Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:47 AM
Original message |
Twenty years of Clintush is enough. |
|
I don't hate Senator Clinton. I disagree with the politics of both her and her husband. Not completely - that would be binary thinking that isn't worthy of a liberal. There are many points on which I agree with Senator Clinton. However, broadly speaking, the political philosophy of the New Democratic ushered in with the Clinton dynasty is problematic for me.
President Clinton, by his own account was the corporate man's president. A pro-business pragmatist is a phrase Bill Clinton used about himself. The result of this pro-business pragmatism was massive deregulation of industries such as banking and telecom that have led to a lot of severe problems. The result was also the rise of Free Trade instead of Fair Trade, which contrary to the promises has seriously harmed the American worker. The Clinton's vision of globalization, which continued on the Bush Sr. vision of a "New World Order" has also had a devastating effect on so-called "developing" countries, keeping their people impoverish while we use the "Shock Doctrine" (thank you Naomi Kline) to force countries to become exporting siphons - with capital flight out of their country and into the pockets of Wall Street.
Under the Clintush Dynasty, the expanse between the richest and poorest Americans has exponentially increased. That is one of the most significant indicators of how our Democracy is doing. As that gap increases, our country moves closer and closer to collapsing in on itself as wealth is concentrated at the top. Under the Clintush dynasty the wages and benefits of the majority of Americans have stagnated or declined. Even during the so-called halcyon days of the 1990's, the "boom" was a boom in Wall Street, not Main Street.
For the American worker, the 1990's was characterized by what Business Week (cf. Chomsky, Albert, Balkin) cheered as "greater worker instability." Let that sink in - business week was cheering this increase. Greater worker instability means that the average worker was too afraid of losing his job to do things like demand better wages or fair treatment or seek a better job. This is of course great for Business, because it can continue to apply pressure to the workforce and decrease benefits, increase hours, decrease pay and working conditions and the climate is such that the worker must tolerate it.
The booming of the 1990's came partially from better economic policies (Clinton was better than Reagan - this is not an all or nothing analysis - but "better than" isn't good enough) but came largely from the technology surge leading to the dot com bubble. Most of the wealth was generated on Wall Street.
In summary - these are the important economic indicators to me:
1) The strength of organized labor, and the governments protection of labor rights - did it increase or decrease or stay the same under a president? 2) The wages of the middle class and poor - did they increase, decrease or stagnate under a president and by how much? 3) The disparity between richest and poorest Americans - did this gap increase, decrease or stay the same under a president.
Combine these points with a Clintushian legacy of Neo-liberalist globalization and so-called "Free Trade" and the continued degradation of Labor and I am ready to say that Twenty years of leadership from two Families is ENOUGH. It's time for something new.
|
LostinVA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:48 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Her voting record is more progressive than Obama's |
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. Reading his campaign platform and Senator Clintons |
|
is a lot more informative than listening to people try to spin media hogwash. He's conservative because he said Regan was an instrument of change. Right. Reagan was an instrument of change. I said it and I'm about the most radical liberal I know.
A better alternative is to ready people's actual proposals and decide on them. That's what I did.
|
neutron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
16. She does Superhuman work for her endorsements |
|
Go to her website and take a look. She is driven.
|
neutron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
17. Krugman doesn't think much of Obama proposals |
neutron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
19. but movie stars in LaLa Land don't care |
AX10
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. That depends on the issue. And that doesn't change the fact that twenty years of Clintush is enough |
LostinVA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. Stop it with the Clintush stuff |
|
It sounds like something Rush Limbaugh would say.
|
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. No I don't think I will. |
|
It is actually the word that captures my point perfectly. Twenty years - TWENTY YEARS - under the same two families. Enough is enough.
|
LostinVA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
15. It compares the Clinton's to the Bush's and that's against DU rules |
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
21. Well, no its not. But there's an alert button there if you want to go for it. |
LostinVA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
22. I know how to use the alert button, but thank you for your help |
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #22 |
orleans
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
10. sounds like a "dirty word" someone could get suspended if overheard |
aquart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Do they feed you more for each talking point?
|
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. It's not a "meme" to me. It deeply, deeply bothers me. |
|
I don't think its healthy for a representative democracy to be represented by the same two families for twenty years. I can't believe that in every election I have been old enough to vote in (I will be 31 in March) There has either been a Bush or a Clinton on the Ballot. And that every President since I was ten has been a Bush or a Clinton.
No, this is absolutely not enough reason to vote for a candidate on its own. I know that. But you can scream "meme meme meme" all you want, it doesn't change the fact that it is a serious issue to me that I feel strongly about. It's time for something new.
|
Change has come
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
SheWhoMustBeObeyed
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
20. I picture seals barking for fish |
|
Like your sig line, btw. :thumbsup:
|
aquart
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:53 AM
Response to Original message |
5. The Bush family did its best to destroy the Clintons |
|
Who not only refused to be destroyed, they even refused to be mean about it.
But its convenient for Obama to make them into one amorphous mass. Hoping we can't see the distinctions like the difference between Alito and Ginsberg.
That's projection, dear. From your very own Borg collective.
|
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
11. It's so funny how you attack people - I've been an Obama supporter for about 24 hours. |
|
I've made my decision on who to support based on my best understanding of the issues, of history, and of my own feelings in intuitions.
Of course, when anyone does that they are obviously some campaign operative who is spewing talking points around everywhere.
Of course there are distinctions between Bush Sr. Clinton and Bush Jr. Nothing is black and white. But on the issues I wrote about, economic trends domestically and internationally, they have a great deal in common.
No one ever acts like someone could possibly support a different candidate without being stupid, ignorant or seduced by propaganda.
I don't think people who support Hillary Clinton are stupid or unable to think for themselves. I think we just have a difference of opinion of what kind of change would be best for America right now.
|
Seen the light
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:05 AM
Response to Original message |
13. It took a Clinton to clean up the mess the first Bush made; it'll take a Clinton to clean up the mes |
|
s the next one made.
Hyuck, hyuck, hyuck, aren't I clever?
|
ErnestoG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:12 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Many of us have had it with the establishment political/entitlement candidates. They can retire now, we need a change.
|
Political Heretic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 01:41 AM
Response to Original message |
24. All these posts and not a one of them deals substantively with the concerns |
|
It's like all DU is now is a bunch of name calling and personal attacks.
God I even know questions that should be asked in response to the issues I've raised. Maybe I'll just have to discuss them with myself?
"But Political Heretic, if what you say is true, specifically the end where you talk about the shared legacy of neo-liberalist economic policy at home and abroad, what do you see in Obama that convinces you it will be any different? How exactly does he distinguish himself from this trajectory?"
I don't know! Wouldn't it be nice if political candidates running for president had to arrange their cabinets and chief positions before getting elected? I'd love to cast a vote for a candidate based on knowing his or her entire planned administration. Having said that, I already know that both the remaining democratic candidates are moderate. I already know that the campaign platforms of the remaining candidates contain no dramatic differences. Yes there are differences, but having carefully read on the issues for both candidates, the differences are not dramatic. I've eliminated voting third party as an option. So now I HAVE to choose. What criteria should I base my choice on? I feel like it is time for a new person with new connections. I would give anything if an Obama administration did not include the same old Washington players in key positions. I think its time for a change.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon Jun 24th 2024, 01:39 AM
Response to Original message |