You’re Hillarious Hillary
I’ve heard the arguments in favor of Hillary.
But really…
Who is the real Hillary Clinton?
The Facts
Washington is plagued by special interest groups. These interest groups usually donate money to influence a candidate’s agenda. Hillary, out of all the Presidential candidates has accepted the most money from lobbyists. She even accepted almost nine more times the amount from lobbyists as her rival Barack Obama.
Lobbyists send money to candidates and politicians who are most able to be influenced. Candidates who don’t fight for special interest groups don’t receive money. That’s a fact.
The Senate
1) In 2006 the issue of banning cluster bombing in civilian areas arose in the senate. Cluster bombing are extremely deadly to civilians because they cover a large area. It is estimated that 40% of cluster bombs hit the group unexploded. These bombs become like land mines, ready to wreak havoc at the unexpected moment.
Hillary Clinton voted with the Republicans and voted against the ban while Obama voted for the ban. Analysts claim she voted against the ban because she did not want to appear “soft” on terror.
If Hillary Clinton really wanted to end President Bush’s policies, wouldn’t she have voted for the ban?
2) A blogger over at DailyKos compared both Hillary and Obama’s senate votes. The blogger points to many issues, but I found this one about lead poisoning the most interesting.
Hillary introduced a senate bill (S.1793) to give tax credits to building owners who remove lead based paint.
On the other hand, Obama tackled the same issue in a different way. He introduced a bill (S.1306) to classify certain lead containing products are hazardous substances. He also sponsored a bill (S.2132) prohibiting interstate transport of lead containing toys.
Both are good bills right? But who put more initiative into the issue? Hillary’s bill is important but only helps the problem if building owners choose to comply. Obama’s bill is much more progressive and will help end the problem, whether people want to comply or not. Obama’s bill is also much more risky…he risks pissing off lobbyists and toy manufactures.
3) The Iraq war resolution. Hillary knows it was a mistake, and I guarantee she wishes for another chance to vote on it. Whether she lacked the judgment, was mislead by the WMD propaganda, or didn’t want to be soft on terror is up for you to decide. But the plain truth is that she voted for the war. And it will haunt her to the end, especially since her rival voted against it.
Though these are just a few of many examples, they show us a lot about Hillary Clinton. She’s for sure a status quo candidate, unwilling to act on what might make her unpopular.
The Campaign
Clinton’s donors have become worried about her financial situation. Why did she spend $25,000 on luxury hotel rooms in Las Vegas, the $250,000+ monthly salaries on top campaign managers, or the millions she spent on consultants in January?
Was it because she was expecting to win on Feb 5th? Do these blunders show her lack of management skills and judgment?
The big question is: If Hillary Clinton cannot be faithful with her donor’s money, how can Americans ever trust her with our money?
America’s experienced CEOs and military leaders know to never underestimate the future or the opponent. If Hillary Clinton claims experience, shouldn’t she have known not to underestimate Barack Obama’s rise?
Campaign Tactics
Candidates are somewhat like athletes. They are expected to play by the rules, be team players, and have good sportsmanship…even when they lose. The best kind of athletes and teams have good etiquette. They will play fairly even when they have an easy opportunity to take a cheep shot. Any athlete should have character and integrity. How much more should the leader of the free world play by these same standards?
1. Hillary accuses Obama for plagiarizing a part of his friend’s speech. Seriously, is this all Hillary has on Obama? It’s an obvious fact that politicians borrow from each other all the time. When was the last time she plagiarized another politician? Oh yeah, it was days after she criticized Obama…
2. Hillary is slowly realizing that she is probably not going to win the people’s vote. So she turns to the infamous Superdelegates, the party leaders and powerful politicians who don’t have to vote in favor of the people’s choice. Her new website, delegatehub.com, makes sure to remind Superdelegates that they don’t have to vote with the people. Quote from the main page of her website: “The fact is: no automatic delegate is required to cast a vote on the basis of anything other than his or her best judgment about who is the most qualified to be president.”
Hillary, I have a simple question for you? Are you suggesting that the people are unfit to pick their president? What ever happened to the principles of democracy?
3. Today an image surfaced depicting Obama in traditional Somali garb. The Clinton campaign was blamed and interestingly enough, did not deny releasing the image. We all know Obama has been called a Muslim in disguise. And Clinton recently charged Obama with using “Karl Rove like tactics” against her. If Clinton is against using “Republican” tactics, why would her campaign fuel propaganda that Obama is a Muslim?
As seen below, it is normal for politicians to act diplomatically and dress according to foreign customs:
Hillary Clinton will do everything she can to win a 51% majority (or less, by using superdelegates). Her campaign has tried to unfairly get the delegates from Florida and Michigan, which she obviously won because she was the only frontrunner on the ballot. Obama and Edwards stayed true to the Democratic National Committee and boycotted the Florida and Michigan primaries for setting their date too early.
WAKE UP to the TRUTH!
If nominated, Hillary Clinton will deep hurt the Democratic Party and probably lose the general election. People are tired of the deeply divided Bush and Clinton years. For many young voters, like myself, either a Bush or Clinton has been if office for our entire life. If Clinton wins, it means decades of two elite families controlling the future of our nation. Isn’t that a bit frightening and anti-democratic?
Polls indicate that Hillary Clinton will lose the general election vs. John McCain. McCain’s war experience and his moderate stances on things like Global Warming and Illegal Immigration will win the independent vote along with many Democrats who dislike Clinton. The truth is that the Republicans are deeply divided over Bush’s policies and McCain’s likely nomination. Nothing could unite them better like Hillary Clinton’s nomination. If Clinton gets the nomination, the GOP will rip her to shreds and McCain will win the election. Do we really want another four years of Bush-like policies?
I hope that those voting on March 4th will be able to see the truth about Hillary Clinton. Make the rest of America proud, and consider the facts before voting!
Other Readings
6 comments so far
Leave a reply
Great article! Keep up the good work!
[...] mattcho wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptPolls indicate that Hillary Clinton will lose the general election vs. John McCain. McCain’s war experience and his moderate stances on things like Global Warming and Illegal Immigration will win the independent vote along with many … Read the rest of this great post here Posted by [...]
Excellent article! each time I read about Hillary, it only reinforces my dislike for her, and her political views.
I’m voting for Obama.
The only sensible criticism you can claim on Hillary is her taking money from lobbyists. Because that raises doubts on the independence of her decision making. The rest is pure bs. But nobody ever explains why accepting donnations from interest groups is such a bad thing. This picture of the evil corporations controlling and exploiting the poor masses with the savior of the masses on the horizon is ridiculous. The reason she got so much money from them is that they gave it to her. The other candidates didn’t get as much, but not because they refused: because nobody was offering. The question is why nobody was offering to the other candidates? The mere fact that Obama took some (just much less) from lobbyiest invalidates his claim of being independent. The guy is the perfect bullshitter, he excels at that. He takes money from the poor instead of the rich by making false promises to them. The basic rethoric says “I hope that things will change”. He will make radical changes, while bringing everybody together. Radical change never happens in consensus, my friend. We’ve seen radical change in the past 8 years, it comes from somebody who ignores what other people think. Otherwise, you have to be subtle, work slowly, carefully and intelligently. But Mr.Obama is just another Bush, just on the opposite side of spectrum. In the same way, he attracts people by using overly simplistic language etc. etc. It would be rather funny actually if he wasn’t able to brainwash all those young people.
As for his campaign, being only a good preacher and nothing more, he should transform it into a religious movement and fullfill his social purpose thus.
In summarizing the lobbyist contributions, why did you leave Ron Paul out? Unlike Richardson, Dodd, Romney and Thompson; Ron Paul is still in the race and has an even lower number in lobbyist contributions.
Is it because Dr. Paul’s numbers would not make Obama look quite as good?
Nice article. Well written, even though I don’t like Obama either…