How Many Americans Understand Hillary?
A note of personal disgust to Hillary Clinton's remarks concerning NAFTA in the Boston Globe:
"With NAFTA, Bill and Hillary Clinton really stuck it to rural America, Mudcat told me, though in slightly more graphic terms. So when Clinton visited the Globe this week I asked her about that charge...Clinton, however, wasn't about to get into a hissing match with a Mudcat. 'I understand politics, so I understand making charges, but I don't think the evidence is there to support that,' she concluded." Scott Lehigh's column, Boston Globe, October 12, 2007Is there anybody out there who would dare question that Hillary Clinton understands politics? I certainly do not. I have never, never heard, nor will I ever, ever say that the Clintons don't understand politics. Everybody on the planet knows they are the standard of measure in the practice of politics. So you just read her comment in the October 12 edition of The Boston Globe, "I don't think the evidence is there to support that." To highlight Hillary's impeccable understanding of politics, let's move back four days to her statement in USA Today for the supporting evidence (from the horse's mouth) on NAFTA's devastation to rural and blue-collar America.
"I think we do need to take a deep breath and figure out how we can make it (NAFTA) work for the greatest number of people," she told USA Today. Clinton said NAFTA's benefits have gone to the wealthy and cost jobs for working people. Susan Page, USA Today, October 8, 2007First, it is callous and offensive to the many Americans who have been "sucking wind" due to Clinton trade policies for Hillary to tell them "to take a deep breath." Secondly, Hillary, you want more "supporting evidence" other than your own statement? Top-tier economists, many who were tricked on these ill-thought, ill-negotiated, ill-enforced, and erroneously presented to Congress trade treaties, are now taking a second look themselves. Former Clinton official and Berkeley economist Brad DeLong, Clinton Treasury secretary Larry Summers, Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson, and a former vice chair of the Fed, Princeton's Alan Blinder, have all voiced strong concerns. Blinder has gone so far as to argue that off shoring and outsourcing of American jobs could ship away as many as 40 million jobs in the next two decades.
The reason Hillary is distancing herself from the trade treaties, rather than continuing to talk about ridiculous "unintended consequences," is because she "understands politics" like nobody else. In the early primary states, Iowa and South Carolina have lost twice as many jobs to NAFTA than they gained, and in New Hampshire, they have lost two-and-a-half times more jobs than they gained. The bottom line is that the Clintons did a number on small-town rural America and blue-collared workers everywhere. To get in tight with the big boys, they brokered a deal to trade local economies, jobs, and benefits (code word: healthcare) for Wall Street dividends. I think the greatest verifier to the validity of that last statement is on the cover of Fortune back in July. The headline over a posed shot of Hillary says "BUSINESS LOVES HILLARY! WHO KNEW IT?" I'll tell you who knows it. Many, many rural and blue-collared Americans know it. That cover is a perfect illustration as to why Hillary can not win the general election and why the collateral damage to the down ticket of her toxic coat-tails could cost us Congress. The question is not whether Hillary "understands politics," but instead, how many of us understand Hillary.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
For the last year we have had the Communist
Republican Party running this land and now we have a chance to take it back. You better quit running Hilary down and get behind her 1000% because the stakes are life as we know it. Cheney was taling about power never heard of he was talking about complete take over next time.
How about Dennis Kusinic ?
He is maybe the only Democrat who have not been bought by corporate interests.
RIGHT ON, ChristinDemocrat!!!
Imagine you have the right to tap and track every person in the United States. You have the ablilty to slander, alter accounts, cut off credit cards, make up evidence, destroy whom you will declare a war for personal profit, kill who you will for the largest jack pot in world history. That is called the Communist party Just kidding its the republicans that were in office and the Presdient from 2000 to now. We no longer live in America we live in a state run nation. Maybe if we elect Hilary we can turn some of this back. She along stands on top to give us a chance.
Cross Hillary and she'll show you what Dubya would be like with balls.
Hilary is a good as we can get in the Privitized Government age. Image you have the NSA, CIA, The Millitary as a whole at you disposal to stand behind your person business venture. Image you have the Saudi Government to fund you every whim. Then your name would be Dick Cheney and George Bush.
When people are able to use the function of our government for personal gain solely then we become the property of people in office.
Imagine 300 million people paying taxes and you have the right to channel that money for your own personal business venture. Then you would be the top 500 of the Republican Party.
There's your point: "...as good as we can get in the Privitized Government age."
We can't afford to settle for the best "they" will let us have.
Come the revolution
Please allow me to list 5 reasons why your posts are bat-shit insane:
1. Many of your sentences wobble from one subject to another. Sometimes each misspelled word in a sentence seems like it's confused about why it's between the two words that surround it.
2. You evidently have some deep-rooted resentment of commas. Please reconcile.
3. You compare the Republican Party to the Communist party. Either you're trying to make an ironic counter-argument to the right wing comparison of Liberals and fascists, or you have no understanding of either party.
4. In the span of 18 minutes you posted 5 multi-paragraphed comments. But I don't think you said anything.
That's like saying that Nero was a better emperor than Caligula
Libertarian tax policy. Tax the land, not the buildings.
http://www
Property taxes that discourage holding undeveloped land are part of Libertarian thinking.
Great, that's just what we need, develop every inch of privately owned land.
Last night I watched Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth." As I watched I kept thinking about how different our country would be today if that man had become president in 2001 instead of the smirking, sociopathic spoiled child we have now.
How did we end up with the smirking, sociopathic spoiled child? A number of reasons: The MSM ridiculing Gore's wardrobe and mannerisms while giving Smirky McChimp a free pass on everything. The machinations of Jeb and Katherine Harris in Florida. The anachronistic Electoral College. The criminally partisan Supreme Court decision. And of course the badly bungled Gore campaign.
But here's one inescapable fact: If the 97,000-plus people in Florida who voted for Nader had voted for Gore instead, Gore would have won Florida and the election and Smirky McChimp would have gone into the garbage can of history where he belongs.
And now I see many of my fellow Democratic progressives talking about doing the same thing in 2008 -- throwing a temper tantrum if a candidate who is not sufficiently "pure" for them gets the Democratic nomination.
Please, people, don't do it. Work hard for the candidate you support in the primaries, but after the nomination is decided, accept the result, hold your nose if you have to, but vote for the Democratic candidate.
Unless you really, truly want another four years of Republican bungling, war-mongering and corruption.
Perhaps I will hold my nose, but NOT if Hillary is a candidate. She's a neocon. Her VOTING record along with her refusal to be pinned down on what she stands for SAYS EVERYTHING about her: SHE DOESN'T STAND FOR ANYTHING EXCEPT THE NEOCON AGENDA. A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for . . .
- the "one world government" with its CFR/PNAC/N
- this new United Fascist Police State (UFPSA? of America) we now live in.
- invasion of Iran and the murder of hundreds of thousands of Iranian people, at the hands of a stretched-thin military force and a blackshirt goon squad named Blackwater.
IN THE NEWS: more evidence of the TRUE nature of the Clinton power-couple was in the Washington Post on Sunday: QWest defense testimony is that the (Bill) Clinton Administration approached QWest in the very beginning of 2001 about the implementation of its (illegal) wiretapping program. They demanded QWest's phone records, but QWest, one of only a few communications companies, refused to turn them over, after which they suffered government retailiation.
The Feds did this least 7 months before 911, which proves that our present predicament had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11/01. It should be no surprise, since the Patriot Act was also written before 9/11, during the Clinton Administration in the mid-to-late '90s. The wars were planned during the Clinton Administration too.
MEANING, Bill Clinton, a proud globalist, was in on the scam ALL ALONG on the slow shift of the U.S. to a fascist police state. The Bush and Clinton dynasties are very much alike and share many of the same goals. They're Bolsheviks who, along with other neocons, have infiltrated BOTH political parties.
George Bush is now coaching Hillary behind the scenes on her campaign!!!So if Hillary is nominated thanks, but NO THANKS. NEVER.I'd rather have a batshit looney libertarian in the White House than a neocon fronting as a democrat. GO RON PAUL.
Someone tell me where she stands on any subject? Why would anyone vote for her? she has all but said she would not do what her democrate base want the democrates to do, for example pull the troops out, so why is she the so called front runner? somebody?anybody? explain? might as well vote republician.
hey ralph nader said that there was no difference in voting for either gore or bush. That was obviously one of the most short sighted statments ever made on so many levels and in so many areas. Look how much damage was done to the country with the help of the people that actually believed that statement and voted for Nader.
She checks which way the polls are blowing and that is where she stands for now on an issue. You really don't know where she will stand once she is elected. With hillary, you get 4 more years of bush,
I admire Hillary for her coolness.
I've heard the criticisms, I've taken into account her dealings with big business, I've questioned her sincerity on numerous occasions.
But ultimately, I like the fact that she remains cool under fire, and that she always seems to know just what to say and just how to say it.
Yeah, she's a politician, but I likewise know that she's a human being, not as cold and calculating as many would claim, but simply pragmatic about how politics work in this country.
Many might disagree, but I think she dealt with her husband's infidelity in a very dignified manner -- ultimately it seemed that she didn't let her husband's actions define her as an INDIVIDUAL, and I admired her for that.
This is not an endorsement of her in any way (that honor goes to Kucinich) but I don't feel that she is the demoness that many are trying to make her out to be.
We are actually lucky to have such a good -- and diverse -- pool of candidates this year...Hil
Regardless of which Democrat gets the nomination, its good to be able to choose from the best of the best.
yeah, and she'd be great to have a beer with...
You be her friend - I am not interested.
Nah, I'd probably have the beer with Edwards.
Scotch with Hillary, maybe.
Not that it will make any difference, but I think we're still dealing with "least objectionable alternativ
I'll admit to prejudice - I was working in Little Rock when they were starting out, and when I met Bill my first impression was "the phoniest politician I've ever met". Hillary's worse.
And much better than I knew them, I knew too many of the power brokers who financed and trained them. The rule is, "Once you take care of our interests, you can hug as many trees as you want." Same people who pull BushCo's strings.
She rationalizes better than Romney, but she shares the same level of commitment to whatever positions are convenient at the moment. The only real improvement we'd get with Hillary is that the crumbs would go to slightly better causes.
She is undoubtedly smart and would make a better President than our current POTUS 9so would my cat Theo).
She is not however an advocate of the average american, that long-neglected majority of citizens. Hillary is such a corporist with strong ties to the military complex that she will always act in their best interest at OUR expen$e. She either overcompromises and is a fool or she fully understands which side her bread is buttered on.
The perception that we have a "choice" pool of candidates is flase. We have a etnically/ sexually diverse pool but we have the same old same old.Anyone that gets to the White House is bought. THe Clintons in particular are bought. Rupert Murdoch held a fundraiser for Hillary's Senate race here in NY and rest assured, Murdoch has the Midas touch in selecting a winner. However his endorsement is frightenning.
Lastly as Senator, Hillary has yet to introduce legislation to curb rampant corporate crime. Our esteemed Gov. Spitzer's example of successfully taking on white collar criminals as NYS Attorney General apparently has not inspired her to support this with Federal legislation.
I frankly don't know what she's done for NY, maybe for people upstate but not for New Yawhkers.
Now I would vote for Spitzer as Prez. in a New York minute!
If a doctor botched the delivery of your baby and caused brain damage:
1) Hillary Clinton, a corporate attorney (Rose Law Firm), would have been representing the hospital trying to limit your award.
2) John Edwards would have been representing you, against against the corporation, trying to get you just compensation because, you'd have to care for the mentally handicapped child for the rest of their life.
Edwards comes from a background of representing people like you.
Hillary Clinton "chose" to go work at one of the most notorious corporate law firms in Arkansas, fighting against people like you.
That's the "choice" she made.
'nuff said.
ST,
You just succinctly illustrated the definitive difference between Edwards and Clinton. You've also won a new fan!
Hillary Clinton doesn't support 'free trade,' she supports 'protected trade.' That is, trade supported by Big Government institutions like the Commerce Department.
Hillary Clinton would be a disaster for America and would lead to more corporatism and war.
But LeftLibm ,just imagine the economic disasters RuPaul the hack would bring upon this country. One shudders to think.
I wouldn't mind supporting a true socialist candidate. But RuPal is simply a nihilist hack
totally without a clue.
Now in an ideal world, Robert Reich would be an amazing president! With Hilary Clinton as Secretary of State and Gore as a Secretary of Interior.
THANK YOU! I can't imagine why other presidential candidates aren't pointing out that Hillary hit the working class with not one, but two blows.
When she failed with her healthcare program AND succeeded with NAFTA, she forced American workers to compete with workers in other countries (ALL OF THEM) who DO have government sponsored healthcare. No matter how productive American workers are and no matter how many wage cuts they accept, it turns out to be cheaper for corporations to take the work to places where somebody other than themselves will be held financially responsible for workers' health care.
Are these TWO blunders what she's talking about when she refers to her superior "experience?" Wouldn't it be better to have somebody whose "experience" doesn't include signing the death sentence of the American laboring class?
There's a good reason the Wall Street Bankers are supporting Hilllary ... More Free Trade Deals...
Hillary will help them export neoliberal economics to line their pockets at the expense of people in both our countries.
At home Hillary will create a whole new corporate welfare system ... the Health Care Complex.
Hillary Clinton with the other DLC Democrats sold out to the industrial cartels and the ultra rich who own them.
Clinton is a plutocrat and with the rest of the DLC and the Blue Dogs is a member of the left branch of the Republican party.
She is supply side through and through and is therefore the bitter enemy of the working class.
Her health care plan is a scheme to create fat subsidies for a rapacious private health insurance cartel that should not even exist.
KUCINICH is the only truly progressive candidate.
Only KUCINICH will fight the cartels.
Only KUCINICH was trustworthy on the war, opposing the will of the war & oil cartels.
Only KUCINICH supports single-payer health care, which Truman wanted us all to have a century ago.
Only KUCINICH sides with the working class against the global capitalists on trade policy.
Only KUCINICH is an honest citizen & a Democrat.
Edwards before Obama, Obama before Clinton, Hell before Hillary in the Democratic primary.
Democrats unite: don't vote for the "front runners" created by the plutocratic bias of the corporate media:
VOTE KUCINICH 2008
that should read, "half a century ago."
I like Kucinich very much.
But Doc you forgot to add.
BUT KUCINICH stands no chance of being nominated.
BUT KUCINICH stands no chance of being elected in '08.
I'm wid you, doc.
Kucinich would make the best President by far.
In order to get there he might want to tone down the more radical aspects of his platform until he gets into office. He also tends to rant instead of keeping his answers short.
Remember: say enough to be interesting, but not so much as to be boring.
Good post Dave. Hillary is so pole driven, her index finger is wrinkled from her constant desire to find the wind direction. Too many Americans hate her with a passion, including and especially women. She thinks the female vote is in her corner and how wrong she is. Why do you think she showed up on The View today? I predict she wont score 50% of the female vote. Women don’t trust or respect her.
Donald Duck could run against her and she would lose. Her only chance is an ultra conservative third party candidate to peel away about 15% of the votes from Rudy or Donald. Keep an eye out for that. The Clinton machine has a wide reach.
Senator Clinton certainly doesn't make it easy for people to understand her. The reason? She has a habit of saying contradictory things on the same issue--most notably, Iraq--to different audiences. I call it the "Hillary Two Step," but others might have a less charitable description.
I agree with you and will put it in Plain English, Hillary is a lying bitch.
Where are all the Hillary apologists? There are unbelievers here who need to be attacked (err reprogrammed, reeducated, retrained, brainwashed, etc.) for their heretical view of Queen Clinton and the inevitability of her coronation.
BTW, unemployment statistics are misleading. Unemployment figures do not indicate the countless souls who have accepted positions with reduced wages and benefits. Nor do unemployment figures indicate the number of people who have dropped out of the workforce. Unemployment benefits are paid for a maximum period of six (6) months. After that, you're not a statistic, you're a casualty.
Want to know the real story, look at annual individual median income over the last decade, especially the last five (5) years.
Hey Greedy--
I was starting to wonder the same thing myself.
Maybe they're at a Rove reprogramming camp this week learning new and better ways to troll for Hillary.
right on about the unemployment numbers. Especially those who have dropped off the radar because they can't find a job that hasn't gone to India or China.
Wasn't it Mark Twain who said that you have lies, damn lies, and Statistics!?
Well where the economy is concerned I'd go one step further and borrow Steinbeck's descriptor and say, "the Bull Bitch of statistics, Economics!" The only so-called science in the world where you get one question with five answers and every one of them "right!"
The problem, for anybody who actually works for a living in this country, right now, is that NAFTA, CAFTA, and all the other back room deals, including this:
"The bottom line is that the Clintons did a number on small-town rural America and blue-collared workers everywhere. To get in tight with the big boys, they brokered a deal to trade local economies, jobs, and benefits (code word: healthcare) for Wall Street dividends.
Yeah Dave,they're exporting America, and if they could they'd put The Rockies, the Grand Canyon, and Yosemite on a boat to China and the rest of us in the drive thru window at a McDonalds.
"Wasn't it Mark Twain who said that you have lies, damn lies, and Statistics!?"
Yes. "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics
Great quote.
And the rest of your comment is dead nuts on!
(Posted at 11:11 PM - Timing delay by HuffPo)
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
