Hillary’s Ultra-Left Marxist

Campaign Speak

Filed Under Hillary Clinton, 2008 Presidential Election, Hillary Clinton Make Overs, Hillary Lies

 By Amanda Carpenter

Hillary Clinton denies that she’s a Marxist, but she sure talks like one.

While campaigning for the Democratic nomination for President, Clinton has said “something has to be taken away from some people” to advance her political goals and lauded billionaire investor Warren Buffet as a “patriot” because he wants to pay more taxes.

Clinton strives to maintain a moderate image in public appearances, but she’s prone to making an occasional unscripted remark that reveals her true nature as a hard-line liberal ideologue.

Here is a compilation of such statements Hillary Clinton has made on the campaign trail over the past month:

“An uninsured person who goes to the hospital is more likely to die than an insured person. I mean, that is a fact. So what do we do? We have to build a political consensus. And that requires people to give up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground. The same with energy. You know, we can’t keep talking about our dependence on foreign oil and the need to deal with global warming and the challenge that it poses to our climate and to God’s creation and just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.” – June 4, CNN’s Sojourners Presidential Forum

“Is labor in the house? Well, that’s good because we work better when you work for us and I am so grateful to all of you!” – June 20, a rally for the union-friendly Employee Free Choice Act in the Upper Senate Park on Capitol Hill

The Employee Free Choice Act, which the Senate recently voted down, would have eliminated the secret ballot process required to organize a workplace and opt for a public petition system called “card check.”

“If you want to organize and somebody signs a card that should be sufficient as an indication of their desire to be part of a union. If you go just with the elections, then you’re going to have a continuing opportunity for employers not only to delay and postpone but to harass and intimidate. And we’ve seen this all over the country And, you know, I’m all for secret ballots. I’m all for elections. But then you’re going to have to have a lot more enforcement and supervision over what happens during an organizing drive than the current administration has been willing to provide.” – June 19, AFSCME National Leadership Conference in Washington D.C.

“We need to end any kind of benefit in our tax code that goes to any company that out sources jobs. If they want to outsource them, they shouldn’t do that on taxpayers’ money. Let them bear the cost of it and not get some kind of tax benefit for moving our jobs overseas.” – June 19, AFSCME National Leadership Conference in Washington D.C.

“[Warren Buffett]’s honest enough to say, look, tax me because I’m a patriotic American.”-June 28, PBS All-American Presidential Forum, the third nationally-televised Democratic presidential debate at Howard University

“Well, I really believe that it takes a village to raise a child, and the American village has failed our children.”- June 28, PBS All-American Presidential Forum

When Hillary said the statement above, members of the media working in the “spin room” at the debate audibly groaned at the obvious reference to her 1996 child-rearing tome, “It Takes a Village.”

“We’re going to make it very clear to everyone that works for the government that they can’t go out and make a profit on their government work. They have to serve the people.” – July 3, at a campaign stop in Iowa

Since leaving the White House, both Bill and Hillary have published memoirs about their lives and “government work” that earned multi-million dollar advances. Additionally, former President Bill Clinton has been paid millions to deliver speeches around the world.

Source: Townhall.com

 Hillary will not win enough of the Black Vote to offset Obama’s popularity with the young voters regardless of their ethnicity. And he’ll garner enough of the undecided voters to offset Hillary’s popularity amongst white women, gays and lesbians of the United States. She may win the popular vote but I predict right here and now that Obama will win more delegates. Hillary is too devisive amongst her own colleagues, especially the far left wingers and without their full support, the Clintonistas go down in flames. Barack on the other hand promises change and a fresh new vision. The choice to me is a ” No-Brainer”. Do you want to move progressively forward with a President who can bring about changes necessary to propel the United States back to the forefront of Global Matters or are you ready for 8 more years of Clinton Bullshit??? You know; higher taxes, repeal of the tax cuts you’ve received for the past 8 years, a recession and the reduction of our military forces to the dangerously low level of preparedness that plagued the Clinton administration, more government and entitlements?? You’ve been kept safe and free of attack for almost 7 years. President Bush must be doing something right.

And what about the troop surge?? Everybody knows it’s working especially the troops. Ask them…the ones coming back. I have and the stories they tell are not the same ones you’re seeing nightly on ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC and CNN. Only Fox News reports the truth. The other media outlets all have a political agenda to support and a secular progressive, liberal ideology to maintain. This is perhaps the most significant Presidential election of my life. You want to deal with the terrorists from a position of strength or let the Democrats negotiate with the Muslim Extremists to the point of Reparations??? Don’ think it’ll happen?? Wait and see. And do you want to see your young sons and daughters drafted into the military for a 3 year conscription?? If a Democrat gets elected President, it’ll happen. U.S. Representative Charles Rangel, D-New York has already drafted the legislation and made his intentions known publically. The Republicans support the troops and fund the War. The Democrats mock the Military at every opportunity with their pundits( Cindy Sheehan) and the Mainstream Media, and try to deny funding the War every year. Wake up AMERICANS…BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE.  If you vote Democratic please vote for Obama. I can accept him as  a President and I’m a devout Republican.

New York Explosion! Terror Hit?

On Like Donkey Kong

Is The Surge Working? An Interview With General Petraeus

Genghis Khan Redux?

<!– –>

Iran Opening? Poll Shows Public Rejects Regime’s Agenda
By Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Is the extremist agenda of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – including support for terror, development of nuclear weapons and confrontation with the United States and Israel – popular among Iranians? Are they willing to make the sacrifices that would come from an increasingly tight global boycott imposed because of Iran’s defiance of United Nations strictures on its nuclear development?A rare glimpse into the minds of the Iranian people – via a telephone survey of Iranians conducted for Terror Free Tomorrow – shows that the answers to both questions is “no!”Apparently, Ahmadinejad and the ayatollahs are in serious political trouble. Iranians do not much care about getting the bomb and very much worry about global isolation.

The survey shows:

* Iranians oppose the institution of an “unelected Supreme Leader” by 61-27 and favor democracy by 79-14. So when liberals assail neocons for having a naive faith in peoples’ aspirations for freedom, they are just wrong – even in Iran.

* Iranians want nuclear power more than nuclear weapons. Suffering under gasoline rationing and falling energy exports, three-quarters said that developing nuclear power, without weapons, was “very important.” By contrast, only 37 percent said developing nuclear weapons was a similar priority. Since the Iranian regime says that it wants nuclear power, not nuclear weapons, its stated position accords with its people’s views. (The government, of course, is lying and wants to get a bomb.)

The survey underscores the need to separate nuclear power from weaponry in the mi nds of the people and make clear that Western sanctions are designed to prevent Iran from getting the bomb, not power or energy.

* Iranians would gladly agree to “full inspections and a guarantee that Iran would not develop nuclear weapons” if other nations would increase overall trade and investment (80 percent), increase investment in the energy sector (79 percent), give humanitarian assistance (80 percent) or assist in helping Iran develop peaceful nuclear energy (80 percent).

* Only 33 percent said supporting terrorist proxies Hezbollah or Hamas was a priority, and 55 percent are ready to endorse full recognition of Israel and of a Palestinian state if they could get “normal trade and full recognition” from the United States. Almost two-thirds – 64 percent – said that they are willing to end Iranian assistance to armed groups in Iraq and 51 percent would forgo nuclear weaponry and accept full international controls and inspections in return for normal relat ions with the United States.

These data emphasize the importance of a Western willingness to bring Iran in from the cold in return for a no-nuclear-weapons agreement. The palpable thirst of the people for an end to their isolation speaks volumes about the attractiveness of such a proposition.

* The government in Iran gets dismal ratings. By 52-33, Iranians feel Ahmadinejad has failed to cut unemployment or inflation; by 56-22, they say he has not kept his campaign promise to “put oil revenues on the tables of the average family.”

But does this all matter? Do the opinions of the Iranian people count in this dictatorship? Clearly, they do. The data point to a potential for revolution should Iran’s global isolation increase. People are fed up with living in a pariah state and want normal relations with the rest of the world – even if it means abandoning their leaders’ extremist agenda.

Thus, the recent actions of Florida, Missouri and Louis iana in cutting off all pension-fund investments in companies that do business in Iran takes on particular importance. Their nation’s global isolation clearly grates on the Iranian people and stokes their fears and disenchantment with their government.

Divestment legislation is making good progress in Pennsylvania (shepherded by state Rep. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat) and in California and New Jersey. In New York, unfortunately, the Legislature adjourned without taking any action. Divestterror.org, an organization founded by Frank Gaffney of the Reagan Pentagon, is leading these battles.

The Louisiana action is particularly important. The state law – sponsored by state Rep. Pete Schneider, a Republican – authorizes the governor to contract with Wall Street firms to develop a terror-free investment index of companies and mutual funds in which the state can put its pension funds. Once such a fund is developed, the potential for it to become the gold standard for disinvestment i s enormous.

Morris, a former political adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race. To get all of Dick Morris’s and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by email, go to www.dickmorris.comBe the first to read Dick Morris’ column.
Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
Sign up today

Iran Opening? Poll Shows Public Rejects Regime’s Agenda
By Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Send an email to Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

Email It
Print It
Take Action

Read Article & Comments (56) Trackbacks Post Your Comments

Is the extremist agenda of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – including support for terror, development of nuclear weapons and confrontation with the United States and Israel – popular among Iranians? Are they willing to make the sacrifices that would come from an increasingly tight global boycott imposed because of Iran’s defiance of United Nations strictures on its nuclear development?A rare glimpse into the minds of the Iranian people – via a telephone survey of Iranians conducted for Terror Free Tomorrow – shows that the answers to both questions is “no!” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad attends a meeting with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani in Tehran June 26, 2007. REUTERS/Raheb Homavandi (IRAN) Related Media: VIDEO: Ahmadinejad Sees Israel’s End Soon VIDEO: New Charges Leveled At Iran VIDEO: Nuclear Watchdogs Arrive In Iran Apparently, Ahmadinejad and the ayatollahs are in serious political trouble. Iranians do not much care about getting the bomb and very much worry about global isolation. The survey shows: * Iranians oppose the institution of an “unelected Supreme Leader” by 61-27 and favor democracy by 79-14. So when liberals assail neocons for having a naive faith in peoples’ aspirations for freedom, they are just wrong – even in Iran. * Iranians want nuclear power more than nuclear weapons. Suffering under gasoline rationing and falling energy exports, three-quarters said that developing nuclear power, without weapons, was “very important.” By contrast, only 37 percent said developing nuclear weapons was a similar priority. Since the Iranian regime says that it wants nuclear power, not nuclear weapons, its stated position accords with its people’s views. (The government, of course, is lying and wants to get a bomb.) The survey underscores the need to separate nuclear power from weaponry in the mi nds of the people and make clear that Western sanctions are designed to prevent Iran from getting the bomb, not power or energy. * Iranians would gladly agree to “full inspections and a guarantee that Iran would not develop nuclear weapons” if other nations would increase overall trade and investment (80 percent), increase investment in the energy sector (79 percent), give humanitarian assistance (80 percent) or assist in helping Iran develop peaceful nuclear energy (80 percent). * Only 33 percent said supporting terrorist proxies Hezbollah or Hamas was a priority, and 55 percent are ready to endorse full recognition of Israel and of a Palestinian state if they could get “normal trade and full recognition” from the United States. Almost two-thirds – 64 percent – said that they are willing to end Iranian assistance to armed groups in Iraq and 51 percent would forgo nuclear weaponry and accept full international controls and inspections in return for normal relat ions with the United States

As  a 21-year-old college senior, Ms. Rodham’s thesis was apparently based on  the tactics of radical community organizer Saul D. Alinsky. The old Jewish radical was famous as a community organizer from Chicago’s Back of the Yards, the home of stockyard workers made famous by Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle.” From the late 1930s until his death in 1972, Alinsky crisscrossed the country, stirring the have-nots — poor whites and blacks — to demand power from the haves.

I s Hillary a Maxist?? I don’t know but some of her recent comments would sure lead one to suspect that she is. The comment, ” we’re gonna take from you for the common good ” sounds socialistic/marxist..plain old income redistribution…take from the haves and give to the have-nots. A classless society…everybody the same. Jesus where do I get in line for this welfare State gravy train??? SOCIALISM that’s Hillary’s agenda folks…WAKE THE HELL UP BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE.

Hillary is the Anti-Christ and the sooner you LIberal fools realize that the quicker you can make a difference and an intelligent choice for your posterity. Voting for Hillary ensures your children a life of SOCIALISM. Is that what you want for them??? God I hope not. 

Beginning in January, employers in Arizona could face having their business licenses suspended or revoked if they get caught hiring illegal immigrants.

A new law signed Monday by Gov. Janet Napolitano created the state crime of hiring illegal immigrants and requires all businesses to verify the employment eligibility of workers through a federal database.

It’s intended to remove the economic incentive for immigrants to sneak across the border and help lessen Arizona’s role as the busiest illegal gateway into the nation.
The Democratic governor said she signed the bill because the federal government has failed to overhaul the country’s broken immigration policies, though she believes the new law contains flaws that should be fixed.

“I signed it, too, out of the realization that the flow of illegal immigration into our state is due to the constant demand of some employers for cheap, undocumented labor,” Napolitano wrote in a letter to lawmakers…

…Republican Rep. Russell Pearce of Mesa, who proposed the new law, said it will provide the state with huge savings because Arizona will have to pay fewer health care and education costs for illegal immigrants and their families.

No jobs and these illegals will go home.

Hillary Clinton has gone nuts…AGAIN and anyone with eyes has to see she putting forth a SOCIALISTIC Political Agenda..PLAIN and SIMPLE. National Government controlled HealthCare, Income redistribution, increased government spending ( pork ), her teaming up with Senator Boxer to reintroduce the FCC’s Fairness Doctrine and apply it to Conservative Right-Wing Talk radio. She’s a KOOK….stop being duped by this opportunist. Here’s a synopsis of her new tax code proposal. 

 Under the tax plan Mrs. Clinton rolled out last week, she’d be raising income taxes on all filers earning $200,000 a year or more. That won’t have much effect on Mr. Buffett, who has managed to accumulate a vast fortune for himself and his shareholders without paying much in the way of personal income tax. We don’t begrudge him that fortune an iota. But raising taxes will make it more difficult for many Americans whose income comes primarily from earning salaries as opposed to owning businesses to accumulate their own, smaller-scale fortunes.

Mrs. Clinton has offered her own philosophical justifications for tax increases over the years. Mayor Giuliani pointed out last week in San Francisco that, in 2004, Mrs. Clinton explained, “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” In New Hampshire, she decried “robber barons” and spoke of trying to create a culture of “shared prosperity.”

Oh well so much for hard work and dedication…I think I’ll just get in line and hold my hands out.

Here’s the link to the news story. Enjoy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070623/ap_on_go_co

/congress_energy_73;_ylt

=AqN0ndCfYZsUJLoFCOO3dttkM3wV

It’s funny that International Human Rights Watch Groups want Guantanamo shut down but no sovereign nation with country men being detained as enemy combatants at Gitmo, want them back.

President George W. Bush’s detainee policy — as well as his broad assertions of executive power in the war on terrorism — has been facing stiff challenges in U.S. courts and by Democrats who control the U.S. Congress.

Bush would like to clear up the Guantanamo issue and what to do about the 375 suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban followers held there before leaving office in January 2009 and remove it as an issue for his successor, amid a host of opinions from presidential candidates on what to do about it.

Democrats generally want to close it, while Republicans would keep the facility. Former Massachusetts Republican Gov. Mitt Romney told a presidential debate last month he would double the size of it.

Pressure to do something soon is intense. Colin Powell, who was secretary of state during Bush’s first term, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” this month he would close it, “not tomorrow, but this afternoon.”

White Housespokeswoman Dano Perino told reporters on Friday, “I would submit to you that the countries who have complained more vehemently about the human rights record, alleged abuses of human rights at Guantanamo Bay, are the very ones who refuse to take any prisoners themselves,” Perino said.

Human rights groups and many Democrats have demanded the United States bring the detainees to U.S. soil to stand trial in U.S. courts. Perino said she was not aware of any plans to bring Guantanamo detainees to the United States.

“I cannot believe that the American federal prison system cannot try 380 people,” said Rep. Alcee Hastings, a Florida Democrat.

Perhaps we should build a new medium security prison say in Miramar, Florida. Perhaps it could be built at 5010 S.W. 151st Terrace in Miramar, Florida. It’s reported the person at that address really wants Guantanamo Bay shut down and cannot believe our federal Prison System cannot try 380 prisoners. Alcee Hastings???… wasn’t he impeached while he served as a Federal Judge???

The answer to that question is a resounding…YES!!!!! In 1979, Hastings was appointed a federal judge for the Southern District of Florida by President Jimmy Carter. Two years later, Hastings was indicted on charges of conspiring to solicit a bribe from two defendants awaiting sentencing in his court. Hastings was unanimously acquitted of the charges in 1983.

The Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, however, soon launched a separate investigation into the matter which lasted nearly four years. Ultimately, the council (which was led by former Watergate prosecutor John Doar and comprised of the active appeals court judges for that circuit and three U.S. District judges) found that Hastings was not only guilty of the initial charges, but also that he repeatedly lied during his trial. Following this report, the House Judiciary Committee approved seventeen articles of impeachment against Hastings. Sixteen dealt with the bribery case, while one centered around Hastings’ improper revelation of sensitive government information obtained through a federal wiretap in 1985. In late 1988, the articles passed the House by a vote of 413-3. The Senate, following a trial by a twelve-member committee, chose to convict Hastings on eight of the articles, but opted not to restrict him from seeking federal elected office in the future (which it had the authority to do).

In 1992, a federal judge remanded Hastings’ conviction back to the Senate, arguing that Hastings should have received a trial by the full Senate, and also that his Senate trial constituted “double-jeopardy.” The Supreme Court, however, had ruled in a similar case that the courts have no jurisdiction over impeachment proceedings, and Hastings’ conviction was therefore upheld.

By the way… 5010 S.W. 151st Terrace in Miramar, Florida is the home address of Representative Alcee Hastings, D-Miramar.

Free Trips to San Juan in February — Bring Along the Kids!

Fourteen members and their spouses spent five days of the “President’s Day District Work Period” at a luxurious hotel in sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico at an Aspen Institute conference on “No Child Left Behind.” Several of the members apparently took the conference mandate quite literally and brought their own children for a free trip: Congressman Zach Wamp, of Tennessee, was joined by his son, Cody, and Congressman Jan Schakowsky, of Illinois, was accompanied by her daughter, Mary Hart. The average cost of the trip was about $7,000 per member. Only five of the 15 were members of the House Education Committee:

• Zach Wamp (R-TN)
• Melvin Watt (D-NC)
• John Tierney (D-MA)*
• Janet Schakowsky (D-IL)
• Edward Pastor (D-AZ)
• George Miller (D-CA)*
• Nita Lowey (D-NY)
• Raymond Green (D-TX)
• Diane Degette(D-CO)
• Susan Davis (D-CA)*
• Russ Holt (D-NJ)*
• Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)*
• Sam Farr (D- CA)
• Bob Etheridge(D-NC)
• Richard Lugar (R-IN)

* member, House Education and Labor Committee

Last summer, the director of the Aspen Institute Congressional Program, former U.S. Senator Dick Clark, insisted, in an interview with us, that Aspen had discontinued paying for the trips of the children or siblings of members. Apparently, that policy has been changed, since two children went to San Juan and another sibling to China.

And, by the way, Speaker Pelosi has proposed that adult children be permitted to accompany members on taxpayer paid trips.

A number of the February travelers are perennial beneficiaries of the Aspen largesse. For example, while House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller may have had an interest in the “No Child Left Behind” conference, he is a serial traveler on the Aspen dime. Since 2000, he and his wife have attended a total of 30 Aspen conferences at a cost of more than $125,000, and total trips valued at over $200,000 — and only three of them were concerned with education. Mr. and Mrs. Miller traveled to Aspen conferences in:

Naples, Fla., San Juan, Vancouver, Prague, Grand Cayman, Florence, Helsinki, Punta Mita, Mexico (three times) Scottsdale, China, Barcelona (two times), Montega Bay, Jamaica, Rome, Moscow, Cancun, Venice, Dublin, Istanbul (two times), Honolulu, Krakow, and Llubjana.

In addition, Congressman Miller has traveled on government expense to:

Mexico, Cambodia (two times), Vietnam (two times), South Africa, France, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Laos, Egypt, Lebanon, Israel (two times), Jordan, Iraq, Italy (two times), Sudan (two times), Ghana, Liberia, and Cape Verde. (The records do not indicate whether his wife also joined him on these trips.)

The government trips consumed almost 75 days at a cost of over $65,000, excluding the airfares for military transport. And, Congressman Miller is not a member of any committee dealing with foreign relations. The Aspen trips took over 150 days! That’s an average of almost 30 days each year!

Who has time to work with this kind of travel schedule?

But he’s not alone.

Fellow traveler Sen. Richard Lugar is another Aspen favorite. He and his wife were on 25 other Aspen trips and visited:

Naples, Helsinki (two times), Grand Cayman, Punta Mita, Mexico (three times), Scottsdale, London, Montega Bay, Rome, Moscow, Honolulu, Cancun, Barcelona, Lausanne, Venice, Dublin, Istanbul, and Krakow.

Almost makes you want to be a Senator, doesn’t it?

Other Aspen regular travelers and their wives with the number of free trips include:

• Howard Berman (D-CA) — 18
• Donald Payne (D-NJ) — 16
• Henry Waxman (D-CA) — 13
• Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) — 12
• Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) — 11
• Gene Greene (D-TX) — 11
• Barbara Boxer (D-CA) — 10
• Nita Lowey (D-NY) — 10

April in China

During the so-called “Spring District Work Period” in April, many of the same characters went on yet another Aspen trip to China for a Chinese-American relations conference at a cost of about $25,000 per couple. Only two of the travelers were on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Don Payne (D-NJ) brought his brother along. Joining the group were:

• Donald Payne (D-NJ)
• Lloyd Doggett (D-TX)
• Frederick Upton (R-MI)
• Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)
• Susan Davis (D-CA)
• Brian Baird (D-WA)
• Mike Honda (D-CA)
• Michael Castle (R-DE)
• Anna Eshoo (D-CA)
• William Clay (D-MO)
• Tom Petri (R-WI)
• Tom Udall (D-NM)

Slovenia in May

During the “Memorial Day District Work Period,” the following members went on an Aspen sponsored trip to Slovenia, no doubt tending to their district and constituents all the while they were sight-seeing. Most were accompanied by their spouse. What is truly amazing is that every single one of the participants had already attended other conferences on the same subject. Howard Berman, Henry Waxman and George Miller — and their wives — went to five separate Aspen conferences in various European capitals and a Mexican resort; Lloyd Doggett and his wife attended four. The complete list of attendees:

• Lloyd Doggett (D-TX)*
• Rush Holt (D-NJ)***
• George Miller (D-CA **
• John Tierney (D-MA)*
• Melvin Watt (D-NC)***
• Harry Waxman (D-CA)**
• Carl Levin (D-MI)***
• Phil English (R-PA)***
• Earl Blumenauer (D-OR)**
• Howard Berman (D-CA)**

* Attended four Aspen conferences on Political Islam: Mexico, Barcelona, Istanbul, and Slovenia

** Attended five Aspen conferences on Political Islam: Helsinki, Mexico, Barcelona, Istanbul, Slovenia

*** Attended two Aspen conferences on Political Islam: Istanbul, Slovenia(Holt)Mexico, Slovenia (Watt),

**** Attended three Aspen conferences on Political Islam: Barcelona, Istanbul, Slovenia

What’s wrong with this picture?

Why would the Aspen Institute invite the same people back to conference after conference about the same topic in expensive and exotic places? Why are so many members invited to participate in forums that have nothing to do with their committee assignments? Why are most of the participants Democrats?

Aspen points out that it does not lobby and only wants to give Congressmen the opportunity to think about important issues away from the pressures of the Capital. Given what we know about their schedules, that’s hardly a good argument for the free trips.

It’s true that Aspen does not lobby, but it does develop public policy initiatives on a wide range of issues and even has a special conference for legislative staff. So, it definitely has a point of view — and usually a liberal one. There’s nothing at all improper about Aspen’s conferences, but the lavish foreign trips contribute to the evolving Congressional imperiousness.

What’s wrong with the free travel? Well, for one, it creates a sense of entitlement. Members of Congress have gotten used to being wined, dined and flown to beautiful and expensive places. It adds to the insulation from their constituents, it takes up time that should be spent on the job they were elected to do and it basically provides tax free income for free travel.

And it’s not just Aspen. Another favorite travel underwriter is the International Management and Development Fund, which hosted Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and his wife on a $20,000 trip to Germany in February. Congressman Hinchey has received over $200,000 worth of free travel since 2000. Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Eliot Engel (D-NY), Mark Souder (R-IN), Tom Feeney (R-FL) and Ralph Regula (R-OH) also went to Germany.

It’s not what they were elected to do. Since 2000, Aspen has spent over $4 million on 719 trips for members of Congress and their spouses and family members.

It’s time for Congress to stop the free travel and focus on the important issues that need resolution. That means showing up for work and making tough decisions.

Maybe then, Americans might have some confidence in Congress.

It’s time for Conservative, fiscal responsible AMERICANS to take back AMERICA  and demand that all the congressional lazy bastards/bitches start working for us. They can’t pass any meaningful legislation of any kind. Maybe we should “OUTSOURCE” THE RESPONSIBILITIES OR RUNNING OUR NATION TO CHINA, PAKISTAN, BANGLADESH, you know like Microsoft does with their Customer Service and all their Technical Support. Everytime I call I get Ahmad in Bangladesh and I never can understand him so I tell him to let me talk to somebody who speaks English…you know perhaps an AMERICAN. he gets all pissed off…especially when I tell him to F… OFF!!! Maybe we should elect Ahmad, Jose’, Mohammad, Rosario, Rosa’ and Khomeini to be U.S. Congress persons. I bet they’d show up and work hard 5 days a week unlike the lazy assholes there now. We as AMERICANS  should impeach the whole damned Congress, sue every Congress person for breach of contract, failure to perform and anything else I can think of. Tax and spend Democrats….and Republicans…the Divided Party that has forgot what AMERICA has expected from them for 50 years.  What do you Republicans stand for…NOW??? Will you please tell AMERICA….We would sure like to know. Get up off your lazy asses and get something accomplished…social security, veteran benefits, tax cuts, illegal immigration, the high price of gasoline. Start with these and don’t you even think about a recess until these problems are taken care of to the satisfaction of Americans…YOU KNOW..YOUR CONSTITUENCY.