Jon Stewart mocks hypocritical Republican morons — Karl Rove, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and ‘Toe-Sucking‘ Dick Morris
The Killer From Wasilla
Cindy McCain’s $300,000 ‘Convention’ Outfit
Cindy has the price of a Scottsdale split-level hanging from her ears….[ more ]
Popularity: 3% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
McCain cannot remember how many houses he owns!
John McCain is soaring to new heights of hypocrisy on his wife’s personal jet. He flies around the country bent on duping the public into believing he’s “one of them,” a regular guy who can empathize with Americans facing an overwhelming economic crush. What’s more, he disparages those who oppose his ridiculous policy proposals as “elitist.” But who’s the real elitist?
The REAL McCain is a multimillionaire who owns ten luxurious homes. The REAL McCain backs President Bush’s tax cuts for big corporations. The REAL McCain empathizes only with the interests of our nation’s wealthy minority, not its money-strapped majority. But far too many are buying into McCain’s deceit because the corporate press won’t present the whole picture, so we created this video to educate the public about the REAL McCain….[ MORE HERE >> ]
Obama Strikes Back
References:
1. John McCain The Hypocrite — McCain is an unethical recidivist who is once again mired in a putrid conflict of interest scandal with a major corporate player. Most of the Inside-the-Beltway press corps seems not to care about this latest McCain chicanery–so you are kept in the dark about it. A free press is a great thing, isn’t it?
2.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
G8 leaders enjoy 18-course meal as they discuss “how to solve the global food crisis.”
The leaders of the richest nations of the world sat down to an 18-course gastronomic extravaganza at the G8 summit in Japan to discuss world hunger.
The dinner and lunch included:
1. Caviar,
2. Milkfed lamb,
3. Sea urchin and tuna,
4. Champagne and wines flown in from Europe and the U.S.
5…..and a lot more
The extravagance of the menus drew disapproval from critics who thought it hypocritical to produce such a lavish meal when world food supplies are under threat, and some parts of Africa are so war ravaged that famine is killing thousands of Human Beings daily:
Bush and company would rather lie themselves into fighting the “Oil Wars,” to promote “Peace” and “Democracy,” while conveniently forgetting that the real “humanitarian” war should be fought in places like Darfur, in the Sudan — where Arab tribes have been slaughtering black Africans mercilessly, with the help of the Arab dominated Sudanese government.
The G8 summit is a colossal waste of time.
It is nothing but an expensive “Country-Club” meeting place of “Golfing-Buddies,” where they discuss who to fleece next or who to “bomb” next or who to “sanction” next.
The “aid” that the G8 group provides Africa, for instance, is largely wasted by the numerous NGO’s “accompanying” the aid — the NGO officials live “rich” in Africa, waste resources and in many cases have been known to share the “loot” with corrupt African leaders.
Don’t get me wrong — there a many credible charities doing great work in Africa.
If it’s not these NGO’s, then it’s the World Bank or the IMF — imperialist tools which have been used for many years to “control” corrupt African governments. Add these two organizations to badly managed African governments and you have the potent-mix that has crippled many economies in Africa.
Helen Caldicott states in her book titled — “If You Love This Planet:”
“Fifteen percent of the food used by U.S. homes and restaurants is thrown away …”
“Most aid serves as an instrument of foreign policy, not really as a charitable gift. For example, in 1965-66, during a famine, the United States threatened to cut off food aid to India when its government attempted to take control of U.S.-owned fertilizer companies. India capitulated because it needed the money, thereby giving more freedom to U.S. investment companies. In effect, while millions of Indians starved, food shipments were stalled to force the government to capitulate to the demands of U.S. corporations. In 1964, U.S. aid to Brazil dropped from $81.8 million to $15.1 million because America disapproved of the government at the time. These are just two instances in which the U.S. government withheld food for political purposes. Food is used to reward and manipulate poor countries rather than to feed hungry people.”
“Surprisingly, most U.S. aid actually winds up subsidizing American corporations. During the Johnson administration, 90 ,’ percent of all foreign aid benefited U.S. corporate development programs, such as the building of dams, nuclear power plants, roads, and bridges in the Third World, and the profits accrued to the relevant U.S. companies. So U.S. foreign aid serves not only as a coercive instrument of foreign policy but also to support private U.S. contractors, universities, banks, consulting firms, lobbyists, and so forth. In fact, foreign aid is now recognized to be a lucrative business, and companies are scrambling to capitalize on it. Even in 1970, multinationals invested $270 million in Africa and repatriated $995 million, $200 million in Asia and received $2,400 million, and $900 million in Latin America for $2,900 million. Corporations also tend to borrow most of their investment funds for Third World projects from Third World banks.”
“Wealthy countries impose tariffs or trade barriers on processed goods, but none on raw materials, thus ensuring that poor countries remain in poverty. For instance, in 1985, British tariffs on raw cotton were zero, on cotton yam 8 percent, and on cotton T-shirts 17 percent. So the Third World can never break the poverty cycle, because First World tariffs work against the importation of manufactured goods from the Third World. A Third World country is defined as one that exports raw materials and imports finished goods. But processed goods are worth much more money than raw materials are.”
“….And so the spiral continues: increased debt leads to more cash crops and environmental degradation, which leads to flooded markets in the First World and lower prices, with decreased return to the Third World. Therefore, the debt increases, and this leads to malnutrition, starvation, and helplessness.
Read More Excerpts Here OR Just Buy The Book: HERE!
Africa needs to wake up and “feed itself” — these frequent G8 “photo-ops” and grand “gastronomic extravaganzas” have never been in Africa’s best interests!.
Popularity: 17% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
Hillary’s loss is mot Women’s Failure. The claim that some ‘Angry White Women‘ either will vote for John McCain or stay home on Election Day, sounds like disappointment devolving into hypocrisy.
Writes: Connie Schultz
Last week, I gave my daughter a small plaque painted with the words of a Japanese proverb.
It was a mother’s gift to celebrate her new apartment and to remind her that she is ready for whatever life throws at her. I couldn’t help but think, though, that the six little words at its center were a potent reminder for me, too, in these days following the primary election defeat of Hillary Clinton:
“Fall seven times, stand up eight.”
There are plenty of Clinton supporters who don’t want to hear this, I know, but it’s time to brush the dirt off and pull ourselves up. Hillary Clinton’s loss is not a failure for women unless we will it to be so.
A woman will not be elected president in 2008. This reality has knocked the wind out of millions of Americans, especially a lot of women, including me.
Like many women about my age, I grew up believing that a woman could run our country but thought I never would get to see her do it in my lifetime.
Then along came Hillary.
I was never so happy to be wrong than when she proved, one primary after another, that plenty of fellow Americans believed she had the mettle to be commander in chief.
Click PIC For Larger Image
And the chutzpah. Lord. Time and again, pundits and politicians predicted her demise. Time and again, there she was, giving another victory speech. It was enough to make a grown girl giggle.
I didn’t always agree with Clinton, but so what? I’d voted for a lot of bozos over the years, and even the best of candidates have flaws. I didn’t need Hillary Clinton to be perfect. I needed her to win.
Oh, to come so close.
There is a funereal quality to the coverage of campaigns once they’re over, and Clinton’s is no exception. Lots of “post-mortem” this and “life after” that; dreams “die,” careers may or may not be “resurrected.”
There are lots of references to mourning, too, especially in discussions about the letdown after a long and hard-fought battle. Grief has many faces, many moods, and it must be said that some Clinton supporters aren’t at their best just yet.
Let a little time pass so that this disappointment can run its course.
I’m not talking months or even weeks. I’m just asking for a little space for those who poured a lot of hope and energy into what they thought was going to be the culmination of a lifetime’s worth of dreams.
Surely, nobody understands better that rush of adrenaline than those who dared to believe in Barack Obama. That’s just one of the many things they have in common with the Clinton crowd.
Which brings me to those Clinton supporters who now insist they cannot and will not support Obama. They claim they either will vote for John McCain or stay home on Election Day. That sounds like disappointment devolving into hypocrisy.
We either stand for change or we don’t. We believe in participating in democracy, or we don’t. It’s one thing to vote for McCain because you trust his road map for the future. It’s quite another to do it out of some warped notion of revenge. A bitter retreat is no way to honor the first woman to come this close to being the presidential nominee.
McCain Lies and Flip-Flops
Hillary Clinton lost, but she lost on her terms. She was no quitter, and that is a legacy that will only burnish with time. I am reminded of a recent dinner with several other female columnists from around the country.
At first, we talked about the usual things: family and jobs and keeping watchful eyes on the balance. But after a round of drinks — OK, maybe it was two rounds — we started whining about ugly reader responses, particularly from men who focus on our gender instead of our opinions.
Then one of the women mentioned Clinton and brought all of us to a hush.
“I don’t know,” she said, poking at the ice in her glass. “Some days I think this job isn’t worth it, but then I think of Hillary and how she never stops no matter how hard they hit her. If she can take all that and still come out smiling, we can keep on, too.”
Yes, we can.
Popularity: 14% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
|
Donate To The Obama | Biden Team
