South Carolina Repudiates Clinton Race-Baiting

Could there be a backlash against the Clintons? They used race to divide the people of South Carolina, in other primary states, and it has failed, so far. We won't know until Florida and February 5th whether divide-and-conquer politics will have succeeded or if the Clinton gang self-destructed:

South Carolina (Reuters) - Barack Obama easily won South Carolina's bitterly contested Democratic presidential primary with the aid of heavy black support on Tuesday, dealing a setback to rival Hillary Clinton after a week of political brawling.

Obama, an Illinois senator who would be the first black U.S. president, beat Clinton and John Edwards handily in the latest fight in a back-and-forth Democratic nominating battle. Clinton and Edwards were running close for second place, according to exit polls.

South Carolina was the latest test for Obama and Clinton, a New York senator, in their escalating battle for the right to represent the Democratic Party in November's presidential election.

After two consecutive losses, in New Hampshire and Nevada, Obama badly needed a win on Saturday as he headed into the February 5 "Super Tuesday" contests in two dozen states to have a realistic chance of victory.

The high stakes fueled a week of angry accusations, harsh advertisements and increasingly personal jabs between the two candidates, capped by a volley of attacks on Obama from Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Exit polls showed Obama won four of every five black voters in a state where they were expected to be about half of the primary electorate. He also won one-quarter of white votes, higher than many had predicted.

Why we're Needed: World Income Inequality and Globalization

I made this addition to TPP on the issue of world income inequality. The purpose is to point out that globalization and outsourcing have neither benefited America or the rest of the world. There is in fact greater inequality. This in turn creates much of the increased turmoil in the world. In can be argued that 9-11 had in roots economic injustice. A poor world is one in where hatred and ignorance breeds. In Muslim nations power is in the hands of a few (or a dictator) while the great majority suffer. And this poverty is what fuels Jihadism. There is great resentment among the peopl at the fact that Sheiks live in great luxuary, with the help of Western oil companies, while they live in abject poverty. America should side with the people of the world and help promote economic justice. That will lead to greater democracy and fewer threats like al Qaeda. Prior to radical Islamic there was Soviet Communism that also took advantage of poverty and economic inequality:

"In nation after nation, conditions for a majority of people have actually worsened in the last decade, as the gap between those on top and bottom grows. A U.N. report released on August 25, 2005 reported that in sub-Saharan Africa alone, the number of poor people increased by almost ninety million in little more than a decade (from 1990 to 2001). In Latin America, unemployment rose from nearly 7 percent in 1995 to 9 percent in 2002....Despite claims that the globalization of capitalism is raising living standards for all, this 158-page U.N. report, The World Social Situation: The Inequality Predicament, noted that greater economic globalization has gone along with with greater inequality both between and within countries. Even comparatively wealthy nations like the United States, Canada, and Britain have failed to escape this trend."

- Source: The Real Wealth of Nations by Riane Eisler

Clinton Posed with Obama "Slum Lord" in 1990s

Once again the Clintons are caught being hypocrites. The power couple have had a history of posing and taking money from countless numbers of criminals. So when Hillary attacked Obama for his ties to a crook, we shouldn't be surprised that Billary also had met or took money from the same person:

Bill and Hillary Clinton got walloped yesterday when a photograph surfaced showing them posing with an alleged fraudster whom the former first lady had called a "slum landlord" and linked to Barack Obama in Monday's debate.

In the picture, Hillary Rodham Clinton is grinning alongside Chicago builder and Democratic moneyman Antoin "Tony" Rezko - who stands between the Clintons.

Rezko has been indicted on federal fraud charges and goes to trial next month. The charges involve an alleged scam by Rezko to extort payoffs from companies looking to do business with two state boards in Illinois.

Just days ago, Sen. Clinton slammed Obama for his connection to Rezko, after the presidential rivals got in an angry personal exchange about Republican ideas.

"I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago," Clinton fumed.

NBC revealed the photo yesterday when Clinton appeared on the "Today" show.

"I probably have taken hundreds of thousands of pictures. I don't know the man. I wouldn't know him if he walked in the door. I don't have a 17-year relationship with him," Clinton said when asked by host Matt Lauer for her explanation.

Detroit's Mayor in Sex Scandal

If it weren't bad enough that the people of Detroit are suffering, largely due to a totally inept, corrupt government, but they are forced to live through the embarrassment--and cost--of a sex scandal. The tax payers of Detroit, whom cannot afford paying millions for the whistle blowers settlements,are being dealt possibly a death blow. Democrats or Republicans don't to mention what scandals go on when towns are controlled by one party:

But what makes this one extraordinary are the lengths to which the forbidden lovers went to cover up their trysts. Back in April 2002, only four months into Kilpatrick's first term, rumors emerged of a wild party involving a stripper at the mayoral mansion. Around the same time, one of the mayor's bodyguards, Harold Nelthrope, reported that the mayor's personal police posse was running amuck, crashing cars and racking up overtime. Deputy Police Chief Gary Brown launched an investigation, which could have uncovered the clandestine couple. But two weeks into his investigation, Brown was fired. A month later, Brown and Nelthrope filed a whistleblower lawsuit against Kilpatrick and the city, which finally came to trial last summer. Kilpatrick and Beatty insisted under oath there was no affair and that they hadn't fired Brown. Even without the text messages that appear to maker liars out of them now, the jury found against Kilpatrick and the city. The case ended up being settled for $9 million of Detroit taxpayers' dollars--or, as the Free Press figured it, the equivalent of 126 police officers' salaries.

Now, Kilpatrick and Beatty could face perjury charges--a 15-year offense. The county prosecutor, Kym Worthy, announced Friday she is launching an investigation, which is expected to include how the Free Press obtained the text messages the city failed to turn over during the trial last summer. Worthy is promising to be "fair, impartial and thorough. We will not be rushed by anyone or anything."

Predictably, there is outrage all over Detroit and calls for the mayor's head. "He's an embarrassment and now it's proven he's a habitual liar," city union boss John Riehl, told NEWSWEEK. Riehl, who represents 900 Detroit workers in the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, is having them picket city hall on Wednesday to demand that Kilpatrick resign. "He's put Detroit's national image in the gutter."

Florida Republican Presidential Debate Transcript

Romney is ahead in the polls in Florida and he did very well in Thursday's debate. McCain might not have it wrapped-up after all. It was clever for the candidates to avoid attacking each other. It drew a obvious contrast to the squabbling among the Democrats. Read the Entire transcript here. Here's an excerpt:

MR. WILLIAMS: So to our candidates, gentlemen, welcome to you all. Thank you for being here, and let's begin. And Governor Romney, I thought we'd begin with you. The president just today signed off on this economic stimulus plan that would send out 116 million checks to American homes. The plan is somewhat contrary to yours, providing lots of short-term stimulus to individuals. Your plan, as you know, focuses as much on the long term as the short term. Are you disappointed that your recipe for the economy was not embraced by the president? And as a follow-up, will you now embrace his plan?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, there's a great deal that is effective in his plan. I just wish it went further. What's effective is, first, he's getting money back to consumers. And given the fact that two-thirds of our economy is a consumer economy, getting money back into the hands of our citizens, a lot of them paying a lot for gasoline, a lot for heating oil, a lot of people concerned about how to make ends meet, that makes sense to me. Mine was a little different. It had a permanent tax cut for people at the lowest income tax bracket. I also have a savings plan for individuals that allows folks who are making under $200,000 a year to save their money tax free, no (interest on ?) interest, dividends or capital gains. I guess we can get to that later. But his first start to help the consumers is a good start.

I just think we need to go further.

Second, we go to -- to corporate support and helping corporations have the incentive to buy more capital equipment. That he also does. I do it more aggressively than he does by writing off a larger amount of capital expenditures -- getting companies to, frankly, buy more stuff so that as they do so that other companies will hire people because if you want to turn an economy around, the key thing is to grow jobs. It's not just to get checks in the hands of consumers; it's consumers buying things that creates jobs. It's companies buying things that create jobs.

And then finally, his last leg is with regards to helping the FHA take on a broader array of -- of -- of homes that are in trouble, homeowners that are in trouble. And that's really very important, and I'm appreciative of the fact that the president took that step. We -- we really have across the country a housing crisis, a mortgage crisis, that seems to have spilled out into the entire economy, and -- and the effect of this, of course, is to put a lot of pain against a lot of people. And so helping reverse the housing crisis is critical.

And that's why expanding the FHA loan requirements, or excuse me, if you will, loosening those requirements and expanding the ability of FHA to help out homeowners would make a big difference. So net-net is something I support, and I look forward to taking it further.

NY Times Endorses Establishment Candidates: Clinton, McCain

I recently recently that the likely winners of their respective primaries are the most establishment of the candidates...Hillary Clinton and John McCain. The Times just confirmed that belief:

It is unfair, especially after seven years of Mr. Bush’s inept leadership, but any Democrat will face tougher questioning about his or her fitness to be commander in chief. Mrs. Clinton has more than cleared that bar, using her years in the Senate well to immerse herself in national security issues, and has won the respect of world leaders and many in the American military. She would be a strong commander in chief.

[...]As strongly as we back her candidacy, we urge Mrs. Clinton to take the lead in changing the tone of the campaign. It is not good for the country, the Democratic Party or for Mrs. Clinton, who is often tagged as divisive, in part because of bitter feeling about her husband’s administration and the so-called permanent campaign. (Indeed, Bill Clinton’s overheated comments are feeding those resentments, and could do long-term damage to her candidacy if he continues this way.)

We know that she is capable of both uniting and leading. We saw her going town by town through New York in 2000, including places where Clinton-bashing was a popular sport. She won over skeptical voters and then delivered on her promises and handily won re-election in 2006.

Here's their logic for endorsing McCain:

[...]there is a choice to be made, and it is an easy one. Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe. With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field.

We have shuddered at Mr. McCain’s occasional, tactical pander to the right because he has demonstrated that he has the character to stand on principle. He was an early advocate for battling global warming and risked his presidential bid to uphold fundamental American values in the immigration debate. A genuine war hero among Republicans who proclaim their zeal to be commander in chief, Mr. McCain argues passionately that a country’s treatment of prisoners in the worst of times says a great deal about its character.

Why they didn't endorse Giuliani. I kind of agree with this reasoning:

The real Mr. Giuliani, whom many New Yorkers came to know and mistrust, is a narrow, obsessively secretive, vindictive man who saw no need to limit police power. Racial polarization was as much a legacy of his tenure as the rebirth of Times Square.

Mr. Giuliani’s arrogance and bad judgment are breathtaking. When he claims fiscal prudence, we remember how he ran through surpluses without a thought to the inevitable downturn and bequeathed huge deficits to his successor. He fired Police Commissioner William Bratton, the architect of the drop in crime, because he couldn’t share the limelight. He later gave the job to Bernard Kerik, who has now been indicted on fraud and corruption charges.

The Rudolph Giuliani of 2008 first shamelessly turned the horror of 9/11 into a lucrative business, with a secret client list, then exploited his city’s and the country’s nightmare to promote his presidential campaign.

Clintons Leave no Fingerprints

Excellent analogy and article. The reason they leave no fingerprints is because they are master criminals (Whitewater, Filegate, Chinagate, Travel Officegate, Pardongate, etc., etc.):

First, a quick show of hands: How many of you honestly thought we'd make it through this Democratic presidential primary without a bruising debate over race? Whether or not the Clintons were involved, this conversation is hardly shocking. And before it's over, it will likely grow more intense.

What is surprising, however, is how skillfully, and with how much brilliant calculation, Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband steered the nomination campaign toward these turbulent waters. She's done nothing but win since this debate began and even if she loses on Saturday in South Carolina, she's framed the campaign in a way that lets her live to fight another day. Perhaps even more surprising has been the media's willingness to be played.

Voters Pessimistic About America's Future

The time is now for a political break from the two-party system. The status quo is frightening to contemplate:

Whatever their ideological differences this election year, Americans seem able to agree on one thing: the political landscape being crisscrossed by the 2008 candidates is barely recognizable as the one traveled by George W. Bush and Al Gore a mere eight years ago.

Obviously, Sept. 11 and its aftermath have changed the country in countless and irretrievable ways. But even beyond the emergence of war and national security as pre-eminent concerns, there has been a profound reordering of domestic priorities, a darkening of the country’s mood and, in the eyes of many, a fraying of America’s very sense of itself.

While not universal, that tone pervaded dozens of interviews conducted over the last week with Americans of all political stripes in 8 of the 24 states that hold primaries or caucuses on Feb. 5, as well as with historians, elected officials, political strategists and poll takers. As the candidates fan out to New York and California and here to the heartland, they are confronting an electorate that is deeply unsettled about the United States’ place in the world and its ability to control its own destiny.

We have no say:

Now, Americans feel a loss of autonomy, in their own lives and in the nation. Their politics are driven by the powerlessness they feel to control their financial well-being, their safety, their environment, their health and the country’s borders. They question whether each generation will continue to ascend the economic ladder. That the political system seems so impotent only deepens their frustration and their insistence on results.

As she considers this campaign, Susan C. Powell, a 47-year-old training consultant who lives in a Kansas City suburb, said that what she feels is not so much hopelessness as doom.

“I know plenty of people who are doing worse than they were,” Ms. Powell said, “and nobody’s helping them out. People’s incomes are not keeping pace with inflation. People can’t afford their homes. People in their 30s and 40s, middle-income, and they don’t have jobs they can count on or access to health care. How can we say that we’re the greatest country on earth and essentially have the walking wounded?

Democrats Uneasy with Clintons' Aggression

This is proof for why we need alternative to the two-party system. All this squabbling is going while our economy is crumbling. Does this suggest these people are putting their country first? We face a crisis. The candidates should be working together to come up with solutions, not distracting us with childish arguments. What more proof do you need to show that the two-party system is failure. In fact, the Wall St. collapse is due to these people running the country without the consent of the governed. Since it is the very same corporations that profited from the housing boom, and from those onerous sub-prime loans, that run our nation. The politicians just stood around and refused to stop the profiteers from plundering the economy:

A growing number of U.S. Democrats are expressing concern over the aggressiveness in Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign.

With the New York senator's husband, former President Bill Clinton, taking a more active role in her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, much of recent attack advertising has been focused on her chief rival, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., , the Washington Post reported.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who endorsed Obama last week, criticized Bill Clinton for what he called his "glib cheap shots" at Obama.

"That's beneath the dignity of a former president," Leahy told reporters. "He is not helping anyone, and certainly not helping the Democratic Party."

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who is not aligned with any of the contenders, said party unity was being threatened by the escalating attack ads.

Bloomberg Dismisses Stimulus Package

I added several of the ideas proposed by the NY Mayor to the People's Platform proposal section, also the criticisms of the Federal governments stimulus package:

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Wednesday the White House and Congress are negotiating a shortsighted economic stimulus package and should focus instead on encouraging immigration and helping strapped homeowners.

"We can't borrow our way out of this. The jig is up," Bloomberg said during a speech to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which honored his environmental efforts.

The billionaire mayor, who is said to be considering an independent presidential bid yet denies that he is a candidate, said the $150 billion stimulus package being hammered out between Democratic and Republican leaders won't be enough.

"There's just one problem: It's not going to make much of a difference because we've already been running huge deficits," Bloomberg said. "If we spend all the money right now, and there is no recovery because of it, then we don't have a second hand to play."

- Read entire article.

House Fails to Override Health Bill Veto

This demonstrates once and for all Bush's lack of concern for the people of America:

For the second time in three months, the House failed Wednesday to override President Bush's veto of a bill that would greatly increase spending on a popular children's health insurance program.

Democratic leaders fell 15 votes shy of obtaining the two-thirds majority needed for an override. The final vote was 260-152, with 42 Republicans siding with Democrats.

The result was expected, even as override supporters pointed to the slowing economy as another reason to spend another $35 billion on the State Children's Health Insurance Program over the next five years.

[...]The legislation that Bush vetoed would have increased enrollment in the children's health program from 6 million to 10 million over the coming five years. The revenue needed for that enrollment increase would come from a 61-cent increase in the federal excise tax on a pack of cigarettes, as well as comparable tax increases on other tobacco products.

[...]The president's second veto occurred in December. He said the bill encouraged too many families to replace private insurance with government-subsidized health coverage. He vetoed a similar bill in October. Democratic leaders then fell 13 votes short in their attempt to override that particular veto, so they actually lost ground Wednesday.

The children's health program serves families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid, but not enough to afford private insurance.

Drought Could Force Nuke-Plant Shutdowns

This is another reason why nuclear power is not a viable source of energy:

Nuclear reactors across the Southeast could be forced to throttle back or temporarily shut down later this year because drought is drying up the rivers and lakes that supply power plants with the awesome amounts of cooling water they need to operate.

Utility officials say such shutdowns probably wouldn't result in blackouts. But they could lead to shockingly higher electric bills for millions of Southerners, because the region's utilities may be forced to buy expensive replacement power from other energy companies.

Already, there has been one brief, drought-related shutdown, at a reactor in Alabama over the summer.

"Water is the nuclear industry's Achilles' heel," said Jim Warren, executive director of N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network, an environmental group critical of nuclear power. "You need a lot of water to operate nuclear plants." He added: "This is becoming a crisis."

An Associated Press analysis of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors found that 24 are in areas experiencing the most severe levels of drought. All but two are built on the shores of lakes and rivers and rely on submerged intake pipes to draw billions of gallons of water for use in cooling and condensing steam after it has turned the plants' turbines.

Because of the yearlong dry spell gripping the region, the water levels on those lakes and rivers are getting close to the minimums set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Over the next several months, the water could drop below the intake pipes altogether. Or the shallow water could become too hot under the sun to use as coolant.

Most Americans believe U.S. economy in decline: Zogby

The American people know better than the politicians what's really going on. That is why the American people must come up with a solution. Thus the need for TPP:

Most Americans believe their country's economy is in decline and that its cities are experiencing economic troubles on a variety of fronts, according to a Zogby International Poll released Wednesday.

Americans also count five economic issues among the top 10 problems cities face, said John Zogby, speaking at a meeting of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which sponsored the poll. These include affordable housing, the housing market, local job development, health care and property taxes.

But they are also worried about their individual well-being, the survey of 32,085 people found.

More than two-thirds of respondents said they get less spending power from their paychecks than they did five years ago, and more than a quarter say unemployment has risen in their cities in the past five years.

- Read more of the poll results...

Maureen Dowd: Two Against One

Famed columnist, Maureen Dowd, does it. This time she exposes the Clintonian dirty campaigning tactics:

If Bill Clinton has to trash his legacy to protect his legacy, so be it. If he has to put a dagger through the heart of hope to give Hillary hope, so be it.

If he has to preside in this state as the former first black president stopping the would-be first black president, so be it.

The Clintons — or “the 2-headed monster,” as the The New York Post dubbed the tag team that clawed out wins in New Hampshire and Nevada — always go where they need to go, no matter the collateral damage. Even if the damage is to themselves and their party.

Bill’s transition from elder statesman, leader of his party and bipartisan ambassador to ward heeler and hatchet man has been seamless — and seamy.

[...] Bad Bill had been roughing up Obama so much that Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina suggested that he might want to “chill.” On a conference call with reporters yesterday, the former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a national co-chairman of the Obama campaign, tut-tutted that the “incredible distortions” of the political beast were “not keeping with the image of a former president.”

Jonathan Alter reported in Newsweek that Senator Edward Kennedy and Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois congressman and former Clinton aide, have heatedly told Bill “that he needs to change his tone and stop attacking Senator Barack Obama.”

- Read the entire article...

Bill Clinton Falls Asleep in Black Church on MLK Day

This is what Bill Clinton thinks about blacks and MLKjr:

Video: Clintons will do "Just About Anything" to Regain Power

Mike Barnacle appearing on Morning Joe described the tactics of the Clintons. He is right on in essentially calling Billary thugs:

Ross Perot Quotes

Added quotes from Ross Perot.