We must vote Hillary or end up with a Republican theocracy, right?
From DU circa 2008 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5071798
Unlikely partnerships have become a Clinton trademark. Some are symbolic, such as her support for a ban on flag burning with Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) and funding for research on the dangers of video games with Brownback and Santorum. But Clinton has also joined the gop on legislation that redefines social justice issues in terms of conservative morality, such as an anti-human-trafficking law that withheld funding from groups working on the sex trade if they didn't condemn prostitution in the proper terms. With Santorum, Clinton co-sponsored the Workplace Religious Freedom Act; she didn't back off even after Republican senators such as Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter pulled their names from the bill citing concerns that the measure would protect those refusing to perform key aspects of their jobs—say, pharmacists who won't fill birth control prescriptions, or police officers who won't guard abortion clinics.
Clinton has championed federal funding of faith-based social services, which she embraced years before George W. Bush did; Marci Hamilton, author of God vs. the Gavel, says that the Clintons' approach to faith-based initiatives "set the stage for Bush." Clinton has also long supported the Defense of Marriage Act, a measure that has become a purity test for any candidate wishing to avoid war with the Christian right.
Liberal rabbi Michael Lerner, whose "politics of meaning" Clinton made famous in a speech early in her White House tenure, sees the senator's ambivalence as both more and less than calculated opportunism. He believes she has genuine sympathy for liberal causes—rights for women, gays, immigrants—but often will not follow through. "There is something in her that pushes her toward caring about others, as long as there's no price to pay. But in politics, there is a price to pay."
thanks to bobthedrummer for his post that I had bookmarked
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511338638
Links in original 2008 post are broken - updated links below:
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1993235_1993243_1993262,00.html
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/09/hillarys-prayer-hillary-clintons-religion-and-politics
Hobby Lobby, anyone?
= new reply since forum marked as read
she tells them to cut it out 
Love it! 
Last edited Sat Feb 27, 2016, 06:31 PM - Edit history (1)
HRC is scary to too many FDR-Progressive-Democrats and Independents (they will stay home, or cast a vote for Stein).
And she's hated by the GOP, so no crossover BUT BIG turnout against her.
She was not electable in 2008.
She's not electable in 2016 (do the math).
This primary fight is over control of the Party. The DLC-New Democrat-insiders are facing completely losing power over the party if Bernie is nominated (which is a harder bar to clear than the GE). The insiders would rather nominate HRC and lose the GE (but keep control) of a 'loser' Party (remember all the Governorships, and seats in Congress and statehouses the Dems have lost since 2010...) because THEY are on the gravy train. It's plain ugly greed. 
