All whistleblowers are punished!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2016 11:26 AM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest Version of
Hillary Clinton
You were leafleting and they arrested you. Thomas Drake, who worked for the
NSA, went to his superiors and talked about a wasteful and illegal NSA
program. He was brought up on charges of espionage and although eventually,
he won his case, he ended up losing his job, his federal benefits, and his
family. He works in an Apple store as a sales person. And he's just one of,
I can't even count the numbers. People who thwart the system, are punished.
Sometimes, they're punished when they just follow the laws and don't attempt
to disrupt anything. But if one takes a stand, I guess one has to expect
negative consequences. One could end up being stranded in Russia with no way
to come home to America without being thrown in jail, or imprisoned in the
Ecuadorian embassy with the threat of capture if you set foot outside.
Miriam ,
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2016 10:10 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest Version of
Hillary Clinton
Yes, agreed, again only talking matters of degree.
Of course, Bill Clinton signed both the elimination of Glass-Steagle and one
of his last acts was the deregulation of deriatives in December 2000.
Both of course were pushed by the corrupted Republicans, Phil Graham ran
point on both.
Those acts however were the weapons of mass destruction that blew up the
global economy.
Now, what I most fault Obama for is that while his DOJ has pursued numerous
settlements, there has not been one of these jokers even tried criminally.
Not one.
That is a sin and an outrage. They shouldn't be too big to jail for the
rampent fraud.
This goes to the distorted judicial system as Sanders points out over and
over again rightfully.
Shit, I've spent thousands of dallars for an illegal arrest for just
leafleting or trying to on the most protected public forum, the State
Capitol. My crime was not a crime, but this administration criminalized
civil rights and the state is pursuing bogus charges for same.
And I'm just one blind guy.
Yet, coroporate execs who literally defrauded millions and did through their
actions cause loss of homes, jobs, and even, I'll argue deaths get off with
a mild slap in the pocket book after they were bailed out at our expense.
Yes, I'm outraged and that includes at Obama!
I'm just saying I think Hilliary would be even worse and I'm not molified by
her at all!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2016 9:52 AM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest Version of
Hillary Clinton
Yes, but Wall Street was in his cabinet, Timothy Gythner, Lawrenceeither.
Summers, and a justice department which did not pursue any of the
heads of banks or big financial institutions. And his biggest funder
was the head of a huge hotel chain and is now in his cabinet. Her name
escapes me. If he'd been in politics longer, he'd have had as many
connections as the Clintons do.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe harcz
Comcast
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2016 7:44 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest
Version of Hillary Clinton
To be fair to Obama he was much less in the hip pocket of Wall Street
than Hilliary or her husband. I'm not letting Obama off the hook here
I'm
just talking about matters of degree.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Jarvis" <carjar82@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 9:18 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Progressive 3.0: Beware the Latest
Version of Hillary Clinton
Hiding behind her Womanhood will not separate Hillary Clinton from thestraight.
Establishment that pays her freight. Barak Obama, despite the
Republican nay Sayers, was a puppet of the establishment despite being
Black. The fact that Hillary Clinton is unable to understand what it
is to be a Corporate Lackey, should be a red flag.
But personally, I think Hillary Clinton knows who she is. She just
thinks the rest of America is confused enough not to figure her out.
Carl Jarvis
On 2/5/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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
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.
