Hillary calls for a mass movement demanding action on climate change.

[pnwmom]

Just like all the Repubs.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/22/hillary-clinton-climate-change_n_5015203.html

TEMPE, Ariz. (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton says young people understand the significant threat of climate change and that she hopes there will be a mass movement that demands political change.

The potential 2016 presidential candidate says at a Clinton Global Initiative University panel that young people are much more committed to doing something to address climate change. Clinton says it isn't "just some ancillary issue" but will determine the quality of life for many people.

The former secretary of state cited global warming as a major issue that students could face in the future.

SNIP

[Laelth]

1. Good for Hillary!

That's nice to hear from her.



-Laelth

[rhett o rick]

18. Ha! She said it is a problem and "she hopes there will be a mass movement that demands

political change." Now that's a commitment.

[Laelth]

20. It's weak sauce, I admit.

But I'll take weak sauce leaning a little to the left over consistent right-wing corporatism any day. Her current rhetoric is an improvement. I want to give credit where it is due, and she deserves credit for the statements quoted in the OP, I think.

-Laelth

[rhett o rick]

28. I would really like to feel better, but in some cases rhetoric is worse than nothing.

She is asking people to become more active but it is much more important that major corporations be on board. When she convinces Exxon or Goldman-Sachs to commit to reducing climate change, then I will pay attention.

I believe (please correct me if I am wrong) she has stated in the past that she supports fracking and the XL Pipeline.

Fracking is destroying our environment. How can any Democrat support fracking?

[Laelth]

31. As far as I know, you are right.

Hillary Clinton supports fracking, as cali demonstrates in a thread HERE, and I seem to recall her supporting the Keystone XL Pipeline (though I don't have a link for that at the moment).



-Laelth

[sabrina 1]

84. Well, she can't support such a movement AND support the secret Free Trade Agreement

Because some of what is in that 'secret' agreement has been leaked, by Wikileaks, and it concerns Environmental issues. Iow, Corporations, if this isn't changed, will have far more control over Environmental issues including foreign Corporations.

ANYONE who cares about the Environment can NOT support this potential disaster of a bill.

[rhett o rick]

88. And to say that in another way, "Those that support the TPP do not care about the environment."

People are often fooled by wonderful sounding rhetoric. She is hoping there is a mass movement. But will she support a mass movement with anything other than rhetoric? Will she convince Goldman-Sachs (one of her sponsors) that they need to change their business model? Most likely "hoping" is as far as she will go.

[sabrina 1]

90. Exactly. When you watch what they do rather than what they say, it is amazing

how so often the difference is so obvious it's a wonder any of it works at all.

If she really means that about hoping for such a movement, we will be hearing her loudly denouncing the TPP and withdrawing any support she has given it up to now.

But I won't hold my breath. However that is a question she should be asked, over and over again if she decides to run.

[cantbeserious]

2. How About A Mass Movement Demanding Action On Income Inequality

Sorry, forgot that HRC is part of the 1%.

[pnwmom]

3. She also called for a broader mass movement toward political change.

How do you know that wouldn't encompass income inequality?

When she and Bill left the Governors' office, his state salary was $32K, her lawyer salary was about $100K and they didn't even own a home. They haven't always been wealthy.

[mucifer]

6. Yeah but NAFTA happened under him.

Then slowly it became bye bye jobs.

But, this thread is about climate change and I'm glad she is for fighting that.

[pnwmom]

9. Is her name Bill? Last I checked, women could even vote without their husband's permission.nt

[still_one]

10. In fact she has opposed CAFTA, which Bill does not, so you are correct

[pandr32]

49. Bush Sr. arranged NAFTA

...and attended the NAFTA ceremonies in all three capitals in Mexico, Canada, and here in December 1992. He and Mulroney, and Salinas all ceremoniously signed it. All Clinton did was officially sign it into law.

[rhett o rick]

19. Between the two of them they have amassed quite a bit of wealth in a few years.

I guess it's the American Dream to get Wall Street Corps to hand you hundreds of thousands of dollars for having tea with them.

[pnwmom]

21. She made most of her money selling her books, and since then

she's been putting money from speeches into the Clinton Foundation.

[rhett o rick]

25. Yes "selling books". That's where you can get $14 million in advance to keep whether any books

are sold. And PAC's are often the major book buyers. I certainly looks more legitimate than accepting $400,000 for a few minute of lecture.

[pnwmom]

26. Why isn't the advance justified? Since Bill Clinton's made $15 million, it's reasonable to expect

that an investment on her book will pay off for the publisher.

[rhett o rick]

66. It looks like a great way for PAC's to transfer money to candidate's personal accounts.

Newt Gingrich made millions from his books also. Rupert Murdock bought most of them.

[pnwmom]

68. Right. She's just like the Repubs, you keep saying that. All I see is speculation. n/t

[rhett o rick]

69. I have never said that and I am tired of you defaulting to that meme when you

run out of decent arguments. Her wealth puts her as part of the 1%. She is very chummy with Wall Street especially Goldman-Sachs, possibly the worst of the worst. I see no indication that she will do anything but continue the widening wealth gap, continue the NSA/CIA Security State, and continue the Wall Street economy. If you have evidence otherwise, I'd be interested.

And we know she has serious integrity problems after she threw her allegiance in with the Republicans in her vote to authorize the IWAR.

We need someone that truly represents the people and has Democratic Values.

[pnwmom]

70. You just compared her to Newt Gingritch. Why didn't you compare her

Last edited Wed Sep 17, 2014, 09:29 PM - Edit history (5)

to a Democratic book author instead? Ted Kennedy, for example. He made money from writing, too.

Or was he different because he came from old money, and Hillary and Bill are greedy upstarts?

http://www.amazon.com/Edward-M.-Kennedy/e/B002KLN1Y4/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1

Or to Bernie Sanders. He's an author.

http://www.amazon.com/Outsider-House-Bernie-Sanders/dp/1859848710/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1411003511&sr=8-4&keywords=bernie+sanders+books

Or to President Obama. His first substantial wealth came from a book, just like with Hillary and Bill.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_0_10?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=obama+book&sprefix=obama+book%2Caps%2C232

No -- you only want to compare her to a Rethug like Newt Gingrich. Because it's fine when other Dems write books -- just not Hillary.

[rhett o rick]

72. Wow you are really reaching. I think H. Clinton is running for president and I don't think she

represents the 99%. I think she has ties to Wall Street and in particular Goldman-Sachs.

[pnwmom]

75. Obama ran for President, and wrote books. Did you criticize him for that, too?

With a nice house and two high salary jobs, the President and Mrs Obama were better off financially when they went into office than the Clintons were. The Clintons had a partnership in a little Arkansas law firm and a $32K a year governor salary to support them, and no house. The Clintons know as well as the Obamas what it is like to have been part of the 99%. Neither couple is in the 99% anymore, but for some reason you reserve your rancor for Hillary.

[former9thward]

41. How did they become wealthy on government jobs?

[rhett o rick]

67. Calling for a mass movement isn't really taking any action. When she gets Wall Street to get

on board, let me know.

[BeyondGeography]

5. She'z pot of da One Puhcent!!!

Wow, man.

[still_one]

8. Perhaps you are unaware of her record. She has always supported income equality. Strongly

supported the Lilly Ledbetter Act, and took the following positions:

No salary increase for Congress until minimum wage increased. (Jul 2007)
Would accept minimum wage as president. (Jul 2007)
Stand up for unions; organize for fair wages. (Jun 2007)
Get tough with China and bring jobs back home. (Feb 2007)
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages. (Dec 2006)
Passed 2 planks of 7-plank platform, “New Jobs for New York”. (Oct 2006)
Minimum wage should be tied to congressional salaries. (Jun 2006)
Pushed for extension of unemployment insurance. (Feb 2004)
The working poor deserve a living wage. (Oct 1999)
America can afford to raise the minimum wage. (Sep 1999)
Recently “we’re in it together” became “you’re on your own”. (Sep 1996)
Voted YES on extending unemployment benefits from 39 weeks to 59 weeks. (Nov 2008)
Voted NO on terminating legal challenges to English-only job rules. (Mar 2008)
Voted YES on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Jun 2007)
Voted YES on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Feb 2007)
Voted YES on raising the minimum wage to $7.25 rather than $6.25. (Mar 2005)
Voted NO on repealing Clinton's ergonomic rules on repetitive stress. (Mar 2001)
Protect overtime pay protections. (Jun 2003)
Rated 85% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
Allow an Air Traffic Controller's Union. (Jan 2006)
Sponsored bill linking minimum wage to Congress' pay raises. (May 2006)
Extend unemployment compensation during recession. (Jan 2008)
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue. (Jan 2009)
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination. (Jan 2009)

[AgingAmerican]

40. I believe she can walk

...and chew bubblegum at the same time.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. Why the Repub sarcasm?

Has anyone here said that Republicans are better on climate change?

Which of her potential Dem challengers in a primary doesn't believe in climate change, and doesn't hope that young people will be much more committed than older ones have been on addressing the issue?

I congratulate Hillary on announcing that she takes the standard Democratic stance on climate change.

[pnwmom]

11. Many people here have repeatedly said that Hillary is nothing but a Republican in disguise.

And they're either lying or greatly misinformed.

[still_one]

12. They are blinded by animosity, and refuse to even look at her record. While not everyone will agree

with everything, the vast majority of her actions are liberal, but of course that is forbidden to say to some


http://www.ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

[pnwmom]

13. Thanks for the link, still_one. n/t

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

15. Please quit spamming me with that link.

I've seen it, thanks.

[still_one]

16. Who made you ruler of what can or cannot be posted. Typical...put your fingers in your ears and say

LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

17. I'm not, I'm simply asking you not to keep posting it under *my* comments.

You, of course, don't have to honor my request. You can instead be rude, and passive-aggressive and insult me because I asked you not to.

Of course, that says a lot about the kind of person you are.

Do you want to be known as rude and insulting?

[still_one]

23. first of all I was replying to someone else in YOUR thread. Second, it isn't spam. Are you saying

that information is incorrect? Third the person I was responding to was the person who started the main thread.

You call me rude, perhaps you should look in mirror, accusing someone of posting "spam" is rude for your information.

and so I will say right back at you

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

29. Ok, I sometimes have trouble with the nesting here.

And mistake which comments are posted under others. I thought you had posted it under mine, not someone else's.

Personally, I don't think mistakenly asking you not to do something is rude, but that's your call.

[still_one]

30. OK. I definitely am not angry about it, and respect diverse opinions. Seriously, have a nice day

[AgingAmerican]

42. Doh!

nt

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

44. Yeah, I got the nesting wrong.

Thought he'd posted it under my comment, not one just below mine. But I don't delete my mistakes, I let people see when I screw up.

[AgingAmerican]

45. It's all good

...gotta respect honesty, especially in regards to politics!

[pnwmom]

54. Comments in a thread are open to anyone, they don't belong to you. n/t

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

58. If you bother to read the rest of the comments

in the exchange, you'll realize that I wasn't referring to 'comments in a thread' by using the word 'my'. I mistakenly thought still_one's reply was to 'my' comment, meaning 'the comment I wrote'. The reason I made it 'comments' rather than 'comment' is that under another OP, a day or so ago, I believe it was, still_one had posted the exact same link under another comment I personally wrote. I wasn't trying to 'claim' all comments nested underneath mine as 'belonging' to me.

So my comments belong to me, your comments belong to you, and joe schmoe's comments belong to joe schmoe. In this one case, as I have a couple of other times before over the last few months, I simply got the nesting confused, and thought he was replying to a comment I actually wrote.

[pnwmom]

60. Even so, anyone's free to reply to anyone -- sometimes so that others can see what the person's

answer would be, even if the first commenter has heard it before.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

61. Sure, which is why my first response

was just to simply ask the poster simply not to post the same comment to me over and over.

Now he wasn't, because he was actually posting to someone else (you?), but if I started posting a single sentence in response to comments you posted, how many times would it take before you assumed I was trolling you and asked me to stop?

[MADem]

52. Bow out of the thread, then. It's an accurate resource to describe HRC's -- or any politicians'--

POV on the issues of the day.

It's not spam.

[nomorenomore08]

74. She's a centrist Dem. Better than practically any Republican, to be sure. And I'll vote for her

if she's the nominee, even if she's not my first choice. But I must say some of her supporters come across as unnecessarily defensive.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

14. Well, I'd suggest they're being hyperbolic.

Although the party has shifted so far to the right in the last few decades that there probably were Republicans to the left of her on various issues in the past. I seem to recall Nixon, for instance, was the one who created the most sweeping pro-environmental changes the country has seen to date. EPA, Clean Air and Water, iirc.

[merrily]

39. Not by much. Being more like Republicans was the whole

strategy of the Democratic Leadership Council, of which she and Bill were founding members around 1985, along with Gore, Lieberman, Pryor and others. The Koch brothers were among the early contributors.

The DLC/New Democrat philosophy philosophy took over the Party after Bill became the first DLC-endorsed candidate. Hillary traveled abroad with the CEO to spread the DLC philosophy, which supposedly gave us Tony Blair.

Democrats including Kerry, joined New Democrat Caucuses in the House and Senate. Gore was the second DLC endorsed Pres. candidate. Kerry was the fourth because the DLC had endorsed founding member Lieberman first, but everyone, with the possible exception of Lieberman, knew that Lieberman would drop out early. Obama was the fifth.

By then the Party basically WAS DLC, at least as far as the professional, several other third way type think tanks existed and CEO Al From allegedly wanted to do other things. So, it folded, leaving its papers to the Clinton Presidential library.

As you said, the party shifted to the right over the last several decades. That's why.

[pnwmom]

55. The whole country shifted to the right after the fall of the Soviet Union.

The Democratic party shifted with it. You are correct that some old Repubs, like Dwight D. Eisenhower, would be considered liberals these days.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

59. I actually don't believe that. I think a lot of people were simply confused as to

what they believe and what they call themselves.

When you poll the bulk of Americans, they consistently agree by 2-1 or 3-1 with policies that are considered 'liberal', but then turn around and call themselves 'moderates' or even 'conservatives'. There was also a study out a while back (6 months? a year?) that showed that the politicians representing districts were almost to a person, voting more conservatively than the people they supposedly represent.

So I don't think Americans as a whole truly did shift all that far rightward. I think politicians did, and Americans still vote for what they can get, but are almost in every case, given more conservative representation than they actually want, because of the limited choices given to them within the two party system.

[cali]

46. I don't think she's a republican in disguise. I think she's a full fledged corporatist

she's hardly cutting edge on LGBT rights but she's better than any repub. She's good on choice and most other social issues, but she's lousy on a lot of important issues. She's big on fracking. She's a major defender of the worst of Wall Street and don't forget she's done such things as co-sponsor a bill to fucking criminalize flag burning which damn well is criminalizing political speech.

she's a shameless opportunist and panderer.

[MineralMan]

7. Well, see, she really doesn't mean it. She's just saying that

to make you think she means it. Yeah, that's the ticket...

[cali]

47. there is plenty of evidence to contradict her words.

I've provided links in other posts.

[rhett o rick]

22. Looks like rhetoric to me. At least candidate Obama PROMISED to turn back the Patriot Act. nm

[jeff47]

24. So she said "someday, someone should do something about this".

Oooo. Inspiring. Look at that leadership.

[AgingAmerican]

43. Do you disagree?

Nothing should be done about it? She is absolutely right. It will take a mass movement.

[jeff47]

65. She's passing the buck on to someone else to do it.

Though good try at assuming the problem was doing something about it, instead of Clinton avoiding doing something about it.

[AgingAmerican]

77. She is in reality

She cannot do it alone. It will take a mass movement.

[jeff47]

80. And she's saying it's someone else's job to start that movement. (nt)

[AgingAmerican]

81. Nowhere does she say

that it's 'someone else's' job to save the planet. She says it will take a mass movement before it happens, which is absolutely correct.

[jeff47]

87. She says it's up to young people to do it.

She also says it will take a mass movement, and then does not talk about how to create or encourage that mass movement.

In other words, she said "This is a big problem. Someone should fix it".

[bunnies]

71. You have a "No more third way bullshit" sig line....

while defending Hillary Clinton. Thats some funny shit right there.

[AtomicKitten]

73. so that's what cognitive dissonance looks like

good catch!

[AgingAmerican]

79. So thats what

....irrelevant looks like!

Good catch!

Do you believe that politicians will singlehandedly save us from climate change, or do you think it will take a mass movement?

[AtomicKitten]

83. My takeaway from this is that it's

breathtakingly hypocritical for someone to promote the Keystone pipeline as she has - link for reference: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023022353 and then pontificate about the perils of climate change.

[AgingAmerican]

85. So she is wrong?

It won't take a mass movement to spark significant change in our policies toward carbon emissions? Hey, even my broken clock is right every now and again.

[AtomicKitten]

89. yes her simplistic statement is incorrect

That was never more clear than when trying to pass meaningful gun control after Sandy Hook. The masses - over 90% of Americans -supported it, but Congress couldn't get it done.

Rhetorical platitudes aside, it will take a compliant Congress to effect sweeping change in policy.

[AgingAmerican]

78. Im not defending Hillary, but

I agree with what she said, because it's true.

[cali]

27. and I should believe her why?

after all she has been a very good friend to big oil and pushes fracking all around the world.

yeah, she really cares.

[hatrack]

33. And her State Dept's "Git Er Done!" approach on KXL

But we need a mass movement so that:

A. I will be forced to do the right thing ... Someday ..
B. I can pretend to be leading it.

Whatever.

[merrily]

32. Rebranding. Different wrapper. Same contents. Don't buy it.

http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5544144

[navarth]

35. sadly must agree. Nt

[raouldukelives]

34. Hopes there will be? Maybe she should be in NY on the 21st.

Still, I am glad to know she is against fracking, offshore drilling, keystone and the Wall St speculation that leads to so much unnecessary waste.

[KurtNYC]

36. "hopes" implies that there isn't one now, and that she won't be leading it

There is one now:

http://www.thenation.com/blog/179533/can-ancient-doctrine-force-government-act-climate-change

http://climatemarch.org/

[NorthCarolina]

37. Did she happen to mention what she would do, or what should be done, to address the issue? nt

[pnwmom]

63. The media barely covered this, as it was. So I have no idea. n/t

[Orsino]

38. "Somebody tell me what to do," begs our next president.

Goddammit, I wish she would just lead.

[marmar]

48. Just in time for the climate march......

...... She must have had her weathervane out.

[packman]

50. Yada, yada, blah, blah - full of sound and fury but---

like being in favor of motherhood. Would feel better if Hillary would get around making some statements about the destruction of the middle class in America, a decent living wage in America, the homeless in America, the corruption in our banking and in Wall Street, the drug problem in America. Hey, I'm all for addressing climate change issues, but Hillary needs to take a few lessons from Elizabeth Warren and begin to act like she gives a fuck about what problems Americans have living in America.

[pnwmom]

53. Oh yeah? She's been speaking but most of the media hasn't been reporting. How about this:

Hillary Clinton denounces income inequality in populist speech

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025548623

[packman]

56. Thanks for link-

Guess I just want to hear more of it.

[pnwmom]

57. Me, too. Hopefully this will continue even more strongly as time goes on. n/t

[nomorenomore08]

76. +2

If she's "inevitable" then I'm crossing my fingers that Sanders and Warren influence her to shift left. Even just a little.

[riversedge]

51. Thanks Hillary. We know you care

[oldandhappy]

62. Wonder if she will show up for the Climate March this weekend.

Makes me giggle. Maybe she means it and maybe she sees a big show that she wants to use for herself. Donno. But I will be at our local Climate March. We the people and all that, smile.

[Dems to Win]

64. Just like the mass movement that demanded NO WAR ON IRAQ?

Cause that was soooo effective.

All those active, motivated New Yorkers couldn't even convince their senator to vote NO on going to war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Looking at you, Hillary.

[AgingAmerican]

82. There was no mass movement

against the Iraq war. There was a mass movement for civil rights, however.

[Rex]

86. She must be running for POTUS