J's Cafe Nette

Archive for September 10th, 2007

Sorry folks, I have a great deal of distrust for Hillary Clinton. In what appears to be another purely political move on her part she had decided to return further monies donated to her campaign which were in some fashion tied to this felon.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign said Monday it will return $850,000 in donations raised by Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu, who is under federal investigation for violating election laws.

Clinton, D-N.Y., previously had planned only to give to charity $23,000 she received from Hsu for her presidential and senatorial campaigns and to her political action committee, HillPac.

Isn’t it just a wee bit interesting there was no interest in returning this full amount of money when the original story surfaced and $23,000 was returned, but now that the FBI is investigating, she wants to wash her hands of this man and all of his contributions.

I expect some carefully crafted statement to come from her campaign soon or perhaps the candidate herself to speak. Must have frightened her a bit too that her name was bandied about in papers like the NYT and the LAT in a less than favorable light. When was the last time you heard of that happening to a candidate with the last name Clinton. I suppose now she will attempt to become the hero for “doing the right thing.” No. Doing the right thing would have been to give all the money back when it was learned that Mr. Hsu was a fugitive from justice.

This story is not going to disappear and the more we learn the worse it could become for those on the left who can be tied to this man. Let me rephrase that, if we don’t have another teflon candidate that would be the case…my greatest fear is that we do and that others not so deeply involved with Mr. Hsu’s money will pay the consequence.

Update: Further information has become available following the initial piece:My Way News is reporting the following:

“In light of recent events and allegations that Mr. Norman Hsu engaged in an illegal investment scheme, we have decided out of an abundance of caution to return the money he raised for our campaign,” Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said in a statement Monday night. “An estimated 260 donors this week will receive refunds totaling approximately $850,000 from the campaign.”

Wolfson said the Clinton campaign also will vigorously review its fundraisers, including thorough criminal background checks, in the future. “In any instances where a source of a bundler’s income is in question, the campaign will take affirmative steps to verify its origin,” he said.

The amount that the campaign identified as raised by Hsu would make him one of her top fundraisers. During the first six months of this year, her presidential campaign raised $52 million from individual contributors, second to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., who raised $58.5 million.

So now they will thoroughly vet their fundraisers? Nice timing don’t you think?

HT: Drudge Report

Check out Macsmind where he mentions the growing FBI investigation of this campaign finance fraud. Good stuff.

Tweet This Post

I have always shied away from posting on Cindy Sheehan as I never felt she was either worth the time or deserving of any mention.

This woman in my opinion is a disgrace, certainly not a patriot and while some may disagree she disparages the sacrifice of her son every time she pulls one of her political stunts.

Via The Hill:

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Monday in or near the hearing room where Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker are testifying on the situation in Iraq, according to the U.S. Capitol Police.

Four anti-war protesters were arrested for disorderly conduct. One of them, who was not named, is being taken to George Washington Hospital “due to complaint of injury” and is also charged with assault on a police officer.

According to the information from the Capitol Police, Sheehan and the other three were shouting in a hallway.

This behavior is juvenille and serves absolutely no purpose but to get out the message of the far left. If children behaved in this manner in school they would be reprimanded in some manner. I am pleased the Capitol Police were there to reprimand those who chose to behave in a manner unbecoming a civilized adult.

Tweet This Post

There is only so much that can be repeated as to the partianship in Washington, but I have actually been ashamed of those on the left who have rabidly attacked a man they voted to place in Command of the Multinational Forces in Iraq.

I believe after reading this, Senator McConnell has had about enough also.

About General Petraeus:

He’s proven his devotion to this country. His integrity is above reproach. And any suggestion to the contrary is totally absurd and demonstrably untrue.

“And so I resent the comments of those who have sat comfortably in their air-conditioned offices, thousands of miles away from the firefights and the roadside bombs, and tried their Washington best in recent days to impugn the general’s good name.

“The Democratic Majority sent him into battle by a unanimous vote, funded his mission, and asked him to report back on progress. And when he returns, is he greeted with the respect and appreciation his service deserves? No. He’s attacked again, at home, by some of the very Democratic senators who confirmed him.

“They’re following the lead of the left-wing groups that placed a full-page ad in today’s New York Times, questioning the character of a four-star general who has the respect and admiration of the more than 150,000 brave men and women serving under his command. These childish tactics are an insult to everyone fighting for our freedom in Iraq, and they should be condemned.

“Republicans have tried to maintain a level of civility in this debate. We’ve let most of the rhetorical excesses of the other side slide, knowing that tempers are bound to flare in this charged environment. But the effort to discredit General Petraeus personally over the past few days is completely and totally out of bounds. It needs to be recognized as such, and it needs to end — right now.

“The early effort to undermine his mission was troubling enough. Scarcely had a fraction of the additional soldiers or Marines landed in Iraq before we started hearing the voices of defeat. Amazingly, some Democrats who had called for a surge before January, would then label the policy a failure two full months before it fully began. Others said the war was lost even as these soldiers and Marines were being sent into battle.

This is just a small portion of the entire speech the Senator delivered this morning. Please read it all. It is only my hope that others on the Right will stand to defend this Commander as Senator McConnell has.

Update: Also check out this piece by Colonel Repya at Captains Quarters. Below is the final paragraph of his post.

This week our enemies gleefully will watch this public display of political theater unfold, complete with repeated partisan attacks on a good and honorable man. General Petraeus is an impeccably honest leader and soldier, a man who has dedicated his life to the service of this great nation in time of war and peace. His family has suffered the same long and painful separations all military families have endured. Yet Senate Democrats have already questioned his honesty and others will attempt to shed him of his dignity. Meanwhile, their accomplices in the media will attempt to raise questions as to the accuracy and validity of his report and testimony. This is the shameful state of American politics today. For General Petraeus and the men and women in our military that he represents to be subjected to this circus during wartime is beyond the pale of human decency. Is there any wonder when polled that the American people claim so little faith in our Congress?

Well said sir.

Update 2: Courtesy of a link from Politico, here is a transcript of General Petraeus’s remarks this morning before House committees. This is followed by a link to the opening statement of Ambassador Crocker.

Tweet This Post

There is an exclusive interview at Pajamas Media today in regard to the Scott Thomas Beauchamp affair. Bob Owens speaks directly with the investigating officer in this case, Major John Cross.

The head of the U.S. Army investigation into Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp is breaking his silence in an exclusive interview with Pajamas Media.

Stationed in Iraq, Beauchamp is an Army private who wrote three articles for The New Republic magazine — which quickly came under suspicion when active-duty military bloggers, journalists, and bloggers, like Confederate Yankee and Blackfive, found his claims to be impossible, excessive or unlikely.

Most controversial of Beauchamp’s stories was the third – “Shock Troops.” It included allegations of the author and another soldier verbally mocking a burn victim, claims of a “Saddam era dumping ground” containing children’s remains being desecrated by American soldiers and tales of another soldier using a Bradley armored vehicle to smash civilian stalls and run over dogs for sport.

Beauchamp seems to have slipped past the normal fact-checking process because his new wife, Elspeth Reeve, is a fact checker for the magazine, as we revealed here last month.

When this story first broke, I immediately began checking the milblogs and found many who were doubtful that all of this information was anything more than a figment of the imagination of the writer. The sad part of this is that so many in the MSM and on the left were willing to buy this pack of lies just based on the fact that it shed negative light on the US military.

This was quite a scoop for Pajamas Media. Read the whole thing as it gives great first hand insight into the investigation and its conclusions. Thank goodness for this medium we call the blogs as these stories would be near impossible to debunk otherwise.

Tweet This Post

Would you ever have guessed that the brain function of a conservative is different than that of a liberal? I never really devoted much time to thinking about it myself although it would stand to reason it would be true.

As I read the results of this study published in the British journal Nature Neuroscience, I began to wonder how many who call themselves one or the other would agree.

The brain neurons of liberals and conservatives fire differently when confronted with tough choices, suggesting that some political divides may be hard-wired, according a study released Sunday.

Aristotle may have been more on the mark than he realised when he said that man is by nature a political animal.

Dozens of previous studies have established a strong link between political persuasion and certain personality traits.

Conservatives tend to crave order and structure in their lives, and are more consistent in the way they make decisions. Liberals, by contrast, show a higher tolerance for ambiguity and complexity, and adapt more easily to unexpected circumstances.

The affinity between political views and “cognitive style” has also been shown to be heritable, handed down from parents to children, said the study, published in the British journal Nature Neuroscience.

I have never put a whole lot of stock in studies such as this as they are often laden with the researchers personal objectivity or lack thereof. However, I must admit that the descriptions offered in relation to the two political persuasions in this instance seemed to be fairly accurate.

The match-up was unmistakable: respondents who had described themselves as liberals showed “significantly greater conflict-related neural activity” when the hypothetical situation called for an unscheduled break in routine.

Conservatives, however, were less flexible, refusing to deviate from old habits “despite signals that this … should be changed.”

Whether that is good or bad, of course, depends on one’s perspective: one could interpret the results to mean that liberals are nimble-minded and conservatives rigid and stubborn.

Or one could, with equal justice, conclude that wishy-washy liberals don’t stick to their guns, while conservatives and steadfast and loyal.

Just some food for thought on a Monday morning.

Tweet This Post

Jerusalem has such a wealth of history I do not know if all of it will ever be unearthed, but this is an amazing story of the latest archaeological find.

Under threat from Romans ransacking Jerusalem 2,000 years ago, many of the city’s Jewish residents crowded into an underground drainage channel to hide and later flee the chaos through Jerusalem’s southern end unnoticed.

The ancient tunnel was recently discovered buried beneath rubble, a monument to one of the great dramatic scenes of the destruction of the Second Temple in the year 70 A.D.

The channel was dug beneath what would become the main road of Jerusalem, the archaeology dig’s directors, Ronny Reich of the University of Haifa and Eli Shukron of the Israel Antiquities Authority, said Sunday. Shukron said excavators looking for the road happened upon a small drainage channel that led them to the discovery of the massive tunnel two weeks ago.

There is a great photo of a portion of this tunnel available at the Star Tribune and one of a few of the artifacts unearthed at Power Line.

Tweet This Post

I had mentioned toward the end of last week that I would try to post at least one patriotic piece a day up to and on 9-11. Today’s offering is one which immediately upon viewing, became a favorite.

The parents of this young girl must have been so proud.

Hope you like it.

Tweet This Post

I do not have the slightest idea if anyone from the Clinton camp ever entered Ms. Willey’s house nor that of David Schipper or what their motive might have been if they did. This latest story does give one pause though, if World Net Daily has all the facts in order.

David Schippers at President Clinton’s impeachment trial in 1998
After reading WND’s report of Kathleen Willey’s stolen manuscript, David Schippers – the chief counsel for the 1998 impeachment trial of President Clinton – told Willey he had a remarkably similar experience prior to publication of his best-selling book and believes the Clintons also were behind it.

During the writing of “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment” in the spring of 2000, an intruder came into his suburban Chicago home at least four times while his wife was alone upstairs, Schippers told WND in a phone interview from his Chicago law office.

On the third or fourth occasion, a box of impeachment-related documents was stolen, he said.

The intrusions followed a series of claims by his wife, Jackie – who typed the manuscript from his handwritten text – that her computer was being hacked.

It might just be me, but I cannot wrap my arms around people who are somewhat prominent leaving front doors unlocked even during the day and windows wide open at night. I am not saying the incidents did not happen but those little facts gnaw at my brain.

Once again, this is not an accusation, just a reporting of what Mr.and Mrs. Schippers have supposedly told the WND. Strange, huh?

Tweet This Post