It Depends on What Your Definition of ‘Baggage’ Is

By Rick Saunders & Jeff Schreiber
America’s Right

Sen. Hillary Clinton may have even more baggage now than when she first loaded the U-Haul and vacated the White House back in January 2001.

Several times here at America’s Right, we’ve noted that President-elect Barack Obama’s selection of Hillary Clinton was an excellent political move for all involved, but as Sen. Clinton works her way through the confirmation process required for her to be installed as President-elect Barack Obama’s Secretary of State, a number of issues should present themselves as to possible conflicts of interest and more.

First, according to an Associated Press report gleaned from her official correspondence, we’ve learned that on at least a half-dozen separate occasions, Sen. Clinton may have intervened in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband’s foundation. Among those companies impacted by Clinton’s actions? PAETEC Communications, Barr Laboratories, Merck & Company, and more. All, of course, are denying any improprieties, but each either themselves or through intermediaries later donated to the Clinton Foundation or Clinton-related causes.

Second, rumors are flying that Sen. Clinton’s campaign committee received contributions from Bernard Madoff, the Wall Street crook whose $50 billion Ponzi scheme–also known as “Social Security Light”–has resulted in his court-mandated pre-trial “hard time” under house arrest in his $7 million Park Avenue pad in New York City. Although you’d be hard-pressed to read about it in The New York Times or hear about it from the so-called journalists at NBC News, political donor databases and indeed show that, between Bernard Madoff and son Peter (identified as a senior manager at Bernard L. Madoff Investments), $6,900 has been contributed to Clinton’s personal senatorial campaign and $50,000 has been given to the generic Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Even President-elect Obama received his share. And while there is no word yet from Obama on what, if anything, he intends to do about those particular contributions, Sen. Clinton was apparently declining calls to divest herself of the money, claiming through intermediaries that since it was given long ago to her first Senate campaign fund–which no longer exists–no repayment obligation therefore exists.

Wait for it during the confirmation hearing . . . “Well, Senator,” Hillary will say, leaning forward into the Bob Barker microphone, “it depends on what your definition of ‘fund’ is.”

In the interest of fairness, however, it should be noted that the list of other recipients of Madoff’s largesse reads like a Who’s Who of liberal Democrats — who received over 90% of all monies Madoff donated to politicians, political committees and parties. Whose committee between 1998 and 2004 received $6,300 from Madoff? New York Sen. Charles Schumer, a Democrat. Any others? Of course — they’re Democrats! New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg received $3,600 from Madoff in 2004 and 2007, and New York Congressman Charlie Rangel received $2,000. The latter, of course, now sits as the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, from which all tax legislation originates. After it was revealed that Madoff’s Ponzi scheme was unraveling, both Schumer and Lautenberg announced they would be donating the contributed money to various charities. No final word yet from Clinton or Rangel on what, if anything, they intend to do.

Third on the list of Sen. Clinton’s possible problems is a constitutional roadblock which has presented itself and very well could render her ineligible to serve in Obama’s cabinet. Article I, Section 6 of the United States Constitution states the following:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time: and no person holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of either House during his continuance in office.

Since the “emolument” (read: salary) of the Office of the Secretary of State was increased by President Bush by executive order while Hillary Clinton was representing New York in the Senate, a significant question exists as to whether she is even eligible to serve as Secretary of State. The problem, of course, is that there have been other instances in the past where similar questions have surfaced, and each time they have been finessed and massaged through various subsequent steps taken to “undo” the prior pay raise in order to, thereafter, “un-ring” the bell of constitutional disqualification.

Finally, and perhaps most disturbingly relevant and most of concern considering Sen. Clinton’s prospective position, there’s the $491 million in post-presidential contributions to her husband’s presidential library and “Clinton Global Initiative,” collected over the past decade by Bill Clinton from overseas donors described by The Wall Street Journal as various “assorted rogues, dictators and favor-seekers,” including but certainly not limited to more than $60 million from various sources in the Middle East.

Even more astounding, according to the terms of the agreement between the prospective Secretary of State’s husband and President-elect Obama’s administration, the former president and his bony, smelly index finger may continue to collect overseas donations so long as all checks are addressed to some Clinton-related entity other than the “Clinton Global Initiative.” The other known aspects of the aforementioned agreement are even more interesting. From the Journal piece:

Instead of being immediately disclosed, future donations will only be made public once a year and the exact amounts and dates of previous donations will never be made public.

While Mr. Clinton will submit some donations from foreign governments to Administration scrutiny, he need only do so if the donations are new or are of a significantly larger magnitude from a previous donation. In other words, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Sultanate of Oman can keep giving millions without U.S. government review even while Mrs. Clinton is America’s chief diplomat. These disclosure limitations suggest that the Clintons seriously out-negotiated Team Obama. We hope the President-elect does better with Iran.

The double standard here is maddening. If it were the wife, or brother, or adviser, or valet parking attendant of a former Republican president who, since leaving office, had gallivanted across the globe and garnered almost a half billion dollars in contributions to his presidential library and charitable foundation, congressional Democrats would be up in arms and left-leaning so-called journalists like Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow and the entire New York Times editorial board would be ready to explode in a fine mist of venom and vitriol.

Because it’s the Clintons, however, and because Sen. Clinton is looking to serve as diplomat-in-chief for the Obama administration, the silence is deafening. As the Journal points out, when Henry Kissinger was asked to co-chair the 9/11 Commission, “the political went bonkers about his foreign clients.” Where’s the outrage here?

Regardless, any day when a Clinton is testifying under oath is a good, sunny, zip-a-dee-doo-dah day for conservatives. Former Republican Party strategist and Clinton White House adviser Dick Morris even woke up this morning and proposed a number of questions he’d like to see asked while the former First Lady’s hand was still burning from contact with the Bible. Of course, they will not be asked and, even if they were, we certainly wouldn’t receive any answers.

When it comes to the Clintons and when it comes to the Democrats, there has never been and there never will be accountability, at least not until our mainstream press undergoes a sea change in terms of ideology and credibility. Scandal, for a Democrat, is practically an expectation when it comes to public service. Quid pro quo political contributions are a way of life.

In the end, will Hillary Rodham Clinton be confirmed as Secretary of State for Barack Obama’s adminstration despite baggage which would be politically cumbersome if not deadly for anybody across the aisle? Absolutely.

After all, it depends on what your definition of “baggage” is.

Both Jeff Schreiber and Rick Saunders contributed to this report. Rick Saunders is a freelance writer who splits his time between endeavors in southern California and the American southwest. He began writing for America’s Right in December 2008.



  1. Janet says:

    At least she’s a natural born citizen, had disclosed her health background and her college information. We actually know where she was born, which hospital and she’d show us her baby footprint if we wanted to see it.

    Listening to her speak today (caught most of her opening speech), I was in awe of her seriousness, wealth of knowledge and intelligence. I realize she is not perfect, but I certainly trust HER more than anyone else on the planet to lead this country. It should have been Hillary.

  2. Old Codger says:

    Janet, I couldn’t agree more. It should have been Hillary.

    Hillary certainly isn’t perfect. And “baggage”? Of course she’s got “baggage.” Someone without baggage is someone who’s never gone anywhere and probably doesn’t plan on going.

    But for all that “baggage,” nobody on the planet has been more thoroughly vetted and tested than Hillary Clinton.

    She may be the smartest choice Obama makes. I just worry about what will happen to her and the other appointees (some of whom we’d be well rid of) in that unlikeliest of events that Obama should be officially disqualified.

  3. Anonymous says:

    You ‘trust’ Hillary Clinton to lead this country?….lead it where? Can you honestly tell me that you do not see a serious conflict of interest considering the Clintons have lined their pockets with millions of dollars from foreign ‘contributors’ who expect something in return..what amazes me is that these people are duping you as well as all the American people…their arrogancy is exceeded only by their mastery of deceptive speech.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Well, from the beginning I saw BO’s move to put Hillary in State as disingenuous.

    I thought the end game was to sucker her out of her Senate seat so it could be given to someone more “predictable” and then throw Hillary to the wolves come confirmation time, or if she makes it, just fire her a year or so after she’s confirmed. That way the anti-Clinton faction gets rid of the Clintons. Bada-boom. No more Clintons in government.


    I would not hire either of the Clinton’s to clean restrooms. They have both proven over and voer again that they lack the integrity required.

    Thanks, Ken

  6. Anonymous says:

    And she’s connected to George Soros!

    Jan in ID

  7. Janet says:

    Foreign contributors? You mean the ones who gave Obama almost half of all his campaign contributions?

    Or are you referring to the foreign contributors who lined the pockets of the poor people of the world, AIDS victims, malaria victims, et al, through Clinton’s fundraising for his charities?

    The only money he makes is through speaking engagements and consulting. There are many Americans who consult in foreign countries, Clinton is not the only one. But he is the only one who had to put out a detailed list which he did. What the heck else do you want? How about Obama’s damm birth certificate, for heaven’s sake?

  8. Anonymous says:

    Janet, Janet, Janet,

    Wake up honey, it’s time for school.

  9. Tigress says:

    Dear Jeff,

    While I have been tremendously grateful to you for your informative, outstandingly-written updates on the Obama citizenship court cases, your commentary on Senator Hillary Clinton’s Secretary of State confirmation process leaves a lot to be desired. With all due respect, you and your co-writer seem to be suffering from Clinton Derangement Syndrome (CDS). It’s a condition that happens to be very closely related to Palin Derangement Syndrom (PDS), which you have previously displayed an immunity to and virtually diagnosed many times in others, so the cure for you will probably come sooner than you think.

    In your first point against Senator Clinton you state: “…on at least a half-dozen separate occasions, Sen. Clinton may have intervened in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband’s foundation.” Actually, I was under the impression that intervening in government issues is what ALL congress people do. The fact that there were a ‘half-dozen’ of those companies that also contributed to the Clinton Foundation does not seem like an unusually large number given that the Foundation has been around for 10 years. I would have expected many more, so I am not sensing any big corruption conspiracy here (a symptom of CDS).

    Your second point about Bernie Madoff contributing to her campaign does not even seem newsworthy. Apparently Madoff is a democrat—so what? You seem to imply politicians who received contributions from Madoff must have had a hand in his scam. (Wild accusations are also a symptom of CDS.) This is silly. If any government officials had hands in this scam, it was more likely several SEC (under the Bush administration) officials.

    Your third point about a possible “constitutional roadblock” to Clinton’s cabinet appointment is a misrepresentation (also a CDS symptom). This exact scenario happens every 4 or 8 years when a new president appoints a new cabinet, often selecting from Senate and House talent, and is always sidestepped by adjusting the cabinet post’s salary back down (with probably a big fat raise for the next fiscal year.). I’ll wager you could find many Bush II, Bush I, and Reagan cabinet appointees who faced the precisely same “constitutional roadblock”, so highlighting it as a complication only Clinton brings–the implication here being that there is something illegal about it–is very misleading.

    Your final point, the one you describe as “perhaps most disturbingly relevant and most of concern” regarding her husband’s charity donors, is indeed a concern, but not a ‘disturbing’ one (which is an exaggeration, again, symptom of CDS). You quote the Wall Street Journal as saying “various ‘assorted rogues, dictators and favor-seekers’ including but certainly not limited to more than $60 million from various sources in the Middle East” contributed to his Foundation. This is funny, because normally WE pay money TO all these “rogues, dictators and favor-seekers” out of our own pockets for their oil, minerals, natural gas, and plastic junk that fills our Wal-Mart shelves, and now you are complaining that Bill Clinton is “gallivanting across the globe” accepting their money and funneling it to charitable purposes as well as his presidential library? Seems like a worthwhile after-presidency activity to me. What do you want him to do—‘gallivant across the globe’ golfing or making speeches to raise money for his presidential library (which is probably what all former presidents do)? Either way, they all get a library, you know, Democrat or Republican. The WSJ article mentions that the Obama administration has reached an agreement with Bill Clinton on how to handle these donations in the future. They (the WSJ) seem to be a bit put off that they were not consulted in this agreement. Oh well. Their feigned concern that “these disclosure limitations suggest that the Clintons seriously out-negotiated Team Obama” is laughable. They actually ought to be grateful to have a negotiator who is even more skilled than ‘Team Obama’ at the helm of Secretary of State. It bodes well for our country, imho.

    I do agree there is a double standard. Everything the Republicans do is taken in a different light by the media. It’s probably more of a triple standard, actually, as Obama has gotten away with so much more than any other candidate ever has, including documented primary caucus fraud, admitted campaign finance illegalities including illegal contributions from foreign sources, and a range of connections to felons, “rogues, dictators…favor-seekers” and other assorted ne’er do wells that would make even our slimiest politicians blush. I think everyone wishes something could be done about these unfairly differing standards in our media.

    Additionally, I think it would have been nice if you had mentioned a few interesting highlights from Senator Clinton’s confirmation hearing proceedings. This would have given people a better idea of what type of Secretary of State we are in for, and would have eased your CDS considerably. Just for kicks, here are a few:

    Included in Senator Clinton’s opening remarks:

    • We will renew America’s leadership through diplomacy that enhances our security, advances our interests, and reflects our values.
    • Foreign policy must be based on a marriage of principles and pragmatism, not rigid ideology. On facts and evidence, not emotion or prejudice.
    • America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America.
    • I believe American leadership has been wanting, but is still wanted.
    • We must use what has been called “smart power,” the full range of tools at our disposal. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.
    • I don’t get up every morning thinking only about the threats and dangers we face. With every challenge comes an opportunity to find promise and possibility in the face of adversity and complexity.

    She consistently displayed a deep and comprehensive knowledge of all the world’s hotspots. Look over the transcripts of the hearing—the proof is there. This is a person who obviously does her homework.

    Further information and quotes taken from the NYT live blog transcript:

    [When] Senator Boxer displays photographs of women [from other parts of the world] who were burned in acid attacks, punished for divorce or other matters, Senator Clinton responds emphatically.

    It is her hope, she promises, to persuade more governments “that we cannot have a free, prosperous, peaceful, progressive world if women are treated in such a discriminatory and violent way.” In addition to the attacks on Pakistani women outlined by Senator Boxer, Mrs. Clinton cites the attacks on young school girls by Taliban sympathizers.

    “They want to maintain an attitude,” she charged, “that keeps women unhealthy, unfed, uneducated, and this is something that results all too often in violence against these young women.”

    “This is not culture, this is not custom, this is criminal,” she said.

    Speaking broadly and promising that she would place an emphasis on areas like the Office on Human Trafficking and the Women’s Office, she said: “I want to pledge to you that as Secretary of State, I view these issues as central to our foreign policy not as adjunct or in any way lesser. …”

    Senator Clinton’s extensive resume of work on behalf of women and children ( makes her a very interesting and unique candidate for Secretary of State. Women make up 51% of the world’s population. She does have an excellent point when she communicates that defending the rights the many “unhealthy, unfed, uneducated” women (and children) of the world of the should be “central to our foreign policy” as it will help us attain a more “free, prosperous, peaceful, progressive world….” Think about that. It’s refreshing and brilliant.

    For those deeply concerned about Israel (again from NYT live blog transcript):

    Invoking her husband’s work in the Middle East, Senator Clinton recognizes that however intractable problems in the region might seem, “many presidents, including my husband, have spent years trying to help work out a resolution — and we cannot give up on peace.”

    “The president-elect and I understand and are deeply sympathetic to Israel’s desire to defend itself under the current conditions, and to be free of shelling by Hamas rockets.”

    “However we have also been reminded of the tragic humanitarian costs of conflict in the Middle East, and pained by the suffering of Palestinian and Israeli civilians. This must only increase our determination to seek a just and lasting peace agreement that brings real security to Israel, normal and positive relations with its neighbors; and independence, economic progress and security to the Palestinians in their own state.”

    These are measured, empathetic and solution-oriented statements.

    Judge Senator Clinton for the words she uses and the actions she takes, not via the words and actions of others. You do not have to agree with her or like her, but you must at least give her an impartial hearing and present what she stands for fairly. All of the above points I have made I can imagine Governor Sarah Palin also making, as I noticed she never suffered from CDS. She was always fair minded and refrained from making inflammatory accusations, exaggerations, and misrepresentations about Clinton. Her disputes were only with Clinton’s policy stances, and this was one of the reasons true feminists from both the right and left respected and embraced Governor Palin. This same type of reason and fair mindedness is what we should use to judge Senator Clinton.

  10. Jeff Schreiber says:


    I’m trying to make up some ground with schoolwork right now, so excuse me for being short.

    I’m not saying that Clinton is uneducated. I’m not saying even that she’s unqualified. Those are things that were said about Sarah Palin.

    I’m saying that, when it comes to bestowing American diplomatic treatment to a foreign land, don’t you think it’s important to know if that regime had given a few million dollars to the SecState’s husband? Doesn’t it make you wonder if, regardless of all of that homework done, regardless of the pragmatism, Sen. Clinton may be beholden to someone?

    Thanks, by the way, for writing such a logical and thought-out response to the piece. Now, I need to get back to studying.

    – Jeff

  11. Anonymous says:

    Hold on just a minute all you Republicans…………let’s not forget the Bushes and all of their very very very close ties with the saudis…………..remember them??? huh? Huh? do ya? – they certainly made sure that OIL was the big thing for them and got their share – watch the throwing of stones – guys – the glass might not break and those stones could bounce right back at ya………..
    PS I’m an Independent and I wanted Hillary for President not the fraud piece of shit that’s parading around DC now……….

  12. Anonymous says:

    Tigress, you progressive little monkey,

    One thing that you failed to mention in your objections, as to the account of facts, by this article’s authors,

    The odor on former president Clinton’s index finger should not have been described as “smelly”, but rather, “smelling of sea kittens.”

  13. Anonymous says:

    Hillary can have all the flowing commentary on earth written in support of her whatever……. Bottom line… She was one of the very few that was in a position to stand up and demand Obama show his proof to hold office….She, like all the rest failed to uphold her oath of office to protect the Constitution.

    I wouldn't give her or anyone else that now holds a position in the House or Senate…a vote…a position…or the time of day! They have all(including Ms. Clinton) shown their true colors….They don't respect those that voted for them,the rule of law,this Country,their oaths of office or the Constitution. On these points alone they "ALL" need to be removed from office and never even considered for any position of trust or power again….. Like the old saying goes… A leopard never changes his spots!

    Anyone that continues to place these dishonorable(criminal) politicans back in positions that allow them to keep putting this country at risk and on the block for sale for their own gain represent part of the problem…NOT part of the solution.

    Politicians endear themselves to segments of people,but at what cost to the overall good of this country? These groups continue to vote these corrupt people into office and positions of power,even after they prove they have no respect for the will of the people or this country.

    The Senate and House keep turning a deaf ear to the American people,yet everyone continues to champion their favorites relentlessly…..WAKE UP…. They are "ALL" to blame for the position this Country and everyone of us now find ourselves in.Don't even try to convince yourself anyone is clean in this mess….they "ALL" (including Hillary) have a hand in the economic mess and they "ALL" don't care a twit what we have to say about it.

    Anyone at this point that thinks they represent "us" is mistaken…They represent "THEMSELVES" (Hillary included) and have "ALL" sold us down the river to the highest bidder and special interest group.

    This country functions on popularity and $$$$$$$$$$… Until the focus in government is this country and it's well being(not fringe special interest groups that pay for skewed government)we will continue to spiral down.

    Bottom line… Everyone in office right now is against the Constitution, and the American people….They have proven this over & over this year. They refuse to control our borders,our economy, and our laws. Almost everything they have done lately has been against the American people…

    "Don't blow smoke in my face,as you destroy this country and call it incense."


  14. Anonymous says:

    The reason the libs/dems can get away with such unethical activities is because no one challenges them on it and sticks with the challenge until the libs/dems stop the unethical activity.

    Honest, ethical, conservative politicians have given the libs/dems a pass for so long that the dems think it is okay to be sleazy and unethical.

  15. Tigress says:

    Dear Jeff,

    Yes, I do think it’s a potential issue. Senator Clinton’s situation is unique, though: we’ve never before had a Secretary of State who’s spouse is a former president, and it has been perfectly legal (and–let’s give the guy a smidgen of credit here–generous) for Bill Clinton to do this fundraising. They (Obama/Congress) have figured out a way to accommodate the Foundation, so let’s not automatically speculate that it means something shady is going on.

    If we are truly concerned about our government officials being beholden to foreign interests, let’s start by looking at Obama. He or somebody from his ‘team’ should be in jail right now for doing what they have so far admitted to–accepting $30 million in foreign contributions–and we will never know the REAL amount since they are not required to submit to an audit! At least the Clinton Foundation files annual reports and is subject to the IRS. Sheesh. Anyway, all this stuff is probably small potatos compared to the amount of money that passes between governments as ‘investments’ and ‘foreign aid’.

    Thank you for hearing me out–I know you are an extremely busy person. There are many of us out here who find Senator Clinton (while human and a politician to boot) to be incredibly inspirational. She received the most primary votes of ANY candidate in the history of the United States, and there are very solid reasons behind that accomplishment, if only one looks beyond the negative hype.

  16. Jeff Schreiber says:

    The odor on former president Clinton’s index finger should not have been described as “smelly”, but rather, “smelling of sea kittens.”

    Now that there is funny, I don’t care who you are.

    PETA makes me laugh. “Sea kittens,” especially grilled with a little sage butter, make me smile and rub my tummy.

  17. BlueWater says:

    Hey, Anon (independent for Hillary), how original! Responding to a Hillary expose by bashing Bush! I wish I had thought of that. I try to protect that lady, but I never have any hard data. From now on, I’ll deflect attention by pointing out how Bush stinks! And how he uses Purell after shaking hands with people he doesn’t like! While I’m generally considered to be an intellectual genius, that one slipped right by me. I could have saved myself a lot of grief over the years by not engaging in these tiresome and irrelevant discussions about “the facts.” Who needs ‘em? That’s what I always say. The White House should be reserved for a representative of a down-trodden, victimized group that can show those old-farts what it’s like to be ruled, ignored, and marginalized – as long as she’s female, but not Palin because she put her private jet on E-Bay – what an idiot. How can you be against global warming if you don’t have a jet to get to the next conference? Besides, she’s got the only state that isn’t in the red – she must be on the take! She’s even giving money to Alaskans instead of spending it on global initiatives, clinics or mittens for the illegal immigrants picking snowberries. She’s a cruel, heartless, moose-killing woman. She’s the reason the show Northern Exposure got canceled – no moose for the intro! We should rename Alaska “Fannie Maeville” – they claimed to be profitable, too, until we realized they are building the Bush Presidential Library! NO ONE could possibly succeed in this country with the way Bush screwed it up. That working mother who accepts her teenage daughter’s kid is not to be trusted. And what’s this about firing the security detail for her family? She didn’t want security leaks – and she doesn’t care about the safety of her family, either. She’s so selfish. Go Hillary! Who cares if the people of New York were crazy enough to elect a Senator who didn’t live there – crazy like a fox I always say! Who cares if she has no executive experience or major legislation behind her – she cares about me and you! Isn’t that what it’s all about! Let’s hug!

  18. Anonymous says:

    Nobama and no Clintons….I don’t trust any of them as far as one could throw them. Hillary is part of the problem on the HILL!!! Too much money and too much power. A deadly combination…one which this country needs to move away from. WE need to get regular folks running our country. They truly know what is going on and why they can’t pay their bills!!!! These elitist all need to thrown out with the baby and the bathwater!

  19. Anonymous says:

    I have been a constant follower of this site for a while. I am a now former Democrat who is now independent because I am so disgusted with what the democratic party has done – and I am glad my eyes have been opened. It was us democrats who first sounded the alarms about Obama.
    That aside, I have enjoyed this blog and appreciate the smart commentary, but when you start talking about Bill Clintons fingers smelling like fish I start getting offended and pissed off. Is there any place where I/we can go and not have to be subjected to this kind of sexist remark?
    This is one of women’s biggest gripes about Obama, about the DNC, about the media, about the treatment of both HRC and Sarah Palin, don’t talk about women like that. Don’t be as bad as them, there was no need for it.

  20. gailbullock says:

    “The Senate and House keep turning a deaf ear to the American people,yet everyone continues to champion their favorites relentlessly…..WAKE UP…. They are ‘ALL’ to blame for the position this Country and everyone of us now find ourselves in. Don’t even try to convince yourself anyone is clean in this mess….they ‘ALL’ (including Hillary) have a hand in the economic mess and they ‘ALL’ don’t care a twit what we have to say about it.

    “Anyone at this point that thinks they represent ‘us’ is mistaken…They represent ‘THEMSELVES’ (Hillary included) and have ‘ALL’ sold us down the river to the highest bidder and special interest group.” (END QUOTE)

    How many thousands of faxes, letters, emails, and telephone calls did we make to ask that someone–ANYONE–in the House and/or Senate make an objection to the Electoral Votes based on proof of eligibility? How many objections were made? Not a one!

    How many thousands of letters, etc., were made to the members of the SCOTUS? How many Justices heard our cry and voted to hear ONE of the eligibility cases, with respect to upholding our Constitution and protecting our Nation? Not enough.

    Our freedoms are being siphoned out of our Constitution by the very people that we entrusted our liberty and lives to. It’s time to clean House (and Senate), folks!

    I used to be a Democrat. Now I am so far right-wing conservative that I am running out of room on the right!

    JEFF, you answered one of my questions in a comment reply–you are back in school. Hope the Christmas break was enough to recharge your batteries.

    RICK, good to hear from you again. Excellent read, guys!

    I’m still praying because “In God We Trust.”

  21. Anonymous says:


    Now that the Obama BC case is dead I believe that traffic to your internet website will dry up quickly.

    I can’t believe that you didn’t pickup on the story about the Obama nomination of the U,S Treasury Secretary who owes back taxes.

    Good luck with your studies and future law degree. I can only hope that our next generation of lawyers are smarter and not easily manipulated by our corrupt government officials and Supreme Court Justices.

    I also believe that eventually the truth will come out about Obama especially if he disappoints the people that elected him.

  22. gailbullock says:

    I don’t know which key I pushed that deleted everything in my comment except for the last sentence, which made me rewrite the comment again, but I forgot one point in doing so.

    Remember the talk about Hillary’s having an ace up her sleeve during the campaign? Was that ace her knowledge that Obama is not a natural-born citizen? Logic tells me it was.

    And, I enjoy remembering the fact that Obama and Friends did not respond to Berg by Dec. 1, which technically was his unspoken admission that he is not eligible to be POTUS.

    “Smelly finger” — Hahahahaha! Good one!

  23. Kris says:

    If I may, and with all due respect to Tigress’ comments above, may I ask just why you and others would find Hillary Clinton “incredibly inspirational“?

    Earlier this commenter also offers us (Jeff) the following:

    You quote the Wall Street Journal as saying “various ‘assorted rogues, dictators and favor-seekers’ including but certainly not limited to more than $60 million from various sources in the Middle East” contributed to his Foundation. This is funny, because normally WE pay money TO all these “rogues, dictators and favor-seekers” out of our own pockets for their oil, minerals, natural gas, and plastic junk that fills our Wal-Mart shelves, and now you are complaining that Bill Clinton is “gallivanting across the globe” accepting their money and funneling it to charitable purposes as well as his presidential library?

    This apparent attempt to compare wholely mismatched offerings is quite an over-reach for even defenders of the Clintons! The last time most observed Mr. Clinton, even in the days of over the top burger consumption, he didn’t seem large enough to be compared, all by himself, to an entire nation’s citizens’ every day welfare, adapted to keeping their homes and families warm or cool, or simply transporting themselves to their places of employment in order to make a living. If anything, that present need to pay for energy elsewhere and outside of the homespun geography falls upon those who blocked most historical attempts to actually get away from such foreign beholdin. And just guess where that fault mostly lies! Perhaps Mr. Clinton’s “donations” from such could have taken other forms of payment!

    What commenter liked in Hillary’s opening remarks – within her thus far platitude positions only:

    We will renew America’s leadership through diplomacy that enhances our security, advances our interests, and reflects our values.

    Hopefully then, she has received therapy to get beyond her usually non-diplomatic expected rant/responses, even to those of no great challenge on her own friendly home turf (those not even holding or creating weapons of mass destruction – including their own bodies) – “right wing conspiracy”

    Foreign policy must be based on a marriage of principles and pragmatism, not rigid ideology. On facts and evidence, not emotion or prejudice.

    Again, one must suspend caution to swallow this – that is, based again on evidence witnessed simply on just the simple personal “problem solving” domestic front history of this individual.

    Those are only two of the suggested platitudes, so far based solely on words/speech writer, that this commenter urges us to give much more weight to than deserved, “knowing” Mrs. Clinton as we do.

    [When] Senator Boxer displays photographs of women [from other parts of the world] who were burned in acid attacks, punished for divorce or other matters, Senator Clinton responds emphatically.

    One can only be stunned to think that the blazing hypocrisy there can go unnoticed. The elephant in the living room is that Mrs. Clinton is one of the most influential women today to back a comparable acid burning – in fact, and including, dismembering and all the rest that mutilates little “women”, now in millions – and that, within her own country’s “brave” new world. Her approach, similar to the UN approach, can only “feed” women if they agree to be sterilized. Such “high ideals” for women somehow always places them in even greater degradation as persons. This “humanitarian” spirit leaves those “helped” in similar outcomes as those “poor” “helped” by Barney Frank’s and Chris Dodd’s schemes with Freddie and Fannie – they’re worse off now than before and many, many more have been added to their ranks than existed prior to such schemes.

    I know it’s hard to climb down from such high hypnotic platitudinal places, but the truth of our lives today demands efforts that, as always, continue to come only from the little, unseen and unrewarded sacrificing forces of love spread thinly but on the face to face reality of neighborhoods/families both at home and abroad. The big fixes, outlined by the unproven and flawed “empowered” ones, mostly waste funds with little “high mindedness” to show afterwards.

    But then, perhaps a last resort could be “tear” diplomacy … or just filling in awkward moments of discrepancies with “adorned” story telling!

    Not my “inspiration” nor any at all for little girls to look up to.

  24. GATOR-1 says:

    Well my hat was beeping so I figured I beter say something…Sea Kittens? Now that IS funny…The thing is I really dont ever want to really know what that man’s anything smells like, at least not firsthand anyways.

    I could not agree more with Dave @ 7:46…They have ALL sold us out!…While I did have a bit higher opinion of Mr. McCain than most I have read here, I never though of him as the ideal man for the job, rather just the best choice. However that little sawed-off SOB could have stood up for us also…

    NONE of them did so I am in full agreement that they ALL should be packing their bags, We cant trust not the first one of them anymore, they have all proven as much as they have all crawled to their corners…The exact “Why” for each of them is hard to figure especially those non-Dems?

    However in Hillary’s case I figure she is just where she decided she wanted to be…She will be confirmed and she knows full well that PEBO is gonna have a rough time with his Administration. She knows full well should something eventually crash and burn for PEBO that she would be a shoe-in to step a position UP….And even if he slides for four full years, while there is certainly honor among thieves…she will challenge him in 2012 and the only way she wont is if he has somehow slithered past all the legal actions and is a position to win again in that case she would most likely be the new VP…Or whatever she choses….

    I feel like she is already calling her own shots as nothing else explains to me how someone comes out of no where and takes down the Clinton Machine…Nothing explains it unless you look real close at the machine…It has always been about “What is best for the Clintons”….Since day one back in AR they both have put themselves above us all, They get what they want and it seems as if they always will…

    Yes she is Smart, she can durn sure give ya a good speech, and she certainly “does her homework”…But the idea that she is just where she wants to be at this point in time is in itself as scary as the whole idea of Mr Sealed My Chit taking office!

    I have confidence however that the game of “Honor Amoung” can not last forever and it is amazing to me the fevered pitch that they are moving to a logical implosion…

    Sit back and watch the Circus is coming…And its gonna be a big one…


    Thanks Jeff, You ACE those classes…!

    Grow Grow Greators

  25. gailbullock says:

    Jeff, we’ll just see how many of us return to your classroom, to hear from Dean Schreiber and Professors Cardillo, Glenn, Hatem, and Saunders. (Did I miss anyone?)

    What we read here at Americas’s Right is like a breath of fresh air! The liberal sites can’t even keep slant out of their headlines, much less their articles.

    America’s Right is referenced all over the Internet now, as it should be! Thank you and your “faculty” for our education, and thanks to the commenters for their work in bringing links to the classroom, too.

    America’s Right is fertile ground; it’s not gonna dry up! That’s not of significance to you anyway. You provided the site as an outlet, not a popularity contest.

  26. Anonymous says:

    The Constitution may stand in the way of the appointment?

    Since when does the Constitution matter to the Dems?

    It has no bearing on who can occupy the WH… do you think it really matters what the SoS gets paid, at least acciording to the Constitution?

  27. Tigress says:

    Marie–Very well said. Brava.

    Kris–I didn’t say ‘you’ had to find her inspirational, but rather that many others have. And I really think the Republican party does not always have the humanitarian prize wrapped up.

    As for the abortion issue, that you would use this as an example of hypocrisy is interesting. There is capitol punishment on the other end of life where Republicans feel very free do decide who is human and who is not, even when such decisions are sometimes tragic ( As for the fetuses who are innocent, at what point have you decided it becomes human? (can of worms alert) I’d like to know–is it when the zygote forms, when it implants on the uterine wall, when it has 1000 cells, 5000 cells, when it has a heartbeat, a brainwave, or the ability to breath on her/his own? Or does the soul enter the body at birth? There are about 10 different points along this line where good people have good points to argue. (The Pope says its even before all those so you can’t use birth control.) Why, if we are trying to achieve a society with true liberty, are we trying to force our specific and personal interpretations regarding this issue on others? Because ‘we’ others are devoid of morality? This needs to be an issue that government stays out of, in true libertarian form. It’s one thing I don’t get about Republicans–they are all for economic but not personal freedom (unless it involves a gun). I think the evangelicals have hijacked your party and that’s why you don’t have more support.

    That and the name calling.

  28. Lisa says:

    Hey Marie,
    Since when is “stinking” a diss on women? Women are just as likely to be corrupt and stinky as the men are.

    Besides…. if you would go back and re-read that post, the post was referring to the former president’s (as in BILL Clinton) finger stinking. So, not only were the comments not directed at women but not directed at Hillary.

    I am so tired of the whole if you call me a name or say that I’m (fill in the blank) that it’s rampant age, sex, race, gender bias. Give me a break. We all need to grow a thicker skin and stop playing the poor me game. If someone says you stink…. Hey, maybe you do… buy some deodorant!

  29. Anonymous says:

    I am tired of the PC thing too but do you think there are no limits on tact?
    What I objected to was not the original article but in the comments were someone said Bill’s finger actually smelled like ‘sea kittens’ which PETA recently started calling fish. Do you think, in an article about Hillary Clinton, talking about her known to stray husband as having a finger that smells like fish, that there is no sexism in that?
    Me personally, I like people to speak freely, but I am getting really angry that whenever the conversation is about a woman it devolves into this sort of thing. People can wear t-shirts with the word ‘c**t’ on them too,but they won’t be my buddy, and I won’t respect their political opinion.

  30. Kris says:

    Tigress …. again:

    There is capitol punishment on the other end of life where Republicans feel very free do decide who is human and who is not,

    The number of strawmen in the pockets of liberals never fails to amaze. To compare the most vulnerable and innocent life with those living out their lives freely and being judged upon capital crimes – makes one wonder if people have now lost their ability to reason.

    As for the fetuses who are innocent, at what point have you decided it becomes human?

    At what time would you have liked your own existence to have been deliberately ended because if having occurred at any of your own self diagnosed moments of unworthiness to live you would certainly not be currently participating in a comment box. Amazing just how final certain “procedures” against living humans can be. Now then, is it at this ( ) day at this ( ) minute that you ARE NOT human but at this ( ) day and at this ( ) minute with an additional 30 seconds you suddenly have a whole new label – because that is the kind of stupid science and reasoning your “life is cheap” attitude exposes.

    Why, if we are trying to achieve a society with true liberty, are we trying to force our specific and personal interpretations regarding this issue on others?

    Because many of your “we” is “forcing” those deaths upon the innocent – now to the evolving acceptance of infanticide too. And because it is now factual that the majority of those killings involve force upon the woman – “forced abortions” – by those around her whom she is dependent upon and/or involved with. Nice, warm, loving society (brave new world) you enjoy in your outside “womb with a view”. Also, let’s not forget that “liberty” you mention when it pertains to consciences of pharmacists and/or doctors or hospitals who freely DO NOT allow such deliberate killing.

    Because ‘we’ others are devoid of morality?

    Well, with the ongoing evidence presented each day, yes, it would rather appear so.

    This needs to be an issue that government stays out of

    The proof, dear, of that is in your own pudding – so then, get rid of Roe – definitely don’t allow for FOCA – and free us from witnessing human beings (our representatives) spending hours and hours attempting to somehow justify stabbing fully formed infants in the head and sucking out the brains (this after creating a breach birth out of a perfectly normal pregnancy) so they won’t be completely, bodily in the outside world – DELIBERATELY! Insanity without excuse for lack of conscience. Sick!

    And I wouldn’t get into party affiliation calling or any kind of self anointing title one gives oneself. The sickness is now widespread – esp. in the self proclaimed “progressives” … no matter where they live. In that they’ve been given a reprieve – to be allowed to “at least” live.

  31. PattyW says:

    A few ramblings…
    I have always said that politicians were just liars and thieves who can’t get jobs anywhere else, and I still believe most of them are. Don’t let the Clinton’s “charity” blind you to the fact that they are only in it for themselves. If they were honorably charitable, they would keep it to themselves like the rest of us. I do not flaunt my charitable contributions for what it can get me.
    And the media… I fell for one of Huckabee’s “teasers” the other night he had Jerry Springer on. Let me preface this with the fact that I was born, grew up and spent the majority of my adult life in Cincinnati. When Mike Huckabee said he was going to tell something about Jerry most folks were unaware of, I thought, “Will he go THERE???” but of course, he didn’t. Instead of telling everyone about the scandal of Springer’s political life in Cinti, we got some High fructose corn syrup sap about his downtrodden life as a child. Why do these liberals get such a kick out of being portrayed as the victim? I wanted to hear about Jerry’s scandal of writing that check to a hooker in Kentucky. They don’t call him King of Sleaze for nothing! He gets it honest! Most people don’t know about his political life in Cincinnati. He was the most liberal mayor that conservative city has ever seen and because of his antics, it would be along time before any liberals could get elected there!

    And Jeff, since the issue regarding Barry’s native birthplace is rapidly becoming a moot point, I ask what ever became of all the Acorn fraud. I was glad to see the bit on the Black Panthers since I had seen that when it happened and was wondering about it. But places like Ohio and their stupid voter reg/ballot at the same time deal, and people with phoney addresses, and the OH att. gen refusing to do her job and validate the reg. What happened with all that? We may never know.

  32. Jan says:

    Thank you both for a well thought out piece. While Hillary can come across as polished, I am of the firm opinion that her hands are dirty too. The “me mentality” in Washington applies to all of them. They are no longer there for the country or the good of the people, but for themselves.

    Kris @ 3:36 – Well said…..My thoughts exactly.

  33. Tigress says:

    Dear Kris,

    In the point about capitol punishment, the website I referred to must be addressed. I do not defend criminals, especially violent ones; they need to be punished harshly. But sometimes we as a society get it wrong. Please visit the site. It is a group that legally exonerates convicted persons using DNA evidence. I actually have 2 conservative friends who I told about this site and they were angry about it, which was weird. I didn’t get that–what’s humane about wanting someone to ‘pay’ whether it was the guilty part or not?

    And you still did not answer my basic question: at what point does a cell or two become human, become a ‘life’, become a soul? It’s tricky, isn’t it? Everyone has a point they refer to, and they are not all the same. That is the problem. My personal stance on abortion is just that–personal. A lot of stuff you said about what I supposedly think is a figment of your imagination.

    It’s really funny that you refer to me as a liberal, because on other sites they refer to me as a righty. I am just for liberty, that’s all.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Are we assuming that the “smelling like sea kittens” comment was from a man? … If so … is that sexist in itself?

  35. Kris says:

    Tigress … again:

    And you still did not answer my basic question: at what point does a cell or two become human, become a ‘life’, become a soul? It’s tricky, isn’t it?

    No, not at all when the ultimate question is the human existence itself. Once existence is on a continuum there is no right ever to stop it intentionally. Any other consideration is cheap and adds to the cheapening of life we find all around us today. You lived in the womb and continue to live on the same continuum and what you find “tricky”, if it had been exercised on yourself at any of those points you opine about, you yourself would not be here today typing away. Now if you take that lightly then I would suggest that you have a rather suicidal mentality. And to follow that logic, as the discoverer of “the pill” has recently confessed,

    “Carl Djerassi, the 85-year-old Austrian who helped invent the Pill, says his creation has led to a “demographic catastrophe [and national suicide].

    And paralleling this the epidemic of obesity arrives at the same time of the dwindling number of mouths and that populations of Western countries are so decimated that immigration solutions are more like necessary invasions to shore up the national suicides taking place.

    Unfortunately the problem seems to be here that you can’t find it in yourself to get “basic” enough about the question of human existence. You might as well take similar polls about projecting your own life’s age expectation. You’ll get just as many silly mindless offerings, but I bet you won’t deliberately apply any of those options to yourself … and that because admittedly you can’t solve that mystery! It’s a little different perspective when “the life you save may be your own”.

  36. Tigress says:

    Dear Kris,

    You avoid questions with pseudo-intellectual drivel and you are very condescending.

    Good night.

  37. Let us move forward says:

    I wonder if we would have known all this if Hillary had been elected Pres. It seems that the cabinet members are vetted more extensively than the President.

    Or maybe it is because the cabinet members have to be vetted publicly by the Senate and we don’t have to rely on the press.

    Maybe the Presidential candidates should be publicly vetted by the Senate and House before they are allowed to run. Would require amending the Constitution though.

  38. troubleshooter says:

    BAGGAGE you say baggage…
    One should recon the history of these two in light of the facts of what they have walked away from. Ever so close to getting busted but never having the stink of the matter on’em: and so they walk; and as they go they keep building the ultimate in liability protection (POWER). Their whole history in Arkansas, the chapter as chief executive (it was a cigar not sex stupid) and first lady… included a long line of international who’s who of kung-fu fighter dollar men? Equally cunning once non-resident alien status to DC was established… their flight to NY? How about the calamity of her campaign or was it such? Fictional…this assessment before her peers an outcome of an unnatural birth but
    like some of the board games requiring patience…forward thinking and lots of snacks: the wise ol’owl is heard from with in the grove who…who who who…who is behind it all? Only them that need to know or is it they’ all?
    Know this: that no amount of party reorganization will fix this mess…the opportunity came and went…weep and howl cause you, we, no: us’all ain’t seen nothing-yet!

Speak Your Mind