Clinton Bucks Trend, Rakes in Cash From Weapons Industry

[Tom Joad]

I think the arms industry knows a good bet when they see one. War is good for business, and there is hardly a candidate out there better for business than Hillary (all the others are just losers... or like Dennis Kucinich, actually opposed to war).
______________________________________________________
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/27858

The US arms industry is backing Hillary Clinton for President and has all but abandoned its traditional allies in the Republican party. Mrs Clinton has also emerged as Wall Street's favourite. Investment bankers have opened their wallets in unprecedented numbers for the New York senator over the past three months and, in the process, dumped their earlier favourite, Barack Obama.

Mrs Clinton's wooing of the defence industry is all the more remarkable given the frosty relations between Bill Clinton and the military during his presidency. An analysis of campaign contributions shows senior defence industry employees are pouring money into her war chest in the belief that their generosity will be repaid many times over with future defence contracts.

Employees of the top five US arms manufacturers - Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop-Grumman, General Dynamics and Raytheon - gave Democratic presidential candidates $103,900, with only $86,800 going to the Republicans. "The contributions clearly suggest the arms industry has reached the conclusion that Democratic prospects for 2008 are very good indeed," said Thomas Edsall, an academic at Columbia University in New York.

Republican administrations are by tradition much stronger supporters of US armaments programmes and Pentagon spending plans than Democratic governments. Relations between the arms industry and Bill Clinton soured when he slimmed down the military after the end of the Cold War. His wife, however, has been careful not to make the same mistake.

After her election to the Senate, she became the first New York senator on the armed services committee, where she revealed her hawkish tendencies by supporting the invasion of Iraq. Although she now favours a withdrawal of US troops, her position on Iran is among the most warlike of all the candidates - Democrat or Republican.....

[acmavm]

1. Well, water sinks to its own level I hear.

edit: To add that so do greedy corporate bastards looking for a like-minded candidate.

[Skidmore]

2. Ah, yes. Hillary, running for War Goddess.

Gathering offerings from her acolytes.

[Tom Joad]

3. not a goddess, more a war lord. So Presidential, i might add. A US tradition.

[Larkspur]

4. Hillary, the Corporate Welfare Queen, is mining black gold

No surprise. Afterall, "Iron Lady" Margaret Thatcher is her role model.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

5. We simply can't let Hillary be our candidate.

We have to write letters to the editor, tell everyone we know, make home made bumper stickers, ANYTHING we could do to get people to realize that the Bushes and Clintons are working together in handing over our country to corporations to control.

[LWolf]

6. She is not now, and never will be, my candidate. n/t

[BridgeTheGap]

7. Show her the money, every time...

Isn't it time for a change!?!

[MyNameGoesHere]

8. what is this?

Employees of the top five US arms manufacturers - Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop-Grumman, General Dynamics and Raytheon - gave Democratic presidential candidates $103,900, with only $86,800 going to the Republicans. "The contributions clearly suggest the arms industry has reached the conclusion that Democratic prospects for 2008 are very good indeed," said Thomas Edsall, an academic at Columbia University in New York.

It says candidatessssssssss plural who else? or is this a one sided piece?

Further down i see it 50k to hrc. So who got the other half? Maybe one of the untouchables?

[obnoxiousdrunk]

10. Now you're just

spoiling the fun.

[MyNameGoesHere]

15. I wish this were fun

but the point is that a majority of the candidates have taken money from some place people here find offensive. I guess we should not vote for anyone according to those standards.

[Tom Joad]

11. i do think most of them will be very good for the business of war, and more to the point

a democrat is likely to win.
So even if Rudy promised a dozen big wars during his term, it would be a waste of funds for these boys to support him... he ain't likely to win.

So they go to the likely winners, who will at least deliver on some good contracts, and maybe throw in a nice war or two (hillary promises to stay in Iraq, and "all options are on the table" with Iran).... go with the winner.

But obama/edwards won't do much differently, so i am sure they got their fair share.

Stay away from the "losers" like Kucinich... just won't support wars, and seems intent on cutting the military budget no matter how many ceos lose their second, third and fourth homes. He is just heartless.

[Schema Thing]

9. Just my quick-take, but the arms industry seems kinda stingy all around

Top 5 manufacturers, 103k to ALL of the Dem candidates? Less than 200K total to all presidential candidates, dem and repub?

I'm probably missing something really obvious here.

[robinlynne]

12. and she took the money. I wouldn't. great chance to take a position and say no thanks.

we don't want a military based economy in our country any longer.

[Imagevision]

13. I to a degree agree with Obama, Hillary will in fact be nothing more then Bush-Lite...

[MethuenProgressive]

14. Less than 50K from industry *employees* - big fucking deal.

The industry's employees gave more money to Republicans than they did to Clinton.
Lordy, I just can't wait for the next HILLARY MICROWAVES KITTENS!!!!!1!!! post from the Usuals.