Wednesday, March 02, 2016

Is Hillary Clinton An NRA Candidate After All? Worse


In 2008 one of the clubs Hillary wielded viciously against Obama was about how he was too anti-gun. She had been flip-flopping back and forth-- always the values-free opportunist-- between being anti-gun and pro-gun depending who she was trying to suck contributions and votes out of. Today her gun lie is how Bernie is pro-NRA, despite getting a lifetime "D" rating from the NRA.

Zaid Jilani, writing for The Intercept yesterday, exposed the rank hypocrisy that has come to define Clinton's entire shameful career in politics. No one who knows anything about her would deny she would take money from any source. (Unlike less dishonest candidates, she is still hanging on to the thousands of dollars in contributions she was given by Martin Shkreli.) Now she's taking money bundled by a major NRA lobbyist, Jeff Forbes. (Career-long, Hillary has taken more money from lobbyists than anyone in history who ever served in Congress-- $2,973,697, compared to $1,886,850 for second worst crook, John McCain and $1,765,101 for third worst crook Harry Reid.)
As David Sirota reported Monday in the International Business Times, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta is a co-host and the guest of honor at a fundraising lunch in the nation’s capital on March 21.

One of the other co-hosts is Jeff Forbes of the lobbying firm Forbes-Tate.

Forbes has represented the NRA since 2009 and as of the last quarter of 2015 was still registered to lobby for the organization. On his lobbying disclosure, Forbes wrote that he was signed up to lobby for “Issues related to 2nd Amendment rights, regulation and gun control, and tax and appropriations related to same; issues related to corporate tax reform.”

During the 2013 push for universal background checks, Forbes was one of a phalanx of Democratic Party lobbyists employed by the NRA to kill that legislation.

Forbes is an alumnus of the Bill Clinton administration and later worked as chief of staff to former Montana Democratic Sen. Max Baucus.

Another co-host is Steve Elmendorf, who has lobbied for Goldman Sachs and the U.S.-Colombian Free Trade Agreement.
As for the Hillary "landslide" yesterday, it was primarily in the ultra-conservative Deep South, in states that haven't voted for a Democrat since Hillary was out on the hustings campaigning for Barry Goldwater. But what about Massachusetts, her idiot supporters-- who don't understand they're handing the White House over to Trumpf-- whine? Her win in Massachusetts gave her 45 convention delegates. You would never imagine this from listening to the "news" on corporate media but Bernie's loss there, gave him 43 convention delegates. Bernie's win in Colorado brought him 33 delegates and her loss there brought her 24. His win in Minnesota brought him 42 delegates to her 24. And Bernie's rout of her in his home state gave him 10 delegates... and shut her out entirely. Gee, a shutout. She couldn't even manage that in the most backward of right-wing hellholes, Alabama, where Bernie at least got 4 delegates to her 37. This is going to be a long brutal battle and we should be proud to have someone like Bernie willing to go the distance against the forces of pure evil that are enveloping our great country. She doesn't deserve to win a nomination from the party of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt but if Democrats continue voting for her, they will have earned, I'm sorry to say, what Trumpf has in store for them. In her own words on NPR (when she was still just a mere child, a 49 year old child): "I feel like my political beliefs are rooted in the conservatism that I was raised with... I'm very proud that I was a Goldwater Girl." The You Can Help Save America From Herr Trumpf Fund:

Goal Thermometer

Labels: , , , ,


At 5:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This one touches on two of the worst 'pros' discussed by the Clinton crowd for her being a better President than Sanders. The idea that Clinton will get things done and the silliness over gun control.

We all seem to agree that the Democrats won't win both houses of Congress this election, so the last thing we need is someone who is going to 'get things done.' We need someone who will strongly set out broad, progressive (and popular) goals for the nation and for the party and sell that for the next 4 years. If nothing gets done because of a recalcitrant Congress, then that is the pitch for getting people to vote in the midterms. We saw how well 'getting something done' was with the overly complicated, conservative-built ACA that got the Democrats decimated in 2010. We were lucky that Republicans were so obstinate or else we would have had more 'getting things done' like Obama's hideous attempt at a Grand Bargain on the budget. We need a party that offers big things that require big efforts from voters to make it happen. Why vote in the midterms when the party offers nothing but table scraps and 'progress' comes in the form of payoffs to the rich.

The gun issues is another one that makes me laugh when pushed by Clinton supporters. They tell us Sanders can't deliver on any of his promises because of Congress and yet turn around and, at best, say Bernie isn't pure enough on gun control. I feel pretty damn certain that this country will have single payer health care before we have gun control that goes beyond what Bernie has in his platform.


Post a Comment

<< Home