2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNo, Hillary Clinton Does Not Work For Monsanto
Its no secret that I am an ardent Bernie Sanders supporter. However, I feel it is necessary to address a rumor that some of his supporters on the far left continue to circulate. That rumor is that Hillary Clinton is a sworn ally of the much-maligned biotech company, Monsanto. Some people even go so far to claim that she sits on the board of directors, despite presenting absolutely no evidence to back up their statements. In fact, there are many other people alleged by conspiracy enthusiasts to be employed by the corporation, with the same glaring lack of evidence.
All mis-informed hyperbole and debunked conspiracy stories about the company aside, the fact remains that her alleged relationship with the company doesnt exist. She does not sit on their board of directors, and her ties with the company are confined to one lobbyist that her campaign brought on to be a political adviser for the Iowa caucuses.
So why do people continue to push this myth? Why would liberals who call themselves smarter and more informed than the conservatives they oppose repeat something that simply is not true?
Read more at: http://www.forwardprogressives.com/no-hillary-clinton-does-not-work-for-monsanto/
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)Clinton has been a champion of Monsanto publicly and privately.
Whether one believes GMOs are dangerous, or safe and wonderful ,or the jury is out, there is one undeniable fact.
Monsanto is a huge a monopolistic empire with very few core moral values, other than to take over the entire food system, control the market and force producers and consumers into their corporate straight jacket.
I happen to believe no one corporation should be allow to use its power to screw over farmers, contaminate he ecosystem with bastardized lifeforms with unknown results, use its immense legal clout to beat up on dissenting small farmers, stifle honest research, make it impossible to label the content of foods.....and God only knows what else they are up to.
They epitomize what is wrong with a society that has allowed these immense monopolistic corporations to get far too big and unrestrained and allowed to do the equivalent in every aspect of life.
And the last thing we need in the White House is another enabler of this anti-social behavior.
SusanaMontana41
(3,233 posts)No sarcasm. I mean it.
Could you debunk this rumor too, por favor? I'm so hoping you can. I mean that, too. No sarcasm.
Video: Hilary Clinton endorses GMOs, solution-focused crop biotechnology
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/07/03/video-hilary-clinton-endorses-gmos-solution-focused-crop-biotechnology/
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)some guy named Jerry Crawford?
But the narrative that Clinton worked at Monsanto is demonstratively false.
I expect nothing less that a goal post move, have at it.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)i just wanted both goal posts, instead of only one.
As in the whole truth, a level playing field.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)She did work for the Rose Law Firm, which represented Monsanto. Whether or not she herself worked on any Monsanto cases is probably anybody's guess.
However, what is indisputable is that she is a big supporter of GMOs.
http://bangordailynews.com/2014/08/27/opinion/contributors/when-it-comes-to-gmos-which-side-is-hillary-clinton-on/
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)SusanaMontana41
(3,233 posts)Next?
tecelote
(5,122 posts)The article has three reasons why GMO's are not what they claim:
There are three glaring problems with Clintons promotion of GE drought-resistant crops. First, drought-resistant seeds and crops are still in the experimental stage and make up a miniscule portion of GMO crops on the market. More than 95 percent of GE crops are corn, soy, alfalfa, canola and sugar beets, used in animal feed and in processed food products, such as high-fructose corn syrup. These crops are engineered to produce their own Bt toxins in every cell or else to withstand massive doses of herbicides, such as Monsantos Roundup, which are sold to farmers as companions to their GMO seeds.
Second, attempts to engineer seeds to thrive during droughts largely have failed. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, Monsantos DroughtGard, the only drought-resistant crop approved by the USDA so far, produces only modest results, and only under moderate drought conditions.
Third, according to experts at global organizations, such as the Food & Agriculture Organization, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, and the Alliance for Food Sovereignty, a transition to sustainable, regenerative agriculture not genetic engineering is not only the most practical way to feed the world but is absolutely essential if we want to slow and eventually reverse global warming.
---
GMO's may be safe to eat but they are terrible for our planet.
However, they are profitable, so who cares about the planet?
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)What a gem she must be. Lol. The disgusting thing for me is that she is currently taking money from private prison companies. In my opinion anyone doing that should be tarred and feathered and thrown out with yesterday's trash. I know people who have had their lives ruined because of this industry which is nothing more than a cartel.
pnwmom
(108,978 posts)Most lobbying firms have lots of clients. That doesn't mean the clients are connected with each other, anymore than if you hired a lawyer to prepare a will that would mean you were connected to his other clients.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)She has been a staunch supporter of the failed and unpopular Drug War. She also went along with it being rebranded as the War On Terror allowing police, federal law enforcement and the NSA to spy on effort aspect of our lives in order to try and incarcerate more of us. Nothing saddens me more.
artislife
(9,497 posts)This is Monsanto's legacy in Argentina
http://overgrowthesystem.com/argentina-the-country-that-monsanto-poisoned-photo-essay/
Science and all that.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)oasis
(49,388 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)Corporate dems are treated like heroes.
oasis
(49,388 posts)We align ourselves with the majority of Americans who believe this is the best country on the planet.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)oasis
(49,388 posts)If so, steal this thread.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Back in the day Tom Hayden maybe.
Or EF Schumacher , if you really want to get esoteric.
Or today Naomi Klein.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)She has no connections to Monasanto!!
She's a public servant, and has been forever except when she wasn't and that's when she made her hundreds of millions of dollars using her public service connections.
But Bernie is worth less than a million and he's been in public service the whole time. He should have taken a break like Hill did, and turned his public service connections into millions.
The choice is clear: A Real Deal public servant, or one not a real deal.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)A Bernie supporter suggests.
Then maybe it wouldn't be so toxic in here?
*Note to jury, since I'm on someone's list lately. This is not an accusation that RobertEarl is doing this, I'm just pointing out why a post like this is needed.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)Read the article posted above by Art_from_Ark
No one needs to make up lies. That's for the Republicans. But, the truth is Hillary actively supports Monsanto and GMO crops.
Pesticides like Roundup are making a killing. You can look at this as profit or the planet - your choice.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)I'm sure they're making the payoffs out of the goodness of their shriveled little hearts.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-07-17/lobbyists-for-monsanto-exxon-mobile-raise-money-for-hillary-clinton
When Barack Obama was running for the presidency in 2008and later for reelection in 2012he promised he wouldn't take money from registered lobbyists, not even as bundlers. In the race to succeed him, Hillary Clinton is not following in his footsteps.
The former secretary of state raised more than $2 million from 40 "bundlers"fundraisers who get their contacts to give to campaignswho were also lobbyists, according to financial forms released Wednesday by the Federal Election Commission. In all, the Clinton campaign raised $46.7 million between the beginning of April and the end of June.
Bundlers, who are often wealthy or well-connected individuals, do more than donate to campaigns. They put their social networks to work for favorite candidates, persuading (often equally wealthy and well-connected) family members, friends, colleagues, and other contacts to donate as well, effectively bringing in far more money than they could under the current legal donation limits. Individuals can contribute $2,700 to candidate committees (as opposed to super PACS) for the primary election and the same amount for the general election, for a total of $5,400 in a campaign cycle. Campaigns don't have to disclose their bundlersunless those bundlers are also lobbyists.
Clinton's bundlers include some familiar names: Jerry Crawford, an outside lobbyist to Monsanto and Iowa kingmaker, put together another $35,000 or so. Tony Podesta, a mega-lobbyist who co-founded the Podesta Group and is the brother of Clinton's campaign chair John, bundled almost $75,000.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)This happened:
But just FYI Clinton did not work for Monsanto. And also 35k isn't really all that impressive, hopefully Jerry steps it up for the GE.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Isn't this the same Hillary who decried the corrosive influence of money in politics? Or, did she evolve again?
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)And it states that people with contacts work to raise money from individuals for a candidate, within the allowed amount.
In fact it sort of sounds like what Omaha Steve does with Act Blue... He used his contacts, sets fundraising goals, and then updates his contacts on how they are doing with posts about Act Blue progress. Hmmm... Odd.
I guess Omaha Steve is a bundler, and apparently a good one at that http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1280&pid=9963
*Note to jury, not a callout Steve actually has done a great job of getting people to participate and donate to the campaign. And it's even pretty cool that the cmapaign wrote that letter, it's nice to get that recognition!
Omaha Steve
(99,649 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Keep up the good work sir!
MisterP
(23,730 posts)every instance--did they think that "506th time is the charm"?
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Yet there it is... Clear as day a false OP... Taken from Twitter with barely a Google to fact check... Well my Google-Fu is strong... Yet there is it with 33 rec's each one climbing up that mountain of facts.
Now was that a bullishit mountain I was being buried under? John Stewart made that reference once, and he was spot on.
SusanaMontana41
(3,233 posts)When you're finished congratulating yourselves, could you please explain this?
http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/07/03/video-hilary-clinton-endorses-gmos-solution-focused-crop-biotechnology/
Money quote: Genetically modified sounds Frankensteinish drought resistant sounds really like something you want, she said.
murielm99
(30,741 posts)They all do. It is an effective way to raise money.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)One of Clinton's closes political advisers in 2008, who headed a PR firm that represented Monsanto, among other huge corporate clients.
Ckinton is suposed to be an ally of progressive policies witth friends like this?
https://corporatewatch.org/?q=node/392
Burson-Marsteller (B-M) is one of the largest public relations (PR) agencies in the world and also the most reviled due to its mercenary attitude in choosing clients and contracts, and its frequent run ins with activists for environmental and other progressive causes. When helping its industry clients to escape environmental legislation or sprucing up the image of some of the most repressive governments on Earth, B-M brings to bear state of the art techniques in manipulating the mass media, legislators and public opinion.
oasis
(49,388 posts)If DU had an Elijah Cummings award for having Hillary's back, you would get my vote.
I'll take the kick too.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Answer me this...the real question...will she be supporting Monsanto's agenda?
SusanaMontana41
(3,233 posts)They can't answer your question. They can't hear you.
oasis
(49,388 posts)That's all the majority of Americans would ask of a president.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)She does what's good for herself only which is obeying whatever Bush Sr and his wife says. If she cared she wouldn't run. What planet do you live on? Turn off your tv.
oasis
(49,388 posts)Btw, I've worked with the Democratic Party in three states for more than two decades so I have a damn good Idea of leadership when I see it.
All of my efforts for the party were performed on planet Earth. So let that sink in.
Now, if you can present evidence on this board about Hillary "obeying Bush Sr. and his wife" let's have it. Otherwise you can pack it in and be on your way, along with your condescending attitude.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)How can you have a productive discussion with someone with that viewpoint.
You can't.
oasis
(49,388 posts)The important thing is to draw the crackpots out and let them expose themselves to the entire board.
Although I'm not the one who alerted on that tinfoil hat, juvenile claptrap, it's good it was left for all to see and take note of who authored it.
irisblue
(32,975 posts)ALERTER'S COMMENTS Apprenty Bush Sr. makes all the decisions for Hillary Clinton. This is bull and is something we don't need on a Democratic board. Please vote to hide this post, it's absurd, and trolling at its best.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Oct 28, 2015, 12:01 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Yet another silly alert. Since when does a post containing some BS qualify as alert material? Leave the post there so it, and the poster who put it there, can be seen. STOP THE SILLY ALERTS!
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The Bushes tell HRC what to do? wowsa for CT. Refute this and/or ignore the poster. I don't see it violating TOS. LEAVE irisblue
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Post equates "what is good for Mrs Clinton" with doing as Bush Sr. says. It does not imply decisionmaking on his part for her. This kind of accusations may be inartful, but nowhere near trolling.
If that were trolling, then so should any implication be that voting for Mr. Sanders equals handing the White House to the GOP.
Quit the hyper-partisan alerting. It's an abuse of the jury system.
betsuni
(25,532 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)betsuni
(25,532 posts)When I first quickly glanced at your post title I thought it was "No, Hillary Clinton Is Not a Monster." This is often the thought in my head here. Talk about Bullshit Mountain, there's a whole Bullshit Mountain Range.
Also ridiculous is the habit of some people to assume that just because one refuses to mindlessly believe lies and smears and silly conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton, one is a Hillary-only supporter. It's far too early for me to even seriously think about it. It's interesting seeing how Clinton and Sanders are handling their campaigns. It's also ridiculous to find oneself being lectured to about what democratic socialism is. I've identified myself as a socialist for 35 years (and a commie when I'm in a bad mood). Not a fan of the bullshit.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Apparently this lie about Hillary is circulating on the internet.
It's so important to make sure everyone gets the true story on this. Hillary was not a Monsanto lawyer or employee.
SusanaMontana41
(3,233 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)I'm sure if someone did that about Sanders you'd also try to disprove it. Which I did successfully.
Yes Hillary supports GMO's at some level, most Americans do. Unless you shop exclusively organic at Whole Foods, it's likely you are supporting GMO's yourself. More reasearch needs to be done in the field, and dangerous goods should not be sold for public consumption.
SusanaMontana41
(3,233 posts)You know, like these:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/15/1421400/-It-begins-Hillary-Clinton-smears-Bernie-Sanders-over-Single-Payer
http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_bernie_sanders_smear_campaign_has_begun_how_his_opponents_will_try_to_take_him_down/
Desperate attempts by one of Sanders' opponents to derail him hasn't worked.
I don't worry about such "big things."
SunSeeker
(51,559 posts)imthevicar
(811 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)support warmly then that is what happens when one builds connections and their support in need would not be surprising.
eridani
(51,907 posts)No need to conflate one with the other.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)I'd hope you'd stand up for your candidate too.
artislife
(9,497 posts)She gets profit shares in it by filling her coffers with their money.
Do you even like Monsanto?
Do you think it is good science?
Do you ever wonder what is happening to the food supply?
If you are fine with Monsanto, then she's your gal.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)The graphic that was posted here was a complete lie. Some seem to have great respect for the dishonesty of the Benghazi committee and have decided to "go Gowdy" themselves. Seems they didn't stick around to see how the dishonest hearing went. The dishonesty they are promoting won't work.
Response to Agschmid (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed