Home | About | Donate

But Is Hillary Ready for Us?


#1

But Is Hillary Ready for Us?

William Greider

The “Ready for Hilary” campaign has launched a not-very-subtle courtship of discontented Democrats, those leftish liberal activists who yearn for anybody but another Clinton. The not-yet candidate herself spoke to their concerns indirectly when she recently addressed the Silicon Valley Conference for Women. Clinton sketched out progressive goals for family-centered labor-market reforms. They were like love bombs for bleeding-heart liberals.


#3

I see absolutely no reason whatsoever to agonize over this. Both Hilary and Larry Summers have well earned exile from both wings of the Democratic Party of FDR's "New Deal". It's over for them, and Bill. The sooner that is admitted by all who hope for a vibrant party in opposition to the insanity of contemporary politics, the better for America.


#4

Another article that hopes for a Progressive revolution within the Democratic Party. It appears to be the only hope as Third Party's are slowly disappearing from the ballot process without even a eulogy from the MSM. As a Progressive cynic, I can only expect Hilary or any Democratic hopeful to tow the corporate line and abandon the 99%. The pattern has been unbroken since Roosevelt. Warren writes about the "insiders and outsiders" on the beltway, but this is old hat for CD readers. We're just a little bit better at monikers labeling the Larry Summers' of the world as sociopaths or corporate sycophants. To be an "insider" is already obvious to Progressives; accept corporate fundamentalism as the American Way or get out of politics. Why the author thinks an internal revolution in the Democratic Party will occur is anyones guess? In the meantime any pragmatic Progressive sees the entire political farce that is in store for us next year as nothing more than 'business as usual'.


#6

So true, CTS. As I see it, at this stage of campaigning, it is not about the Democratic Party and a third party, but about no more of "The Same."


#7

Groan.

Is there anything more depressing than coming onto this site and seeing Hillary's name in a headline? And this is going to continue for almost two more years.

Anyone looking for a reason to despise the US corporate media need look no further than the way that they are burning up our attention with their useless twaddle about this reprehensible woman who is NEVER going to be President.

mcp


#8

You have your heart in the right place, William, but puleeze, does anyone think Hillary is anything but another vicious neolliberal/neocon who will say anything to woo a few more votes from those she sneers at in secret?


#9

Larry Summers and Dick Cheney are, for all intents and purposes, twins separated at birth as are the various Bush family members and various Clinton family members. We should reject the whole sneaky bunch .... the question being, how do we do that and not end up with the extreme right wing in power?


#10

Really good question. I wish I knew. One good thing, this discussion. The more consensus now; the better, in the long run. If we establish no more Clintons and no more Bushes, then we can, at least, get another comparison.


#11

The question of whether the Democratic party can change is almost a rhetorical one and if Hillary is in charge I would answer no. The Clintons are such manipulative liars and their record of betrayal, as Greider points out is so blatant that the more obvious question is why establishment Dems keep eating it up. Of course Grider already has the answer-they along with the Clintons are consumate insiders, by selection and temperament will be loyal to their fellow priviliged elites. They love to wallow in the cesspool of Washington politics. The fact that they lie to us again and again shows how little respect the have for the base of their party and how easily they believe consent can be manufactured among the gullible and trusting base.. Can they get away with it this time-probably. I've meet so many identidy voters who want Hillary to be president just because she's a woman that she may prevail. What you'll get is a hard line war monger, someone who will show us she's got tubes. If another million have to die and another trillion or so of national treasure have to be spent to show how tough she is, I'm sure it won't bother her a bit.


#12

Immeasurable dark money corrals votes into a black box. Voting in a sham system is not politics, it is entertainment. Tally all the promises kept of the tainted fruits of the American vote and use that as a guide calculating the probability that candidate X will really mean it this time. And say we did repair the vote, the Fed still owns our money so guess who is still in charge? But don't let me spoil the fun, back to the dog & pony show.


#13

"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." Emma Goldman


#14

I like Mr. Greider's mild-mannered way of laying out an argument. But I think he leaves out a few serious items.

One is the source of campaign funding and what that means inside a bought and paid-for system

Second, is that political events in Greece & Spain are paving the way for similar rebellions here, inside "The Homeland."

My third point is in response to what this paragraph expresses:

"A young friend of mine with working-class sensibilities told me recently that the driving subtext for 2016 will be “anger.” A labor Democrat, he has a keen ear for popular attitudes, and he’s afraid this election could leave the country with a harsh right-winger as president—someone who can skillfully exploit confused and angry citizens by scapegoating the usual target groups."

Ultimately, both parties have been pushing what formerly was understood to be right wing positions. These include:

  1. Emphasizing law enforcement and beefing up domestic police departments
  2. Funding draconian Immigration policies along with a well-armed border fence
  3. Spying on citizens and/or infiltrating Left-leaning groups
  4. Investing in war, war, and more war while increasing the military budget (including earmarking $ for a "new generation of nuclear weapons")
  5. Promoting aggressive force rather than diplomacy in all sorts of overseas military "adventures" and related hot spots
  6. Standing back as wages fall down, employment hours are cut, and the nation's wealth seamlessly rises--as it's been engineered to do via policies like those that bail out bankers rather than families facing home foreclosures--direct to the top (1% of the financial pyramid)
  7. Targets independent reporters, journalists and assorted truth tellers for challenging faulty State Narratives
  8. Doing slim to nothing to rein in Big Oil, Big Coal, Big pharma, Big gen-tech cum agriculture, Big Frack, etc.

NONE of these policies are OTHER than right wing. The idea that there can be Liberal hawks is itself ludicrous, although the moniker now has gained credibility.

All citizens of good conscience must pray, act, and organize to see a viable challenge to the duopoly that has turned our nation into a free falling 3rd world republic while sending troops all over the planet like drunken Goliaths to kick some ass.


#15

Not only is the whole electoral spectacle the product of an Insider-Outsider divide, there is also an empowered Deep State funded by the most affluent citizens of this country (and others) that ultimately calls the shots. The Bush and Clinton families, like Mafia Consiglieres have passed the loyalty tests and they know where all the bodies are buried. Under the GUISE of choice, these Deep State puppets, as consummate insiders are all that's held up as "viable" choice. Try getting solid messages out to voters in 50 states if mass media is committed to keeping outliers invisible. It's a catch-22. That's why right wing interests always buy up media. They understand from here to Venezuela to the former Soviet Union, how important Message Control is.


#16

Excellent analysis, Sioux. It reminds me of a certain kind of situation that has been arising lately in my social life, where people are wringing their hands over the spread of "extremism" (ISIS, the Paris bombings, etc.) and I end up saying: Well, you're right to be worried about extremism, but if you haven't noticed, it's already in power. Not only do our so-called leaders start wars and slaughter thousands and more at the drop of a hat (more likely at the utterance of a lie), but they've even abrogated to themselves the right to dock our bank accounts to pay for their greedy mistakes! Fascism is here, baby, and if you can't see it, you ain't got eyes!


#18

I would love to say "If Hillary is the Democrat on the presidential ticket in 2016, it will be the first election since 1972 in which I will not vote", but then I think "What would national policy look like under any Republican candidate" and I have to agree with Russell Brand that voting is a grand waste of time. If the Democratic Party wants to permanently and for all time eliminate itself from the political scene, Hillary is the best choice.


#19

Is Hillary ready for us? She and everybody else in the corporate parties certainly are. That's what the NSA,
FBI, and the militarized police are for. Surprahse, surprise! (Even Gomer would get it, especially after Ferguson!)
Greider isn't stupid. Anyone with a little intellectual courage would explore the information at the
socialist literature tables at any sizeable protest. Naivete and wishful thinking should be long gone for
Greider at his age. Hillary and all the rest are ready for us, with their military, cops, spies, provocateurs,
and shills like Greider, who will try to herd us back into the demagogic corporate party, rather than remind
us that there are alternatives like Jill Stein, the Green Party, and various socialist parties. (Anyone put off
by the word "socialist" should read Einstein's essay "Why Socialism" at MonthlyReview.org.)
And self-fulfilling prophecy can work in either direction. Choose and get moving.
The corporate ruling class expects some kind of revolt as they impoverish and kill more and more people around the world and at home.
Hillary and companies are ready for us. Are we ready for them? I recommend Lenin and Trotsky, Dr. King
and Malcolm X, (not Stalin). No, I'm not blood-thirsty; I've seen "my" government kill and torture plenty of
people through the decades. I want it to stop. But we have to get to the root of the problem. (Greek word-
"radix"= root, hence "radicals" want to get to the root of a problem, in this case, capitalism.)
We have the same problems and worse, that we had 50 years ago. More of us need to get serious about
uprooting the system that institutionalizes greed.


#20

I was rather naive politically when I thought that Hillary would make a good president, back in the days when her husband was president... that's when I believed that she was working in tandem with Bill to bring about much needed changes in our health care system. But they caved... and she went over to the dark side, emerging as a strident war hawk.

Now the very thought of Hillary Clinton as president is deeply upsetting. Are Americans really that stupid?


#22

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a >expletive deleted< sociopathic warmonger and tool of the corporations. Any progressive rhetoric she spouts is solely evidence that she sees the people as a bunch of rubes to be used, tricked and taken advantage of. She is an arrogant, soulless elitist who does not understand the concept of truth, but only the concept of what language will get her her way.

But I cannot jump on the bandwagon for Warren. She is NOT an outsider. If you think she is then ask her what she thinks of Gaza or ISIS or the Ukraine or Iran. She may take the less militaristic option about ISIS (no boots on the ground,) but she still takes the American Imperialist Project positions.

This article provides one example of how the leftist Democrat turns out to not be that when in office. The other example is Obama. If by some miracle the progressives Democrat's wet dream, that Warren ran and got the nomination, came true, then we'd quickly have the third example.

It is far past time that Leftists abandon the term 'Progressive', since the Clintons are co-opting that term, and abandon the Democratic Party. We haven't had a Democratic President who truly worked for Leftist positions since LBJ, and that was only on some domestic issues. When it came to foreign policy he mired us in the worst war in my lifetime, typical Democratic Party behavior.


#23

Wouldn't the NSA, for starters, have copies of all the erased emails? Where is surveillance data when we need it?


#24

H.Clinton has not changed for the better. She is a far worse profiteer and war lover than Bush 2. She was a sorry Sec. of State, not much better as the wife of Pres. Clinton. Obama is the perfect example of what to say, how to win, then do the opposite once in office and she will be no different. J. Bush has picked his insiders and they are the same ones Bush 2 had, that's REAL change. If she was to win (she will be eliminated rather quickly when she does decide to come out of the closet), she will go down in flames like the past. If for some reason she did win (Hell freezing over), Jeb's people will go over to her. The 99Percentes should be fed up with these two dynasties, and plenty fed up with their lies and hypocrisy. I sure as hell am.