HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » hopemountain » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: Tue Nov 6, 2012, 08:26 PM
Number of posts: 3,919

Journal Archives

how is it that albright and hillary can

sacrifice other women's children to the ravages of war? how is that?
this is not the type of woman i consider fit to lead our country. and, no, i do not see the difference in electing a woman who thinks the same as investors in the war machine and maintaining the status quo vs a corporate male puppet who will do the same.

these are the ways hillary votes against the best interests of women & their families:

she supports monsanto gmo foods and poisons & toxins in the food supply for the masses;

she supports wars that offer up the children of the masses for the greed of the corporate war machine;

she is not interested in a living wage for single parents - the majority of whom are women;

she supports the corporate interests to privatize our natural resources which export our resources to china - while fracking, injecting and polluting our earth and the water table - water our children drink with poisons and heavy metals. yes, she is helping the people of flint. that's nice - but, we will see exactly just how much of a force she can be to make a difference there and how she follows up with other environmental crisis regardless of the election outcome;

how is she willing to revamp the costs and financing of education so that when a young person graduates they are not saddled with life crushing debt? her plan offers a pittance of relief and still puts ridiculous amounts of money in the pockets of the banksters and the corporate run education machine;

how much is she willing to do to lower medical costs? is she willing to work to get insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and medical providers to negotiate low cost medical care? is she willing to work to overturn legislation which allows these "medical providers" protection from negotiation?

just because she is a woman does not mean she is the woman for the job. i do not see her with the sincere will to right the social, economic and environmental injustices that affect women and families.

it is alarming to see her pandering to women of color and that women are following her solely for the reason that she is a woman. what exactly is she promising them? why are they not seeing what i see?
Posted by hopemountain | Sat Feb 6, 2016, 09:12 PM (0 replies)
Go to Page: 1