Hillary Heckled At Enviro Forum As Dems Vow A Greener America
LOS ANGELES - Hillary Clinton was peppered by anti-war hecklers at a presidential forum on climate change and energy policy, leading to the forceful expulsion of one protester from the audience.
"How can you say you're for the environment when you are always voting for war?" local activist Tyghe Berry shouted out as he stood up from his seat in the audience and interrupted the front-running Democratic candidate as she vowed to make America green if elected President.
"Were you invited to speak here this afternoon?" responded a visibly perturbed Senator Clinton. Berry was then immediately grabbed by security agents and rushed to a waiting police car by a phalanx of LAPD and federal officers. When Senator Clinton was introduced earlier to the forum she was met with both loud cheers and scattered boos from the predominantly Democratic and liberal audience of approximately 1,000.
The momentary disruption was the emotional high point of an otherwise sedate Saturday afternoon forum that lacked any of the drama or vigor that marked the Democratic debate two nights ago in Las Vegas.
Only candidates Clinton, John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich appeared at the forum on Global Warming & America's Energy future organized by Grist magazine and Public Radio International's Living on Earth and endorsed by a coalition of environmental organizations.
All three participating candidates offered similar promises to push green policies, move America away from reliance on foreign oil, and to reduce greenhouse gases. But the format of the debate allowed no interaction or exchanges between the candidates nor any questions from the public. The panel of three selected questioners asked no challenging questions, allowing the candidates a relatively unobstructed opportunity to promote their respective environmental campaigns.
All presidential contenders of both parties were invited to participate in the debate. No Republicans accepted. Clinton, Edwards and Kucinich were the only declared Democratic candidates that participated in the forum, staged at the Wadsworth Theater on the grounds of the Veterans Administration in West Los Angeles.
Before she was interrupted by the heckling, Clinton, referring to the latest U.N. report on the threat of global warming told the crowd that "we can't afford to fiddle as the world warms." She denounced President George W. Bush as having led an administration that has "dodged, denied and dissembled on the most important global issue."
Relying on what has now become standard Democratic campaign boilerplate, Clinton vowed to take away tax subsidies from oil companies, raise fuel efficiency standards, and promised to "put 5 million Americans to work making America green."
Clinton stressed her three major environmental goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 80% from 1990 levels by 2050, cutting foreign oil imports by two-thirds by 2030 and by accelerating a shift away from a carbon-based economy. Prior to today's forum, the Clinton campaign released a painstakingly detailed, statistic-laden twelve-page paper outlining her climate change and energy policy.
But a plan is "just words on the page" and requires strong leadership to implement, Clinton said, repeating a theme of her own touted experience she first floated earlier this year during a Democratic debate on health care. "If you're ready for change, I'm ready to lead," she said.
"What's the magic you bring?" debate moderator and public radio host Steve Curwood asked Clinton, referring to earlier and unfilled presidential promises to better the environment, including those of her husband.
Clinton responded by saying the population's heightened interest in the issue will now make fulfilling those promises much easier. Increasing global cooperation, Clinton said, should also raise optimism.
Edwards, who has recently escalated his criticism of Clinton, didn't use his time on stage today to directly confront his opponent but, nevertheless, made several less-than-subtle suggestions that his approach sharply differed from that of hers. Edwards made several references to a lobbyist-ridden and "corrupt" government, echoing earlier campaign themes that Clinton was too complicit with such special interests. He also suggested that Clinton and others in the Democratic field were pandering to sympathetic constituencies by not admitting the real level of sacrifice that a transition to a greener economy would demand.
"The American people are ready for a president who calls them to sacrifice and asks them to be patriotic about something other than war," Edwards. "'The big change we need is not going to be easy... and will take the efforts of a generation to achieve." Edwards also denounced the war in Iraq, vowed to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, and said it was embarrassing that America was now debating whether or not torture should be official U.S. policy.
When asked by The Huffington Post after the forum what most distinguishes his environmental policies from those of Senator Clinton, Edwards said "we're more emphatic in the need to reduce the corrupting powers in Washington that keep these things from getting done."
Today's debate couldn't be more timely, coming exactly one day after the U.N.'s Nobel Prize-winning panel on climate change released its fourth and final report on global warming, warning that even the most strenuous efforts at reducing greenhouse gas levels would be coming too late and that the world now has little choice but to prepare for and accept "abrupt and irreversible" climate changes.
"We need the magnitude of the political response to match the magnitude of the problem," said activist Laurie David, one of the organizers of the debate.
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who introduced the forum, took the opportunity to denounce the policies of the Bush Administration, which he accused of downplaying the threat of global warming.
"It's about time we had someone in the White House who actually believes in science," he said to a cheering crowd.
Back-of-the-pack candidate Dennis Kucinich led off his onstage remarks linking the environmental issue to his trademark anti-war policy. "The U.S. must lead the way in abolishing all nuclear weapons," Kucinich said. And he called the current Pentagon refitting of B-2 bombers allegedly ready to bomb suspected nuclear facilities in Iran as a "war-crime in motion," said the veteran Ohio congressman.
Kucinich offered few details of an environmental program but instead proposed a "Green Works" administration that would demand that all of its agencies and departments be dedicated to a sustainable environment.
"It's time to make government an engine of sustainability," he said.
Kucinich boasted of his outsider status, asking how it would be to "imagine a President of the United States not tied to any of these interest groups," he said referring to politically powerful energy, utility and extraction lobbies.
The Democratic candidates differ less on environmental issues than on most any other major policy area. But there are some notable exceptions. Among the top tier candidates, only Edwards has ruled out further development and extension of nuclear power while Obama and Clinton have said they would support more nuclear plants but only attached to a series of broader environmental incentives. The pro-environmental Friends of the Earth recently endorsed Edwards because of his anti-nuke position.
Taking place literally next door to the campus of UCLA, the debate attracted very few students as the middle-aged and elderly seemed to dominate the audience.
Among the many organizations con-sponsoring the forum was the League of Conservation voters, whose endorsement is usually considered a prized catch for any presidential campaign.
The Saturday morning debate lacked nearly all of the pyrotechnics that marked the televised confrontation Thursday among the Democratic candidates who converged on Las Vegas for a CNN-sponsored forum. More than 4 million viewers watched a virtual slugfest in which Hillary Clinton responded to criticism from rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards by accusing them of "throwing mud...right out of the Republican playbook."
Today's environmental forum, however, generated little media attention and went mostly un-noticed by the general public. Several reporters covering the presidential race seemed unaware of the event until the last moment and later criticized its organizers for poor outreach and promotion. The debate started almost an hour behind schedule.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Vice President Al Gore are meanwhile trying to organize their own bipartisan presidential debate on energy and climate change for next month in New Hampshire. Reports say they want the event to take place before the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses scheduled for January 3. With two such high-profiles organizing the December debate in a key battleground states, it's likely that, in contrast to today's event, most if not all the major candidates will agree to attend.
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
Having voted since Nixon, sometimes for real republicans and democrats, i find it surreal that a former President (Clinton) is cammpaigning to actively to elect someone from his own party. This practice should not be allwoed by party charman Dean. I am surprise why the Obama, Kucinich, Edwards, etc camps have not protested. It is obvious by the daily drip of support by unions and minority bosses that President Clinton is in the background collecting IOU's from previous doling out of funds during his two administrations. It makes a mockery of the democratic process. The American people are watching and the democraps are setting up to loose another election.
el gallo, independent.
I thought this was going to be a forum to discuss the candidate positions on energy, environment and global warming?
Hillary can't answer unscripted questions, just like Bush can't.
She can't take the heat at all. So, she should get out of the kitchen and leave it to the big boys. She is way out of her league.
Ah, yes. A Citizen of these United States is dragged out of a public event by police for standing up and speaking his mind. Shades of Bush the Tyrant, no?
And her sarcastic question: were YOU invited to speak here today? Well, is SHE not campaigning for the highest job in the land? To be HIS president, HIS and OUR representative? OUR employee? Just WHO would pay her salary? HE would. I would. And yet we're not allowed to speak at our own public forums. This pattern of dragging people away to jail for daring to stand up and question authority or for speaking the truth is disturbing. It's scary. And it's DEFINITELY NOT my America anymore.
I wonder if it had happened to Edwards or Kucinich, would they have let the activist speak? Would they have let him stay? Would they have stopped the brutal, needless tasering of the activist student in my own home town if they had been speaking there? I'd like to bet that they both would. It's the only hope I have left for our dear, tolerant America.
guess this is the kind of questions you get when you don't plant them.
Hillarys people are putting out the word they can sink Obama with dirt they have dug up on him if they need to.
Memo: Hillary to Obama: Don't get tough with me I have the dirt to sink you!
The heckler who was ejected from that Enviro forum spoke the truth. Even when Hillary was co-president she and Bill contaminated the Balkans with spent shells that release radiation. They are too pro-war.
Besides Hillary is always talking favorably about dialog and negotiation, yet in practice they did not use it during their 8 years in power. Remember WACO? Almost 100 American Christians including 23 children were incinerated after the Clintons gave the order to enter the Branch Davidian compound, and the result was a fiery death for many... The B.D. were surrounded. All the gov't had to do was wait till their supplies had run out. Water and electricity was shut down. Besides the Clintons already served two terms! They are always trying to circumvent the law. (term limits). It's time for a REAL change, not more of the same corruption and illegal Chinese Communist donations, scandals, double talk, hypocrisy, etc. etc.
A word of warning to hillary and her slime mob, you can not win without barrck obama and his supports so keep pissing them off cause you might win the battle(nom) but you'll lose the war!
I think she take too much money from big business to do anything about g.warming! OBAMA 08 FOR A NEW CHANGE.
GET US OFF FORGEIGN OIL????
GET US OFF OIL! PERIOD!
Vow to kick the sh*t out of these corporate pirates. Far more than Global Warming sets squarely at their doorstep. Indict the Oil Barons and their political minions for the last 40 yrs of corruption (probably much longer than that- but those guys are dead now anyway-or close to it)
Start with Bush & Cheney and work your way out.
We may have to hold these trials in the SuperDome to accomadate all the Defendants.
Nothing sparks a conversation like "she who must be hated."
This is an incredibly important election for the Democratic Party. Should they manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this time, they may as well disband. Really, there is no incumbent president and the opposition party seems to not even care about running a serious candidate. Even money that would normally flow more heavily to the Republicans (eg. defense industry) is leaning towards the Dems. Even conservative pundits are already making plans for a Democratic administra
So what do the Dems do? They push the most divisive candidate that they have to the front of the pack. Granted, the DNC leadership was put their by the Clintons. When even lifelong Democrats are saying they will not vote for her, there's a serious problem. I suppose the argument is that she is owed it somehow; that her last name will invoke the magic of halcyon days gone by; and that she'll bring in the women votes.
Realistically, she will be attacked. She'll fight back, but that will only add to her image. Don't be surprised if she starts snapping more and more, she's a screamer. She has absolutely no hope in the South, which means a virtual replay of the 2000/04 elections where a single state changes the whole election.
Rumor has it that she has done a good job for the people of New York. She is strong on women's issues. She still has four years of a Senate term that she just won. She would do the American people and the Democratic Party more good in the Senate than in the White House. But that's not what she wants. This is about her. And her megalomania may be the reef upon which the Democratic Party founders.
I will never vote for Hillary no matter what. She is more of the same crap that we already have in Washington. When Bush was popular after 911 she was up there kissing his ass but now that he is in the tank she is all over him. This is just what the GOP wants, her to get the nomination because she WILL lose. As Nader said, both the Dem and Repubs get their milk from the same Cow.
If Dems really wanted a greener America they would be pushing for the US to get to the same level of electrical generation from nuclear energy as France's 80% and insist that China and India do the same -- it is CO2 and air pollution free and the reserves of uranium are mostly in friendly countries of Australia, Canada and the US.
Of course, Dems don't care about fixing problems as they benefit from their existence by using it to control people and their supporters.
I've listened to this women for awhile and really I see little difference between her and Bush. AMerica need a real change and she is not it. The two party system does not work anymore.
Hillary Clinton is not the first person being heckled, they did the same to VP Al Gore when he was still in office. What was done to VP Al Gore was WORSE,they called Gore crazy and a liar for talking about global warming.
So what if she's heckled, she can't please everybody; it doesn't change my vote..I AM VOTING FOR HILLARY CLINTON!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
