Share on Google Plus
  2
Share on Twitter
  3
Share on Facebook
  17
Share on LinkedIn
  1
Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 23 Shares     
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Article Stats
4 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

What Does Hillary Believe? Populists Want to Know

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 4 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H2 5/17/14

opednews.com

Cross-posted from Campaign for America's Future


Hillary Clinton
(image by Credit marcn, Flickr)


There's a vibrant debate underway that could shape the future of our economy and our society. The New Populism promises to re-energize the political conversation and could potentially restore the Democratic Party's fortunes as well. But the Democratic Party is at risk of being sidelined from the debate, paralyzed by the Sphinx-like silence of its presumptive 2016 nominee.

In Hillary Clinton's absence, Bill -- her husband, frequent proxy and former head of the party -- appears to be waging a rhetorical war on populism. If she doesn't share his anti-populist opinions, now would be a good time to say so.

The "Fiscal" Oldies

Is "anti-populist" a fair description of Bill Clinton's position? This week alone offered ample evidence. Exhibit A is the former president's by-now perennial appearance at conservative billionaire Pete Peterson's "Fiscal Summit," a propaganda event designed to convince a poverty-ridden, wage-stagnated and unemployment-stricken nation that its most urgent priority is convincing the government to do even less about these crises.

And let's not forget the other elements of the "fiscal summit" plan: cutting Social Security and Medicare for the middle class while at the same time lowering taxes for the wealthy. That's anti-populism in a nutshell right there.

I've covered these dismal "summits" before[1] and it's a depressing task. This year I'll outsource the task to the worthy Alec MacGillis at The New Republic, who writes that these events "are riddled with moments of elision, hypocrisy or outright dishonesty that are allowed to pass unchallenged by complaisant moderators."[2]

Indeed.

Although Clinton was the day's big draw, the "Summit" website indicated that only 173 people were watching his remarks online. That's not hard to understand. Viewing one of these events is not unlike watching an over-the-hill oldies band rheumatically sleepwalk its way through "Stairway to Heaven" and "Barracuda" for the thousandth time to a hotel bar filled with drunken business travelers. The songs have lost whatever meaning they once had for the listeners, and from the sound of it the band feels the same way.

But the rich guy's paying so they keep on playing.

Clinton dutifully pitched terrible ideas like a "repatriation" tax cut for offshore corporate profits, saying "we have to unlock this money" somehow. (Since corporate profits are at record levels, and the actual taxes collected for those corporations are quite low, a better way to unlock the money would be to close some corporate loopholes.)

He pitched other anti-populist ideas, too, especially where Wall Street's concerned. "Getting rid of Glass/Steagall didn't have anything to do with the crash," he said. "Nobody has identified a single bank that failed because of the repeal of Glass/Steagall. Not one. Lehman Brothers was an investment bank and Bear Stearns was an investment bank."

This is disingenuous in the extreme. It's true that no Too Big to Fail banks went down during the 2008 crisis. But that's because the federal government rescued them, at great cost and within an enormous distortionary effect on the economy. Why did the government do that? Because they were too big to fail!

The too-big-to-fail problem was exacerbated by the Clinton administration's own actions, especially in creating Citigroup (where a number of Clinton and then Obama officials then enriched themselves). Worse, the banking bill that Clinton signed left the vault doors open for a decade of unregulated fraud and mismanagement -- which he argues could not have been predicted, but which a number of people did predict at the time.

Hey, it's a start.

Then there was the anecdote about President Clinton that Tim Geithner told earlier this week, where he says he asked the former president how he might "pursue a more populist strategy."

"You could take Lloyd Blankfein into a dark alley," Clinton said, "and slit his throat, and it would satisfy them for about two days. Then the blood lust would rise again."

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/the-dumbest-bipartisa

Host of 'The Breakdown,' Writer, and Senior Fellow, Campaign for America's Future
Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

How to Fix the Fed: Dismiss Dimon, Boot the Bankers, and Can the Corporations

The Top 12 Political Fallacies of 2012

Pawn: The Real George Zimmerman Story

What America Would Look Like If Libertarians Got Their Way

"F" The Bureaucracy! The White House Can Help Homeowners Right Now

The Price of Evil at JPMorgan Chase

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 people are discussing this page, with 4 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

She's silent because she does not intend to offer ... by Dennis Kaiser on Sunday, May 18, 2014 at 7:18:42 AM
Why wait for hillarys view on populism.We already ... by liberalsrock on Sunday, May 18, 2014 at 10:14:12 AM
It doesn't matter what you think she believes. Wh... by Mark A. Goldman on Sunday, May 18, 2014 at 6:53:10 PM
She simply proved to be the wrong person.Sen Eliza... by BFalcon on Monday, May 19, 2014 at 5:09:18 AM