I haven't yet actually watched the Clinton crocodile tears ad because I knew I couldn't stomach it. Just the picture and the description of what she said not only chilled me to the bone, the cynicism made me nauseous. That she would use that little girl, with her heartbreak and terror, as the perfect campaign ad, and make a promise to her that she (always the emphasis as "I," Wonder Woman Clinton) likely did not mean, was so disgusting. I wondered how many others had the same reaction.
I read news from Brazil all through the Honduran coup.
If the party oligarchs succeed with Hillary as their candidate, I will write in None of the Above for the general election. There is no lesser evil argument to be made for Hillary.
I could not stand to watch it either as just the picture of Hilliary rotten Clinton pandering and using this little girl for her nefarious ends, almost made me want to puke!
Like the author I grew up in L.A. and this lachrymose, hypocritical display by HRC is nothing but the most disingenuous and frivolous of her pandering to the Hispanics I have seen to date!
Also, I worked and lived in Mexico and if you think Hilliary rotten Clinton really cares about this little girl, then contact me I have a bridge in Alaska I would like to sell you!
I as well....I will not vote for this woman. She is nothing but a right wing, neo-con, neo-liberalism fraud! She and her "New Democrat" - meaning Republican husband moved the Democratic Party to the far right of center...not just to the right, but to the far right. She was a Goldwater Republican as a young person, and she still is.....abandoning FDR Democrat support of labor, the working class, people of color, etc. HIllary is all about wanting power, fame & fortune. Her supporters have the nerve to ask where has Bernie been? He has been speaking about what is going wrong with this country....I ask the same question -where has Hillary been, when not destroying lives overseas?
Hypocrite that she is - she creates the problem or supports it, then criticizes it for votes...!
This is like a Clinton version of 'shock and awe' - a breast beating icon (sic) slickly filmed with the camera down and looking up - I immediately think of GWBush reading a children's book and mission accomplished with security whispering in his ear.
There is something inherently repulsive about a candidate stooping to using a child as a prop. To so callously think it appropriate that a stump photo op where she actually has the chutzpah to pose with that one child - WHO REPRESENTS TENS OF THOUSANDS - to MAKE A DEAL?? - because Hillary Clinton will worry FOR HER?????
The woman is becoming increasingly appalling.She does seem to be quite adept at providing just tons of examples for the meaning of shameless. The electorate might want to listen very closely to the fact that the Clinton campaign made the decision to present it this way If history is any indicator, one day these narcissists will publish their "tell all" version of the choices and decisions made on campaign trail. They represent a particularly vacuous genre of sociopolitical auto eroticism. Ah, for the day when that sort of market no longer exists - it certainly has had a flooded run.
This woman has failed to prevent even the extremes throughout her career - Honduras just for instance - much less change direction. Her husband gifted the oligarchs with NAFTA !!!!!!!! and this is a feminist candidate?
“Bernie, where have you been?” - Dolores Huerta
Mejor dicho, porque Hillary Clinton quedó quieta cuando luchar por los latinos no era de moda.
Unlike Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders been standing up for Latinos since he entered politics in the 1980's. As Mayor of Burlington, Sanders was an outspoken critic of the US military support for Death Squads in Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador. Sanders got Burlington to adopt the Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua as a sister city and raised funds for humanitarian relief. He repeatedly called for an end to the US military and financial support for Nicaraguan Contras and the military in El Salvador.
Unlike Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders has consistently spoken out against corporate friendly trade deals that have led to exploitation of Latinos in Mexico and Central America.
While Hillary Clinton had no comment regarding the poor treatment of farm workers, such as the Immokalee tomato pickers, Bernie Sanders worked to support them.
"Last January, I visited Immokalee, Florida, to get a first-hand view of what was going on in the farm fields of Florida. On one of the days when I was there, a federal grand jury handed up an indictment alleging that workers were held in conditions that amounted to slavery. On Tuesday, a Senate panel convened a hearing into what long ago was called the 'harvest of shame.' " - Bernie Sanders
I just hope most people had the same reaction watching that sickening performance. Seriously, the harder she tries to look like she cares deeply, the harder it is to believe. I don't deny that Hillary is capable of love and caring...I don't think she's an evil person, but damn her pandering is just sickening and I hope people realize that they are being conned.
The mother of that child apparently isn't aware of Clinton's venality and unconscionable willingness to exploit an innocent child for political purposes.
can always write in Bernie. :O)
You may or may not know that Nazi officers who presided over the death camps lived nearby and after "a day at the office" went home to act as "loving" fathers and husbands.
The definition of love perhaps has become as flexible as those pertaining to: Liberal, Feminist, Progressive, etc.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Jeez does Hillary think Latinos are stupid! I've lived among Hispanics all my life and they know when they're being lied to and used. They also have good memories and know what loyalty means. Hillary is an embarrassment to white women!
Plus maybe they don't like GMO Monsanto corn/NAFTA that destroyed Mexico's agricultural legacy of yummy real corn and real food that people could afford to buy. NAFTA hurt Mexico badly!Clinton's love free trade, children not so much...
Excellent and timely article. However, one thing caught my attention:
"the bloody legacy of regime change in America’s backyard started with President Reagan"
ANCIENT HISTORY -- U.S. Marines landed in Nicaragua around 1890 and 1911.
In the 1930s, U.S. forces set up and trained Nicaragua's National Guard,
which in 1934 assassinated Liberal Party general and nationalist rebel
Augusto Cesar Sandino to consolidate the rule of Anastasio Somoza Garcia,
a former Philadelphia used car salesman anointed by the U.S. Embassy
("he may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch").
In 1903, the U.S. engineered the secession of Panama from Colombia
so that it could better control the canal. In 1931, the U.S. supported
a coup by Salvadoran General Maximiliano Hernández Martínez,
who proceeded to massacre around 30,000 people deemed dissident.
There's lots more: read this 1940s book by former Time magazine
correspondent William Krehm: Democracies and Tyrannies of the Caribbean
(which includes the western Caribbean, i.e., Central America).
MODERN HISTORY: Ignoring the ancient past is excusable, but
ignoring the empire's post-WWII machinations in Central America is not.
The classic CIA coup in Guatemala in 1954 (a year after the fateful
CIA-British coup in Iran) set the stage for controlling all the countries
in Central America. Did you think the term "America's backyard"
that you used originated in the 1980s? And "banana republic"?
So the U.S. controlled all Central American regimes --
usually military dictatorships or fraudulent democracies
(Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Panama;
Costa Rica's democracy was less fraudulent) -- and bloody
when necessary. And U.S. supported bloody suppressions
of popular rebellions in Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua,
all of which started before Reagan.
Even the sainted Jimmy Carter's administration supported
the establishment of death squads in El Salvador that
assassinated civil society dissidents. (As applied later
in the Middle East and elsewhere, this became known
as "the Salvador option.")
Reagan may have been more blunt and direct than recent
predecessors in backing bloody Central American regimes.
But for a quarter of a century, those predecessors didn't
need to spill much blood; after 1954 they ran the roost.