Hitlary's Campaign Nearly Broke! She 'Loans' Her Campaign $5 Million!

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/campaign_money/2008/02/06/70644.html

Clinton Lends Her Campaign $5 Million

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

WASHINGTON -- Hillary Rodham Clinton loaned her campaign $5 million late

last month as Barack Obama outraised and outspent her in the Democratic

presidential race.

"The loan illustrates Senator Clinton's commitment to this effort and to

ensuring that our campaign has the resources it needs to compete and win

across this nation," Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson said.

WASHINGTON (AP) _ Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign, lagging far behind

Barack Obama's fundraising this year, expects to be outspent by Obama in

upcoming Democratic nominating contests just as it was in Feb. 5 states, her

strategists conceded Wednesday.

Officials with both campaigns have said Obama raised $32 million in January

and that Clinton raised $13.5 million, a significant gap between the two

that allowed Obama to place ads in virtually every Super Tuesday state and

to get a head start on advertising in primaries and caucuses over the next

week.

In a teleconference with reporters, Clinton chief strategist Mark Penn said

Clinton was having a "record day" raising money over the Internet on

Wednesday.

"We will have funds to compete," he said, "but we're likely to be outspent

again."

Asked whether Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, had

decided to dip into their own wealth to finance the campaign, Penn said,

"I'm not aware that they have." Campaign communications director Howard

Wolfson said he would inquire. The Clinton's financial disclosures, which

reveal only broad ranges of assets, place their wealth between $10 million

to $50 million.

Clinton's name recognition and lead in polls in some of the bigger upcoming

states give her an advantage and Obama's higher spending rate did not

translate into victories in several states Tuesday.

But the terrain ahead features contests in the short term that are favorable

to Obama. On Saturday, Obama and Clinton will compete in contests in

Louisiana, Nebraska and Washington. On Tuesday, Virginia, Maryland and the

District of Columbia hold primaries.

The Clinton camp is counting on March 4 matchups in Ohio and Texas and an

April 22 primary in Pennsylvania. All three are expensive states in which to

campaign.

Obama's camp signaled that he was ready to invest money in those states as

well. "We think we're in strong financial position so if we choose to do so

in the later states we'll have the ability to do that," campaign manager

David Plouffe told reporters Wednesday.

Clinton spent $15 million in December going into the Iowa caucuses and the

New Hampshire primary. Her campaign spent at least $9 million in the last

two weeks of January advertising in Super Tuesday states. Obama spent about

$11 million in Super Tuesday advertising.

Clinton raised $23.7 million in the last quarter of 2007 for the primary

elections compared to Obama's $22 million. Both had about $18.5 million cash

on hand for the primaries going into January. But Obama roared to a

fundraising lead in January by collecting money at the rate of at least $1

million a day and attracting more than 170,000 new donors.

Obama also has a money advantage because he has raised more money from small

donations than Clinton. An analysis by the Campaign Finance Institute, which

tracks trends in political money, found that Obama raised about a third of

his money in 2007 from donors who gave $200 or less. Only one-third of his

money came from donors who have given the legal maximum of $2,300, compared

to Clinton who raised about half of her money from "maxed out" donors and

only 14 percent from donors of $200 or less.

Goebbels speech on March 18, 1933:

"German women, German men !

It is a happy accident that my first speech since taking charge of the

Ministry for Propaganda and People's Enlightenment is to German women.

Although I agree with Treitschke that men make history, I do not

forget that women raise boys to manhood. You know that the National

Socialist movement is the only party that keeps women out of daily

politics. This arouses bitter criticism and hostility, all of it very

unjustified. We have kept women out of the parliamentary-democratic

intrigues of the past fourteen years in Germany not because we do not

respect them, but because we respect them too much. We do not see the

woman as inferior, rather as having a different mission, a different

value, than that of the man. Therefore we believed that the German

woman, who more than any other in the world is a woman in the best

sense of the word, should use her strength and abilities in other

areas than the man.

The woman has always been not only the man's sexual companion, but

also his fellow worker. Long ago, she did heavy labor with the man in

the field. She moved with him into the cities, entering the offices

and factories, doing her share of the work for which she was best

suited. She did this with all her abilities, her loyalty, her selfless

devotion, her readiness to sacrifice.

The woman in public life today is no different than the women of the

past. No one who understands the modern age would have the crazy idea

of driving women from public life, from work, profession, and bread

winning. But it must also be said that those things that belong to the

man must remain his. That includes politics and the military. That is

not to disparage women, only a recognition of how she can best use her

talents and abilities.

Looking back over the past year's of Germany's decline, we come to the

frightening, nearly terrifying conclusion, that the less German men

were willing to act as men in public life, the more women succumbed to

the temptation to fill the role of the man. The feminization of men

always leads to the masculinization of women. An age in which all

great idea of virtue, of steadfastness, of hardness and determination

have been forgotten should not be surprised that the man gradually

loses his leading role in life and politics and government to the

woman.

It may be unpopular to say this to an audience of women, but it must

be said, because it is true and because it will help make clear our

attitude toward women.

The modern age, with all its vast revolutionary transformations in

government, politics, economics and social relations has not left

women and their role in public life untouched. Things we thought

impossible several years or decades ago are now everyday reality. Some

good, noble and commendable things have happened. But also things that

are contemptible and humiliating. These revolutionary transformations

have largely taken from women their proper tasks. Their eyes were set

in directions that were not appropriate for them. The result was a

distorted public view of German womanhood that had nothing to do with

former ideals.

A fundamental change is necessary. At the risk of sounding reactionary

and outdated, let me say this clearly: The first, best, and most

suitable place for the women is in the family, and her most glorious

duty is to give children to her people and nation, children who can

continue the line of generations and who guarantee the immortality of

the nation. The woman is the teacher of the youth, and therefore the

builder of the foundation of the future. If the family is the nation's

source of strength, the woman is its core and center. The best place

for the woman to serve her people is in her marriage, in the family,

in motherhood. This is her highest mission. That does not mean that

those women who are employed or who have no children have no role in

the motherhood of the German people. They use their strength, their

abilities, their sense of responsibility for the nation, in other

ways. We are convinced, however, that the first task of a socially

reformed nation must be to again give the woman the possibility to

fulfill her real task, her mission in the family and as a mother.

The national revolutionary government is everything but reactionary.

It does not want to stop the pace of our rapidly moving age. It has no

intention of lagging behind the times. It wants to be the flag bearer

and pathfinder of the future. We know the demands of the modern age.

But that does not stop us from seeing that every age has its roots in

motherhood, that there is nothing of greater importance than the

living mother of a family who gives the state children.

German women have been transformed in recent years. They are beginning

to see that they are not happier as a result of being given more

rights but fewer duties. They now realize that the right to be elected

to public office at the expense of the right to life, motherhood and

her daily bread is not a good trade.

A characteristic of the modern era is a rapidly declining birthrate in

our big cities. In 1900 two million babies were born in Germany. Now

the number has fallen to one million. This drastic decline is most

evident in the national capital. In the last fourteen years, Berlin's

birthrate has become the lowest of any European city. By 1955, without

emigration, it will have only about three million inhabitants. The

government is determined to halt this decline of the family and the

resulting impoverishment of our blood. There must be a fundamental

change. The liberal attitude toward the family and the child is

responsible for Germany's rapid decline. We today must begin worrying

about an aging population. In 1900 there were seven children for each

elderly person, today it is only four. If current trends continue, by

1988 the ratio will be 1 : 1. These statistics say it all. They are

the best proof that if Germany continues along its current path, it

will end in an abyss with breathtaking speed. We can almost determine

the decade when Germany collapses because of depopulation.

We are not willing to stand aside and watch the collapse of our

national life and the destruction of the blood we have inherited. The

national revolutionary government has the duty to rebuilt the nation

on its original foundations, to transform the life and work of the

woman so that it once again best serves the national good. It intends

to eliminate the social inequalities so that once again the life of

our people and the future of our people and the immortality of our

blood is assured..."

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com

http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.nsm88.com/

http://wsi.matriots.com/jews.html