Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Left bashing, hippie punching and red-baiting is ok it seems [View all]delrem
(9,688 posts)98. Here's a random article on the issue:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/hillary-clintons-two-fore_1_b_3714765.html
"...
Secretary Clinton, in the press conference the day after the coup, "Remarks at the Top of the Daily Press Briefing", refused to commit the United States to restoration of the democratically elected President of Honduras. She refused even to commit the U.S. to using the enormous leverage it had over the Honduran Government to bring that about. Here was the relevant Q&A:
Mary Beth Sheridan. QUESTION: Madam Secretary, sorry, if I could just return for a second to Honduras, just to clarify Arshad's point - so, I mean, the U.S. provides aid both under the Foreign Assistance Act and the Millennium challenge. So even though there are triggers in those; that countries have to behave - not have coups, you're not going to cut off that aid?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Mary Beth, we're assessing what the final outcome of these actions will be. This has been a fast-moving set of circumstances over the last several days, and we're looking at that question now. Much of our assistance is conditioned on the integrity of the democratic system. But if we were able to get to a status quo that returned to the rule of law and constitutional order within a relatively short period of time, I think that would be a good outcome. So we're looking at all of this. We're considering the implications of it. But our priority is to try to work with our partners in restoring the constitutional order in Honduras.
QUESTION: And does that mean returning Zelaya himself? You would insist on that in order to -
SECRETARY CLINTON: We are working with our partners.
She refused to answer the question, even though Zelaya had been an ally of the U.S., a progressive democrat. (Though Republicans decried Zelaya for pushing land-reform, the fact is that Honduras is virtually owned by two dozen families, and drastically needs to drag itself out of its feudal system. Doing that isn't anti-American; it's pro-American. It's what Zelaya was trying to do, peacefully and democratically. Our nation's Founders fought a Revolution to overthrow feudalism - British - in our own country. Hillary was thus being anti-American, not just anti-democratic, here.) This is stunning. The U.S had even been outright bombed by fascists, on the "day that will live in infamy," December 7, 1941; and, then, we spilled lots of blood to beat those fascists in WWII. What was that war all about, if not about opposing fascism and fascists, and standing up for democracy and democrats? A peaceful democratic U.S. ally had now been overthrown by a fascist coup in Honduras, and yet Hillary Clinton's response was - noncommittal?
..."
And so on.
Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband Bill are total DLC third-way corporatists.
They have the big-money corporatist backing that they do because they're both totally owned.
"...
Secretary Clinton, in the press conference the day after the coup, "Remarks at the Top of the Daily Press Briefing", refused to commit the United States to restoration of the democratically elected President of Honduras. She refused even to commit the U.S. to using the enormous leverage it had over the Honduran Government to bring that about. Here was the relevant Q&A:
Mary Beth Sheridan. QUESTION: Madam Secretary, sorry, if I could just return for a second to Honduras, just to clarify Arshad's point - so, I mean, the U.S. provides aid both under the Foreign Assistance Act and the Millennium challenge. So even though there are triggers in those; that countries have to behave - not have coups, you're not going to cut off that aid?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Mary Beth, we're assessing what the final outcome of these actions will be. This has been a fast-moving set of circumstances over the last several days, and we're looking at that question now. Much of our assistance is conditioned on the integrity of the democratic system. But if we were able to get to a status quo that returned to the rule of law and constitutional order within a relatively short period of time, I think that would be a good outcome. So we're looking at all of this. We're considering the implications of it. But our priority is to try to work with our partners in restoring the constitutional order in Honduras.
QUESTION: And does that mean returning Zelaya himself? You would insist on that in order to -
SECRETARY CLINTON: We are working with our partners.
She refused to answer the question, even though Zelaya had been an ally of the U.S., a progressive democrat. (Though Republicans decried Zelaya for pushing land-reform, the fact is that Honduras is virtually owned by two dozen families, and drastically needs to drag itself out of its feudal system. Doing that isn't anti-American; it's pro-American. It's what Zelaya was trying to do, peacefully and democratically. Our nation's Founders fought a Revolution to overthrow feudalism - British - in our own country. Hillary was thus being anti-American, not just anti-democratic, here.) This is stunning. The U.S had even been outright bombed by fascists, on the "day that will live in infamy," December 7, 1941; and, then, we spilled lots of blood to beat those fascists in WWII. What was that war all about, if not about opposing fascism and fascists, and standing up for democracy and democrats? A peaceful democratic U.S. ally had now been overthrown by a fascist coup in Honduras, and yet Hillary Clinton's response was - noncommittal?
..."
And so on.
Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband Bill are total DLC third-way corporatists.
They have the big-money corporatist backing that they do because they're both totally owned.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
146 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So they must discredit us because they want to continue with their malfeasance.
Enthusiast
Feb 2014
#8
same here, certainly in the cases of serial sex offenders and lying politicians
reddread
Feb 2014
#17
Because putting up with all the vitriol directed at the Obamas and Clintons from the right
TheMathieu
Feb 2014
#16
NO the vitriol isn't well earned .. it gets down dirty and ugly on the this board.. so much so
Cha
Feb 2014
#115
They're not allies, they are servants. A concept being removed from discussions. n/t
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2014
#44
Accept diversity! Divisiveness seems to be the new trend on DU. This is a good example of
Coyotl
Feb 2014
#23
There you go again, Dem bashing and tossing in a divisive ad hominen for good measure.
Coyotl
Feb 2014
#36
There you go again, Dem bashing and being divisive. Didn't I already point that ouit?
Coyotl
Feb 2014
#41
There you go again, flame baiting and being divisive. And putting words in my mouth too now.
Coyotl
Feb 2014
#51
So it seems that anyone who disagrees with you is supporting right wing propaganda?
Adrahil
Feb 2014
#81
the Reaganauts were Dem a lot: Kirkpatrick hated the '72 "antiwar, antigrowth, antibusiness,
MisterP
Feb 2014
#25
The Harlem Globetrotters vs. The Washington Generals, except they take turns being
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2014
#47
I don't think it is ok but at the same time I'm not into all the Obama bashing either. nt
arthritisR_US
Feb 2014
#28
Back in the '60s/'70s it was the loyal LBJ/Scoop Jackson Dems that bashed the left.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2014
#29
It's chocked full of ignorance as well as being childishly obnoxious. Poor little thing
Cha
Feb 2014
#118
feel free to post about how Obama or Hillary Clinton should hold hands with republicans
frwrfpos
Feb 2014
#50
You realize that you're discussing this on DU, and not Reagan/Goldwater central?
delrem
Feb 2014
#83
Just do some reading from a prog perspective on HRC and the Honduran coup, joshcryer.
delrem
Feb 2014
#89
HRC supported the Honduran coup dictatorship. If you support HRC on Honduras '09, then own it.
delrem
Feb 2014
#96
Please, joshcryer...be kind to our new friend...he or she has only been here three weeks or so
alcibiades_mystery
Feb 2014
#78
Cannot overlook the strong possibility that sock puppets are being PAID to spread lies/propaganda.
blkmusclmachine
Feb 2014
#58
Whisp, send me a link on this Hamsher thing. I forgot what it was about, never 'got it.' TIA. n/t
freshwest
Feb 2014
#85
Former hippy here, called a communist first when in fourth grade and countless times after that;
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#71
Nader told people Bush was not so bad by saying there was no difference between Bush and Gore
JI7
Feb 2014
#128
I am just wondering how the zootsuiters and flappers feel about all this. nt
arely staircase
Feb 2014
#143
Opposing homophobia is not 'red baiting' especially when the homophobes are not
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2014
#137