Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I must say it....I can't understand how anyone can support Clinton

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:17 PM
Original message
I must say it....I can't understand how anyone can support Clinton
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 02:24 PM by Armstead
I appreciate the fact that many people here honestly support Hillary Clinton. I respect your decision. I understand her appeal as a candidate. I believe her heart is probably in the right place.

But I also have to say this clearly, and with all due respect.

What are you thinking? How can you look at the record and the results of Clintonism and believe that is what America needs at this point in history?

They have surgically removed the backbone of the Democratic Party, and -- in tandem with the GOP -- created a form of phony partisan polarization in which tribalism is substituted for ideology.

They endorsed and supported the agenda of privatization, outsourcing and deregulation that has been the nightmare of the working classes and the wet dream of Corporate Elites.

This would be an excessively long post if I went into all of the reasons and all of the details for my utter dismay at the thought that The Clintons might once again be ensconced in the White House, and once again be the vehicle to force DLC Corporate "Centrism" down our throats as the only alternative to the GOP.

I can only say that consistently, since Bill Clinton first started running, that couple -- and the forces behind them -- have caused either the defeat, outright rejection or ignoring of any form of progressive populist reform, liberal traditions or economic justice.

I realize that after 8 years of Bush, the 90's seem like a misty utopia. Yes there was a strong period of economic growth, and a much more responsible approach to fiscal responsibility. Yes we didn't have the awful progression of right wing judges and otehr baggage of the GOP.

BUT the 00's were only possible because the Clintons made it possible. They surgically removed the backbone from the Democratic Party. They pushed through a corporate conservative agenda, with "free trade," and NAFTA, WTO surpression of national sovereignty.

They allowed the Corporate Media to complete their takeover of the public's information infrastructure, and removed their accountability to the public interest.

They supported the memes of the right wing and corporate powers. They turned the economy over to Alan Greenspan and the solons of Wall St. They ignored any criticisms and marginalized as the irrelevant whining of the "fringe left."

The list to me goes on and on.


You reap what you sow. And in the 00's with Bush, we reaped what the Clintons helped to sow in the 90's.


And now we want to go back and do it all over again?

I'm sorry but I don't get it.

Now that Edwards is out, I'll be rooting for Obama. And if we end up having to choose between Clinton 2 and Romney/McCain, I will put a vice grip over my nostrils and support The Clintons.

But we can do a lot better. We should do a lot better. So why don't we want to at least try?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
KennedyGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Gee..I feel the same way about Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy M Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I'm with you....
I don't get it about Obama. He does nothing for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
557188 Donating Member (494 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. 3rd
Of course I laugh at the idea of Obama's "change".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. 4th n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. 5th
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. 6th
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yossariant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. 7th
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capn Sunshine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #19
36. Is there an echo in here?
It's like a hall of mirrors
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LowerManhattanite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #19
58. And with a sooty-gavel bang,
...a meeting comes to order.

What kind, I will not say. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rockholm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
65. Me too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maribelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #65
70. Me three
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #70
87. Me four!
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:20 PM
Original message
Obama's still an unknown to me.
The Clintons are all too familiar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Really? When was he in the White House?
Did you even read the post?

Guess not!

K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
32. I do too
But unlike the original poster I don't start threads on my feelings to lecture people, or accuse them of being idiots.

This Clinton bashing is just getting stupid at this point--I feel like I am at freerepublic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #32
47. I'm not lecturing or accusing them of being idiots
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 02:42 PM by Armstead
I acknowledged that people do support the Clintons.

I am simply saying that I don't understand it.

And BTW branding all criticism of the Clintons as coming from Free Republic is so last month. Come up with a new talking point please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #47
62. Yeah whatever...
The Billary references and the other bullshit taking place on DU currently is very freerepublic regardless of what month we are in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
39. Obama has a long progressive record.
If you really think that then you need to look beyond the hack job blog posts painting him as a conservative. There's absolutely no comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
53. So do I.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #1
91. Gee, we certainly wouldn't want to risk backsliding into centrist Clintonism by voting for Obama
better guarantee it by voting for Clinton!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. I can't understand why anybody would support either one of them
but that's just me. I wanted real change, something neither of them has bothered to mention. Both want to leave our health in the hands of people who only want to make a buck off our misery. Neither realizes that the only way to fix this shambles of an economy is to scrape it off the top and recirculate it at the bottom. They're both conventional thinkers, not what the country needs at this point in time.

However, since I no longer have a dog in this fight, I'll just sit back and watch the rest of y'all rip each others lungs out over it and vote for whichever right of center nominee the party hands us in November.

By then, my possessions should have been sufficiently thinned out and I should have taken a trip or two to decide where I'll land next.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
springhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #3
37. Agreed.........
Unfortunately I am less than thrilled with either candidate. That being said, I will have to make a decision as I do not want McCain or Romney in the white house. Now that truly would be a disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. K&R....I do agree totally with your sentiments
I cannot see how anyone can support McCain, Romney, Ghouliani, Huckabee or Hillary Clinton. Support for others I can and could understand...but not for those on that list.

I, too, will support Obama now that JRE is out of the running...there is NO way I want Hillary at the head of the Dem ticket come November. We are not merely asking, but fucking begging, to be defeated. Can you imagine the horror of...PRESIDENT MC CAIN AND VICE-PRESIDENT HUCKABEE???

Well, IMO, Hillary at the top of the ticket pretty much guarantees that is what we will get!

:scared:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. six years ago, 90% of Americans supported Bush.
That means some 80-90% of democrats supported Bush. Call them Bush democrats if you will.

So that means only 10-20% of democrats haven't got their heads shoved completely up their asses.

I have to assume that those democrats are not evenly distributed between the two current candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibraLiz1973 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
9. I feel that way about Barack Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
10. Yeah I remember the 80's when the Dem Congress fought Ronnie every step of the way?
Oh wait? That didn't happen.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
33. ending welfare as we know it, nafta, deregulation,
That didn't happen under Reagan or Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #10
40. I also remember when the Clinton Democrats fought the GOP
Oh wait?....etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #40
71. Yeah its hard to acknowledge that there were events prior to 1992.
Much easier to blame the almighty Clenis!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #71
95. Whenever you Hillarites can't respond you stick right-wing talking points in the oppositions mouth
You don't have to endorse the right-wing to oppose the Clintons. It's just that sort of divisiveness, condescension, intellectual dishonesty and insult to our intelligence that guarantees that the Clintons will destroy this party.

Heads up. If you want us to "unify" behind your candidate, you might not want to accuse us of being rightwingers.

The last thing *I* want to do is vote for a candidate who has just spent four months insulting my beliefs, my ideals, my intelligence and my person in general.

Good luck winning your election, but don't blame me when these sorts of comments come back to bite Hillary in the ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
11. This would all carry more weight if they BOTH didn't have such splendiferous records.
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 02:25 PM by Perry Logan
Not perfect--he was a moderate, after all. But if he were really so bad, you couldn't point to so many accomplishments:

The awesome Clinton record:

longest economic expansion in American history--a record 115 months of economic expansion
More than 22 million new jobs: more than 22 million jobs were created in less than eight years -- the most ever under a single administration
Highest home ownership in American history
Made the Federal government smaller (a feat matched only by Harry Truman; if you like small government, vote Democratic)
Lowest unemployment in 30 years: unemployment dropped from more than 7 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000; unemployment for African Americans and Hispanics fell to the lowest rates on record, and the rate for women was the lowest in more than 40 years
Largest expansion of college opportunity since the GI Bill
Connected 95 percent of schools to the Internet
Lowest crime rate in 26 years.
Family and Medical Leave Act for 20 million Americans
Smallest welfare rolls in 32 years
Higher incomes at all levels: after falling by nearly $2,000 between 1988 and 1992, the median family's income rose by $6,338, after adjusting for inflation; all income brackets experienced double-digit growth; the bottom 20 percent saw the largest income growth at 16.3 percent
Lowest poverty rate in 20 years: the poverty rate declined from 15.1 percent to 11.8 percent in 1999--the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years
Lowest teen birth rate in 60 years
Lowest infant mortality rate in American history
Deactivated more than 1,700 nuclear warheads from the former Soviet Union: efforts of the Clinton-Gore Administration led to the dismantling of more than 1,700 nuclear warheads, 300 launchers and 425 land and submarine based missiles from the former Soviet Union
Paid off $360 billion of the national debt: under Clinton, we were on track to pay off the entire debt by 2009; what a difference a stolen election makes...
Converted the largest budget deficit in American history to the largest surplus
Lowest government spending in three decades
Lowest federal income tax burden in 35 years
More families owned stock than ever before
Most New Jobs Ever Created Under a Single Administration: Republicans really chew the rug when you mention this one, so it's worth repeating constantly
Median Family Income Up $6,000 since 1993
Unemployment at Its Lowest Level in More than 30 Years
Highest Home ownership Rate on Record
7 Million Fewer Americans Living in Poverty
Largest Surplus Ever
Lower Federal Government Spending: after increasing under the previous two administrations, federal government spending as a share of the economy was cut from 22.2 percent in 1992 to 18 percent in 2000--the lowest level since 1966
The Most U.S. Exports Ever: between 1992 and 2000, U.S. exports of goods and services grew by 74 percent, or nearly $500 billion, to top $1 trillion for the first time
Lowest Inflation since the 1960s: inflation was at the lowest rate since the Kennedy Administration, averaging 2.5 percent, down from 4.6 percent during the previous administration
The child poverty rate declined more than 25 percent
The poverty rate for single mothers was the lowest ever
The African American and elderly poverty rates dropped to their lowest level on record
The Hispanic poverty rate dropped to its lowest level since 1979
Lowest Poverty Rate for Single Mothers on Record: under President Clinton, the poverty rate for families with single mothers fell from 46.1 percent in 1993 to 35.7 percent in 1999, the lowest level on record
Smallest Welfare Rolls Since 1969: between January 1993 and September of 1999, the number of welfare recipients dropped by 7.5 billion (a 53 percent decline) to 6.6 million. In comparison, between 1981-1992, the number of welfare recipients increased by 2.5 million (a 22 percent increase) to 13.6 million people
Lowest Federal Income Tax Burden in 35 Years: Federal income taxes as a percentage of income for the typical American family dropped to their lowest level in 35 years
Higher Incomes even after Taxes and Inflation: real after-tax incomes grew by an average of 2.6 percent per year for the lower-income half of taxpayers between 1993 and 1997, while growing by an average of 1.0 percent between 1981 and 1993
AGAINST TERRORISM

# PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator of anti-terrorist efforts.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold the Al Qaeda millennium hijacking and bombing plots.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to kill the Pope.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up the Israeli Embassy in Washington.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up Boston airport.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up Lincoln and Holland Tunnels in NY.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up the George Washington Bridge.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up the US Embassy in Albania.
# Bill Clinton tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.).
# Bill Clinton brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.
# Bill Clinton did not blame the Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after Bush left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively -- and successfully -- to stop future terrorist attacks.
# Bill Clinton named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.
# Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to tighten airport security. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.
# Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to allow for better tracking of terrorist funding. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.
# Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for better tracking of explosives used by terrorists. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA.
# Bill Clinton increased the military budget by an average of 14 per cent, reversing the trend under Bush I.
# Bill Clinton tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism.
# Bill Clinton detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries.
# Bill Clinton created national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.
# Of Clinton's efforts says Robert Oakley, Reagan Ambassador for Counterterrorism: "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama".
# Paul Bremer, current Civilian Administrator of Iraq disagrees slightly with Robert Oakley as he believed the Bill Clinton Administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden.
# Barton Gellman in the Washington Post put it best, "By any measure available, Bill Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him" and was the "first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort".
http://liberalslikechrist.org/about/clinton.html
ON THE ENVIRONMENT
Bill Clinton issued an Executive Order on Environmental Justice to ensure that low-income citizens and minorities do not suffer a disproportionate burden of industrial pollution. Launched pilot projects in low-income communities across the country to redevelop contaminated sites into useable space, create jobs and enhance community development.

President Bill Clinton sought permanent funding of $1.4 billion a year through the Lands Legacy initiative to expand federal efforts to save America's natural treasures and provide significant new resources to states and communities to protect local green spaces and protect ocean and coastal resources. Won $652 million for Lands Legacy in the FY 2000 budget, a 42 percent increase.

Launched effort to protect over 40 million acres of "roadless areas," which include some of America's last wild places. Dramatically improved management of our national forests with an ambitious new science-based agenda that places greater emphasis on recreation, wildlife and water quality, while reforming logging practices to ensure steady, sustainable supplies of timber and jobs. Balanced the preservation of old-growth stands with the economic needs of timber-dependent communities through the Pacific Northwest Forest Plan.

Adopted a uniform tailpipe standard to passenger cars, SUVs and other light-duty trucks, producing cars that are 77 percent cleaner -- and light-duty trucks up to 95 percent cleaner -- than those on the road today. Set new standard to reduce average sulfur levels in gasoline by up to 90 percent. Once fully implemented in 2030, these measures will prevent 43,000 premature deaths and 173,000 cases of childhood respiratory illness each year, and reduce emissions by the equivalent to removing 164 million cars from the road.

# Approved strong new clean air standards for soot and smog that could prevent up to 15,000 premature deaths a year and improve the lives of millions of Americans who suffer from respiratory illnesses. Defending the standards against legal assaults by polluters.

# Accelerating Toxic Waste Cleanups. Completed cleanup at 515 Superfund sites, more than three times as many as the previous two administrations, with cleanup of more than 90 percent of all sites either completed or in progress. Secured $1.4 billion in FY 2000 to continue progress toward cleaning up 900 Superfund sites by 2002.

# Providing Safe Drinking Water: Proposed and signed legislation to strengthen the Safe Drinking Water Act and ensure that our families have healthy clean tap water. Required America's 55,000 water utility companies to provide regular reports to their customers on the quality of their drinking water.

# Established EPA's Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) that provides grants to States to finance priority drinking water projects that meet Clean Water Act mandates. To date, the DWSRFs have provided $1.9 billion in loans to communities.

# Awarded nearly $200 million in Department of Agriculture (USDA) loans and grants for over 100 safe drinking water projects in rural areas of 40 states. USDA grants and loans target rural communities plagued by some of the nation's worst water quality and dependability problems.

# Expanded Safe Drinking Water Act protections to protect 40 million additional Americans in small communities from potentially dangerous microbes, including Cryptosporidium, in their drinking water.

# Ensuring Clean Water. Launched the Clean Water Action Plan to help clean up the 40 percent of America's surveyed waterways still too polluted for fishing and swimming. Secured $3.9 billion since 1998, a 16 percent increase, to help states, communities and landowners in reducing polluted runoff, enhancing natural resource stewardship, improving citizens' right to know, and protecting public health.

# Strengthening Communities' Right to Know. Strengthened the public's right to know about chemicals released into their air and water by partnering with the chemical industry and the environmental community in an effort to provide complete data on the potential health risks of the 2,800 most widely used chemicals. Nearly doubled the number of chemicals that industry must report to communities, while expanding the number of facilities that must report by 30 percent.

# Expanded the community right to know about releases of 27 persistent bio-accumulative toxins (including mercury, dioxin, and PCBs). These highly toxic chemicals are especially risky because they do not break down easily and are known to accumulate in the human body.

# Secured $83 million in FY 2000 for two major new efforts to restore salmon in the Pacific Northwest: $58 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund, which provides resources for states and tribes to protect and rebuild salmon stocks; and $25 million to implement the historic Pacific Salmon Treaty with Canada, which established two regional funds to improve fisheries management and enhance bilateral scientific cooperation between the two countries and provides funding to buy back fishing permits in Washington.
# Expanding Wildlife Refuges. Added 57,000 acres, including lands along the last free-flowing section of the Columbia River, to the Saddle Mountain National Wildlife Refuge to protect salmon habitat in Washington.

# Forging Partnerships to Protect Habitat. Completed 255 major Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), compared to 14 before the Administration took office, to protect more than 20 million acres of private land and over 170 threatened and endangered species. These voluntary agreements protect habitat while providing landowners the certainty they need to effectively manage their lands.

# Strengthening Protections for Wildlife. Signed legislation that strengthens protections for wildlife by mandating that the most important use of our nation's wildlife refuges is giving refuge to migratory birds and other animals reliant on this rich system of natural habitat.

Protecting our Oceans and Coasts

# Creating Comprehensive Oceans Policy. Directed the development of key recommendations for strengthening federal oceans policy for the 21st century and appointed a high-level task force to oversee the implementation of those recommendations. Convened a National Ocean Conference in June 1998 that brought together government experts, business executives, scientists, environmentalists, elected officials and the public to examine opportunities and challenges in restoring and protecting our ocean resources.

# Strengthening Our National Marine Sanctuaries. Secured a funding increase of over 100% to better support national marine sanctuaries -- homes to coral reefs, kelp forests, humpback whales, and loggerhead turtles. Supporting the five-year Sustainable Seas Expeditions to explore, study and document ways to better protect underwater resources.

# Preserving Coral Reefs. Issued an Executive Order to expand protection of coral reefs and their ecosystems to address issues of coral reef management, expansion of marine protected areas and increased protections for coral reef species.

# Protecting Marine Mammals. Led negotiations resulting in a multilateral agreement to protect dolphins in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean. Issued new standards to protect the endangered northern right whale from injuries from ships by instituting a first-ever ship reporting requirement in two areas of right whale critical habitat. Fought for creation of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, an area of more than 12 million square miles off the coast of Antarctica.

# Banning Ocean Dumping of Toxic Waste. Led the world in calling for a global ban on ocean dumping of low-level radioactive waste. The U.S. was the first nuclear power to advocate the ban.

Introduced "Better America Bonds" to generate $10.75 billion in bond authority over five years to preserve open space, improve water quality and clean up abandoned and contaminated properties known as brownfields. Local communities can work together in partnerships with land trust groups, environmentalists, business leaders and others to develop innovative solutions to their community's development challenges.

# Provided leadership critical to successful negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol, which sets strong, realistic targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and establishes flexible, market-based mechanisms to achieve them as cost-effectively as possible.

# Investing in Clean Energy Research. Won more than $1 billion in FY 1999 and in FY 2000 for the Climate Change Technology Initiative, a program of clean energy research and development that will save energy and consumers money. Extended the tax credits for wind and biomass energy production through 2001, reducing emissions and reliance on imported oil.

# Growing Clean Energy Technologies. Issued an Executive Order to coordinate federal efforts to spur the development and use of bio-based technologies, which can convert crops, trees and other "biomass" into a vast array of fuels and materials. Set a goal of tripling our use of bioenergy and bioproducts by 2010 to reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions by up to 100 million tons a year -- the equivalent of taking 70 million cars off the road.

# Improving Scientific Understanding. Increased funding for the United States Global Change Research Program to more than $1.7 billion in FY 2000 to provide a sound scientific understanding of both the human and natural forces that influence the Earth's climate system. This record research budget continues strong support for the "Carbon Cycle Initiative" begun last year to improve our understanding of the role of farms, forests, and other natural or managed lands in capturing carbon.

# Energy Efficiency Standards for Appliances. Issued new energy efficiency standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezers and room air conditioners that will save consumers money and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and dependence on foreign oil. The new standards will cut the average appliance's energy usage by 30 percent and save more than seven quadrillion BTUs of energy over the next 30 years, more than seven times the annual energy consumption of the entire state of Arkansas.

# Promoting federal Energy Efficiency. Issued an Executive Order directing federal agencies to reduce energy use in buildings 35 percent by 2010, reducing annual greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of taking 1.7 million cars off the road and saving taxpayers over $750 million a year. Forged new partnerships with industry to develop and promote energy-saving cars, homes and consumer products with the potential to save Americans hundreds of millions of dollars in energy bills and significantly curb greenhouse gas pollution.
http://www.environmentalcaucus.org/gore.html

PS: What about corruption?

Forget about it. As measured by the total number of convictions and forced resignations, Clinton's was the cleanest administration since Teddy Roosevelt.

Hillary's record is excellent, too--not at all like the crap you hear about her:

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the The Humane Society of the United States 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Trust for Historic Preservation 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Education Association 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Wilderness Coalition 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the League of Conservation Voters 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Children's Defense Fund 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Organization for Women 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group 91 percent in 2006.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group 100 percent in 2005

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 100 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House).

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Public Health Association 80 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 93 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 93 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers 84 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 88 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the American Federation of Government Employees 83 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the National Committee for an Effective Congress 95 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 100 percent in 2005.

According to the National Journal - Composite Liberal Score's calculations, in 2005, Senator Clinton voted more liberal on economic, defense and foreign policy issues than 80 percent of the Senators.

According to the National Journal - Liberal on Social Policy's calculations, in 2005, Senator Clinton voted more liberal on social policy issues than 83 percent of the Senators.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Alliance for Retired Americans 100 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 92 percent in 2005.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the Bread for the World 100 percent in 2003-2004.

Senator Clinton supported the interests of the The Partnership for the Homeless 100 percent in 2003-2004.
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=WNY99268

She was promoting universal coverage before it was cool. Furthermore she helped to create the SCHIP program. And most importantly she was dead on in the debate the other week where she said political will was the most important thing needed to push health care reform through and we know without a doubt she has that.

She has fougt unrelentingly for a woman's right to choose as well as women's rights both domestically and abroad

Create a Strategic Energy Fund - Hillary has proposed a Strategic Energy Fund that would inject $50 billion into research, development and deployment of renewable energy, energy efficiency, clean coal technology, ethanol and other homegrown biofuels. Hillary's proposal would give oil companies a choice: invest in renewable energy or pay into the fund. Hillary's proposal would also eliminate oil company tax breaks and make sure that oil companies pay their fair share for drilling on public lands. Instead of sending billions of dollars to the Middle East for their oil, Hillary's proposal will create a new clean energy industry in America and create tens of thousands of jobs here.

Champion a Market-Based "Cap and Trade" Approach - Hillary supports a market-based, cap and trade approach to reducing carbon emissions and fight global warming. This approach was used successfully to limit sulfur dioxide and reduce levels of acid rain in the 1990s. By capping the amount of emissions in the environment and allowing corporations to buy and sell permits, this approach offers corporations a flexible, cost-efficient method to do their share to reduce emissions and combat global warming. The program will reduce emissions, drive the development of clean technologies, and create a market for projects that store carbon dioxide.

20% Renewable Electricity Standard by 2020 - Hillary believes we need to shift our reliance on high carbon electricity sources to low-carbon electricity sources by investing in renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind. As President, she'll work to require power companies to obtain 20 percent of their energy from renewable sources by 2020.

Make Federal Buildings Carbon Neutral - Hillary believes that the federal government should lead the way in reducing carbon emissions from buildings. Buildings account for 40 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and the federal government owns or leases more than 500,000. Hillary would require all federal buildings to steadily increase the use of green design principles, energy efficient technologies, and to generate energy on-site from solar and other renewable sources. By 2030, all new federal buildings and major renovations would be carbon neutral, helping to fight global warming and cutting the $5.6 billion that the federal government spends each year on heating, cooling and lighting.

Protecting Against Exposure to Toxic Chemicals - Hillary wants to make the products we use safer, especially for children. There are tens of thousands of chemicals used in the U.S. and hundreds of new chemicals introduced each year, but little health testing is conducted for many of them. Hillary would require chemical companies to prove that new chemicals are safe before they are put on the market, and would set more stringent exposure standards for kids. She would also create a "priority list" of existing chemicals and require testing to make sure they are safe. To improve our understanding of the links between chemicals and diseases like cancer, Hillary would create an "environmental health tracking network" that ties together information about pollution and chronic diseases.

Hillary's Record

In the White House, Hillary led efforts to make adoption easier, to expand early learning and child care, to increase funding for breast cancer research, and to help veterans suffering from Gulf War syndrome who had too often been ignored in the past. She helped launch a national campaign to prevent teen pregnancy and helped create the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, which moved children from foster care to adoption more quickly and the number of children who have moved out of foster care into adoption has increased dramatically.

She was instrumental in designing and championing the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which has provided millions of children with health insurance. She battled the big drug companies to force them to test their drugs for children and to make sure all kids get the immunizations they need through the Vaccines for Children Program. Immunization rates dramatically improved after the program launched.

Hillary has been a leading member of the Environment and Public Works Committee since she was elected to the Senate. Today, she chairs the Superfund and Environmental Health Subcommittee and in that capacity has promoted legislation to evaluate and protect against the impact of environmental pollutants on people's health and clean up toxic waste.

Global warming and Clean Air
Spoken out forcefully about the need to tackle global warming in hearings, speeches, rallies and on the Senate floor and co-sponsored "cap and trade" legislation.
Worked to reduce air pollution that causes asthma and other respiratory diseases by writing and helping to pass new laws to clean up exhaust from school buses, and other diesel-powered equipment.
Supported legislation to reduce pollution from power plants, including harmful emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, mercury, and carbon dioxide - emissions that contribute to poor air quality, smog, acid rain, global warming, and mercury contamination of fish.
Aggressively fought the Bush Administration's ill-advised attempts to weaken clean air laws.

Improving Water Quality and Protecting Drinking Water
Helped to overturn the Bush Administration's attempt to allow more arsenic in drinking water.
Cosponsored legislation to protect lakes, rivers and coastal waters by fighting the spread of destructive invasive species, such as the zebra mussel.
Helped ot pass new clean water laws, including measures to protect New York City's water supplies and clean up Long Island Sound.

Protecting Public Lands
Fought oil company efforts to pen the Artic Wildlife Refuge in Alask and Pacific and Atlantic coastal waters to drilling.
Cosponsored the Roadless Area Conservation Act, which prohibits road construction and logging in unspoiled, roadless areas of the National Forest System, and voted for additional funding and manpower to combat forest fires in the west.

Reducing Dangerous Chemicals and Cleaning Up Hazardous Waste
Supported legislation to restore the "polluter pays" principle by reinstating a chemical company fee to fund cleanups of highly contaminated "Superfund" waste sites.
Cosponsored the "kids-Safe Chemical Act," which requires chemical companies to provide health and safety before putting new chemicals in consumer products.
Proposed legislation to create an environmental health tracking network to enable us to better understand the impact of environmental hazards on human health and well-being.

Tackling the Toxic Legacy of 9/11
Pushed for health care benefits for first responders, residents and others whose health has been impacted from breathing the toxic dust and smoke in New York City after 9/11.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/8/20/134810/677

Hillary Clinton co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, a state-level alliance with the Children's Defense Fund, in 1977. In late 1977, President Jimmy Carter (for whom she had done 1976 campaign coordination work in Indiana) appointed her to the board of directors of the Legal Services Corporation, and she served in that capacity from 1978 through the end of 1981. For much of that time she served as the chair of that board, the first woman to do so. During her time as chair, funding for the Corporation was expanded from $90 million to $300 million, and she successfully battled against President Ronald Reagan's initial attempts to reduce the funding and change the nature of the organization.

Following the November 1978 election of her husband as Governor of Arkansas, Clinton became First Lady of Arkansas in January 1979, her title for a total of twelve years. Bill appointed her chair of the Rural Health Advisory Committee the same year, where she successfully obtained federal funds to expand medical facilities in Arkansas' poorest areas without affecting doctors' fees.

Hillary Clinton chaired the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee from 1982 to 1992, where she sought to bring about reform in the state's court-sanctioned public education system. One of the most important initiatives of the entire Clinton governorship, she fought a prolonged but ultimately successful battle against the Arkansas Education Association to put mandatory teacher testing as well as state standards for curriculum and classroom size in place. She introduced Arkansas' Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth in 1985, a program that helps parents work with their children in preschool preparedness and literacy.

And a bit of stuff from the White House :

The First Lady worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War, which became known as the Gulf War syndrome. Together with Attorney General Janet Reno, Clinton helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice. In 1997, she initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which she regarded as her greatest accomplishment as First Lady.

Along with Senator Ted Kennedy, she was the major force behind the State Children's Health Insurance Program in 1997, a federal effort that provided state support for children whose parents were unable to provide them with health coverage.<124> She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses and encouraged older women to seek a mammogram to detect breast cancer, with coverage provided by Medicare.<125> She successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the National Institutes of Health.<43> The First Lady worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War, which became known as the Gulf War syndrome.<43> Together with Attorney General Janet Reno, Clinton helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice.<43> In 1997, she initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which she regarded as her greatest accomplishment as First Lady.<43> As First Lady, Clinton hosted numerous White House Conferences, including ones on Child Care (1997),<126> Early Childhood Development and Learning (1997),<127> and Children and Adolescents (2000),<128> and the first-ever White House Conferences on Teenagers (2000)<129> and Philanthropy (1999).<130>

Hillary Clinton traveled to over eighty countries during this time,<131> breaking the mark for most-travelled First Lady held by Pat Nixon.<132> In a September 1995 speech before the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, Clinton argued very forcefully against practices that abused women around the world and in China itself.<133> She was one of the most prominent international figures at the time to speak out against the treatment of Afghan women by the Islamist fundamentalist Taliban that had seized control of Afghanistan.<134><135> She helped create Vital Voices, an international initiative sponsored by the United States to promote the participation of women in the political processes of their countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton

More:
http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/nationalsecurity/israel/index.cfm
http://clinton.senate.gov/issues/nationalsecurity/darfur

The following are polls from progressive groups, rating Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, on how often they vote for progressive issues. For each group, http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011142.php

Clinton Vs. Barack Obama (progressivepunch)
Overall Progressive Score: 92% 90%
Aid to Less Advantaged People at Home and Abroad: 98% 97%
Corporate Subsidies 100% N/A
Education, Humanities and the Arts 88% 100%
Environment 92% 100%
Fair Taxation 97% 100%
Family Planning 88% 80%
Government Checks on Corporate Power 95% 97%
Healthcare 98% 94%
Housing 100% 100%
Human Rights & Civil Liberties 82% 77%
Justice for All: Civil and Criminal 94% 91%
Labor Rights 91% 91%
Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful 94% 90%
War and Peace 80% 86%
easures to protect New York City's water supplies and clean up Long Island Sound.

HILLARY'S EXPERIENCE ON THE WORLD STAGE:

Her historic speech at the UN Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 not only galvanized women around the world, it helped spawn a movement that led to advances politically, legally, economically, and socially for women in many countries over the next decade. Among other initiatives, she spearheaded the Clinton Administration's efforts to combat the global crisis of human trafficking. She persuaded the First Ladies of the Americas to use their collective power to eradicate measles and improve girls' education throughout the western Hemisphere. And she is widely credited with helping women in Kuwait finally win the right to vote.

As First Lady and now as a two-term senator who represents the most ethnically diverse state in the nation and who sits on the Armed Services Committee, Hillary Clinton has become a fixture on international issues over the past 15 years. She has traveled to more than 80 countries, going from barrios to rural villages to meetings with heads of state. She has consulted with dozens of world leaders - Nelson Mandela, King Abdullah, Tony Blair among them -- on matters as diverse as America and NATO's roles in Kosovo, eradicating poverty in the Third World, and the plight of women living under the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Today, she is one of the most influential voices in the world on human rights, democracy, and the promotion of a "new internationalism" in foreign affairs that calls for a balanced use of military force, diplomacy, and social development to strengthen American interests and security globally.

While American First Ladies historically have made great (and often overlooked) contributions to our nation, Hillary Clinton's wide-ranging experience on international issues as First Lady is unprecedented. Indeed, she is the only First Lady to have delivered foreign policy addresses at major gatherings of the United Nations, the World Bank, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the World Economic Forum.

Hillary Clinton has been fighting for the rights of children for special needs for decades. In her first job out of law school working for the Children's Defense Fund, she conducted research that led to Congress passing the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, the landmark bill mandating that all children with disabilities be educated in the public school system. later, she helped improve the education of children with special needs by working to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act. In 2005, she sponsored an amendment to increase funding for the act by $4 billion dollars. She also cosponsored the Personal Excellence for Children with Disabilities Act, a bill that promised to help schools recruit and retain new special education teachers, and better prepare general education teachers and staff to work with children with special needs.

Most recently, she has called for greatly expanded funding to the National Institute for Health to investigate treatments for children with disabilities. And she has put forth a comprehensive and detailed plan to help children and families affected by autism, with numerous elements that correspond very closely to what families in the autism community have been demanding for years.

some points on her legal career:

1969 Truehaft, Walker and Bernstein in Oakland, one of the most liberal law firms in the country. They defended the Panthers.
1970 Yale University - city legal services, provided free legal advice for the poor.
1971 Staff attorney, Children's Defense Fund in Cambridge, Massachusetts
1971 Carnegie Council on Children, legal consultant.
1974 Impeachment Inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal.
1974 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville School of Law - One of only two female faculty members.
1976 Worked pro bono on child advocacy.
1978 Jimmy Carter appoints Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation.


Education

Wellesley College where she majored in political science.
Yale Law School, where she served on the Board of Editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action.

Political Activist Experience

Pragmatic Liberal

Always fascinated by radicalism, she wrote her senior thesis on a great radical organizer of poor people, Saul Alinsky of Chicago. Though when she was offered a job by Alinsky, after she wrote about him, and she turned him down--because she didn't think he was effective enough. She said to her boyfriend at that timebe in politics you have to win. And it didn't look to her like Alinsky was winning enough of his battles. She came to question his methodology and concluded in her thesis that larger government programs and funding were needed, not just community action at the grass roots.

She was the commencement speaker at Wellesley in 1969, chosen by her fellow students--there had never been a student commencement speaker there before. The scheduled speaker was Sen. Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, who Hillary had campaigned for, a Republican, the first black to be a member of the U.S. Senate in a hundred years. In his remarks he was patronizing, Hillary thought. He seemed to defend the Nixon administration's conduct of the war, and didn't mention the wrenching events of 68. When he finished, Hillary got up and extemporaneously excoriated him. As a result of that speech, she was featured in Life magazine as exemplary of this new generation of student leaders. They ran a picture of her in pedal pushers and her Coke-bottle glasses. That article made her well known in the student movement in the U.S.

She monitored the Black Panther trial in New Haven. She monitored the trial to see if there were any abuses of the rights of the Panthers on trial, and helped schedule the monitors. Her reports were turned over to the ACLU.

1971 Senator Walter Mondale's subcommittee on migrant workers, researching migrant problems in housing, sanitation, health and education.

Political Campaign Experience

1964 In high school, volunteered for Republican candidate Barry Goldwater.
1968 New Hampshire, Eugene McCarthy primary challenge to LBJ.
1972 Campaigned in the western states for 1972 Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern
1976 Jimmy Carter Presidential race, served as an Indiana campaign coordinator.

The Clinton Campaigns (Bill Clinton has stated Hillary played pivotal roles in his campaigns)

1974 Bill Clinton's Congressional race (L)
1976 Bill Clinton's Attorney General race (W)
1978 Bill Clinton's Governor's Race (W)
1980 Bill Clinton's Governor's Race (L)
1982 Bill Clinton's Governor's Race (W)
1992 Bill Clinton's Presidential Race (W)
1996 Bill Clinton's Presidential Race (W)
2000 Hillary Clinton's Senate Campaign (W)
2006 Hillary Clinton's Senate Campaign (W)

Legal Experience

1969 Truehaft, Walker and Bernstein in Oakland, one of the most liberal law firms in the country. They defended the Panthers.
1970 Yale University - city legal services, provided free legal advice for the poor.
1971 Staff attorney, Children's Defense Fund in Cambridge, Massachusetts
1971 Carnegie Council on Children, legal consultant.
1974 Impeachment Inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal.
1974 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville School of Law - One of only two female faculty members.
1976 Rose Law Firm. In 1979, she became the first woman to be made a full partner.
1976 Worked pro bono on child advocacy.
1978 Jimmy Carter appoints Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corporation.

She was twice named by the National Law Journal as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America, in 1988 and in 1991.

First Lady of Arkansas

1979 Chaired the Rural Health Advisory Committee
1979 Introduced the Arkansas' Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth, a program that helps parents work with their children in preschool preparedness and literacy.
1982 - 1992 Chaired the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee

She was named Arkansas Woman of the Year in 1983 and Arkansas Mother of the Year in 1984.

Clinton had co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families in 1977.

Served on the boards of the Arkansas Children's Hospital Legal Services (1988-1992)and the Children's Defense Fund (as chair, 1986-1992)

Corporate board of directors of TCBY (1985-1992),Wal-Mart Stores (1986-1992), and Lafarge (1990-1992)

First Lady of the United States of America

"She's very smart ... people rightly give her credit for having been a participant in the Clinton administration and for doing some heavy lifting on issues." Barack Obama, speaking of Hillary Clinton's White House experience and contradicting Obama supporters - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart 8/22/07



When asked about his wife's role in his administration in August of 2000, President Bill Clinton said "She basically had an unprecedented level of activity in her present position over the last eight years.''

1993 First to bring a serious universal healthcare plan to be considered by the US Congress
1997 Helped develop the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997

The First Lady led the effor on the Foster Care Independence bill, to help older, unadopted children transition to adulthood. She also hosted numerous White House conferences that related to children's health, including early childhood development (1997) and school violence (1999). She lent her support to programs ranging from "Prescription for Reading," in which pediatricians provided free books for new mothers to read to their infants as their brains were rapidly developing, to nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses. She also supported an annual drive to encourage older women to seek a mammography to prevent breast cancer, coverage of the cost being provided by Medicare.

Hillary Clinton was the only First Lady to keep an office in the West Wing among those of the president's senior staff. While her familiarity with the intricate political issues and decisions faced by the President, she openly discussed his work with him, yet stated that ultimately she was but one of several individuals he consulted before making a decision. They were known to disagree. Regarding his 1993 passage of welfare reform, the First Lady had reservations about federally supported childcare and Medicaid. When issues that she was working on were under discussion at the morning senior staff meetings, the First Lady often attended. Aides kept her informed of all pending legislation and oftentimes sought her reaction to issues as a way of gauging the President's potential response. Weighing in on his Cabinet appointments and knowing many of the individuals he named, she had working relationships with many of them.

She persuaded Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin to convene a meeting of corporate CEOs for their advice on how companies could be persuaded to adopt better child care measures for working families.

With Attorney General Janet Reno, the First Lady helped to create the Department of Justice's Violence Against Women office. One of her closest Cabinet allies was Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Following her international trips, Hillary Clinton wrote a report of her observations for Albright. A primary effort they shared was globally advocating gender equity in economics, employment, health care and education.

During her trips to Africa (1997), Asia (1995), South America (1995, 1997) and the Central European former Soviet satellite nations (1997, 1998), Hillary Clinton emphasized "a civil society," of human rights as a road to democracy and capitalism.

The First Lady was also one of the few international figures at the time who spoke out against the treatment of Afghani women by Islamist fundamentalist Taliban that had seized control of Afghanistan.

One of the programs she helped create was Vital Voices, a U.S.-sponsored initiative to promote the participation of international women in their nation's political process. One result of the group's meetings, in Northern Ireland, was drawing together women leaders of various political factions that supported the Good Friday peace agreement that brought peace to that nation long at civil war.

Hillary Clinton was also an active supporter of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), often awarding its micro-loans to small enterprises begun by women in developing nations that aided the economic growth in their impoverished communities. Certainly one of her more important speeches as First Lady addressing the need for equal rights for women was international in scope and created controversy in the nation where it was made: the September 1995 United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China.

Senator From New York

After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Hillary worked with her colleagues to secure the funds New York needed to recover and rebuild. She fought to provide compensation to the families of the victims, grants for hard-hit small businesses, and health care for front line workers at Ground Zero.

She is the first New Yorker ever to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

She has introduced legislation to tie Congressional salary increases to an increase in the minimum wage.

She helped pass legislation that encouraged investment to create jobs in struggling communities through the Renewal Communities program.

She has championed legislation to bring broadband Internet access to rural America.

She worked to strengthen the Children's Health Insurance Program, which increased coverage for children in low income and working families.

She authored legislation that has been enacted to improve quality and lower the cost of prescription drugs and to protect our food supply from bioterrorism.

She sponsored legislation to increase America's commitment to fighting the global HIV/AIDS crisis.

She's working for expanded use of information technology in the health care system to decrease administrative costs, lower premiums, and reduce medical errors.

She's worked to ensure the safety of prescription drugs for children, with legislation now included in the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, and her legislation to help schools address environmental hazards. She has also proposed expanding access to child care.

She has passed legislation that will bring more qualified teachers into classrooms and more outstanding principals to lead our schools.

Hillary is one of the original cosponsors of the Prevention First Act to increase access to family planning. Her fight with the Bush Administration ensured that Plan B, an emergency contraceptive, will be available to millions of American women and will reduce the need for abortions.

She introduced the Count Every Vote Act of 2005 to ensure better protection of votes and to ensure that every vote is counted.

Senate Armed Services Committee

Subcommittees:

* Airland
* Emerging Threats and Capabilities
* Readiness and Management Support

Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works

Subcommittees:

* Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health (Chair)
* Subcommittee Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
* Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions

Subcommittees:

* Children and Families
* Employment & Workplace Safety
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. I've seen it and heard it for ten years...
But it all boils down to a simple question.

Is the United States really better off now than it was in 1992?

If not, why not? If you recall, the country went down the dumpster very quickly when GW took over. That would not have happened so quickly if the Clintons had achieved more then small little accomplishments and much bigger failures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #16
76. It was better in 2000 than it is NOW
and was MUCH better in 2000 than in 1992.

Oh I see: Right Wing Talking Point #1 in 2000: if the economy was in such great shape, why did it take a dump 6 months after Bush took over, and the Republicans were running EVERYTHING.

Hello????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #76
86. It was taking a dump in 2000
The artificial bubble created by the technology boom was already creating conditions for a recession.

And in 1992 the economy was in a recession.

The real issue though, is what was happening with the fundamentals. For example, jobs were created, but then they either disappeared or were shipped overseas.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #86
103. In 1992 a Bush was still president.
And I saw no "DUMP" in my industry until 2001/2002. Sounds like another Bush to me.

You know, comparing the presidency of Bill Clinton and dissing it to push a candidate by proxy is not exactly designed to make friends and influence people. You don't have to "pump" your "partisans," they already believe, and you're doing damage with your assertions.

Dangerous ground: it builds apathy and 3rd parties, something we do not need right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
End Of The Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #11
57. Thank you for continuing to post this!
And it's longer every time, too, isn't it? Truly I don't understand how any Dem can bash Bill, and I appreciate your educational efforts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MediaBabe Donating Member (610 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:54 PM
Original message
Thank you for posting
Thanks for taking the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #11
108. so, which one flunked the bar, and which edited the law review?
I keep confusing the two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fresh_Start Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
13. If you think Clinton is the source of the downfall of the democratic
party, could you please explain Reagan and Bush Sr to me?

And according to Obama, the downfall was the old time democrats in power before Reagan (e.g, Ted Kennedy) and the excesses of the 60's and 70's.

I was very young in the 60's and a teen in the 70's. I didn't see the excesses that Obama was complaining about - I saw antiwar, civil rights, education rights, environmentalism, consumer protection. If those are excesses to be dismissed, I can't imagine was values Obama and I share.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. The downfall was a long complex process
There were many historical and social and economic forces that caused it in the 70's, 80's and 90's.

No, the Clinton's were NOt single-handedly responsible for that.

But they did accelerate the process when they came along, by rejecting the positive aspects of what had come before and throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fresh_Start Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. thank you for agreeing that the Clintons weren't responsible
I did a poll a little while ago and asked DUers whether they wanted a President that followed what the people wanted or a President that did what he personally believed was right.

Overwhelmingly DUers want someone who followed what the people wanted.
Given a binary choice, that is also my position

Clinton for the most part (did what the people wanted).
His early effort to allow gays in the military was an attempt to do what was right rather than what was public opinion.
Do not kid yourself that people didn't want welfare reform, they absolutely did.
The Reagan myths, pushed by the media, were still resonating.

Clinton did not approve NAFTA. Bush Sr did.
Clinton pushed ameliorations to NAFTA while attempting to get NAFTA through Congress.
NAFTA is not the source of the economic problems in the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #31
63. My problem with the Clintons in this process
Clinton could have used the "political capital" he gained in his election to move things away from Reaganism.

He could have more deliberately stood up to promote and push for a liberal (progressive) agenda in a way that actually moved the sentiments of the majority in that direction. Especially on the bread-and-butter issues and on issues of wealth and power.

Gays in the military was a political mistake, that played right into the hands of the GOP, by only associating the Democrats and liberalism with wedge issues....(That is not to downplay the importance of gay rights. But he should have focused first on bread-and-butter issues as his initial act, to defuse the idea of the liberal boogeymen.)

As for NAFTA, he did not have to support it or accept Bush's version. He actively was pushing through Bush's agenda against the base of his own party.

You are correct that NAFTA is not the source of economic problems. But it is an example of a whole set of priorities and policies that have been hollowing out the domestic economy, eroding the middle class, washing away social policies and transforming the economy into some monolithic force beyond anyone's control except for the masters of global capital.










Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fresh_Start Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #63
73. Clinton started supporting a liberal agenda
when the Congress was lost, he made compromises to make progress.
Clinton moved many liberal causes forward.
He didn't have crushing victories.
But he made forward progress and to dismiss that he made progress on liberal goals, is deceitful.

He pushed for and got adjustments to NAFTA. Not in the treaty itself but in accompanying legislation. So he didn't 'ACCEPT' Bush, Sr version as approved.

So you are arguing that Clintons flaw was that he tried to move a liberal agenda? So now you are arguing that he wasn't pragmatic enough, when in the prior sentence you are argument he's too pragmatic.

Clinton showed the country competency by a democratic administration undermining a decade or more of GOP speak that democrats can't be trusted in power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #73
99. Clinton was half-hearted
When I say a "liberal agenda" I am talking in the most basic, bread-and-butter sense and symbolically in terms of large issues of Money and Power.

They bungled the few times he did try to advance a liberal agenda or watered it down so much it became meaningless, such as health care reform.

The whole architecture of "free trade" was nothing but an attempt to impose the right-wing corporate agenda on the United States and every other government in the world. Opposition to that is not isolationism or an attempt to stifle international trade. There were (are) ways to foster true global prosperity and trade without selling out American workers or perpetuating sweatshops overseas or forcing otehr nations to become corporate colonies.

But Clinton totally bought into the sandwich, and only gave lip service to the case against so-called "free trade."

Now that the obvious failures of that approach are becoming conventional wisdom, they belatedly admit that maybe that system has problems. But where were they when it mattered?

That's just one of the issues on which the Clintons either fumbled the ball, or deliberatly threw it to the elites.

We can and should do better than to put the same team back in charge. There are other alternatives.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #31
105. He not only pushed NAFTA, he also repealled Glass-Steagall... but don't let facts hit the
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 07:06 AM by JTFrog
economic disaster in the face (meaning he undid the banking safeguards that FDR put in place). He also pushed the Telcom Act that gave us the Corporate Media (who are pushing the myths you complain about). He also let Poppy walk free after promising to investigate while he was campaigning and set us up for Bush Jr.

He starved almost a million Iraqis with sanctions and jeopardized women and children in our country living on welfare.

Clinton did what people wanted? Maybe that's what you wanted. Maybe you wanted to see the country devastated by pushing through republican plans. Maybe you wanted to see us torn apart by a man who stood in front of the country and lied instead of saying it's none of your goddamn business who I had sexual relations with and trying to redefine the definition of "is".

I'm sick of the Bush's and the Clinton's. They've proven they will just continue to enable each other and that's not a winning scenario for Americans.

*edit - spelling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UALRBSofL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. OP I'm sorry you feel that way
But I believe differently. But you have your right to feel that way and vote your conscious. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
50. The "downfall" of the Democratic Party was the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
We went from official support of racism to official
opposition to it and, in doing so, enabled the conversion
of the entire White South from Democrats to Republicans.

It was the right thing to do, of course, but we paid for
it as a party.

The issues around Clinton are as Armistead stated: By
promoting the rise of the DLC and "go along with the
Republicans" Democrats, Bill Clinton completely muddied
over those (costly) Democratic achievements of so
long ago and threw away all clarity in the party's
basic message.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fresh_Start Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #50
66. sadly, LBJ's signing the Civil Rights Act
was a major factor along with the supporting civil rights legislation he signed on voting and education.
LBJ did the right thing while fully understanding the cost to himself and the democratic party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #50
79. Doesn't Obama want to bring everyone TOGETHER?
Democrats working WITH Republicans? Which has worked SO WELL in the past?

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fresh_Start Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #79
82. President Carter was supposed to heal the nation as well
I have nothing but admiration for President Carter. He is probably the finest human to be President during my lifetime.
But to assume that the President can heal the nation, is a helleva assumption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 06:41 AM
Response to Reply #82
102. Then perhaps he should stop foisting it?
He talks A LOT about "Making History." That's a pretty thick rug to pray on, so to speak. It's Obama's assumption, or that of his followers and he doesn't dispute it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
15. my guess is "identity politics".
She's a woman, and being a woman is more important than being a person who stand up for "progressive populist reform, liberal traditions or economic justice."

Plus, given the size of her money machine, obviously many of her supporters are well over the median income and really do not care any more about the working class than the average Republican. Then there are the endorsements she picks up because people wanna get an inside track to whatever plums the inevitable winner can dish out, and other endorsements who feel like they owe something to Bill Clinton for whatever he did for them back when he was President. Even Krugman might be one of those.

Then there are the sheeple, listening to the M$M and the big shot endorsers, and those who do not remember the 1990s or a more progressive Democratic party. People under 30 can only remember Bush and Clinton, and in that regard, Clinton clearly kicks sirius a$$.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. The HELL with some patronizing terms as, "identity politics"
I'm a registered member of the DSA, and even though VP Gore was my first choice, I really like and admire Senator Clinton -- regardless of her gender.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. that's patronizing?
I learned it from a class I took from PFAW. Maybe that is not what I was supposed to take away from the class, but it seemed useful to have a name for that which I oppose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #28
45. Yes, it is totally patronizing
To say women vote for HRC because she's a woman, or blacks because Obama is biracial. I believe it is dismissive bad paints the group being discussed as shallow and unanalytical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #45
61. but isn't it pretty clear
that they are not voting for Obama because he's Jesse Jackson and they are not voting for Hillary because she's Tammy Baldwin or Gloria Steinem. Isn't it a fair assumption to think that in a random group of 100,000 Americans that there are probably 30,000 who are pretty shallow. Enough to swing an election if they are easily lead by the M$M.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #15
42. Then How Do You Explain The Fact That Obama Does Best With Up Scale Democrats?
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 02:40 PM by DemocratSinceBirth
Do you know the only demographic besides African Americans that Barack beat Clinton in was folks earning over $200,000.00 per year...

If you look at the research there is a positive relationship for support for Barack Obama and income; the more you earn the more likely you are to support him...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #42
81. NEVER a good sign in my book.
The main difference between Up Scale Democrats and Up Scale Republicans is......

Oops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
18. That's how I felt about Edwards
go figure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #18
25. I can understand that.
I can totally relate to disliking an individual candidate.

However, believe it or not, with Hillary my bafflement is not based on whether or not I like her as a candidate.

It is what she represents, and the long patterns that she is a part of.

If there is another 16 years like the last 16 years, we're going to be up the creek without a paddle.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I honestly can't comprehend
how anybody can compare the last 7 years to the 8 years that preceded them.

To me the country did a 180 7 years ago this week. To lump this maladministration with Clinton just seems ridiculous to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #26
94. Because Bush and Clinton both are symptoms of something deeper
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 04:57 PM by Armstead
Yes, in many ways the country did do a 180 7 years ago. Took a nosedive. Fell off the tracks....whatever metaphor you choose. Bush and the GOP have been absolutely terrible for the country.

However, in other ways, what happened was not a significant departure from what had been happening for the previous 20 years under Reagan, Bush, Clinton. The rich were getting richer; the poor were getting poorer; the middle class was getting the limb sawed out from under it; the corporations were getting all kinds of presents such as deregulation, privatization and the gift of neo-liberal "free trade which enabled them to outsource jobs and operations.......

One thing we both will agree on is that the GOP has got to go. However, my own opinion is that we've got to evolve forward, rather than reprise the form of DLC Democratic governance that also hekped to pertpetuate systemic problems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #25
88. How about another 8 years like we had when Bill was in office? Was it really THAT bad, in comparison
???


The awesome Clinton record:

longest economic expansion in American history--a record 115 months of economic expansion
More than 22 million new jobs: more than 22 million jobs were created in less than eight years -- the most ever under a single administration
Highest home ownership in American history
Made the Federal government smaller (a feat matched only by Harry Truman; if you like small government, vote Democratic)
Lowest unemployment in 30 years: unemployment dropped from more than 7 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000; unemployment for African Americans and Hispanics fell to the lowest rates on record, and the rate for women was the lowest in more than 40 years
Largest expansion of college opportunity since the GI Bill
Connected 95 percent of schools to the Internet
Lowest crime rate in 26 years.
Family and Medical Leave Act for 20 million Americans
Smallest welfare rolls in 32 years
Higher incomes at all levels: after falling by nearly $2,000 between 1988 and 1992, the median family's income rose by $6,338, after adjusting for inflation; all income brackets experienced double-digit growth; the bottom 20 percent saw the largest income growth at 16.3 percent
Lowest poverty rate in 20 years: the poverty rate declined from 15.1 percent to 11.8 percent in 1999--the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years
Lowest teen birth rate in 60 years
Lowest infant mortality rate in American history
Deactivated more than 1,700 nuclear warheads from the former Soviet Union: efforts of the Clinton-Gore Administration led to the dismantling of more than 1,700 nuclear warheads, 300 launchers and 425 land and submarine based missiles from the former Soviet Union
Paid off $360 billion of the national debt: under Clinton, we were on track to pay off the entire debt by 2009; what a difference a stolen election makes...
Converted the largest budget deficit in American history to the largest surplus
Lowest government spending in three decades
Lowest federal income tax burden in 35 years
More families owned stock than ever before
Most New Jobs Ever Created Under a Single Administration: Republicans really chew the rug when you mention this one, so it's worth repeating constantly
Median Family Income Up $6,000 since 1993
Unemployment at Its Lowest Level in More than 30 Years
Highest Home ownership Rate on Record
7 Million Fewer Americans Living in Poverty
Largest Surplus Ever
Lower Federal Government Spending: after increasing under the previous two administrations, federal government spending as a share of the economy was cut from 22.2 percent in 1992 to 18 percent in 2000--the lowest level since 1966
The Most U.S. Exports Ever: between 1992 and 2000, U.S. exports of goods and services grew by 74 percent, or nearly $500 billion, to top $1 trillion for the first time
Lowest Inflation since the 1960s: inflation was at the lowest rate since the Kennedy Administration, averaging 2.5 percent, down from 4.6 percent during the previous administration
The child poverty rate declined more than 25 percent
The poverty rate for single mothers was the lowest ever
The African American and elderly poverty rates dropped to their lowest level on record
The Hispanic poverty rate dropped to its lowest level since 1979
Lowest Poverty Rate for Single Mothers on Record: under President Clinton, the poverty rate for families with single mothers fell from 46.1 percent in 1993 to 35.7 percent in 1999, the lowest level on record
Smallest Welfare Rolls Since 1969: between January 1993 and September of 1999, the number of welfare recipients dropped by 7.5 billion (a 53 percent decline) to 6.6 million. In comparison, between 1981-1992, the number of welfare recipients increased by 2.5 million (a 22 percent increase) to 13.6 million people
Lowest Federal Income Tax Burden in 35 Years: Federal income taxes as a percentage of income for the typical American family dropped to their lowest level in 35 years
Higher Incomes even after Taxes and Inflation: real after-tax incomes grew by an average of 2.6 percent per year for the lower-income half of taxpayers between 1993 and 1997, while growing by an average of 1.0 percent between 1981 and 1993
AGAINST TERRORISM

# PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON developed the nation's first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator of anti-terrorist efforts.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold the Al Qaeda millennium hijacking and bombing plots.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to kill the Pope.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up the Israeli Embassy in Washington.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up Boston airport.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up Lincoln and Holland Tunnels in NY.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up the George Washington Bridge.
# Bill Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to blow up the US Embassy in Albania.
# Bill Clinton tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.).
# Bill Clinton brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.
# Bill Clinton did not blame the Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after Bush left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively -- and successfully -- to stop future terrorist attacks.
# Bill Clinton named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.
# Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to tighten airport security. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.
# Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to allow for better tracking of terrorist funding. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.
# Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for better tracking of explosives used by terrorists. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA.
# Bill Clinton increased the military budget by an average of 14 per cent, reversing the trend under Bush I.
# Bill Clinton tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism.
# Bill Clinton detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries.
# Bill Clinton created national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.
# Of Clinton's efforts says Robert Oakley, Reagan Ambassador for Counterterrorism: "Overall, I give them very high marks" and "The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama".
# Paul Bremer, current Civilian Administrator of Iraq disagrees slightly with Robert Oakley as he believed the Bill Clinton Administration had "correctly focused on bin Laden.
# Barton Gellman in the Washington Post put it best, "By any measure available, Bill Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him" and was the "first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort".
http://liberalslikechrist.org/about/clinton.html
ON THE ENVIRONMENT
Bill Clinton issued an Executive Order on Environmental Justice to ensure that low-income citizens and minorities do not suffer a disproportionate burden of industrial pollution. Launched pilot projects in low-income communities across the country to redevelop contaminated sites into useable space, create jobs and enhance community development.

President Bill Clinton sought permanent funding of $1.4 billion a year through the Lands Legacy initiative to expand federal efforts to save America's natural treasures and provide significant new resources to states and communities to protect local green spaces and protect ocean and coastal resources. Won $652 million for Lands Legacy in the FY 2000 budget, a 42 percent increase.

Launched effort to protect over 40 million acres of "roadless areas," which include some of America's last wild places. Dramatically improved management of our national forests with an ambitious new science-based agenda that places greater emphasis on recreation, wildlife and water quality, while reforming logging practices to ensure steady, sustainable supplies of timber and jobs. Balanced the preservation of old-growth stands with the economic needs of timber-dependent communities through the Pacific Northwest Forest Plan.

Adopted a uniform tailpipe standard to passenger cars, SUVs and other light-duty trucks, producing cars that are 77 percent cleaner -- and light-duty trucks up to 95 percent cleaner -- than those on the road today. Set new standard to reduce average sulfur levels in gasoline by up to 90 percent. Once fully implemented in 2030, these measures will prevent 43,000 premature deaths and 173,000 cases of childhood respiratory illness each year, and reduce emissions by the equivalent to removing 164 million cars from the road.

# Approved strong new clean air standards for soot and smog that could prevent up to 15,000 premature deaths a year and improve the lives of millions of Americans who suffer from respiratory illnesses. Defending the standards against legal assaults by polluters.

# Accelerating Toxic Waste Cleanups. Completed cleanup at 515 Superfund sites, more than three times as many as the previous two administrations, with cleanup of more than 90 percent of all sites either completed or in progress. Secured $1.4 billion in FY 2000 to continue progress toward cleaning up 900 Superfund sites by 2002.

# Providing Safe Drinking Water: Proposed and signed legislation to strengthen the Safe Drinking Water Act and ensure that our families have healthy clean tap water. Required America's 55,000 water utility companies to provide regular reports to their customers on the quality of their drinking water.

# Established EPA's Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) that provides grants to States to finance priority drinking water projects that meet Clean Water Act mandates. To date, the DWSRFs have provided $1.9 billion in loans to communities.

# Awarded nearly $200 million in Department of Agriculture (USDA) loans and grants for over 100 safe drinking water projects in rural areas of 40 states. USDA grants and loans target rural communities plagued by some of the nation's worst water quality and dependability problems.

# Expanded Safe Drinking Water Act protections to protect 40 million additional Americans in small communities from potentially dangerous microbes, including Cryptosporidium, in their drinking water.

# Ensuring Clean Water. Launched the Clean Water Action Plan to help clean up the 40 percent of America's surveyed waterways still too polluted for fishing and swimming. Secured $3.9 billion since 1998, a 16 percent increase, to help states, communities and landowners in reducing polluted runoff, enhancing natural resource stewardship, improving citizens' right to know, and protecting public health.

# Strengthening Communities' Right to Know. Strengthened the public's right to know about chemicals released into their air and water by partnering with the chemical industry and the environmental community in an effort to provide complete data on the potential health risks of the 2,800 most widely used chemicals. Nearly doubled the number of chemicals that industry must report to communities, while expanding the number of facilities that must report by 30 percent.

# Expanded the community right to know about releases of 27 persistent bio-accumulative toxins (including mercury, dioxin, and PCBs). These highly toxic chemicals are especially risky because they do not break down easily and are known to accumulate in the human body.

# Secured $83 million in FY 2000 for two major new efforts to restore salmon in the Pacific Northwest: $58 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund, which provides resources for states and tribes to protect and rebuild salmon stocks; and $25 million to implement the historic Pacific Salmon Treaty with Canada, which established two regional funds to improve fisheries management and enhance bilateral scientific cooperation between the two countries and provides funding to buy back fishing permits in Washington.
# Expanding Wildlife Refuges. Added 57,000 acres, including lands along the last free-flowing section of the Columbia River, to the Saddle Mountain National Wildlife Refuge to protect salmon habitat in Washington.

# Forging Partnerships to Protect Habitat. Completed 255 major Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), compared to 14 before the Administration took office, to protect more than 20 million acres of private land and over 170 threatened and endangered species. These voluntary agreements protect habitat while providing landowners the certainty they need to effectively manage their lands.

# Strengthening Protections for Wildlife. Signed legislation that strengthens protections for wildlife by mandating that the most important use of our nation's wildlife refuges is giving refuge to migratory birds and other animals reliant on this rich system of natural habitat.

Protecting our Oceans and Coasts

# Creating Comprehensive Oceans Policy. Directed the development of key recommendations for strengthening federal oceans policy for the 21st century and appointed a high-level task force to oversee the implementation of those recommendations. Convened a National Ocean Conference in June 1998 that brought together government experts, business executives, scientists, environmentalists, elected officials and the public to examine opportunities and challenges in restoring and protecting our ocean resources.

# Strengthening Our National Marine Sanctuaries. Secured a funding increase of over 100% to better support national marine sanctuaries -- homes to coral reefs, kelp forests, humpback whales, and loggerhead turtles. Supporting the five-year Sustainable Seas Expeditions to explore, study and document ways to better protect underwater resources.

# Preserving Coral Reefs. Issued an Executive Order to expand protection of coral reefs and their ecosystems to address issues of coral reef management, expansion of marine protected areas and increased protections for coral reef species.

# Protecting Marine Mammals. Led negotiations resulting in a multilateral agreement to protect dolphins in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean. Issued new standards to protect the endangered northern right whale from injuries from ships by instituting a first-ever ship reporting requirement in two areas of right whale critical habitat. Fought for creation of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary, an area of more than 12 million square miles off the coast of Antarctica.

# Banning Ocean Dumping of Toxic Waste. Led the world in calling for a global ban on ocean dumping of low-level radioactive waste. The U.S. was the first nuclear power to advocate the ban.

Introduced "Better America Bonds" to generate $10.75 billion in bond authority over five years to preserve open space, improve water quality and clean up abandoned and contaminated properties known as brownfields. Local communities can work together in partnerships with land trust groups, environmentalists, business leaders and others to develop innovative solutions to their community's development challenges.

# Provided leadership critical to successful negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol, which sets strong, realistic targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and establishes flexible, market-based mechanisms to achieve them as cost-effectively as possible.

# Investing in Clean Energy Research. Won more than $1 billion in FY 1999 and in FY 2000 for the Climate Change Technology Initiative, a program of clean energy research and development that will save energy and consumers money. Extended the tax credits for wind and biomass energy production through 2001, reducing emissions and reliance on imported oil.

# Growing Clean Energy Technologies. Issued an Executive Order to coordinate federal efforts to spur the development and use of bio-based technologies, which can convert crops, trees and other "biomass" into a vast array of fuels and materials. Set a goal of tripling our use of bioenergy and bioproducts by 2010 to reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions by up to 100 million tons a year -- the equivalent of taking 70 million cars off the road.

# Improving Scientific Understanding. Increased funding for the United States Global Change Research Program to more than $1.7 billion in FY 2000 to provide a sound scientific understanding of both the human and natural forces that influence the Earth's climate system. This record research budget continues strong support for the "Carbon Cycle Initiative" begun last year to improve our understanding of the role of farms, forests, and other natural or managed lands in capturing carbon.

# Energy Efficiency Standards for Appliances. Issued new energy efficiency standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezers and room air conditioners that will save consumers money and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and dependence on foreign oil. The new standards will cut the average appliance's energy usage by 30 percent and save more than seven quadrillion BTUs of energy over the next 30 years, more than seven times the annual energy consumption of the entire state of Arkansas.

# Promoting federal Energy Efficiency. Issued an Executive Order directing federal agencies to reduce energy use in buildings 35 percent by 2010, reducing annual greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of taking 1.7 million cars off the road and saving taxpayers over $750 million a year. Forged new partnerships with industry to develop and promote energy-saving cars, homes and consumer products with the potential to save Americans hundreds of millions of dollars in energy bills and significantly curb greenhouse gas pollution.
http://www.environmentalcaucus.org/gore.html

PS: What about corruption?

Forget about it. As measured by the total number of convictions and forced resignations, Clinton's was the cleanest administration since Teddy Roosevelt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
20. (a) Edwards' and Clinton's voting records were similar 89% of the time
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 02:31 PM by spooky3
(b) some of us have more confidence in her experience and ability to withstand the Republican machine than we have in Obama. We know her weaknesses and her strengths. He is more of an unknown, and "borrowed" many of Edwards' substantive ideas. I hope you can understand how someone else could weigh these factors more heavily or differently than you do, given the current disastrous state of affairs in the US and the world.

Either Clinton or Obama would be vastly superior to McCain, Romney or any other Rethug.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
24. I'll give you two reasons : Recession / Depression
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 02:34 PM by lamprey
The Economy is tanking. How bad it will get, nobody knows. The next president will be dealing with a crisis. There 's a good chance the next President will have a Jimmy Carter Presidency. I got honors Economics in college. I'm scared shitless by the underlying dynamics of the economy right now. So here are two reason.

1. When I hear Clinton on the economy it's crystal clear that she understands the compexcities of the subject and has mastered them.

2. If despite best efforts, the next president rashes and burns, it would be tragic if that was Obama, inspiring a new generation of Americans, having their dream broken, turning away from politics and the Democratic party.

IMHO, Clinton will have to have to fight every week, and it will be very tough.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. I believe we have to look at both short term AND macro trends
Without going into a lot of details here, I believe The Clintons may be able to steer us through the short-term effects of a cyclical recession okay.

But I also believe the neo-liberal, corporate brand of economics they support will continue to undermine the foundations of our economy on a more deep-seated level.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 06:49 AM
Response to Reply #29
104. Obama is very "neo" himself.
Lobbyists working on his campaign, megabucks from Wall Street and Health Care Industry......

Concentrate on something else more concrete regarding what Obama will actually do: you're not convincing the people you want to win over.

And please don't tell me to go to his web site: I will not sign up for his campaign or mailing lists to read his policy statements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
27. Good liberal voting record and a long history of service
I don't give a damn about her being a corporate lawyer. I know many good progressives who do that for a living -- including some DUers.

She also has -- by far -- the best stance and record on GLBT rights of the top three Dem candidates.

She is a bit to the left of Senator Obama, and it amazes me that Obama supporters and "supporters" on here act like he's Karl Marx to her Hitler. Their Senate voting records are very close... and he certainly can be labeled as much of a "hawk" as she is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
30. Tracy Flick! I think of Hillary like I would Tracy Flick if I were in high school
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 02:36 PM by caligirl
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid988092926?bctid=1377935786

An ad for Infinite appears and then the Flick, short but pointed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #30
52. I'm going to have to see Election again
It's playing on Showtime this month
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #52
74. The one premium channel I don't get. Oh well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
34. Exactly
The Clintons have a strategy that can get you through the next election by compromising principles, targeting interest groups and going negative. It sometimes works in the short term but in the long run it destroys the party and the progressive movement.

The Democratic Party is almost lucky Bush came along to push people our way because the Clinton's left the party withering on the vine with no future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
35. How many times are you going to post this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #35
49. Probably as often as I get frustrated that we are going down the path of the......
same old shit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #49
77. I feel the same way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
38. There's no doubt they left us weaker the last time they ran things
==Bill Clinton was the first two-term Democratic president since F.D.R. and was enormously popular — and yet at the end of eight years in office, there were fewer Democratic senators, fewer Democratic congressmen, fewer Democratic governors, fewer state legislators, and the party was in debt. You can be regarded as a charismatic president, and yet it doesn’t translate into structure.==

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/25/magazine/25WWLNQ4.t.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
41. Thank you for stating that so clearly. (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beregond2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
43. HC
Very well said. My feelings exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
44. What was the name of the governor in Texas
who used his wife to get around term limits? He used to brag that she still brought in the eggs from the henhouse every morning even when she was "governor."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Strong Donating Member (334 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
46. Neoconservatism must be stopped. The Clintons have never lost. Do the math. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. How do the Clintons differ from the neo-conservatives?
Seriously.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. Bill grew up in a trailer instead of a prep school. That's it. (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cubs4life Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #48
54. Are you for real? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #48
59. They Had A Sane Foreign Policy For Staters
Force wasn't the first tool in the tool box they resorted to solve international problems...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #59
67. I kinda remember how the Clintons helped Bush push the Iraq War on us
But now Bill Clinton says he opposed the war.

Yes their foreign policy is better than Bush's overall.

But it is only in a matter of degree. The basic tenants are not all that different. Just a little bit kinder and gentler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #67
69. How?
Didn't the PNAC statement come out in 1998 and didn't Clinton resist their efforts to invade Iraq?

He had a sensible policy...He was able to keep Saddam in a box without getting the United States bogged down in a land war in Mespotamia...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #69
85. I was referring to 2002-03
The Clintons could have called Bush on his bullshit.

Even if Sadaam had a weapons program of some form, Bush fabricated a phony crisis to justify a neo-con war.

It was not difficult to see that.

Instead of calling the "crisis" what it was, the Clintons echoed the phony justifications and backed Bush,. instead of supporting calls to cool the situation down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JAbuchan08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #85
97. The Clintons have always picked their battles with the GOP
From derregulation to the Iraq war, it's always been more important that they win. If they could serve the Democratic agenda and still win, than they would, if they had to split the difference with the Republicans than they would. If they had to embrace the GOP agenda fully to win than they would do that.

Sometimes you have to lose a battle in order to win the war. The Clintons fought to win battles while always ceding ground in the larger war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #97
100. I think I agree with you.....
Edited on Wed Jan-30-08 05:43 PM by Armstead
I believe they were in a position to have won the war for everyone -- or at least won the major battles. But they ceded too much ground too often.

My metaphor is rowing a boat. To me, moderates are rowing in the same direction as liberals and progressives. The only disagreement is on the speed.

But centrists like the Clintons want to steer the boat in different directions, so we end up going backwards or in circles.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #67
83. You've forgotten PNAC, right?
The CLINTONS pushed the Iraq war on us....

You really aren't very good press for Obama; I'd let someone else try and convince us if I were you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #83
90. You confuse me
The Clintons did help to push the Iraq War on us in 2002-3, thereby also pushing the PNAC neocon agenda.

So what is your point of disagreement?

I'm also not an active Obama supporter. Just, someone who would rather see anyone (but a Republican) other than the Clintons get in again.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tyler Durden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 06:36 AM
Response to Reply #90
101. Please, let's not split hairs with this...
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 06:39 AM by Tyler Durden
or we'll start going off into support for the Patriot Act, continued war funding, etcetera. Voting for the War Resolution is a very big tent, and unless someone was standing on the street corner screaming "NO! NO! NO!" then they sort of get a "BY" on that one.

One other thing: it's very easy to say "I oppose the war in Iraq" while running for office in ILLINOIS. Obama wasn't IN the US Senate to vote one way or the other on the War Resolution, and his votes so far do not show a firm anti-war footing to me.

And as far as I'm concerned, anyone who takes over $300,000 from Goldman Sachs with almost a million from other Wall Street firms comes closer to being a Republican than I'm comfortable with.

You don't confuse ME.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Strong Donating Member (334 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #48
75. In a nutshell, the Clintons don't believe the world belongs to them to do with as they please.
Neo-cons do.

The Clintons are proven winners.

Two Presidencies and two Senate terms under their belt.

They've never lost ANYTHING since '78.

I'm going with them because the Neo-con philosophy is pure evil.

It must be stopped.

And the Clintons are the ones to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #46
92. Clintons neveer lost eh?
1976, 1980, 1994
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zodiak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #46
110. How do you feel about her fellow DLCers
being PNAC signatories? Will Marshall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metric System Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
55. "They have surgically removed the backbone of the Democratic Party"
It's funny this is what I think about Obama and his supporters. All they want to do is work with Rethugs. Sebelius's speech the other night was right out of the Obama playbook and it sickened me. The Rethugs WILL NOT willingly work with ANY Democratic President so those who believe that are delusional. Sibelius sounded like the Democrats had no spine and they would rather try to broker a peace agreement with the Rethugs (which will NEVER happen) than show some fighting spirit. Another point about Sebelius, McCaskill and some of the other Obama supporters is that they are rather conservative Democrats, and I think it's suspect that they are more than willing to work so closely with Rethugs. The fact that they don't seem to see the chasm between both parties as monumental tells me a lot about how close they are to the other side. I think it's these types who are removing the backbone of the party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
56. I'll Play
I am a Democrat,a civil liberterian, a capitalist, and a welfare state liberal... I don't find any of the categories to be mutually exclusive...

I believe in free and transparent markets but I look to the market for solutions to most of our problems except when the markets fail...

As Robert Kennedy said the best social program "is a good job and some hope."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #56
72. The markets are failing
I am a capitalist too. But capitalism is destroying itself with its own excesses. This has largely happened because the social and political balance has been eliminated. And the Clintons have been supporters of that process.

We are losing the whole notion of competition and free enterprise to a long chain of corporate mergers that are wiping out the mid and small levels of business.

America is becoming indebted to the rest of the world. We are also selling out our own financial resources. A major global corporation based in my city, for example, has just been bought by Saudi Arabia-- literally.

Policies are no longer dictated by nations and governments. They are all becoming more and more subject to the nebulous dictates of free-floating capital.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stop Cornyn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
60. As a Kucinich and Edwards supporter, I could support Hillary because her health care plan is much
better than Obama's, and she did not vote for Bush's crappy energy bill or his anti-consumer tort bill, like Obama did. I could support Hillary because I can't support McCain, obviously, and because it is very hard for me to support anyone who has embraced Donnie McClurkin like Obama has.

On the other side of the coin, it is difficult to support Hillary because of Kyl-Lieberman, because of her vote against the Senate ethics committee, because of her crappy votes against fair trade, and because her super-high negatives will imperil all of our down-ballot Democratic candidates.

It is a tough call, but I wouldn't fault any Edwards supporter who migrated to either remaining centrist milquetoast candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abburdlen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
64. If she gets the nomination
I won't have a hard time voting for her. She's obviously and intelligent person and would bring some sanity back to the White House.

I just think Obama would be able to do more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #64
78. He will be able to get more done, and he has a far superior mind to Hillary. She is a policy wonk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
68. I appreciate your comment but feel that your title was too aggressive
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
80. What's "Clintonism"?
How long does it take to get an "...ism" after your name?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElboRuum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #80
89. Depends...
If you're Bill Clinton, 8 years.

If you're Bush, 5 minutes after you say "strategery".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
84. Her YES votes on the IWR and K-L should not be rewarded by voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lateo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #84
93. I suppose that should apply to Obama too.
He did vote for the IWR after all. And his non-vote on K-L was lame, lame, lame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #93
96. how could Obama vote for the IWR when he wasn't in the senate at the time?
In fact, he directly opposed it while running for the Illinois state senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kimmerspixelated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-30-08 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
98. Great post!
I couldn't agree more!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
106. Bush took over (by coup). He undid everything Clinton did.
That's how we are where we are. Clinton has stopped the Reagan/Bush march to fascism. At great personal cost to himself. They needed to steal an election to take it back
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #106
107. He undid NAFTA? He reinstated Glass-Steagall? He reinforced Welfare? He dissembled the Corporate
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 07:16 AM by JTFrog
Media?

What exactly did Bush undo that Clinton did. Please give details.

For what I can see, Bush just spent the money Clinton saved. Not sure where else to go with that. Clinton left the country with a positive cash flow and Bush drained it. So yes, there were better days under Clinton because he handled the money better. You have to give him that.

But given his policies, followed by Mrs. Clinton and her votes for IWR, Kyl-Lieberman, Patriot Act, it is obvious that they have been enablers. And I have no desire to see them continue the pattern. It way past time to put that whole chapter of history to rest.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
109. This sentiment is often expressed by Clinton-haters. But normal people like the Clintons just fine.
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 07:32 AM by Perry Logan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #109
111. Thank you for your diagnosis
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 07:36 AM
Response to Original message
112. "Support" Is An Awfully Strong Word
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 07:36 AM by Crisco
At this point I see little difference between the two, except that Obama might wind up being more of a rube.

At this point, what my vote comes down to is, in November there will be a corporate sell-out in blue, and a corporate shill in red.

I'll vote for the one most likely to protect abortion rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberty Belle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-31-08 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
113. I agree. Here's Lakoff's view on why Obama is the most progressive left in the race:
Edited on Thu Jan-31-08 12:11 PM by Liberty Belle
What Counts as an “Issue” in the Clinton-Obama race?



By George Lakoff



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/what-counts-as-an-issue_b_84177.html





This nomination campaign is about much more than the candidates. It about a major split within the Democratic party. The candidates are reflecting that split. Here are three of the major "issues" dividing Democrats.

First, triangulation: moving to the right -- adopting right-wing positions -- to get more votes. Bill Clinton did it and Hillary believes in it. It is what she means by "bipartisanship." Obama means the opposite by "bipartisanship." To Obama, it is a recognition that central progressive moral principles are fundamental American principles. For him, bipartisanship means finding people who call themselves "conservatives" or "independents," but who share those central American values with progressives. Obama thus doesn't have to surrender or dilute his principles for the sake of "bipartisanship."

The second is incrementalism: Hillary believes in getting lots of small carefully crafted policies through, one at a time, step by small step, real but almost unnoticed. Obama believes in bold moves and the building of a movement in which the bold moves are demanded by the people and celebrated when they happen. This is the reason why Hillary talks about "I," I," "I" (the crafter of the policy) and Obama talks about "you" and "we" (the people who demand it and who jointly carry it out).

The third is interest group politics: Hillary looks at politics through interests and interest groups, seeking policies that satisfy the interests of such groups. Obama's thinking emphasizes empathy over interest groups. He also sees empathy as central to the very idea of America. The result is a positive politics grounded in empathy and caring that is also patriotic and uplifting.

For a great many Democrats, these are the real issues. These real differences between the candidates reflect real differences within the party. Whoever gets the nomination, these differences will remain.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC