America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

we can add to the Clinton List..??


how long does it take..??

Chute, I don't know what to say.

I have MORE respect for dirt.......

I always wanted me a bag o' that fancy store bought dirt - just so's folk would respect me, ya' know?

I heard Hillary was gonna re-dirt da ghettos with the fancy store bought stuff if she gets elected...

In the context of her candidacy she is probably correct.

Didn't Yoko Ono recently admit an initimate love affair with Hillary ?

Probably.

Here is the order I will vote


1. Everyone Else
2. Satan
3. Hillary
4. Ted Cruz

It was another epic week in Clinton Inc.’s slog toward the Democratic presidential nomination — full of hypocrisy, scandal and disappointed kids.

The lowlight was surely Hillary Clinton hip-checking Roosevelt Island tots out of a park so she can hold a campaign rally.

Instead of the long-planned Imagination Playground, Four Freedoms Park on June 13 will host Hillary’s first major policy address of the campaign. Too bad, kids.

On top of that, her event will cause major headaches for what remains of this year’s Roosevelt Island Day, a yearly celebration launched in the wake of 9/11.

“It’s going to be horrendous logistically,” Sherie Helstien, vice president of the island’s community association, told The Post’s Geoff Earle. Security and media are sure to wreak havoc along the single main drag.

Sorry, little people of Roosevelt Island: Hillary has an Eleanor Roosevelt thing, so she needs your park for a speech. And the Clintons’ needs always come first.

At least Hillary is unlikely to actually denounce the islanders before she occupies their park. Malcolm Wiener wasn’t so lucky.

Clinton used the Greenwich, Conn., home of Wiener and his wife, Carolyn, for a Friday fund-raiser. The Wieners can afford the $29.7 million mansion because Malcolm’s a top hedge-fund manager.

Hillary, on the other hand, has been claiming she has it out for hedgies. “Something is wrong when CEOs earn more than 300 times than what the typical American worker earns and when hedge-fund managers pay a lower tax rate than truck drivers or nurses,” she said recently.

Maybe the Wieners don’t think she really means it? After all, that thunder does come from a woman who charges universities $250,000 to talk for an hour.

Here’s a tip for that June 13 speech, Hillary: Don’t go trying to present yourself as a woman of the people.

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would that be a surprise?

You guys do realize that the "Clinton Foundation" is not Hillary Clinton's campaign fund, right? I mean, certain people will frame news stories to make your first assumption be that... but the clinton foundation is just a charity. It's a charity that does work in asia, africa, latin america and the US. I have no idea what the quality of work it does is, or what percentage of donations and grants actually goes directly to the work (many charities are horrible and use 80%+ for "administrative").... but there should be no surprise that an international charity would collect international donations....

In fact, the entire clinton foundation thing is limp at best. I mean, if the best dirt you can come up with on a woman like Own Email Server Clinton is that she's managing to encourage countries to donate to her husband's international charity in some sort of tit-for-tat state department deals... oh no!!! some kids in asia are getting treated for aids! The HUMANITY!!!!!

I am positive there is a good scandal around that woman. Hell, there already have been good scandals. Just because the general readership of the right wing blogosphere isn't smart enough to realize the egregious flaunting of national security she showed when using her own email server.... no one seems to care. But oh no, they care about a charity because they associate the name together and think it's campaign donations. This sort of weak sauce just makes the right look lazy.

I read that. It's apparently incorrect. The model of the charity is not as a $$ redistribution house (like most seem to be these days), but apparently staffs the individuals performing the charitable work. This would actually give you the very high %. I don't have the time to look deeper to see who's being paid to do what, but that makes some sense and explains the divergent numbers.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/29/rush-limbaugh/rush-limbaugh-says-clinton-foundation-spends-just-/

I don't believe the charities number of 88% goes directly to help though either. The truth is likely in between.



I can't find any record of the clintons receiving any money from the foundation. They may have been on the board, but I would think a google search would pull up all sorts of info on them being paid to be on the board. Do you have any evidence that they were receiving any money from the foundation as board members or employees? And don't give me that whole "friends of the clintons receiving high paying jobs" thing... how do you think most people get those high paying jobs? Usually by having worked with someone on a different project in the past.

.........

saw a pic of her smoking a pineapple white owl not long ago....

You sure it wasn't a Black & Mild