While tensions still simmering on the streets of Baltimore and a national movement against a discriminatory U.S. justice system continuing to build, presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton made a strong statement Wednesday morning vowing to bring to an end the "era of mass incarceration."
The very first thought that came to mind on this was Imelda Marcos. No wonder so much is spent on primping crews in elections these days.
What a lying sack of crap this woman is. Disgusting. But what is even more disgusting is that so many faux-progressives will fall for this charade.
It seems that her first name was used to draw the contrast between her and her husband.
This is the old tactic of running on left and governing on the (far) right. They keep doing it
because it works.
Lies, and the Lying Liars who tell them...
Who freaking cares?
American politicians, dancing tip-toeing and sliding around the real issues: social injustice, racism, wealth disparity and a generally punitive approach toward those who have not succeeded in an unbalanced system. Talking about punishing a little less here and a little more there fails to address the problem. But--they know that.
It's past time to expose to all in the world, once and for all time, that this fake sincerity is the business model of the triangular party of the progressive/ liberal wing of the dim. party, the figuritivehead of which is one syphilitic example of how governance is corrupt. Whilst deploring Baltimore poverty, he manipulates the strings to global warming, while juggling the demands of secretive war (crimes)...but to the hopey changey among us, it's his arrogantly constipated belief that TTP is how the world turns now.
TPP that is, but if you wanna TTP, that's fine too-just let the Koch boys know
Her words are cheap
Believing them would be uncountably costly
Talking about ending mass incarceration is great but it is only talk until you have a plan in place to provide a way that these young people can attain skills and meaningful jobs. Otherwise they will end up back in prison.
Bill was happy to gut many of the social programs, and is the "father" of the system where welfare recipients could not have the father figure living at home. His "reduction of the deficit" was achieved in part by breaking up families, I do not understand the stupidity that can label this man the first "black" president. It just shows the voters listen to the propaganda, rather than seeing the deeds.
Please! why does everyone refuse to see the wood in the trees?
There is one, and only one, cause of all our economic woes. During the
early 1900's our stupid/corrupt politicians signed away our Sovereign
"rights" , that allowed us to print and issue our own interest free,
debt free money; and since then we have all become "debt slaves". Our
rights to print and issue our own money out of thin air were ceded to
private banking Corporations, thus now, we borrow all our money from
them, and they simply print it out of thin air, and charge us interest
for the privilege. Given the nature of our economic cycles, the booms
and busts, it is virtually impossible for us ever to repay all such
debts, especially since, when they print our borrowings, they do not
also print the money to cover the interest repayments. This particular
economic consequence was recorded centuries ago in the well known fable
about the boy who possessed a goose that laid "golden" eggs; he sold the
goose for a paltry sum and forever thereafter he was destitute.
The remedy for our problems is simple; we abrogate any agreement
previously made, reclaim our Sovereign "rights" to print and issue our
own debt free interest free money.
This will enable us to stop income-taxing of individuals; we may pay
everyone that needs it a social wage, based on a break even computation,
this will eliminate poverty and deprivation; those in receipt of the
Social wage will be encouraged into employment, without loss of this
Social wage, and to work for any employer for additional income,
mutually agreed between them. this gives control of work and income to
the "workman". Employers will gain a workforce of people willing to
accept much lower wages than previously paid, thus making the employer
production cost significantly lower; plus, the employer no longer
collects taxes for the Government. The employer Corporation/business
will pay tax annually as usual. The collection of V.A.T. or G.S.T.,
consumer taxes will cease.
All Government expenditures will be provided by the planned issue of our
own debt free interest free money using legislation approved by
Parliament. Health, Education, University courses, Infrastructure of all
kinds, etc. etc.
Provided that all of these expenditures are actually "spent" into
circulation they will not create inflation; inflation will occur, for
instance, when too much money chases too few "goods". The Government
must own and run it's own Bank, just like the original Commonwealth
Bank. No Private Bank or Corporation will be permitted to create money,
under any guise; our financial system will revert to one of "sound "
money. Sound money is that which turns around sound borrowing and
lending, controlled by being liquid cash, backed by the ownership of
assets, and strict criteria keeping them in balance; borrowing and
lending outside of these criteria, characterised as "high risk", will be
permitted between parties willing to accept such risk, and then, only
when it involves their own wholly owned assets.
Interest rates in the private sector will be set by the private sector.
The floating exchange rate will be converted into "fixed" rates decided
by Government, and as decided between Sovereign Nations and embodied in
trade agreements. Our currency will not be traded on "Exchanges", our
Nation will be immunised against the manipulated predations of the "Market".
The foregoing explains the broad brush strokes involved, but in summary
we would have a Nation with little or no foreign debt, a Nation whose
domestic economy sits on a solid unshakeable base, a Nation better able
to compete in the wider World, a Nation without poverty whose peoples
are empowered to think and work for themselves, a Nation rescued from
the avarice of the "Money Lenders", and above all, a Government able to
be free and Independent, instead of being owned by Corporate money and
influence. This is named "The Universal Economy" because it will operate
For those who doubt the efficacy of this proposal, I suggest they study
the United States example. The clever banking Corporations engineered
the U.S. dollar to be the Worlds reserve currency. Ever since the U.S.
has been printing money out of thin air, the only Nation to do so, now
they have military bases in more than one hundred and seven Nations,
they have engineered regime change and wars in countless Nations, and
recently have printed trillions of dollars, called quantitative easing,
and poured it into foreign banks and financial Institutions trying to
prevent the next meltdown; but it is not working because their printed
money was not spent into circulation, instead it inflated the prices of
shares and real estate, the bust cometh.
Whatever. Young black men are currently popular among the liberal bourgeoisie/media, making it a potentially profitable campaign tool. Clinton has a long record of support for the neoliberal agenda, regardless. And regardless of even that, VP Joe Biden is the 2016 Dem Party candidate, and will be launching his campaign later in summer. Any Dem pol can run against him for the nomination, of course. Dems are likely to lose 2016 regardless. The masses of poor (and those who get why unrelieved poverty is sinking the US) voted for Obama in hopes that he could launch a legit discussion about our poverty crisis.(note: The majority of US poor are white.) Dems and libs aren't interested.
She is two faced. She is of the right-wing neocon purple DLC traitor class, just like her husband. Her propaganda only works if the people choose to believe her propaganda, but if the people will seriously look at her past, there is no way all her leftist propaganda will be believed.
I don't think so. Seriously the Clinton campaign is already resorting at least it is better than voting for a Republican and they have not even gotten into the primaries yet.
Think about that, she is already so distasteful to progressives, they are already restoring to the final week of elections tactic, come and vote for our party because at least we are better than the other party.
This is occurring prior to the primaries even starting, where they are running against their own and not the other guy.
This would have been a fascinating result to witness, where progressives actually hated the candidate that was meant to represent them more than the candidate that is meant to represent the opposition.
I see an illness in Hillary's future where, she can no longer run for office and unfortunately must withdraw, boo hoo, this rather than face the growing progressive opposition to the corporate scam that is Hillary Clinton (her ego would not let her run as token opposition a second time).
"Biden-bot?" Didn't you take a US government class in school? With rare exception, the vice president goes on to run for president. This is the norm. Biden had already announced that he will be launching his campaign later in summer. I have no idea why people have a problem with this. I didn't express a preference for Biden. I stated a fact. Any Dem pol can run against Biden for the nomination, of course. That's what the 2016 primaries will be about. You do know how the primaries work, don't you?
Ah, a right winger. I've noticed that they have an unhealthy fixation on sex.
Yes and no. Bill Clinton actually ended welfare aid. TANF is a marginally-subsidized, short-term work program for those with children, and this includes married couples. Clinton didn't "break up families." That's a strange thing to say, apparently based on your general lack of knowledge about this issue. There is no aid for the long-term jobless poor, and for many of the unemployable. Nothing.