Question: How can I be convinced who Senator Clinton will represent?

[chknltl]

Prior to the war in Iraq, I was one of the minority of Americans who did not want that war. I was profoundly saddened by the zeal with which my fellow Americans went along with their politicians and the news-media. I firmly believed then and history has proved me out, that Saddam Hussein posed NO threat to We The People. Senator Jim McDermott, (Dem Wa.), actually went to Iraq prior to the war to learn for himself what was going on. His report that Saddam posed no threat to America got him labeled Baghdad Jim by the repuke media...and yet he was right!

Today I cringe again over the possibility of yet another war, this time in Iran. I believe that We The People do not want this war in Iran. Again I feel that Iran poses no real threat to We The People. At least this time We The People share my feelings.

So if We The People do NOT want a war in Iran...doesn't it make sense that our representatives should honor our wishes?
Isn't THAT what DEMOCRACY is about? A government Of The People By The People and For The People. Am I missing something here? Where did that concept change to include Of The Corporations, By The Corporations and For The Corporations? I as an American citizen have an even greater fear of that. I am a selfish citizen, I do NOT want to give away my government to ANY minority shareholders...I want it to remain in the hands of WE THE PEOPLE!!!

So when one of our elected representatives runs for the position of President, I need to know in my heart of hearts that this person will represent WE THE PEOPLE over the needs of capitalistic interests. (Exactly America's problem right now). I do NOT want a continuance of corporate influence in my government, I want that plague to Democracy diminished or even ended if possible.

One by one I watched in horror as my champions for WE THE PEOPLE fell by the wayside, first Kucinich, then Edwards. Now I am siding with Senator Obama. I have no evidence but I feel that he is the least tainted of the two Democrats. He being around for the least amount of time, it is my thinking that just maybe he has the least amount of ties to corporate influence. I have really nothing more to base that hope on...NOTHING.

Senator Clinton on the other hand voted FOR the war in Iraq. That is a a matter of record. She did this when I believed in my heart of hearts that this was WRONG, but she was voting along with a majority of her colleagues and along with the wishes of the majority of WE THE PEOPLE. Much more recently she voted for Kyle Lieberman. By that time she was NOT voting for the wishes of We The People. Who benefited from war with Iraq? Was it We The People or was it the minority stockholders in America's government, in this case The Military Industrial Complex Eisenhower warned us about? Who would benefit from a war with Iran, would it be We The People or would it be that same Military Industrial Complex?

Yes, I will enthusiastically back Senator Clinton should she get the nomination. There will be none of that nose holding from me! She will get everything I have to offer just as would Senator Obama should he get the nomination. You can count on me 110% when the time comes. But that time is not here yet. Now WE THE PEOPLE are down to deciding between these two Senators. This matter is important to me. Can anyone convince me that the wishes of WE THE PEOPLE will be served better by Senator Clinton over Senator Obama given their track records?

They say never by a pig in a poke, at this point I have done just that by caucusing for Obama in yesterday caucuses. I did so not only because I do not want to see that war with Iran, but because I sense that the biggest threat to America's Democracy comes from within, from our government being taken over by special interests, by lobbyists and by corporations. The last time THAT happened we wound up in something called the Great Depression. We teeter on that slope again and for the same reasons!

Like EVERYONE here in DU I want to see WE THE PEOPLE take back our government... I seek no flames for this post although I know they will surely come. I seek honest thoughts on this from my fellow DUers. I came here for your collective wisdoms... at the end of the day we are truly on the same side! It is my hopes that you who respond to this post understand this, I hope you see my fear and address it. I know that the Military Industrial Complex has done bang up business under bush and I truly want to see an end to that. I want them OUT OF MY GOVERNMENT! When I google Military Industrial Complex/Hillary Clinton it is quite allarming. Here is but one such:

http://democracyrising.us/content/view/1127/164/

I notice that the majority of these articles came out in October of '07, a factoid that gives me pause. Was this done deliberately by some repuke think tank? And yet many are mere rehashes of an article from the Huffington Post. I am surely not the only American with such fears, what wisdoms can you give us my fellow DUers?

thanks
c

PS: My most profound Thank You to both Senator Clinton supporters and to Senator Obama supporters for getting us this far. In spite of all the kicking and screaming going on here, YOU FOLKS ROCK!!! :patriot:

[neutron]

1. Because Clinton was a President of Peace

The war thing is hyped BS. John Kerry and others voted to give Bush
leeway, and were shocked when he went berzerk.

Obama was NOT a Senator at the time. He has said that he does
not know how he would have voted.

[zanne]

5. BILL CLINTON IS NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT! nt

[chknltl]

23. You make a valid point regarding Senator Obama

We The People can not know which way he would have voted had he been there to have cast his vote. I think it was a great act of bravery to have voted against giving bush the tools to start the Iraq War and I salute all who did. Senator Obama has not been around long enough to accrue such baggage...perhaps, yes this is my wish-full thinking but just perhaps, this might be a good thing.

If he sees and can learn from history, and realize that the needs of We The People must come before the needs of holding down a job as a congressman...well than we may have us a good one here huh? It may turn out that just because he wasn't around long enough to suffer the same pitfalls that Senator Clinton fell into, (not saying he wouldn't have and odds favor that he would have succumbed to them as well), then he may pick up a good trick here! He may be able to use this as a motivational tool, one which motivates him to stand against the needs of the few in favor of the needs of the many. I am willing to accept that as a possibility...at least until someone points out that my thinking is in error. That is what I seek in this thread.

[K Gardner]

2. Excellent post !

[chknltl]

11. Why thank you. nt

[stray cat]

3. I'm convinced Hillary will represent me better than Bush and hence McCain

[chknltl]

7. Yes...we agree here, 110%

:hug: I already KNOW WE THE PEOPLE can count on you during the primaries.


But we are not at that point yet. My question is: Which of these two Democrats will represent us better over the needs of corporate interests?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

4. if you are a Dem she will represent you

[zanne]

6. I'm afraid she'll represent me like Nancy Pelosi does. nt

[chknltl]

10. This too is my concern.

You will notice that I am one of a few who has not removed the "Impeach Bush" thingy from my posts. I still feel that the needs of "We The People" have been usurped by the needs of "We The Corporations". I feel that bush's representations of "We The Corporations" to be ultimately the greatest threat to America's Democracy. I do not want this threat slowed, I want it ELIMINATED! But this is not a thread about impeachment... it is I hope one about Democracy and about finding out from my fellow DUers what is really going on within our Democracy. I am quite aware that Representative Pelosi is FAR FAR better for We The People than Hastert was....but does she really represent the ultimate wishes of We The People? That I do not have answers to. Hopefully our fellow DUers will help us out. Hopefully we can get some answers regarding Senator Clinton AND Senator Obama. That is what I seek, I seek our collective wisdom.

[chknltl]

14. That would be my hopes...

...yet her vote for the war in Iraq, her vote for Kyle Lieberman give me pause. When this is combined with the assertion that America may have been reduced to electing dynasties...well I have concerns. I'll give you my solemn promise ElsewheresDaughter, you can count on me to back Senator Clinton should she get the nomination. My sincerest thanks to you for helping to get her this far. Today is not the day to decide between republicans and democrats though...We are instead deciding between two great Democrats and I am trying to resolve which of these two nominees will better represent We The People. I have well grounded fears when it comes to the hostile takeover of our government by it's minority shareholders: corporate intrests. I can think of no greater threat to Democracy than that of this ongoing hostile takeover. Bush has accelerated this attack and I seek assurances that Senator Clinton or Senator Obama will put a halt to this.

[comradebillyboy]

8. Neither Clinron nor Obama will provoke a war with Iran

1. It is not in their best interests.
2. It is not in the nation's best interest.
3. The US armed forces are overstressed and need to be rested and refitted; the top brass really don't want a war with Iran right now.
4. With the exception of Israel, there is no international support for a war with Iran
5. War with Iran would close the Persian gulf to oil exports, seriously damaging our economy and the world wide economy.

Clinton is not a neo-con ideologue, but a very pragmatic politician and her first order of business, if elected, should be to get the nation's economy back on track. She would like a second term, another war will wreck any chance of that. I expect that she would open up some sort of diplomatic dialog with Iran at a lower level at first and at higher levels as progress is made.

[chknltl]

12. Yes! Yes! This is what I looked for regarding her likely actions toward Iran!

You have even reminded me of something which backs up what you say: the fact that Madeline Allbright still councils the Clintons...she is and always has been a strong proponent of DIPLOMACY OVER WAR!
Thank you.

Even-so, do you think that Senator Clinton will hold the line when it comes to representing the needs of We The People over the needs of We The Corporations? I live in an area surrounded by the fruits of the Military Industrial Complex. I have McChord Airforce Base, Ft. Lewis Army Base, Bremerton Naval shipyards and Bangor Submarine base all within an hours drive of my home. I am acutely aware of what these bases have contributed to my area economically. I am NOT so much against the Military Industrial Complex but I am KEENLY aware that Democracy can NOT be trumped by corporate interests. When that happens, democracy dies a little bit. This then is still my concern, who will represent the needs of WE The People better? Thank you again for assuaging my fear about Iran.

[Armstead]

9. Hillary IS the corporate candidate -- Obama has the potential to do better

To me that is the bottom line.

Obama is no Edwards or Kucinich or even a Dean. It is quite possible that he could end up being a sellout.

But for me the bottom line is that Obama has the potential to avoid that, and become a truly representative president of all the people. He has the potential to stand up against the corporate interests and advance liberal and progressive poilicies, especially if the base keeps his feet to the fire.

Hillary, on the other hand, is so deeply embedded into the matrix of Big Money and Big Power that she can never break free of the DLC corporate conservative centrism. She may talk a good populist line, but so did her husband in 1992, before he sold us down the river.

[chknltl]

13. I sense much of that same history.

I do not sense what you sense about Obama though...I am aware of no history of his which backs that up. (If you have something PLEASE help us out). I back him out of HOPE because I have little more than that to work with. The best I could come up with stems from his "freshness" in politics. That is a nebulous at best item to pin my hopes on but at the moment it is all I have.

So if Senator Clinton gets the nomination and she gets my FULLEST support, how can WE THE PEOPLE bring about a change to this phenomenon? In my heart of hearts I do not believe that either President Clinton or Senator Clinton are such monsters that they would see an end to Democracy. History clearly shows us that corporatism can and will bring Democracy to the brink of destruction. It is easily apparent that this was exactly what bush has allowed to happen. Senator Clinton is NOT bush lite.... or at least I hope not.

[Armstead]

15. The Clintons were the gift that keeps opn giving for Corporatism

As for the Clintons, frankly, Corportism got much much worse during the 90's. Rather than being a break in the line of Reagan-Bush1-Bush 2, Clinton was a seamless conenction between Republican administrations, in terms of polarizing the economy and turning it over to Corporate Monopolists.

The Clintons sat back and watched and -- much worse -- actually endorsed it through such crap as NAFTA, MFN for China and other examples of neoliberal "free trade."

Bill Clinton handed the media over to the mega corps and creepy companies like Clear Channel. He gave the Corporate Bosses a new pool of captive cheap labor through Welfare Deform,he enthusiastically endorsed the corporate policies of Alan Greenspan (an acolyte of Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand), he turned to Wall St. for all economic advice....etc. etc. etc.

[chknltl]

16. Ok. This is history, one that is further grounds for my concern.

But it is history non-the-less. Senator Clinton is not President Clinton. I hope it is not her desire to repeat those things which have been so harmful to our Democracy. She too can see that history and I WANT to believe she is even more keenly aware of it than you or I. Although I have little to go on for my hopes, it is my hopes that she is NOT some monster who will choose to render aid to corpoaratism over the clear needs of Democracy. We have way too many good DUers out there supporting Senator Clinton's bid.. again it is my hopes that they are seeing something I have yet to see.
That is the true nature of my post. WE ALL WANT WHAT IS BEST FOR DEMOCRACY. We have this in common. I hope to use that commonality in order to get to the bottom of my concerns, to the bottom of OUR concerns in order to ascertain who really will be the best Democratic Candidate.

(edited to repair the wording of a sentence in order to better reflect my thoughts))

[Armstead]

17. I don't want history to repeat itself

I honestly believe that if Hillary is the nominee, the boot of the DLC will be pressed on the party even harder. That will bring all of the concessions, sell outs and sweeping of real economic issues under the carpet, while throwing out crumbs to the huddle masses.

Yes, if she's the nominee I'll support her to fight the GOP....etc. etc. etc.

But I honestly don't think there will be a chance to actually move the country in a better direction if she becomes the nominee or president. It's just be a sequal called DLC/Clinton 2.

[chknltl]

20. hmmm. so I am right for supporting Senator Obama

I am dismayed that our fellow DUers have not risen to voice disagreement here... My worries about a war with Iran have been laid to rest by one of them but my bigger worries that Senator Clinton will still be party to our bigger problem, the erosion of our Democracy by favoring the needs of the minority shareholders: "corporatism", has NOT been assuaged.

I still have not discovered that Senator Obama will be any better here. All I have to work with is his "newness" on the scene. It is my HOPE that this newness translates to being untouched by that same corporatism. There are no guarantees against that he too will fall victim over time. At this point he may indeed be the best candidate to defend Democracy that we have left, and for that reason has and deserves my support.

Until a fellow DUer can offer up legitimate counters to what you have asserted Armstead, you have answered my call for information and help. I feel less like I support a "Pig in a Poke" now. Thank you. I weep for our great nation. TOO MANY Americans have died defending America's Democracy...I do not want to believe that it will end this way. I want to believe that at some point WE THE PEOPLE will rise up again and take back our own governance.

Also, thank you for your support for Senator Clinton should it come to that. We are not monsters for opposing her you and I. We want what we feel is best for America and we know that she will stand by us better than a repuke....but we can hope for more none-the-less.

edited for spell check, and a good thing too! :blush:

[LittleBlue]

18. If she can't admit she's wrong on IWR, I will not vote for her.

Under any circumstances. Sorry, one warmonger is the same as another to me. I am a one-issue voter. Tough.

[chknltl]

21. If I may, I would like to persuade you otherwise.

I am an Obama supporter, as you may have noticed I have tried to be impartial throughout this thread. Now it seems that I must take on the mantle of a Senator Clinton supporter...in reality I am a supporter of American democracy.

I see things on a scale, one side has what is best for America and the other has what is worst. Because America is still a powerful force for our planet, and because I am by birth a citizen of this country, I want what is best for her and ultimately what is best for our planet. To me, there is no finer form of governance than democracy but I am not one to advocate the export of it. I prefer that We The People lead by example. There are forces at work here who who would destroy this precious thing called DEMOCRACY and they will too but only IF We The People let them.

If while participating in a battle would you advocate surrendering the entire war just because the battle is not going as we would wish it? No I suspect you would not. Like the rest of us you would be into it for the long haul. History clearly shows that we can suffer defeats in battle yet win the war. The battle of the Bulge makes a great example here. Americans did NOT give up in spite of the opposition they faced. They could have surrendered you know but they fought on.

Yes you can easily say that this is the politics of war as opposed to war itself. I argue that this is indeed a war, the war to take control of our democracy. On one side we have corporatism which is fueled legitimately by capitalism and on the other side you have We The People and our equally legitimate concerns to maintain our hold over our own self governance: DEMOCRACY.

If members of We The People give up now...we may indeed lose it all. I will not debate with you that this may be a good thing. America is the belligerent actor here but like the French Freedom Fighters during Hitler's occupation, we too can do our part to reverse our current state of affairs. Senator Clinton may have her feet on BOTH sides of this battle but I sincerely doubt that she would want to see democracy destroyed...hell I doubt even dick cheney is that evil. That said, Senator Clinton is far closer to supporting democracy than dick cheney could be. Sadly, each one of the republican nominees including Ron Paul is somewhere between Senator Clinton and dick cheney. We The People must move the pendulum of our own governance as close to representing democracy's wishes as we can. That is OUR job in this war. The fact that it has slipped a bit in a direction counter to democracy is no reason to give up on her just yet. Too many Americans from Valley Forge to Felusia have died defending democracy. We are not at the point where we can surrender...not yet.

Do you remember something called the Great Depression? America's democracy was in FAR worse shape back then. Yet We clung to it, we took our country back from the corporatist who held OUR wealth, who felt it right to control that wealth and who almost destroyed America's democracy in the process. Many Americans lost their lives in that battle, starvation and freezing took it's toll and yet We The People did NOT give up! We took that wealth away from those bastards and redistributed it throughout the Middle Class. WE CAN DO SO AGAIN

But it will be far harder to save our Democracy if bush remains in power...McCain is nothing more than even more bush. Worse, this asshole has no problem with dumping a nuke on Iran! Do you suppose the good citizens of Iran would want YOU to give up now? NO!!!! THEIR VERY EXISTENCE may depend on YOU standing in there and fighting for them too. Do you really think Senator Clinton to be such a monster that she would drop a nuke on Iran? I can assure you that she is NOT nor would she ever do that! So please PLEASE contrast how many humans worldwide will die if Senator McCain gets to be POTUS with how many will die should Senator Clinton become POTUS. If Senator Clinton gets the nomination she will need YOUR support...it would be a cosmic tragedy should she lose to McCain because others who may think like you walk away from that support.

Right now democracy and the world needs YOU my fellow DUer...no, I do not want to see democracy destroyed any more than you do. No I do not want to see those deaths I suggested any more than you do. If for nothing else, we MUST back Senator Clinton in order to save lives and I hope, as I have argued here, to save America's democracy.

If you still want to surrender, well that is your choice my fellow DUer. You do not have to answer my post, I just wanted to let you see things as I am seeing things and perhaps get you to reconsider. I FEEL YOUR PAIN BUT GODDAMMIT WE NEED YOU!!!

[WilyWondr]

19. Look at the support structure

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/donordems.asp?cycle=2008

BHO 10% of contributions are from contributors of $4600.
HRC 33% of contributions are from contributors of $4600.

I have never given $4600 to a political campaign and doubt I ever would. IMO, that means that 1/3 of the people supporting HRC's campaign are not people I can relate to on many issues. What if the limit on campaign contributions was $100. Do you think BHO would have the nomination sewn up by now?


Also, according to opensecrets.org, HRC has taken $823,000 from lobbyists while BHO has taken $86,000 from lobbyists.

These 2 facts make it difficult for me to believe that HRC will be representing me or people like me while sitting in the oval office.


Hell yes, I am in favor of public financing of campaigns.

[chknltl]

22. PERFECT POST WilyWonder

:hug:

This is the very meat of what I too am feeling. I am not alone in these feelings and my thread is meant more than anything else to be used as a format for Senator Clinton supporters to clear this up for us. Look, WilyWonder, you and I are on the same page here, we want to see We The People take back our government. So do Senator Clinton's supporters!

Corporatism is NOT democracy. It gets no simpler than that. The problem is NOT Senator Clinton though, the problem is that We The People have allowed things to fall to the point that corporatism is close to being the ultimate control over We The People.

So how do we remedy this? First things first, We The People need to be made aware of our one true enemy. That enemy is capitalism unrestricted. Democracy can NOT survive long in an environment where capitalism is allowed to take the reigns of our government. Yes, the corporations do have a legitimate right to making profits BUT not at the expense of We The People's own self governance. WE THE PEOPLE must retain the ultimate control over our representitives... including the President.

I can not address the nuts and bolts of the bigger picture as you have in your post, I do not know what reforms are needed but I can at least see that bigger picture. If Senator Clinton becomes our President we will be able to work with her I think. If McCain gets that job...well there is NO way he will give us back our government...he is FAR TOO deeply into the pockets of corporatism...he will listen to We The People no more than bush or cheney has so far.

Thank you for your post...it truly is a good one!