Evolution: Why another former Hillary Clinton supporter has come to feel the Bern

" 8. Believing and trusting Bernie

***1. THE ENVIRONMENT:I live near one of the areas in Pennsylvania famous for the videos of water catching on fire and fields of dead cows and mutated animals. To say fracking is dangerous is an understatement. To say it's abomination against our environment and the rape of Mother Earth is a lot more accurate.

Hillary got on stage in Flint, Michigan and said that fracking is okay by her (with several complex qualifiers). Ouch. I learned that it's true that Hillary not only has been a vocal supporter of fracking in the USA, but has led the push to export the practice to other countries. According to Mother Jones (again, hardly a right-wing news source), Hillary championed the profits and minimized the risks to many developing nations during her time as Secretary of State.

In other words, she adopted, in whole, the propaganda selling line of a multibillion dollar industry that is enriching its leaders with $30 and $40 million annual bonuses while poisoning the earth in ways that are just incomprehensible. Yes, 97.3 times out of 100, it causes no problems (except, of course, for the links to earthquakes), but when it goes wrong -- which is sometimes -- it's devastating what it does to the groundwater and the environment -- it will take tens of thousands of years to undo the damage from one mishap. The problem, and what HRC is focused on... is that 100% of the time fracking makes huge profits. Fracking has poisoned the earth and, aside from the global climate change it contributes to, is a deadly threat to our planet. One must choose: it's fracking or it's profits. There is no middle ground, and Hillary's choice is clear.

THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE: For a host of reasons, the pipeline is a bad idea. The environmental implications of a problem are almost beyond comprehension. Hillary's own words on the pipeline speak for themselves. As secretary of state, when asked as to whether she supported it, she said "[W]e are inclined to do so. We're either going to be dependent on dirty oil from the Gulf or dirty oil from Canada." (This isn't a misquote, here she is saying it). Now, she says she's against it. The fossil fuel industry (through registered lobbyists, PAC's, and Super-PAC's) has contributed over $3.5 million to HRC's campaign. I do not believe ("mark my words" on this) that she will curtail it.

I do not believe Hillary will do anything to cut the $20 billion per year in corporate welfare they receive. WE MUST CHOOSE. WE CANNOT BOTH BE AN ENVIRONMENTALIST AND A HILLARY SUPPORTER. THE TWO ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE.***2. PRESERVING AMERICAN JOBS/PEOPLE OVER CORPORATIONS: Hillary was a big fan of the North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA has led to astounding corporate profits -- and the loss of a huge number of American jobs as corporations can now outsource labor to Mexico where the cost of living (and thus wages) is a fraction of what it is in the U.S. Her claims on her position are revisionist (if not Orwellian), now outrageously claiming that she has steadfastly been against it. Her support of NAFTA is credited by many with generating support for Donald Trump in the many areas that have been devastated by it. This, once again, was one of the few times that the contest was between the 1% -- the corporation owners and CEO's -- and the middle and working classes. And, once again, Hillary chose the 1%. The accomplishments she advertises (the Lilly Ledbetter Act, "feel-good" positions, etc.) are window-dressing. They are a side-show; a distraction. It's only when one finds the times when the contest was between the 1% and the working and middle classes that her true colors are revealed.

Bernie has fought his whole life for the workers and the middle class. When NAFTA was being considered, he travelled to Mexico and the manufacturing states in the US. He saw what it would do. To the chagrin of Hillary's backers, Bernie forcefully spoke out against NAFTA and voted against it. Is the reason I switched to supporting Bernie becoming clearer?

And Hillary ain't done with "trade treaties" that are a boon to the 1% and the destruction of the working and middle classes. Hillary was a vocal supporter of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). Whereas the cost of living in Mexico permits companies to pay $2.25 per hour wages, the cost of living in the countries involved with the TPP is less than a third of that. Again, the middle-class and workers in the US can't compete -- cause, you know, it costs more than .86 cents per hour to raise a family here. And (until the buying power of the middle and workers is eventually wiped out as these policies move forward), the 1% cashes in and we are sold out.

Like her position on NAFTA, Hillary again tries to backpedal, apparently not aware that the internet saves things like speeches given as secretary of state, folks keep videos these days and that she's on tape 24 times of the at least 45 times she openly supported it. When confronted with another example of choosing to serve her backers and masters in the 1% and thus throwing the rest of us under the bus, she denies she was ever for it. And her friends at CNN are more than happy to try to help. I hope everyone is aware at this point that CNN is owned by Time Warner -- which has (aside from any individual donations through employees and lobbyists) donated $400,000 to Clinton (other sources put the estimate of how much CNN cash has found its way to Hillary a lot higher. Is CNN acting with integrity by not mentioning this? Well...CNN ran an online poll asking users who was winning the first debate. When the numbers came back 81% (Bernie)/13% (Hillary), CNN erased the poll, scrubbed it from their website, and instead ran an op-ed headline that Hillary had won. If it's not just downright scary that a "neutral objective news source" would do that, I don't know what is.

So, do you trust that Hillary wouldn't flip-flop again on this issue, or as president (God forbid) would enter into a new "trade agreement" just as bad (or worse) -- that would decimate American jobs in favor of unspeakable 1% profits? Well, the Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue, a top lobbyist for the 1% and the TPP, said in an interview that he is "confident" that Hillary will again "evolve on the issue" if she is elected.. Please, please people -- THINK about what you're doing before voting!

Again, in yuge contrast, Bernie's entire life and career has been about standing up for the working and middle class in this type of conflict.

The "too big to fail" banks have funded her campaign. They crashed our economy once, and HRC will not reinstate the laws that made them keep (federally insured) banking separate from their investment functions (Glass-Steagall). What better example could there be? Sitting on the board of WalMart, the nation's largest employer who pays wages so low that a full time employee with one child qualifies for food stamps, while it's top executives earn multi-million dollar bonuses and its owners are worth ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY BILLION DOLLARS. There are times when we need to pick sides. We need to say "this is not okay," this is not the country I want to live in...and it's sure not the way I want to vote. Note that the Waltons just infused another multi-million dollar donation into Hillary's campaign.

Back to Top

Back to Top

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).