Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
BernieforPres2016
BernieforPres2016's Journal
BernieforPres2016's Journal
March 7, 2016
AMY GOODMAN: Marian Wright Edelman, we just heard Hillary Rodham Clinton. She used to be the head of the board of the Children’s Defense Fund, of the organization that you founded. But you were extremely critical of the Clintons. I mean, when President Clinton signed off on the, well, so-called welfare reform bill, you said, “His signature on this pernicious bill makes a mockery of his pledge not to hurt children.” So what are your hopes right now for these Democrats? And what are your thoughts about Hillary Rodham Clinton?
MARIAN WRIGHT EDELMAN: Well, you know, Hillary Clinton is an old friend, but they are not friends in politics. (emphasis mine) We have to build a constituency, and you don’t—and we profoundly disagreed with the forms of the welfare reform bill, and we said so. We were for welfare reform, I am for welfare reform, but we need good jobs, we need adequate work incentives, we need minimum wage to be decent wage and livable wage, we need health care, we need transportation, we need to invest preventively in all of our children to prevent them ever having to be on welfare.
And yet, you know, many years after that, when many people are pronouncing welfare reform a great success, you know, we’ve got growing child poverty, we have more children in poverty and in extreme poverty over the last six years than we had earlier in the year. When an economy is down, and the real test of welfare reform is what happens to the poor when the economy is not booming. Well, the poor are suffering, the gap between rich and poor widening. We have what I consider one of—a growing national catastrophe of what we call the cradle-to-prison pipeline. A black boy today has a one-in-three chance of going to prison in his lifetime, a black girl a one-in-seventeen chance. A Latino boy who’s born in 2001 has a one-in-six chance of going to prison. We are seeing more and more children go into our child welfare systems, go dropping out of school, going into juvenile justice detention facilities. Many children are sitting up—15,000, according to a recent congressional GAO study—are sitting up in juvenile institutions solely because their parents could not get mental health and health care in their community. This is an abomination.
That is a staggering indictment, from the woman Hillary Clinton regularly mentions as her mentor, of a gap between Hillary Clinton's words and her record. It reflects upon a political decision that she and Bill made to leave many children behind in order to ensure a second term. (The "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act," as it was cynically called, was signed in August of 1996, just about three months before the '96 presidential election.)
Hillary's mentor Marian Wright Edelman on the Clintons and Welfare Reform
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/how-hillary-clinton-betrayed-the-childrens-defense-fund-for-political-gainAMY GOODMAN: Marian Wright Edelman, we just heard Hillary Rodham Clinton. She used to be the head of the board of the Children’s Defense Fund, of the organization that you founded. But you were extremely critical of the Clintons. I mean, when President Clinton signed off on the, well, so-called welfare reform bill, you said, “His signature on this pernicious bill makes a mockery of his pledge not to hurt children.” So what are your hopes right now for these Democrats? And what are your thoughts about Hillary Rodham Clinton?
MARIAN WRIGHT EDELMAN: Well, you know, Hillary Clinton is an old friend, but they are not friends in politics. (emphasis mine) We have to build a constituency, and you don’t—and we profoundly disagreed with the forms of the welfare reform bill, and we said so. We were for welfare reform, I am for welfare reform, but we need good jobs, we need adequate work incentives, we need minimum wage to be decent wage and livable wage, we need health care, we need transportation, we need to invest preventively in all of our children to prevent them ever having to be on welfare.
And yet, you know, many years after that, when many people are pronouncing welfare reform a great success, you know, we’ve got growing child poverty, we have more children in poverty and in extreme poverty over the last six years than we had earlier in the year. When an economy is down, and the real test of welfare reform is what happens to the poor when the economy is not booming. Well, the poor are suffering, the gap between rich and poor widening. We have what I consider one of—a growing national catastrophe of what we call the cradle-to-prison pipeline. A black boy today has a one-in-three chance of going to prison in his lifetime, a black girl a one-in-seventeen chance. A Latino boy who’s born in 2001 has a one-in-six chance of going to prison. We are seeing more and more children go into our child welfare systems, go dropping out of school, going into juvenile justice detention facilities. Many children are sitting up—15,000, according to a recent congressional GAO study—are sitting up in juvenile institutions solely because their parents could not get mental health and health care in their community. This is an abomination.
That is a staggering indictment, from the woman Hillary Clinton regularly mentions as her mentor, of a gap between Hillary Clinton's words and her record. It reflects upon a political decision that she and Bill made to leave many children behind in order to ensure a second term. (The "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act," as it was cynically called, was signed in August of 1996, just about three months before the '96 presidential election.)
March 7, 2016
Another new one for Hillary tonight, or at least new to me: "Clawbacks"
Tonight she said she would go after companies like Johnson Controls who had received government assistance or subsidies then moved overseas and claw back the benefits they had received.
1. Is this a new position for her or have I just missed it?
2. Is there anything in U.S. law that supports this if those provisions weren't written as strings attached to the prior government assistance?
March 7, 2016
Did anybody notice Hillary use the expression "debt free tuition"
in the discussion about public schools that kind of bled into college education? Did I hear that right? If so, what is she talking about? I saw somebody post the other day that Bill claimed that Hillary supported free tuition but in the prior debates she was against it. Has she changed her position on this issue to match Bernie?
March 7, 2016
Hillary "Well if we're going to talk about the 1990's"
I can't believe she's actually defending the Import/Export bank, which is corporate welfare.
March 7, 2016
Bernie hits Hillary over the head on trade agreements
"Glad she discovered religion"
Spectacular, just as many of us were advocating that he needed to do tonight!
March 6, 2016
<“I’ve tried really hard to care about things that were very different from my parents. I was curious if I could care about money on some fundamental level, and I couldn’t. That wasn’t the metric of success I wanted in my life.>
Is she saying that money is the metric of success for her parents given that is where she chose to draw the contrast between herself and her parents?
The funny thing is Chelsea talking about how she just can't care about money. NBC paid her $600,000 for a little bit of work. IAC pays her $300,000 plus stock options to sit on a corporate board. She and her hedge fund husband recently moved from a $4 million New York City residence to a $10 million New York City residence.
I guess you don't need to care about money when you know it will always fall in your lap.
Chelsea Clinton can't bring herself to care about money
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/10902554/Chelsea-Clinton-interview-I-will-always-work-harder-than-anyone.html<“I’ve tried really hard to care about things that were very different from my parents. I was curious if I could care about money on some fundamental level, and I couldn’t. That wasn’t the metric of success I wanted in my life.>
Is she saying that money is the metric of success for her parents given that is where she chose to draw the contrast between herself and her parents?
The funny thing is Chelsea talking about how she just can't care about money. NBC paid her $600,000 for a little bit of work. IAC pays her $300,000 plus stock options to sit on a corporate board. She and her hedge fund husband recently moved from a $4 million New York City residence to a $10 million New York City residence.
I guess you don't need to care about money when you know it will always fall in your lap.
March 6, 2016
Going on now. CNN and MSNBC have had video of it in a small box insert, but can't interrupt the talking heads to let people hear any of it.
Live Stream of Bernie in Warren, MI
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/Watch-Live-Bernie-Sanders-Holds-Rally-Michigan-371168341.htmlGoing on now. CNN and MSNBC have had video of it in a small box insert, but can't interrupt the talking heads to let people hear any of it.
March 5, 2016
<After an appropriate stint at a think tank to write his memoir and a quiet transition to Wall Street, President Obama’s first Treasury secretary, who left office in 2013, is now ready to make millions thanks to help from a big bank he used to regulate.
Bloomberg News this week disclosed that Geithner has gotten a line of credit from JPMorgan Chase, the nation’s biggest bank, to invest in a new $12 billion fund at the private equity firm where he works, Warburg Pincus.
The filing with the New York Department of State does not give the amount of the line of credit or the terms, but according to Bloomberg, Warburg Pincus executives are signing up for a total $800 million and Geithner, as a top officer, is probably getting a sizable chunk of that.
The returns on the private equity investment are bound to be much higher than whatever interest Geithner will be paying on the loan, so he is virtually guaranteed to make many millions in profit on the deal.
Geithner of course was the Treasury secretary who pushed the bailout of the big banks, including JPMorgan, in the wake of the financial crisis, beating off anyone who wanted to discipline the banks or punish their executives with the argument that doing so would further destabilize the financial system.
His cosseting of the banks brought him into conflict with the chairman of the bailout oversight panel, Elizabeth Warren, the future senator from Massachusetts, and the inspector general for the program, Neil Barofsky, as well as one of the top bank regulators, then-FDIC chairman Sheila Bair — all of whom have documented their clashes with Geithner in recent books.>
Tim Geithner cashing in
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/02/09/ex-treasury-secretary-geithner-cashing-wall-street/80057762/<After an appropriate stint at a think tank to write his memoir and a quiet transition to Wall Street, President Obama’s first Treasury secretary, who left office in 2013, is now ready to make millions thanks to help from a big bank he used to regulate.
Bloomberg News this week disclosed that Geithner has gotten a line of credit from JPMorgan Chase, the nation’s biggest bank, to invest in a new $12 billion fund at the private equity firm where he works, Warburg Pincus.
The filing with the New York Department of State does not give the amount of the line of credit or the terms, but according to Bloomberg, Warburg Pincus executives are signing up for a total $800 million and Geithner, as a top officer, is probably getting a sizable chunk of that.
The returns on the private equity investment are bound to be much higher than whatever interest Geithner will be paying on the loan, so he is virtually guaranteed to make many millions in profit on the deal.
Geithner of course was the Treasury secretary who pushed the bailout of the big banks, including JPMorgan, in the wake of the financial crisis, beating off anyone who wanted to discipline the banks or punish their executives with the argument that doing so would further destabilize the financial system.
His cosseting of the banks brought him into conflict with the chairman of the bailout oversight panel, Elizabeth Warren, the future senator from Massachusetts, and the inspector general for the program, Neil Barofsky, as well as one of the top bank regulators, then-FDIC chairman Sheila Bair — all of whom have documented their clashes with Geithner in recent books.>
March 4, 2016
This is an article on the CBC endorsement of Hillary over Bernie a few weeks ago. I think the whole thing is interesting, but there was one quote near the end that I thought was truly astonishing and revealing:
<“Obviously Bernie is appealing” to voters, Rep. Elijah Cummings told BuzzFeed News. “To raise $6 million is nothing to sneeze at. And you’re talking about people with a little bit of money. So he is appealing to a group of people who Hillary needs to pay attention to. While the polls show that she’s got some of the black vote, those ‘$34’ people probably fit into the same economic situation as many African Americans — and you still don’t know how many of those are African American.”>
So if people have a little bit of money, Hillary needs to pay attention to them. As opposed to people who don't have a little bit of money and consequently can be ignored.
Black Lawmakers and Their Staffers Split on Bernie Sanders plus an astonishing quote
http://www.buzzfeed.com/darrensands/black-lawmakers-and-their-staffers-split-on-bernie-sanders#.nwN5629DeThis is an article on the CBC endorsement of Hillary over Bernie a few weeks ago. I think the whole thing is interesting, but there was one quote near the end that I thought was truly astonishing and revealing:
<“Obviously Bernie is appealing” to voters, Rep. Elijah Cummings told BuzzFeed News. “To raise $6 million is nothing to sneeze at. And you’re talking about people with a little bit of money. So he is appealing to a group of people who Hillary needs to pay attention to. While the polls show that she’s got some of the black vote, those ‘$34’ people probably fit into the same economic situation as many African Americans — and you still don’t know how many of those are African American.”>
So if people have a little bit of money, Hillary needs to pay attention to them. As opposed to people who don't have a little bit of money and consequently can be ignored.
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Feb 23, 2016, 03:28 PMNumber of posts: 3,017
