November 5, 2007 – 7:59 am
I’ve been out of the country for about a week. So I come back, and start digging through the news. And I come to this ad by Mitt Romney.
Romney is classing this election up by attacking Hillary Clinton over sex with his "internship" line. I want to be clear about something.
We will lose with this kind of behavior. We will get crushed with this kind of behavior. Attacking Bill on sex in the 90s didn’t work. He left office with twice President Bush’s approval rating.
Furthermore, as I have pointed out repeatedly, Hillary is a crook. She makes Bob Ney look like a choir boy. It is clear that she has been involved in profound campaign finance fraud related to Norman Hsu, etc. There was also the party that she accepted a $1m in-kind for several years ago. There is all the 90s era stuff with Bill.
But attacking her for sex is going to put us in the same place. Mitt Romney should be ashamed of himself, not that he’s capable of that. And not that he’s at any risk of winning the presidency anyways.
Matt Margolis is doing the right thing. Mitt Romney is not.
Tags: Clinton, Corruption, Ethics, Romney
October 16, 2007 – 10:14 am
(Cross-posted from Redstate)
With Hillary Clinton the seemingly inevitable Democrat presidential nominee, conservatives are going to have to start reminding people just how bad "that woman" is.
The good news? There is quite a bit of material to work with. Like this article in The Hill by Alex Bolton. He is writing about a new book by Don Van Natta, Jr., and Jeff Gerth, a current and a former New York Times reporter, respectively. Excerpts:
“Hillary’s defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack.
“The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill. Bill’s supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions."
So she listens in on the conversations of her political enemies? But the CIA better not listen in to the conversation of America’s enemies. Oh no, that’s a violation of their rights!
In August, Clinton voted against an emergency law that temporarily expanded the government’s power to conduct surveillance on American soil without a warrant. The bill was criticized for being overly broad and sidelining the role of a special court set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
You can see how she could be a change candidate. In her strange world, there probably isn’t enough hypocrisy and venality in Washington. And she actually could change that.
Tags: Clinton, Corruption
October 9, 2007 – 3:11 pm
Yesterday, Kevin Hassett, an economist at AEI and a member of John McCain’s economics team, pointed out something that we forget. Hillary Clinton is a big ole porker:
Democrats have been so busy preparing the coronation of Hillary Clinton that they have failed to train a critical eye on her record.
When it comes to earmarks, an issue that voters responded to more than any other in the last election except for Iraq, her record is about as bad as it gets. If Dennis Hastert was the king of earmarks, Hillary Clinton was his queen. Republicans had their “bridge to nowhere.'’ Hillary has her knitting mill. …
The Clinton campaign refused to respond at all to requests that she identify her earmarks.
Here’s a project for diligent GOP and conservative activists:
- Identify the pork projects. How much taxpayer money does she spend on ridiculous things?
- Identify how the projects are being used politically. Which of her donors or allies are making money off of the projects?
We have the time to do the research. And the press believes that the Clintons are crooks. This will just be another fact after Norman Hsu, etc. If we get the facts, I think that these facts will get told on more than Fox.
Tags: Clinton, Corruption, Ethics, Republicans, Technology
October 9, 2007 – 2:59 pm
Andrew Sullivan makes a powerful argument against Hillary Clinton:
A thief and liar is hired by Clinton. But his thievery is less important to Clinton than his loyalty. After all, his theft was an attempt to keep president Clinton’s failures with respect to al Qaeda under wraps. And so he gets a pardon. Remember: the Clintons are on their best behavior right now. And they still rehire their corrupted loyalists. Like the other royal family, the Clinton court exists to reward loyalty, protect the brand, circle the wagons and to punish dissenters. With post-Cheney executive powers, the potential for the Clinton machine to abuse their power more profoundly than in the 1990s is high.
The Clintons are crooks. No question about it. And the inability of our party to stand anywhere credibly of corruption is going to make it hard to attack her.
Tags: Clinton, Corruption, Ethics
October 3, 2007 – 10:52 am
Reps. Jeb Hensarling and Marsha Blackburn had a very brief conference call with bloggers.
They noted that S-CHIP was vetoed by the President. They pointed out all the details about this being more than a children’s healthcare program. 17 states are adding adults with this. Dropping the citizenship requirement. Clearly this call (and further calls) are about rallying support for that. They also talked about earmarks.
Then there were questions.
Ed Morrissey from Captains Quarters. He asked whether or not the veto could be sustained. Hensarling points out that they already have the Republicans votes to win this fight. Then they talked about talking points. "If people realize what they have done with the S-CHIP program. With the Hillary Clinton memo from yesterday. … A walk towards a nationalized healthcare system. … More people will have opposition when they see the details …"
I asked about stripping Rep. John Doolittle of his position as founder of the RSC. Hensarling said that he would not support stripping any RSC member because they are the target of an investigation. That’s very disappointing.
Dave Weigel of Reason.com. Asks about John Murtha’s comments about earmarks and transparency. "Transparency is John Murtha’s worst nightmare. He will do everything he can to combat transparency to the earmark system. … What the Democrats say and what they have done are completely at odds with one another. … They have huge loopholes in their system. .. This is a soft underbelly of the Democratic Party. … If [earmarks] are so good, why do they try to hide them?"
NZ Bear asked about the future legislative fights over the war. Hensarling says that he was surprised that the Democrats have not brought more resolutions to the floor. "We know that they are being hypocritical about the war. … As Jim Clyburn stated so eloquently, Good news about the war is bad news for the Democratic Party. …"
Tags: CA 04, Congress, Corruption, Healthcare, Live blogging, Republicans
September 16, 2007 – 8:33 pm
I keep giggling whenever I read about the Norman Hsu scandal.
First, Fred Thompson got it right. Didn’t the Clinton’s learn anything from the fundraising scandals of the 90s?
Second, the first great fundraising scandal of the post-Abramoff ethics era is about an illegal donor. He didn’t give money for ideological reasons. He gave money so that he could pretend to other people that he had access.
Third, it was about bundling. The new ethics reform legislation addressed bundling … by lobbyists. Not felons. And not random donors.
Oh well. Somehow, I don’t think that the Democrats are looking for ethics reform.
Tags: Clinton, Corruption, Ethics, Fundraising
September 5, 2007 – 4:45 am
Jon Fleischman has some polling data on John Doolittle re-election. They are bad:
- In a one-on-one match up, if the election were held today, Democrat Charlie Brown gets 51% of the vote to Congressman Doolittle’s 31%.
- Those surveyed were also asked if they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Doolittle. Respondents came back with 28% favorable and 56% unfavorable.
- In the survey, GOP primary voters were asked whether Congressman Doolittle should run for another term. 33% of those asked said he should. A staggering 50% said that the Congressman should either resign or should not run again.
Of course, the Congressman’s staff are getting subpoenaed to testify to a grand jury on Abramoff:
Two of GOP Rep. John Doolittle’s top aides have been subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury investigating ties between Doolittle, his wife and jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
The grand jury subpoenas from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia were issued to Chief of Staff Ron Rogers and Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Blankenburg. They were announced on the House floor as Congress returned from its August recess Tuesday after the aides informed the House speaker about the subpoenas, as required under House rules.
Tom Cole at the NRCC has already thrown Doolittle under the bus. Perhaps it is time for him to get out?
I think that it is additionally significant that Jon is writing this and pitching a candidate, Assemblyman Ted Gaines. Jon is a leader in the conservative wing of the party. The fact that he is moving this suggests that conservatives are ready and willing to attack Doolittle
Tags: CA 04, California, Congress, Corruption, Polling, Republican
