Hillary Clinton continues to hold a large lead over Barack Obama among Pennsylvania Democrats:
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in Pennsylvania shows Hillary Clinton leading Barack Obama 51% to 38%. Those numbers are little changed from a week ago.
Clinton now leads by twenty-five percentage points among women and is essentially even among men. She attracts votes from 69% of white women while also leading among voters over 40 and those with incomes under $75,000 a year. Obama leads 79% to 13% among African-American voters.
The economy is seen as the top issue by 53% of Likely Democratic Primary Voters, but they differ as to what must be done. Forty-six percent (46%) say it’s most important to reduce income inequality while 45% say the priority should be on generating more economic growth.
With six weeks remaining before the vote, and no early voting in Pennsylvania, it’s likely that Clinton’s lead will shrink over time but it’s going to be hard for Obama to catch her.
March 13th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Hillary and Bill Clinton have made a significant issue about how the press is treating Hillary unfairly in their hyper-critical reporting on her and their “softball” reporting on Barak Obama. Hillary maintains she has been fully investigated by the media and Barak hasn’t!
As the Tony Rezko trial begins in Chicago, Clinton and her surrogates are linking Obama to Rezko and the media is speculating about whether Obama will be called to testify as a witness in the case. Obama has always admitted he received $85,000 in contributions from Rezko which Obama has now donated to charity rather than keep.
Yet the civil fraud trial of Bill Clinton for defrauduing Hillary’s largest donor in 2000 into giving her campaign more than $1.2 million, pending in Los Angeles courts since 2003, is now preparing for a November, 2008 trial. The discovery that is now proceeding after a February 21 hearing, and the pending trial, have NEVER been announced by the mainstream media.
Hillary was able to extricate herself as a co-defendant in the case in January, 2008 after years of appeals to be protected by the First Amendment from tort claims arising out of federal campaign solicitations she made. Her abuse of the intent of California’s anti-SLAPP law after the California Supreme Court refused to dismiss her from the case in 2004 is emblematic of her contempt for the Rule of Law.
Hillary will be called as a witness in both discovery and the trial according to the trial court Judge who so-advised Hillary’s attorney David Kendall when he dismissed Hillary as a co-defendant in 2007. A subpoena is being prepared this month and will be served personally on Hillary, along with Chelsea, Pa Gov. Ed Rendell, Al Gore and other well known political and media figures.
Yet the media has refused to report about this landmark civil fraud case- brought by Hillary’s biggest 2000 donor to her Senate race, regarding allegations that were corroborated by the Department of Justice in the criminal trial of Hillary’s finance director David Rosen in May, 2005. That indictment and trial was credited as resulting from the civil suit’s allegations by Peter Paul, the Hollywood dot com millionaire Bill Clinton convinced to donate more than $1.2 million (according to the DOJ prosecutors and the FBI) to Hillary’s Senate campaign as part of a post White House business deal with Bill.
The media - except for World Net Daily- has also suspiciously refused to report on Hillary’s last FEC report regarding her 2000 Senate campaign, filed in January 30, 2006. In a secret settlement of an FEC complaint by the plaintiff in Paul v Clinton, Peter Paul, the FEC fined Hillary’s campaign $35,000 for hiding more than $720,000 in donations from Paul, and it required Hillary’s campaign to file a 4th amended FEC report.
In that report Hillary and her campaign again hid Paul’s $1.2 million contribution to her campaign and falsely attributed $250,000 as being donated by Paul’s partner, Spider Man creator Stan Lee, who swore in a video taped deposition he never gave Hillary or her campaign any money.
Lee did testify to trading $100,000 checks with Paul to make it appear he gave $100,000 to Hillary’s campaign (admission of a felony) but none of that has been reported by the “overly critical” media!
Where is the outrage from Obama that the press is engaging in a double standard relating to his possible role in the Rezko trial and his refunding the $85,000 contributed to his campaign by Rezko- which Obama has always admitted taking. The media makes no mention of Hillary’s role as a witness in Bill’s fraud trial for defrauding Hillary’s largest donor- and Hillary’s refusal to refund the $1.2 million she illegally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000?legally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000?
Visit Hillcap.org for videos and info. See the video that had over 6 million hit which was taken out, and back again in youtube. Let the truth be told.
March 13th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
[...] today, Hillary Clinton continues to maintain a wide lead in Pennsylvania, but there are indications that her lead may not be as stable as it looks: New York Sen. Hillary Clinton has something in common with former Republican Sen. Rick Santorum. A [...]
March 26th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
What Hillary Clinton did in 1999 when New York City’s Roman Catholics were outraged and asked her to intervene against the hateful artform (paid for by tax money) that was aimed against their religion? Museum of Modern Art in Brooklyn exhibition displayed Virgin Mary covered in elephant dung and surrounded by indecent images. Museum where this has happened was supported (back then) by our tax dollars.
So Hillary listened to the Roman Catholic concerns, Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights called the Virgin Mary painting “Catholic-bashing garbage”, but she ignored them, and let it go in the name of free speech. White House Press Correspondent Joe Lockhart told the media that President Clinton supports his wife’s position regarding the exhibit. If this art happened to target any other
religion while being funded by the tax payers money at the same time, there would be a definite uproar.
September 26th, 1999-
Catholic Cardinal John O’ Connor tells his congregation at St. Patrick’s Cathedral that he is “saddened by what appears to be an attack not only on our blessed mother …but one must ask if it is not an attack on religion itself and in a special way on the Catholic Church.” He also supports “city officials” in opposition to the exhibit.
September 27th, 1999-
Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is running for the U.S. Senate against Guliani, states that, “I share the feeling that I know many New Yorkers have that there are parts of this exhibit that would be deeply offensive… I would not go to see this exhibit” but criticizes Mayor Guliani in saying that “it is not appropriate to penalize and punish an institution such as the Brooklyn Museum.”
Reuters reported on Oct. 2nd 1999: - Roman Catholics sang hymns and handed out vomit bags Saturday to protest an art show with a picture of the Virgin Mary, her right breast made of elephant dung, while animal rights activists objected to art made of sliced up animals.
CBS reported: in this evening’s news, while broacasting Hillary’s words about not shutting down a whole museum over it, showed the picture at the center of the debate. An African-American or African woman is depicted as the Madonna. Then, surrounding her, there are shelacked splatters of elephant dung, and x-rated pictures.
I am really confused about her need for the Roman Catholics votes.