Larkspur
Larkspur's JournalProposing “No Honeymoon for Hillary” plan
Assuming that HRC wins the Democratic nomination for President, I'll hold my nose and vote for her in the GE, but I will never trust her. She is nothing but a lesser of 2 evils choice for me.
I think the next phase Progressives need to take is that the nanosecond after HRC wins the GE, is to implement a “No Honeymoon for Hillary” plan. That plan is to scrutinize every appointment she makes to staff agencies and cabinet positions as well has be a hawk on her policy positions right after she wins the GE. Since she is campaigning on being able to hit the floor running as President, HRC has no need for a honeymoon period.
And of course, the rest of the Democrats in Congress, especially HRC’s super delegates, need to be scrutinized and pressured as well by Progressives.
After all, that is how American Democracy works. The end of the election is not the end of democracy.
And we'll know we are doing our job when the Ed Rendell's, Rahm Emmanuels, et all screech their complaints to the media about us.
Our response to the Turd Way (old DLC) whiners needs to be the famous saying of Frederick Douglas, "Power gives up nothing without a fight, never has, never will." If they don't like American Democracy, then they can move to China.
Huff Post op ed: The "Meta-Issues" Behind the Sanders-Clinton Contest
Thought this was a very good analysis of the differing views between Hillary and Bernie.
And why Hillary’s “Bernie is a single issue candidate” line of attack most likely will not work.
The "Meta-Issues" Behind the Sanders-Clinton Contest
SNIP
Sanders' stump speech … drives home a single theme -- the fact that the American economy and politics are dominated by a handful of billionaires who have "rigged" the system to support their interests at the expense of the majority. With this foundation laid, Sanders calls for a political "revolution" that will mobilize voters to demand a leveling of the playing field, offering such expansive programs as universal health care and free college education. He proposes paying for these by imposing taxes on the very wealthy and on excessive Wall Street behavior. And he emphasizes a more restrained foreign policy that avoids irresponsible, costly, unwinnable wars.
Sanders' edge is that he offers "bumper sticker" clarity. Because his programs and proposals all flow from a coherent economic and political philosophy, his message more easily resonates with many voters. This clarity is something that Republicans have long owned and Democrats have missed. While Republicans could speak of "small government and individual freedom," Democrats could only respond with a bewildering array of causes and programs that lacked a central over-arching theme. With Sanders, Democrats can respond with theme like "a government that cares" and "we all matter."
SNIP
So Hillary’s critique is off the mark. Bernie is a multiple issue candidate who has a single theme and coherent economic and political philosophy. I suspect her “single issue candidate” critique of Bernie has to do with her very close ties to Wall Street and other Big Money interests, whom Bernie is hammering. They do have easily bruised egos on Wall Street. I wonder what she said in those speeches to Wall Street?
My published LTE in the Killingly (CT) Villager--Doubts about Clinton’s ability to lead
(Hillary Clinton) is not interested in ideas that will "never make it in the real world," reports the AP (“Clinton Steps Up Attacks On Sanders Days Before Iowa”, AP via Huffinton Post, January 21, 2016)
Luckily for us, she was not an advisor to our nation’s Founding Fathers and Mothers. If she was, she would have either derailed the American Revolution, labeling Thomas Paine, John Hancock, Ben Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, etc as extremists, or would have been tarred and feathered by our Founding Fathers and Mothers as a British Loyalist.
When our Founding Fathers and Mothers ignited the American Revolution, they knew that no colony up to that time had ever successfully seceded from its mother country, but that historical fact did not deter them. Willing to fight the odds against tyranny and despair, no matter how great, is how this nation was born and it’s ingrained in the core of our nation’s DNA. It’s what also inspired the succeeding generations of American revolutionists -- the abolitionists, suffragettes, civil and labor rights activists, environmentalists, etc -- to defy the odds again and help make this nation a more perfect union and truer to its founding ideals.
When I was 19, I earned my private pilot’s license. The flight examiner told me that no pilot is ever perfect so the most important attributes, along with technical competence, a successful pilot must have are good judgment, a calm temperament, humility, and knowledge of your whereabouts and destination. Without these, a pilot, his/her plane and passengers are doomed no matter how fancy a plane you fly.
Hillary’s behavior when she sees the race tightening is to panic and viciously lash out at her main challenger and his/her supporters. She did this in 2008 against Presidential candidate Barack Obama and is doing it again against Sen. Bernie Sanders. We are seeing a repeat of Hillary’s “evil Queen of Hearts” persona rising before us. Remember in 2008, Obama’s campaign slogan was “Yes We Can!” Hillary’s attack slogan then and now can be summed up with “No, You Can’t, so shut up and vote for me, the Entitled One!”
I was never an Obama fanatic but what convinced me to vote for him in the 2008 primary was that he displayed a calm public demeanor, an even keel, even when his campaign faced “stormy seas,” addressed his mistakes quickly, countered his opponents’ attacks, and continued to offer us a positive vision of what we can strive towards.
This year, as in 2008, Hillary Clinton has failed to demonstrate to me the temperament that befits a President of the United States, especially one in this Nuclear Age. Freaking out and attacking Sen. Bernie Sanders, a rising populist star in the Democratic Party’s Presidential primary, for having the audacity to campaign on ideas that are as American as Thomas Paine’s and President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s is un-American and leaves me with her vision, a dark vision of a world she rules but is bereft of hope and justice, one that this Democrat associates with Rightwing ideology, and with doubts about her ability to be a competent Commander-in-chief or our Armed Forces.
Profile Information
Member since: 2001Number of posts: 12,804
