2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton Turns Stand-Up Comic: "I’m a Progressive Who Gets Things Done"
Promoting Fracking Worldwide is Not Progressive: On behalf of Chevron and other US oil companies, Secretary Clinton and the State Department pushed fracking globally, as Mother Jones has documented: How Hillary Clintons State Department Sold Fracking to the World.
Boosting Corporate-Friendly Trade Deals is Not Progressive: Secretary Clinton repeatedly praised the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as it was being negotiated by the US Trade Representative and her State Department and she recruited countries into the deal. In October, with Bernie Sanders climbing in the polls, Clinton said she no longer supported the pact, and prevaricated about her earlier boosterism.
Enabling Military Coups is Not Progressive: When she headed the State Department, it enabled a military coup in Honduras that overthrew democratically-elected President Manuel Zelaya, a progressive. Clinton was briefed on the dishonesty that allowed aid to illegally reach the coup government.
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/02/04/hillary-clinton-turns-stand-comic-im-progressive-who-gets-things-done
Very good read
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Git-R-Dun?
PonyUp
(1,680 posts)Flying Phoenix
(114 posts)Still love his drawings - grew up practically reading the Rocky Mountain News, pull out sports section, and look at Drew's latest cartoons.
His website: http://www.drewlitton.com
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I would think the issues would have been important to talk about and it dies not happen.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)For All going to be given, the numbers he has given are not realistic.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)uponit7771
(90,339 posts)FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)uponit7771
(90,339 posts)... I do get the fact from last night that he's focused like a laser on trade, finance reform and wall street... that's great, put that's were the passion ends and screw everything else.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Compensation going to increase pay checks? Sanders was given an opportunity to present his agenda, why does he avoid to talk about issues to bring progress to Americans.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Hillary Clinton Is a TPP Candidate
Keep all this in mind when the phrase "lesser evil" turns up again in 2016. Just as Hillary Clinton is a carbon candidate (click to see why), she's a "free trade" TPP candidate as well. Yes, she once said ... sorta, under pressure of a political campaign ... that NAFTA could have been better ("has not lived up to its promises" . But buried near the end of Michele Swenson's June 2014 article is this:
"Free Trade" Advocates Convene at Clinton Global Initiative
The reference is to the main 2014 CGI conference. For starters, this information is a lot more current than a 2008 campaign-driven regret. For another, it shows the way the Clinton Foundation's CGI is used as an agent of neoliberal policies. Swenson's whole section on this is worth reading, but here are some of the better bits (some paragraphing mine):
Echoing promises of lowered trade barriers, improved labor conditions and environmental protections made by NAFTA advocates two decades earlier, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Hanoi, Viet Nam in 2012 promoted the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the most far-reaching trade agreement ever, encompassing 12 Pacific Rim countries. Secretary Clinton stated support for free expression online, and pronounced, "Democracy and prosperity go hand-in-hand," even as the backroom dealings of hundreds of corporate lobbyists have engaged in writing the TPP to challenge everything from Net Neutrality to democratic process and state sovereignty
http://crooksandliars.com/2015/01/nafta-tpp-clinton-global-initiatives-free
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Rich and giving it to those in need. This is what the Clinton Initiative does, guess this is bad in some people's opinion.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)and Hillary clearly does not represent the Majority
Argue all you like - it won't change REALITY
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)pengu
(462 posts)nil desperandum
(654 posts)Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clintons wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
20% of US uranium owned by Russia....in a deal that the state department had to sign off while she was the SecState while her foundation was taking money from those involved.
If she were a republican those who support her now would be all over the story. Instead we have another in a stream of apparent conflicts of interest that we're supposed to take at face value there was no actual conflict of interest.
Sanders took in less than $2000 in speaking fees and he donated all of it, there is a true progressive in this race and it's not Ms. Clinton.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Iraqi Dinar 123 News: The U.S State Department spread out a series of E-mails for the media and opened electronic messages for public viewing, after the case heightened against Hillary Clinton regarding the original financial transactions fulfilled in the exchange of investment prospects in Iraq. There are some proved connections between the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and banks & companies like JP Morgan and ExxonMobil. The candidate for U.S Presidential Hillary Clinton has made a number of agreements with many companies in order to get profitable financial contracts in Iraq by providing them facilities. She also said that financial assets of the JP Morgan bank has reached at more than 450 000 million U.S dollars and also improving the Exxon Mobil according to the letters of support the investment.
These statements came when an online site International Business News reported that Hillary Clinton has modified her statements of larger public based interests and her support on war on Iraq. It is also said that she sent letters in 2011 to U.S National Security Protection and stated Iraq as an Investment site. She also said that United States must recognize Iraq as a place of major business openings. These electronic connections identifying that Assistant of Hillary, Tom Naidz arranged a conference and invited more than 30 representatives from major investment companies, and also invited U.S and Iraqi government representatives in order to discuss much better ways to take advantages economically from Iraq.
http://www.iraqidinar123.com/more-leak-emails-hillary-clinton-got-massive-commission-to-announce-iraq-investment-zone/
nil desperandum
(654 posts)what really irritates me about the Clinton deal on Uranium is that it gives the appearance of collaboration to sell of 20% of a national strategic reserve to a former, and perhaps current, enemy of the national interest.
I've been out of the US military for almost 40 years now, so concern about Russia probably sits heavier with me than those who didn't see that era of service and I've never been a fan of giving them the tools to make their military capability stronger. Dealing for corn and crops makes sense, we don't want people to starve around the world but giving them 1/5th of our Uranium production seems unwise. Especially as we don't yet know the depth of their motivation in the ME.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)We move onward, what are the problems we face every day, the history of Iraq war of which is Bush's war is not going get the guns off of the streets.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Talking about nailing hello to a wall, Sanders responses to foreign affairs is a very good example of the ability to nail hello to a wall.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Iraq, Libya. Syria, Honduras. etc. Why either of you choose to brag about it is a never ending source of amusement.
http://www.salon.com/2016/01/23/there_is_no_foreign_policy_d_league_hillarys_foreign_policy_disastrous_experience_partner/
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Is he equally qualified for the job?
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)Jarqui
(10,125 posts)I keep asking "what progressive legislation has she authored and rallied folks to get behind to get things done?"
And the lists are embarrassingly thin.
She's worked for people but the above?
Hillarycare failed. She didn't get that done. There was childrens health care that came along which she supported but she didn't write the bill and drive it through Congress - Ted Kennedy and his GOP counterpart did. Her support helped - that;s all.
Her Senate accomplishments seem light. Here are the three bills she sponsored:
S. 1241: A bill to establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site in the State of New York. Bush signed the bill Dec. 3, 2004.
S. 3613: A bill to name a post office the "Major George Quamo Post Office Building." Bush signed the bill Oct. 6, 2006.
S. 3145: A bill to designate a highway in New York as the Timothy J. Russert highway. Bush signed the bill July 23, 2008.
She supported other stuff like the Iraq war and the Patriot Act. Didn't do much in amendments. She spoke up on some issues but wasn't a significant mover within the Senate or leader in oversight or hearings.
She served as Secretary of State but marched to Obama's doctrine he laid out in Audacity of Hope. Was she a SoS heavyweight leader in shaping that policy like Henry Kissinger? No. I'm sure she chimed in with advice but it was Obama's call and agenda.
This is really a very dubious claim. If you think otherwise, present the facts.
olddots
(10,237 posts)Chezboo
(230 posts)Dems, stop lying to yourselves about Hillary: Sure, she "gets s*** done" atrocious s***, that is.
The argument that Clinton can navigate the nightmare of D.C. better than Bernie is simply wrong
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/05/dems_stop_lying_to_yourselves_about_hillary_sure_she_get_s_done_atrocious_s_that_is/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow