Regarding TPP - she helped write it and negotiated it as it was an international treaty and her state department negotiated it. She came out against it after she spent four years promoting it. She found out the nation was not only wise to it but against it. If she had continued to support it, she'd be in even deeper doo doo in her campaign against Bernie Sanders. This was her attempt to match Bill's NAFTA agreement. NAFTA is a much more balanced treaty than is TPP, particularly on the issue of intellectual property which the Chinese and the South Koreans seem to be dismissive of.
We can remember what happened to George Romney's '68 run for President when he claimed to have support the war policy in Viet Nam only because he'd been brain washed by another President who was a Democrat.
Keystone - she refused to say where she stood as she started campaigning for President and didn't advocate she was against it until Nebraska indicated it would not allow for condemnation of property to gain access for the pipeline effectively killing the pipeline for at least years while it would be fought out in courts.
Pro for profits Prisons? CCA is one of her biggest donors. Do you really think Corrections Corporation of America, a company that got its start after Bill Clinton was elected donates to her so she'll make it harder for them to profit? Or are they paying of Hillary for everything Bill did for them?
All my concerns were answered beneath the the videos with links and labeled in the OP.
Just to be clear: I am voting for her if she gets the nod and I will campaign for her. If the only thing Bernie Sanders accomplishes is getting her edged left, I will be happy. If I get the 1992 left wing pro-single payer Hillary, I will be very, very happy.
March 19, 2015 American Camping Association (J-1 Visa Program) Atlantic City, NJ $260,000.00
March 11, 2015 eBay Inc. San Jose, CA $315,000.00
February 24, 2015 Watermark Silicon Valley Conference for Women Santa Clara, CA $225,500.00 January 22, 2015 Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (Keystone Pipeline) Whistler, Canada $150,000.00
January 21, 2015 tinePublic Inc. (Keystone Pipeline) Winnipeg, Canada $262,000.00
January 21, 2015 tinePublic Inc. (Keystone Pipeline) Saskatoon, Canada $262,500.00
December 4, 2014 Massachusetts Conference for Women Boston, MA $205,500.00
October 14, 2014 Salesforce.com San Francisco, CA $225,500.00
October 14, 2014 Qualcomm Incorporated San Diego, CA $335,000.00
October 13, 2014 Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers Colorado Springs, CO $225,500.00
October 8, 2014 Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed) Chicago, IL $265,000.00
October 7, 2014 Deutsche Bank AG New York, NY $280,000.00 October 6, 2014 Canada 2020 (Keystone Pipeline) Ottawa, Canada $215,500.00
October 2, 2014 Commercial Real Estate Women Network Miami Beach, FL $225,500.00
September 15, 2014 Cardiovascular Research Foundation Washington, DC $275,000.00
September 4, 2014 Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, LLP San Diego, CA $225,500.00
August 28, 2014 Nexenta System, Inc. San Francisco, CA $300,000.00
August 28, 2014 Cisco Las Vegas, NV $325,000.00
July 29, 2014 Corning, Inc. Corning, NY $225,500.00
July 26, 2014 Ameriprise Boston, MA $225,500.00
July 22, 2014 Knewton, Inc. San Francisco, CA $225,500.00
June 26, 2014 GTCR Chicago, IL $280,000.00
June 25, 2014 Biotechnology Industry Organization San Diego, CA $335,000.00
June 25, 2014 Innovation Arts and Entertainment San Francisco, CA $150,000.00
June 20, 2014 Innovation Arts and Entertainment Austin, TX $150,000.00
June 18, 2014 tinePublic Inc. (Keystone Pipeline) Toronto, Canada $150,000.00
June 18, 2014 tinePublic Inc. (Keystone Pipeline) Edmonton, Canada $100,000.00
June 10, 2014 United Fresh Produce Association Chicago, IL $225,000.00
June 2, 2014 International Deli-Dairy-Bakery Association Denver, CO $225,500.00
June 2, 2014 Let's Talk Entertainment Denver, CO $265,000.00
May 6, 2014 National Council for Behavorial Healthcare Washington, DC $225,500.00
April 11, 2014 California Medical Association (via Satellite) San Diego, CA $100,000.00
April 10, 2014 Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc. Las Vegas, NV $225,500.00
April 10, 2014 Let's Talk Entertainment San Jose, CA $265,000.00
April 8, 2014 Marketo, Inc. San Francisco, CA $225,500.00
April 8, 2014 World Affairs Council Portland, OR $250,500.00
March 24, 2014 Academic Partnerships Dallas, TX $225,500.00
March 18, 2014 Xerox Corporation New York, NY $225,000.00
March 18, 2014 Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal (Keystone Pipeline) Montreal, Canada $275,000.00
March 13, 2014 Pharmaceutical Care Management Association Orlando, FL $225,500.00
March 13, 2014 Drug Chemical and Associated Technologies New York, NY $250,000.00
March 6, 2014 tinePublic Inc. (Keystone Pipeline) Calgary, Canada $225,500.00
March 5, 2014 The Vancouver Board of Trade (Keystone Pipeline) Vancouver, Canada $275,500.00
March 4, 2014 Association of Corporate Counsel - Southern California Los Angeles, CA $225,500.00
February 27, 2014 A&E Television Networks New York, NY $280,000.00
February 26, 2014 Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society Orlando, FL $225,500.00
February 17, 2014 Novo Nordisk A/S Mexico City, Mexico $125,000.00
February 6, 2014 Salesforce.com Las Vegas, NV $225,500.00
January 27, 2014 National Automobile Dealers Association New Orleans, LA $325,500.00
January 27, 2014 Premier Health Alliance Miami, FL $225,500.00
January 6, 2014 GE Boca Raton, FL $225,500.00
November 21, 2013 U.S. Green Building Council Philadelphia, PA $225,000.00
November 18, 2013 CME Group Naples, FL $225,000.00
November 18, 2013 Press Ganey Orlando, FL $225,000.00
November 14, 2013 CB Richard Ellis, Inc. New York, NY $250,000.00
November 13, 2013 Mediacorp Canada, Inc. Toronto, Canada $225,000.00
November 9, 2013 National Association of Realtors San Francisco, CA $225,000.00
November 7, 2013 Golden Tree Asset Management New York, NY $275,000.00
November 6, 2013 Beaumont Health System Troy, MI $305,000.00
November 4, 2013 Mase Productions, Inc. Orlando, FL $225,000.00
November 4, 2013 London Drugs, Ltd. Mississauga, ON $225,000.00
October 29, 2013 The Goldman Sachs Group Tuscon, AZ $225,000.00
October 28, 2013 Jewish United Fund/Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago Chicago, IL $400,000.00
October 27, 2013 Beth El Synagogue Minneapolis, MN $225,000.00
October 24, 2013 Accenture New York, NY $225,000.00
October 24, 2013 The Goldman Sachs Group New York, NY $225,000.00
October 23, 2013 SAP Global Marketing, Inc. New York, NY $225,000.00
October 15, 2013 National Association of Convenience Stores Atlanta, GA $265,000.00
October 4, 2013 Long Island Association Long Island, NY $225,000.00
September 19, 2013 American Society of Travel Agents, Inc. Miami, FL $225,000.00
September 18, 2013 American Society for Clinical Pathology Chicago, IL $225,000.00
August 12, 2013 National Association of Chain Drug Stores Las Vegas, NV $225,000.00
August 7, 2013 Global Business Travel Association San Diego, CA $225,000.00
July 11, 2013 UBS Wealth Management New York, NY $225,000.00
June 24, 2013 American Jewish University University City, CA $225,000.00
June 24, 2013 Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Company, LP Palos Verdes, CA $225,000.00
June 20, 2013 Boston Consulting Group, Inc. Boston, MA $225,000.00
June 20, 2013 Let's Talk Entertainment, Inc. Toronto, Canada $250,000.00
June 17, 2013 Economic Club of Grand Rapids Grand Rapids, MI $225,000.00
June 16, 2013 Society for Human Resource Management Chicago, IL $285,000.00
June 6, 2013 Spencer Stuart New York, NY $225,000.00
June 4, 2013 The Goldman Sachs Group Palmetto Bluffs, SC $225,000.00
May 29, 2013 Sanford C. Bernstein and Co., LLC New York, NY $225,000.00
May 21, 2013 Verizon Communications, Inc. Washington, DC $225,000.00
May 16, 2013 Itau BBA USA Securities New York, NY $225,000.00
May 14, 2013 Apollo Management Holdings, LP New York, NY $225,000.00
May 8, 2013 Gap, Inc. San Francisco, CA $225,000.00
April 30, 2013 Fidelity Investments Naples, FL $225,000.00
April 24, 2013 Deutsche Bank Washington, DC $225,000.00
April 24, 2013 National Multi Housing Council Dallas, TX $225,000.00
April 18, 2013 Morgan Stanley Washington, DC $225,000.00
Tue 8 Mar, 2016 11:48 am
Tue 8 Mar, 2016 09:05 pm
First of all, Sec of States promote the agenda of the President they work for. They can certainly give advice against something to a President but they don't express an opinion contrary to the President in public. Your argument against her is nonsensical because she was doing her job when she supp0rts a President.
Tue 8 Mar, 2016 09:10 pm
That's funny bobsal because Sanders voted the exact same way Clinton did on that bill.
Black Lives Matter Activist Confronts Clinton About Racially Charged Remarks Because the Corporate Media Won't
Clinton says it's the first time anyone's asked her about saying "superpredators need to be brought to heel." Why?
By Adam Johnson / AlterNet
February 24, 2016
It took one activist in South Carolina to ask a question no one in the media had the courage to ask: Why Clinton used decidedly racist language in 1996 to promote her husband’s “tough on crime” legislation. Speaking before Keene State College to promote Bill Clinton’s crime bill, then-First Lady and campaign surrogate Hillary Clinton said the following:
Black Lives Matter protester Ashley Williams wasn’t going to let these comments go. At a $500-a-head event in Charleston, South Carolina, the young activist held up a sign that read, “we have to bring them to heel,” and shouted at the former Secretary of State, “I am not a super predator.”
Clinton demurred, avoided a direct response, and Williams was eventually escorted out of the building. At least someone had bothered to confront Clinton with her own words:
Today, Clinton’s dehumanizing language is jarring, but some 20 years ago it was the cornerstone of right-wing criminal justice panic, some of which the Clintons helped stoke. The comments, first unearthed by Buzzfeed’s Andrew Kaczynski and Christopher Massie in May of last year, have recently resurfaced and become something of a headache for the campaign around the margins. Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow, cited them in her scathing critique of Clinton’s record on race, as did the Daily Beast’s Goldie Taylor.
“I wanted to bring her to confront her own words,” Williams told the Huffington Post. “We did this because we wanted to make sure that black people are paying attention to her record, and we want to know what Hillary we are getting.”
Popularized by John J. DiIulio Jr, the superpredator myth was born from the pages of the far-right Weekly Standard and is credited with providing pseudo-academic cover for a wave of harsh anti-drug and juvenile penalties that swept the nation in the '90s. DiIulio eventually disavowed the idea, telling the New York Times in 2014 that his projections were mistaken and that “demography is not fate.” The Times chronicled the devastating effect the myth had on the African-American community:
It certainly had consequences. It energized a movement, as one state after another enacted laws making it possible to try children as young as 13 or 14 as adults... Many hundreds of juveniles were sent to prison for life, though in the last few years the United States Supreme Court has ruled that such sentences must not be automatic, even in murder cases. Individual circumstances and possible mitigating factors should be weighed, the justices said.
Inescapably, superpredator dread had a racial component. What the doomsayers focused on, in the main, were young male African-Americans. For Steven A. Drizin, a law professor at Northwestern University writing for The Huffington Post last September, the deep-seated fear that any black teenager in a hoodie must be up to no good was essentially what got Trayvon Martin killed in Florida two years ago.
The scandal is that it took one intrepid activist to finally confront Clinton with these words. The most glaring failure to do so came from Fusion, who hosted the Iowa Black and Brown forum before the February 1 caucus. While the panel did press Clinton on her support of mass incarceration, it remained vague and didn’t cite these specific, racially charged statements despite the fact that they had been floating around social media for some time.
Adam Johnson is an associate editor at AlterNet. Follow him on Twitter at @adamjohnsonnyc.
Wed 9 Mar, 2016 06:25 am
I see it every freaking day on Democratic Underground and here, too.
I am not going to call out members here. I am not about turn any discussion into a GOP debate. If you think Bernie Sanders hasn't been maligned and Hillary hasn't been foisted as the only solution, then we see things here differently. The DNC primary discussion hasn't gotten anywhere as nasty as the GOP's, but its gotten nasty enough.
The only politician I see who hasn't gotten personal is Bernie. Hillary has put in any number of dirty shots, like the her auto bailout mis-truthes in the last debate.
And this is the kind of crap most voters are sick and tired of, its out of step with what they want from their leaders.
Wed 9 Mar, 2016 07:17 am
If you think Bernie Sanders hasn't been maligned and Hillary hasn't been foisted as the only solution,
See, now you're being disingenuous. I challenge you to provide a specific example of someone hero-worshiping Hillary as if she's perfect (as you said you see examples of all the time), and you erect a straw man and say Hillary's being "foisted as the only solution". I call bullshit.
Besides anyone being honest will admit that the only hero-worship that has been happening has been of Bernie, by Bernie fans. They are the one's saying he's the only one "pure", "the only hope for liberals", the last good politician, etc., etc., etc. And the worst vitriol has been coming from Bernie fans toward Hillary. I also challenge you to show one example where Bernie has been maligned like Hillary - where someone has called him the kind of names The Berniebots call Hillary. Double bullshit.
Wed 9 Mar, 2016 08:56 am
When you attack Clinton over specific issues then shouldn't we apply the exact same standard to Bernie? I am pointing out that your demand we answer vague questions about Hillary is stupid on several points.
1. They are vague.
2. When examined Bernie has done the same exact thing on some of the issues so it should raise the same questions about him in your mind but you seem to be fine that Bernie did them but not fine that Hillary did. That shows a bias going in on your part.
3. You demand that the vague statements be defended without telling us why they are an issue for you.
4. Making such a list of why you dislike someone is not an argument against them any more than the list of people Bill had killed is an argument against him.
I didn't write this, but it expresses my attitude in this election cycle perfectly:
I have examined where my loyalties lie, you judge, I'll explain my position.
From my perspective, the party I joined thirty nine years ago was a party I believed in and so gave my loyalty, It was the party of The New Deal, The Great Society and at the time I joined also the party of civil liberty, equal rights and a war against poverty. I see a party in 2016 that is not that party. The question of my loyalty now becomes murky. I think my loyalty now only belongs to my class and because Bernie Sanders shares this loyalty to my class, I must support him every way possible.
So many in the party leadership and the party overall are comfortable and this place of comfort has made them cold to the reality that is daily life for a great many people.
They make many assumptions from ivory towers of middle class or wealth with little awareness it would seem of those that are lower middle class (quickly falling into poverty even tho they work harder with multiple McJobs than they did before lower middle class meant poverty).
As to the poor - they seem completely oblivious to them and convince themselves that welfare reform didn't harm anybody, I know Hill and Bill believe this, but it did and does to this day I assure you, it was not a pragmatic solution to a "welfare queen" problem handled well because a Democrat helped to all but destroy it. It will not be a brave pragmatic solution to "earned benefit queens" they will likely label SS beneficiaries, as they collude yet again with republicans to begin to shred these last vestiges of the new deal and great society.
They cause the poor to become poorer still while so many in the party applaud the politicians responsible. Their applause and support are what make them just as responsible as their political idols.
They think this is a game, or a sport with my team and their team, not realizing or caring that the ball that is tossed around in this sport is a child that only gets to eat at school and will soon lose that food, or the ball is an elderly widow or widower that can only afford to take their medicine every other day or maybe will freeze to death in a small flat during a winter they could not pay their gas bill (this happens ALREADY where I live).
There are many other balls tossed around for their sport and amusement, too many to list them all here, some are dead or dying, some are living under a tarp in a vacant lot hoping the cops don't roust them or the suburban teenagers don't decide to slum it and amuse themselves by assaulting them while laughing and taunting the "bum" for cell phone footage. Some of these comfortable people give advice to "the poor that in fact do OK" as a famous DLC Democrat once said. One of the Conservative DU posters once even suggested dumpster diving as a viable and reasonable option.
Too many of them applaud policies and politicians that make all these problems worse, they need to get it through their heads, many are dying and more will die of poverty, this is no game and the poor aren't doing OK, they are doing worse all the time with less help available all the time.
It is not serious, pragmatic, or brave to cause more people to suffer and die in poverty because it is referred to flippantly as "eating peas" or "being adult". It is not pragmatic even when the ones shipping away the jobs or destroying welfare "feel your pain". It never was bravery, but cowardice. It is not balanced when an increasing number of people fall into poverty and die while others become wealthier at an exponential rate.
The punditry, politicians, and comfortable may think it is a fun sport full of serious brave adults that make hard decisions.
Cowards all really, making easy decisions, easy because their decisions don't harm them, but rather the poor they barely acknowledge exist for the profit of the wealthy.
Sometimes they even have the gaul to pat themselves on the back and reassure each other "the poor in fact do OK".
I feel very sincerely about these class and poverty issues, I give my loyalty completely to the forgotten, struggling and increasingly poor working classes that birthed me. You decide if that makes me disloyal to a party that has all but forgotten us save for donations and Pyrrhic election victories, because I will fight tooth and nail against any one of them or any elected Democrat that is harmful to my class, in other words harmful to most of America.
For these reasons and others, my loyalties now lie only with Bernie Sanders, politicians that share his views, and the revolution that is necessary if we are to fight and win against overwhelming odds, a fight I take on for my class, the very survival of countless people, and for a better future to leave behind for our younger generations.
Thu 10 Mar, 2016 06:48 am
Absolutely. I do have issues with Bernie. And some of them are issues I have with Hillary. But I also feel the the ones I have the biggest problems with:
gitmo, private prisons industry, TPP, single payer vs ACA, privatization of the VA services, reducing or eliminating Social Security, fracking, PACs, campaign reform, ect are in Hillary's basket and not Bernies.
I am not going into this with the feeling I'm settling or measuring the least evil.
Understanding that if Bernie doesn't get it, I will not have the least qualm pulling the lever for Hillary. I will support her knowing she understands my issues whether she acts on them or not, Bernie is drawing her left and evolving her positions to be more in line with me and who I feel are the majority of thoughtful voters.
In the end how we shape Congress is more important than which Democrat is in the White House. I also believe Bernie will draw more voters than Hillary and that means more votes for Congressional runs. Already the polls are indicating Democrats will retake the Senate. We can have the House back in four to six years.