Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 3 Share on Twitter 2 Share on LinkedIn Share on Reddit Tell A Friend Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites
OpEdNews Op Eds

Choices 2016. Is change possible?

By       Message Peter Lawlor       (Page 1 of 1 pages)     Permalink    (# of views)   1 comment

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...)
Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 1   Valuable 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H4 2/9/16

Author 58409

voter
voter
(Image by on-line image. No attributions)
  Permission   Details   DMCA
- Advertisement -
"A man's reach should exceed his grasp" Robert Browning.

During Thursday night's democratic debate with Hillary Clinton, Bernie said that either one of them would be be "100 times better" than any republican. I am afraid I must differ. If Mr. Sanders is 100 times better (and he is), Ms. Clinton would be maybe 75 times better. I say that because while she has many laudable positions, and great foreign policy chops (with the exception of her glaring Iraq vote problem), I believe her establishment approach to politics relies on the big money run, status quo approach. The approach that was codified and exacerbated by the vile republican backed "citizens United" ruling. The result of course is the increasing slide into the plutocratic 'for-the-rich' democracy we now suffer under.

It gives me no pleasure to point out several questionable comments Ms. Clinton made Thursday night, since I don't want to weaken her candidacy and I know it is long past time we had a woman president. Also if she wins I and every rational democrat and thinking independent will absolutely be voting for her. But we as democrats or independents should be willing to speak about problems in our own ranks. We can not blindly ignore things we disagree with in the name of party loyalty. That is what the teapublican sheep do. We need to be better than that. We need to push our candidates to be better.

First, consider that since the debacle called the Bush era, our country has steadily slid right, occluding many democrats. Democrats who, like republicans, cater to big money and lack the courage to stand firm for progressive principals. Wake up and smell the coffee my fellow Americans! We have been sliding toward fascism and we need more than maintaining the status quo! We need a revolution to restore democratic values and fairness! We need leaders with the courage to stand for meaningful change and we must turn out in force to support them! Remember the lessons of 2014. Many democrats tucked their tails and ran away from President Obama, willing to keep their heads down and not make waves" and they got slaughtered! There were a few however with the courage to proudly stand fight for progressive ideals. Those were the few who won their elections.

- Advertisement -

I found Ms. Clintons equating her sex with being progressive a rather odd and somewhat sexist idea. It seemed she was simply using her sex to deflect from her too cozy relationships with wall street and the banks. Apparently, playing the victim is still in style and Ms. Clinton is milking it. Many trolls jump on is these sexist issues and use them to divide liberals. I saw Bill Clinton (a man I admire) complain that the "Bernie bros" were making nasty and sexist attacks on line, implying that it reflected on Sanders. I mean to comment on the lack of class of some individuals is fine, however Mr. Sanders has no control of peoples on-line remarks. In fact as an admin on a face book political site, I see it every day and feel sure most of the nastiest stuff comes from republican trolls pretending to be democrats as they sow the seeds of resentment and anger. Some people feel it is also a tactic of Hillary supporters. Both charges are unprovable. Myself I simply delete any nasty comments and ban the worst. I would never make the leap to using my suspicions as a way to impugn a candidate who has no control over free speech.

So let's deal in facts. While Ms. Clinton seems to finally be moving in the right direction lately, when she makes statements about going after banks and admonishing banks to "cut it out", I would still like to hear her commit to re-instating Glass-Steagall and breaking up the too-big-to-fail banks. She claims G S is not that important"so why not commit to supporting it if is is not a big deal? The fact is that over the last couple of years, she has made about 100 speeches for banks and wall street types and been paid over 20 million dollars Hey, "that's what they offered". Does anyone really think Goldman Sachs just wanted to hear her life story or her opinions on finance? Which makes her protestations about "artful smears" seem rather hollow in the light of the undeniable fact that our political system is awash in money and candidates have to spend most of their time in office begging for donations. Let me ask the people who claim there is no "proof" that Hillary has ever changed a vote to repay big donors" do you realize every republican candidate taking money from billionaires like the Koch's can make the same claim? So let's just say she never let's her big donors sway her. Don't you think there will be some candidates who will? Don't you think taking millions from the very people who need to be regulated sends the wrong message? Wouldn't you like to see a true "we the people" representative government? It starts with overturning Citizens United and breaking up the too-big-to-fail banks and imposing real campaign finance reform. I found it very telling that when asked if she would go after the banks and wall street, she replied that she would "IF they pose a threat"! IF? Really!?

Last point on this subject. When Chuck Todd said there are absolutely transcripts available of her wall street speeches and asked her if she would release them" why did she avoid answering? Why say you'll "look into it" when they are easily available? If you have nothing to hide, why not just say "sure"?

- Advertisement -

Next why does Ms. Clinton keep misrepresenting Sanders position on issues like single payer? She keeps repeating that Bernie wants to destroy the ACA and start over again, while she on the other hand just wants to improve it. Only problem, as Bernie has repeatedly said, he helped craft the ACA and also wants to build upon it, not do away with it. Of course Ms Clinton is allowed her opinion that single payer is an unattainable dream" even though almost every other developed country has some form of it and all the people of those countries have healthcare coverage which is much less expensive. The main force keeping up the drumbeat and spreading fear that it is an unrealistic dream, are the insurance giants who stand to lose the bloated profits they now enjoy if single payer is enacted.

We live in a very transitional time. Republicans have completely sold out to the highest bidder and push corporate schemes to privatize every public program starting with the V.A. and S.S. Make no mistake, they want to turn these programs over to corporate America and you can count on these profit driven "privatized schemes to drive costs up. Greed will dictate policy just like it does in the for-profit health insurance industry. Just like the for-profit prison system that locks up so many minorities and poor Americans. Greed is part of the human equation and to deny it is foolish. Republicans have also decided in order to achieve their plutocratic goals, lying and fear mongering are perfectly acceptable and justifiable. We must utterly defeat them in November if we want a fair, just society.

We need to reach out and shake the huge number of apathetic Americans who sit on the couch watching reality T.V. election day and can't be bothered with voting. Because they are doing exactly what the corporate owned republicans want and they will deserve the plutocratic nightmare a republican victory will usher in. America needs to dream big again and fight like hell for our democracy.

 

- Advertisement -

Must Read 1   Valuable 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Love learning. Hate stupidity and intolerance. First let me say that I am not a professional writer, although I have written a couple of screenplays and even sold one some years ago. I am however a professional actor and a member of the screen (more...)
 

Peter Lawlor Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

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

Debunking the Swiss gun myth.

GREED! Anatomy of a revolution

The Big GOP Tax Lie

GREED, RACISM AND APATHY - The new axis of evil

Greed + ignorance + racism= the new GOP

Sex lies and anarchy