Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest Version of Hillary Clinton
Published on
Friday, February 05, 2016
by
Common Dreams
Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest Version of Hillary Clinton
Some thoughts on watching last night's Democratic debate
by
John Atcheson
. 0
Tweet
. 3.82k
Share
. 24
Share
. 0
Share
. 4
Pin
. 0
Mail
. 0
Share
40 Comments
Former secreatary of state Hillary Clinton takes the stage on Thursday night
for a debate with Sen. Bernie Sanders hosted by MSNBC. (Photo: Getty)
Listening to Hillary last night trying to pass herself off as a progressive
is like watching a chameleon change colors to match its surroundings. Not
quite the same, however. The chameleon's move is defensive. Hillary's is
strictly offensive.
The poll-tested, focus-grouped phrases like "a progressive who gets things
done" come right out of the Madison Avenue mold. Or take her contention
that the "Wall Street guys are working against her." They're doing this by
contributing to her Super PAC, apparently, because the week prior to saying
this Hillary was meeting with the likes of Bain Capital and Blackrock. It
can't denied, Wall Street money was and is pouring into her campaign.
"When [Clinton] says let's talk about issues and let's look forward, what
she's really saying is let's not talk about my campaign financing, or my
policy history, because it won't bear the scrutiny my new, new, new
progressive brand demands."Look, let's get this straight.
It wasn't very long ago when Hillary Clinton favored the TPP, the Keystone
XL Pipeline and the death penalty. She also opposed gay marriage and
reinstating Glass-Steagall. Her foreign policy is closer to the neocons who
got us into Iraq (which she voted for) than what the American people favor.
She's flipped on immigration, gun control, and NAFTA.
That's not progressive.
She attributes her changes towards progressivism to "evolving" as a result
of "new information." But as Politico points out, for most of these issues,
there was no new information. For example, what's changed on gay marriage,
other than public opinion? It also begs a question: if Sanders could see
the folly of invading Iraq, or the stupidity of repealing Glass-Steagall, or
the gross inequity of trade pacts, why couldn't she?
Either she has bad judgment, or she's being disingenuous about
flip-flopping.
But now it's apparent that the American people are taking a progressive turn
and so, Hillary is shedding her moderate coat, and donning her progressive
one.
When Mrs. Clinton - filled with righteous indignation - says let's talk
about issues and let's look forward, what she's really saying is let's not
talk about my campaign financing, or my policy history, because it won't
bear the scrutiny my new, new, new progressive brand demands.
As for whether the money she takes buys influence, the American people have
their own opinion. In a groundbreaking study of American beliefs called "the
Smith Project," here's what they had to say:
The Democratic and Republican Parties are essentially useless in changing
this situation. Americans overwhelmingly agree (78%-15%) that both political
parties are too beholden to special interests to create any meaningful
change.
The Smith Project is one of the most comprehensive analyses of what
Americans believe about the political process and their government, and
they've concluded that money buys favors.
Could Hillary be taking Wall Street's money and not being influenced? Well,
maybe. But I guarantee this: they will have access to a Clinton White House
that you and I don't.
It's worth noting that in both Obama's administration and in Bill Clinton's,
Wall Street luminaries held many of the top spots in government, including
Secretary of Treasury.
But back to her bait-and-switch persona. It's important because the
American people want conviction and integrity. Switching from long held
positions as the winds change shows little conviction and questionable
integrity. And that contributes to concerns about money influencing
positions.
Essentially, Hillary will be whatever she needs to be to get elected. It's
about her, not us. Moderate? Progressive? Whatever we want to hear,
apparently.
At the end of the day, Mrs. Clinton is trying to change to meet the changing
times. But the times are calling for revolutionary change, integrity, and
independence, while she's selling herself as a pragmatic deal-maker who
knows how to work the old system.
Skip to main content
//
. DONATE
. SIGN UP FOR NEWSLETTER
Friday, February 5, 2016
. Home
. World
. U.S.
. Canada
. Climate
. War & Peace
. Economy
. Rights
. Solutions
. Sanders vs. Clinton
. Election 2016
. TPP vs. Democracy
. Water Crisis in Flint
. Renewable Revolutions
Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest Version of Hillary Clinton
Published on
Friday, February 05, 2016
by
Common Dreams
Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest Version of Hillary Clinton
Some thoughts on watching last night's Democratic debate
by
John Atcheson
. 40 Comments
.
. Former secreatary of state Hillary Clinton takes the stage on
Thursday night for a debate with Sen. Bernie Sanders hosted by MSNBC.
(Photo: Getty)
. Listening to Hillary last night trying to pass herself off as a
progressive is like watching a chameleon change colors to match its
surroundings. Not quite the same, however. The chameleon's move is
defensive. Hillary's is strictly offensive.
. The poll-tested, focus-grouped phrases like "a progressive who gets
things done" come right out of the Madison Avenue mold. Or take her
contention that the "Wall Street guys are working against her." They're
doing this by contributing to her Super PAC, apparently, because the week
prior to saying this Hillary was meeting with the likes of Bain Capital and
Blackrock. It can't denied, Wall Street money was and is pouring into her
campaign.
. "When [Clinton] says let's talk about issues and let's look forward,
what she's really saying is let's not talk about my campaign financing, or
my policy history, because it won't bear the scrutiny my new, new, new
progressive brand demands."Look, let's get this straight.
. It wasn't very long ago when Hillary Clinton favored the TPP, the
Keystone XL Pipeline and the death penalty. She also opposed gay marriage
and reinstating Glass-Steagall. Her foreign policy is closer to the neocons
who got us into Iraq (which she voted for) than what the American people
favor. She's flipped on immigration, gun control, and NAFTA.
That's not progressive.
She attributes her changes towards progressivism to "evolving" as a result
of "new information." But as Politico points out, for most of these issues,
there was no new information. For example, what's changed on gay marriage,
other than public opinion? It also begs a question: if Sanders could see the
folly of invading Iraq, or the stupidity of repealing Glass-Steagall, or the
gross inequity of trade pacts, why couldn't she?
Either she has bad judgment, or she's being disingenuous about
flip-flopping.
But now it's apparent that the American people are taking a progressive turn
and so, Hillary is shedding her moderate coat, and donning her progressive
one.
When Mrs. Clinton - filled with righteous indignation - says let's talk
about issues and let's look forward, what she's really saying is let's not
talk about my campaign financing, or my policy history, because it won't
bear the scrutiny my new, new, new progressive brand demands.
As for whether the money she takes buys influence, the American people have
their own opinion. In a groundbreaking study of American beliefs called "the
Smith Project," here's what they had to say:
The Democratic and Republican Parties are essentially useless in changing
this situation. Americans overwhelmingly agree (78%-15%) that both political
parties are too beholden to special interests to create any meaningful
change.
The Smith Project is one of the most comprehensive analyses of what
Americans believe about the political process and their government, and
they've concluded that money buys favors.
Could Hillary be taking Wall Street's money and not being influenced? Well,
maybe. But I guarantee this: they will have access to a Clinton White House
that you and I don't.
It's worth noting that in both Obama's administration and in Bill Clinton's,
Wall Street luminaries held many of the top spots in government, including
Secretary of Treasury.
But back to her bait-and-switch persona. It's important because the American
people want conviction and integrity. Switching from long held positions as
the winds change shows little conviction and questionable integrity. And
that contributes to concerns about money influencing positions.
Essentially, Hillary will be whatever she needs to be to get elected. It's
about her, not us. Moderate? Progressive? Whatever we want to hear,
apparently.
At the end of the day, Mrs. Clinton is trying to change to meet the changing
times. But the times are calling for revolutionary change, integrity, and
independence, while she's selling herself as a pragmatic deal-maker who
knows how to work the old system.
