Maggie's Farm

While we're at it, please --please --check out this morning's insty link "more than a touch of malice".

It goes to here:

http://ricochet.com/main-feed/More-Than-a-Touch-of-Malice

...and concerns what is being played as 'another Obama error' regarding the contraception/Catholic issue.

A good case is made that it is no error at all. But the larger question of what this bunch is up to, is the reason you should take a look at the article --and the comments, don't miss the comments.

(excerpt)

In 2008, when he first ran for the Presidency, Barack Obama posed as a moderate most of the time. This time, he is openly running as a radical. His aim is to win a mandate for the fundamental transformation of the United States that he promised in passing on the eve of his election four years ago and that he promised again when he called his administration The New Foundation. In the process, he intends to reshape the Democratic coalition – to bring the old hypocrisy to an end, to eliminate those who stand in the way of the final consolidation of the administrative entitlements state, to drive out the faithful Catholics once and for all, to jettison the white working class, and to build a new American regime on a coalition of highly educated upper-middle class whites, feminists, African-Americans, Hispanics, illegal immigrants, and those belonging to the public-sector unions. To Americans outside this coalition, he intends to show no mercy.

more hair raise:

Irresistible force ('we must stop Iran') meets immovable object ('we cannot stop Iran').

http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/jr-nyquist/what-does-the-ayatollah-want

Gary Locke has terrified me from the get-go.

===

Bill Clinton --lordy mercy --where to start --how about as Gov of Arkansas steering Chinese money into his new (and now notorious graft vehicle) Arkansas Development Finance Authority, and quid pro quo,

http://www.kycbs.net/Catbird3.htm

(scroll down an inch to)

Arkansas State Teachers' Fund - Hey, Teach, do you know where your retirement funds are?

From: The Progressive Review : Clinton Scandal Clips Part 15:

PENSION FUND INVESTS IN CHINA - The Clinton crowd, which almost caused a disaster in the Arkansas state pension fund in the mid-1980s by its risky investments, is at it again according to Investor's Business Daily and the American Spectator.

The Arkansas State Teachers' Fund has put large sums into four companies with strong links to Chinese intelligence and the People's Liberation Army, including the China Ocean Shipping Co., China North Industries, China Resources Enterprises and China Travel.

Some of these firms are also linked to Indonesian Clinton crony Mochtar Riady. The system owns nearly $2 million worth of stock in a COSCO subsidiary.

Says Charles Altmon of the highly rated Growth Stock Outlook newsletter ... the pension fund investments are "downright foolish."

For more, GO TO > > > The Great Nest Egg Robberies ; Hail to The Chief; The Indonesian Connection

(Hyperlinks in the above, at site)
===

the Catbird Seat site will make you wish you were more suicidal --enter at own risk. But here's a start to understanding the Democratic party and China:

https://sites.google.com/site/dirtygoldingoldmansachs/the-catbird-chronicles-goldman-sachs

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/26/214938.shtml

===

The Idiot's Guide to Chinagate
Richard Poe
Tuesday, May 27, 2003
===
(excerpt)

China will likely replace the USA as world leader, said Bill Clinton in a recent Washington Post interview. It is just a matter of time. Clinton should know. He has personally done more to build China’s military strength than any man on earth.

Most Americans have heard of the so-called "Chinagate" scandal. Few understand its deadly import, however. Web sites such as "Chinagate for Dummies" and its companion "More Chinagate for Dummies" offer some assistance.

Unfortunately, with a combined total of nearly 8,000 words, these two sites – like so many others of the genre – offer more detail than most of us "dummies" can absorb.

For that reason, in the 600 words left in this column, I will try to craft my own "Idiot’s Guide to Chinagate," dedicated to all those busy folks like you and me whose attention span tends to peter out after about 750 words.

Here goes.

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, China presented no threat to the United States. Chinese missiles "couldn’t hit the side of a barn," notes Timothy W. Maier of Insight magazine. Few could reach North America and those that made it would likely miss their targets.

Thanks to Bill Clinton, China can now hit any city in the USA, using state-of-the-art solid-fueled missiles with dead-accurate, computerized guidance systems and multiple warheads.

China probably has suitcase nukes as well. These enable China to strike by proxy – equipping nuclear-armed terrorists to do its dirty work while the Chinese play innocent. Some intelligence sources claim that China maintains secret stockpiles of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons on U.S. soil, for just such contingencies.

In 1997, Clinton allowed China to take over the Panama Canal. The Chinese company Hutchison Whampoa leased the ports of Cristobal and Balboa, on the east and west openings of the canal, respectively, thus controlling access both ways.

A public outcry stopped Clinton in 1998 from leasing California's Long Beach Naval Yard to the Chinese firm COSCO. Even so, China can now strike U.S. targets easily from its bases in Panama, Vancouver and the Bahamas.

How did the Chinese catch up so fast? Easy. We sold them all the technology they needed – or handed it over for free. Neither neglect nor carelessness is to blame. Bill Clinton did it on purpose.

As a globalist, Clinton promotes "multipolarity" – the doctrine that no country (such as the USA) should be allowed to gain decisive advantage over others.

To this end, Clinton appointed anti-nuclear activist Hazel O'Leary to head the Department of Energy. O'Leary set to work "leveling the playing field," as she put it, by giving away our nuclear secrets. She declassified 11 million pages of data on U.S. nuclear weapons and loosened up security at weapons labs.

Federal investigators later concluded that China made off with the "crown jewels" of our nuclear weapons research under Clinton’s open-door policy – probably including design specifications for suitcase nukes.

Meanwhile, Clinton and his corporate cronies raked in millions.

In his book "The China Threat," Washington Times correspondent Bill Gertz describes how the system worked.

Defense contractors eager to sell technology to China poured millions of dollars into Clinton's campaign. In return, Clinton called off the dogs. Janet Reno and other counterintelligence officials stood down while Lockheed Martin, Hughes Electronics, Loral Space & Communications and other U.S. companies helped China modernize its nuclear strike force.

"We like your president. We want to see him re-elected," former Chinese intelligence chief Gen. Ji Shengde told Chinagate bagman Johnny Chung.

Indeed, Chinese intelligence organized a massive covert operation aimed at tilting the 1996 election Clinton's way.

Clinton's top campaign contributors for 1992 were Chinese agents; his top donors in 1996 were U.S. defense contractors selling missile technology to China.

Clinton recieved funding directly from known or suspected Chinese intelligence agents, among them James and Mochtar Riady, who own the Indonesian Lippo Group; John Huang; Charlie Trie; Ted Sioeng; Maria Hsia; Wang Jun and others.

Commerce Secretary Ron Brown served as Clinton's front man in many Chinagate deals. When investigators began probing Brown's Lippo Group and Chinagate connections, Brown died suddenly in a suspicious April 1996 plane crash.

Needless to say, China does not share Clinton's enthusiasm for globalism or multipolarity. The Chinese look out for No. 1.

"War [with the United States] is inevitable; we cannot avoid it," said Chinese Defense Minister Gen. Chi Haotian in 2000. "The issue is that the Chinese armed forces must control the initiative in this war."

(close excerpt)
===

Sorry for wall of text, BD --go ahead and delete it if it's a prob --

--right you are. Wouldn't be so bad if only they'd put each other in jail when they deserve it. But they won't.