You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #24: it's their true colors [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-03-08 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
24. it's their true colors
You were quite young in 1992. I was 30. I didn't like Clinton then. He talked too much like a Republican on the economy. Everything was economic growth, economic growth, economic growth.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/74

His first term confirmed that for me in many ways, which I can no longer remember. Perhaps NAFTA and "the era of big government is over". Welfare reform, although he vetoed two previous bills. It seemed to me that he was not much better than Bush Sr.

He was much better than Dole, but I voted against him anyway since he was projected to win big. The second term seemed to be all Lewinsky. I had forgotten about his tax cuts for the rich and his other foibles.

Then there was 2000. What business did Hillary have running for the Senate in New York? She never lived there and was obviously just using the prestige and size of New York as a springboard for a Presidential run. Since New York is my mom's home state, I took that personally and tried to run against her. However, since I am not a celebrity with lots of connections to the rich and powerful, I was unable to get on the ballot. But it helped me to see her as a rich celebrity with connections to the rich and powerful as opposed to a person "of the people and for the people".

Then she voted for and promoted the Iraq war. Still, I figured her victory was inevitable and would not be too bad. Then Edwards ran, trying to advance the issues of the poor and working class. Meanwhile, Hillary was running an empty campaign based on her inevitability and collection of big-shot endorsements - before ANYBODY even got to vote. Her debate performances were empty - not gonna commit to a specific policy proposal until we have a balanced budget and a bipartisan commission. When she finally came up with proposals they looked suspiciously like Edwards' earlier proposals.

Like Lieberman, I think it is when push comes to shove that their true colors come shining through - the arrogance, the elitism, the dishonesty, the pro-business and pro-military and pro-prison biases. I think that is her real base and like Bush, she tries to sell herself as a person with compassion for the ordinary American and it just is not at all evident in the record she is running on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC