How Hillary Clinton Will Handle Populist Critics

[cali]

Bianca Acebron Peco, a smart, young and politically active New Hampshire college grad, is exactly the kind of person Hillary Clinton’s proto-campaign would love to have knocking on doors in that early primary state.

But the 22-year-old is ambivalent about Clinton.

“It’s not that I hate her,” Acebron Peco said last week at a New Hampshire Young Democrats event in the basement of a Mexican food restaurant in Nashua. “I just want someone someone new and fresh and isn’t as tied to the old ways things have always been done.”

It’s a sentiment that has been amplified recently by many in the progressive left, who describe Clinton as a centrist and hawkish insider, and complain that she is too loyal to her impressive Rolodex of corporate donors, foreign leaders and Wall Street bigwigs.

“We would consider her a corporate Democrat in stark terms,” lamented Hugh Espey, the executive director of the progressive, Des Moines-based Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement. “She is a middle-of-the-road Democrat that on a regular basis would pick Wall Street over Main Street.”

<snip>

http://time.com/3772504/how-hillary-clinton-will-handle-populist-critics/

[joshcryer]

1. She has no choice but to channel it.

The question is whether she'll be able to get past the "liar" rhetoric, which the right wing will channel to great effect. She has already talked about income inequality and student loans and how modern youth are disillusioned (see her John Stewart interview). She will continue on that track but it remains to be seen if people believe her.

"Woman as liars" is a cultural meme that Clinton must overcome, it's going to be hit or miss. But I think she can do it.

[cali]

2. Her own corporate record is also something she'll have to deal with, convincing doubters

that she won't choose Wall Street over Main Street on the most crucial issues.

[joshcryer]

3. Such as?

Name a piece of legislation, if you will.

Worst I can think of is her vote for crappy bankruptcy reform, but she missed the final vote (Bill had a heart attack) and she said she would've vote no on that. So she's kind of in limbo, with an "absentee" non-vote.

Can't think of anything else. Claims about TPP drafting are silly since as SOS she acted in accord with the President's wishes. She can very easily claim that under TPP she was following orders. Claims to the contrary are easily dismissed. (This is kind of why she needs TPP to pass before she faces election and why there's such a huge push for fast track. Obama takes the fall for a geopolitical issue, Clinton walks away.)

[Doctor_J]

40. she has stated that she is in favor of heritage care over healthcare

She stated that she will not allow so uhc to happen while she is president. What more evidence do you need?

[joshcryer]

42. Link? I appreciate substance over soundbites.

I don't even know what the fuck you're talking about. Probably some idiotic smear.

[Doctor_J]

47. I have posted the link to those pronouncements 4-5 times.

I prefer to stop catering to willful ignorance.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. I had this debate before with that gentleman

Single payer is dead unless the Democrats get a Democratic president, a filibuster proof supermajority in the Senate and control of the House.

The odds of that trifecta happening in the foreseeable future are between slim and none...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

8. One thing you can say about Hillary, she certainly has a sufficient image consultants & handlers to manage re-inventing herself on any issue.

[VanillaRhapsody]

18. Except that her "corporate record" is much better than you will allow yourself to believe...

OpEd: Disagrees with progressives on corporatism & military

Is Hillary a progressive? The answer is unambiguously no; Hillary is a liberal centrist. Progressives support "fair trade," which means that free trade agreements should include environmental and labor clauses; Hillary is an ardent free-trader. WikiLeaks' Julian Assange is a hero to progressives who believe in open government and oppose secrecy, but a traitor to Hillary. Progressives ardently oppose military intervention abroad; Hillary is a hawk. And progressives are ardently anti-corporate, while Hillary is pro-corporate.
Often the difference is a matter of degree: progressives would tax capital gains as regular income; Hillary might only moderately increase it, as illustrated in this exchange:
The capital gains tax under Bill Clinton was 28%. It's now 15%.
CLINTON: I wouldn't raise it above the 20% if I raised it at all. I would not raise it above what it was during the Clinton administration.
Source: Jeb vs. Hillary On The Issues, by Jesse Gordon, p.37,66,&168 , Dec 10, 2014
Take back $55B in Bush’s industry give-aways

We need a fighter back in the White House. We need someone who’s going to take on the special interests.
I have a plan to take away $55 billion of the giveaways and the subsidies that the president and Congress have lavished on the drug companies and the oil companies and the insurance companies and Wall Street. And I have a plan to give that money back--give it back in tax cuts to the middle class--to people who deserve it, who have been struggling under this president, who feel invisible, who feel like they’re not even seen anymore.
Now, obviously, I can’t do this alone. I can only do it if I get people who believe in me and support me and who look at my track record and know that I’ve spent a lifetime trying to empower people, trying to fight for them.
And I will turn this economy around. We will get back to shared prosperity and we will see once again that we can do this the right way so it’s not just a government of the few, by the few and for the few.
Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary , Apr 16, 2008
FactCheck: Pushed Wal-Mart for women managers & environment

Obama attacked Clinton’s one-time membership on the board of directors of the world’s largest retailer, saying, “While I was watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.”
It’s true that Clinton sat on the Wal-Mart board for six years while her husband was governor of Arkansas, where the chain has its corporate headquarters. She was paid about $18,000 a year for doing it. At the time, she worked at the Rose Law Firm, which had represented Wal-Mart in various matters.
But according to accounts from other board members, Clinton was a thorn in the side of the company’s founder, Sam Walton, on the matter of promoting women, few of whom were in the ranks of managers or executives at the time. She also strongly advocated for more environmentally sound corporate practices. She made limited progress in both areas. In 2005 she returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing “serious differences” with its “current” practices.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Dem. Debate , Jan 21, 2008
World Bank should impose rules on sovereign wealth funds

Q: Citigroup and Merrill Lynch have both gone overseas, hat in hand, looking for $20 billion in investment to stay afloat, from foreign governments. Is foreign ownership a problem?
A: I’m very concerned about this. About a month and a half ago, I raised this concern because these are called sovereign wealth funds. They are huge pools of money, largely because of oil and economic growth in Asia. And these funds are controlled often by governmental entities or individuals who are closely connected to the governments in these countries. I think we’ve got to know more about them. They need to be more transparent. We need to have a lot more control over what they do and how they do it. I’d like to see the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund begin to impose these rules. And I want the US Congress and the Federal Reserve Board to ask these tough questions. I’d like to see us move much more aggressively both to deal with these sovereign wealth funds.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas , Jan 15, 2008
Bush defanged the Consumer Product Safety Commission

Q: All the Chinese recalls of toxic toys & products still represent fewer than 1/100th of all imports. Is this an over-reaction?
A: The reason we have such few recalls, even though they have been increasing because the evidence has been so overwhelming is because this administration has basically defanged the Consumer Product Safety Commission. They do not have any real appetite for going after these companies and countries that are flooding our markets with dangerous products, and that has to stop.
Source: 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR , Dec 4, 2007
FactCheck: Yes, Bush shrunk CPSC; but it shrank before Bush

When discussing the safety concerns about toys imported from China, Clinton accused the Bush administration of crippling the Consumer Product Safety Commission, saying, “The reason we have such few recalls... is because this administration has basically de-fanged” the CPSC.
It’s true that Bush has made some controversial appointments to the CPSC. Congressional Democrats have opposed his choices several times, accusing his nominees of having conflicts of interest or being weak on product safety. CPSC is also widely reported to be understaffed and underfunded. During the Bush administration, the commission has gone from 480 to 401 full-time employees (including only one full-time toy tester).
But not all of this can be pinned on Bush. CPSC has been shrinking for decades. Between 1980 and 1982, during Ronald Reagan’s administration, the agency went from 978 employees (its peak number) to only 649. Even during Bill Clinton’s time in office, the agency went from 515 to 480 employees.
Source: FactCheck on 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR , Dec 4, 2007
Outraged at CEO compensation

[In Bill’s cabinet, Labor Secretary] Robert Reich was gladdened by Hillary’s passionate condemnation of corporate-executive compensation. “These are real issues, Bill,” she said, pointing out that the average CEO of a big company “is now earning 200 times the average hourly wage. Twenty years ago the ratio was about forty times. People all over this country are really upset about this.”
Source: For Love of Politics, by Sally Bedell Smith, p.220 , Oct 23, 2007
Stop bankruptcies to get rid of pension responsibilities

The pension system is broken. We’ve got to stop companies going into bankruptcy in order to get rid of their pension responsibilities. We have to have defined benefits pension plans again. When I am president, we’ll have a Department of Labor that actually cares about labor.
Source: 2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum , Aug 8, 2007
Enough with corporate welfare; enough with golden parachutes

Let’s finally do something about the growing economic inequality that is tearing our country apart. The top 1% of our households hold 22% of our nation’s wealth. That is the highest concentration of wealth in a very small number of people since 1929. So let’s close that gap. Let’s start holding corporate America responsible, make them pay their fair share again. Enough with the corporate welfare. Enough with the golden parachutes. And enough with the tax incentives for companies to shift jobs overseas.
Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference , Jun 20, 2007
Close lobbyists’ revolving door; end no-bid contracts

I believe that the foundation of a strong economy doesn’t begin with giving people who are already privileged and wealthy even more benefits. I think it comes from shared prosperity.
Let’s start by cleaning up the government, replacing this culture of corruption and cronyism with a culture of competence and caring again. Let’s stop outsourcing critical government functions to private companies that overcharge and underperform! Let’s close the revolving door between government and the lobbying shop, and let’s end the no-bid contracts for Halliburton and the other well-connected companies!
And how about the radical idea of appointing people who are actually qualified for the positions that we ask them to hold for us! Well, when I’m president, the entrance to the White House will no longer be a revolving door for the well connected, but a door of opportunity for the well qualified.
Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference , Jun 20, 2007
1976 Rose Law: Fought for industry against electric rate cut

Clashing interests of the well-to-do & the rest of Arkansas were in evidence in 1976 in the form of an initiative. The initiative had been launched by advocates for the poor, a group called the Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN).
With utility rates in Arkansas skyrocketing, ACORN pushed through a ballot initiative requiring utilities to lower rates for residential users in Little Rock and to increase them for business. The measure passed.
Business fought back. The engine driving the challenge was the Rose Law Firm, which enlisted Hillary to help. Hillary could hardly decline to fight her friends, especially so early in her career. This was the by-product of Hillary’s choice to join Rose. She would advocate for clients who would be on the opposite sides of the causes she had formerly championed.
The winning brief was crafted by Hillary and a colleague. The judge embraced the theory--that the ordinance amounted to an unconstitutional taking of property.
Source: Her Way, by Jeff Gerth & Don Van Natta, p. 57-58 , Jun 8, 2007
Corporate lawyer at Rose Law while Bill was Attorney General

It was Hillary who decided that she wanted to be financially secure, and took the steps to accomplish that, said Betsy Wright. “ Bill would live under a bridge--as long as it was okay with Chelsea.”
Upon Bill’s election as attorney general, Hillary faced how to resume her legal career. She was now willing to consider corporate law. Bill recommended the Rose Law Firm.
Rose was the ultimate establishment law firm, representing the most powerful economic interests in the state. The most powerful argument against Hillary was that she was a woman. The firm’s partners were all white men, most of whom were already wealthy and graduates of the two Arkansas law schools. Hillary, with her Wellesley and Yale credentials and her view of the law as an instrument for social reform, would be a radical departure.
Source: A Woman in Charge, by Carl Bernstein, p.127-129 , Jun 5, 2007
Corporate elite treat working-class America as invisible

Q: Overall, is Wal-Mart a good thing or a bad thing for the United States of America?
A: Well, it’s a mixed blessing. When Wal-Mart started, it brought goods into rural areas, like rural Arkansas where I was happy to live for 18 years, and gave people a chance to stretch their dollar further. As they grew much bigger, though, they have raised serious questions about the responsibility of corporations & how they need to be a leader when it comes to providing health care & having safe working conditions and not discriminating on the basis of sex or race. This is all part, though, of how this administration and corporate America today don’t see middle class and working Americans. They are invisible. They don’t understand that if you’re a family that can’t get health care, you are really hurting. But to the corporate elite and to the White House, you’re invisible. So we need to get both public sector and private sector leadership to start stepping up and being responsible and taking care of people.
Source: 2007 South Carolina Democratic primary debate, on MSNBC , Apr 26, 2007
Companies get rewarded with hard-working people left hanging

So many of us grew up with what I call the basic bargain: If you worked hard and if you played by rules you’d be able to build a better life for yourself and your family. Well, I don’t think in the last six years our country has actually been living up to that basic bargain. The leadership here in Washington seems to ignore middle class and hardworking families across our country. Under this president’s leadership household debt has soared, healthcare costs have skyrocketed, assuming that you have it. Wages have remained stagnant. Now corporate profits are up. And productivity is up, which means Americans are working harder than anybody in the world, but we’re not getting rewarded. I’ll tell you who is getting rewarded. Companies like Halliburton are getting rewarded with no-bid contracts, then they move their CEOs across the ocean to another country and leave us hanging right here at home.
Source: 2007 IAFF Presidential Forum in Washington DC , Mar 14, 2007
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program

As governor, I hosted a lunch for Wal-Mart executives and our economic development people to encourage the company to buy more products made in America and to advertise this practice as a way to increase eases. Wal-Mart's "Buy American" campaign was a great success and helped to reduce resentment against the giant discounter for putting small-town merchants out of business. Hillary loved the program and supported it strongly when she went on the Wal-Mart board a couple of years later. At its high mark, Wal-Mart merchandise was about 55 percent American made, about 10 percent more than that of its nearest competitor. Unfortunately, after a few years Wal-Mart abandoned the policy in its marketing drive to be the lowest-cost retailer, but we made the most of it in Arkansas while it lasted.
Source: My Life, by Bill Clinton, p.321-322 , Jun 21, 2004
1970s: Potential conflict of interest when GM sued Arkansas

No sooner had Hillary joined the Rose Law firm than a major case pitting us against the state--in other words, her husband [as Attorney General].
General Motors had been one of Rose’s clients for many years. Mostly we defended it in liability cases. GM was gearing up for consumer lawsuits around the country arising from the discovery that Chevrolet engines were being put in Oldsmobiles--this was a major piece of national business that GM was handing over to Rose Law. The only problem was that GM expected the various state attorneys general to take the lead against the car company. In fact, a nationwide steering committee of AGs was being formed, and [Bill Clinton] was taking a high profile role in it.
This, of course, was the very scenario everyone dreaded. Hillary was in an awkward position. GM agreed to let us remain as council--provided that all files were locked in a cabinet in my office. Ultimately, the case was settled on a national level, so no real problem arose.
Source: Friends in High Places, by Webb Hubbell, p. 57-58 , Nov 1, 1997
Businesses play social role in US; gov’t oversight required

For those who live in urban areas with few businesses of any kind, the impact of changes in the private sector is most direct & devastating, with high unemployment & crime, drug abuse, welfare dependency, & school failure. Problems elsewhere eventually affect us all [so] government has a big responsibility to help remedy them. But its resources are limited.
Other developed countries, like Japan & Germany, are more committed to social stability than we have been, and they tailor their economic policie to maintain it. We have chosen a different path, leaving more of our resources in the private sector.
As a society, we have a choice to make. We can permit the marketplace largely to determine the values & well-being of the village, or we can continue, as we have in the past, to expect business to play a social as well as an economic role. That means we have to look realistically at what government must require business to do, principally in the areas of health, safety, the environment [and so on].
Source: It Takes A Village, by Hillary Clinton, p.274-275 , Sep 25, 1996
Family-friendly work policies are good for business

One of the most hopeful signs I have seen is the growing interest of the business community in assisting employees with child care. Businesses are recognizing that when employees miss work to stay home with sick children, the bottom line suffers too.
The Du Pont Company was one of the first large companies to institute work-family programs such as job sharing and subsidized emergency child care. A study of employees confirmed the view that family-friendly policies are a good business practice.
On October 31, 1995, I hosted an event at the White House honoring 21 companies in the American Business Collaboration for Quality Dependent Care that have pledged to contribute $100 million for child and dependent care in 56 cities. All the companies participating believe in our theme: ‘Doing together what none of us can afford to do alone.’
Source: It Takes A Village, by Hillary Clinton, p.220-221 , Sep 25, 1996
Angry at unacceptable acquiescence to greed in the 1980s

In the 1980s, Hillary Clinton had overheard a conversation between her husband and a Japanese executive. "You could do a lot to stimulate your economy," the executive told Clinton, "if your executives in American industry weren't so greedy." Her husband replied that American executives were being given permission to grab the most at the top by Reagan economic policies, which were designed so wealth would allegedly trickle down to those at the bottom. But those at the bottom weren't seeing the benefits. Hillary agreed. She was angry at what she called "the unacceptable acquiescence in greed that had occurred during the 1980s."
Source: The Agenda, by Bob Woodward, p. 25-26 , Jun 6, 1994
Serving on boards provides ties but requires defending too

Hillary's positions on the boards of Wal-Mart, TCBY, and Lafarge from which she earned close to $200,000 in director's fees over 1986 to 1991, hardly make her a foe of industry. But those connections served her well when she tried to gain business support for programs like HIPPY. But it did not create much goodwill when it was reported in April that a Ohio subsidiary of the Lafarge Corp., from which Hillary Clinton was earning $31,000 a year in director fees, was burning hazardous waste to fuel cement plants. The Ohio company, Systech, had been hotly attacked by environmentalists, community activists, and government regulators for polluting the environment. Whether or not Hillary had made board decisions affecting Systech is unclear. At the time she said that Lafarge was taking steps to dispose of tens of millions of gallons of hazardous waste that would otherwise have been dumped in landfills.
Source: The Inside Story, by Judith Warner, p. 217 , Aug 1, 1993
Voted YES on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore.

Amendment to repeal the tax subsidy for certain domestic companies which move manufacturing operations and American jobs offshore.
Reference: Tax Subsidy for Domestic Companies Amendment; Bill S AMDT 210 to S Con Res 18 ; vote number 2005-63 on Mar 17, 2005
Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy.

Vote to pass a bill that would require debtors able to repay $10,000 or 25 percent of their debts over five years to file under Chapter 13 bankruptcy (reorganization and repayment) rather than Chapter 7 (full discharge of debt).
Reference: Bill HR 333 ; vote number 2001-236 on Jul 17, 2001
Rated 35% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record.

Clinton scores 35% by US Chamber of Commerce on business policy
Whether you own a business, represent one, lead a corporate office, or manage an association, the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of AmericaSM provides you with a voice of experience and influence in Washington, D.C., and around the globe.
Our members include businesses of all sizes and sectors—from large Fortune 500 companies to home-based, one-person operations. In fact, 96% of our membership encompasses businesses with fewer than 100 employees.
Mission Statement:

"To advance human progress through an economic, political and social system based on individual freedom, incentive, initiative, opportunity, and responsibility."
The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.




Even the 35% rating the Chamber of Commerce gave her alone belies your exaggerated and hyperbolic opinion of Hillary Clinton's corporate record...

[billhicks76]

37. Here We Go Again

Hillary has been stated to be an honorary member of the Bush Family...the same family that tried to instigate a coup against FDR, traded with the Nazis during WW2, smiled at the assassination of JFK, covered up CIA drug experimentation on unwitting US citizens, made a deal with Iran to keep the hostages until after the 1980 election,ramped up the Drug War to totalitarian levels, sold drugs to support illegal wars, sold arms to Iran, allowed 911 to happen despite repeated warnings, dragged us into illegal wars in the middle east based on lies and tanked the economy which has still barely recovered. Hillary and Bill (yeah I know they are different people but they BOTH have been declared members of the Bush family by Bush Sr and GW) are so in bed with them only a Wall St exec or a military contractor could really love them...besides foolish ostriches with their head in the sand I suppose. I think Jeb Bush and Hillary should ride off into the sunset together never to be seen again...God knows they are both filthy rich from fleecing the public and exploiting their status for so long. I bet when we all die and pass to another place we will see the truth revealed for what these people really are and it won't be pretty.

[VanillaRhapsody]

59. Yes here we go again indeed...More rhetoric with no basis in facts..

Do you have any links that support your hyperbolic contention? Or are we going to continue to just be expected to believe your anti hillary propaganda?

[Doctor_J]

65. Read reply #5, and click on a few of the dozens of links in there

Jesus...none so blind as those who will not see.

[VanillaRhapsody]

67. is this your reply or someone else's?

why not speak for your self? Which again proves my point!

[billhicks76]

73. Last Time I Linked You Ignored It

[VanillaRhapsody]

74. You linked to what?

Did you link to her record? Or somebody's Op Ed hit piece?

[billhicks76]

75. You Were In Denial

Last edited Fri Apr 10, 2015, 11:36 PM - Edit history (1)

About their Bush family connections. They aren't that different than Bush having ties to Saudi families as it all feeds deceit and corruption. You refused to believe Hillary, like her husband, is considered an intimate, honorary Bush family member. Ironically, GW came out that time and said as such. Bush Sr had always praised Bill for suppressing investigations and publicly referred to him as his 5th son. You can list policy statements on and on but it comes down to the person and trust to enact anything their mouth blabbers out. I do not trust Bill or Hillary as they are Bush proxies and proven liars.

[VanillaRhapsody]

76. what connections?

it was proven as bunk!

[billhicks76]

79. Really?! Lets Argue Over Facts?

Thats a Republican tactic. Bush is tied to the Saudis...thats a fact. And the Clintons are intimate with the Bushes...another inconvenient fact.

[hifiguy]

80. Everything billhicks describes has been documented

here to massively redundant length via appropriate links.

[yallerdawg]

69. You know...

opinion always trumps fact.

[VanillaRhapsody]

71. That's what I hear.....

[djean111]

28. "Politicians as liars" would be more precisely correct. Playing the poor woman card is not going to

work, methinks. Casting any disbelief as being just because she is a woman is disingenuous. Politicians who accept huge amounts of money from Wall Street are going to truckle to Wall Street.
Gender has nothing to do with it. And if Hillary is framed as some woman struggling against misogyny, then, really, how effective would she be in office? We are told that Obama is practically helpless against Congress.

If Hillary is trying to figure out just what to say in order to get votes, as opposed to just getting out what she actually wants to do, not mere platitudes, then, like any politician, she may be seen as lying.

[7962]

35. You can darn well bet they're going to use it though. Already warning about using certain words!

http://www.thewrap.com/hillary-clinton-super-volunteers-warn-against-coded-sexism/

This is already part of the plan. ANY criticism is going to be "anti woman". Its ridiculous. She wants to run, should should have to put up with the same crap male candidates have to deal with.

[djean111]

36. Should be interesting to watch. That's a weird list of words that are suddenly misogynous.

[joshcryer]

43. Yes, as a woman, the "liar card" will be used.

That goes without saying. It won't stick. People are getting fucking tired of the sexist "women are liars stereotype."

[RiverLover]

4. So she'll be picking the populist messages that don't tread on conservatives. So exciting!

After all, during her quarter century in the national limelight, Clinton has been closely associated with a raft of policies that populists specifically abhor. It was her husband’s administration that filed down Social Security and Medicare (the liberal base would like Hillary to commit to expanding them), passed NAFTA (the base would like her to reject future free trade deals) and repealed Glass-Steagall, a law that separated commercial and investment banking. (The populist left blames the repeal of Glass-Steagall in part for the massive growth of the biggest Wall Street banks and want her to promise to reinstate it.) As both a New York Senator and Secretary of State, Clinton backed U.S. military intervention in Iraq, Libya and Syria—positions that liberals generally opposed.

How Clinton reacts to this pressure remains to be seen, but most expect her to go on an careful offensive: she’ll come out of the gate sometime this week or next talking the populist talk and loudly embracing a ream of progressive policies, such as fair wages, paid family leave and universal early childhood education, that do not alienate centrists. And then she’ll punt, as quietly as possible, on the stickiest issues, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, taxing stock market transactions and raising corporate taxes.

“She has to have a credible challenger before she is pushed anywhere,” said Whit Ayres, a longtime moderate Republican pollster at North Star Opinion Research. “If you were in her shoes, why would you say something that you didn’t want to say? She won’t have to talk about anything.”

[woo me with science]

5. No more Wall Street, Third Way corporatists and warmongers.

Nothing is more important than stopping Hillary or any other Third Way corporatist in a Democrat suit from being shoved down our throats as the Democratic nominee in 2016.

Corporate Republicans and the corporate Third Way are not just another flavor of politician within an essentially functioning representative government. They are building perpetual war, a police and surveillance state, and using our own laws and intelligence agencies to empower corporations over the will of the American people to dismantle democracy itself.

Hillary's assaults on American jobs and wages extend even beyond the vicious TPP.

The nonpartisan Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) has already concluded that Hillary's TPP will be a vicious assault on the jobs and wages of the vast majority of American workers. Fully NINETY PERCENT of American workers will see a pay cut as a result of this axe to the throat of the American worker, and that is not even counting the jobs that will be lost altogether.

But Hillary is not even stopping there. She is also pushing for predatory increases in H1B visas that take jobs from Americans:

Hillary pushes for increases in H1B visas and outsourcing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6405669

Reject Third Way lies and denial of the obvious. Watch the policies, not the pretty rhetoric.

Keep in mind the stunning level of corruption and dishonesty we have come to expect from corporate politicians like Hillary, who LIE TO OUR FACES claiming to care about income inequality while simultaneously supporting and even AUTHORING major policies that take a sledgehammer to American jobs, wages, and futures.

Watch the actual policies they support, not the pretty rhetoric.


Hillary Clinton's leading role in drafting the TPP
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101667554

Hillary Clinton and Trade Deals: That “Giant Sucking Sound”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016101761

Hillary Clinton Cheerleads for Biotech and GMOs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/112772326

Dissecting Hillary Clinton's Neocon Talking Points - Atlantic Interview
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209519

NYTimes notices Hillary's natural affinity toward the neocons.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025205645

Hillary Clinton, the unrepentant hawk
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024876898

More from Hillary Clinton's State Department: The fascistic TISA (Trade in Services Agreement)
http://m.thenation.com/blog/180572-grassroots-labor-uprising-your-bank

How Hillary Clinton's State Department sold fracking to the world
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251376647

Hillary Clinton Sides with NSA over Snowden Disclosures
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101695441

On the NSA, Hillary Clinton Is Either a Fool or a Liar
http://m.thenation.com/article/180564-nsa-hillary-clinton-either-fool-or-liar

Corporate Warfare: Hillary Clinton admits role in Honduran coup aftermath
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025601610#post29

The Bill and Hillary Clinton Money Machine Taps Corporate Cash
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025189257

Hillary's Privatization Plan: TISA kept more secret than the TPP
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014829628

Hillary Clinton criticizes Obama's foreign policy 'failure'; strongly defends Israel
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014867136

Some of Hillary Clinton's statements on Social Security.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024379279

Hillary Clinton's GOLDMAN SACHS PROBLEM.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025049343

Ring of Fire: Hillary Clinton - The Perfect Republican Candidate
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209285

How Americans Need Answers From Hillary Clinton On TPP, KXL, Wall St & More
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017181611

Hillary Clinton Left Out By Liberal Donor Club
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025809071

Why Wall Street Loves Hillary
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016106575

Hillary Clinton: Neocon-lite
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101684986

Interactive graphic of Hillary Clinton's connections to the Forbes top 400 (Follow link in post)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025824981#post9

[joshcryer]

6. Under what circumstances would Clinton undermine Obama's policy?

How on earth would she do it? Obama has set the policy, literally thousands of policy wonks are writing the orders and executive decisions and laying the foundation for a post-Obama presidency. It's not happening and it will not happen. What Obama set forth will be literally the policy of any future Democratic Presidency. This is just how it is. I will not refer to "reality" because that word is mocked here. But you won't be able to provide a simple explanation as to why Clinton would reverse Obama's policies.

[woo me with science]

13. Another Twilight Zone denial from the "deny Hillary's entire record" corporate posting crew.

Notice that the posts about her corporate record extensively reference her actual behavior and record, whereas the denials always take some absurd form of 'Yeah, she worked on the TPP and praised it in speeches, but you can't prove she really meant it!'

This is the degree to which we are treated like absolute blithering idiots, incapable of drawing conclusions from a candidate's lengthy record of policy and associations.

And this is the Orwellian nonsense that passes for advocacy for a corporate candidate these days: Not laying out an impressive record of working for the 99 percent and opposing predatory policies like the TPP and bank bailouts and H1B visas and wars for profit and the surveillance state....but a record of working FOR these things, paired with a belligerent challenge that you can't *prove* she will continue to do all the horrible things her record and associations suggest she will.

It's Twilight Zone level propaganda, beyond insulting to anyone who follows the issues and understands the duty of a candidate to appeal to voters with a record. Hillary has been clear on all the issues detailed in my links, and she has chosen AGAINST the 99 percent on all of them. More importantly, these aren't minor issues. These are serious, serious issues at the heart of the corporate coup of democracy being perpetrated on this nation.

[font color=red]Reject Third Way propaganda. Reject denial and rewriting of history.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5767160

[/font color]

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

20. Maybe there's a FOURTH way Hillary & her 100's of consultants can come up with to pacify the populist crowd.

[woo me with science]

27. You can be sure the Madison Avenue consultants are working on it.

Actually, though, the "defense" of her record is so weak and insulting that I honestly believe the strategy of corporatists in both parties is to elect a Republican next time.

We misunderstand politics and our politicians in 2015 when we assume their goal is always to win. That was the old system, democracy.

In oligarchy, the goal is using the two parties you own in whichever way best furthers the corporate agenda.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

30. lol, with sucha gargantuan task, no wonder Hillary needed to hire 100's of consultants. Sad, but true.

[Nay]

60. I also believe that the corporatist strategy will be to elect a Republican this time. It's

pretty obvious to me. The pollsters will blame it on the tendency of voters to switch to the other party after 8 years of the first party, and the deal will be struck. If that's the goal, I hope Hillary wins, although I don't have any sense that she will be anything but a placeholder for the next wave of craziness to hit this insane and barbaric country.

[VanillaRhapsody]

23. except YOU are the one in the twilight zone...

OpEd: Disagrees with progressives on corporatism & military

Is Hillary a progressive? The answer is unambiguously no; Hillary is a liberal centrist. Progressives support "fair trade," which means that free trade agreements should include environmental and labor clauses; Hillary is an ardent free-trader. WikiLeaks' Julian Assange is a hero to progressives who believe in open government and oppose secrecy, but a traitor to Hillary. Progressives ardently oppose military intervention abroad; Hillary is a hawk. And progressives are ardently anti-corporate, while Hillary is pro-corporate.
Often the difference is a matter of degree: progressives would tax capital gains as regular income; Hillary might only moderately increase it, as illustrated in this exchange:
The capital gains tax under Bill Clinton was 28%. It's now 15%.
CLINTON: I wouldn't raise it above the 20% if I raised it at all. I would not raise it above what it was during the Clinton administration.
Source: Jeb vs. Hillary On The Issues, by Jesse Gordon, p.37,66,&168 , Dec 10, 2014
Take back $55B in Bush’s industry give-aways

We need a fighter back in the White House. We need someone who’s going to take on the special interests.
I have a plan to take away $55 billion of the giveaways and the subsidies that the president and Congress have lavished on the drug companies and the oil companies and the insurance companies and Wall Street. And I have a plan to give that money back--give it back in tax cuts to the middle class--to people who deserve it, who have been struggling under this president, who feel invisible, who feel like they’re not even seen anymore.
Now, obviously, I can’t do this alone. I can only do it if I get people who believe in me and support me and who look at my track record and know that I’ve spent a lifetime trying to empower people, trying to fight for them.
And I will turn this economy around. We will get back to shared prosperity and we will see once again that we can do this the right way so it’s not just a government of the few, by the few and for the few.
Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary , Apr 16, 2008
FactCheck: Pushed Wal-Mart for women managers & environment

Obama attacked Clinton’s one-time membership on the board of directors of the world’s largest retailer, saying, “While I was watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.”
It’s true that Clinton sat on the Wal-Mart board for six years while her husband was governor of Arkansas, where the chain has its corporate headquarters. She was paid about $18,000 a year for doing it. At the time, she worked at the Rose Law Firm, which had represented Wal-Mart in various matters.
But according to accounts from other board members, Clinton was a thorn in the side of the company’s founder, Sam Walton, on the matter of promoting women, few of whom were in the ranks of managers or executives at the time. She also strongly advocated for more environmentally sound corporate practices. She made limited progress in both areas. In 2005 she returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing “serious differences” with its “current” practices.
Source: FactCheck.org on 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Dem. Debate , Jan 21, 2008
World Bank should impose rules on sovereign wealth funds

Q: Citigroup and Merrill Lynch have both gone overseas, hat in hand, looking for $20 billion in investment to stay afloat, from foreign governments. Is foreign ownership a problem?
A: I’m very concerned about this. About a month and a half ago, I raised this concern because these are called sovereign wealth funds. They are huge pools of money, largely because of oil and economic growth in Asia. And these funds are controlled often by governmental entities or individuals who are closely connected to the governments in these countries. I think we’ve got to know more about them. They need to be more transparent. We need to have a lot more control over what they do and how they do it. I’d like to see the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund begin to impose these rules. And I want the US Congress and the Federal Reserve Board to ask these tough questions. I’d like to see us move much more aggressively both to deal with these sovereign wealth funds.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas , Jan 15, 2008
Bush defanged the Consumer Product Safety Commission

Q: All the Chinese recalls of toxic toys & products still represent fewer than 1/100th of all imports. Is this an over-reaction?
A: The reason we have such few recalls, even though they have been increasing because the evidence has been so overwhelming is because this administration has basically defanged the Consumer Product Safety Commission. They do not have any real appetite for going after these companies and countries that are flooding our markets with dangerous products, and that has to stop.
Source: 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR , Dec 4, 2007
FactCheck: Yes, Bush shrunk CPSC; but it shrank before Bush

When discussing the safety concerns about toys imported from China, Clinton accused the Bush administration of crippling the Consumer Product Safety Commission, saying, “The reason we have such few recalls... is because this administration has basically de-fanged” the CPSC.
It’s true that Bush has made some controversial appointments to the CPSC. Congressional Democrats have opposed his choices several times, accusing his nominees of having conflicts of interest or being weak on product safety. CPSC is also widely reported to be understaffed and underfunded. During the Bush administration, the commission has gone from 480 to 401 full-time employees (including only one full-time toy tester).
But not all of this can be pinned on Bush. CPSC has been shrinking for decades. Between 1980 and 1982, during Ronald Reagan’s administration, the agency went from 978 employees (its peak number) to only 649. Even during Bill Clinton’s time in office, the agency went from 515 to 480 employees.
Source: FactCheck on 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR , Dec 4, 2007
Outraged at CEO compensation

[In Bill’s cabinet, Labor Secretary] Robert Reich was gladdened by Hillary’s passionate condemnation of corporate-executive compensation. “These are real issues, Bill,” she said, pointing out that the average CEO of a big company “is now earning 200 times the average hourly wage. Twenty years ago the ratio was about forty times. People all over this country are really upset about this.”
Source: For Love of Politics, by Sally Bedell Smith, p.220 , Oct 23, 2007
Stop bankruptcies to get rid of pension responsibilities

The pension system is broken. We’ve got to stop companies going into bankruptcy in order to get rid of their pension responsibilities. We have to have defined benefits pension plans again. When I am president, we’ll have a Department of Labor that actually cares about labor.
Source: 2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum , Aug 8, 2007
Enough with corporate welfare; enough with golden parachutes

Let’s finally do something about the growing economic inequality that is tearing our country apart. The top 1% of our households hold 22% of our nation’s wealth. That is the highest concentration of wealth in a very small number of people since 1929. So let’s close that gap. Let’s start holding corporate America responsible, make them pay their fair share again. Enough with the corporate welfare. Enough with the golden parachutes. And enough with the tax incentives for companies to shift jobs overseas.
Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference , Jun 20, 2007
Close lobbyists’ revolving door; end no-bid contracts

I believe that the foundation of a strong economy doesn’t begin with giving people who are already privileged and wealthy even more benefits. I think it comes from shared prosperity.
Let’s start by cleaning up the government, replacing this culture of corruption and cronyism with a culture of competence and caring again. Let’s stop outsourcing critical government functions to private companies that overcharge and underperform! Let’s close the revolving door between government and the lobbying shop, and let’s end the no-bid contracts for Halliburton and the other well-connected companies!
And how about the radical idea of appointing people who are actually qualified for the positions that we ask them to hold for us! Well, when I’m president, the entrance to the White House will no longer be a revolving door for the well connected, but a door of opportunity for the well qualified.
Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference , Jun 20, 2007
1976 Rose Law: Fought for industry against electric rate cut

Clashing interests of the well-to-do & the rest of Arkansas were in evidence in 1976 in the form of an initiative. The initiative had been launched by advocates for the poor, a group called the Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN).
With utility rates in Arkansas skyrocketing, ACORN pushed through a ballot initiative requiring utilities to lower rates for residential users in Little Rock and to increase them for business. The measure passed.
Business fought back. The engine driving the challenge was the Rose Law Firm, which enlisted Hillary to help. Hillary could hardly decline to fight her friends, especially so early in her career. This was the by-product of Hillary’s choice to join Rose. She would advocate for clients who would be on the opposite sides of the causes she had formerly championed.
The winning brief was crafted by Hillary and a colleague. The judge embraced the theory--that the ordinance amounted to an unconstitutional taking of property.
Source: Her Way, by Jeff Gerth & Don Van Natta, p. 57-58 , Jun 8, 2007
Corporate lawyer at Rose Law while Bill was Attorney General

It was Hillary who decided that she wanted to be financially secure, and took the steps to accomplish that, said Betsy Wright. “ Bill would live under a bridge--as long as it was okay with Chelsea.”
Upon Bill’s election as attorney general, Hillary faced how to resume her legal career. She was now willing to consider corporate law. Bill recommended the Rose Law Firm.
Rose was the ultimate establishment law firm, representing the most powerful economic interests in the state. The most powerful argument against Hillary was that she was a woman. The firm’s partners were all white men, most of whom were already wealthy and graduates of the two Arkansas law schools. Hillary, with her Wellesley and Yale credentials and her view of the law as an instrument for social reform, would be a radical departure.
Source: A Woman in Charge, by Carl Bernstein, p.127-129 , Jun 5, 2007
Corporate elite treat working-class America as invisible

Q: Overall, is Wal-Mart a good thing or a bad thing for the United States of America?
A: Well, it’s a mixed blessing. When Wal-Mart started, it brought goods into rural areas, like rural Arkansas where I was happy to live for 18 years, and gave people a chance to stretch their dollar further. As they grew much bigger, though, they have raised serious questions about the responsibility of corporations & how they need to be a leader when it comes to providing health care & having safe working conditions and not discriminating on the basis of sex or race. This is all part, though, of how this administration and corporate America today don’t see middle class and working Americans. They are invisible. They don’t understand that if you’re a family that can’t get health care, you are really hurting. But to the corporate elite and to the White House, you’re invisible. So we need to get both public sector and private sector leadership to start stepping up and being responsible and taking care of people.
Source: 2007 South Carolina Democratic primary debate, on MSNBC , Apr 26, 2007
Companies get rewarded with hard-working people left hanging

So many of us grew up with what I call the basic bargain: If you worked hard and if you played by rules you’d be able to build a better life for yourself and your family. Well, I don’t think in the last six years our country has actually been living up to that basic bargain. The leadership here in Washington seems to ignore middle class and hardworking families across our country. Under this president’s leadership household debt has soared, healthcare costs have skyrocketed, assuming that you have it. Wages have remained stagnant. Now corporate profits are up. And productivity is up, which means Americans are working harder than anybody in the world, but we’re not getting rewarded. I’ll tell you who is getting rewarded. Companies like Halliburton are getting rewarded with no-bid contracts, then they move their CEOs across the ocean to another country and leave us hanging right here at home.
Source: 2007 IAFF Presidential Forum in Washington DC , Mar 14, 2007
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program

As governor, I hosted a lunch for Wal-Mart executives and our economic development people to encourage the company to buy more products made in America and to advertise this practice as a way to increase eases. Wal-Mart's "Buy American" campaign was a great success and helped to reduce resentment against the giant discounter for putting small-town merchants out of business. Hillary loved the program and supported it strongly when she went on the Wal-Mart board a couple of years later. At its high mark, Wal-Mart merchandise was about 55 percent American made, about 10 percent more than that of its nearest competitor. Unfortunately, after a few years Wal-Mart abandoned the policy in its marketing drive to be the lowest-cost retailer, but we made the most of it in Arkansas while it lasted.
Source: My Life, by Bill Clinton, p.321-322 , Jun 21, 2004
1970s: Potential conflict of interest when GM sued Arkansas

No sooner had Hillary joined the Rose Law firm than a major case pitting us against the state--in other words, her husband [as Attorney General].
General Motors had been one of Rose’s clients for many years. Mostly we defended it in liability cases. GM was gearing up for consumer lawsuits around the country arising from the discovery that Chevrolet engines were being put in Oldsmobiles--this was a major piece of national business that GM was handing over to Rose Law. The only problem was that GM expected the various state attorneys general to take the lead against the car company. In fact, a nationwide steering committee of AGs was being formed, and [Bill Clinton] was taking a high profile role in it.
This, of course, was the very scenario everyone dreaded. Hillary was in an awkward position. GM agreed to let us remain as council--provided that all files were locked in a cabinet in my office. Ultimately, the case was settled on a national level, so no real problem arose.
Source: Friends in High Places, by Webb Hubbell, p. 57-58 , Nov 1, 1997
Businesses play social role in US; gov’t oversight required

For those who live in urban areas with few businesses of any kind, the impact of changes in the private sector is most direct & devastating, with high unemployment & crime, drug abuse, welfare dependency, & school failure. Problems elsewhere eventually affect us all [so] government has a big responsibility to help remedy them. But its resources are limited.
Other developed countries, like Japan & Germany, are more committed to social stability than we have been, and they tailor their economic policie to maintain it. We have chosen a different path, leaving more of our resources in the private sector.
As a society, we have a choice to make. We can permit the marketplace largely to determine the values & well-being of the village, or we can continue, as we have in the past, to expect business to play a social as well as an economic role. That means we have to look realistically at what government must require business to do, principally in the areas of health, safety, the environment [and so on].
Source: It Takes A Village, by Hillary Clinton, p.274-275 , Sep 25, 1996
Family-friendly work policies are good for business

One of the most hopeful signs I have seen is the growing interest of the business community in assisting employees with child care. Businesses are recognizing that when employees miss work to stay home with sick children, the bottom line suffers too.
The Du Pont Company was one of the first large companies to institute work-family programs such as job sharing and subsidized emergency child care. A study of employees confirmed the view that family-friendly policies are a good business practice.
On October 31, 1995, I hosted an event at the White House honoring 21 companies in the American Business Collaboration for Quality Dependent Care that have pledged to contribute $100 million for child and dependent care in 56 cities. All the companies participating believe in our theme: ‘Doing together what none of us can afford to do alone.’
Source: It Takes A Village, by Hillary Clinton, p.220-221 , Sep 25, 1996
Angry at unacceptable acquiescence to greed in the 1980s

In the 1980s, Hillary Clinton had overheard a conversation between her husband and a Japanese executive. "You could do a lot to stimulate your economy," the executive told Clinton, "if your executives in American industry weren't so greedy." Her husband replied that American executives were being given permission to grab the most at the top by Reagan economic policies, which were designed so wealth would allegedly trickle down to those at the bottom. But those at the bottom weren't seeing the benefits. Hillary agreed. She was angry at what she called "the unacceptable acquiescence in greed that had occurred during the 1980s."
Source: The Agenda, by Bob Woodward, p. 25-26 , Jun 6, 1994
Serving on boards provides ties but requires defending too

Hillary's positions on the boards of Wal-Mart, TCBY, and Lafarge from which she earned close to $200,000 in director's fees over 1986 to 1991, hardly make her a foe of industry. But those connections served her well when she tried to gain business support for programs like HIPPY. But it did not create much goodwill when it was reported in April that a Ohio subsidiary of the Lafarge Corp., from which Hillary Clinton was earning $31,000 a year in director fees, was burning hazardous waste to fuel cement plants. The Ohio company, Systech, had been hotly attacked by environmentalists, community activists, and government regulators for polluting the environment. Whether or not Hillary had made board decisions affecting Systech is unclear. At the time she said that Lafarge was taking steps to dispose of tens of millions of gallons of hazardous waste that would otherwise have been dumped in landfills.
Source: The Inside Story, by Judith Warner, p. 217 , Aug 1, 1993
Voted YES on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore.

Amendment to repeal the tax subsidy for certain domestic companies which move manufacturing operations and American jobs offshore.
Reference: Tax Subsidy for Domestic Companies Amendment; Bill S AMDT 210 to S Con Res 18 ; vote number 2005-63 on Mar 17, 2005
Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy.

Vote to pass a bill that would require debtors able to repay $10,000 or 25 percent of their debts over five years to file under Chapter 13 bankruptcy (reorganization and repayment) rather than Chapter 7 (full discharge of debt).
Reference: Bill HR 333 ; vote number 2001-236 on Jul 17, 2001
Rated 35% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record.

Clinton scores 35% by US Chamber of Commerce on business policy
Whether you own a business, represent one, lead a corporate office, or manage an association, the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of AmericaSM provides you with a voice of experience and influence in Washington, D.C., and around the globe.
Our members include businesses of all sizes and sectors—from large Fortune 500 companies to home-based, one-person operations. In fact, 96% of our membership encompasses businesses with fewer than 100 employees.
Mission Statement:

"To advance human progress through an economic, political and social system based on individual freedom, incentive, initiative, opportunity, and responsibility."
The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

[billhicks76]

38. Democrats Fear The Clintons Like Republicans Fear The Bushes

They know what lay beneath the surface and how hard they can bite. Reich is a true Progressive and he doesn't want Hillary but Im sure he would support if backed into a corner especially given that he knows her personally which always mitigates the tense realities. I know Democrats that like Republicans that they are friends with and would support them in many endeavors too. If one really really cares about America they would support a Progressive.

[hatrack]

45. Talk is cheap, and about 80% of the post above is just that - talk

Quotes from her autobiography, snippets of "heartening" conversations and the like.

No cigar.

[VanillaRhapsody]

57. bull....and it shows you still havent read it.....you won't find a cigar if you don't read the facts

did you see her rating with the ALEC run Chamber of Commerce? 35%!!!


but you have NO evidence to the contrary...

Here is the condensed version since you cannot be bothered with reading facts..

Take back $55B in Bush’s industry give-aways. (Apr 2008)
FactCheck: Pushed Wal-Mart for women managers & environment. (Jan 2008)
World Bank should impose rules on sovereign wealth funds. (Jan 2008)
Bush defanged the Consumer Product Safety Commission. (Dec 2007)
FactCheck: Yes, Bush shrunk CPSC; but it shrank before Bush. (Dec 2007)
Outraged at CEO compensation. (Oct 2007)
Stop bankruptcies to get rid of pension responsibilities. (Aug 2007)
Enough with corporate welfare; enough with golden parachutes. (Jun 2007)
Close lobbyists’ revolving door; end no-bid contracts. (Jun 2007)
1976 Rose Law: Fought for industry against electric rate cut. (Jun 2007)
Corporate lawyer at Rose Law while Bill was Attorney General. (Jun 2007)
Corporate elite treat working-class America as invisible. (Apr 2007)
Companies get rewarded with hard-working people left hanging. (Mar 2007)
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program. (Jun 2004)
1970s: Potential conflict of interest when GM sued Arkansas. (Nov 1997)
1970s: Potential conflict of interest when GM sued AR. (Nov 1997)
Businesses play social role in US; gov’t oversight required. (Sep 1996)
Family-friendly work policies are good for business. (Sep 1996)
Serving on boards provides ties but requires defending too. (Aug 1993)
Voted YES on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy. (Jul 2001)
Rated 35% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record. (Dec 2003)

[SwampG8r]

68. well as I remember

Cigars and Clinton's should be discussed separately

[joshcryer]

46. Please don't call me a "Third Way Shill."

The US is capitalist. Warren is a corporatist (she literally wants to break up the banks which would leave by her own words more corporate profits). Get over it. Get over the anti-corporate hate. The American public don't give a shit. Obscurity is literally your place. You'll never be significant in American politics. Move on.

Propaganda? Win an election. Pass some legislation. Make even one remotely true prediction. You never win elections, you never pass legislation (I have fought for and passed legislation, 10% of the vote), you never make literally any predictions that have proven true. Have fun, do your thing, you are irrelevant to me. I have literally never been persuaded by your "efforts." You have never, in my decade of posting here, convinced me of anything. Have at it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

58. +++1000

[L0oniX]

55. ^^^THIS^^^ ...should be it's own op.

[woo me with science]

62. kick

[woo me with science]

19. More.

.........

Hillary Clinton criticizes Obama's foreign policy 'failure'; strongly defends Israel
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014867136

The Warmongering Record of Hillary Clinton "I urged him to bomb..."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026219783

Hillary defends Israel on Gaza carpet bombing
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025274041

Hillary tacks right of Obama on foreign policy.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024707589

Dissecting Hillary Clinton's Neocon Talking Points - Atlantic Interview
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017209519

NYTimes notices Hillary's natural affinity toward the neocons.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025205645

Hillary Clinton, the unrepentant hawk
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024876898

Hillary Clinton Praises George W. Bush and the Art of Compromise
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026394878

Hillary Clinton's role in right-wing Honduran coup and aftermath
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025601610#post29

Hillary Clinton's Horrifying Iraq War Vote Still Matters.
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/hillary-clintons-iraq-war-vote-still-matters-9737

Secret recordings show US military and a Democratic congressman distrusted Hillary Clinton on Libya (lying, manipulating intelligence)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026157088

Hillary Clinton Blasts ‘Unfair’ World Reaction Over Gaza, Cites Anti-Semitism As Factor
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025364869

Obama didn't go as far as Hillary now says she wanted to go in smashing Syria
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251375376

Hand in Hand With Kissinger: A Review of Hillary Clinton’s Review
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016102317

Hillary Clinton Serves Us KISSINGER KOOL-AID
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025504036

MJ - Hillary Clinton Praises a Guy With Lots of Blood on His Hands
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025493748

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

25. Makes me wanna puke everytime I see that pic of Hillary with her war-criminal pal Kissinger. It's just sickening.

[840high]

78. Me, too.

[LuvNewcastle]

7. I have a feeling that

I'm going to be nauseated for the whole campaign season. I think I already know what's going to happen, and ain't none of it good.

[RiverLover]

9. Me too. /nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

12. The problem is trouble follows the Clintons no matter what they say or do. Isn't it time we choose a candidate who can get the progressive message out absent any controversy?

[LuvNewcastle]

26. That's a good point.

I don't want to see her run at all, but it has obviously been planned for quite some time. Many people are focused on her candidacy right now, but that can change the instant people get distracted by a shiny object they haven't seen before. Americans are notoriously fickle. We need a Progressive woman to run against her. Warren would have been great, but maybe there's someone nobody has thought of.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. Word is Al Gore is looking at a possible run if Hillary stumbles out of the gate...

Frankly, I think Hillary's already stumbled, badly, before she's even declared her candidacy. Clearly, we can do better. Maybe even Elizabeth can be convinced to run this time (sure hope so!).

[Katashi_itto]

10. Planning on Waffles that day if she is my only choice.

The Republicans will be running a 21st century version of Caligula. I still will not vote for her.

The Waffle Abides

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

14. I like mine with blueberries drowned in maple syrup. Maybe Hillary will stop waffling and re-invent herself as a strong progressive woman of the people...

with a wink-wink to her corporate pals on Wall Street. It just might just work, who knows.

[Demeter]

16. It will still be a lie

[Katashi_itto]

17. Waffles are never a lie.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

24. Only ones made without artificial preservatives.

[Katashi_itto]

63. That is a very Zen observation.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

21. And your point is...? What difference does it makes as long as Hillary wins?

[Demeter]

22. If the PEOPLE win, it's good

[Katashi_itto]

70. It makes all the difference. Does she like waffles or not? I demand she take a stand.

[stonecutter357]

11. Clickbait.

[Demeter]

15. First, she will ignore us and the message

Second, she will awkwardly try to infiltrate, co-op, or otherwise tie herself to the message

Third, she will attack the message

Fourth, she will spend a fortune of Other People's Money to drown out the message

Fifth, she will lose. And we will lose thanks to her efforts.


In the unlikely event that she DOESN'T lose, she will unleash a scorched-earth policy on anyone sounding the slightest bit progressive. So we're damned if we do, damned if we don't.

So, might as well continue to do our work!

[woo me with science]

32. +1 And I believe your "fifth" is absolutely part of the plan.

From the DCCC "Accept Doom" email campaign for the midterms, to the constant attacks on the base, to the weird "defense" of Hillary that isn't, I don't think we have *ever* seen such a transparent, relentless campaign by corporate Democrats to depress Democratic turnout.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

34. A "fifth" of vodka is definitely part of MY plan if there's any hope of gettin to the polls to vote for Hillary.

[jeff47]

54. You forgot one

Sixth, liberals will be blamed for her loss. It will be framed as "liberals failed Clinton", not "Clinton failed liberals".

[sendero]

29. I find it funny....

.... that those sentiments expressed by the "young progressives" echo mine perfectly (I'm late 50s). But HRC can talk all she wants, I'm not going to believe anything that she says that is in contrast with her extremely well-established record.

Leopards don't change their spots, especially leopards her age.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

33. So not true...even tattoos can be removed these days-or re-inked to tattoo over-so, yes, leopard indeed prolly CAN also change their spots!

[Capt. Obvious]

39. RW Time gives a rat fucker publicity

Was I the first one in?

[Autumn]

41. That's a whole lot of truth

“She is a middle-of-the-road Democrat that on a regular basis would pick Wall Street over Main Street.”

[bigtree]

44. this is a weak and mostly speculative article

...which ignores many aspects of Clinton's 'populist' appeal which she demonstrated in her last presidential bid.

One example:

Dolores Huerta, co-founder of United Farm Workers with Cesar Chavez, has been stumping for Hillary

Rio Grande Guardian, News Report
María González-Escareño and Joey Gomez,
Feb 19, 2008

LAREDO, February 17 - Hillary Clinton's ties with the Latino community date back 35 years ago, while Barack Obama's date back six months ago, said Dolores Huerta and Laredo's political and community leaders at a meet and greet breakfast Sunday.

“She's not the 'Johnny Come Lately',” said Huerta (75), co-founder of the United Farm Workers union with César Chávez.

“When she was in her 20s, she was registering voters down in the Valley, right in the poorest parts of the United States of America for Latinos to live. Hillary was knocking on doors to register Latinos to vote..” (sorry, broken link)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4679349



Hillary Clinton draws on lessons learned in poor neighborhoods

Thursday, January 24, 2008

By MARCELLA BOMBARDIERI
The Boston Globe

NEW BEDFORD, Mass. - Carting a 77-part questionnaire on a clipboard, a 25-year-old lawyer named Hillary Rodham made her way through the poorest neighborhoods of this ailing industrial city, three-decker by three-decker. Knocking on every third door, sitting in cramped living rooms, she and a Portuguese translator asked startled, often wary parents whether they had any children who didn't go to school.

Every 10th house or so, she found such a child. They included the children of Portuguese and Cape Verdean immigrants who quit or flunked out because no one helped them learn English, a 10-year-old boy who had been classified as retarded despite passing his regular classes, and a little girl in a wheelchair who languished on her family's back porch because she had no way to get to school.

Clinton's brief experience in 1973 living in Cambridge and working for the Children's Defense Fund, including in New Bedford, was until recently a forgotten chapter of a famous life . . .

"I knew then that I wanted to spend my career being a voice for children," she told students in November at her alma mater, Wellesley College, "children particularly who had been left behind, children who drew the short straw in life."

And indeed, in 1973 Clinton had a hand in some of the most cutting-edge legal advocacy of the time, being done from the fund's stately Victorian headquarters on Cambridge Street in Harvard Square. Yet she did the work for less than nine months before taking a job in Washington, as aide to the congressional committee examining Richard Nixon's impeachment. From there she moved to Arkansas, where she joined a private law firm.

Clinton remained involved with children's issues throughout her career. She chaired the fund's board for years, pursued education reform as first lady of Arkansas, and fought in the White House for health insurance for low-income children.

On the campaign trail, Clinton focuses on the least-edgy aspect of what she did, cataloguing discrimination against children who were disabled. Much of what the fund did, though, was to advocate for victims who were less than picture-perfect: teenage mothers, minority youths who had been expelled for disciplinary infractions, and juvenile delinquents.

In her book, Clinton briefly describes traveling to South Carolina to interview 14- and 15-year-olds who were being housed with adult criminals. Several of her colleagues recalled finding boys who had been raped in jail. The organization took at least one case to court.

The project that brought Clinton to New Bedford eventually became a much-publicized report, "Children Out of School in America." With volunteers as well as its own staff, the fund spoke to 6,500 families across the country, concluding that 2 million school-age children were being excluded from public school because of segregation, special needs, or poverty... (same as above, broken link)


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4344039&mesg_id=4345193

[Bluenorthwest]

48. I thought this was going to be about Reproductive Choice, which does not get enough attention

compared to teh gay, or maybe about how much you dig the Pope. But instead, it's about you not liking Hillary. What a surprise.

[brooklynite]

49. Think back to the Howard Dean campaign...

...he attracted a lot of young people looking for something different. Unfortunately, he couldn't convince them to come out and vote.

[leveymg]

50. She will appear only in the most controlled venues, and learn more dismissive one-liners.

That's about the extent of what she can do, without taking populist campaign positions she surely won't honor as we sweep up the rubble.

[mmonk]

51. She won't. The media will give her cover by limiting populist questions.

[Doctor_J]

66. She will discuss cultural issues only

gay marriage, gay marriage, gay marriage....

[jeff47]

53. It only took 14 paragraphs for the author to reveal

That they have no clue "How Hillary Clinton Will Handle Populist Critics":

How Clinton reacts to this pressure remains to be seen,

[L0oniX]

56. I'll vote for a real Democrat ...when one appears on the ballot.

I'm not going to vote for a corporate war hawk. If big money interests is what it takes to win then I am done voting ...and fuck this corrupt greedy system.

[Octafish]

61. ''We would consider her a corporate Democrat in stark terms...''

“She is a middle-of-the-road Democrat that on a regular basis would pick Wall Street over Main Street.”

Yeah.

[Yupster]

64. I don't expect her to respond to much of anything

Certainly not critics.

[woo me with science]

72. kick

[BainsBane]

77. We have just had new and fresh

and the problem was he didn't have the ability to get legislation through congress. New and fresh is overrated. It's not just about ideas. Presidents need to be able to get stuff done. Whoever the nominee is, I hope they are more effective at working with congress.