Slate - "Why Is Everyone So Craven?" (a bit of a controversial read)

[NRaleighLiberal]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/08/31/anne_marie_slaughter_and_the_podesta_group_choose_money_over_democratic.html

By Ben Mathis-Lilley

Resistance-minded Democratic Party politicians have become fond of declaring that Donald Trump is trampling, assaulting, and attacking the ideals of American democracy by ignoring corruption rules, bullying institutions like the FBI, letting Russia off the hook for sabotaging our last election, etc. And it’s true: Trump is abusing, molesting, and committing genocide against pretty much every standard of honesty and ethical conduct that has ever existed in United States public life. But the institutional Democrats’ newfound and ostentatious affection for the sacred principles of civil society can ring hollow, and two recent stories involving well-connected Democrats faced with decisions between upholding small-d democratic ideals and helping powerful interests maintain their power demonstrate why that is.

The first involves the Podesta Group, a lobbying company that was founded by brothers John and Tony Podesta; John was Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman and Tony was a major donor. (John Podesta doesn't appear to have had any connection to the firm's activities since at least 2003, but in addition to still being run by his brother it employs a number of other veteran Democratic Party/Clinton operatives.) The Daily Beast reported Monday that the Podesta Group collaborated from 2012 until 2014 with infamous Trump adviser Paul Manafort to lobby American officials on behalf of Kremlin-backed Ukrainian leader Viktor Yanukovych. Specifically, the Beast says, the Podesta Group promoted the dubious claims of various Kremlin-affiliated hacks and stooges in an effort to make the case that the 2012 Ukraine election, which Yanukovych won in part because his chief rival had been imprisoned for political reasons, was a fair and free one. (One example: The Podesta Group distributed materials quoting Russia-friendly French politician Thierry Mariani calling the Ukrainian election “the best election he had ever seen,” a hilarious claim that sounds a lot like something a certain current U.S. president might say.) Call me a dreamer, but I think the small-d democratic move in this case probably would have been not working with a notorious international right-wing sleazeball to help expand Russia's ethno-authoritarian sphere of influence, right?

The second story involves Anne-Marie Slaughter, a prominent wonk and State Department official under Clinton who is now president of an officially non-partisan but ostensibly left-leaning think tank called New America. (Slate’s Future Tense section, which covers emerging technologies and the policy debates around them, is a partnership between Slate, Arizona State University and New America.) In June, a scholar at New America named Barry Lynn issued a statement that criticized Google for engaging in monopolistic business practices. According to an account in the New York Times on Wednesday, Google, which is a New America donor, complained. New America then pulled the statement from its website (though it was re-posted a few hours later) and Lynn was pushed out. Slaughter initially declared that the Times' report was "absolutely false," but later, not having identified any erroneous information in the article, admitted that its "facts" were "largely right," while arguing they'd been taken out of context. More of New America/Slaughter's response can be seen here; their argument is basically that Lynn was a pain in the ass as a coworker for a lot of reasons and not just the Google thing, which may well be true. But they don't deny that one of the reasons Slaughter was irritated at Lynn was because he was "imperiling funding" by criticizing Google, and the fact remains that his statement was briefly pulled from New America’s site. Neither reality squares with the ideal of supporting the free exchange of ideas. It's not nearly the same level of offense as doing PR for a dictatorship, but it's not good.

In these stories, we see influential Democrats—members of the party that deplores Trump's crony-capitalist corruption, his attacks on the press, his affection for bad foreign regimes, and his general assault on the idea of truth—abetting the truth-suppressing impulses of an omnicorporation and a Russia-affiliated gangster government. This willingness to compromise ideals for power's sake is not unusual in the party. For one thing, Slaughter's State Department connection is a reminder of how many top-level Democratic figures were aware that Hillary Clinton used a private email account while she was Secretary of State, a shady ruse which is employed quite frequently by politicians who are attempting to prevent journalists from obtaining records of their activities via Freedom of Information Act requests. Top Democrats were silent at the time about this arrogant disregard for the principle that public servants should be accountable to the public; one of Clinton's top aides, asked in 2009 why he himself used a private email address at State, said that he was doing so to "avoid FOIA." (He later claimed he was joking.) Later, when Clinton ran for president, the Democratic National Committee worked on her behalf against Bernie Sanders while publicly claiming it was remaining neutral, which is as literal a trample-attack-assault on the democratic process as could be imagined. (Yes, American parties are allowed to choose their own candidate in whatever way they see fit, which doesn't have to involve a popular vote; the point is that Democrats claimed they were running a democratic contest when, in fact, they were not.)

snip - much more - read at the link. Certain to elicit some good discussion, for sure.

[greeny2323]

1. Uh huh

"the point is that Democrats claimed they were running a democratic contest when, in fact, they were
not"

That's so fucking strange because when I went to vote in my primary I was able to vote for either candidate.

[Warren DeMontague]

3. We should be so lucky to have so many choices NEXT time!

I counted up to 3, at one point

[bettyellen]

5. Don't you know we didn't have the biggest amount of primaries ever and that was because they're

Corrupt! Even though they had a totally typical amount of debates, it was a conspiracy of some sorts. I'm so sick of people tearing down Dems for billishit reasons.

[Kolesar]

7. ::dry::

High five!

[dsc]

9. translation black people, women and gays got to choose the candidate they wanted

and we straight white males didn't like her so they must have cheated.

[MrsCoffee]

2. Oh for fuck's sake.... But her emails....

[Warren DeMontague]

4. is that the same Barry Lynn formerly of Americans United for Separation of Church & State?

I must have missed that whole deal.

[Kolesar]

8. I would guess not

I found one article about the kerfuffle and Americans United for Separation of Church and State did not come up.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/30/16226616/barry-lynn-google-new-america

[Kolesar]

6. Find candidates that you like and support them earnestly

That is the best advice I can give. Your influence can pull politics into a more principled direction.

This article is sour grapes of the loser Bernie Sanders. I have no patience for weepers revisiting Debbie Wasserman Shultz' role in the primary. I missed the antipathy that must have played out here during the primary. I was avoiding DU*. I drove as far as Saskatchewan last summer to avoid the fire hose of malaise on this teeny spark of a harm that would not extinguish.

"Since you asked"

*I came back in November for solace and was happy to see that the Tsarina, the skate punk, and all the other Obama haters had been banned. This place is way better.

[FSogol]

10. +1 N/T

[GaryCnf]

11. Not to spoil the

Bbashing stereotypes being foisted in what seems like every 10th OP, but I am over this crap about Hillary and her emails/Russia/Clinton Foundation etc.

I don't give a F about using a private server to carry out diplomatic missions in secret. That's how things get done in the real world AND there is about 1% of the population that knows enough about foreign policy to not get manipulated the way a majority of the country did over the brilliant Obama Iranian nuclear deal.

I don't care whether Podesta or even the Clintons were cozying up to the Russians to milk donations for the Clinton Foundation. The Foundation does great work. Donald Trump does fascism. If you can't tell the difference there is something wrong with you.

I voted for Secretary Clinton because she got the nomination and I ALWAYS vote for the nominee of the Democratic Party, that's it. But this kind of stuff is about nothing but hating on Hillary and not her policies and it does nothing but empower people who want to believe that all leftists are a bunch of children who will believe anything as long as it is negative about her. And, I for one leftist am tired of wasting time and energy that could be spent putting Democrats in office dispelling that notion.

[blue neen]

12. Amen to that!