Skip to main content

Hillary Clinton and The other "Art of the Deal"

Someone recently texted me saying, I thought TPP and Libya were your only concerns about Hillary Clinton. What am I missing?"
My reply:
Well, I am confused. I don't know which “concerns about Libya” are referenced. I believe Senator Clinton has been vindicated repeatedly concerning the Benghazi attack, for instance. Notwithstanding, the covert war activities that precipitated the Benghazi attack might be something worth looking into.
There is much to be said, and, my feelings about Clinton are indeed mixed. At any rate, no response like this can hope to be complete and exhaustive. Here is some stuff more or less off the top..
There is not only her role in TPP as you mentioned, and in all the recent wars, and in selling America down the drain through various international trade "deals," there is indeed more. 
As you may know, I am against war-as-industry as opposed to war-as-defense., so I don’t like the militarization of Congress, promoted and financed by corporate war-mongers and mercenaries: Unless I am mistaken, Clinton is deeply embedded in that system. I hope to come back to that point later.
Unfair elections (fraud)

I believe Clinton exercised/exercises considerable influence over the DNC and its policies formal and informal. I am quite convinced she could have stopped the anti-Sanders campaign-within-a-campaign had she chosen to. 
Is the election fraud an isolated event, or could it indicate a modus operandi, in which case, progressive Democrats and Sanders supporters (perhaps as many as 40 percent of those at the convention), may not be capable of forcing her hand if she decides later to go back on her promises and thus denies her newfound "faith" in Bernie's progressive agenda.
Which brings us to another issue: Can she be trusted to promote our progressive values? 
True, sometimes it is hard to distinguish between fact and fiction on this topic. As stated before, concerning Benghazi, Clinton told the truth, in my opinion and she did the best she could have done, so I am not holding that against her.
I do feel uncomfortable with the integrity of Clinton's  politics, as should be made clear below..
She has grey areas: Some seem frivolous to me. Others are more serious Did she lie concerning the classified emails about which everyone is talking?  Hillary's denials belie the recent announcement of the head of the FBI’s  top guy, James Comey.  As to her truthfulness, however, this is but a grey area: It seems to me she may or may not have believed the information was classified at the time she spoke. Some are hoping her security clearance will be denied. I don’t think that will happen. Given the public statement by FBI Director James Comey, it seems that she needs a refresher course at the very least. One would hope that she has learned her lesson.
Background noise
What was Whitewater all about anyway?  I did not follow that back in the day, so it is something I might need to revisit. Either way, Whitewater is still there, like bees buzzing in a field.
The Art of the (Trade) Deal
I understand that Hillary Clinton has signed on for every rotten trade deal in the past. We now know how disastrous those were, “killing millions of jobs," as Sanders famously noted.
I have read elsewhere that Clinton helped negotiate the present TPP deal, was a key negotiator, and now, perhaps due to pressure from Bernie Sanders and the forty percent of Republicans who support him, she has backed off causing to question her honesty and integrity. In short, they don't trust her, and why should they when, according to prominent commentators, she was set endorse an agreement that does the following: 
Circumvents our courts: TPP reportedly gives foreign firms the right to circumvent our courts and attack our laws
Encourages fracking and leave environmental laws toothless.  
Sacrifices jobs, millions of manufacturing jobs. 
Leaves our deficits untouched. (Some people worry about deficits. Others may think they are irrelevant. I am uncertain at this point.)
Increases our drug costs! (As if our drug prices were not too high already, especially compared to other countries. Allegedly it would also compromise access for many people in the Pacific Rim.
Favors factory farms.  The deal supposedly would also increase corporate control over agriculture. "The TPP is modeled on past free-trade deals that have made wildly inaccurate promises about benefits for small farmers. Under NAFTA, when U.S. corn exports to Mexico increased dramatically, more than 2 million Mexican farmers were driven from their lands. But the number of U.S. family farmers fell sharply, too.
Defeats Glass-Steagall restoration efforts. It is said that TPP “market access” rules would "undermine efforts to limit the size of banks or to establish “firewalls” between financial activities, such as restoring U.S. Glass-Steagall Act regulations"
 Makes bad laws worse, and forces them upon other nations The agreement, we are told, will  "force what’s broken with copyright law in the United States upon other countries." The TPP would "lengthen onerous copyright terms from a previous trade agreement—keeping information and art locked away from the public domain for decades and opening the floodgates for further abuse of copyright laws and censorship."
Are all of the above enough to justify opposing Cllinton?
You will have to decide for yourself, but yes, the TPP is a biggie, not something to be brushed aside with a flip of a wrist. 
Disastrous  trade deals are a Clinton legacy. If these were not enough to make me hesitant about election Ms. Clinton, the war deals (not yet discussed) would do it. 
In closing: Both Trump and Clinton are artists in deal making. I don't think they are equally bad, but that does not make me feel comfy with the Democratic party at this time. 

P.S. Yes, I know, I did not get around to writing about the wars: wars, war mongering, innocent deaths, drone killings, innocent children, foreign meddling and more. However, I think I had best cover "Clinton and the Art of War Dealssome other time, however, as I am getting tired now. 
I would sign off by noting that the TPP and "the wars" must not be flipped away like shoo -flies. Remind me if you want me to finish this tomorrow with a section on wars, war deaths, war mongering, war waste, war bed partners … are you sure you really want to read all of that?


 #unfairelections #electionfraud #bernieorbust #hillaryversustrump #politics #artofthedeal


Popular posts from this blog

8 Facts About the Circle of Fifths that you May Not Already Know

I love all child refugees but … where will the money come from? Part III

Quote from a Facebook friend: “Much as my heart breaks for the children who want to come here because circumstances are better … circumstances will not be better here if we allow more people to live here than we can afford to support.” So says one of my Facebook friends.

Green Party is not red, is not blue, is not the oligarchy.

Green  (Is not  Red   is not   Blue ) Kennewick, Washington  Political Opinion By Frank Ellsworth Lockwood Some people have been pushing the notion that if you are a member of the Green Party you should vote for a Democratic, but there is another side to this argument. If you are a Green, then you are no more a Democrat than a Republican is. Green is for things that the Red and Blue oppose: While Green Party is for peaceful coexistence, Republicans and Democrats have supported wars-for-profit for all of my life. (I am 75; they will not be changing any time soon.) Green is for live and let live, while Red and Blue are about greed and conniving, and this is no exaggeration when both of the above have always supported the overthrow of democratically elected socialist governments, replacing them with puppet governments, dictators and tyrants who practiced suppression-for-profit. Green is for racial and economic equality as well as for recognition of tribal rights. Our 2016 Pre