Is Hillary Clinton a Corporate Stooge?

[Quixote1818]

Sorry if this has been posted but I did a search and it didn't come up.

Jonathan Stein is a reporter in Mother Jones' Washington, D.C. Bureau.

November 5, 2007

MARSHALLTOWN, Iowa - In John Edwards' America, no issue matters so much as the fight between you and the system.

Speaking this weekend to a crowd of roughly 150 mostly elderly Iowans in the Charles City (pop. 7,812) town library, Edwards tied every one of the Democrats' bread and butter issues to a singular idea—"This system is corrupt. And it's rigged. And it's rigged against you."

"There are huge issues facing America," the former senator said, standing in front of a massive American flag and a smaller Iowa state flag. "We have a dysfunctional health care system, desperately needs reform. We have huge issues with social security. The prescription drug law under Medicare. We've got issues with protecting our planet from global warming. Extraordinary economic inequality." Here he pauses, then speaks slowly, his southern drawl becoming more pronounced with each syllable. "But whatever the positions of the candidates on these issues, I want to make it very clear where I stand. I don't think we can change these things unless we do something to change this system."

In packaging his stump speech this way, Edwards passes on the opportunity to feed his audiences the red meat that conventional wisdom and the polls suggest they want. He doesn't discuss Iraq for longer than a few sentences. He hits the Bush administration for its warmongering on Iran, but only as an addendum.

More: http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2007/11/John-Edwards-Iowa-caucuses.html?src=email&link=hed_20071107_ts4_Hillary%20Clinton%2C%20Corporate%20Stooge%3F

[tularetom]

1. Does a cat have an ass?

I'm liking Edwards better all the time. I'll probably still vote for Kucinich in the primary but Edwards would be my second choice.

[AdHocSolver]

23. Remember the phrase "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush"? As much as I like Kucinich...

and, I in no way imply that Dennis is comparable in any way to Nader (whom I consider a fraud), but I feel it necessary to point out that in this race, "a vote for Kucinich is a vote for Hillary". Unfortunately, the same logic does apply.

[eridani]

52. Not in a caucus state it isn't.

There are precinct, then county, and sometimes Congressional District caucuses following those. You can change your support at any of those levels for strategic reasons.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

55. Bullshit. Vote for the candidate who mirrors qualities you hold in high esteem.

Your meme is bullshit.

[timtom]

63. That's an extremely cynical approach...

I vote my conscience.

I'm not a political strategist. And I'm not a grand master chess player.

There is only one Democratic contender in this race who speaks his conscience and has values consonant with mine.

All the others are too clever by half!

[Generator]

57. Yes but the cat

penis is very mysterious. I even googled it-no luck. Apparently it's never seen-my first male cat-nothing but fur.

[Double T]

2. At the very least.

[WillyT]

3. Nyuck, Nyuck, Nyuck...

Quite possibly.

:evilgrin:

[Yael]

4. Yes, yes, she is

[Rick Myers]

5. Yes.

I favor Edwards or Obama, with Clark and Richardson as VP or SecState.

[AdHocSolver]

26. I like your picks. I think Edwards is a stronger campaigner and would do better in the general.

Obama would be a candidate of choice in 2016.

[bpeale]

44. and Edwards doesn't have a lot for the repugs to attack him on

he's a family man, still married to his first wife, he's standing by that wife who suffers from incurable breast cancer. he has young children. he spends most if not all his free time with his family. he does what he can for the poor. what is there for the republicans to attack? a haircut? a big house? puleez!

[JackORoses]

6. Hillary is Shemp

[begin_within]

7. I felt that Bill Clinton made too many concessions to the corporate world, and

I don't see Hillary as being any different from him, in that area. He signed NAFTA and the telecommunications bill, and had Carl Lindner sitting next to him at Ford's theater. What does that tell you. How would Hillary be any different? Sure, the economy was roaring in the 1990s, but for the most part all the money was going to the top.

[Captain Hilts]

12. I did too, but that's how he got elected. Kind of like how FDR...

turned around and trashed the League of Nations and World Court in order to get Hearst's support for his nomination in 1932. Neither Eleanor nor most of his aides spoke to him for a couple of days.

[begin_within]

15. Clinton ran in 1992 with a campaign theme of "Putting People First," and it

sounded real good - very populist stuff, and I bought into it and voted for him in 1992. But by 1996 I was so disillusioned with him and his pandering to corporate interests that I voted for Monica Moorehead in the Worker's World Party in 1996. The whole populist rhetoric of Clinton's 1992 campaign was a bunch of hot air. If Hillary is the nominee and adopts that same stuff next year, I refuse to be fooled by it.

[eridani]

53. But there was no organized progressive base pushing him back then

What if there had been?

[AdHocSolver]

28. The corporate world has abandoned the Bush family "dynasty" and is looking for a new "face".

Daddy Bush had hoped to set up a family "dynasty" supported by the corporate world. However, Junior has antagonized so many people world-wide that the corporate world is looking for "new blood" to support its agenda within government. The Clintons proved they would toe the corporate line when Bill was President, with NAFTA, the telecommunications act, etc. They are being given another chance to be anointed the new "dynasty".

Anyone who thinks that the Clintons will be anything but "business as usual" are fooling themselves.

[JDPriestly]

32. They bought into the Chicago School of Economics free market

theories. They bought it lock, stock and barrel. Free markets are fine, but so are Keynesian controlled markets. The real solution is flexibility., something that appropriately takes ideas from both extreme doctrines. The important thing is to serve the interests of the largest number of people in our society, not just the interests of the lucky, wealthy few.

The problem with Hillary Clinton is that she does not understand that since the '70s, there has been a battle between the two opposing economic models Hayek/Friedman on the one side and Keynes on the other. Clinton fell under the spell of the Hayek/Friedman model. It happens to have been the model that favored and promoted the interests of the wealthy over those of ordinary people and the poor.

As I said above, we need a leadership that is flexible and mixes aspects of the two "pure" models. The only way you can get that mix right is to keep the interests of the middle class first and foremost in mind when making economic policy. Edwards will do that. He will stand tall for the middle class. I believe that what I am hearing him say is that he will be flexible, but that his flexibility will be governed by and serve the interests of the middle class and of bringing as many people into the middle class as possible.

In my view, Edwards' economic philosophy is what we need now. The Bush administration has imposed some crazy quilt economic doctrine that purports to promote "freedom" meaning a "free market" a la the Hayek/Friedman school. In reality, Bush talks about "freedom" but is using that term to mean promoting the interests of the rich and forcing poverty, subservience and repression on the rest of us. Edwards is the only candidate with a clear understanding of the economic reality and battles of our time. He is the only candidate with a coherent and consistent vision of the role of the middle class. He is the only candidate who understands how to make the middle class strong again.

[begin_within]

42. Have you sent that to the Edwards campaign?

That's a good explanation that they might be interested in having

[Hawkowl]

46. Nice summation

Clinton is the wrong candidate at the wrong time. Free markets and loose money policy would only throw gasoline on the fire of this unacknowledged recession.

[Rage for Order]

8. Without a doubt

However, trying to find a politician who isn't is like trying to find a Republican presidential candidate at a NAACP-sponsored forum.

[Cha]

9. No..

They just take their money and when they get what they want they'll tell them to suck eggs.

[daninthemoon]

10. Yes. Hillary would be better than bushler has been, or any of the

rethug candidates, but my biggest worry is that she somehow wins, and things don't change as drastically as they must for the survival of not just America, but the entire human species. Yes, it's that important. Vote Kucinich.

[Captain Hilts]

11. No moreso than other major candidates. Obama sucked up to coal mine owners today. nt

[Harper_is_Bush]

13. Is Obama a Repuke plant? Is Dennis an global warming denier trojen horse?

Is this thread still here?

[LibertyorDeath]

14. With very few exceptions

They all are.

[TahitiNut]

16. Well, d'uh!

Hell, yes. Wall street, big pharma, investment banking, media conglomerates, and insurance in particular.

[omega minimo]

17. It's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it

[mitchum]

18. Fuck yeah

[Lerkfish]

19. no, its a symbiotic, quid pro quo relationship. "stooge" implies she is being

unwittingly used.

both the corporations and HRC know exactly what their relationship parameters are.

[Quixote1818]

21. Ok, then is Hillary a Crocodile or a Plover?

In the tropical regions of Africa, the crocodile lies with its mouth open. The plover flies into its mouth and feeds on bits of decaying meat stuck in the crocodile’s teeth. The crocodile does not eat the plover. Instead, he appreciates the dental work. The plover eats a meal and the crocodile gets his teeth cleaned. Coincidentally, the Egyptian plover is also known as the crocodile bird.

[Lerkfish]

22. not really sure. You may be taking the metaphor beyond its useful application.

[Quixote1818]

27. That is probably not the best symbiotic relationship for the Hillary Clinton metaphor

Let me see if I can find a better one?

[AdHocSolver]

29. She is a plover.

Actually, this is not a bad metaphor. The crocodile is the corporate world, the land equivalent of the shark, and the plover is allowed to feed unharmed, so long as it serves the crocodile.

[Quixote1818]

30. Great Job!

I don't know how I missed that!

[leftchick]

38. I agree, PLOVER!

and a wicked one at that!

[RaleighNCDUer]

31. Definitely the plover. nt

[JackORoses]

43. Hillary is the Croc, America is the Plover... Crocodiles Cry Tears But Feel No Pain

[sjdnb]

20. Yes

but, so are most of them -- even the ones we thought were not.

But, eh, if they weren't they'd rarely be elected.

That, my friends, is what our democracy has been reduced to.

And, while I've been in the 'game' for decades, I'll be darned if I can think of any realistic way to get our country out of this mess.

[Vincardog]

24. Does a bear shit in the woods?

[Richard Steele]

25. A former WalMart BOARD member, a corporate stooge? Say it ain't so!

:rofl:

[cali]

35. How about Edwards and Fortress?

A Hedge Fund he consulted for, that foreclosed on homes in NOLA, and had all kinds of bad practices prior to that. He got paid quite well thank you. Or, as someone pointed out, Obama sucking up to big coal?

They're all affiliated with big corporate dollare, or they want to be- with the exception of Dennis.

[Richard Steele]

36. The OP question was about Hillary. You know- the candidate you constantly claim NOT to support?

Her.

[cali]

37. And how is it not pertinant to explain

that this is a problem endemic to the process? Clinton isn't operating in a vacume. duh. As to your lame snark: pffft.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

56. Take that dicksteele!

:rofl:

Perhaps I need to add this :sarcasm: to better define what I think of that rebuke. Your attempt to deflect is sorely lacking cali.

[Richard Steele]

61. Shhh! Show no emotion!

[Naturyl]

33. Yep, unfortunately, she is.

Isn't it clear by the fact that she is the media-touted "frontrunner" when most Democrats actually want someone else?

[Indi Guy]

34. Is Hillary Clinton a Corporate Stooge?

Yes.

And that's why she'll win the nomination & be elected.

[Indi Guy]

59. Gotta reaffirm nt

[papau]

39. NO - I do not think she is a "corporate stooge"-she was/is a mix of progressive/liberal/populist who

was the only major voice for single payer in 93 - as noted in their books Bill was the centerist that ordered her to create a task force that would not be allowed to consider single paper - a victory my (the insurance industry" lobbyists) celebrated as a victory over Hillary.

I know of no action on her part that can be traced back to a corporate lobbyist making her do something her particular combination of progressive/liberal/populist was not leading her to do without corporate influence.

I think Edwards is saying that she is too understanding of what the lack of a mandated federal only financing law produces in terms of corporate access - but that well be the situation until the seats on the USSC are changed and free speech is not a given for corporations in terms of politics, I like Edwards spirit and policies, and I do not think he was saying that Hillary is owned by the corporations.

[RufusTFirefly]

41. Hillary was NEVER a voice for single-payer

Unless I'm mistaken, her original plan mandated employers to provide health care to their workers through a system of HMOs. Sorry, but that is not single-payer.

[papau]

48. Very wrong - I was head of the Sun Life of Canada US tax dept and worked with our lobbyists in DC &

was in the discussions that the health lobbyists were having.

Hillary was the only voice for single payer.

We - the insurance industry - convinced Bill that we would support His HMO version of universal life since we still made our profits - so he orderred Hillary to not consider single payer when gabe her the authority to start up a task force.

The task force therefore never was allowed to consider single payer.

We (my insurance lobbyists) had a party when we were certain they had conned Bill.

And of course we immediately started to shoot the anti-universal TV spots.

Indeed in Hillary's book she notes how Bill demanded that there be no single payer.

Sorry - this is one of the few things I have personal knowledge about. And Hillary was indeed pro-single payer - and her current "choice" plan - like Edward's 08 plan - has a nice "Medicare like policy from the gov" choice. :-)

[eridani]

54. Except that it is a bullshit choice that will only expand the problems of Medicare

Seniors in for profit HMOs cost 12% more than those in standard Medicare, and taxpayers are subsidizing that bullshit. It means nothing to have a government option if private insurers can undercut it by cherrypicking the healthy and then denying claims.

[papau]

64. The "private option" is a GOP requirement for Medicare - not for Hillary's Universal Medicare like

option.

The Dem attempt to remove the GOP Medicare option was killed by a GOP filibuster this year.

[eridani]

65. It would work in exactly the same way

Private insurance would undercut the government plan by removing dollars from the health care fund pool to CEOs and shareholders.

[papau]

66. True - if allowed - but no Democratic is suggesting that we should allow "private Medicare"

The GOP forced this on us a few years ago -

and now prevent removing it by filibuster.

Hillary's new plan does not have this crap in it for the "Medicare like policy option run by the government".

[eridani]

67. What I am trying to say is that allowing private insurance to continue--

--will destroy the "Medicare like policy option run by the government", by diverting health care dollars away from it.

[papau]

68. anti-selection doesn't work - underwriting costs are too high - the 10 -30% cost advantage will move

folks to "chose" the Medicare option.

[eridani]

70. There will not be a cost advantage to the Medicare option

Private HMOs right now are offering super-cheap plans competing with Medicare, but only to healthy people. And there's also the problem that they will find some excuse not to pay up when people file claims, or go out of business entirely if their pool is small and they mistakenly insure someone who turns out to be expensive.

The idea that Clinton's plan can cover everyone without bankrupting the country with subsidies to private insurance is nonsense. If that were the case, insurance companies wouldn't be backing her.

[papau]

71. I am not aware of any HMO Medicare option with a cost advantage - could you

name the plan you are referring to?

My review of what was being offered seemed to show higher priced - by 12% - plans being offered that sold because they gave a set of benefits different than what Medicare was giving - meaning they gave a little less benefit for event A and then gave a benefit for event B which was not covered by Medicare - and they try to tell you that coverage of event B makes them "better" than Medicare.

[eridani]

72. My husband gets plenty in the mail

I just throw them out--I'll save one and post the details one of these days.

[papau]

74. Thanks - I'll be interested to see if they are different from the ones I get n/t

n/t

[smoogatz]

40. Yes! But she's OUR corporate stooge.

The difference being, I think she genuinely cares about promoting prosperity in general, not just making the rich even richer.

[antigop]

45. Watch the following videos for your answer...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhLBSLLIhUs
Hillary pushes for more h1-b visas and outsourcing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLNOSGM2jK4
Lou Dobbs: Hillary Clinton's hypocrisy (part 1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgdrh2Bc95M
Lou Dobbs: Hillary Clinton's hypocrisy (part 2)

[libodem]

47. Does the Pope wear a funny hat?

I'll vote for her if she wins the primary, though.

[asdjrocky]

49. He is the ONLY candidate speaking on these issues...

Now if America can get a chance to listen. That's another story.

[HamdenRice]

50. Is the Pope Catholic? Does a bear shit in the woods? nt

[CANDO]

51. Is water wet?

eom

[Disturbed]

58. Sen. Clinton is a centrist Dem. She is not trying to placate the

Left Wing of the Dems. She is trying to appeal to the Centrist Dems, Conservative Dems, Moderate Repugs, & the Independents. She and Bill are the great Triangulaters. Sen Clinton & her team are fairly sure most Dems will vote for her once she garners the Nomination. She needs the majority of Moderate Repugs, & the Independents to win.

[Hardrada]

60. How can you be a centrist when there is no fucking CENTER

anymore? The RW corporate capitalists are just wrong, wrong, wrong and no Dem should kowtow to them or serve as their handmaiden.

[TheWatcher]

62. .....

[wildbilln864]

69. Duh!

Of course!

[bigwillq]

73. YES!

YES!

Vote for DK!:bounce: