Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
.
She is and has been involved with Dominionists.
article | posted March 19, 2008
Hillary's Nasty Pastorate
Barbara Ehrenreich
There's a reason Hillary Clinton has remained relatively silent during the flap over intemperate remarks by Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, she's a lot more vulnerable than Obama.
You can find all about it in a widely under-read article in the September 2007 issue of Mother Jones, in which Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet reported that "through all of her years in Washington, Clinton has been an active participant in conservative Bible study and prayer circles that are part of a secretive Capitol Hill group known as "The "Fellowship," also known as The Family. (Mother Jones article link, below)
The Family's most visible activity is its blandly innocuous National Prayer Breakfast, held every February in Washington. But almost all its real work goes on behind the scenes--knitting together international networks of right-wing leaders, most of them ostensibly Christian. In the 1940s, The Family reached out to former and not-so-former Nazis, and its fascination with that exemplary leader, Adolf Hitler, has continued, along with ties to a whole bestiary of murderous thugs. As Sharlet reported in Harper's in 2003:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich
Hillary's Prayer: Hillary Clinton's Religion and Politics
News: For 15 years, Hillary Clinton has been part of a secretive religious group that seeks to bring Jesus back to Capitol Hill. Is she triangulating—or living her faith?
By Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet
Illustration by: Andy Friedman
September 1, 2007
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature … rayer.html
.
She is and has been involved with Dominionists.
article | posted March 19, 2008
Hillary's Nasty Pastorate
Barbara Ehrenreich
There's a reason Hillary Clinton has remained relatively silent during the flap over intemperate remarks by Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. When it comes to unsavory religious affiliations, she's a lot more vulnerable than Obama.
You can find all about it in a widely under-read article in the September 2007 issue of Mother Jones, in which Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet reported that "through all of her years in Washington, Clinton has been an active participant in conservative Bible study and prayer circles that are part of a secretive Capitol Hill group known as "The "Fellowship," also known as The Family. (Mother Jones article link, below)
The Family's most visible activity is its blandly innocuous National Prayer Breakfast, held every February in Washington. But almost all its real work goes on behind the scenes--knitting together international networks of right-wing leaders, most of them ostensibly Christian. In the 1940s, The Family reached out to former and not-so-former Nazis, and its fascination with that exemplary leader, Adolf Hitler, has continued, along with ties to a whole bestiary of murderous thugs. As Sharlet reported in Harper's in 2003:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich
Hillary's Prayer: Hillary Clinton's Religion and Politics
News: For 15 years, Hillary Clinton has been part of a secretive religious group that seeks to bring Jesus back to Capitol Hill. Is she triangulating—or living her faith?
By Kathryn Joyce and Jeff Sharlet
Illustration by: Andy Friedman
September 1, 2007
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature … rayer.html
Clinton: 'Coal Will Be Part of the Energy Mix For Years to Come, Both in the U.S. and Around the World'
Hillary Clinton’s record is remarkably consistent, in serving the people at the top, by serving to them the people at the bottom.
By Eric Zuesse / AlterNet
March 21, 2016
The “Down with Tyranny” blog quotes Hillary Clinton’s statement in a recent letter to Democratic U.S. Senator from West Virginia, Joe Manchin, assuring him that as President she won’t be overly aggressive to reduce the coal industry, because coal-mining jobs are at stake; thus: “Coal will be part of the energy mix for years to come, both in the U.S. and around the world.”
That blogger, who styles himself “Gaius Publius,” has excellent sources in the national Democratic Party, and he comments:
Clinton uses job-concern as a reason to seem like we should proceed carefully. But after all, a great many people in the U.S. are out of jobs — many in disappearing industries — and yet I’ll be willing to bet money she either signs TPP or refuses to renegotiate it; then signs TTIP and TISA, and with them, says goodbye to the last jobs worth having, save those near the top.
So, jobs? Maybe she cares only in this case? Or maybe she cares about something else as well.
Personally, I don’t take her worrying about coal jobs any more seriously than I take her worrying about, say, manufacturing jobs. Remember, the Pennsylvania primary is coming soon, with West Virginia shortly after. And if she really cares about mitigating the aggressive destruction of the coal industry, there are ways to bail out people too, not just big carbon corporations and the banks that lend to them. …
I don’t think this is an unfair criticism of her, though some do think so. I find it an interesting implicit dog-whistle. “Don’t worry, coal bosses; we’ll foam your landing strip too.”
The blogger analogizes this to the bail-out of Wall Street, which Clinton supports: he says that she favored there, and still does, bailing out the lenders instead of bailing out the borrowers, and he thinks that in the coal issue she will protect the coal companies instead of protect their workers.
Hillary Clinton’s record, her vaunted experience, is remarkably consistent, in serving the people at the top, by serving to them the people at the bottom. Here are some of the relevant headlines::
“Hillary Clinton’s Global-Burning Record”
“Hillary Clinton Backs Fast-Track on Obama’s Trade Deals”
“Hillary Clinton Oversaw US Arms Deals to Clinton Foundation Donors”
“Hillary Clinton Is Backed by Major Republican Donors”
“Hillary Clinton’s Six Foreign-Policy Catastrophes”
“Hillary v. Bernie: Their Two Opposite Views of the Presidency”
She’s “the experience candidate,” in the view of voters, as if the content of that experience doesn’t matter, and as if what matters instead is the posts she has occupied: First Lady for 8 years, U.S. Senator for 4 years, then Secretary of State for 4 years.
By contrast, Bernie Sanders has a record of having been a civil-rights organizer for the Congress of Racial Equality while a student at the University of Chicago, then a mayor of Burlington, Vermont for eight years, the U.S. Representative from Vermont for 18 years, and a U.S. senator from Vermont for (so far) 10 years.
Donald Trump has no political record, except as a donor to the campaigns of Democrats and Republicans — and, of course, as the heir of NYC real-estate mogul Fred Trump, Fred’s son who continued the growth of Fred’s business.
To summarize: Hillary Clinton has a consistent record of having served well her billionaire donors. Donald Trump has a consistent record of having been served well by the politicians to whom he has donated. Bernie Sanders has a consistent record of having served well the public who elected him to public office. (That’s why he has the highest approval-rating of all 100 U.S. senators.)
It’s common for politicians to lie, and anyone who judges a candidate on the basis not of what he/she has done but instead on the basis of what he/she tells voters what that given politician will do is judging the candidate on an invalid basis.
So: would it be reasonable to assert that anyone (other than her major donors) who votes for Hillary Clinton is simply a sucker? Reader-comments here are welcomed to discuss this question, providing reasons why or why not that’s the case.
1. Amid all the accusations that Hillary Clinton is not an honest or authentic politician, that she’s an endless shape-shifter who says whatever works to get her to the next primary, it’s important not to lose sight of the one truth she’s been telling, and will continue to tell, the voters: things will not get better. Ever. At first, I thought this was just an electoral ploy against Sanders: don’t listen to the guy promising the moon. No such thing as a free lunch and all that. But it goes deeper. The American ruling class has been trying to figure out for years, if not decades, how to manage decline, how to get Americans to get used to diminished expectations, how to adapt to the notion that life for the next generation will be worse than for the previous generation, and now, how to accept (as Alex Gourevitch reminded me tonight) low to zero growth rates as the new economic normal. Clinton’s campaign message isn’t just for Bernie voters; it’s for everyone. Expect little, deserve less, ask for nothing. When the leading candidate of the more left of the two parties is saying that — and getting the majority of its voters to embrace that message — the work of the American ruling class is done.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests