” things.

    But there is perhaps another more subtle set of “defining” episodes playing out for Mr. Obama in the televised comedy salons that had previously, by and large, been relatively gentle spaces for him. The bits about him are getting harsher. They are no longer just gentle gibes about Bo the dog, big ears, bad bowling and beer summits.

    A conspicuous (if not “defining”) episode occurred Oct. 3 on Saturday Night Live in a skit set in the Oval Office. The president (played by Fred Armisen) was defending his record against critics who had accused him of turning the United States “into something that resembles the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.” Not so, protested the faux-Bama.

    “When you look at my record, it’s very clear what I’ve done so far,” he said. “And that is nothing.” [snip]

    And from the outset, Mr. Obama has been praised as someone who “gets late night,” whose ironic and self-deprecating humor is well-suited to the genre’s sensibilities. He was the first sitting president to appear as a guest of Jay Leno’s and David Letterman’s. “You ignore their influence at your peril,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House’s deputy communications director. “They are often leading indicators of where the narrative is headed.”

    But recent indicators could be proving ominous. There has been a proliferation of jokes that feed on — or are fed by — a resuscitated old narrative against the president that goes back to last year’s campaign when both John McCain and Hillary Clinton tried to portray Mr. Obama as an All Talk/No Walk showboat.

    Last Tuesday, Jon Stewart advanced the Saturday Night Live “do nothing” theme on “The Daily Show.” It began as a standard Stewart video-clip juxtaposition of Mr. Obama (and surrogates) promising to end the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. It continued with clips from the ensuing months of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and National Security Adviser Jim Jones saying they had not yet gotten around to reversing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” citing Mr. Obama’s “full plate” of business. (“The president needs a metaphor czar,” Mr. Stewart said.)

    What followed was Mr. Stewart, exasperated with a man he had supported, throwing his hands up and essentially imploring the president to, you know, do something.

    “All that stuff you’ve been putting on your plate?” Mr. Stewart said. “It’s [expletive] chow time, brother. That’s how you get things off your plate.” [snip]

    Others have noted another creeping caricature of Mr. Obama as a ditherer. On Thursday, for instance, Mr. Leno joked that no one should expect the president’s decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan anytime soon. “Remember, it took five months to decide on a puppy,” he said. [snip]

    By and large, the bulk of late-night barbs directed at the president remain glancing at best. [snip]

    As if trying to strike pre-emptively against inevitable ridiculers, Mr. Obama seemed eager to embrace the “I haven’t done anything yet” conceit in his Rose Garden remarks Friday morning. “Let me be clear,” he said. “I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments.” But it was also striking how so many people seemed to greet the Nobel news with shock followed by laughter, as if truth and caricature has achieved a newly seamless blend in the Obama imprint.

    Really, the words rang distinctively comic: “Did you hear that Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize?” It sounded like the set up to a joke — one of those jokes where the set-up itself is the punch-line.

    “That’s pretty amazing, winning the Nobel Peace Prize,” Jay Leno said, first out of the box Friday night. “Ironically, his biggest accomplishment as president so far … winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

  22. As Hillary said about GWB,”all hat and no cattle”.

    It just seems that he is awarded lots of stuff like, 1) democratic nomination 2) US Presidency 3)Nobel Prize, so whats next, the man of the year?? or has he gotten that already??

    It’s stupid, nobody believes he did anything to deserve even the first gift. Hillary should have gotten all these awards as she has worked for them her entire life. It just makes me sick!

  23. admin Says:
    October 11th, 2009 at 5:36 pm

    What Obama has done is earned himself a heavenly spot as the subject of abject ridicule by Late night performers and Fox. It will be fun watching him shrink and shrivel like a shriveled-up nut in a bag of earth worms. How long before he cracks? Anyone’s guess-

  24. So now that he’s won the leaky Nobel Peace Prize for doing less than nothing, I wonder what his encore will be.

  25. confloyd

    She is working for them NOW. It is HRC out being tough, and making tough negotiations. He had a pattern, and everyone ignored it, so they got what they ignored, and now seem surprised.

  26. It will fun to watch him shrink and shrivel up. It was so much FUN watching Brazoid squirming in her seat today, she also said he needed to get moving on some of the things he been talking, talking, talking, talking about.
    She winced at the ending statement of huff n puff’s. I loved it. Her golden god is losing his shine.

  27. NMF, if there is anything that is making him look good is HRC’s work. He is soakn it up and taking credit for it, but I have a feeling most people know who is actually doing it.

    Fox and Friends yesterday morning was talking about the Prize, and said I wonder what BC and Hillary had to say about that. Even they know who would of deserved it more.

  28. He better not go to Oslo to pick up his rubber prize. As someone said on the news shows today, it would be much better if he sent a military widow/widower to claim the prize that he should never have accepted in the first place.

  29. I’m pretty sure that I noted one year that Hillary and bill have the same anniversary as my husband and I…..today, October 11.

    Admin…thanks for the post….I have grown adicted to this site!

  30. October 12, 2009

    Hillary Clinton urges Northern Ireland to reach deal on police and justice

    David Sharrock, Ireland Correspondent

    Hillary Clinton will urge Northern Ireland’s leaders today to finish the work of the Good Friday accord by agreeing a timetable for transferring police and justice powers from Westminster.

    The US Secretary of State’s visit coincides with the announcement that a terrorist group is going out of business. The Irish National Liberation Army, which in 1979 murdered the MP Airey Neave, declared its war over yesterday, in a statement delivered over the grave of its founder Seamus Costello.

    After talks in Dublin with Brian Cowen, the Taoiseach, Mrs Clinton said of the stand-off between the Democratic Unionists and Sinn Féin: “There are questions and apprehensions but I believe that due to the concerted effort of the British Government, the Irish Government, the support of friends like us in the United States, the parties understand that this is a step they must take together. I will certainly provide as much support as I can.”

    Speaking earlier in London, she said that there was now no financial support from American sympathisers for the “evil enterprise” of republican terrorists such as the Real IRA.

    “To me, terrorism is terrorism, and those who would try to disrupt the peace are out of step and out of time,” she said. “But it is imperative that the process established by the Good Friday agreement be seen all the way to conclusion. I know that Prime Minister Brown is very focused on that.”

    The prospects of a breakthrough today at Stormont, where she will address the chamber, have dimmed as the DUP continue to seek concessions before agreeing to the devolution of policing and justice powers. Sinn Fein wants it to take place immediately. A snap election cannot be ruled out.

    The INLA has for 11 years observed a less than perfect ceasefire; in February it claimed it had murdered a drug dealer. It has been talking with intermediaries of London and Dublin for several months and is believed to be in contact with the international commission about putting its weapons beyond use.

    timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6870326.ece

  31. Yes, HRC will go into the lions den, BC will do good international charitable work, and OO does ??????????

    Congratulations to Carol, and to the Hill couple.

  32. confloyd Says:
    October 11th, 2009 at 5:59 pm

    Donna Brazile is a such a “legend in her own mind”. I wish I had a pin long enough to burst her bubble from right here at the keyboard.

    As Brazile failed miserably as Al Gore’s campaign strategist, she has now undertaken the role of

    “sidewalk foreign policy adviser”. Read here:

    h… w… brazileassociates.com/viewNews.cfm?id=412

  33. Only thing left for BHO is his acceptance of Best Actor at the Academy. Now that’s one I wouldn’t be surprised about.

  34. Admin,

    I was wondering if the number of people logging on has been growing or declining.

    I try very hard to let BO supporters know that his only opposition is not just coming from the Repugs and that there are many democrats who despise him as much as I do.

    I wish that the media…at least fox…would cover opposition from the Hillary wing of the party.

  35. admin, I almost forgot, he got an emmy for a book he did not write. Oh for sure he really should get the best actor. He been impersonating a real POTUS for 9 months.

  36. Let me restate what I said earlier about his awards.
    1) the nomination that he did not win.
    2) the presidency that he did not win
    3) the nobel prize he did not deserve
    4) and emmy for a book he did not write

    So how do I get on this gravy train???

  37. I thought for sure he was also man of the year?? Anyone know?? I want to keep a list of his non accomplishments!

  38. oh and he also played golf again this afternoon, for anyone who is interested in more of his non-accomplishments as opposed to Hillary working her heart out on his worthless behalf.

  39. Protest planned against NJ school’s Obama song

    BURLINGTON TOWNSHIP, N.J. – Conservative groups plan to rally Monday near a New Jersey school where students performed a song celebrating President Barack Obama.

    The planned rally has school district officials planning to beef up security at the B. Bernice Young School in Burlington Township, which houses kindergartners through second-graders.

    The song drew national attention last month after a video of the performance was posted on YouTube. Conservatives say it shows how schoolchildren are being indoctrinated to idolize Obama, allegations school officials have denied.

    The Obama song initially was performed during a Black History Month assembly in February and was repeated in March when author Charisse Carney-Nunes, who wrote the children’s book “I Am Barack Obama,” visited the school.

    Someone apparently with Carney-Nunes videotaped that performance and posted it at the author’s Web site without the approval of school officials. A copy of that video appeared in September on YouTube, titled “School Kids Taught to Praise Obama.”

    Citing concerns for the safety of students and staff, Superintendent Christopher Manno has asked organizers to reconsider the protest because classes will be held that day. Manno said protesters will not be allowed on school property and additional district staffers will be on hand.

    Bill Haney, a rally organizer, said members of several groups would take part in the protest, although it was not clear Sunday how many people would be involved. “Consider this a protest to squelch this trend to politicize our youth,” organizers said in a prepared statement. “We are supporting the constitutional rights of our children and protest against the progressive social agenda promoted by the New Jersey Education Association and the National Education Association.”

    philly.com/philly/wires/ap/news/state/new_jersey/20091011_ap_protestplannedagainstnjschoolsobamasong.html

  40. October 11, 2009

    The White House Has Decided: Fox News Isn’t News.The testy relations between the Obama White House and Fox News aren’t getting any better.

    White House communications director Anita Dunn unleashed an unusual barrage against the network during an interview Sunday on CNN, repeating her charge that Fox is “opinion journalism masquerading as news.”

    “The reality of it is that Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party,” Dunn said, standing outside the White House.

    President Barack Obama did sit for interviews on Fox during the campaign, but the Obama White House has spurned the network since January, even as Obama has granted a flurry of sit-downs with other TV outlets. Fox is owned by News Corp., which also owns The Wall Street Journal.

    Dunn said Obama was ready to make another Fox appearance, but promised that he’d come armed for battle. “Obviously he’ll go on Fox because he engages with ideological opponents,” she said.

    During the show, CNN media critic Howard Kurtz flashed a comment from Fox senior vice president Michael Clemente, that read, in part: “With all due respect to anyone who might still be confused between news reporting and vibrant opinion, my suggestion would be to talk about the stories and the facts rather than attack the messenger, which over time has never worked.”

    Dunn said that the White House might reconsider its stance “when they want to treat us like they treat everyone else.”

    blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/10/11/the-white-house-has-decided-fox-news-isnt-news/

  41. The slide down the chute of oblivion has begun for BO.This was the most amazing day of recognition by Fox for coverage and praise for Hillary.Have shown and praised the efforts that she has made to calm a nervous world and bring them to the table and start peace negotiators to a common agreement on many ways to avoid warfare.Hillary is on her way up and BO is going down down down.

    By ABM90 Now if we could unseat O’reilly and Hannity along with BO the stench would leave Fox and we might really have a fair and balanced news source

  42. Happy Birthday, JBStonesfan…

    and

    Happy Anniversary, Carol

    *****************************************************
    admin says:

    There is outrage and mockery about Obama gifted a now cheapened prize, but little outrage and mockery about Obama gifted the much more important and consequential Democratic Party nomination…

    Obama has no deeds on his ledger account, only words.

    **************************************************

    Obama cheapens a presitigious award and the presidency…

    Obama’s nomination and Presidency all evolved and manifested because O is not George Bush…O’s big accomplishment is ‘O is not George Bush’ – that’s it…bottom line…

    …Admin continues:

    “Now the ultimate Age Of Fake confirmation is the gifting of the Nobel Peace Prize to Fake Obama of the Fake, nay – nonexistent, achievements.

    Like a pickpocket in a crowd Obama had the audacity to bamboozle the dopes for his own self-advancement.

    In the Age Of Fake achievement does not matter, experience does not matter, results do not matter. It’s a lesson Hillary supporters learned during the primaries.

    The Age Of Fake will be followed by The Great Reckoning.”

    ********************************************

    The O’s are shameless…how they can go to Oslo and not be embarrassed…I hope they have something planned to recognize the other recipients and hopefully donate some fo the money to them and not just another O speech -me, me, me…

    Joan Walsh greatly disappoints…such is the box one is in when one must defend talking points…Joan, you should know better…do not become a robot…keep your own voice…or at least try to find it again…

    Steve Winn, on Fox, cut to the chase and said what i have been saying from day one…Obama has squandered critical time…he should have been focused on job creation from Day One…after we got jobs being created again…THEN we could move on to Health Reform and Energy…O has done everything backwards…and so far, accomplished nothing…

    …now we have the Dems forced into a corner of mandates and more taxes on people who have no money to pay for either…dims, prepare to take big losses in the midterms…if for no other reason than people, at least, want some balance in washington, DC

  43. DOJ denies existence of a ‘blog squad’

    Various conservative blogs are talking about the existence of a “blog squad” at the U.S. Justice Department. The website, the Muffled Oar writes that a blogging unit formed within the Department of Justice to counter websites with posts, articles, and user comments critical of the Obama administration. Matthew Miller Director of Public Affair at the Justice Department told the Washington Times,:

    “There is no ‘blog squad’. There is Tracy [Russo] who handles online media. It’s the policy of the office of public affairs to not post anonymous comments. We have not seen any evidence that anyone does post comments, and if we did have evidence of that, people would no longer work here.”

    Mr. Miller countered accusations of the existence of a “blog squad” pointing to what he says is lack of evidence.

    “I noticed, actually, that the posts don’t actually point to any evidence of anonymous comments coming from the Department of Justice, which of course, I believe you can trace. I think it says they’ve seen an uptick.”

    The Muffled Oar, first reported on the existence of such a blogging unit, writing:

    “Tracy Russo is one such blogger from the campaign of John Edwards. The unit is housed in the Office of Public Affairs. Not only is the Department of Justice Blog Squad going to reach out to nontraditional media like TPM Muckraker or the Muffled Oar, but they are also tasked with fostering anonymous comments at conservative leaning blogs such as the Free Republic. They are also tasked with fostering anonymous comments, or comments under pseudonyms, at newspaper websites with stories critical of the Department of Justice, Holder and President Obama.”

    National Review’s the Corner blog picked up this story from Muffled Oar on Tuesday:

    h… muffledoar.blogspot.com/2009/10/anonymous-doj-blogger-campaign-attacks.html

    “At the same time that DOJ was refusing to answer questions about its outrageous dismissal of the voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and apparently paying government employees to post anonymous or pseudonymous comments or comments under false names attacking critics of the administration, the department declared that it was launching its new website “to increase openness and transparency in government.”

    The Muffled Oar points out that Ms. Russo of the DOJ’s Public Affair’s office is a former John Edwards campaign blogger. However, Mr. Miller defends Ms. Russo’s role at DOJ saying,:

    “Tracy [Russo] was hired to lead our online efforts which have been to redesign the department’s web page to lead the post into social media to use new communications tools to communicate with the American people.”

    This story seems far from over. Should it be surprising web users are suspicious of a Democrat political partisan former campaign blogger who has the power of the Justice Department behind her now? Apparently this administration still has not learned much from their past mistakes.

    washingtontimes.com/weblogs/watercooler/2009/oct/08/doj-denies-existence-blog-squad/

  44. The Most Transparent Administration Ever? Not at DOJ [Hans von Spakovsky]

    h… corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MWViM2IwMmUzMDUxNjdjZjcxYmVlMzc4ZGEwYjNhZDI=

    Is the Department of Justice engaging in fraud, or is it simply trying to hide its propaganda?

    Those of you wondering how DOJ uses your tax dollars to enforce our nation’s laws might be interested to learn that Eric Holder has apparently hired former Democratic campaign bloggers to work at the department in what appears to be a secret propaganda unit.

    According to a story at The Muffled Oar website, the bloggers are housed in the Office of Public Affairs (the press office). Their job is to place “anonymous comments, or comments under pseudonyms, at newspaper websites with stories critical of the Department of Justice, Holder and President Obama.” One of the bloggers is former DNC and John Edwards staffer Tracy Russo, whose name was featured prominently on the department’s introduction of its new website on October 1.

    At the same time that DOJ was refusing to answer questions about its outrageous dismissal of the voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and apparently paying government employees to post anonymous or pseudonymous comments or comments under false names attacking critics of the administration, the department declared that it was launching its new website “to increase openness and transparency in government.” In fact, Russo claims it is “just the first step towards creating the most open, accessible, and transparent Justice Department possible.” If that is true, how can DOJ justify these anonymous/pseudonymous postings? The misrepresentation is clearly material or DOJ wouldn’t go to such lengths to engage in it.

    I doubt that the Office of Public Affairs (OPA) has received an ethics opinion from Justice’s Professional Responsibility Advisory Office (PRAO) saying that it is acceptable for OPA employees to be harassing critics of the department through postings that deliberately hide their DOJ affiliation (a practice that is not very “open” or “transparent”). DOJ lawyers also ought to be aware of ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4, which states that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. If the report in The Muffled Oar is correct, tax dollars are being used directly for such dishonest, deceitful behavior.

    This administration does not seem to understand the difference between the political campaign it waged to get into office and the entirely different responsibility it now has to enforce this nation’s laws in an objective, nonpartisan, nonpolitical manner.

  45. Justice Department Launches New Web Site

    this link leads to the DOJ official site if you want to have a look..

    h… w… mainjustice.com/2009/10/01/justice-department-launches-new-web-site/

  46. White House Attacks Fox News as ‘Research Arm of the Republican Party’

    If you want to embed, admin:

    youtube.com/watch?v=1AEt180Wnls&feature=player_embedded

  47. Obama-Media Parasites:CNN Brings Indoctrinated BLACK Children to Sing Praise/Push Obama’s HealthCare

    please embed, admin… This vid just about takes the cake!

    youtube.com/watch?v=ik1KC–AmbY

  48. Mrs. Smith Says:

    October 11th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
    White House Attacks Fox News as ‘Research Arm of the Republican Party’

    ****************************************

    yeah, so what do they call NBC/MSNBC???

    …’the Research Arm of the O administration’?

    and what about CNN?

    …the O admin is pathetic…

  49. As the Obama administration reconsiders its Afghanistan policy, White House officials are minimizing warnings from the intelligence community, the military and the State Department about the risks of adopting a limited strategy focused on al Qaida , U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy .

    Recent U.S. intelligence assessments have found that the Taliban and other Pakistan -based groups that are fighting U.S.-led forces have much closer ties to al Qaida now than they did before 9/11, would allow the terrorist network to re-establish bases in Afghanistan and would help Osama bin Laden export his radical brand of Islam to Afghanistan’s neighbors and beyond, the officials said.

    McClatchy interviewed more than 15 senior and mid-level U.S. intelligence, military and diplomatic officials, all of whom said they concurred with the assessments. All of them requested anonymity because the assessments are classified and the officials weren’t authorized to speak publicly.

    The officials said the White House is searching for an alternative to the broader counterinsurgency strategy favored by Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal , the U.S. military commander in Afghanistan , and Gen. David Petraeus , the head of the U.S. Central Command.

    ———————

  50. Thanks for the birthday wishes and thank you administrator for the videos, especially ‘She’s A Rainbow”. Happy anniversary as well to Carol, and the Clintons(?). Lets hope and pray for Hillary as she goes about her work, with quiet dignity and little fanfare, but with remarkable courage and tangible results.

  51. Paying the Health Tax in Massachusetts Be warned:

    Even people with good insurance will risk fines if mandatory insurance becomes the national law.

    By Wendy Williams

    My husband retired from IBM about a decade ago, and as we aren’t old enough for Medicare we still buy our health insurance through the company. But IBM, with its typical courtesy, informed us recently that we will be fined by the state.

    Why? Because Massachusetts requires every resident to have health insurance, and this year, without informing us directly, the state had changed the rules in a way that made our bare-bones policy no longer acceptable. Unless we ponied up for a pricier policy we neither need nor want—or enrolled in a government-sponsored insurance plan—we would have to pay $1,000 each year to the state.

    My husband’s response was muted; I was shaking mad. We hadn’t imposed our health-care costs on anyone else, yet we were being fined (“taxed” was the word the letter used).

    We’ve spent much of our lives putting away what money we could for retirement. We always intended to be self-sufficient. We’ve paid off the mortgage on our home, don’t carry credit-card debt, and have savings in case of an emergency. We also have a regular monthly income of about $3,000, which includes an IBM pension. My husband, 61, earns a little money on the side, sometimes working as an electronics consultant on renewable energy projects. I’m 58 and make some money writing science books. We are not wealthy, but we aren’t a risk of becoming a burden on society either. How did we become outlaws?

    The turning point was three years ago, when then-Republican Gov. Mitt Romney pushed through the state legislature a health-care plan that he promised would provide universal coverage while lifting from the middle-class the burden of having to pay for those who do not have insurance. His argument was that the uninsured drove up the cost of health care for everyone by seeking care at emergency rooms and then skipping out on their medical bills. Hospitals make up for those unpaid bills by charging everyone else more than they otherwise would.

    The central plank of the Romney plan was a mandate that required everyone to buy health insurance or pay a fine for posing a risk to society by walking around without coverage. There would be subsidies for those who couldn’t afford insurance, and residents would be required to buy a minimum amount of health insurance, on the grounds that they might buy a policy that doesn’t cover the cost of their care and end up skipping out on their medical bills. “We insist that everybody who drives a car has insurance, and cars are a lot less expensive than people,” Mr. Romney told the Boston Globe in 2006.

    Mr. Romney and Sen. Ted Kennedy publicly promised that the middle class—that is, people like us—would not be taxed and that our health-care costs would actually decrease if the plan became law.

    My husband and I weren’t convinced. It all seemed inane, but we are neither politically or socially conservative and figured the plan wouldn’t affect us much. Besides, who could be against a plan that covers more people for less money?

    For the first two years of the mandate, our IBM health insurance was seen as acceptable in the eyes of the state. This year the rules changed. The state requires that health plans cap out-of-pocket expenses for individuals (not including monthly premiums) at $2,000 a year. Our plan’s cap is $2,500.

    Ten years ago, we had excellent coverage through a more gold-plated plan. But we found that it was no longer worth paying the premiums and scaled back to a more modest policy. Today, we pay about $300 a month for catastrophic care. If we went with the next step up in plans offered to us by IBM, our monthly premium would increase to $800. We simply don’t need to pay that kind of money for the amount of health care we actually consume.

    Nonetheless, we now owe the state an extra $1,000. Ironically, that’s about the extra amount we would pay out-of-pocket under our current plan if both of us actually fell ill in the same year.

    We could choose a state-sponsored plan. It would mean paying more than what we pay now, but less than what IBM’s next step up would cost. But we don’t want to.

    IBM seems like a rock of stability compared to the state of Massachusetts. It’s apparent that state health-care policies can change at the whim of politicians in Boston, and we might not be able to adjust to the new rules. The way we figure it, if we sign up for a state-subsidized plan we will be at the mercy of the state.

    So we are sticking with our plan and paying the tax. But what bothers me most is that a similar health-care mandate is being proposed in Washington, and some of the same promises that were made here are being made again—such as that the mandate will never hit middle-class folks with a new tax. When asked about the mandate, Maine Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe said recently, according to the New York Times, “It surprises me that we would have these high-level penalties on average Americans.”

    Well, I don’t find it surprising. The mandate in Massachusetts was sold as something that wouldn’t penalize people like my husband and me. But those political promises were only good for as long as it took to get the mandate enacted into law.

    Mrs. Williams is co-author of “Cape Wind: Money, Celebrity, Class, Politics and the Battle for Our Energy Future” (PublicAffairs, 2007).

    *************************************************

    …they are coming for the rest of us…we will be prisioners of the Insurance industry and IRS…all in the name of ‘health care reform’

  52. That is what I heard all day on the talk shows, how the Taliban did not knock the Twin Towers down, Al Queda did.

    They are stupid, what about Mullah Omar, he found shelter with Osama Bin Laden and he has never been caught either. They have already indoctrinated the Taliban.

  53. NJ Governor Mocks Opponent’s Waistline

    by Deborah Dunham

    Oct 9th 2009 4:00PM

    Is it wise to point a mocking finger at an opponent’s weight? New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine seems to think so. A recent campaign ad from Corzine features a shot of rival Christopher Christie stepping out of a vehicle, exposing his hefty midriff while a narrator comments that Christie is “throwing his weight around” to avoid traffic tickets.

    Other unflattering shots of Christie have appeared throughout Corzine’s campaign ads. “Mr. Corzine’s television commercials and Web videos feature unattractive images of Mr. Christie, sometimes shot from the side or backside, highlighting his heft, jowls and double chin,” writes David Halbfinger from The New York Times. While Christie reportedly would not comment on his actual weight, it is evident that he is sorely overweight. But does this make a difference to voters?

    It appears Governor Corzine wants it to. He tries to portray himself as a model of fitness, running in local 5K and 10K races, sometimes two in one weekend. “I always see the governor at my gym; he is definitely a fitness fanatic. I like knowing that he is health conscious.,” says one local New Jersey resident who frequents the same New York Sports Club as Corzine. “It’s actually motivating.”

    Is poking fun at a rival’s weight a smart move in a nation where more than 60 percent of our folks are overweight? Or, is it better to have officials who are healthy and weight conscious so they can lead by example?

    As hard as we may try not to judge, some research shows weight-based discrimination happens throughout the workplace — it may just not be as public as this campaign.

  54. S…

    Thanks for posting a well written description of your current situation with the State of MA (Patric’s) HC Reform Policy. I believe Obama is using Patric’s Plan as the model for HC for the rest of the Nation.

    There must be a group somewhere in MA that is having the same misgivings you are as to burden put in place by the State’s HC mandates unwanted by MA residents opposed to the program. No?

  55. Look at this, GWBush and Obama have awoken a sleeping giant. Those lifers up there on the hill who have been throwing the American people to the wolves to benefit themselves need to be very, very afraid. The people want centrists, we just need to convince them center left is the best. Hillary!

    While the energy of the anti-tax and anti-Big Government tea party movement may yet haunt Democrats in 2010, the first order of business appears to be remaking the Republican Party.

    Whether it’s the loose confederation of Washington-oriented groups that have played an organizational role or the state-level activists who are channeling grass-roots anger into action back home, tea party forces are confronting the Republican establishment by backing insurgent conservatives and generating their own candidates — even if it means taking on GOP incumbents.

    “We will be a headache for anyone who believes the Constitution of the United States … isn’t to be protected,” said Dick Armey, chairman of the anti-tax and limited government advocacy group FreedomWorks, which helped plan and promote the tea parties, town hall protests and the September ‘Taxpayer March’ in Washington. “If you can’t take it seriously, we will look for places of other employment for you.”

    “We’re not a partisan organization, and I think many Republicans are disappointed we are not,” added Armey, a former GOP congressman.

    In Florida, where the national party has signaled its preference for centrist Gov. Charlie Crist in the GOP Senate primary, tea party activists are lining up behind former state House Speaker Marco Rubio in reaction to Crist’s public backing for President Barack Obama’s stimulus package.

    “We were very disappointed with Gov. Charlie Crist when he supported the stimulus, the bailout, and he appeared publicly with President Obama,” said Everett Wilkinson, a South Florida-based organizer for Tea Party Patriots. “The opposition comes from Crist’s support for the largest spending plan ever and the environmental policies he’s pushing on the American people.”

    Rubio has already made appearances at Florida tea parties, and protesters have been seen waving signs declaring, “Anybody but Charlie Crist.” He also has Armey’s endorsement, and Armey headlined a Dallas fundraiser for him several weeks ago.

    Wilkinson said that the tax status of his Florida-based group limits what it can do to assist Rubio in the August 2010 primary. But he said the organization would launch an aggressive get-out-the-vote operation and issue a report card grading each candidate appearing on the ballot.

    Tea party activists are also lining up behind challengers to GOP establishment-backed Senate candidates in Colorado and Connecticut. In California, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina — like Crist, another National Republican Senatorial Committee-favored Senate contender — is the target of tea party animus in her primary against conservative state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore.

    “My impression is that the support among tea partyers for DeVore is high,” said Mark Meckler, a California-based organizer for Tea Party Patriots. “I hear nothing but praise for the guy.”

    Tea party organizers say their resistance to Republican Party-backed primary candidates has much to do with what they perceive as the GOP’s stubborn insistence on embracing candidates who don’t abide by a small government, anti-tax conservative philosophy.

    “It’s an outgrowth of the frustration people have had with the Republican Party,” said Andrew Moylan, director of governmental affairs for the National Taxpayers Union, another group that has played a large role in organizing the tea party movement. “I think a lot of people have been angry at Republicans for betraying our trust.”

    “I think the GOP establishment has ignored their constituents and the feelings of their constituents for years,” added Meckler.

    It’s an unusual predicament for the Republican Party, since the conservative-oriented issues that animate Tea Party activists once seemed destined to make the movement a valuable auxiliary to the Republican Party.

    While there’s little evidence of tea party activist support for Democratic candidates, the specific notion of electing a GOP majority hasn’t ranked high on their agenda either.

    At the recent “Defending the American Dream Summit,” a conservative event held in Arlington, Va., a breakout session featuring tea party organizers saw panelists peppered with questions ranging from how to start up political action committees and 501(c)(3) organizations to whether it was necessary to hire lawyers.

    “Nothing is going to change unless we can get politicians elected who can implement fiscally conservative policies,” Teri Adams of the Philadelphia-based Independence Hall Tea Party Association, which will be launching a political arm, told those in attendance.

    In a handful of states, tea party activists have zeroed in on House Republican incumbents and have launched primary challenges in protest of their past support for the controversial Wall Street bank bailout.

    One of those activists, Canyon Clowdus, an Army veteran who is taking on third-term conservative Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), has blasted the incumbent for making “a horrible mistake” in voting for Troubled Asset Relief Program.

    “He has put a financial burden on my four children that will amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars each,” Clowdus says of Conaway on his campaign website.

    “I think it was a bad, bad political decision,” Armey said of the 34 Senate Republicans and 91 House Republicans who voted for the TARP bailout, “and if you talk to grass-roots activists, it has become a political test for them.”

    Moylan agreed that TARP is “really kind of the flash point that started all of this.”

    “People are paying attention and are willing to hold these people accountable,” he said.

    For some, supporting insurgent campaigns or waging primary bids just isn’t a strong enough signal to send to a Republican Party that has abandoned core conservative policies.

    Erick Erickson, founder and editor of the influential conservative blog RedState, has urged tea party activists to “put down the protest signs” and stage takeovers of local Republican parties.

    “Grass-roots activists need to start infiltrating the party,” said Erickson. “The only way to start getting [the establishment] back is to start pounding them with every fist we have.”

  56. Just in case you all forgot this little ditty…apparently the Fraud has. But of course as you know, the MM will never call him on this….
    ***************************

    THE BRIEFING ROOM

    Tuesday, February 17th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
    Statement by the President on Afghanistan
    THE WHITE HOUSE

    Office of the Press Secretary

    ___________________________

    For Immediate Release February 17, 2009

    There is no more solemn duty as President than the decision to deploy our armed forces into harm’s way. I do it today mindful that the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan demands urgent attention and swift action. The Taliban is resurgent in Afghanistan, and al Qaeda supports the insurgency and threatens America from its safe-haven along the Pakistani border.

    To meet urgent security needs, I approved a request from Secretary Gates to deploy a Marine Expeditionary Brigade later this spring and an Army Stryker Brigade and the enabling forces necessary to support them later this summer. This increase has been requested by General McKiernan and supported by Secretary Gates, the Joint Chiefs and the Commander of Central Command. General McKiernan’s request for these troops is months old, and the fact that we are going to responsibly drawdown our forces in Iraq allows us the flexibility to increase our presence in Afghanistan.

    This reinforcement will contribute to the security of the Afghan people and to stability in Afghanistan. I recognize the extraordinary strain that this deployment places on our troops and military families. I honor their service, and will give them the support they need.

    This increase is necessary to stabilize a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, which has not received the strategic attention, direction and resources it urgently requires. That is why I ordered a review of our policy upon taking office, so we have a comprehensive strategy and the necessary resources to meet clear and achievable objectives in Afghanistan and the region. This troop increase does not pre-determine the outcome of that strategic review. Instead, it will further enable our team to put together a comprehensive strategy that will employ all elements of our national power to fulfill achievable goals in Afghanistan. As we develop our new strategic goals, we will do so in concert with our friends and allies as together we seek the resources necessary to succeed.

  57. From BP via Hillbuz…please embed Admin
    ************************************

    I saw this at HillBuzz.. … BREAKS MY HEART!
    what a wonderful human being…

    here is yet another person so deserving of the NPP over that piece of chit in the WH

    youtube.com/watch?v=2t-n9TniHIs&feature=player_embedded

  58. Correct if I am wrong, but isn’t Obama putting the bank controls in now?? I have this suspicion if he is, things are about to get a whole lot worse.
    These are the controls that Soros is talking about that needs to be put in before the big shock can take place.

    Soros, after the breakup of the Soviet Union had a sudden sense of guilt and said that he now believed that controls should be put in force before the shock doctrine can be administered.

    He also knows his time is short because people are catching on to Obama and have actually relagated him impotent. So hold on to your hats folks, its about to get bad. Just my prediction!

  59. Gonzotex, That was a powerful video, how could Obama get the award of this man, I don’t know, its a travesty of justice.

  60. gonzotx Says:

    October 11th, 2009 at 10:33 pm

    ————————–

    And this is exactly why that egotistical unworthy hairbrain should have turned down the prize. And this is also why the committee that awarded the prize to this idiot should be stripped of their powers and paraded in shame.

  61. wbboei, check this out. I found this by accident. It seems that Jeffrey Soros has a film company. It just got a 15million grant from the Warhol Foundation. This is so hard to track.

    h tt p:/ /c re ative- capital.org /theprogram /apply

  62. 1. La Raza Wants Healthcare for Illegal Aliens

    The president of the National Council of La Raza, America’s largest Hispanic advocacy organization, said healthcare reform should include “everyone” — including illegal aliens.

    Speaking at a press conference in support of President Barack Obama’s efforts to overhaul the healthcare system, La Raza President Janet Murguia said:

    “From our perspective there’s a strong case to be made in this country for us to reform healthcare,” and “it ought to include everyone.

    “We know that politically it’s very difficult right now to take on the issue of undocumenteds [but] there’s no reason why we shouldn’t be trying to cover as many people as possible, certainly when it comes to undocumented children. Our goal should be to have healthcare for everyone.”

    Murguia told CNSNews: “In terms of fairness and cost efficiencies, I think it’s in the interest of healthcare reform to have access to as many people as possible.”

    Language inserted in the healthcare reform legislation would make federal health insurance subsidies available only to U.S. citizens and legal residents. But the House and Senate bills do not contain a clear provision for verifying citizenship status.

    Rep. Michael Honda, a California Democrat, said undocumented aliens, “if they can afford it, should be able to buy their own private plans. It keeps them out of the emergency room.”

    Rep. Honda and other Democrats who support his position say that the illegals should be able to buy insurance “even if it comes through a government-established exchange,” the Washington Times reported.

    But Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican, declared: “If anyone can, with a straight face, advocate that we should provide health insurance for people who broke into our country, broke our laws and for the most part are criminals, I don’t know where they ever would draw the line.”

  63. wbboei, check out this on SOros, I haven’t seen this before.

    Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power

    Special Report | By Cliff Kincaid | October 27, 2004

    Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time.

    How many times have we heard or read stories about Vice President Dick Cheney’s old firm, Halliburton, and its alleged influence over the government? A public company with more than 100,000 employees, Halliburton had revenues of $13 billion in 2001. However, George Soros is a human Halliburton who will be in a position if John Kerry is elected president to pull the strings. He is reportedly worth $7.2 billion. But his role in buying the White House for John Kerry has received generally positive coverage. Soros, we’re told, is a “philanthropist” committed to “democracy.” The Republican Party, by contrast, is supposed to be run by fat cats and Big Business, such as those at Halliburton.

    Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time. Convicted in France of insider trading, Soros specializes in weakening or collapsing the currencies of entire nations for his own selfish interests. He is known as the man who broke the Bank of England. His power is such that his statements alone can cause currencies to go up or down. Other people suffer so he can get rich. But journalists don’t want to examine the questionable means by which he achieved his wealth because they share his goal of electing Kerry and the Democrats. Curiously, once he made his fortune he became a global socialist, endorsing global taxes on the very means he employed to get rich – international currency speculation and manipulation.

    The media consistently ignore the fact that this so-called “philanthropist” has had several brushes with the law as he has laid siege to national economies and currencies. Hard-working U.S. businessmen understand how Soros has made his money. In protesting a Soros appearance hosted by the University of Toledo, Edwin J. Nagle III, president and CEO of the Nagle Companies, highlighted “the immoral and unethical means by which he achieved his wealth.” He added, “I certainly didn’t see included in his bio the stories on how he collapsed whole country’s currencies for his own self interests so that many may suffer.”

    Here, Soros signed a consent decree in United States District Court, in a Securities and Exchange Commission case involving stock manipulation, and was fined $75,000 by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for holding positions “in excess of speculative limits.” Stories about Soros rarely, if ever, mention any of his legal problems.

    Despite his vision of an “open society,” he operates an unregulated “hedge fund,” open only to the super-rich, and is currently fighting a proposal from the Bush-appointed chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate and monitor these offshore entities. House Speaker Dennis Hastert said on national television that no one really knows where the Soros money comes from.

    Soros has categorically denied receiving money from drug cartels or any form of criminal activity. The fact remains, however, that at least some of his financial operations have been based offshore, in banking and financial centers that are widely reported to be considered conducive to money-laundering. The Soros fund is based in the Netherlands Antilles, a self-governing federation of five Caribbean islands. A CIA factbook describes the region as “a transshipment point for South American drugs bound for the US and Europe; money-laundering center.”

    Soros reportedly purchased a major stake in one of Colombia’s biggest banks, at a time when the Drug Enforcement Administration, in its study, “Colombian Economic Reform: The Impact on Drug Money Laundering within the Colombian Economy,” was documenting how major drug kingpins were taking advantage of the liberalization of the economy to put illicit drug revenue into legitimate businesses. The report stated: “U.S. and Colombian Government authorities have evidence of drug proceeds being deposited in every major bank in Colombia… A Colombian source indicated that many banks and businesses are owned covertly by principal members of the Cali cartel.”

    His complex web of financial interests, companies and foundations makes Halliburton look like a Mom & Pop operation.

    The charge we read in the press is that Halliburton gets government contracts and makes money from the Iraq war. Far less attention has been paid to the fact that the company has lost 54 employees as a result of that war. Nobody in the press mentions that Soros profits from the Kosovo war, which he supported as a preemptive strike against Yugoslavia, because he runs an investment fund that now does business there. Even though he pays big bucks to advertise his opposition to the Bush policy of democracy-building in Iraq, reporters still describe him as someone with a reputation for building democracy abroad.

    However, his position on Iraq may be a diversion from the real reason he wants to get rid of Bush – his longstanding desire to adopt a national “retreat and defeat” approach to the drug problem.

    Soros’ long-time goal has been to subvert the national anti-drug policy of the U.S. Government, to move away from the use of national and global law enforcement resources against the drug trade. He calls this “harm reduction,” meaning that criminal activity associated with the use of drugs will supposedly be reduced if the government takes over the drug trade and provides drugs and drug paraphernalia, including needles, to addicts. But law enforcement would still be required to keep drugs out of the hands of children. If this is not the case, then Soros intends to allow substances such as marijuana, cocaine and heroin to be distributed to children.

    If Soros is able to capture the White House and implement his drug policy nationally, millions more people could be led to experiment with dangerous psychoactive substances and damage themselves, their families, and society. Even marijuana, depicted by the media as a “soft” drug, has extremely negative consequences. In the new book, “Marijuana and Madness,” one of the editors, Prof. Robin Murray of Britain’s Institute of Psychiatry, cites studies and evidence from around the world, some of it going back 40 years, linking the use of marijuana to mental illnesses, including schizophrenia and psychosis.

    In a recent article about his growing financial and political clout, the Washington Post sanitized Soros by claiming that he “funded efforts to reform campaign laws, decriminalize marijuana and change [the] criminal justice system.” All of that is misleading, if not false. His “reform” of campaign laws left a loophole that will enable him to set a record “for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle,” to quote the Post itself. So where are the investigative stories into Soros and his agenda?

    A key part of the Soros agenda — his proposed surrender in the war on drugs — has been carefully concealed from the American people during this campaign. The war on Islamic terrorism is front and center, to be sure, but the war on drugs is still of major concern to millions of Americans, especially parents fearful of the influence of Hollywood and the drug culture.

    A Soros role in formulating national drug policy is worthy of special press attention because his pro-drug legalization campaign has been considered at odds with the vast majority of Republicans and Democrats who share the view that legalization would make the drug problem far worse.

    In the current campaign, however, a major transformation has taken place. Soros is said to have “privatized” or replaced the Democratic Party by subsidizing many different liberal-left organizations that comprise its political base and creating new ones, the “527” organizations.

    Among the candidates who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination, Soros financially supported John Kerry, Wesley Clark, Senator Bob Graham, and Howard Dean. He has been praised by Senator Hillary Clinton and contributed to her Senate campaign and political action committee. He has also contributed to the political campaigns of Democratic Senators Tom Daschle, Carl Levin, John Corzine, Mary Landrieu, Debbie Stabenow, Charles Schumer, Joseph Biden, Patrick Leahy, Paul Sarbanes, Thomas Harkin, and Barbara Boxer. In 2002, Soros funded Al Gore for president and contributed $153,000 in “soft money” to the Democratic National Committee. Soros, who is also very close to Bill Clinton, was described by Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott as a “national treasure.”

    It is significant that Soros and two of his sons have contributed $2000 each to Brad Carson, the Democratic Senate candidate in Oklahoma. His Republican opponent, Dr. Tom Coburn, was a member of the U.S. House for six years, where he developed a reputation as a leading opponent of efforts to legalize marijuana and fund needle exchange programs that facilitate illicit drug use. Coburn exposed Soros-style “harm reduction” as a backdoor approach to legalization of illicit drugs. Coburn was also a strong supporter of drug testing and even fought to require drug testing of members of Congress. Coburn and his staff voluntarily underwent drug testing. If elected to the Senate, say his supporters, Coburn would be the chamber’s leading voice for protecting children from the dangers of drug abuse and a scientific voice of reason against the Soros-supported movement that seeks to legalize drugs. It’s no wonder that Soros and his sons have targeted Coburn for defeat.

    Soros has also contributed to Barack Obama, running for the Senate as a Democrat from Illinois. CNSNews.com reports that, “Not only did Soros donate to Obama’s campaign, but four other family members – Jennifer, sons Jonathan and Robert and wife Susan – did as well. Because of a special provision campaign finance laws, the Soroses were able to give a collective $60,000 to Obama during his primary challenge.”

    Soros was described by the New Yorker as close to Harold Ickes, a former Clinton deputy chief of staff who runs the Media Fund, one of many Soros-supported “527” groups. Soros described him as a “real pro.”

    Away from the scrutiny or even the notice of the establishment press, Soros has emerged as a counter-culture hero.

    The drug culture magazine, Heads, calls him “Daddy Weedbucks,” ran an excerpt from his book, Soros on Soros, and declared that “he drops the bucks exactly where they’re needed.” The September-October issue of the drug culture magazine High Times recognizes the stakes, noting that there are “ten reasons to get rid of Bush” and that one is that there will be “No legalization of pot” under Bush. The implication of the article was that the situation would change under Kerry.

    None of this is being reported, however, by the major media.

    His partner, Peter Lewis, whitewashed by the Post as “one of the country’s 10 most generous philanthropists,” was actually arrested in New Zealand for “importing” drugs, including hashish and marijuana.

    The Human Halliburton

    The media call him a billionaire “philanthropist” who “promotes democracy” and “democratic institutions” abroad. He has been invited to address the National Press Club on October 28, 2004, just before the election. But admitted marijuana user George Soros, who says he tried marijuana “and enjoyed it,” doesn’t just “give” money away. He spends money for a purpose because he wants to remake America and the world. He is depicted in a recent lengthy New Yorker article by Jane Mayer as well-intentioned, not that concerned about money, the victim of scurrilous attacks, and someone who simply wants his “ideas” to “be heard.” This is typical of the fawning coverage of Soros. Mayer made a brief reference to his collaborator, Peter B. Lewis, and his funding of “efforts to decriminalize marijuana,” but she failed to explore how Soros is himself committed to legalizing dangerous drugs. Mayer did disclose that a meeting was held in August, after the Democratic Party convention, of what critics call a “billionaire conspiracy” to defeat Bush. Soros and Lewis were among the participants in the meeting, which was supposed to be kept private.

    Soros’ strong opposition to President Bush’s effort to create democratic institutions in Iraq contradicts his alleged support for democracy. But the media don’t point this out because they oppose Bush’s Iraq policy. Mayer, who interviewed the billionaire at length, suggests that Soros may be “looking for influence [in a Kerry Administration] to get out of Iraq” but that to pursue such an objective in exchange for his financial support to the candidate might be deemed “not appropriate” by some observers.

    It would be unwise for the public to dismiss the idea that he would not demand implementation of his other “ideas,” including drug legalization.

    Sometimes described as an atheist or agnostic, Soros has announced a vision of a secular “open society.” However, his agenda of drug legalization has remained largely hidden from public view during the current campaign.

    While Soros may not want to openly talk about what he would expect out of a Kerry Administration, his allies have obviously been giving it much thought.

    At the 2004 conference of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance was asked about his association with Soros and the billionaire’s attempt to put John Kerry in the White House. The questioner asked, “Are we going to get some Supreme Court justices out this?” Nadelmann modestly answered, “We will see,” and cautioned that it may be difficult to deliver “all the goods.”

    This is critical because the U.S. Supreme Court is already considering the matter of the several U.S. states that have laws on the books permitting some form of “medical marijuana” use, a violation of federal law, and could return to the subject in the future. The Court is expected to rule by June 2005 on a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision, challenged by the Bush administration, that bars federal agents from interfering with the growing and use of marijuana by two women in California.

    Hollywood has already been captured by the illegal drug lobby.

    At the 2004 NORML conference, Allen St. Pierre of the NORML Foundation described how various U.S. television programs “have previewed marijuana in a way ultimately positive.” He named them as ER, Chicago Hope, the Practice, Sybil, Murphy Brown, Sports Night, Becker, West Wing, Roseanne, Sex in the City, Six Feet Under, Whoopi, Montel, That 70s Show, and the Larry David Show. “These shows are seen by tens of millions of people,” he said. “So that’s what it’s so crucial that we’re able to capture—and to demonstrate the change in—culture.”

    The challenge for the drug culture is now to capture the U.S. Government. Soros is their front man.

    Bloomberg.com quoted Strobe Talbott, U.S. deputy secretary of state from 1994 to 2001, as saying, “Whenever George Soros called and asked to meet, I would move heaven and earth to do so. I treated him like the foreign minister of another country because of all that he had done.” Even under the Bush Administration, Soros has been considered an important and influential figure. He gave a September 16, 2003, speech at the State Department on “America in the Global Community: Building Long-Term Security.”

    So think about the clout he would have if he almost single-handedly buys the White House for John Kerry and plays a role in the election of several new Senators.

    Rather than investigate the source of the Soros money, Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson has praised Soros for engineering the “privatization” of the Democratic Party through funding of the “527” political groups and bypassing what he calls an incompetent Democratic Party apparatus. At the far-left “Take Back America” forum in June, Soros was photographed greeting Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who introduced him to the group. She told the crowd that, “we need people like George Soros, who is fearless and willing to step up when it counts.” He stepped up with his money.

    However, Meyerson and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman have attacked House Speaker Dennis Hastert for raising questions about where Soros gets his money.

    A professed believer in democracy, Soros has used the “527” loophole in a campaign finance law that he promoted to restrict the political activities of “special interests.” He has set a record “for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle.” Those “special interests” turned out to be other people — not him. He has since poured millions of dollars into anti-Bush groups and voter registration drives, some marked by alleged fraud, for the Democratic Party.

    His commitment to democracy is never questioned. Typical of the pro-Soros media coverage was a USA Today story on June 1 that gave Soros credit for freeing millions of people from communism and “supporting democracy.” The story ignored his insider trading conviction. While Soros provided some funding to anti-communist groups during the Cold War, his career has been designed to make money and extend his influence over nations and people. Communism was a threat because it was not hospitable to his investments.

    An excellent example of how he operates is Kosovo. As indicated earlier, it is relevant to note that, after the Soros-supported war on Kosovo, a province of Yugoslavia, a Soros fund announced in 2000 that it was investing $150 million — with loan guarantees from the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation — in the Balkans. It was called the “Southeast Europe Equity Fund.” By 2002, the OPIC-supported size of the investment had risen to $200 million and OPIC announced that Soros Investment Capital, Ltd. Fund Yugoslavia had acquired a controlling stake in Eksimbanka, a private commercial bank in Serbia, and had financed the start-up of Serbia Broadband Networks, the leading cable television and broadband services company in Serbia.

    What’s more, his “open society” doesn’t extend to himself. He unregulated “hedge funds,” open only to the super rich, are beyond public scrutiny or the interest of the press. In a curious chapter of his career, he reportedly invested in an energy company run by George W. Bush, in an unsuccessful attempt to buy influence with the Bush family.

    As noted, in another curious development, the global capitalist has become a global socialist advocating a global tax, known as the Tobin Tax, on the means by which he exploited the global capitalist system and became rich – international currency speculation and manipulation. Soros has declared that the Tobin Tax is a “valid suggestion” for raising international revenue and that opposition to implementing the tax can be overcome. What has not been reported is that Thomas Palley, the director of the Globalization Reform Project at Soros’ Open Society Institute, was a featured speaker at a January 2003 event in Washington, D.C. to discuss how to implement the tax.

    “He made his money the old-fashioned way, on Wall Street,” wrote Post columnist Harold Meyerson. In fact, he made his money through investment techniques that are not available to ordinary investors, and his financial interventions can affect nations and their economies.

    Soros claims that the “527” organizations he funds “file detailed and frequent reports with government regulators.” On the January 9 NOW With Bill Moyers program on PBS, Charles Lewis of the Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity argued that while Soros was funding 527 groups, Soros was disclosing these contributions and that the money could be tracked.

    Again, that begs the question of where he gets his money.

    His use of that loophole — in a law that he promoted to restrict the influence of outside “special interests” on political campaigns — is suspicious and curious on its face. Equally curious, Soros claims that the Bush Administration’s reaction to 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq caused him to spend millions of dollars through these “527” organizations to defeat Bush. However, Soros favored the Clinton Administration’s preemptive attack on Yugoslavia, in the absence of any threat to the U.S. and without U.S. Congressional authorization.

    While Soros runs around the country talking about defeating Bush, mostly because of his Iraq policy, he is using his money to target other candidates who have prosecuted the war on drugs.

    The pro-Soros national media have refused to examine the implications of a ruling by New York State Supreme Court Justice Bernard Malone. He ruled that it was improper for the Soros-backed Working Families Party to get involvement in a Democratic primary for District Attorney and he referred the case to local prosecutors and New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for a possible criminal investigation. Thanks to the money provided by Soros, David Soares defeated incumbent District Attorney Paul Clyne in the Democratic primary. At the time of Clyne’s defeat, Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance Network said he was proud that his group had “contributed to this race” and that “what happened in Albany” has “national resonance.” That suggested to some that Soros, if he is successful in putting John Kerry in the White House, would change the nation’s anti-drug policy.

    The Criminals Lobby

    Soros, who lives in New York, has also contributed $150,000 to a California ballot measure, proposition 66, to overturn the three-strikes law, which mandates prison terms of 25-years-to-life for defendants convicted of a third felony. The ballot measure is opposed by the state’s district attorneys and law enforcement agencies.

    In other unsavory connections, a Soros grant was given to Linda Evans, who was pardoned by Bill Clinton for her involvement in the Weather Underground terrorist group. The Weather Underground was involved in the 1981 Brinks robbery, in which three murders were committed, and a series of bombings, including the bombing of the U.S. Capitol in November 1983.

    The Baltimore, Maryland, branch of the OSI on May 12 hosted Bernardine Dohrn, another former member of the Weather Underground who once expressed solidarity with mass murderer Charles Manson, at a forum on criminal justice issues. Speaking to a Weather Underground “war council” in Michigan in 1969, Dohrn gave a three-fingered “fork salute” to Manson. As noted by Ami Naramor of The Claremont Institute, “Calling Manson’s victims the ‘Tate Eight,’ Dohrn gloated over the fact that actress Sharon Tate, who was pregnant at the time, had been stabbed with a fork in her womb. ‘Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!'” Dohrn, now an associate professor and director at Northwestern University’s Children and Justice Center, was a member of the advisory committee of the “children’s rights watch” project of Human Rights Watch, funded by Soros.

    Not coincidentally, the drug culture has embraced the Weather Underground. High Times magazine has called David Gilbert, a Weather Underground member now in prison, an “anti-imperialist political prisoner” and has hailed his book, No Surrender. High Times says Gilbert works behind bars for “prisoners’ rights” – a favorite cause of Soros.

    The latest development is creation of “Cannabis Consumers,” a bizarre organization of out-of-the-closet illegal pot smokers, formed to celebrate and glorify the drug. Director Mikki Norris, who says her group received a grant from the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance, says, “we honor George Soros.”

    The Soros-supported Drug Policy Alliance supports “marijuana clubs” currently dispensing the drug, supposedly on “medical” grounds. The federal government has tried to close down these clubs—a policy that could change if Soros gains access to and influence over the White House. Several states have passed “medical marijuana” initiatives, funded by Soros, attempting to provide the drug under the cover of treating illnesses. But the American people have been kept in the dark about whether the Soros campaign to weaken drug laws would be embraced and implemented on a national basis by a Kerry Administration.

    One of the few reporters to question the Soros agenda is John Berlau of Insight magazine, who asked whether Soros would benefit financially from his huge expenditures on political activity. Michael Vachon, the spokesman for Soros Fund Management in New York City, said, “I have no faith in the ability or desire of Insight magazine to portray George Soros’ activities in an unbiased manner.” Pressed, he said, “There’s no relationship between the policy prescriptions George Soros recommends and his own financial holdings. He doesn’t make policy recommendations to increase his own personal wealth. That’s not what motivates him.”

    There can be no doubt, however, that if the Soros plan for drug legalization goes forward, there would have to be an official infrastructure in place to finance drug production and distribution and handle the enormous profits that will be made from legalization. Legalization will not eliminate drug profits, it will only transfer some of them to government and “legitimate” industries. Soros could be poised to invest in those industries and companies.

    He is laying the groundwork for the creation of a system under which government and corporations would legalize, dispense and advertise hard drugs, much like tobacco or alcohol, and supply addicts with needles and drug paraphernalia. In effect, Soros appears to be financing drug legalization for the purpose of creating a new market for federal payments to underwrite drug purchases for addicts. Soros appears to favor an indoor version of “Needle Park,” where addicts come to government offices to inject or smoke their drugs at taxpayer expense.

    His position is also reflected in his funding of the ACLU, which itself favors the legalization of all drugs—even heroin and crack cocaine—and opposes virtually all measures taken to curtail drug use. In another example of its extremist approach, the group has rejected funds from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and participation in the Combined Federal Campaign, because acceptance of the money would require adopting measures to make sure it does not employ terrorists or support terrorist activity.

    Soros hired Aryeh Neier as president of his Open Society Institute (OSI) in 1993. Neier worked for the ACLU for 15 years, including eight as national director.

    Typically, Soros and his cronies present the current “war on drugs” as draconian, a huge waste of money and a threat to civil liberties. Legalization is then presented, usually couched in terms of reducing the harm associated with illegal use and procurement of drugs. The audience is never presented with a third option—eradication of drug crops at home and abroad, an intensified military/intelligence effort against drug lords abroad, tougher sentences for users and dealers, and more drug testing.

    In 1995, Soros made a major contribution to the Council on Foreign Relations, which two years later, under the leadership of Mathea Falco, released a comprehensive report on U.S. international drug control strategy, entitled, Rethinking International Drug Control. However, A.M. Rosenthal of the New York Times, who participated in the task force that drafted the report, declined to endorse it, saying that it “is so negative in substance and tone about United States efforts to stem drug use, production and distribution that it amounts to an invitation to drop those efforts…”

    Soros clearly has his sights set on global policy on drugs. Soros was a signer of a 1998 letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urging a radical revamping of global anti-drug policies. Another signer was Morton H. Halperin, a former Department of Defense and National Security Council Official.

    In a typical laudatory article about Soros, USA Today author Rick Hampson made a brief reference to his belief in “liberalized drug laws.” Nothing was said, however, about how Soros has managed to liberalize or weaken those laws across the country, and how he has his sights set on national anti-drug policy. The National District Attorneys Association says that since 1996 “incremental changes in state drug laws have continued at an alarming rate across our nation” and they are designed to “ultimately legalize drugs.” Soros was identified in this report as one of the wealthy individuals behind this “very well financed” drug legalization movement that is “highly adept at manipulating the media.”

    In an October 18 Newsweek story, “Can a Billionaire Beat Bush?” writer Marcus Mabry said that Soros will “be there” even if Bush wins, ready to “build a new left…” Soros and other ” wealthy progressives,” he says, “will set about assembling the infrastructure,” including think tanks, foundations, and civic groups, of this “new left.”

    But Soros has already done this. The late left-wing writer, Walt Contreras Sheasby, noted that the Soros influence “is one of those hushed secrets inside the left…” and that he has subsidized “many of the activist groups, luminaries and publications of the American left…”

    Mabry completely ignored his pro-drug legalization agenda and erroneously claimed that his involvement in this year’s presidential campaign is “his first significant involvement in American electoral politics.” Mabry ignored Soros’s funding of at least 19 initiatives to weaken drug laws.

    Journalists carefully conceal their own conflicts of interest. On the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) NOW With Bill Moyers program on January 9 of this year, Moyers interviewed Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity about the big money supporting the presidential candidates. But little time and attention was paid to how Soros was trying to buy the White House and pouring millions of dollars into groups such as MoveOn.org to bring this about. Moyers, former press secretary to President Lyndon Johnson, failed to tell his viewers that he is on the board of Soros’ Open Society Institute and that it has funneled $1.7 million into Lewis and his Center for Public Integrity. Moyers had conducted and aired an interview with Soros on September 12, 2003, where he declared, “The Republican Party has been captured by a bunch of extremists…” Soros was presented as an opponent of unchecked capitalism and a supporter of democracy and nation-building abroad.

    The power of the Soros-supported media network was demonstrated in mid-October when a controversy emerged over Sinclair Broadcasting airing parts of Stolen Honor, a film raising questions about the detrimental impact of John Kerry’s 1971 anti-war testimony on U.S. Vietnam POWs being held by the communists. Kerry had branded U.S. soldiers as war criminals, and POWs interviewed in Stolen Honor said this resulted in more torture to them. The Democratic Party, the Kerry campaign, and various groups denounced Sinclair for planning to air Stolen Honor. MediaChannel.org, Common Cause, the Alliance for Better Campaigns, Media Access Project, Media for Democracy, and the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ held an anti-Sinclair news conference. They denounced Sinclair for allegedly abusing the public airwaves by planning to air “propaganda.” All of these organizations — except for the possible exception of the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ — are funded by Soros.

    Media Matters, a left-wing media watchdog group that was also pressuring Sinclair to abandon plans to air the testimony of the former POWs, was “developed” with help from the Center for American Progress, funded by Soros.

    The attack on Sinclair had the effect of diverting attention away from the extensive and controversial media connections of Soros, his foundations, and the organizations they subsidize, and legitimate questions about the Soros-supported candidate John Kerry. These groups – and the many prominent journalists who serve on their boards – make Sinclair look penny ante.

    Pro-Soros media coverage dates back many years and continues to the present day, as detailed in this report. In 1996, Dan Rather’s CBS Evening News highlighted him as a philanthropist and humanitarian, someone who had made a fortune but was now making a difference. The story by correspondent Anthony Mason ignored his commitment to legalization of drugs.

    That same year, Judith Miller of the New York Times wrote that he was “bringing his philanthropy home.” While she made a brief reference to his drug legalization agenda, the headline over the piece said he was committed to “social justice.” His close adviser, Aryeh Neier, a longtime ACLU official, was described merely as a “human rights advocate.”

    On the far left, The Nation magazine and its Nation Institute have been supported by OSI. The magazine published a generally flattering piece about the Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

    In 1994 Soros received the Burton Benjamin Memorial Award at an International Press Freedom Awards dinner, sponsored by the Committee to Protect Journalists. Five years earlier, OSI gave 4 grants, totaling $220,000, to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Benjamin was senior executive producer at CBS News and served briefly as chair of the Committee to Protect Journalists before his death in 1988.

    The Soros media connections include:

    An investor in the Times Mirror Company, Soros funded the Project on Media Ownership, headed by Professor Mark Crispin Miller at New York University. Whose purpose was expose “media concentration.” A total of $300,000 over several years came from George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI). In 1999, a survey commissioned by the Project on Media Ownership and the Benton Foundation and paid for by OSI found that seventy-nine percent of adults would favor a law requiring commercial broadcasters to pay 5 percent of their revenues into a fund for public broadcasting.

    Eric Alterman of The Nation has hailed Soros for spending millions on “education campaigns with America Coming Together, voter mobilization drives with MoveOn.org and research activities with the Center for American Progress (CAP)–where I am a senior fellow…” Alterman says his own magazine, The Nation, is viewed as out of the mainstream in part because of “the continued appearance in its pages of a long-time Stalinist communist, Alexander Cockburn, whose unabashed hatred for both America and Israel … tarnish the reputation of its otherwise serious contributors.” Alterman’s mentor, I.F. Stone, was a paid agent of the KGB and a Stalinist.

    In the Los Angeles Times Book Review, Orville Schell said that Soros had written a “succinct and well-reasoned book,” The Bubble of American Supremacy, which ought “to provide a welcome template for how the candidates might begin to think their way through to a more coherent view of America’s place in the world.” Soros had spoken on March 3 at the Goldman Forum on the Press and Foreign Affairs, sponsored by UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism. The event was a conversation between Soros and Journalism Dean Orville Schell.

    OSI gave $60,000 to the Independent Media Institute , whose executive director, Don Hazen, is a former publisher of Mother Jones. Hazen has called Soros a “progressive philanthropist.” A story carried by the Independent Media Institute on its AlterNet project says Soros “believes in democracy, positive international relations and effective strategies to reduce poverty, among other things.”

    OSI gave a $75,000 grant to the Center for Investigative Reporting. The group’s board of advisers includes prominent journalists.

    OSI gave $246,528 to the Center for Public Integrity, headed by former CBS News producer Charles Lewis, “to support the continuing expansion of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.” A total of $1 million went for “the Global Access Project.” In total, it is estimated that the group has received $1.7 from Soros.

    OSI gave $200,000 to the Fund for Investigative Journalism. This group, too, features prominent journalists on its board.

    OSI’s “Network Media Program” gave $22,157 to Investigative Reporters & Editors.

    Soros Foundations have provided $160,000 to MediaChannel.org, a so-called “media issues supersite, featuring criticism, breaking news, and investigative reporting from hundreds of organizations worldwide.” The executive editor is Danny Schecter, a former news program producer and investigative reporter at CNN and ABC. It was created by Globalvision News Network, whose board includes “Senior executives from the world’s leading media firms.”

    OSI has contributed $70,000 toward the far-left Independent Media Center, or Indymedia, known as an “independent newsgathering collective,” whose servers were seized by a federal law enforcement agency on October 7. The action was apparently related to an investigation into international terrorism, kidnapping or money laundering.

    OSI provided $600,000 to the Media Access Project, a so-called telecommunications public interest law firm critical of conservative influence in the major media.

    OSI provide $30,000 to the Media Awareness Project, a “worldwide network dedicated to drug policy reform” and promoting “balanced media coverage” of the drug issue.

    OSI provided $200,000 to the Association for Progressive Communications, “an international network…working for peace, human rights, development and protection of the environment…”

    Considering all of the money that Soros or his organizations have provided to news organizations, it should be no surprise to learn that journalists love him. His web site advises visitors to “read about George Soros from The New York Times, USA Today, Time Magazine, et al.,” all of which are reprinted on the site and highly favorable. His new web site features several complimentary statements about Soros from articles in the press and media figures.

    Either the media fear his wealth and power, they favor his positions on the issues, or they want access to his money. The people have a right to know.

  64. wbboei, Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power

    Special Report | By Cliff Kincaid | October 27, 2004

    Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time.

    How many times have we heard or read stories about Vice President Dick Cheney’s old firm, Halliburton, and its alleged influence over the government? A public company with more than 100,000 employees, Halliburton had revenues of $13 billion in 2001. However, George Soros is a human Halliburton who will be in a position if John Kerry is elected president to pull the strings. He is reportedly worth $7.2 billion. But his role in buying the White House for John Kerry has received generally positive coverage. Soros, we’re told, is a “philanthropist” committed to “democracy.” The Republican Party, by contrast, is supposed to be run by fat cats and Big Business, such as those at Halliburton.

    Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time. Convicted in France of insider trading, Soros specializes in weakening or collapsing the currencies of entire nations for his own selfish interests. He is known as the man who broke the Bank of England. His power is such that his statements alone can cause currencies to go up or down. Other people suffer so he can get rich. But journalists don’t want to examine the questionable means by which he achieved his wealth because they share his goal of electing Kerry and the Democrats. Curiously, once he made his fortune he became a global socialist, endorsing global taxes on the very means he employed to get rich – international currency speculation and manipulation.

    The media consistently ignore the fact that this so-called “philanthropist” has had several brushes with the law as he has laid siege to national economies and currencies. Hard-working U.S. businessmen understand how Soros has made his money. In protesting a Soros appearance hosted by the University of Toledo, Edwin J. Nagle III, president and CEO of the Nagle Companies, highlighted “the immoral and unethical means by which he achieved his wealth.” He added, “I certainly didn’t see included in his bio the stories on how he collapsed whole country’s currencies for his own self interests so that many may suffer.”

    Here, Soros signed a consent decree in United States District Court, in a Securities and Exchange Commission case involving stock manipulation, and was fined $75,000 by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for holding positions “in excess of speculative limits.” Stories about Soros rarely, if ever, mention any of his legal problems.

    Despite his vision of an “open society,” he operates an unregulated “hedge fund,” open only to the super-rich, and is currently fighting a proposal from the Bush-appointed chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate and monitor these offshore entities. House Speaker Dennis Hastert said on national television that no one really knows where the Soros money comes from.

    Soros has categorically denied receiving money from drug cartels or any form of criminal activity. The fact remains, however, that at least some of his financial operations have been based offshore, in banking and financial centers that are widely reported to be considered conducive to money-laundering. The Soros fund is based in the Netherlands Antilles, a self-governing federation of five Caribbean islands. A CIA factbook describes the region as “a transshipment point for South American drugs bound for the US and Europe; money-laundering center.”

    Soros reportedly purchased a major stake in one of Colombia’s biggest banks, at a time when the Drug Enforcement Administration, in its study, “Colombian Economic Reform: The Impact on Drug Money Laundering within the Colombian Economy,” was documenting how major drug kingpins were taking advantage of the liberalization of the economy to put illicit drug revenue into legitimate businesses. The report stated: “U.S. and Colombian Government authorities have evidence of drug proceeds being deposited in every major bank in Colombia… A Colombian source indicated that many banks and businesses are owned covertly by principal members of the Cali cartel.”

    His complex web of financial interests, companies and foundations makes Halliburton look like a Mom & Pop operation.

    The charge we read in the press is that Halliburton gets government contracts and makes money from the Iraq war. Far less attention has been paid to the fact that the company has lost 54 employees as a result of that war. Nobody in the press mentions that Soros profits from the Kosovo war, which he supported as a preemptive strike against Yugoslavia, because he runs an investment fund that now does business there. Even though he pays big bucks to advertise his opposition to the Bush policy of democracy-building in Iraq, reporters still describe him as someone with a reputation for building democracy abroad.

    However, his position on Iraq may be a diversion from the real reason he wants to get rid of Bush – his longstanding desire to adopt a national “retreat and defeat” approach to the drug problem.

    Soros’ long-time goal has been to subvert the national anti-drug policy of the U.S. Government, to move away from the use of national and global law enforcement resources against the drug trade. He calls this “harm reduction,” meaning that criminal activity associated with the use of drugs will supposedly be reduced if the government takes over the drug trade and provides drugs and drug paraphernalia, including needles, to addicts. But law enforcement would still be required to keep drugs out of the hands of children. If this is not the case, then Soros intends to allow substances such as marijuana, cocaine and heroin to be distributed to children.

    If Soros is able to capture the White House and implement his drug policy nationally, millions more people could be led to experiment with dangerous psychoactive substances and damage themselves, their families, and society. Even marijuana, depicted by the media as a “soft” drug, has extremely negative consequences. In the new book, “Marijuana and Madness,” one of the editors, Prof. Robin Murray of Britain’s Institute of Psychiatry, cites studies and evidence from around the world, some of it going back 40 years, linking the use of marijuana to mental illnesses, including schizophrenia and psychosis.

    In a recent article about his growing financial and political clout, the Washington Post sanitized Soros by claiming that he “funded efforts to reform campaign laws, decriminalize marijuana and change [the] criminal justice system.” All of that is misleading, if not false. His “reform” of campaign laws left a loophole that will enable him to set a record “for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle,” to quote the Post itself. So where are the investigative stories into Soros and his agenda?

    A key part of the Soros agenda — his proposed surrender in the war on drugs — has been carefully concealed from the American people during this campaign. The war on Islamic terrorism is front and center, to be sure, but the war on drugs is still of major concern to millions of Americans, especially parents fearful of the influence of Hollywood and the drug culture.

    A Soros role in formulating national drug policy is worthy of special press attention because his pro-drug legalization campaign has been considered at odds with the vast majority of Republicans and Democrats who share the view that legalization would make the drug problem far worse.

    In the current campaign, however, a major transformation has taken place. Soros is said to have “privatized” or replaced the Democratic Party by subsidizing many different liberal-left organizations that comprise its political base and creating new ones, the “527” organizations.

    Among the candidates who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination, Soros financially supported John Kerry, Wesley Clark, Senator Bob Graham, and Howard Dean. He has been praised by Senator Hillary Clinton and contributed to her Senate campaign and political action committee. He has also contributed to the political campaigns of Democratic Senators Tom Daschle, Carl Levin, John Corzine, Mary Landrieu, Debbie Stabenow, Charles Schumer, Joseph Biden, Patrick Leahy, Paul Sarbanes, Thomas Harkin, and Barbara Boxer. In 2002, Soros funded Al Gore for president and contributed $153,000 in “soft money” to the Democratic National Committee. Soros, who is also very close to Bill Clinton, was described by Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott as a “national treasure.”

    It is significant that Soros and two of his sons have contributed $2000 each to Brad Carson, the Democratic Senate candidate in Oklahoma. His Republican opponent, Dr. Tom Coburn, was a member of the U.S. House for six years, where he developed a reputation as a leading opponent of efforts to legalize marijuana and fund needle exchange programs that facilitate illicit drug use. Coburn exposed Soros-style “harm reduction” as a backdoor approach to legalization of illicit drugs. Coburn was also a strong supporter of drug testing and even fought to require drug testing of members of Congress. Coburn and his staff voluntarily underwent drug testing. If elected to the Senate, say his supporters, Coburn would be the chamber’s leading voice for protecting children from the dangers of drug abuse and a scientific voice of reason against the Soros-supported movement that seeks to legalize drugs. It’s no wonder that Soros and his sons have targeted Coburn for defeat.

    Soros has also contributed to Barack Obama, running for the Senate as a Democrat from Illinois. CNSNews.com reports that, “Not only did Soros donate to Obama’s campaign, but four other family members – Jennifer, sons Jonathan and Robert and wife Susan – did as well. Because of a special provision campaign finance laws, the Soroses were able to give a collective $60,000 to Obama during his primary challenge.”

    Soros was described by the New Yorker as close to Harold Ickes, a former Clinton deputy chief of staff who runs the Media Fund, one of many Soros-supported “527” groups. Soros described him as a “real pro.”

    Away from the scrutiny or even the notice of the establishment press, Soros has emerged as a counter-culture hero.

    The drug culture magazine, Heads, calls him “Daddy Weedbucks,” ran an excerpt from his book, Soros on Soros, and declared that “he drops the bucks exactly where they’re needed.” The September-October issue of the drug culture magazine High Times recognizes the stakes, noting that there are “ten reasons to get rid of Bush” and that one is that there will be “No legalization of pot” under Bush. The implication of the article was that the situation would change under Kerry.

    None of this is being reported, however, by the major media.

    His partner, Peter Lewis, whitewashed by the Post as “one of the country’s 10 most generous philanthropists,” was actually arrested in New Zealand for “importing” drugs, including hashish and marijuana.

    The Human Halliburton

    The media call him a billionaire “philanthropist” who “promotes democracy” and “democratic institutions” abroad. He has been invited to address the National Press Club on October 28, 2004, just before the election. But admitted marijuana user George Soros, who says he tried marijuana “and enjoyed it,” doesn’t just “give” money away. He spends money for a purpose because he wants to remake America and the world. He is depicted in a recent lengthy New Yorker article by Jane Mayer as well-intentioned, not that concerned about money, the victim of scurrilous attacks, and someone who simply wants his “ideas” to “be heard.” This is typical of the fawning coverage of Soros. Mayer made a brief reference to his collaborator, Peter B. Lewis, and his funding of “efforts to decriminalize marijuana,” but she failed to explore how Soros is himself committed to legalizing dangerous drugs. Mayer did disclose that a meeting was held in August, after the Democratic Party convention, of what critics call a “billionaire conspiracy” to defeat Bush. Soros and Lewis were among the participants in the meeting, which was supposed to be kept private.

    Soros’ strong opposition to President Bush’s effort to create democratic institutions in Iraq contradicts his alleged support for democracy. But the media don’t point this out because they oppose Bush’s Iraq policy. Mayer, who interviewed the billionaire at length, suggests that Soros may be “looking for influence [in a Kerry Administration] to get out of Iraq” but that to pursue such an objective in exchange for his financial support to the candidate might be deemed “not appropriate” by some observers.

    It would be unwise for the public to dismiss the idea that he would not demand implementation of his other “ideas,” including drug legalization.

    Sometimes described as an atheist or agnostic, Soros has announced a vision of a secular “open society.” However, his agenda of drug legalization has remained largely hidden from public view during the current campaign.

    While Soros may not want to openly talk about what he would expect out of a Kerry Administration, his allies have obviously been giving it much thought.

    At the 2004 conference of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance was asked about his association with Soros and the billionaire’s attempt to put John Kerry in the White House. The questioner asked, “Are we going to get some Supreme Court justices out this?” Nadelmann modestly answered, “We will see,” and cautioned that it may be difficult to deliver “all the goods.”

    This is critical because the U.S. Supreme Court is already considering the matter of the several U.S. states that have laws on the books permitting some form of “medical marijuana” use, a violation of federal law, and could return to the subject in the future. The Court is expected to rule by June 2005 on a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision, challenged by the Bush administration, that bars federal agents from interfering with the growing and use of marijuana by two women in California.

    Hollywood has already been captured by the illegal drug lobby.

    At the 2004 NORML conference, Allen St. Pierre of the NORML Foundation described how various U.S. television programs “have previewed marijuana in a way ultimately positive.” He named them as ER, Chicago Hope, the Practice, Sybil, Murphy Brown, Sports Night, Becker, West Wing, Roseanne, Sex in the City, Six Feet Under, Whoopi, Montel, That 70s Show, and the Larry David Show. “These shows are seen by tens of millions of people,” he said. “So that’s what it’s so crucial that we’re able to capture—and to demonstrate the change in—culture.”

    The challenge for the drug culture is now to capture the U.S. Government. Soros is their front man.

    Bloomberg.com quoted Strobe Talbott, U.S. deputy secretary of state from 1994 to 2001, as saying, “Whenever George Soros called and asked to meet, I would move heaven and earth to do so. I treated him like the foreign minister of another country because of all that he had done.” Even under the Bush Administration, Soros has been considered an important and influential figure. He gave a September 16, 2003, speech at the State Department on “America in the Global Community: Building Long-Term Security.”

    So think about the clout he would have if he almost single-handedly buys the White House for John Kerry and plays a role in the election of several new Senators.

    Rather than investigate the source of the Soros money, Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson has praised Soros for engineering the “privatization” of the Democratic Party through funding of the “527” political groups and bypassing what he calls an incompetent Democratic Party apparatus. At the far-left “Take Back America” forum in June, Soros was photographed greeting Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who introduced him to the group. She told the crowd that, “we need people like George Soros, who is fearless and willing to step up when it counts.” He stepped up with his money.

    However, Meyerson and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman have attacked House Speaker Dennis Hastert for raising questions about where Soros gets his money.

    A professed believer in democracy, Soros has used the “527” loophole in a campaign finance law that he promoted to restrict the political activities of “special interests.” He has set a record “for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle.” Those “special interests” turned out to be other people — not him. He has since poured millions of dollars into anti-Bush groups and voter registration drives, some marked by alleged fraud, for the Democratic Party.

    His commitment to democracy is never questioned. Typical of the pro-Soros media coverage was a USA Today story on June 1 that gave Soros credit for freeing millions of people from communism and “supporting democracy.” The story ignored his insider trading conviction. While Soros provided some funding to anti-communist groups during the Cold War, his career has been designed to make money and extend his influence over nations and people. Communism was a threat because it was not hospitable to his investments.

    An excellent example of how he operates is Kosovo. As indicated earlier, it is relevant to note that, after the Soros-supported war on Kosovo, a province of Yugoslavia, a Soros fund announced in 2000 that it was investing $150 million — with loan guarantees from the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation — in the Balkans. It was called the “Southeast Europe Equity Fund.” By 2002, the OPIC-supported size of the investment had risen to $200 million and OPIC announced that Soros Investment Capital, Ltd. Fund Yugoslavia had acquired a controlling stake in Eksimbanka, a private commercial bank in Serbia, and had financed the start-up of Serbia Broadband Networks, the leading cable television and broadband services company in Serbia.

    What’s more, his “open society” doesn’t extend to himself. He unregulated “hedge funds,” open only to the super rich, are beyond public scrutiny or the interest of the press. In a curious chapter of his career, he reportedly invested in an energy company run by George W. Bush, in an unsuccessful attempt to buy influence with the Bush family.

    As noted, in another curious development, the global capitalist has become a global socialist advocating a global tax, known as the Tobin Tax, on the means by which he exploited the global capitalist system and became rich – international currency speculation and manipulation. Soros has declared that the Tobin Tax is a “valid suggestion” for raising international revenue and that opposition to implementing the tax can be overcome. What has not been reported is that Thomas Palley, the director of the Globalization Reform Project at Soros’ Open Society Institute, was a featured speaker at a January 2003 event in Washington, D.C. to discuss how to implement the tax.

    “He made his money the old-fashioned way, on Wall Street,” wrote Post columnist Harold Meyerson. In fact, he made his money through investment techniques that are not available to ordinary investors, and his financial interventions can affect nations and their economies.

    Soros claims that the “527” organizations he funds “file detailed and frequent reports with government regulators.” On the January 9 NOW With Bill Moyers program on PBS, Charles Lewis of the Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity argued that while Soros was funding 527 groups, Soros was disclosing these contributions and that the money could be tracked.

    Again, that begs the question of where he gets his money.

    His use of that loophole — in a law that he promoted to restrict the influence of outside “special interests” on political campaigns — is suspicious and curious on its face. Equally curious, Soros claims that the Bush Administration’s reaction to 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq caused him to spend millions of dollars through these “527” organizations to defeat Bush. However, Soros favored the Clinton Administration’s preemptive attack on Yugoslavia, in the absence of any threat to the U.S. and without U.S. Congressional authorization.

    While Soros runs around the country talking about defeating Bush, mostly because of his Iraq policy, he is using his money to target other candidates who have prosecuted the war on drugs.

    The pro-Soros national media have refused to examine the implications of a ruling by New York State Supreme Court Justice Bernard Malone. He ruled that it was improper for the Soros-backed Working Families Party to get involvement in a Democratic primary for District Attorney and he referred the case to local prosecutors and New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for a possible criminal investigation. Thanks to the money provided by Soros, David Soares defeated incumbent District Attorney Paul Clyne in the Democratic primary. At the time of Clyne’s defeat, Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance Network said he was proud that his group had “contributed to this race” and that “what happened in Albany” has “national resonance.” That suggested to some that Soros, if he is successful in putting John Kerry in the White House, would change the nation’s anti-drug policy.

    The Criminals Lobby

    Soros, who lives in New York, has also contributed $150,000 to a California ballot measure, proposition 66, to overturn the three-strikes law, which mandates prison terms of 25-years-to-life for defendants convicted of a third felony. The ballot measure is opposed by the state’s district attorneys and law enforcement agencies.

    In other unsavory connections, a Soros grant was given to Linda Evans, who was pardoned by Bill Clinton for her involvement in the Weather Underground terrorist group. The Weather Underground was involved in the 1981 Brinks robbery, in which three murders were committed, and a series of bombings, including the bombing of the U.S. Capitol in November 1983.

    The Baltimore, Maryland, branch of the OSI on May 12 hosted Bernardine Dohrn, another former member of the Weather Underground who once expressed solidarity with mass murderer Charles Manson, at a forum on criminal justice issues. Speaking to a Weather Underground “war council” in Michigan in 1969, Dohrn gave a three-fingered “fork salute” to Manson. As noted by Ami Naramor of The Claremont Institute, “Calling Manson’s victims the ‘Tate Eight,’ Dohrn gloated over the fact that actress Sharon Tate, who was pregnant at the time, had been stabbed with a fork in her womb. ‘Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!'” Dohrn, now an associate professor and director at Northwestern University’s Children and Justice Center, was a member of the advisory committee of the “children’s rights watch” project of Human Rights Watch, funded by Soros.

    Not coincidentally, the drug culture has embraced the Weather Underground. High Times magazine has called David Gilbert, a Weather Underground member now in prison, an “anti-imperialist political prisoner” and has hailed his book, No Surrender. High Times says Gilbert works behind bars for “prisoners’ rights” – a favorite cause of Soros.

    The latest development is creation of “Cannabis Consumers,” a bizarre organization of out-of-the-closet illegal pot smokers, formed to celebrate and glorify the drug. Director Mikki Norris, who says her group received a grant from the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance, says, “we honor George Soros.”

    The Soros-supported Drug Policy Alliance supports “marijuana clubs” currently dispensing the drug, supposedly on “medical” grounds. The federal government has tried to close down these clubs—a policy that could change if Soros gains access to and influence over the White House. Several states have passed “medical marijuana” initiatives, funded by Soros, attempting to provide the drug under the cover of treating illnesses. But the American people have been kept in the dark about whether the Soros campaign to weaken drug laws would be embraced and implemented on a national basis by a Kerry Administration.

    One of the few reporters to question the Soros agenda is John Berlau of Insight magazine, who asked whether Soros would benefit financially from his huge expenditures on political activity. Michael Vachon, the spokesman for Soros Fund Management in New York City, said, “I have no faith in the ability or desire of Insight magazine to portray George Soros’ activities in an unbiased manner.” Pressed, he said, “There’s no relationship between the policy prescriptions George Soros recommends and his own financial holdings. He doesn’t make policy recommendations to increase his own personal wealth. That’s not what motivates him.”

    There can be no doubt, however, that if the Soros plan for drug legalization goes forward, there would have to be an official infrastructure in place to finance drug production and distribution and handle the enormous profits that will be made from legalization. Legalization will not eliminate drug profits, it will only transfer some of them to government and “legitimate” industries. Soros could be poised to invest in those industries and companies.

    He is laying the groundwork for the creation of a system under which government and corporations would legalize, dispense and advertise hard drugs, much like tobacco or alcohol, and supply addicts with needles and drug paraphernalia. In effect, Soros appears to be financing drug legalization for the purpose of creating a new market for federal payments to underwrite drug purchases for addicts. Soros appears to favor an indoor version of “Needle Park,” where addicts come to government offices to inject or smoke their drugs at taxpayer expense.

    His position is also reflected in his funding of the ACLU, which itself favors the legalization of all drugs—even heroin and crack cocaine—and opposes virtually all measures taken to curtail drug use. In another example of its extremist approach, the group has rejected funds from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and participation in the Combined Federal Campaign, because acceptance of the money would require adopting measures to make sure it does not employ terrorists or support terrorist activity.

    Soros hired Aryeh Neier as president of his Open Society Institute (OSI) in 1993. Neier worked for the ACLU for 15 years, including eight as national director.

    Typically, Soros and his cronies present the current “war on drugs” as draconian, a huge waste of money and a threat to civil liberties. Legalization is then presented, usually couched in terms of reducing the harm associated with illegal use and procurement of drugs. The audience is never presented with a third option—eradication of drug crops at home and abroad, an intensified military/intelligence effort against drug lords abroad, tougher sentences for users and dealers, and more drug testing.

    In 1995, Soros made a major contribution to the Council on Foreign Relations, which two years later, under the leadership of Mathea Falco, released a comprehensive report on U.S. international drug control strategy, entitled, Rethinking International Drug Control. However, A.M. Rosenthal of the New York Times, who participated in the task force that drafted the report, declined to endorse it, saying that it “is so negative in substance and tone about United States efforts to stem drug use, production and distribution that it amounts to an invitation to drop those efforts…”

    Soros clearly has his sights set on global policy on drugs. Soros was a signer of a 1998 letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urging a radical revamping of global anti-drug policies. Another signer was Morton H. Halperin, a former Department of Defense and National Security Council Official.

    In a typical laudatory article about Soros, USA Today author Rick Hampson made a brief reference to his belief in “liberalized drug laws.” Nothing was said, however, about how Soros has managed to liberalize or weaken those laws across the country, and how he has his sights set on national anti-drug policy. The National District Attorneys Association says that since 1996 “incremental changes in state drug laws have continued at an alarming rate across our nation” and they are designed to “ultimately legalize drugs.” Soros was identified in this report as one of the wealthy individuals behind this “very well financed” drug legalization movement that is “highly adept at manipulating the media.”

    In an October 18 Newsweek story, “Can a Billionaire Beat Bush?” writer Marcus Mabry said that Soros will “be there” even if Bush wins, ready to “build a new left…” Soros and other ” wealthy progressives,” he says, “will set about assembling the infrastructure,” including think tanks, foundations, and civic groups, of this “new left.”

    But Soros has already done this. The late left-wing writer, Walt Contreras Sheasby, noted that the Soros influence “is one of those hushed secrets inside the left…” and that he has subsidized “many of the activist groups, luminaries and publications of the American left…”

    Mabry completely ignored his pro-drug legalization agenda and erroneously claimed that his involvement in this year’s presidential campaign is “his first significant involvement in American electoral politics.” Mabry ignored Soros’s funding of at least 19 initiatives to weaken drug laws.

    Journalists carefully conceal their own conflicts of interest. On the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) NOW With Bill Moyers program on January 9 of this year, Moyers interviewed Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity about the big money supporting the presidential candidates. But little time and attention was paid to how Soros was trying to buy the White House and pouring millions of dollars into groups such as MoveOn.org to bring this about. Moyers, former press secretary to President Lyndon Johnson, failed to tell his viewers that he is on the board of Soros’ Open Society Institute and that it has funneled $1.7 million into Lewis and his Center for Public Integrity. Moyers had conducted and aired an interview with Soros on September 12, 2003, where he declared, “The Republican Party has been captured by a bunch of extremists…” Soros was presented as an opponent of unchecked capitalism and a supporter of democracy and nation-building abroad.

    The power of the Soros-supported media network was demonstrated in mid-October when a controversy emerged over Sinclair Broadcasting airing parts of Stolen Honor, a film raising questions about the detrimental impact of John Kerry’s 1971 anti-war testimony on U.S. Vietnam POWs being held by the communists. Kerry had branded U.S. soldiers as war criminals, and POWs interviewed in Stolen Honor said this resulted in more torture to them. The Democratic Party, the Kerry campaign, and various groups denounced Sinclair for planning to air Stolen Honor. MediaChannel.org, Common Cause, the Alliance for Better Campaigns, Media Access Project, Media for Democracy, and the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ held an anti-Sinclair news conference. They denounced Sinclair for allegedly abusing the public airwaves by planning to air “propaganda.” All of these organizations — except for the possible exception of the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ — are funded by Soros.

    Media Matters, a left-wing media watchdog group that was also pressuring Sinclair to abandon plans to air the testimony of the former POWs, was “developed” with help from the Center for American Progress, funded by Soros.

    The attack on Sinclair had the effect of diverting attention away from the extensive and controversial media connections of Soros, his foundations, and the organizations they subsidize, and legitimate questions about the Soros-supported candidate John Kerry. These groups – and the many prominent journalists who serve on their boards – make Sinclair look penny ante.

    Pro-Soros media coverage dates back many years and continues to the present day, as detailed in this report. In 1996, Dan Rather’s CBS Evening News highlighted him as a philanthropist and humanitarian, someone who had made a fortune but was now making a difference. The story by correspondent Anthony Mason ignored his commitment to legalization of drugs.

    That same year, Judith Miller of the New York Times wrote that he was “bringing his philanthropy home.” While she made a brief reference to his drug legalization agenda, the headline over the piece said he was committed to “social justice.” His close adviser, Aryeh Neier, a longtime ACLU official, was described merely as a “human rights advocate.”

    On the far left, The Nation magazine and its Nation Institute have been supported by OSI. The magazine published a generally flattering piece about the Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

    In 1994 Soros received the Burton Benjamin Memorial Award at an International Press Freedom Awards dinner, sponsored by the Committee to Protect Journalists. Five years earlier, OSI gave 4 grants, totaling $220,000, to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Benjamin was senior executive producer at CBS News and served briefly as chair of the Committee to Protect Journalists before his death in 1988.

    The Soros media connections include:

    An investor in the Times Mirror Company, Soros funded the Project on Media Ownership, headed by Professor Mark Crispin Miller at New York University. Whose purpose was expose “media concentration.” A total of $300,000 over several years came from George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI). In 1999, a survey commissioned by the Project on Media Ownership and the Benton Foundation and paid for by OSI found that seventy-nine percent of adults would favor a law requiring commercial broadcasters to pay 5 percent of their revenues into a fund for public broadcasting.

    Eric Alterman of The Nation has hailed Soros for spending millions on “education campaigns with America Coming Together, voter mobilization drives with MoveOn.org and research activities with the Center for American Progress (CAP)–where I am a senior fellow…” Alterman says his own magazine, The Nation, is viewed as out of the mainstream in part because of “the continued appearance in its pages of a long-time Stalinist communist, Alexander Cockburn, whose unabashed hatred for both America and Israel … tarnish the reputation of its otherwise serious contributors.” Alterman’s mentor, I.F. Stone, was a paid agent of the KGB and a Stalinist.

    In the Los Angeles Times Book Review, Orville Schell said that Soros had written a “succinct and well-reasoned book,” The Bubble of American Supremacy, which ought “to provide a welcome template for how the candidates might begin to think their way through to a more coherent view of America’s place in the world.” Soros had spoken on March 3 at the Goldman Forum on the Press and Foreign Affairs, sponsored by UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism. The event was a conversation between Soros and Journalism Dean Orville Schell.

    OSI gave $60,000 to the Independent Media Institute , whose executive director, Don Hazen, is a former publisher of Mother Jones. Hazen has called Soros a “progressive philanthropist.” A story carried by the Independent Media Institute on its AlterNet project says Soros “believes in democracy, positive international relations and effective strategies to reduce poverty, among other things.”

    OSI gave a $75,000 grant to the Center for Investigative Reporting. The group’s board of advisers includes prominent journalists.

    OSI gave $246,528 to the Center for Public Integrity, headed by former CBS News producer Charles Lewis, “to support the continuing expansion of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.” A total of $1 million went for “the Global Access Project.” In total, it is estimated that the group has received $1.7 from Soros.

    OSI gave $200,000 to the Fund for Investigative Journalism. This group, too, features prominent journalists on its board.

    OSI’s “Network Media Program” gave $22,157 to Investigative Reporters & Editors.

    Soros Foundations have provided $160,000 to MediaChannel.org, a so-called “media issues supersite, featuring criticism, breaking news, and investigative reporting from hundreds of organizations worldwide.” The executive editor is Danny Schecter, a former news program producer and investigative reporter at CNN and ABC. It was created by Globalvision News Network, whose board includes “Senior executives from the world’s leading media firms.”

    OSI has contributed $70,000 toward the far-left Independent Media Center, or Indymedia, known as an “independent newsgathering collective,” whose servers were seized by a federal law enforcement agency on October 7. The action was apparently related to an investigation into international terrorism, kidnapping or money laundering.

    OSI provided $600,000 to the Media Access Project, a so-called telecommunications public interest law firm critical of conservative influence in the major media.

    OSI provide $30,000 to the Media Awareness Project, a “worldwide network dedicated to drug policy reform” and promoting “balanced media coverage” of the drug issue.

    OSI provided $200,000 to the Association for Progressive Communications, “an international network…working for peace, human rights, development and protection of the environment…”

    Considering all of the money that Soros or his organizations have provided to news organizations, it should be no surprise to learn that journalists love him. His web site advises visitors to “read about George Soros from The New York Times, USA Today, Time Magazine, et al.,” all of which are reprinted on the site and highly favorable. His new web site features several complimentary statements about Soros from articles in the press and media figures.

    Either the media fear his wealth and power, they favor his positions on the issues, or they want access to his money. The people have a right to know.

  65. Wbboei, Look at this!
    Part1

    The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power

    Special Report | By Cliff Kincaid | October 27, 2004

    Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time.

    How many times have we heard or read stories about Vice President Dick Cheney’s old firm, Halliburton, and its alleged influence over the government? A public company with more than 100,000 employees, Halliburton had revenues of $13 billion in 2001. However, George Soros is a human Halliburton who will be in a position if John Kerry is elected president to pull the strings. He is reportedly worth $7.2 billion. But his role in buying the White House for John Kerry has received generally positive coverage. Soros, we’re told, is a “philanthropist” committed to “democracy.” The Republican Party, by contrast, is supposed to be run by fat cats and Big Business, such as those at Halliburton.

    Soros may be the biggest political fat cat of all time. Convicted in France of insider trading, Soros specializes in weakening or collapsing the currencies of entire nations for his own selfish interests. He is known as the man who broke the Bank of England. His power is such that his statements alone can cause currencies to go up or down. Other people suffer so he can get rich. But journalists don’t want to examine the questionable means by which he achieved his wealth because they share his goal of electing Kerry and the Democrats. Curiously, once he made his fortune he became a global socialist, endorsing global taxes on the very means he employed to get rich – international currency speculation and manipulation.

    The media consistently ignore the fact that this so-called “philanthropist” has had several brushes with the law as he has laid siege to national economies and currencies. Hard-working U.S. businessmen understand how Soros has made his money. In protesting a Soros appearance hosted by the University of Toledo, Edwin J. Nagle III, president and CEO of the Nagle Companies, highlighted “the immoral and unethical means by which he achieved his wealth.” He added, “I certainly didn’t see included in his bio the stories on how he collapsed whole country’s currencies for his own self interests so that many may suffer.”

    Here, Soros signed a consent decree in United States District Court, in a Securities and Exchange Commission case involving stock manipulation, and was fined $75,000 by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for holding positions “in excess of speculative limits.” Stories about Soros rarely, if ever, mention any of his legal problems.

    Despite his vision of an “open society,” he operates an unregulated “hedge fund,” open only to the super-rich, and is currently fighting a proposal from the Bush-appointed chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate and monitor these offshore entities. House Speaker Dennis Hastert said on national television that no one really knows where the Soros money comes from.

    Soros has categorically denied receiving money from drug cartels or any form of criminal activity. The fact remains, however, that at least some of his financial operations have been based offshore, in banking and financial centers that are widely reported to be considered conducive to money-laundering. The Soros fund is based in the Netherlands Antilles, a self-governing federation of five Caribbean islands. A CIA factbook describes the region as “a transshipment point for South American drugs bound for the US and Europe; money-laundering center.”

    Soros reportedly purchased a major stake in one of Colombia’s biggest banks, at a time when the Drug Enforcement Administration, in its study, “Colombian Economic Reform: The Impact on Drug Money Laundering within the Colombian Economy,” was documenting how major drug kingpins were taking advantage of the liberalization of the economy to put illicit drug revenue into legitimate businesses. The report stated: “U.S. and Colombian Government authorities have evidence of drug proceeds being deposited in every major bank in Colombia… A Colombian source indicated that many banks and businesses are owned covertly by principal members of the Cali cartel.”

    His complex web of financial interests, companies and foundations makes Halliburton look like a Mom & Pop operation.

    The charge we read in the press is that Halliburton gets government contracts and makes money from the Iraq war. Far less attention has been paid to the fact that the company has lost 54 employees as a result of that war. Nobody in the press mentions that Soros profits from the Kosovo war, which he supported as a preemptive strike against Yugoslavia, because he runs an investment fund that now does business there. Even though he pays big bucks to advertise his opposition to the Bush policy of democracy-building in Iraq, reporters still describe him as someone with a reputation for building democracy abroad.

    However, his position on Iraq may be a diversion from the real reason he wants to get rid of Bush – his longstanding desire to adopt a national “retreat and defeat” approach to the drug problem.

    Soros’ long-time goal has been to subvert the national anti-drug policy of the U.S. Government, to move away from the use of national and global law enforcement resources against the drug trade. He calls this “harm reduction,” meaning that criminal activity associated with the use of drugs will supposedly be reduced if the government takes over the drug trade and provides drugs and drug paraphernalia, including needles, to addicts. But law enforcement would still be required to keep drugs out of the hands of children. If this is not the case, then Soros intends to allow substances such as marijuana, cocaine and heroin to be distributed to children.

    If Soros is able to capture the White House and implement his drug policy nationally, millions more people could be led to experiment with dangerous psychoactive substances and damage themselves, their families, and society. Even marijuana, depicted by the media as a “soft” drug, has extremely negative consequences. In the new book, “Marijuana and Madness,” one of the editors, Prof. Robin Murray of Britain’s Institute of Psychiatry, cites studies and evidence from around the world, some of it going back 40 years, linking the use of marijuana to mental illnesses, including schizophrenia and psychosis.

    In a recent article about his growing financial and political clout, the Washington Post sanitized Soros by claiming that he “funded efforts to reform campaign laws, decriminalize marijuana and change [the] criminal justice system.” All of that is misleading, if not false. His “reform” of campaign laws left a loophole that will enable him to set a record “for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle,” to quote the Post itself. So where are the investigative stories into Soros and his agenda?

    A key part of the Soros agenda — his proposed surrender in the war on drugs — has been carefully concealed from the American people during this campaign. The war on Islamic terrorism is front and center, to be sure, but the war on drugs is still of major concern to millions of Americans, especially parents fearful of the influence of Hollywood and the drug culture.

    A Soros role in formulating national drug policy is worthy of special press attention because his pro-drug legalization campaign has been considered at odds with the vast majority of Republicans and Democrats who share the view that legalization would make the drug problem far worse.

    In the current campaign, however, a major transformation has taken place. Soros is said to have “privatized” or replaced the Democratic Party by subsidizing many different liberal-left organizations that comprise its political base and creating new ones, the “527” organizations.

    Among the candidates who ran for the Democratic presidential nomination, Soros financially supported John Kerry, Wesley Clark, Senator Bob Graham, and Howard Dean. He has been praised by Senator Hillary Clinton and contributed to her Senate campaign and political action committee. He has also contributed to the political campaigns of Democratic Senators Tom Daschle, Carl Levin, John Corzine, Mary Landrieu, Debbie Stabenow, Charles Schumer, Joseph Biden, Patrick Leahy, Paul Sarbanes, Thomas Harkin, and Barbara Boxer. In 2002, Soros funded Al Gore for president and contributed $153,000 in “soft money” to the Democratic National Committee. Soros, who is also very close to Bill Clinton, was described by Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott as a “national treasure.”

    It is significant that Soros and two of his sons have contributed $2000 each to Brad Carson, the Democratic Senate candidate in Oklahoma. His Republican opponent, Dr. Tom Coburn, was a member of the U.S. House for six years, where he developed a reputation as a leading opponent of efforts to legalize marijuana and fund needle exchange programs that facilitate illicit drug use. Coburn exposed Soros-style “harm reduction” as a backdoor approach to legalization of illicit drugs. Coburn was also a strong supporter of drug testing and even fought to require drug testing of members of Congress. Coburn and his staff voluntarily underwent drug testing. If elected to the Senate, say his supporters, Coburn would be the chamber’s leading voice for protecting children from the dangers of drug abuse and a scientific voice of reason against the Soros-supported movement that seeks to legalize drugs. It’s no wonder that Soros and his sons have targeted Coburn for defeat.

    Soros has also contributed to Barack Obama, running for the Senate as a Democrat from Illinois. CNSNews.com reports that, “Not only did Soros donate to Obama’s campaign, but four other family members – Jennifer, sons Jonathan and Robert and wife Susan – did as well. Because of a special provision campaign finance laws, the Soroses were able to give a collective $60,000 to Obama during his primary challenge.”

    Soros was described by the New Yorker as close to Harold Ickes, a former Clinton deputy chief of staff who runs the Media Fund, one of many Soros-supported “527” groups. Soros described him as a “real pro.”

    Away from the scrutiny or even the notice of the establishment press, Soros has emerged as a counter-culture hero.

    The drug culture magazine, Heads, calls him “Daddy Weedbucks,” ran an excerpt from his book, Soros on Soros, and declared that “he drops the bucks exactly where they’re needed.” The September-October issue of the drug culture magazine High Times recognizes the stakes, noting that there are “ten reasons to get rid of Bush” and that one is that there will be “No legalization of pot” under Bush. The implication of the article was that the situation would change under Kerry.

    None of this is being reported, however, by the major media.

    His partner, Peter Lewis, whitewashed by the Post as “one of the country’s 10 most generous philanthropists,” was actually arrested in New Zealand for “importing” drugs, including hashish and marijuana.

  66. Wbboie

    Part2

    The Human Halliburton

    The media call him a billionaire “philanthropist” who “promotes democracy” and “democratic institutions” abroad. He has been invited to address the National Press Club on October 28, 2004, just before the election. But admitted marijuana user George Soros, who says he tried marijuana “and enjoyed it,” doesn’t just “give” money away. He spends money for a purpose because he wants to remake America and the world. He is depicted in a recent lengthy New Yorker article by Jane Mayer as well-intentioned, not that concerned about money, the victim of scurrilous attacks, and someone who simply wants his “ideas” to “be heard.” This is typical of the fawning coverage of Soros. Mayer made a brief reference to his collaborator, Peter B. Lewis, and his funding of “efforts to decriminalize marijuana,” but she failed to explore how Soros is himself committed to legalizing dangerous drugs. Mayer did disclose that a meeting was held in August, after the Democratic Party convention, of what critics call a “billionaire conspiracy” to defeat Bush. Soros and Lewis were among the participants in the meeting, which was supposed to be kept private.

    Soros’ strong opposition to President Bush’s effort to create democratic institutions in Iraq contradicts his alleged support for democracy. But the media don’t point this out because they oppose Bush’s Iraq policy. Mayer, who interviewed the billionaire at length, suggests that Soros may be “looking for influence [in a Kerry Administration] to get out of Iraq” but that to pursue such an objective in exchange for his financial support to the candidate might be deemed “not appropriate” by some observers.

    It would be unwise for the public to dismiss the idea that he would not demand implementation of his other “ideas,” including drug legalization.

    Sometimes described as an atheist or agnostic, Soros has announced a vision of a secular “open society.” However, his agenda of drug legalization has remained largely hidden from public view during the current campaign.

    While Soros may not want to openly talk about what he would expect out of a Kerry Administration, his allies have obviously been giving it much thought.

    At the 2004 conference of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance was asked about his association with Soros and the billionaire’s attempt to put John Kerry in the White House. The questioner asked, “Are we going to get some Supreme Court justices out this?” Nadelmann modestly answered, “We will see,” and cautioned that it may be difficult to deliver “all the goods.”

    This is critical because the U.S. Supreme Court is already considering the matter of the several U.S. states that have laws on the books permitting some form of “medical marijuana” use, a violation of federal law, and could return to the subject in the future. The Court is expected to rule by June 2005 on a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision, challenged by the Bush administration, that bars federal agents from interfering with the growing and use of marijuana by two women in California.

    Hollywood has already been captured by the illegal drug lobby.

    At the 2004 NORML conference, Allen St. Pierre of the NORML Foundation described how various U.S. television programs “have previewed marijuana in a way ultimately positive.” He named them as ER, Chicago Hope, the Practice, Sybil, Murphy Brown, Sports Night, Becker, West Wing, Roseanne, Sex in the City, Six Feet Under, Whoopi, Montel, That 70s Show, and the Larry David Show. “These shows are seen by tens of millions of people,” he said. “So that’s what it’s so crucial that we’re able to capture—and to demonstrate the change in—culture.”

    The challenge for the drug culture is now to capture the U.S. Government. Soros is their front man.

    Bloomberg.com quoted Strobe Talbott, U.S. deputy secretary of state from 1994 to 2001, as saying, “Whenever George Soros called and asked to meet, I would move heaven and earth to do so. I treated him like the foreign minister of another country because of all that he had done.” Even under the Bush Administration, Soros has been considered an important and influential figure. He gave a September 16, 2003, speech at the State Department on “America in the Global Community: Building Long-Term Security.”

    So think about the clout he would have if he almost single-handedly buys the White House for John Kerry and plays a role in the election of several new Senators.

    Rather than investigate the source of the Soros money, Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson has praised Soros for engineering the “privatization” of the Democratic Party through funding of the “527” political groups and bypassing what he calls an incompetent Democratic Party apparatus. At the far-left “Take Back America” forum in June, Soros was photographed greeting Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who introduced him to the group. She told the crowd that, “we need people like George Soros, who is fearless and willing to step up when it counts.” He stepped up with his money.

    However, Meyerson and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman have attacked House Speaker Dennis Hastert for raising questions about where Soros gets his money.

    A professed believer in democracy, Soros has used the “527” loophole in a campaign finance law that he promoted to restrict the political activities of “special interests.” He has set a record “for the most money donated by an individual in an election cycle.” Those “special interests” turned out to be other people — not him. He has since poured millions of dollars into anti-Bush groups and voter registration drives, some marked by alleged fraud, for the Democratic Party.

    His commitment to democracy is never questioned. Typical of the pro-Soros media coverage was a USA Today story on June 1 that gave Soros credit for freeing millions of people from communism and “supporting democracy.” The story ignored his insider trading conviction. While Soros provided some funding to anti-communist groups during the Cold War, his career has been designed to make money and extend his influence over nations and people. Communism was a threat because it was not hospitable to his investments.

    An excellent example of how he operates is Kosovo. As indicated earlier, it is relevant to note that, after the Soros-supported war on Kosovo, a province of Yugoslavia, a Soros fund announced in 2000 that it was investing $150 million — with loan guarantees from the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation — in the Balkans. It was called the “Southeast Europe Equity Fund.” By 2002, the OPIC-supported size of the investment had risen to $200 million and OPIC announced that Soros Investment Capital, Ltd. Fund Yugoslavia had acquired a controlling stake in Eksimbanka, a private commercial bank in Serbia, and had financed the start-up of Serbia Broadband Networks, the leading cable television and broadband services company in Serbia.

    What’s more, his “open society” doesn’t extend to himself. He unregulated “hedge funds,” open only to the super rich, are beyond public scrutiny or the interest of the press. In a curious chapter of his career, he reportedly invested in an energy company run by George W. Bush, in an unsuccessful attempt to buy influence with the Bush family.

    As noted, in another curious development, the global capitalist has become a global socialist advocating a global tax, known as the Tobin Tax, on the means by which he exploited the global capitalist system and became rich – international currency speculation and manipulation. Soros has declared that the Tobin Tax is a “valid suggestion” for raising international revenue and that opposition to implementing the tax can be overcome. What has not been reported is that Thomas Palley, the director of the Globalization Reform Project at Soros’ Open Society Institute, was a featured speaker at a January 2003 event in Washington, D.C. to discuss how to implement the tax.

    “He made his money the old-fashioned way, on Wall Street,” wrote Post columnist Harold Meyerson. In fact, he made his money through investment techniques that are not available to ordinary investors, and his financial interventions can affect nations and their economies.

    Soros claims that the “527” organizations he funds “file detailed and frequent reports with government regulators.” On the January 9 NOW With Bill Moyers program on PBS, Charles Lewis of the Soros-funded Center for Public Integrity argued that while Soros was funding 527 groups, Soros was disclosing these contributions and that the money could be tracked.

    Again, that begs the question of where he gets his money.

    His use of that loophole — in a law that he promoted to restrict the influence of outside “special interests” on political campaigns — is suspicious and curious on its face. Equally curious, Soros claims that the Bush Administration’s reaction to 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq caused him to spend millions of dollars through these “527” organizations to defeat Bush. However, Soros favored the Clinton Administration’s preemptive attack on Yugoslavia, in the absence of any threat to the U.S. and without U.S. Congressional authorization.

    While Soros runs around the country talking about defeating Bush, mostly because of his Iraq policy, he is using his money to target other candidates who have prosecuted the war on drugs.

    The pro-Soros national media have refused to examine the implications of a ruling by New York State Supreme Court Justice Bernard Malone. He ruled that it was improper for the Soros-backed Working Families Party to get involvement in a Democratic primary for District Attorney and he referred the case to local prosecutors and New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for a possible criminal investigation. Thanks to the money provided by Soros, David Soares defeated incumbent District Attorney Paul Clyne in the Democratic primary. At the time of Clyne’s defeat, Ethan Nadelmann of the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance Network said he was proud that his group had “contributed to this race” and that “what happened in Albany” has “national resonance.” That suggested to some that Soros, if he is successful in putting John Kerry in the White House, would change the nation’s anti-drug policy.

  67. wbboei,
    Part 3

    The Criminals Lobby

    Soros, who lives in New York, has also contributed $150,000 to a California ballot measure, proposition 66, to overturn the three-strikes law, which mandates prison terms of 25-years-to-life for defendants convicted of a third felony. The ballot measure is opposed by the state’s district attorneys and law enforcement agencies.

    In other unsavory connections, a Soros grant was given to Linda Evans, who was pardoned by Bill Clinton for her involvement in the Weather Underground terrorist group. The Weather Underground was involved in the 1981 Brinks robbery, in which three murders were committed, and a series of bombings, including the bombing of the U.S. Capitol in November 1983.

    The Baltimore, Maryland, branch of the OSI on May 12 hosted Bernardine Dohrn, another former member of the Weather Underground who once expressed solidarity with mass murderer Charles Manson, at a forum on criminal justice issues. Speaking to a Weather Underground “war council” in Michigan in 1969, Dohrn gave a three-fingered “fork salute” to Manson. As noted by Ami Naramor of The Claremont Institute, “Calling Manson’s victims the ‘Tate Eight,’ Dohrn gloated over the fact that actress Sharon Tate, who was pregnant at the time, had been stabbed with a fork in her womb. ‘Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!'” Dohrn, now an associate professor and director at Northwestern University’s Children and Justice Center, was a member of the advisory committee of the “children’s rights watch” project of Human Rights Watch, funded by Soros.

    Not coincidentally, the drug culture has embraced the Weather Underground. High Times magazine has called David Gilbert, a Weather Underground member now in prison, an “anti-imperialist political prisoner” and has hailed his book, No Surrender. High Times says Gilbert works behind bars for “prisoners’ rights” – a favorite cause of Soros.

    The latest development is creation of “Cannabis Consumers,” a bizarre organization of out-of-the-closet illegal pot smokers, formed to celebrate and glorify the drug. Director Mikki Norris, who says her group received a grant from the Soros-funded Drug Policy Alliance, says, “we honor George Soros.”

    The Soros-supported Drug Policy Alliance supports “marijuana clubs” currently dispensing the drug, supposedly on “medical” grounds. The federal government has tried to close down these clubs—a policy that could change if Soros gains access to and influence over the White House. Several states have passed “medical marijuana” initiatives, funded by Soros, attempting to provide the drug under the cover of treating illnesses. But the American people have been kept in the dark about whether the Soros campaign to weaken drug laws would be embraced and implemented on a national basis by a Kerry Administration.

    One of the few reporters to question the Soros agenda is John Berlau of Insight magazine, who asked whether Soros would benefit financially from his huge expenditures on political activity. Michael Vachon, the spokesman for Soros Fund Management in New York City, said, “I have no faith in the ability or desire of Insight magazine to portray George Soros’ activities in an unbiased manner.” Pressed, he said, “There’s no relationship between the policy prescriptions George Soros recommends and his own financial holdings. He doesn’t make policy recommendations to increase his own personal wealth. That’s not what motivates him.”

    There can be no doubt, however, that if the Soros plan for drug legalization goes forward, there would have to be an official infrastructure in place to finance drug production and distribution and handle the enormous profits that will be made from legalization. Legalization will not eliminate drug profits, it will only transfer some of them to government and “legitimate” industries. Soros could be poised to invest in those industries and companies.

    He is laying the groundwork for the creation of a system under which government and corporations would legalize, dispense and advertise hard drugs, much like tobacco or alcohol, and supply addicts with needles and drug paraphernalia. In effect, Soros appears to be financing drug legalization for the purpose of creating a new market for federal payments to underwrite drug purchases for addicts. Soros appears to favor an indoor version of “Needle Park,” where addicts come to government offices to inject or smoke their drugs at taxpayer expense.

    His position is also reflected in his funding of the ACLU, which itself favors the legalization of all drugs—even heroin and crack cocaine—and opposes virtually all measures taken to curtail drug use. In another example of its extremist approach, the group has rejected funds from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, and participation in the Combined Federal Campaign, because acceptance of the money would require adopting measures to make sure it does not employ terrorists or support terrorist activity.

    Soros hired Aryeh Neier as president of his Open Society Institute (OSI) in 1993. Neier worked for the ACLU for 15 years, including eight as national director.

    Typically, Soros and his cronies present the current “war on drugs” as draconian, a huge waste of money and a threat to civil liberties. Legalization is then presented, usually couched in terms of reducing the harm associated with illegal use and procurement of drugs. The audience is never presented with a third option—eradication of drug crops at home and abroad, an intensified military/intelligence effort against drug lords abroad, tougher sentences for users and dealers, and more drug testing.

    In 1995, Soros made a major contribution to the Council on Foreign Relations, which two years later, under the leadership of Mathea Falco, released a comprehensive report on U.S. international drug control strategy, entitled, Rethinking International Drug Control. However, A.M. Rosenthal of the New York Times, who participated in the task force that drafted the report, declined to endorse it, saying that it “is so negative in substance and tone about United States efforts to stem drug use, production and distribution that it amounts to an invitation to drop those efforts…”

    Soros clearly has his sights set on global policy on drugs. Soros was a signer of a 1998 letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urging a radical revamping of global anti-drug policies. Another signer was Morton H. Halperin, a former Department of Defense and National Security Council Official.

    In a typical laudatory article about Soros, USA Today author Rick Hampson made a brief reference to his belief in “liberalized drug laws.” Nothing was said, however, about how Soros has managed to liberalize or weaken those laws across the country, and how he has his sights set on national anti-drug policy. The National District Attorneys Association says that since 1996 “incremental changes in state drug laws have continued at an alarming rate across our nation” and they are designed to “ultimately legalize drugs.” Soros was identified in this report as one of the wealthy individuals behind this “very well financed” drug legalization movement that is “highly adept at manipulating the media.”

    In an October 18 Newsweek story, “Can a Billionaire Beat Bush?” writer Marcus Mabry said that Soros will “be there” even if Bush wins, ready to “build a new left…” Soros and other ” wealthy progressives,” he says, “will set about assembling the infrastructure,” including think tanks, foundations, and civic groups, of this “new left.”

    But Soros has already done this. The late left-wing writer, Walt Contreras Sheasby, noted that the Soros influence “is one of those hushed secrets inside the left…” and that he has subsidized “many of the activist groups, luminaries and publications of the American left…”

    Mabry completely ignored his pro-drug legalization agenda and erroneously claimed that his involvement in this year’s presidential campaign is “his first significant involvement in American electoral politics.” Mabry ignored Soros’s funding of at least 19 initiatives to weaken drug laws.

    Journalists carefully conceal their own conflicts of interest. On the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) NOW With Bill Moyers program on January 9 of this year, Moyers interviewed Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity about the big money supporting the presidential candidates. But little time and attention was paid to how Soros was trying to buy the White House and pouring millions of dollars into groups such as MoveOn.org to bring this about. Moyers, former press secretary to President Lyndon Johnson, failed to tell his viewers that he is on the board of Soros’ Open Society Institute and that it has funneled $1.7 million into Lewis and his Center for Public Integrity. Moyers had conducted and aired an interview with Soros on September 12, 2003, where he declared, “The Republican Party has been captured by a bunch of extremists…” Soros was presented as an opponent of unchecked capitalism and a supporter of democracy and nation-building abroad.

    The power of the Soros-supported media network was demonstrated in mid-October when a controversy emerged over Sinclair Broadcasting airing parts of Stolen Honor, a film raising questions about the detrimental impact of John Kerry’s 1971 anti-war testimony on U.S. Vietnam POWs being held by the communists. Kerry had branded U.S. soldiers as war criminals, and POWs interviewed in Stolen Honor said this resulted in more torture to them. The Democratic Party, the Kerry campaign, and various groups denounced Sinclair for planning to air Stolen Honor. MediaChannel.org, Common Cause, the Alliance for Better Campaigns, Media Access Project, Media for Democracy, and the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ held an anti-Sinclair news conference. They denounced Sinclair for allegedly abusing the public airwaves by planning to air “propaganda.” All of these organizations — except for the possible exception of the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ — are funded by Soros.

    Media Matters, a left-wing media watchdog group that was also pressuring Sinclair to abandon plans to air the testimony of the former POWs, was “developed” with help from the Center for American Progress, funded by Soros.

    The attack on Sinclair had the effect of diverting attention away from the extensive and controversial media connections of Soros, his foundations, and the organizations they subsidize, and legitimate questions about the Soros-supported candidate John Kerry. These groups – and the many prominent journalists who serve on their boards – make Sinclair look penny ante.

    Pro-Soros media coverage dates back many years and continues to the present day, as detailed in this report. In 1996, Dan Rather’s CBS Evening News highlighted him as a philanthropist and humanitarian, someone who had made a fortune but was now making a difference. The story by correspondent Anthony Mason ignored his commitment to legalization of drugs.

    That same year, Judith Miller of the New York Times wrote that he was “bringing his philanthropy home.” While she made a brief reference to his drug legalization agenda, the headline over the piece said he was committed to “social justice.” His close adviser, Aryeh Neier, a longtime ACLU official, was described merely as a “human rights advocate.”

    On the far left, The Nation magazine and its Nation Institute have been supported by OSI. The magazine published a generally flattering piece about the Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

    In 1994 Soros received the Burton Benjamin Memorial Award at an International Press Freedom Awards dinner, sponsored by the Committee to Protect Journalists. Five years earlier, OSI gave 4 grants, totaling $220,000, to the Committee to Protect Journalists. Benjamin was senior executive producer at CBS News and served briefly as chair of the Committee to Protect Journalists before his death in 1988.

    The Soros media connections include:

    An investor in the Times Mirror Company, Soros funded the Project on Media Ownership, headed by Professor Mark Crispin Miller at New York University. Whose purpose was expose “media concentration.” A total of $300,000 over several years came from George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI). In 1999, a survey commissioned by the Project on Media Ownership and the Benton Foundation and paid for by OSI found that seventy-nine percent of adults would favor a law requiring commercial broadcasters to pay 5 percent of their revenues into a fund for public broadcasting.

    Eric Alterman of The Nation has hailed Soros for spending millions on “education campaigns

  68. wbboei,
    part 4

    The Soros media connections include:

    An investor in the Times Mirror Company, Soros funded the Project on Media Ownership, headed by Professor Mark Crispin Miller at New York University. Whose purpose was expose “media concentration.” A total of $300,000 over several years came from George Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI). In 1999, a survey commissioned by the Project on Media Ownership and the Benton Foundation and paid for by OSI found that seventy-nine percent of adults would favor a law requiring commercial broadcasters to pay 5 percent of their revenues into a fund for public broadcasting.

    Eric Alterman of The Nation has hailed Soros for spending millions on “education campaigns with America Coming Together, voter mobilization drives with MoveOn.org and research activities with the Center for American Progress (CAP)–where I am a senior fellow…” Alterman says his own magazine, The Nation, is viewed as out of the mainstream in part because of “the continued appearance in its pages of a long-time Stalinist communist, Alexander Cockburn, whose unabashed hatred for both America and Israel … tarnish the reputation of its otherwise serious contributors.” Alterman’s mentor, I.F. Stone, was a paid agent of the KGB and a Stalinist.

    In the Los Angeles Times Book Review, Orville Schell said that Soros had written a “succinct and well-reasoned book,” The Bubble of American Supremacy, which ought “to provide a welcome template for how the candidates might begin to think their way through to a more coherent view of America’s place in the world.” Soros had spoken on March 3 at the Goldman Forum on the Press and Foreign Affairs, sponsored by UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism. The event was a conversation between Soros and Journalism Dean Orville Schell.

    OSI gave $60,000 to the Independent Media Institute , whose executive director, Don Hazen, is a former publisher of Mother Jones. Hazen has called Soros a “progressive philanthropist.” A story carried by the Independent Media Institute on its AlterNet project says Soros “believes in democracy, positive international relations and effective strategies to reduce poverty, among other things.”

    OSI gave a $75,000 grant to the Center for Investigative Reporting. The group’s board of advisers includes prominent journalists.

    OSI gave $246,528 to the Center for Public Integrity, headed by former CBS News producer Charles Lewis, “to support the continuing expansion of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.” A total of $1 million went for “the Global Access Project.” In total, it is estimated that the group has received $1.7 from Soros.

    OSI gave $200,000 to the Fund for Investigative Journalism. This group, too, features prominent journalists on its board.

    OSI’s “Network Media Program” gave $22,157 to Investigative Reporters & Editors.

    Soros Foundations have provided $160,000 to MediaChannel.org, a so-called “media issues supersite, featuring criticism, breaking news, and investigative reporting from hundreds of organizations worldwide.” The executive editor is Danny Schecter, a former news program producer and investigative reporter at CNN and ABC. It was created by Globalvision News Network, whose board includes “Senior executives from the world’s leading media firms.”

    OSI has contributed $70,000 toward the far-left Independent Media Center, or Indymedia, known as an “independent newsgathering collective,” whose servers were seized by a federal law enforcement agency on October 7. The action was apparently related to an investigation into international terrorism, kidnapping or money laundering.

    OSI provided $600,000 to the Media Access Project, a so-called telecommunications public interest law firm critical of conservative influence in the major media.

    OSI provide $30,000 to the Media Awareness Project, a “worldwide network dedicated to drug policy reform” and promoting “balanced media coverage” of the drug issue.

    OSI provided $200,000 to the Association for Progressive Communications, “an international network…working for peace, human rights, development and protection of the environment…”

    Considering all of the money that Soros or his organizations have provided to news organizations, it should be no surprise to learn that journalists love him. His web site advises visitors to “read about George Soros from The New York Times, USA Today, Time Magazine, et al.,” all of which are reprinted on the site and highly favorable. His new web site features several complimentary statements about Soros from articles in the press and media figures.

    Either the media fear his wealth and power, they favor his positions on the issues, or they want access to his money. The people have a right to know.

    .

  69. I would like to have posted this on the DNC blog last year, they would have been pist.It kind of makes you scratch your head as it was Dean that introduced Obama to SOros. It is also quiet amazing that Obama has followed Bush’s policies right down the line. hmm, hmmm!

    Who Is Renting Howard Dean?

    by Anton Chaitkin and Scott Thompson

    Multi-billionaire speculator George Soros held a $1,000 per person private fundraiser for Howard Dean’s Presidential campaign over the Sept. 27-28 [2003] weekend at Soros’s mansion in Katonah, New York. After years of impoverishing Russia and Eastern European economies, looting raw materials, preying on currencies in the name of “philanthropy,” Soros is now moving millions of dollars into the U.S. Democratic Party. Soros and his allies hope to control the policy of the potential Democratic replacements for the now-imploding Republican Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld Administration, to keep “open season” for predatory imperial finance. Soros has, for the moment, fixed on Howard Dean for a candidate. But how does Dean fit the bill for Soros’s scheme of things?

    The most direct answer would be that the former Governor of Vermont is not actually a Democrat. Yes, he has repeatedly run for office under that party’s name; but if you ask someone attached to the Dean campaign about his politics, you will be told, not Democrat but “fiscal conservative”–as if that were a distinct party.

    This year Dean began stating opposition to some of the war policies of the Bush Administration. But Dean postures to the right of President Bush, in demanding Bush “take a much harder line on Iran and Saudi Arabia.” He throws in with the Cheney-Wolfowitz neo-conservatives setting up the Bush Administration’s next war, by claiming that Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Libya are fuelling Palestinian and other terrorism worldwide.

    – Safe for Wall Street –

    Howard Brush Dean III is the wealthy heir of a long line of Wall Street Republicans. Coming out of Yale like his ancestors, Howard himself went to work in finance. But he got bored, became a medical doctor, got bored with that and went into politics. Now a Presidential candidate, Dean has simply rented himself to the available sources of support–with some surprising and disturbing results.

    Dean cut Vermont’s budget and made saving money for the state’s Wall Street creditors his only significant objective. He presided over the disappearance of the state’s machine-tool plants, and the decline of its dairy farming and lumbering. The destruction of productive industry and its necessarily high-paid union labor pleased Dean’s Wall Street friends, so Vermont got a higher bond rating despite the gutted economy.

    That Dean openly supported the mid-1990s Newt Gingrich-led Conservative Revolution is now scandalous within the Democratic Party. Dick Gephardt noted in their televised debate Sept. 23, 2003, that in 1995 when Democrats were fighting to keep Newt Gingrich from shutting down the government, Dean had sided with Gingrich, who wanted to cut Medicare $270 billion. Howard Dean actually told reporters back in 1995, that the way to balance the budget would be to “cut Social Security,” raise the Social Security retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare, and veterans’ pensions, while the states cut almost everything else. “It would be tough,” Dean said, “but we could do it.” As late as June 2003, Dean said he would “entertain” raising the Social Security eligibility age to 68.

    His rivals have increasingly attacked Dean for these brutal prescriptions, and for his recent loud switches back and forth to curry favor from various voting constituencies. Wall Street is worried that it may lose its darling Dean. The Washington Post, reflecting the control of the paper by Lazard Fre@agres and Warren Buffett, in an Oct. 2 editorial warned Democrats not to revolt against austerity, and praised Howard Dean’s long-term ugliness against seniors and the poor as expressing the “unhappy reality.”

    The history of Dean’s own family money, and its curious intertwining with the Bush family, helps explain why Dean would be considered “safe” for imperial speculators like Soros.

    His grandfather, the first Howard Brush Dean, graduated from Yale in 1918, and got into the Yale clique dominated by Averell Harriman. Grandpa Dean started out at the Guaranty Trust Company, the base for financier George Herbert Walker, who organized the W.A. Harriman & Co. private bank in November 1919 and became the Harriman bank’s chief executive. Walker’s daughter Nancy was a bridesmaid at the wedding of grandpa Dean on April 10, 1920. The following year, Nancy Walker took part in her sister Dorothy’s wedding to Prescott Bush, grandfather of the current President.

    Candidate Dean also boasts that President George W. Bush’s mother’s mother, Pauline Robinson, was a bridesmaid for Howard’s mother’s mother. This might make Dean a natural successor to Bush–if America had a royal family.

    Yale University students, predominantly members of the Harriman/Bush secret Skull & Bones Society, organized Pan American Airways. Grandpa Dean was, though not a “Bonesman,” socially close to this set, and a wealthy broker and a stock exchange governor; so he was made vice president and director of Pan Am from 1943-1950, while Prescott Bush was also a director of Pan Am.

    Candidate Dean’s father, Howard Dean, Jr., left Yale, worked for grandpa’s Pan Am, and then expanded the family fortune as a stock broker.

    – If Not FDR, Then the Sewer –

    Addressing the Vermont state legislature in 1996, Dean acknowledged that “some workers are simply not earning as much as they used to,” and that “lower salaries mean less revenue for state programs.” His response was not to advocate Franklin Roosevelt’s economic recovery policies to reverse the plunge into poverty, but to demand the immediate elimination of “any potential deficit by the end of this fiscal year.”

    When energy pirates and speculators are allowed to ruin living standards, they offer criminalization as an alternative to a productive existence. Howard Dean’s new patron George Soros, for example, is the world’s most important individual advocate of the legalization of the full scope of narcotics. Cooperating with the drug money launderers and promoters of narco-terrorist control over South American and Mexico, Soros has financed pro-dope propaganda and referendums in the United States, and paid for pro-dope organs such as the Drug Policy Alliance.

    Dean himself is not really from Vermont, but from New York, Wall Street, and the elite Hampton beaches. And the startling nature of who it is that is renting Howard Dean, begins to be clear when considering his campaign apparatus in his home base.

    Professional lobbyist Ethan Geto is the chairman of the Dean campaign for New York City and New York State. According to statements from sources to this news service, Geto, while associated with New York Attorney General Robert Abrams, promoted and protected NAMBLA, the North-American Man-Boy Love Association, an organization of pederasts and child abusers. While Geto represents himself as a leading homosexual and Gay Rights advocate, and Howard Dean as a friend of gays, the Gay Rights movement expelled NAMBLA from its ranks and harshly condemns pederasts as criminals.

    Geto, who now manages all aspects of the Dean campaign in New York and is Dean’s spokesman in the money center, had been the long-time political aide-de-camp to Robert Abrams. When Abrams became New York State Attorney General in 1979, he and Geto began a political witchhunt against psychiatrist Judianne Densen-Gerber, NAMBLA’s main enemy and a tireless campaigner against pederasty and Satanic child abuse. Utilizing a media smear campaign together with criminal investigation, Abrams and Geto forced Densen-Gerber to resign from her anti-narcotics program and sought her financial ruin.

    In 1987 Abrams, with Geto at his side, also launched civil and criminal actions against Lyndon LaRouche and his associates, activities which Judge Steven Crane, presiding over the resulting case, characterized in a published court decision on Feb. 16, 1995 as implicating a “conspiracy to lay low these defendants at any cost, both here and in Virginia.”

    At the time, Nathan Riley, Abrams media coordinator, told an investigator for LaRouche that “progressives and gays” in Abrams office were pressing for the prosecutions for purely political reasons–that is, to abort recent political successes by the LaRouche movement, which had won March 1986 Illinois primaries and placed a proposition requiring the application of standard public health measures in the treatment of AIDS on the California ballot. Subsequent investigations demonstrated that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the New York media salon of John Train–featuring Richard Mellon Scaife and other scions of the neo-conservative banking and intelligence establishment–played the major hand in sustaining Abrams’ prosecution. Abrams received an award from the ADL for it.

    – ‘Billionaires’ Grass-Roots Organization’ –

    The present attachment of the Dean campaign to the financiers’ political money spigot reflects that same malicious dynamic.

    Steven Grossman is national finance chairman for Howard Dean. Grossman is the former chairman of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the main lobby for the Israeli government. Grossman may be the most important activist for securing Israeli Likud-nik influence inside the Democratic Party, and was chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 1997-1999.

    Finance chairman Grossman is the linchpin for the whole Dean money outreach. The Northeastern States Finance Director is Emily Wurgaft–formerly an officer under Grossman at his National Jewish Democratic Council. Emily managed the recent affair at the Soros mansion, and her network overlaps heavily with Ethan Geto’s. Meanwhile Aaron Holmes, a young staff member of Grossman’s own losing 2002 campaign for Massachusetts governor, is now the chairman of the Dean campaign in California.

    Grossman’s AIPAC and Ethan Geto go way back together. In 1981, contributors to AIPAC formed a political action front group called Roundtable PAC, a money conduit for junk bond scamsters Michael Milken and Ivan Boesky, gangster Meshulam Riklis (Ariel Sharon’s personal sponsor), and the leaders of United Fruit/United Brands. Both Robert Abrams and Ethan Geto, instead of prosecuting these gentlemen, joined them in giving birth to the Roundtable PAC, which served as a seed crystal for the growth of a right-wing power axis spanning Israel and the United States.

    Now George Soros has done a strategic redeployment out of Eastern Europe, and he and his friends are pouring funds into an attempt to control the U.S. Democratic Party. He has pledged an initial $10 million to “Americans Coming Together” (ACT), which aims at running the Democrats’ campaign against Bush. Soros has apparently pledged more millions, if needed; while there are reports that he is cutting back on his estimated $300-450 million a year to the former “East Bloc” nations. Also, six plutocrats allied to Soros have already given another $12 million combined, and reports of the group’s fund-raising ambition range from $75 million to the NewsMax estimate, $250 million. ACT would seem to be the oxymoron of a billionaire-backed “grassroots” organization.

    George Soros’s spokesman Michael Vachon told an inquiring journalist that Soros is at the moment “keenest for Dean.” But Vachon hinted that other candidates might serve the speculator’s purposes, should the odor around Dean’s Democratic credentials grow too embarrassing.

  70. But Rep. Steve King, an Iowa Republican, declared: “If anyone can, with a straight face, advocate that we should provide health insurance for people who broke into our country, broke our laws and for the most part are criminals, I don’t know where they ever would draw the line.”

    =========================

    We are already paying for their care in the emergency room.

  71. Had a pleasant surprise this morning.Great coverage of Hillary’s trip to Uk Ireland and her remarks at every stop.The fringe media devoyed much time and video to her 24/7 efforts for peace.CNN,NBC and CBS have finally recognized that our nation is in trouble with BO and his useless Nobel Prize.Don’t lose faith my friends.She will be our next CIC and sooner than some expect.

    By ABM90 Slide Oh messiah,slide.

  72. By the way, people around me want to know how I am so well informed. I tell them I belong to a blog where there are some pretty amazing people, who really know where to find information. Thank You All.

  73. US ‘won’t meddle’ pledges Clinton
    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said the devolution of policing and justice powers is an issue for the Northern Ireland Assembly alone.

    “The Obama administration and the United States is committed to helping you on your journey,” she said.

    “But when it comes to the important issue of the devolution of policing and justice, that is a decision for this assembly to take.”

    Mrs Clinton was addressing MLAs at Parliament buildings on Monday.

    “As a true friend, my hope is that you will achieve what you set out to do… to complete the process of devolution,” she told assembly members.

    She was speaking as talks to transfer policing and justice powers continue.

    The financing of the deal on those powers has been a major sticking point in recent weeks, with a series of intensive talks held between Gordon Brown and NI’s leaders.

    A letter detailing Mr Brown’s financial offer to pay for the devolution move was delivered to NI’s first and deputy first ministers on Monday.

    Mrs Clinton’s address followed talks with the the ministers at Stormont Castle.

    ——————————————————–
    ANALYSIS

    Gareth Gordon, BBC News, Belfast
    Hillary Clinton delivered a carefully worded speech praising the progress that has been made. But she warned that peace and economic progress go hand in hand and that the global economic downturn threatened some of the gains made in the past decade.

    It was not the US’s intention, she said, to meddle in the devolution of policing and justice but she made clear what she wanted to happen.
    At the end, she was given a standing ovation although two DUP MPs did not take part.

    William McCrea and Gregory Campbell left while the rest of the chamber was on its feet applauding.
    ———————————————————

    You can go here to listen to her speech:

    news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/8301784.stm

  74. Admin says:

    “David Brooks and Ruth Marcus are scratching their heads in the above video, but why didn’t they scratch their heads when Obama decided to even consider running for president and when the Democratic National Committee along with Dean/Kennedy/Kerry/Brazile/Pelosi gifted Obama the nomination?”

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    Exactly! Coupled with the info posted by confloyd, noting that the DNC has been “privatized” by Soros money. The agenda carried out by Congress is clearly the Soros’ agenda; not an agenda designed to benefit the people who elected them.

    ~~~~~~~~

    Obama-Media Parasites:CNN Brings Indoctrinated BLACK Children to Sing Praise/Push Obama’s HealthCare

    please embed, admin… This vid just about takes the cake!

    youtube.com/watch?v=ik1KC–AmbY

  75. If she’s hesitant at all, it’s because bambi keeps flip-flopping
    ——————————-
    Clinton warning to Afghan leader

    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said whoever wins Afghanistan’s recent election will be expected to do more to address the country’s problems.

    Speaking to the BBC while in London, Mrs Clinton said the next leader needed to build better relationships with the US, the army and the Afghan people. She said America’s goal in Afghanistan was still to defeat al-Qaeda. But the current US review of the conflict was “leading to some welcome clarity” on the best tactics, she said.

    Mrs Clinton, currently on a European tour, told the BBC’s Today programme that the US was “anxiously awaiting” the outcome of the presidential elections which were held in Afghanistan in August. The results have been delayed over accusations of fraud and malpractice. Preliminary results indicate that the incumbent, Hamid Karzai, leads with about 55% of the vote – considerably ahead of his nearest rival Abdullah Abdullah, who has 28%.

    ‘Welcome clarity’

    BBC diplomatic correspondent James Robbins said Mrs Clinton appeared unusually hesitant when asked whether the US would be proud to stand beside Mr Karzai if he emerged as the winner. She said simply that the president had been “very helpful on many fronts”. “We often overlook the progress made in Afghanistan because of the serious challenges that still exist,” she said.

    “But we are very clear that, if this election results in him being re-elected, there must be a new relationship between him and the people of Afghanistan, between his government and governments which are supporting the efforts in Afghanistan to stabilise and secure the country.”

    Mrs Clinton said the next president would also have to do more to train and deploy Afghan forces to take over from foreign troops. “It is a more complex picture than sometimes emerges from snapshot views. But clearly we expect more; we’re going to be working towards more,” she said.

    Late on Sunday, the New York Times quoted senior administration officials as saying the US president was impatient and “not satisfied” with progress on developing civil institutions, the judiciary and security forces in Afghanistan.
    President Barack Obama’s civilian goals had been largely unmet, the officials said.

    Mr Obama announced in March he would deploy hundreds of civilians to work in the country but officials told the paper that, because of deteriorating security, many aid workers could not travel outside the capital to advise farmers.

    The US president is currently undertaking a review of the US military involvement in Afghanistan and the wider region, eight years after the operation began.

    The commander of US forces in Afghanistan, Gen Stanley McCrystal, has formally requested a significant increase in troop numbers. Mr Obama is reported to have ruled out troop cuts or a major scaling back of the US effort in Afghanistan, but it remains unclear whether he will approve a significant escalation of an increasingly unpopular war.

    Mrs Clinton described the review process as “a very thorough scrubbing” of US strategy which was “leading to some welcome clarity”. She said America’s aim in the region was still “to achieve the goal of disrupting, dismantling and defeating al-Qaeda and its extremist allies”, but that it was now adopting “a much more careful analysis of who actually is allied with al-Qaeda”.

    “We want to be smart about how we are proceeding. The lives that our young men and women, both American and British, have put at risk – and lost – are very much in our minds. We intend to get this as right as is humanly possible.” Mrs Clinton said many people had been paid or coerced to fight with the extremists – and developing partnerships with such people would yield results, as had been the case in Iraq.

    The secretary of state’s visit comes at a time of increasing volatility in the region. At the weekend, some 19 people died when militants ambushed an army base in Rawalpindi in neighbouring Pakistan, an attack blamed by Pakistan on the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

    Mrs Clinton said the attack on Rawalpindi, an army town to the south of the capital, Islamabad, showed militants in Pakistan were increasingly threatening the authority of the state. But she said the US saw no evidence they were going to succeed, or that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal was under threat.

    news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8301875.stm

  76. Hillary Clinton arrives in MoscowToday

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives in Moscow for a three-day official visit to discuss bilateral ties as well as international key-issues.

    Mrs. Clinton is scheduled to meet with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and other Russian officials.

    aysor.am/en/news/2009/10/12/klinthon/

  77. Clinton says Nobel a recognition of Obama’s vision

    WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says she thinks President Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize because he projects the image of a more cooperative America in world affairs.

    She also said in an interview broadcast Monday that she doesn’t think winning the honor will affect Obama’s decision on whether to send large numbers of additional troops into Afghanistan.

    Clinton answered “no” when asked in the NBC “Today” show interview if she would ever run for president again. And she denied that she has been marginalized in administration policymaking. Clinton said this impression is “absurd” and that “I’m not one of those people who feel I have to have my face in front of the newspaper” every day.

    google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jRUYRN6l27zapdQimTs45scYCypgD9B9H3S80

  78. JanH

    I don’t know if you read a previous post of mine, about a visionary I use to work for. I tried to make one of his visions come true. It was obvious to me that his visions were no good unless someone else took care of it, and people were sold on it. My boss prove just to be a visionary, and the implementation of his visions did not accomplish anything. In additon, he just wanted to take credit for it, not work at selling it. In fact implementing his vision really bommeranged, as people were suspicious of his ideas.

    I did not both to work toward implementing one of his visions again. It was obvious that the other people working for him did not bother to implement his visions.

    It takes more than ideas, it take some rolling up of the sleeves of the visionary. I don’t think OO knows how to do that.

  79. “I’m not one of those people who feel I have to have my face in front of the newspaper” every day.”

    ————————
    LOL…exactly! Unlike someone else we all know.

  80. NMF,

    I’m sorry I must have missed that one. If you have a link, I would love to read further.

    But you are absolutely right. It does take more than ideas. And a further minus in obama’s category is that half of his ideas are faulty to begin with.

  81. Admin, is it this site or my computer? Since yesterday if I try to log on here, a pop up comes up that says “trouble viewing this site, using compatibility mode…” I have never seen that before.

  82. Also, I see that the corrupt media asked Hillary if she would run for President again and she said no. What is the low down on that Big Pinkers?

    I like the moniker, “Rent-a-Dean” and think I will sometimes refer to Him as “Rent-a-President.” roflmao

  83. JanH says:

    “she [Clinton] denied that she has been marginalized in administration policymaking. Clinton said this impression is “absurd” and that “I’m not one of those people who feel I have to have my face in front of the newspaper” every day.”

    ~~~~~~~~

    I’ve agreed with her assessment all along. Knowing how seriously she takes her position as SOS, theres no way she would ever allow Power or Rice to even think they are capable of replacing her expertise in Foreign Affairs. Hillary’s marginalization has always been a rumor stoked by the media basically to stampede us into thinking her voice is no longer relevant in foreign affairs.

  84. Show Me the Bill!

    Do you think Congress should vote on bills without reading them? How about voting on bills that don’t even exist yet, except in fragments?

    The Senate Finance Committee is poised to vote on a massive health care reform bill on Tuesday allegedly authored by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.). A glaring, outrageous, unreported fact is that the bill’s actual text has been kept secret. No one actually knows what’s in it – not even the senators who will be told to vote for it.

    “Perhaps the Nobel committee will award President Obama another prize to share with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, for “imagination in medical financing.”

    Bits and pieces are leaking out, but entire sections will be added later. That’s what happened with the House version. Nobody read the bill, and 75 “phantom” amendments were added after the vote. A similar maneuver happened in the Senate when a key committee approved another version of a sweeping health care bill in July without seeing the text. Actual language was unveiled months later in September.

    In short, senators will follow recent precedent and be voting on something that does not even exist yet.

    Even the Congressional Budget Office, which issued a report this week saying the Baucus plan would cost under $900 billion instead of more than a trillion, was operating without actual text. When the CBO crunched the detailed, 1,018-page House version this summer, it reported that it would cost far more than President Obama claimed. Obama then broke precedent and summoned the CBO director to the White House for a “talk.” Now the CBO says the Senate bill will cost less. They think. They hope. They speculate.

    What’s more, CNSNews.com reports that an aide to Sen. Harry Reid said that current debates may be irrelevant because an entirely different version might be inserted into an unrelated House tax bill, HR 1586. That’s the measure that levies a 90 percent tax on bonuses given to executives of firms that receive bailout money. Among other things, this could be a way of getting around the constitutional requirement that all tax bills originate in the House.

    Sen. Reid continues to insist that he wants a “public option” that would lead to a “single-payer” system, which means the end of private insurance and the dawn of socialized medicine. Just ask Barney Frank. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said this week that she has the votes necessary to ram through a bill with “the public option” as soon as it comes back to her chamber.

    “The real bill will be another 1,000-page, trillion dollar experiment… that vastly expands the role of the federal government in the personal health care decisions of every American,” Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) warned.

    House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer would not rule out the possibility that the House would vote for identical Senate language, thus avoiding having the bill go to conference for scrutiny and debate and getting it quickly to President Obama’s desk.

    Stunned by the August town halls, Tea parties and the massive Sept. 12 taxpayer rally in Washington, liberals know the window is closing on their plan to nationalize one-sixth of America’s economy and put our health care decisions in the hands of government bureaucrats. So they are working in the dark to ram this through before most Americans find out.

    Even with all the subterfuge, some details have slipped out:

    –Do what we say, not what we do–Congress has exempted itself from mandatory coverage provisions that they want to impose on their fellow citizens.

    –Taxing through higher deduction requirements— Dick Morris has been warning everyone that the seven-and-a-half percent trigger to deduct medical expenses on your federal tax return will be bumped to ten percent. That would shake billions out of people’s pockets who have had to spend significant money on health care, and will be an effective violation of the Obama campaign promise not to raise taxes on Americans making less than $250,000.

    –Taxing Class II medical devices, such as breast pumps, pacemakers, ventilators, wheelchairs and needles. Call this the “mommy tax.”

    –Different tax rates for people in different states. The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel reports: “Majority Leader Harry Reid …worked out a deal by which the federal government will pay all of his home state’s additional Medicaid expenses for the next five years. Under the majority leader’s very special formula, only three other states – Oregon, Rhode Island and Michigan – qualify for this perk.” This means that Americans in other states would subsidize constituents of Harry Reid and some of his political friends. A dozen Democratic governors have come out against the Medicaid mandate as a budget buster, but Reid is covering his own political interests – with your money.

    Are you angry yet?

    Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) took to the floor of the House during the earlier spendathon and said the nation is in the grip of “gangster government,” in which powerful interests are raiding the treasury to ensure their own continued power. The health care “reform” bill is more of the same, but even more dangerous. This is about the government’s power of life and death over our families, not just our wallets.

    The liberal “mainstream” media are providing cover for all this. None is asking to see the health bill language. You have to go to places like the Media Research Center’s Newsbusters blog, where Brent Bozell exposed the Reid plan.

    The Left will get away with all this unless, Americans speak out now and let them know in no uncertain terms that this is unacceptable and tyrannical. America needs to speak with a loud, single demand of our rulers in Washington:

    “Show me the bill!”

    h….. townhall.com/columnists/RobertKnight/2009/10/12/show_me_the_bill!?page=full

  85. the nation is in the grip of “gangster government”

    ——————————-

    Indeed, the very idea that they keep voting blindly is criminal in itself.

  86. just about everyone has had something to say about O receiving the NPP

    Nobel Peace Prize Seen in a New Light

    Bob Schieffer Says Regardless of Why Obama Was Given Award, the Nobel Will Never Look the Same Again

    cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/11/ftn/main5377072.shtml?tag=cbsnewsLeadStoriesAreaMain;cbsnewsLeadStoriesPrimary

    [ ] Schieffer says:

    For the record, I generally agree with the President’s approach on foreign policy, but the Nobel Committee did him no favors by giving him the award before he had anything to show for his efforts.

    It’s like a parent doing a child’s homework. Sure, you love the kid, but telling the teacher he needs an A before he turns in his work doesn’t quite get it.

    So instead of cheers, the President gets to take his lumps – reactions of incredulity, laughter, sarcasm, Republicans accusing him of being all talk and no action, Democrats accusing Republicans of siding with the enemy (which is what Republicans used to accuse Democrats of!), and on and on it goes.

    [ ]

    ********************************

    that’s right…’just like a parent doing a child’s homework’

    *****************************************

    thedailybeast.com has the clip – I wish I knew how to bring it here…(admin, pls help)

    Hillary says she has no need to “have my face in front of newspaper or on tv every minute of the day…maybe it is a woman thing and I am totally secure”

    Hillary says alot in that short clip…ah…and as opposed to who does need to be everywhere – every minute…even accepting awards he does not deserve

  87. Since the site went down. I have had trouble trying to get to the Hillary Site from my browser.

    This is the message i recieved

    Warning: Cannot modify header information – headers already sent by (output started at /home4/hillaryi/public_html/index.php:5) in /home4/hillaryi/public_html/wp-includes/pluggable.php on line 865

    I have Yahoo

    What is going on?

    Can anyone help me?

    Lucky i saved this site on my favorites

    This is the message i get

  88. …S, I left this post for you upthread:

    S…

    Thanks for posting a well written description of your current situation with the State of MA (Patric’s) HC Reform Policy. I believe Obama is using Patric’s Plan as the model for HC for the rest of the Nation.

    There must be a group somewhere in MA that is having the same misgivings you are as to burden put in place by the State’s HC mandates unwanted by MA residents opposed to the program. No?

  89. It’s really frustrating that in the new USA today article it says she is
    not going to run for President again and that she wants to retire at some point. We need her.

  90. Be careful of what the USA Article says (You never know if those are exact quotes), and this is what has to be said at this point in her position.

  91. October 12th, 2009

    The First Draft: Hillary Clinton marginalized? If you have to ask…

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spent the weekend in Switzerland and Ireland, but landed on the morning talk shows on Monday, fending off questions about whether she has been marginalized in the Obama administration. It’s not considered a good sign when people start asking this question in Washington, because the implication is that the answer is “yes.”

    Clinton had no comment when newscaster Ann Curry on NBC’s “Today” program asked whether she should be more visible on such hot-button issues as Iran and Afghanistan. But she responded fully when asked about concerns that the “highest-ranking woman in the United States needs to fight against being marginalized.”

    “I find it absurd, I find it beyond any realistic assessment of what I’m doing every day,” Clinton said. “I believe in delegating power. I’m not one of those people who feels like I have to have my face in the front of the newspaper or on the TV every moment of the day. It would be irresponsible and negligent were I to say, ‘Oh no, everything must come to me!’”

    She had a theory about why she’s comfortable working this way. “Maybe this is a woman’s thing. Maybe I’m totally secure in that I feel absolutely no need to go running around in order for people to see what I’m doing. It’s just the way I am.”

    But aren’t there moments, she was asked, having campaigned so hard for president against Barack Obama, that you just want to make a decision yourself?

    No. “I am part of the team that makes the decision.”

    On another front, Clinton said flatly she would not run for president again. She said she’s looking forward to retirement “at some point.”

    blogs.reuters.com/frontrow/2009/10/12/the-first-draft-hillary-clinton-marginalized-if-you-have-to-ask/

    ——————————-

    I am sure the rabid media will have a field day speculating about her last comments. However I see this as being a beautiful and off-the-charts smart woman completely comfortable in her own skin. Of course she will retire some day. It could also be that she sees the writing on the wall for a one-term tainted presidency for bambi and is thinking ahead.

  92. Hillary stands her round with quick pint in city pub

    Monday October 12 2009

    She is second only to President Barack Obama and is known across the globe. Yet US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton still made time for a quick tipple in McDaid’s pub near Grafton Street.

    And afterwards, she managed to get in a visit to Bewley’s for a cup of tea.

    Unlike her husband, former US President Bill Clinton, Hillary stayed away from the black stuff, and had a small glass of beer instead, alongside US Ambassador to Ireland Dan Rooney.

    She may be one of the most powerful people in the world, but wellwishers still managed to surround Mrs Clinton during her whistle-stop tour of Dublin yesterday.

    The US Secretary of State had a frantically busy schedule yesterday. She met with British Foreign Secretary David Milliband yesterday morning, before jetting to Dublin to visit Taoiseach Brian Cowen, Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin and President Mary McAleese in Aras an Uachtarain.

    She then travelled to Belfast where she stayed overnight.

    herald.ie/national-news/hillary-stands-her-round-with-quick-pint-in-city-pub-1911044.html

  93. I can’t see Hillary ever giving up “public life” completely. Personally, given all the skullduggery that went on during the primaries, I don’t blame her for not wanting to run for potus again. Those same monsters will still be lurking in the shadows to attack.

    At the same time, I could see her setting up a foundation the likes of her husband’s but focused on helping women in the world. I think she could do amazing things and add to her already bulging accomplishments.

  94. 12/10/2009

    Netanyahu vows never to let Israelis be tried for war crimes

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that he would never allow any of the Israel’s leaders or soldiers to be put on trial for war crimes.

    Netanyahu opened his fiery speech at the inauguration of the Knesset’s winter session by blasting the Goldstone Commission’s report sponsored by the United Nations, that accused Israel of committing war crimes during its war against militants in the Gaza Strip last year.

    Israel has the right to defend itself, Netanyahu declared, and would not acquiesce to a situation where wartime leaders or troops who participated in the operation stand trial.
    Advertisement

    When details of the investigation’s conclusions first emerged in September, Netanyahu blasted the commission as nothing but a “kangaroo court.” “The Goldstone report is a kangaroo court against Israel, whose consequences harm the struggle of democratic countries against terror,” said Netanyahu during closed meetings. He was referring to the report’s author, Richard Goldstone, a South African war crimes prosecutor.

    The 575-page report also accused Hamas of actions amounting to war crimes by firing rockets at civilians in southern Israel. The Palestinian Authority, Hamas’ rival in the West Bank, initially retracted its proposal for an immediate vote on the probe.

    Following weeks of criticism, President Mahmoud Abbas on Sunday retracted the deferral and ordered his envoy to the United Nations to resubmit the report.

    haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1120498.html

  95. JanH Says:
    October 12th, 2009 at 11:39 am

    Nice alternative, JanH-

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    JanH Says:
    October 12th, 2009 at 11:54 am

    Netanyahu vows never to let Israelis be tried for war crimes

    ~~~~~~~~~
    I’ve been reading small blurbs about that intermittently posted by it seems Palestinian sympathizers.

    Netanyahu vows never to let Israelis be tried for war crimes

  96. JanH, who is Hillary talking about when she says: “I’m not one of those people who feels like I have to have my face in the front of the newspaper or on the TV every moment of the day. It would be irresponsible and negligent were I to say, ‘Oh no, everything must come to me!’” ?

  97. neetabug Says:
    October 12th, 2009 at 11:09 am

    Since the site went down. I have had trouble trying to get to the Hillary Site from my browser.

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    Temporarily, it might help uploading another browser. I have 4 browsers on my desktop in case one fails to perform for one reason or another. IE always has loading problems for me and I only use it sporadically.

  98. LOL…admin…in just one article she praised and damned. Pretty neat trick she has of doing that over and over again without losing her dignity.

  99. “Unlike her husband, former US President Bill Clinton, Hillary stayed away from the black stuff, and had a small glass of beer instead, alongside US Ambassador to Ireland Dan Rooney.”

    ~~~~~~~~

    Ah, the pubsters must have loved having Hillary and Ambassador Rooney imbibing with them. The Irish are such a friendly lot. Having an Irish last name doesn’t hurt either. The success of Ireland’s tourist trade results from the welcoming hospitality of the people.

  100. The Chicago Cubs are seeking Chapter 11 protection, a step that will allow its corporate parent to hand the team to new owners.

    The team filed for bankruptcy in Delaware on Monday. The move was anticipated as the Tribune Co. looks to complete an $845 million sale of the team, Wrigley Field and related properties to the family of billionaire Joe Ricketts.

    Tribune, which also owns the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times, filed for bankruptcy protection in December, but the Cubs were not included in the filing. The team’s brief stay in Chapter 11 is expected to protect the team’s new owners from potential claims from Tribune creditors.
    ———

    Well after backing that ZERO…they are resorting to bankruptcy……

  101. Mrs.Smith, I have changed my mind about the healthcare thing. I think I just wanted it because I personally desparately need it, but I think if we follow the rethug idea, I’ll be able to afford something for myself, but we must get rid of the pre-existing condition clause immediately.

    I used to work for the state of Texas in the prison system. I remembered this today because it being Columbus day, state and federal employees have the day off. When I went to work for TDCJ after years of working in healthcare with barely 6 holidays per year, I really enjoyed having those days off. It seemed we got off for everything.
    I am reminded today that I joined TDCJ during the period when Texas had just contracted its healthcare to UTMB. For several years it was a joint contract with TDCJ regulating and watching everything UTMB did. Healthcare was very good for the inmates at that time because of the regulations the state required because of a lawsuit by William Wayne Justice. I remember that they had medical facilities at all the regional healthcare centers and top of the line ambulances all news and in perfect condition. They also had centralized alot of the psych care at several units near Houston and one in Rusk. It was a very good system from what I could see. I know the xray dept.which I personal traveled to several points for the state to open and make sure all regulations were put in place correctly were very good.
    Once the final contract was award to UTMB, looking now from the outside, was much poorer than it was previously under a joint venture. Its nothing now to see those once great ambulances stalled on the side of the road in an around the Houston area. They have now contracted alot of the small hospitals around the prison units itself to give care, although they still have to travel to Galveston for surgical care.

    What I am getting at is that UTMB from all outward appearance has let the equipment fall behind in order to make a profit, I imagine that is exactly what will happen to medicare, medicaid when the govt. sells those private entities to the insurance companies. I think we are in for some very bad medicine. I imagine the state of Texas has saved money contracting these services out, but at the expense of the inmates.

  102. I have to say I can see Hillary not even wanting or being happy not to be on the nightly news every day. It so hampered the great work she and Bill did on a daily basis. I think we should probably be happy that the news media isn’t riding on her right shoulder everywhere she goes as they did previously. We are fortunate that we have her keeping the lid on things while Odumbo negates his responsibilities to the soldiers in Afganistan.

    I see today that LameCherry is calling for impeachment and says that he and some of his buddies will not rest until its done. He says America can’ t wait until 2012, but of coarse he is a wing nut and suffers from Clinton derangement syndrome. I don’t mind reading his stuff as long as it doesn’t have BC or Hillary in it because he has a way of cutting Bambi to the quick.

  103. I found that article last night about Dean, I found it quiet interesting as my original idea was that the Bush’s actually had a hand in getting Obama elected, but have since changed my mind.

    I am so worried about the nationalizing of so much of our economy as after a year or two the govt. can put them on the auction block and sell them to the highest bidder, which is what they could do with healthcare. Can you imagine having a Chinese healthcare company running our healthcare?? How about those nationalized car companies, what do you think they will pay American workers in the auto industry, or would they just close them permanently??

    Something is going on and SOros is behind it.

  104. Sen. Reid continues to insist that he wants a “public option” that would lead to a “single-payer” system, which means the end of private insurance and the dawn of socialized medicine. Just ask Barney Frank. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said this week that she has the votes necessary to ram through a bill with “the public option” as soon as it comes back to her chamber.

    =================

    Dare we hope? Medicare for everyone?

    But this report is phoney, because Reid would never describe anything in these terms (even if true).

  105. confloyd Says:
    October 12th, 2009 at 1:23 pm

    Mrs.Smith, I have changed my mind about the healthcare thing.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I haven’t changed my mind, confloyd. I want the closed door deals made by Obama with Big Pharma rescinded null and void before we have a HCP we can believe-in in hand. The $10B discount Drug companies are offering on a short list of drugs is a pittance over the long haul compared to their profit ratio past and present.

    Government/Taxpayer dollars fund their research for new drug products. HC and Pharmaceuticals should be made affordable to the people permanently.

  106. Mrs. Yeah, but can we trust this administration?? I don’t think so, they have their own best interest in mind, not ours.

    I would love to have universal healthcare/dental, but will be actually get it?? THen will they keep it govt. run?? I am afraid they will auction it off after a couple of years.

  107. confloyd Says:
    October 12th, 2009 at 1:35 pm

    I found that article last night about Dean, I found it quiet interesting as my original idea was that the Bush’s actually had a hand in getting Obama elected, but have since changed my mind.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~
    Great find on Dean, confloyd. I had no idea Dean was so well connected to the Bushes. The article stated the trust factor (old money) was why Soros chose to support him.

    You have to believe all the genealogy research was done on Obama long before he was a candidate set to steal the election from Hillary. They knew his grandmother was already a pawn of the elites. They knew his mother was anti-American and never had a problem degrading the US because she hated everything the US stood for and blamed the poverty in other countries on the US government.

    This was the reason the Dems and the Repubs commiserated during the Primary to ensure Hillary was NOT the Dem nominee because they knew she would beat McCain, hands down… and be our 44.

  108. JanH Says:

    October 11th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
    I still wish that bambi had turned down the prize. I have zilch respect for him before. I never knew it could get any worse.
    &&&&&&&&&

    Him declining the Nobel, “Perhaps I can win this in the future for some more deserving accomplishments”, would have been a class act.

    We all know he only does faux class acts.

    This just confirm his Fauxness.

  109. rgb44hrc Says:
    ——

    They are all ready writing his acceptance speech…”speeches of all speeches”……I betcha you that he will say “I accept it on behalf of all my American people”…puke puke!!!!

  110. U.S. sponsored byU.S. Home
    Crime
    America’s Future
    Supreme Court
    NEWS ARCHIVE

    HOT TOPICS
    H1N1
    Housing Market
    Health Care
    SECTION MAP

    SEE MORE – Sept. 11 – Crime – Education – Supreme CourtNew York-Based Muslim’s Web Site Calls for God to ‘Kill the Jews’
    Tuesday, October 13, 2009
    By Joshua Rhett Miller

    Print ShareThis
    RevolutionMuslim.com

    Yousef al-Khattab, formerly Joseph Cohen, is seen here in an undated photograph.
    Yousef al-Khattab, formerly Joseph Cohen, is seen here in an undated photograph.
    A New York bicycle cabbie who last year used his Web site to mock the beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl posted a prayer calling for the murder of Jews and exhorting Muslims to “throw liquid drain cleaner in their faces.” And there’s nothing authorities can do about it.

    Yousef al-Khattab, who runs RevolutionMuslim.com and pedals a pedicab in New York City, insists the words he has posted on his Web site are a prayer, and not a threat — and that his hatred is protected by the First Amendment.

    “If it was a threat, I’d be in jail,” the 41-year-old al-Khattab told Foxnews.com from his home in Queens. “I’m asking my God, that’s what it is. Every supporter of Israel is an enemy combatant and the immune system is not anti-Semitic for resisting disease.”

    Al-Khattab removed the Oct. 7 post a “few days ago” and replaced it with a post about a mosque in Jerusalem.

    An American-born Jew formerly known as Joseph Cohen who converted to Islam after attending an Orthodox rabbinical school — al-Khattab called on Allah to carry out “wrath on the Jewish occupiers of Palestine & their supporters.”

    “Please throw liquid drain cleaner in their faces,” he wrote. ” … burn their flammable sukkos while they sleep … Ya Allah (Oh God) answer my duaa (prayer).” (“Sukkos” refers to the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, during which Jews build and eat their meals in outdoor huts known as “sukkahs,” which represent the huts the Jews lived in during their exodus from Egypt.)

    Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News’ senior legal analyst, said the posting is “absolutely protected” by the First Amendment.

    “All innocuous speech is absolutely protected and all speech is innocuous when there is time for more speech to rebut or address it,” he told Foxnews.com. “So even if this Web site were to call on Muslim freedom fighters to kill Jews, as long as there is time for someone else to challenge this with words, then the originals words are lawful.”

    The blog post, signed by al-Khattab, notes that it should be taken only as a “prayer” and not as an incitement to genocide. But officials at the Anti-Defamation League are worried about its ability to influence others.

    “Whether it’s a poem or a prayer, however he describes it, he decided to post it. And if you’re going to be posting a prayer like that, you just don’t know who’s going to read that and who might be influenced by it,” said Oren Segal, director of the ADL’s Center on Extremism. “There’s a certain amount of responsibility behind posting your own blog. We take it very seriously.”

    Segal said the New York Police Department is “aware” of the blog post. Calls to Paul Browne, deputy commissioner of public information for the NYPD, were not immediately returned.

    RevolutionMuslim.com has been monitored by the ADL since 2006, Segal said, and has roughly five to 10 active members who frequently distribute anti-Semitic literature in front of mosques throughout New York City.

    “This is a group we’ve monitored for a while,” Segal said. “This is nothing particularly new, but then again, [the threat] has the ability to potentially influence people.”

    The posting reflects the “prayer of every true Muslim,” al-Khattab said.

    “Every true Muslim would say the same thing,” he continued. “Most people would agree that any occupied people have the right to defend themselves.”

    Al-Khattab, who said he’s driven a pedicab in New York for the last three years, is married with four kids. He said he’s driven plenty of Jewish passengers without incident.

    “I’ve never killed one,” he told Foxnews.com. “I suffer from mental Tourette’s [syndrome]. I say what’s on my mind. We have freedom of speech.”

    Al-Khattab said he created RevolutionMuslim.com with the mission of “preserving Islamic culture” and seeking support of the “beloved Sheik Abdullah Faisal, who’s preaching the religion of Islam and serving as a spiritual guide.”

    Faisal was convicted in the U.K. in 2003 for spreading messages of racial hatred and urging his followers to kill Jews, Hindus and Westerners. In sermon recordings played at his trial, Faisal called on young, impressionable Muslims to use chemical weapons to “exterminate unbelievers” and “cut the throat of the Kaffars [nonbelievers] with [a] machete.”

    Authorities believe Faisal’s sermons influenced London transport bomber Germaine Lindsay and the so-called “shoe bomber,” Richard Reid, who attended mosques where Faisal preached.

    FBI spokesman Richard Kolko told Foxnews.com last year that it’s difficult to bring criminal charges against operators of Web sites like RevolutionMuslim.com unless specific threats are made.

    ‘It’s usually a First Amendment right if they don’t cross the threshold of making threats,” Kolko said. “There’s nothing we should or could do.”

    Gregg Zukowski, president of the NYC Pedicab Association, said al-Khattab has been riding a pedicab in midtown Manhattan “on and off” for the past several years without any reported incidents. Zukowski was unaware of al-Khattab’s Web site.

    “He’s just like one of a 1,000 guys who ride a pedicab,” Zukowski told Foxnews.com. “There’s nothing that sticks out about him in particular.”

Comments are closed.