Subject: POOR HILLARY

This is disgusting! This is really disgusting…be sure to read it all…
If Hillary wins in 2008 and Bill is ‘appointed’ to fill her Senate
seat and either live to retire ‘they’ (together or alone) would get two US Presidential retirement checks, two US Senate retirement checks, and a retirement check from the State of Arkansas .
    About the only thing they MIGHT NOT get is a Social Security  check….but I wouldn’t bet on it….

       I understand ole Bill has earned $40,000,000 in the past six years.  What a guy!
       AND THE REST OF THE STORY… Hilarious Rotten Clinton, as a New York State  Senator, now comes under the ‘Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan,’ which
means that even if she never gets reelected, she STILL receives her Congressional salary until she dies. (Would it not be nice if all Americans were pension eligible after only 4 years?)

    If Bill outlives her, he then inherits HER salary until HE dies.
He is already getting his Presidential salary until he dies. If Hillary outlives Bill, she also gets HIS salary until she dies. Guess who pays for that?
       It’s common knowledge that in order for her to establish NY residency, they purchased a million dollar-plus house in upscale Chappaqua , New York .
Makes sense!
  They are entitled to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes sense.

         As she runs for President, will YOU vote for her?  Even if she cries on TV!?
GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!

      edited …some parts of the email were false~ (imagine that )

New York Daily News

Hillary’s big lie grows

There she goes again. Hillary Clinton told another whopper. Actually, it’s the same whopper she and her husband told before.

In Iowa last weekend, Clinton was asked about her 2002 vote to suppport the Iraq war. It’s a tough question for her, given the war’s unpopularity among Democrats. Moreover, her two leading opponents for the 2008 presidential nomination have crowd-pleasing positions. Former Sen. John Edwards said his vote for the war was a mistake and he regretted it, and Sen. Barack Obama opposed the war before the invasion.

So Clinton’s camp sees her pro-war vote as heavy baggage. She has never denounced it or said it was wrong, but, at times, has done something worse. She has lied about the reasons for it.

Sunday in Davenport, Iowa, was one of those times. Asked about her vote by a man in front of a mostly adoring rally, Clinton trotted out the whopper. She said she was misled by President Bush about the resolution. “He said at the time he was going to the United Nations to put inspectors back into Iraq, to figure out whether they still had any WMD,” she said, adding, “He took the authority that others and I gave him and he misused it.”

That’s very similar to how Bill Clinton defended her last year. In an interview with ABC News, he said Dems who voted for the resolution did so only to force Saddam Hussein to give up, not to use force. “They felt, frankly, let down” about the invasion, Clinton said, painting Dems as dupes of Bush.

It’s a clever argument, but it’s not true. It’s not even within spinning distance of being true.

Here are the facts. The resolution passed the Senate on Oct. 10, 2002, by a vote of 77 to 23, with support from Clinton, Edwards and about 20 other Dems.

Its purpose was clear from its title: “Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq.” Opponents, including Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), voted no because they thought it meant war was inevitable.

They had good reason to worry. Bush made it clear he intended to “disarm” Iraq and the resolution gave him that authority. He could use our armed forces, Section 3 said, “as he determines to be necessary and appropriate” to defend America and enforce UN resolutions. Separately, an amendment requiring Security Council approval for an invasion was defeated. Clinton helped to defeat that amendment.

To hear the Clintons fudge now, you would think the invasion began the very next day. In fact, it began five months later, in March 2003. During those months, as U.S. troops massed in the Mideast, there is no record of Hillary Clinton opposing the invasion or claiming she had been misled.

Indeed, an article in The Washington Post on March 9, 2003, lamented that Congress had been mostly silent since the resolution passed. The only major exception came when Kennedy, Byrd and some House members urged Bush to let weapons inspectors finish their work. Clinton was not recorded as being part of that effort.

That the war has gone badly is a tragedy and a disaster. It is why Democrats won Congress last year. But anybody who wants to be President and commander in chief cannot play the role of victim when the going gets tough on the campaign trail. Blaming others for your own conduct and fudging history are not the right stuff for the Oval Office. Even, or especially, when your name is Clinton.

www.STOPHillary.com

Have you ever heard that a dog “knows” when an earthquake is about to hit?

Have you ever heard that a dog can “sense” when a tornado is stirring up, even twenty miles away?

Do you remember hearing that, before the December tsunami struck Southeast Asia, dogs started running frantically away from the seashore, at breakneck speed?

Do you know that dogs can detect cancer and other serious illnesses and danger of fire?

Somehow they always know when they can ‘go for a ride’ before you even ask and how do those dogs and cats get home from hundreds of miles away?

I’m a firm believer that animals - and especially dogs - have keen insights into the Truth.

And you can’t tell me that dogs can’t sense a potentially terrible disaster well in advance.

Simply said, a good ol’ hound dog just KNOWS when something isn’t right . . when impending doom is upon us . .

GOOD DOG~