Clinton-Obama Rift Begins

Clinton-Obama Rift Begins

A little bit of daylight has begun to emerge between the Clintons and President Obama. As the president’s ratings drop — recently, particularly among liberals — the first signs are beginning to show of distance between the former rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination.
As always with the Clintons, the signs are made evident by a carefully choreographed two-step in which they fill their separate roles, one as an outsider and the other as a loyal insider to the Obama administration. But never doubt that everything these two do is coordinated and orchestrated.
On Bill’s end, there emerge faint signs of disagreement with the president. Commenting on the Gulf oil spill, the former president warned against ratcheting up the rhetoric against BP noting that it is that firm’s expertise upon which the administration must rely to end the spill and terminate the slide in his ratings that it has triggered.
More confrontationally, Bill has endorsed Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff for the Democratic Senate nomination in Colorado even as the Obama White House is strongly backing Michael Bennet, the Democratic senator appointed to fill the seat vacated by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
For Bill Clinton to challenge Obama so overtly to a proxy battle in the Colorado Senate primary is, indeed, remarkable considering his wife’s role in the administration.
Hillary, as befits her position — but not necessarily her personality — is more demure. While she takes no shots at her boss and does not cross him in any way, she is gradually expanding her purview beyond the foreign affairs mandate of her job.
It was Secretary of State Clinton who first released to the media the fact that Obama’s Justice Department would be suing the state of Arizona over their new anti-illegal immigration law. And it was also the secretary of state who noted that she felt that rich people were not paying their “fair share” of taxes in the U.S., while carefully explaining that she was only expressing her personal views.

Read The Full Article

Clinton Delegate Upset With Her Party

Government health care and its complaints

Government health care and its complaints

Danny Huddleston
The promise of free government health care from Obama and Hillary is a tempting proposal. But before we jump on board let’s take a look at how our cousins across the pond are doing. They’ve had “free” health care in England since 1948, and it seems they still haven’t worked all the bugs out of the system. Here are some excerpts from an illuminating article in the left wing newspaper The Guardian:

A big variation in the performance of NHS trusts across England is revealed today in the health inspectorate’s annual survey of patients’ experiences.

In some hospitals more than three-quarters of inpatients said the standard of care was excellent, compared with less than one quarter in others.

In the best trusts, staff almost invariably helped frail patients to eat, but in the worst nearly half the people who needed assistance at mealtimes said they did not get it.

There was also a wide variation between hospitals in the quality of food, cleanliness, responsiveness to call buttons and the proportion of patients expected to share bathrooms and toilets with members of the opposite sex.

The level of quality care seems uneven at best. A hospital in West London had an approval rating of only 24%, almost as bad as Congress! Here is a ground breaking idea they just instituted:
“Since last month people have had the right to choose between any NHS hospital in England and any private clinic meeting the Department of Health’s standards on quality and cost.”


Imagine, you can now go to any hospital. Maybe we should try that.


Unfortunately effective infection control and good basic hygiene have gotten worse:


Norman Lamb, the Liberal Democrat health spokesman, said: “These results will make worrying reading for a government that claims to be committed to infection control and patient dignity. The key indicators of effective infection control – good basic hygiene – have got worse rather than better.”

The Department of Health responded by publishing research from last year showing patients were more concerned about hospital cleanliness than single-sex accommodation. A Mori poll showed 58% of patients thought staying clean in hospital was most important, compared with 17% who wanted single-sex wards.


When you get a toothache in Great Britain the quality of care you’ll be receiving is not your main concern, it’s just hoping you can find a dentist. The conservative  Telegraph has this story:


People who cannot get an NHS dentist are pulling their teeth out with pliers and using Superglue to put caps back.
So declared Mike Penning, from the Tory front bench, in a bid to destroy the “complacent” picture of dentistry painted by Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary.
Let us leave the glue on one side, or beneath whatever caps it may be holding in place: what worried some of us was the thought of the pliers.
Canada is also having a few problems with their nationalized health care system as reported in this article from the Canadian Medical Association:
It is well known that Canada is facing a shortage of maternity care providers in a trend that has been developing over the past two decades. This shortage is being felt most acutely in rural and remote communities. For years, maternity care has been provided in these communities by family physicians with the assistance of registered general nurses. Increasing numbers of family physicians are deciding not to provide intrapartum care. Rural hospitals are finding it equally difficult to attract nurses with maternity care experience.
In many cases, women and their families are leaving their home communities up to 4 weeks prior to their due dates and residing in hotels or with relatives until the birth of their baby. In the most remote communities, women are usually flown out alone, and accommodated in hostels located in large cities, completely unfamiliar to the expectant mothers. The emotional, social, and financial costs to these women and their families are immense.


It looks as though in order to get free health care we may have to give up a few perks such as “infection control” and “patient dignity.” And we may have to become more adept at home dentistry.


Maybe this is why the Democrats never give any examples of other countries where nationalized health care is a success worth emulating, because they can’t find any.

Hillary’s Radical Skeletons

Hillary’s Radical Skeletons

By Ben Johnson | 4/25/2008

Integral to Hillary Clinton’s triumph in the Pennsylvania primary on Tuesday, Jacob Laksin observed in FrontPage Magazine, was convincing Keystone State voters that she “understood the curious ways of more humble folk.” The former feminist liberationist, who channeled dead spirits, belittled those who “stayed home and baked cookies and had teas,” and labored to sue handgun manufacturers for daring to make the Second Amendment possible morphed herself into a gun-toting, whiskey-swilling church lady. Her reinvention as a redneck queen only went so far, though: she did tremendous damage by emphasizing Barack Obama’s ties to anti-American radicals Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers. She has, in short, been lucky in her choice of opponents: a mature candidate would have thrown both under a bus at the first opportunity. Obama’s refusal to do so, likening one to his grandmother, has allowed Hillary to present herself as the voice of mainstream moderation.

She is no such thing.

Conservatives, amused at the once-invincible Obama finally facing tough questions, would be ill-served if they allow her to establish her new image as a plain vanilla moderate. From her crusading days in Wellsley College through her choice of minister during her eight years in the East Wing, Hillary has surrounded herself with a consortium of radicals that would make Obama blush (or rather, feel right at home).

The Mobster’s Marxist
The former Goldwater girl would write her 1969 thesis for Wellesley College on the ideas of native Chicago radical Saul Alinsky. Entitled “There is only the Fight, An Analysis of the Alinsky model,” its 92 pages explored the intellectual world of the Marxist organizer. The young Ms. Rodham likened Alinsky – favorably – to Socialist Party presidential candidate Eugene Debs, Walt Whitman, and Martin Luther King Jr., stating “each embraced the most radical of political faiths – democracy.” Hillary had one difference with Alinsky: she did not believe street demonstrations were effective avenues to promote their shared, far-Left values. Instead, she affirmed her commitment to working “inside the system,” because she believed all change came about only by acquiring political power. Three years after her thesis, Alinsky revealed the source of some of his methods, “I learned a hell of a lot about the uses and abuses of power from the mob, lessons that stood me in good stead later on, when I was organizing…Everybody owned stock in the Capone mob; in a way, he was a public benefactor.” Alinsky certainly benefited: he consorted with Al Capone and Frank Nitti, among other mafiosi. Alinsky knew a ruthless leader when he saw one, offering Hillary a job at his Industrial Areas Foundation Training Institute.

Peeping for the Panthers

She declined in favor of attending Yale Law School. There, she studied under the infamous Thomas (“Tommy the Commie”) Emerson. Emerson introduced her to Charles Garry, an attorney for the Black Panther Party. When Panthers were put on trial in New Haven, Connecticut, for the torture and murder of Alex Rackley, Hillary monitored the trial – on behalf of the Panthers. (Although this is the subject of an urban legend, the monitoring did, in fact, occur.) Her aim, and that of the students she organized, was to look for “civil rights violations” that could be used as technicalities to dismiss the charges against the Panthers.

“Our Law Firm was a Communist Law Firm.”
Unsuccessful in these efforts, in 1972 Hillary Rodham took her unmarried companion, Bill Clinton, to Berkeley, where she worked as an intern at her hand-picked law firm: Treuhaft, Walker, and Bernstein. The practice, founded by current or former members of the Communist Party USA, had long acted as a legal asset for CPUSA, the Black Panthers, and other Bay-area radicals. Founding partner Bob Treuhaft had been labeled one of the nation’s most “dangerously subversive” lawyers.

Had the future presidential candidate somehow inadvertently joined a Marxist law firm 3,000 miles away from her home college? Treuhaft disclosed, “She did want to work for a left-wing movement law firm. Anyone who went to college or law school would have known our law firm was a Communist law firm.” In fact, Treuhaft and his wife, Jessica Mitford, left the Party, not because of ideological variance with the Communists, but because “It was ineffective.” In 1992, the co-president-elect wrote, “I am an admirer of Jessica Mitford.” While Rodham was doing her internship, Treuhaft feverishly worked at getting charges dismissed in Huey P. Newton’s 1967 murder of a police officer. (Hillary’s apologists often claim she monitored the Rackley trial to protest “mistreatment” of Bobby Seale; ironically, Huey Newton abused Seale far worse than any legal system.)

Not all partners in the firm had cut ties with the Communist Party. Doris Brin Walker remained a member of the CPUSA 30 years after Rodham’s intership had ended. Having just finished a stint as president of the National Lawyers Guild when Hillary reported for duty, Walker longed for a “Second American Revolution.” As Hillary left the firm, Walker successfully defended Angela Davis against multiple felonies resulting from a shootout that left a California judge dead. Walker said she undertook the case at the instruction of the CPUSA. She once mused, “For Hillary to pick the most left-wing firm really at that time in the Bay Area, it’s still a surprise to me that more hasn’t been made of that.”

Hillary did yeoman’s work while learning at the feet of the masters. Associates say Hillary helped draftees get themselves declared conscientious objectors, so they would not serve in Vietnam. They insist Hillary served VA interns seeking to avoid taking a loyalty oath to the United States. Some hint she worked on Black Panther cases, or attended their trials. And she undoubtedly assisted Berkeley student body president Daniel Siegel obtain admission to the bar, which he was denied after he thundered: “The question is not violence versus non-violence; the question is when violence, and how violence, and what violence.” He graciously specified targets: “I can see very little objection theoretically, politically, or morally, or anything else, with burning down the Bank of America and all its 500 branches.” Mr. Siegel now shares his legal wisdom at the bench, thanks to Miss Rodham.

A Check in Every Pot, a Government Babysitter in Every Garage

Hillary’s own views continued to reflect a radical orientation toward economics and the traditional family. She worked on Kenneth Kingston’s tome All Our Children: The American Family Under Pressure, which advocated a guaranteed minimum annual income. In a November 1973 article for the Harvard Educational Review, Hillary proposed liberating children from “the empire of the Father.” In that article, she asserted, “Along with the family, past and present examples of such [unjust] arrangements include marriage, slavery, and the Indian Reservation system.” As if to stick it to her opponents, who publicized this quotation during the 1992 election, Hillary authored her first book shortly after taking office: It Takes a Village to Raise a Child.

At the same time, she would meet the woman who would focus her quest for state socialism: Marian Wright Edelman, founder of the Children’s Defense Fund. In 1996, Edelman exhorted Jim Wallis’ leftist religious group Call to Renewal: “Let’s guarantee a job. Let’s guarantee health care and children [sic.] care. Let’s turn this welfare repeal into real welfare reform.” She endorsed full employment, socialized medicine, federally funded babysitters for all, and infinite welfare benefits for those not inclined to forsake indolence. But what will give way in the budget? Defense, of course. Edelman wrote in her1987 book Families in Peril, “We must curb the fanatical military weasel and keep it in balance with competing national needs.”

Government Lawyers for Leftists
To sure up the support of her now-husband, Jimmy Carter named Hillary Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation from 1978-1980. The LSC, purportedly a program to help the poor, has dedicated the time of its taxpayer-subsidized lawyers to serving grassroots leftist organizations, easing restrictions against criminal illegal aliens, and expanding government welfare rolls. Hillary soon became chair of Legal Services, reportedly in a coup against Carter’s preferred candidate. Funding tripled during her reign, reaching its highest ever budget in inflation-adjusted dollars. At that time, LSC opposed California’s Proposition 13, which cut property taxes by more than half, although organizing a political campaign “broke its own rules,” according to Michael Barone. Likewise, the LSC tried to force the New York Transit Authority to hire heroin addicts. In 1978, it filed an amicus brief in the Bakke case, supporting racial quotas in public universities. During her co-presidency in the 1990s, LSC’s budget soared to $400 million; and its case load at the time included such causes as:

  • keeping drug-dealers from being evicted from public housing;
  • getting drug addicts disability benefits;
  • defending illegal aliens convicted of felonies from deportation;
  • suing to get welfare benefits for a criminal illegal alien who had once been deported;
  • demanding bilingual education;
  • opposing Proposition 187, the California voter initiative that would have banned non-emergency aid for illegal aliens; and
  • supporting homosexual adoption.

Clearly, she was within her element.

Hillary’s Pastor Problem

The first major chink in Obama’s electoral armor came with questions of his relationship to Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the recently retired pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ and a longtime Obama family friend and confidant. Hillary took the unusual move of exploiting the issue during a Democratic primary, along the way positioning herself as a the voice of centrist reason. As Donna Brazile reminded voters, the Clintons have their own connection to Rev. Wright: Bill Clinton invited Wright to the 1998 White House Prayer Breakfast, and penned a thank you note afterwards for Wright’s attending this event during the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Oh…and Hillary was present, too.

This would be a minor blip, if it were an isolated connection to the Religious Left, particularly as Hillary the Hunter cast herself as a conservative churchgoer while campaigning in rural Pennsylvania. She did not disclose that she spent eight years faithfully attending Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C., currently pastored by Rev. Dean J. Snyder. Snyder recently praised Jeremiah Wright as “an agent of racial reconciliation” who proclaims “perceptions and truths uncomfortable for some white people to hear.”

To be clear, Snyder did not serve during the 1990s. However, the previous pastor, the Rev. Dr. J. Philip Wogaman, was equally radical. A year after the Berlin Wall fell, he wrote, “Christian socialism’s critique of the excesses and brutalities and idolatries of the free market still need to be heard.” He had earlier lauded Communist Cuba and China’s “modest but real economic success.” As long ago as 1967, Rev. Useful Idiot wrote in his Protestant Faith and Religious Liberty that:

The USSR is characteristic of the more tolerant Communist arrangements for religion. In Russia there are specific constitutional guarantees of freedom of worship, and some provision has even been made for the upkeep of churches and theological seminaries.

Wogaman’s Russia: the Gothic Archipelago.

Traditional Christians were outraged by Wogaman’s views, on this and much else. As Bill Clinton did, Wogaman accused his critics – Christian columnist Cal Thomas, by name – of instigating the Oklahoma City bombing. “People in the media don’t plant bombs. But if they plant hatred and division, doesn’t that affect the behavior of unstable hearers or readers?” (Apparently Wogaman did not listen to Bill Clinton: Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich were responsible for the bombing.)

Even these were not Hillary’s first ties to religious radicals.

Hillary’s Anti-Feminist, Wife-Abusing Hero (Not Bill)

In her memoir, Living History, the junior senator from New York lauded Yale’s chaplain during her years at the law school, Rev. William Sloane Coffin Jr., for his “articulate moral critique of American involvement” in Vietnam. That critique involved his traveling to Hanoi in 1972. Seven years later, he would make a friendly trip to Tehran, the first modern Islamic theocratic state which had just stormed a U.S. embassy and kidnapped dozens of his fellow countrymen.

His friendly sojourns in countries engaged in kidnapping, torturing, or murdering Americans is not the only part of Coffin’s history that should be troubling to the feminist Clinton. Coffin, who taught Judo in the Army, repeatedly beat his second wife, Harriet, once giving her a hairline skull fracture. Discussing the matter years later, the good reverend related his emotions that night: “I said, ‘What the hell, I’ve got to do this again?’” However, he expressed regret that he “didn’t take quite enough aim.” Harriet’s crime, in the words of one academic, was that she “developed a bad drinking problem and interests in psychology and feminism, and Bill didn’t take to any of that. Harriet became desperately unhappy and tried to force Bill into discussing matters he preferred to avoid.” One of Coffin’s friends described it thus: Harriet longed “to be on a podium with him — a podium of equal height with his. And Bill just doesn’t function that way.” But savaging his wife in order to avoid diatribes on feminism did not cost him Hillary Clinton’s admiration.

Things That Go Boom in the Capitol

Hillary also attacked Obama for his close ties to Bill Ayers, a former Weather Underground member who believes he did not do enough to advance his revolutionary agenda. Hillary helpfully told a live television audience, “What they did was set bombs. And in some instances, people died. So it is – I think it is, again, an issue that people will be asking about.”
Obama, in an otherwise disastrous debate performance last week, pointed out the omnipresent Clinton hypocrisy: “By Senator Clinton’s own vetting standards, I don’t think she would make it, since President Clinton pardoned or commuted the sentences of two members of the Weather Underground, which I think is a slightly more significant act.”

Clinton pardoned Weather Underground members Susan L. Rosenberg and Linda Evans. Police caught the pair of domestic terrorists in 1984, in possession of 740 pounds of explosives and a submachine gun. Rosenberg had been involved in the Brink’s heist that left a policeman dead in Nanuet, a city in Clinton’s adopted home state of New York.

Far from penitent, Rosenberg dedicated a poem to another cop-killer: “To Free Mumia Abu Jamal.” For her part, Evans has taken to organizing. FrontPage Magazine’s John Perazzo writes:


Evans still refers to her fellow Weathermen as “comrades,” and claims that all inmates in American prisons are victims of white racism, imperialism, and “political circumstance.” “The prison industrial complex,” she writes in one of her organizational screeds, “is an interweaving of private business and government interests [with] a monumental commitment to lock up a sizeable percentage of the population.” In March 2002 she helped organize a conference (held in Cuba) titled “Tear Down The Walls,” whose purpose was to make a case for the release of “political prisoners” who had been “incarcerated because of their involvement in political activities which challenged the unjust nature of the US socioeconomic system and its hegemonic policies around the world.” Chief among these “political prisoners” were Evans’ fellow Weather bomber Boudin, Symbionese Liberation Army member Kathy Soliah (aka Sara Jane Olson), and convicted cop-killers Mumia Abu Jamal and Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin (aka H. Rap Brown).

Among those who opposed the pardons, issued on the last day of the Clinton co-presidency, were Hillary’s future NY Senate colleague, Chuck Schumer, and U.S. Attorney in New York Mary Jo White. (White, a Clinton appointee, strongly objected to the Clinton administration’s erection of “The Wall” between intelligence agencies tracking terrorists, reportedly writing in a scathing memorandum years before 9/11: “It will cost lives.”)

Similarly, Bill Clinton pardoned members of the Puerto Rican Marxist terrorist organization FALN in order to bolster his wife’s political fortunes. The FALN was responsible for 130 bombings in nine years, including a number within New York City and Chicago. The Justice Department opposed the pardons, as did FBI Director Louis Freeh. FBI Assistant Director Neil Gallagher said boldly, “They are terrorists, and they represent a threat to the United States.” Although Hillary denied any involvement in the decision, a NYC Councilman, Jose Rivera, had asked her to “speak to the president and ask him to consider granting executive clemency” to FALN members.

One can say a number of things about such a long and distinguished intellectual history of leftism, as well as her open lust for enough power to radically alter the American way of life. One cannot say it is moderate in any sense. Unlike Sen. Obama’s histories with Wright or Ayers, Hillary Clinton’s history of radicalism consists of autobiographical journaling, personal activism, and advocacy on behalf of convicted, murderous terrorists.

It should make one wonder whom she would pardon if she ever wields the pardon pen. Wonder and fear.

Ben Johnson is Managing Editor of FrontPage Magazine and author of the book 57 Varieties of Radical Causes: Teresa Heinz Kerry’s Charitable Giving.

Watergate committee staff boss: Hillary was fired for lies, unethical behavior

Clinton didn’t pay health insurance bills

Clinton didn’t pay health insurance bills
By: Kenneth P. Vogel
March 31, 2008 12:11 PM EST

Among the debts reported this month by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s struggling presidential campaign, the $292,000 in unpaid health insurance premiums for her campaign staff stands out.

Clinton, who is being pressured to end her campaign against Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination, has made her plan for universal health care a centerpiece of her agenda.

The campaign provides health insurance to all its employees, their spouses, partners and children — and that wasn’t interrupted by any lag in payments to insurance providers, said Jay Carson, a Clinton campaign spokesman.

He said the campaign this month paid off all outstanding bills to Aetna Healthcare and CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield. Those payments will be reflected on a report the campaign will file this month with the Federal Election Commission, which Carson said will show “zero debt owed to both vendors.”

“Sometimes invoices are not paid immediately because we need additional information for our records, or to verify expenses,” Carson said in a statement e-mailed to Politico. “Sometimes invoices arrive at the very end of the month at the cutoff of the reporting period, which means that we are required to report them as a debt on the current FEC report, even where they are paid in regular course during the next month.”

But the unpaid bills to Aetna were at least two months old, according to FEC filings.

They show the campaign ended last year owing Aetna more than $213,000 for “employee benefits.”

During the first two months of the year, the campaign did not pay down any of that debt. In fact, it accrued another $16,000 in unpaid bills last month, and it finished the month owing Aetna $229,000.

Though the campaign reported owing $63,000 to Carefirst at the end of February for employee benefits, it appears Clinton paid that company on a more frequent basis. The New York senator’s presidential campaign began the month owing $299,000 to Carefirst, but paid that amount in its entirety, and the $63,000 it owed at the end of the month appears to be from services rendered last month.

Campaigns resemble businesses in many ways. Like businesses, one of their biggest costs is salaries, payroll taxes and the benefits of their employees. Also like businesses, they tend to carry unpaid bills as debt from week-to-week or even month-to-month.

But Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, did not report any unpaid bills to insurance providers at the end of February. And the only insurance-related debt reported by Obama, an Illinois senator, was $908 to AIG American International Group for “insurance.”

Their campaigns also reported substantially less debt overall than Clinton’s, which owed $8.7 million at the end of February. Obama owed $625,000 and McCain $4.3 million, though most of his debt was from a bank loan, and only $1.3 million was in the form of unpaid bills to a dozen vendors.

Carson stressed that Clinton’s campaign pays all its bills “regularly and in the normal course of business.”

Hillary’s list of lies

Hillary’s list of lies

By Dick MorrisThe USA Today/Gallup survey clearly explains why Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is losing. Asked whether the candidates were “honest and trustworthy,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won with 67 percent, with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) right behind him at 63. Hillary scored only 44 percent, the lowest rating for any candidate for any attribute in the poll. Hillary simply cannot tell the truth. Here’s her scorecard:

Admitted Lies

    o Chelsea was jogging around the Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. (She was in bed watching it on TV.)
    o Hillary was named after Sir Edmund Hillary. (She admitted she was wrong. He climbed Mt. Everest five years after her birth.)
    o She was under sniper fire in Bosnia. (A girl presented her with flowers at the foot of the ramp.)
    o She learned in The Wall Street Journal how to make a killing in the futures market. (It didn’t cover the market back then.)

Whoppers She Won’t Confess To

    o She didn’t know about the FALN pardons.
    o She didn’t know that her brothers were being paid to get pardons that Clinton granted.
    o Taking the White House gifts was a clerical error.
    o She didn’t know that her staff would fire the travel office staff after she told them to do so.

Tuzla and truth deprivation

Small Vendors Feel Pinch of Clinton’s Money Troubles

February 23, 2008

Small Vendors Feel Pinch of Clinton’s Money Troubles

It was just $2,492.63, a pittance, really, alongside million-dollar television buys and direct mail drops.

But with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination enduring a rough patch, Peter Semetis, the owner of a deli and catering business in Lower Manhattan, had been following the news and growing increasingly worried that he was not going to be paid for the assorted breakfast trays, coffee, tea and orange juice he had provided the campaign for an event in mid-December.

“I’m afraid of her dropping out of the campaign and me becoming a casualty,” Mr. Semetis said.

So on Thursday, he went to small claims court and filed suit. Mr. Semetis, 53, said he was hardly a political pundit but like others across the country, he had become caught up in the election in the last year and was able to offer some analysis. “There is potential for her to lose Texas,” he said — an assessment not at odds with the polls — “which would pretty much force her to quit.”

Mr. Semetis catered a Clinton event, a rally she did not attend, at the offices of District Council 37, the public employees’ union, on Dec. 15, charging the campaign $2,300, plus $192.63 in tax. Officials promised him that his business, Sale & Pepe Fine Foods, would be paid by check or credit card in a couple of weeks. After a few weeks passed, he started calling to see about the holdup.

Often he never reached anyone; other times he was told that his bill had been put through to the campaign’s headquarters in northern Virginia.

Unbeknownst to Mr. Semetis, Mrs. Clinton was navigating some dire financial straits. She was having a dismal month of fund-raising while spending a million dollars a day to battle Senator Barack Obama. She finished January essentially in the red, with $7.6 million in debts, and she was forced to lend her campaign $5 million.

It was when news broke about Mrs. Clinton’s loan earlier this month that Mr. Semetis became positively alarmed and started calling the campaign almost every day. “The fact she’s lost 10 states in a row has increased the phone calls,” he said.

After a reporter from The New York Times contacted the Clinton campaign on Friday, Howard Wolfson, Mrs. Clinton’s communications director, said a check to pay Mr. Semetis had been put through the day before, and he furnished a copy of the check, dated Feb. 21, as proof.

When asked to explain the delay, he said only: “We do our best to pay our vendors in a timely fashion.”

Mr. Semetis, however, is not the only one who has been having trouble lately collecting money from the Clinton campaign. The Hotel Ottumwa, a family-owned hotel in Ottumwa, Iowa, played host to an event attended by former President Bill Clinton on New Year’s Eve for several hundred people and had been trying for almost a month and a half to get paid.

The hotel had initially asked for payment of the $9,125 bill up front but kept being put off. But the owners figured that if any political campaign was good for it, Mrs. Clinton’s would be.

“People were a little more comfortable with Clinton because they’ve got money,” said Kay Whittington, one of the hotel owners.

Last week, the owners heard about an item on the local news about a Des Moines cleaning company, Top Job Services Cleaning, which had been trying unsuccessfully to recoup $7,500 from the Clinton campaign.

Hotel Ottumwa’s owners contacted the television station, which broadcast the hotel’s story right away. Both businesses were paid last week.

Oddly enough, Mr. Semetis, the deli owner, said he was a longtime Republican who was supportive of Mrs. Clinton, because he believed Mr. Obama was too inexperienced and Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, would be too much like President Bush.

Mr. Semetis’s business closed for several weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, forcing him to downsize, and Mr. Semetis said he was still trying to regain his footing.

“This is not politically motivated, believe me,” he said. “This is financially motivated.”

Clinton health plan may mean tapping pay

WASHINGTON – Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans