2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumAnother day, another anti-Clinton lie, this time about Coal.
ETA: This is in response to another thread which links to the NY Post, with the heading that Hillary was lying about coal, when it's pretty clear that she wasn't lying at all, simply explaining her statements, and reiterating her commitment to coal workers who need better jobs than coal mining, which harms their own health, their local environment and is adding to the climate catastrophe. (Sorry for the lack of clarity, my first post!)
http://wvmetronews.com/2016/03/16/after-questions-from-manchin-clinton-walks-back-controversial-coal-comments/
<snip>
A senior advisor to Manchin told MetroNews’ Hoppy Kercheval Manchin was “troubled and concerned by the comments and reached out directly to the Secretary and her senior advisor for energy.”
He also reportedly spoke with former President Bill Clinton in his attempts to clarify Secretary Clinton’s response to a question about how she would make the case for her candidacy to “poor whites who vote Republican.”
In that response on CNN, she said the following: “I’m the only candidate which has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity — using clean, renewable energy as the key — into coal country. Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.”
Critics have seized on that line, though Clinton’s answer did continue.
“We’re going to make it clear that we don’t want to forget those people,” she went on to say.
“Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives, to turn on our lights and power our factories. Now we’ve got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don’t want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on.”<snip>
<snip>
“I wanted to make the point that, as you know too well, while coal will be part of the energy mix for years to come, both in the U.S. and around the world, we have already seen a long-term decline in American coal jobs and a recent wave of bankruptcies as a result of a changing energy market — and we need to do more to support the workers and families facing these challenges.”
In that letter, Clinton backed the Miners Protection Act, legislation Manchin co-sponsored which, if approved, would secure health benefits and pensions for retired miners and their families.
She also made a promise to Manchin.
“I pledge to you that I will focus my team and my Administration on bringing jobs to Appalachia, especially jobs producing the carbon capture technology we need for the future,” she wrote in the letter dated March 15. <snip>
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)HRC, but the anti-Clinton brigade has been busy spinning the dishonesty. I guess the Right Wingers and the faux Bernie supporters are fond of coal burning, black lung and enforced poverty? 
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)
Honest stories are found in legitimate journals, not conservative trash media.
synergie
(1,901 posts)that they don't mind sourcing from whatever pit provides the sweetest hate.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Clinton was intentionally vague, but I don't think she lied. It just sounds like the usual, "I can't save your jobs, but I can promise you just enough to make you feel better."
synergie
(1,901 posts)to clarify what she was saying, and to reiterate her support for coal miners.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Some of my fellow Sandernistas framed it as if she slipped up and "accidentally admitted" coal jobs would go away. She was actually pretty honest with them, and told them they would not have their mining jobs forever, although it came out a little harsh. Of course, it's overly optimistic to tell people they don't have to worry because we'll find something else for them to do. All it takes is one day of driving through old coal mining towns to realize boutiques and shoppes for the tourists don't replace union jobs. All resource extraction jobs are boom-and-bust, so there are tough times ahead in coal country, regardless of who is president, EPA regulations, MSHA enforcement, etc.
I think if you listened to what she actually said, the whole thing, it wasn't that harsh. Coal mining families are well aware of the toll that lifestyle takes on their own bodies and their environment.
Also, the attacks on the fracking thing. Coal based pollution is worse than the methane released from fracking, and if you're going to make the transition energy wise from dirty coal, we're going to have figure out how to use all the available options in the least damaging ways. The environmentalists are debating this now. Knee jerk reactions don't replace careful thought and consideration and long term views of things.
The world is moving away from coal, and we need to figure out what else to tap and how to do so in the least harmful way possible (there are some who say that there are ways to do the fracking that wouldn't pollute the water, cause earth quakes etc.)
We really do have to spend some time and effort figuring out what to do with these industries, we can't just keep going on, simply because we can't figure out how else to employ these people.
The way it was framed elsewhere, was more about "omg she's lying again!" when, she really wasn't. There is no need to be so blatantly dishonest to smear a candidate. I'd rather hear about how each one plans to deal with the actual issue, see if they've done their homework and if they realize the depth of the problems, the coal thing is something we've known for over a century to be a dangerous and unhealthy industry that pollutes our environment and takes a horrific toll on those who mine it.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Nothing new. I guess the people that post them think they are making a difference. Maybe if Bernie were running for president of DU. LOL!
synergie
(1,901 posts)The video doesn't contradict the link I posted, which is in stark contrast to the NYPOST propaganda.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)when she met with leaders in the region. Looks like team Bernie has been trying to use coal issues to get some traction.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)So, you be the judge folks. If she misspoke, she is doing a LOT, just like her comments about the Reagan's and AIDS. Sigh...
synergie
(1,901 posts)Are you misspeaking or do you enjoy carbon pollution, black lung, dead end jobs that kill miner's bodies and poverty? You do that a LOT, where you ignore the words said, the context and the text and then pretend that whatever spin you've put on it, somehow Trumps the truth.
So, yes, everyone use your ears, and your literacy to judge just where the dishonesty is here, and how the many "mistakes" and the fake scandals are desperate attempts at smears from those whose ostensible candidate isn't doing so well in either the vote count or the delegate count.
<sigh> So many forget that our ears don't lie and that we can read AND engage in critical thought, this isn't freeperville.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)It was only for reference.
Chill bro.
George II
(67,782 posts)
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)
Walk away
(9,494 posts)Hillary has such an incredible store of knowledge. She knows so much about every issue and really cares.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)I don't doubt that coal miners' jobs will be reduced or eliminated, not by a Clinton administration but by reality. There's NO doubt that the people of Appalachia's lives will be demonstratively better with clean energy jobs replacing coal mining. That will take some work and planning, but it IS doable in the future.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)She really knows so much. Carbon capture technology! Never heard of it.
PaulaFarrell
(1,236 posts)It is the 'holy grail' which would allow fossil fuels to still be burned. its not been proven and it's also not without its own risks.
DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)
BainsBane
(53,026 posts)
