2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Ripples of Hope [View all]marions ghost
(19,841 posts)This you said above:
"Yet, a closely-related question -- one that has begged to be asked in their discussions of Flint -- defines the very real, and extremely important, differences between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, not only as politicians, but as human beings. And that has to do with fracking.
Now, no highly-contested campaign goes 100% smoothly. And no candidate is perfect. But Hillarys answer wasnt rooted in her being caught off-guard. No, it was a packaged response that has been rehearsed numerous times. And I know that it had to be painful for her supporters at the grass roots, who are conscious of the environment. For just as there is no question among the scientific community that climate change is real -- with only a few who are paid to pretend it is in dispute -- there is really no question that fracking poisons the water, ground, and air. And, of course, those who are paid by the energy corporations pretend that it is in dispute. Sound familiar?
Ms. Clinton danced around the question. In essence, she said that as long as a community is for fracking, its okay. We know that she has advocated fracking in the recent past, which translates to trying to convince a community that the profits from it outweigh the risks. Thus, the majority have the power to poison the minoritys water, for financial gain.
Now, that is simply unacceptable. It is something that I sincerely urge my friends who support Hillary to give serious thought to."
-----THANK YOU H2O man
Basically it's:
Clinton --I support clean water in Flint --but not gonna do anything about fracking
Sanders --I support clean water in Flint, no fracking