Chris Hedges: Revolution Is in the Air

[glowing]

134. If Hillary decided to embrace the American people, throw over the big spender donors, refuse to

create/ run pacs pre-election, and asked the American people to fund her so she could do the things that need to be done for Americans, I think you and every Hillary supporter would understand that 7 million individual donations flooding into a campaign is going to have errors. AND btw, how many people are purposely out there placing donations that would/ can be flagged by the FEC so others can turn around and say, "look over there, that campaign with all those donations on avg of $27.00, is committing fraud; don't look over here at my campaign that is on the take from big corporations". BTW, with the Clinton's, we have a really new phenomenon facing America. The former President has created a NGO, a global money maker for charity, and now a spouse is running for President. Its unprecedented, in our history, to essentially have a candidate and probably the next President, able to accept money from outside the country, into their foundation.

Let me give an example of something our Republican crook of a Gov did in FL. He went on a campaign tirade lambasting all of those, high on the hog living, people who receive public assistance (mostly SNAP benefits). He wanted to drug test people on assistance because those who use drugs, shouldn't receive tax payers public assistance. These poor people had to go and pay for a drug test, if that drug test was negative, the state would reimburse that person. Come to find out, poor people use drugs less of a percentage wise than the general public (about 2%). So, the state lost money on the testing procedures. They didn't catch all these lazy moochers republicans claim are on the public dole. Tax payers lost money by having to pay the testing company and still help subsidize poor people. Now, who really won in this scheme? Rick Scott's family to the tune of free tax payers money. The testing company was originally the Gov's, but because he was a public official, he placed the company in his wife's name. Uh, they still both benefit from that relationship. Everyone who was Dem was publicly calling fowl! Called him corrupt. Called him entrenched in corporations back pocket. Just another item that he does as well, we have Sunshine laws, some of the best laws for citizens to be able to track what's going on in their govt. Well, this guy flies on private donors planes. So, the public cannot know where or whom he's flying around with or what is happening on these private flights. It's been another complaint of corruption... Do we know any other candidates that keep the press so separated from their-selves? When politicians want to hide, there is something the public will most likely think stinks to high heaven.

I'm sorry that your candidate chose to go to private companies and make speeches for huge sums of money in-between her service at State and formally entering the presidential race. AND we all knew she was going to run again in 2012. She knew she was going to run. AND in an environment that hates more and more the corruption in DC in regards to the rich buying more riches, and the rest of us left in the dirt, she chose to go and make personal money off of private speeches. AND the fact that she won't release the speeches that she gave in private to the public doesn't make any sense, unless the public would go nuts over what was specifically said to, say a large bank responsible for massive amounts of fraud; a bank that just paid a $5 billion dollar settlement for purposely perpetrating fraud on its customers. No matter how much you want to scream about the semantics of that ad, people aren't swayed by "everyone is doing it", these donations from these companies and lobbyists and Super Pac's are legally sanctioned, and refusing to disclose what is said behind private paid for speeches, doesn't for most Americans. One of the major reasons people give for not participating in the voting process is because the system is corrupt and all the politicians are bought. Well, Sander's is being bought by the people. AND Trump is funding his own campaign, along with the help of the media covering every moment of his life, looking for the next "breaking" item to alert everyone to in red and try to grab a rating burst in the horse race. So, in a VERY anti-establishment year, the front runners on both sides of the parties are having some major hurdles to overcome. AND good for democracy. Good for the people. Good for the real issues that would help people's lives being finally addressed.