Kittycat
Kittycat's JournalOr the Clinton's
And I believe I read that on May 9th, Panama Papers is releasing the full database, which will include more US companies and individuals.
https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160426-database-coming-soon.html
The database will likely be the largest ever release of secret offshore companies and the people behind them.
Here's a bit from the source that released the data to ICIJ: http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/may/06/panama-papers-source-breaks-silence-over-scale-of-injustices
*snip*
The whistleblower was generally underwhelmed by official reaction to the leak. In New Zealand, the prime minister, John Key, had been “curiously quiet” about his country’s role in enabling “financial fraud” in the Cook Islands. In the US, tax evasion could not be fixed, the source argued, while politicians relied on the super-rich for campaign funding.
The source concluded on an optimistic note. In an age of “inexpensive, limitless digital storage” and internet connections that transcend national boundaries “the next revolution will be digitised”.
“Or perhaps it has already begun,” the source said.
We already know about many High profile individuals like Hillary and Bill's good friend Frank Giustra, who sits on the Clinton Foundation board. And it should be noted that while she was SoS, she failed to act on Human Rights abuses in Columbia involving labor rights that should have been intervened on.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article72215012.html
https://www.rt.com/usa/340480-clinton-donors-panama-papers/
As Oil Money Flowed, Clinton Turned Back on Rights Abuses in Colombia: Report
'This much is clear: After millions of dollars were pledged by the oil company to the Clinton Foundation, Secretary Clinton abruptly changed her position on the controversial U.S.-Colombia trade pact.'
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/04/09/oil-money-flowed-clinton-turned-back-rights-abuses-colombia-report
A new investigative look at the ties between big business interests in Colombia, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and her family's charitable foundation are raising troubling questions about the role that corporate trade deals and big oil may have played in softening the powerful Democrat's position on human rights in the South American country.
During her time heading the State Department, presumptive 2016 presidential nominee Clinton stayed silent on reports of violence and threats against labor activists in Colombia, even as her family's "global philanthropic empire" was developing—and benefiting from—private business ties with a major oil corporation accused of worker-intimidation in the country, according to new reporting published Thursday by International Business Times.
In addition, the IBT investigation shows that after millions of dollars were pledged by the oil company to the Clinton Foundation, Clinton reversed her position on a U.S.-Colombia trade pact she had previously opposed on the grounds that it was bad for labor rights.
*snip*
Just this week, justifying its opposition to the looming Trans-Pacific Partnership and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, the AFL-CIO pointed out that four years after the U.S. and Colombia signed the Labor Action Plan (LAP) to address entrenched labor rights violations—pushed by Clinton's State Department in order to diffuse unions' criticism of the Colombia trade agreement—Colombian workers have suffered over 1,933 threats and acts of violence against unionists. These include 105 alleged assassinations of union activists and 1,337 death threats.
Noting that that there has been virtually no progress over the past year in compliance with the LAP, the labor organization declared:
As the U.S. government negotiates broad trade agreements with Europe and the Pacific Rim, it must look back at the LAP's continued failure in protecting workers’ rights in Colombia, and not commit the same mistakes. It must ensure that these agreements deliver on the promises made for over twenty years about the broader benefits of expanding trade. Investors and companies have received these benefits. Workers in the U.S. and countries that are our trading partners have not. We deserve it.
Pointing to remarks she delivered in Hong Kong in 2011, IBT notes that Clinton has previously "championed" the TPP.
My 10K Post: Who Will Save The Children? a credit back to DU
On Sept. 10, 2004 I officially joined DU, after lurking for quite a while in the background. This marks my 10,000th post, which I dedicate back to DU. It's a little long with the charts, but I hope you take the time to look it over. Thanks.
September 10, 2004. Democratic Underground
(credit: waybackmachine)
Lead article
Who Will Save The Children? by Mark Sullivan
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/04/09/10_children.html
But we're also 14th in our efforts to lift children out of poverty. We're 16th in low birth weight rates; 18th in the percent of children in poverty; 18th in the percent of 15 year olds falling below international education benchmarks; 23rd in infant mortality; and dead last in protecting our children against gun violence.
Since our economy tanked, where do we stand today in these metrics?
Healthcare & Mortality
Health care ranking is last among developed nations
US spends more on Health care than other developed nations.
57th Infant Mortality rate
33rd Maternal Mortality Rate http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20150506/NEWS/150509941
Low birth weight rates
8% of all live births <2500g,
1.4% are Very Low BW or <1500g
2004 Article Continues:
This brings the total number of poverty-stricken children in America, the richest country the world has ever seen, to a staggering 12.8 million. Those numbers alone are enough to make anyone angry, but they are merely the beginning of the long list of Bush's attacks on our nation's future.
And today:
Children & Poverty
More than 16 million children in the United States – 22% of all children – live in families with incomes below the federal poverty level – $23,550 a year for a family of four. Research shows that, on average, families need an income of about twice that level to cover basic expenses. Using this standard, 45% of children live in low-income families.
http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html
The percentage of children living in low-income families (both poor and near poor) has been on the rise—increasing from 39 percent in 2008 to 44 percent in 2014.
As the image above illustrates the percentages of low-income and poor children under 18 years vary by race and ethnicity: whites comprise the largest share of all low-income children (37 percent, 11.4 million) while Hispanics make up the largest share of poor children (36 percent, 5.6 million).5
Black, American Indian, and Hispanic children are disproportionately low income and poor (see figure 6 at link).
http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_1145.html
Education
US Ranks 17th in Education
-snip
Children with a full-time, year-round employed parent are less likely to live in a low-income family, compared to children with parents who work part time or part year, or who are not employed.
Wage Stagnation
Far more at the link if you have time to read it.
http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/
Income Inequality: 1% vs. the 99%
The US Still leads in GDP, but China now leads in GDP/PPP (Purchasing Power Parity)
http://knoema.com/nwnfkne/world-gdp-ranking-2015-data-and-charts
The US still holds the title of most Billionaires: 540 billionaire households, March 2016 report
http://www.forbes.com/sites/katiesola/2016/03/08/the-25-countries-with-the-most-billionaires/6/#3f56b338461b
As well as the most Millionaires: 5.9 million, millionaire households, April 2016 report
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/fameandfortune/10091332/Which-countries-have-the-most-millionaires.html
These are just some highlighted comparisons to a very thoughtful article written almost 12 years ago on many of the failures of GWB beyond the Iraq War. 12 years later for better or worse, here were stand.
I Supported Obama's Goals in 2008, and Support Bernie in 2016.
Several states have yet to vote, and they still need support. The issues that face our country are too great to pretend that this is over. Obama was right in 2008. Change doesn't happen overnight. It doesn't happen by giving up and going backwards, and it happens from the bottom up. We have to continue moving forward, no matter how difficult the challenge, or what the cynics are saying. We don't have to be a house divided, unless we want to be. And we don't have to give in to the same old politics that has taken the future from far too many in our country, we can stand up together and say enough, but it takes a grassroots effort to do this. One that Sanders is promoting.
No one ever said that this would be easy. But I don't believe we can even maintain Obama's current policies, let alone improve anything in this country if we elect a politician that is part and parcel with special interest groups instead of the people. Obama was right to point it out then, and the problem has only multiplied with Clinton. She isn't the candidate for our future, rather she represents politics of the past that we desperately need to move beyond. That isn't throwing a tantrum, that's calling it out, out and being honest.
This is the speech that made me believe we could really change things. I've always been a voter, but with this, I became more active than ever before to change this not just at this level but locally. i encourage everyone to read or watch below. The full speech is also at the link.
Entire Speech at link (excerpts below and emphasis mine)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/us/politics/05text-obama.html?_r=0
Nothing changes because lobbyists just write another check or politicians start worrying about how to win the next election instead of why they should -- (cheers, applause) -- or because they focus on who's up and who's down instead of who matters.
And while Washington is consumed with the same drama and divisions and distractions, another family puts up a "For sale" sign in their front yard, another factory shuts its doors, another soldier waves goodbye as he leaves on another tour of duty in a war that should have never been authorized and should have never been waged -- (cheers, applause) -- that goes on and on and on. (Cheers, applause.)
But in this election, at this moment, you are standing up all across this country to say, "Not this time" -- (cheers) -- "not this year."
The stakes are too high and the challenges too great to play the same Washington game with the same Washington players and somehow expect a different result. This time must be different. This time we have to turn the page. This time we have to write a new chapter in American history. (Cheers, applause.) This time we have to seize the moment. (Cheers, applause.)
Now, this isn't about me and it's not about Senator Clinton. As I've said before, she was a friend before this campaign. She'll be a friend after it's over. (Cheers.) I respect her. I respect her as a colleague. I congratulate her on her victories tonight. She's been running an outstanding race.
But this fall, this fall we owe the American people a real choice. (Cheers, applause.) We have to choose between change and more of the same. We have to choose between looking backwards and looking forward. (Cheers, applause.) We have to choose between our future and our past.
It's a choice between going into this election with Republicans and independents already united against us or going against their nominee with a campaign that has united Americans of all parties, from all backgrounds, from all races, from all religions, around a common purpose. (Cheers, applause.)
It's a choice between having a debate with the other party about who has the most experience in Washington or having one about who's most likely to change Washington -- (cheers, applause) -- because that's a debate that we can win. (Cheers, applause.)
It's a choice between a candidate who's taken more money from Washington lobbyists than either Republican in this race and a campaign that has not taken a dime of their money because we have been funded by you. You have funded this campaign. (Cheers, applause.)
-snip-
But it will not be easy. It will require struggle and it will require sacrifice. There will be setbacks, and we will make mistakes. And that is why we need all the help we can get. (Cheers, applause.)
So tonight I want to speak directly to all those Americans who have yet to join this movement but still hunger for change. They know it in their gut. They know we can do better than we're doing. They know that we can take our politics to a higher level. But they're afraid. They've been taught to be cynical. They're doubtful that it can be done.
But I'm here to say tonight to all of you who still harbor those doubts, we need you. (Cheers, applause.) We need you to stand with us. (Cheers, applause.) We need you to work with us. (Cheers, applause.) We need you to help us prove that together, ordinary people can still do extraordinary things in the United States of America. (Cheers, applause.)
-snip-
You see, the challenges we face will not be solved with one meeting in one night. It will not be resolved on even a Super Duper Tuesday. Change will not come if we wait for some other person or if we wait for some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. (Cheers, applause.) We are the change that we seek.
Our first Exit Poll out of IL is in: 3rd Graders
Time to take a break from the loyalty oaths, and falling on swords for the all important first exit poll of the day out of Illinois...
3rd Grade Results
Here's the demo...
13 girls
14 boys
Age range, 8-9.
Girls: pretty sure they all went Hillary (he's 9, we have to go with pretty sures)
Boys: Definitely Bernie. He's pretty sure.
He's pretty sure it's Bernie that won, but it looks like a nail biter. I think the delegates are going to be split on this one.
* When asked why the girls chose Hillary, it was because she was a girl.
* When asked why Bernie was chosen. They liked him, and some mentioned their parent voted for him.
* When asked about Kasisch, Rubio, Cruz & Trump - I was interrupted and told, "No. No republicans." Okay, then. LOL.
Obviously my kid is milking the tax payer in one of those free public school liberal, lefty, socialist, commie, marxist, democratic classrooms. Where all they do is program our kids to love, be kind, and share their lunch.
Also, this is VERY important... In AT Math today, they studied brackets. I don't follow sports, so I have no clue what he was talking about, except this. These are crazy smart little kids, and his team decided go with North Carolina. If that makes sense to you, then fantastic.
Okay, everyone back to your regularly scheduled GDPing.
Frackers for Hillary: Fundraiser today 3/10
Step on up fracking investors. You too can own a peice of the Clinton Campaign. Unlike Bernie Sanders who relies on the measly pittance of $27/donations from "the people", we can band together and take center stage in the Clinton Campaign. And today, you can join us at the Ritz-Carlton for a luncheon to show your support at the bargain price of only $575/head! Fracking, it's a future we can choke on. Join us, and let's leave them quaking in their boots.
Hillary Clinton continues to fundraise with fracking investors, despite her assertion Sunday that she would largely curtail fracking inside the U.S.
Fracking is a controversial mining technique used to extract natural gas from shale rock. It releases vast quantities of methane into the atmosphere and groundwater, frequently poisoning the water supply of nearby communities.
On Wednesday, Clinton will appear at a $575-a-head fundraising lunch at a Ritz-Carlton Hotel on the Northern California coast hosted by Alisa Wood, a partner at the international private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (KKR).
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/09/hillary-clinton-wants-to-regulate-fracking-but-still-accepts-a-lot-of-fracking-money/
Who said we give anyone a pass for Iraq?
Since when has that ever been an acceptable meme here at DU?
Don't look to us for justifying your disregard of lost lives to make your candidate somehow more acceptable than the alternative. Right now you still have a choice. Search your own soul for answers, and quit playing the sexism card. You diminish all women when you do this.
Our differences are philosophical. Campaign finance to a grossly obscene extent. Trade differences (I'm very concerned about TPP passing). Her penchant for war and causing further disruption in already delicate regions. The constant lies she's caught telling. Forget the transcripts, I'm not an ignorant fool, I know she'll stand with them over us. And tomorrow she fundraises with her friends at pharma, another issue that hits me at home. Especially since I hit the deductible on my high deductible health plan on Feb 4th.
So please stop with these rediculous testing questions. You have your candidate, and I have mine. You made your choice, and you own it - be proud of it. The good, whatever that is, and all the garbage that comes with it. But do not drag women that have struggled, and continue to struggle against men in to this fight, in comparison to a millionaire that has used her position to promise God knows what to these lobbyists on the backs of our future.
(Sanders group) Boston Globe: Third Way in struggle for the Democratic Party's Soul
Great article from a year and a half ago. I did a title search on DU to see if I could understand what the discussion was like back then, given how much it's changed and there's so much defending or ignoring Wall Street money, and couldn't find it. Either way, it serves as a good peice of background on shifts in the party, and who is driving them.
Btw - If anyone happens to find a thread on this archived, please share a link, and I will add it in the OP.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2014/10/06/struggle-for-soul-democratic-party-pits-wall-street-backed-think-tank-against-elizabeth-warren/pYk3SXRnZDmpi7C7N4ZpXN/story.html
Oct. 6, 2014 - WASHINGTON —
On a summer afternoon amid the frenzy of the Democratic National Convention in Boston 10 years ago, a group of Washington business lobbyists, political operatives, and a smattering of senators gathered at one of the city’s downtown law firms to hear a plan.
Members of the group worried that, with the end of the Bill Clinton era, the Democratic Party’s centrist wing had lost its way. Over sodas, they pitched a new think tank named for Clinton’s political philosophy, Third Way.
Fast forward a decade: The philosophy, sketched out privately at the Boston office of Brown Rudnick,is now at the center of an intense struggle for the soul of the Democratic Party.
Third Way, backed by Wall Street titans, corporate money, and congressional allies, is publicly warning against divisive “soak-the-rich” politics voiced by populist Democrats. Its target: Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts senator whose rise to power two years ago helped galvanize Democratic grass roots against Wall Street and pushed the issue of income inequality to the forefront.
This is more than a grudge match. At stake for the Democratic Party is the support of middle-class, swing voters who decide elections.
.... Article continues at link above.
There are many things pivotal leaders promised but couldn't deliver on
In their lifetime, but they opened the door for our country to take a leap forward. Each time. Each time we started boiling over, we leaped. We've been boiling for a while. We have a potential leader that is giving these kids a voice. It will be up to their generation to pick up the torch and carry it. Or, they can say screw it, and us - and sit it out.
We can be jaded, crap on them, marginalize them, and call it a day. Just because we let it happen to us, doesnt mean we should let it happen to them. Honestly, they're our future. I'd rather we let them follow a path that respects the importance of being there for each other (and us in our old age), rather than a life of jaded greed that just lets each day pass us by. Wouldn't you rather grow old trying, than live your life knowing that you didn't bother because it wasn't worth the fight?
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Sep 10, 2004, 10:27 PMNumber of posts: 10,493
