While the public polls show a public disgusted with the two party duopoly on power and demanding change, the same figures are emerging as the choices for the next president. The most obvious is Hillary Clinton who is reportedly positioning herself now as a candidate of change — a curious role for one of the most establishment figures on the political scene. The other leading candidate is Joe Biden who has been a source of continued gaffs as Vice President and viewed as the other leading candidate of establishment interests. However, there is an effort to reinvent Clinton who supported various wars under Bush and Obama and did little to stop torture and surveillance programs. Indeed, the new MSNBC host Ronan Farrow has proclaimed that the “Clintons represent a style of honesty that the public craves.” Farrow does not appear to remember Bill Clinton’s public and sworn denials in the Lewinsky affair or other scandals. Indeed, the new Hillary Clinton is already attracting the type of influence seekers associated with the two parties. Just this last month, Goldman Sachs gave Clinton almost a half of million dollars for just two speeches in one week. The event is made more curious by fact that speech was described as “prepared remarks” followed by limited questions. It is doubtful that Clinton informed Goldman Sachs of anything other than the most predictable remarks from a politician — not some critical re-orientation of their investment strategy. UPDATE: Chuck Schumer has already endorsed Clinton to be the next president.
In speeches on October 24 and October 29, Goldman Sachs gave Clinton $200,000 a speech. Thursday’s speech was a closed door meeting with Goldman and its clients. The prior Tuesday she spoke at a session hosted by Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein.
From Goldman Sachs to the Carlyle group, business interests are lining up to give huge amounts of cash to the Clintons personally for such speeches.
In the meantime, the two parties are moving to ensure that the same faces and choices will be given to voters despite overwhelming discontent over the two-party monopoly on power. With a system protecting incumbents and control of the two main parties, such public opposition remains largely immaterial and business interests are already putting money down on candidates like Clinton — and the “style of honesty” that they crave.
I find hope in comments made above in terms of “dumbing down of the populace”, knowing there are some that see through the political facade.
Over-and-above the Lewinsky affair, most disturbing to me (and I’ve been a life-long Democrat) is the Clinton’s history prior to entering the White House, found in the Whitewater scandal:
==> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/timeline.htm
“June 1993
Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster files three years of delinquent Whitewater corporate tax returns.”
“July 1993
Foster is found dead in a Washington area park. Police rule the death a suicide. Federal investigators are not allowed access to Foster’s office immediately after the discovery, but White House aides enter Foster’s office shortly after his death, giving rise to speculation that files were removed from his office.”
“Nov. 19, 1998
During the first day of impeachment hearings, Starr clears Clinton in relation to the firing of White House travel office workers in 1993 and the improper collection of FBI files revealed in 1996. He also says his office drafted an impeachment referral stemming from Whitewater in 1997, but decided not to send it because the evidence was insufficient.”
I don’t think Foster committed suicide. I believe the Clinton team did remove files from Foster’s office, and this was why in the end, the evidence was “insufficient”.
To me, the Clinton’s political roots come from one place and one place only: Corruption, fraud and white collar crime. We need to rid government of these processes and not reinforce a political heritage that has been documented to be entrenched in illegal activities. If Hillary is what the Democrats are offering up — you can bet I’ll be changing my political party.
Isaac, LOVES that grape. He is a Kool-Aidaholic. He uses the mantra taught by both parties, “Yeah, we may suck and we may be corrupt, but we’re better than those other guys.” If you cut off the Kool-Aid then they’ll realize how infantile that argument is. I think both parties have started using pods which ensures compliance throughout a lifetime. That is really scary.
The article has valid points. It omits other valid points. In 2008 we nominated a candidate in the Democratic Party for President and he won. He did not come from the Hillary wing or big money interests. Hillary was not nominated and elected.
This time around I will not want Hillary. I certainly will reject any RepubliCon nominated and run for office. I do not like Hillary. I may vote 3rd Party if she gets t nod. Snowden may run. Of course I can not vote because I am a dog. Sometimes I help in the voting booth. One handle on the voting machine is good for the whole day. Or paw. Straight ticket. I can not do a “write in” for my half blind guy. I am just a guide dog.
Patsy’s pissed. She doesn’t understand some folks see that BOTH parties are corrupt. Her Kool-Aid]grape] keeps her numbed into believing only one party is part of the corruption. Red Kool-Aid makes Republicans think the same. We need to blow up those Kool-Aid factories. That’s how we get outta this insane loop.
So you have your choice, a bobber and weaver who wants to take America forward or a bobber and weaver who wants to take America back(wards). Pick your poison. A politician is a politician is a politician.
Perhaps under Clinton we will get to a single payer health care insurance system and start cleaning up this mess and saving money. Perhaps we will get some success from someone with a brain that functions well rather than those that wear crazy hats and advocate arming each individual and letting us sort it out ourselves.
Line up the mistakes of each side and you will see that Clinton and the democrats are the least evil of the two, the least incompetent of the two, and the least dangerous to America.
2014-2016, Not One Incumbent.
How is it some of you can do a dissertation on a door knob, but, get so vile when it comes to other’s points of view? Vent your spleen with your irrational diatribe! No, no! Bye!
Anonymous, the loosely knit collective of hackers and activists, have been warning of this day for several years. Want to be instantly depressed? Go to one of Anonymous’ semi-official YouTube sites and watch. The guy who was the more or less official face of Anonymous for the media, Barrett Brown, has been arrested. The Obama/Holder justice department wants to send him away for a hundred year sentence. No one will disagree that Barrett is a pain in the butt and can be obnoxious, but last time I looked, that was not against the law except in Arizona where they passed a law making it illegal to annoy Sheriff Joe.
Reblogged this on Brittius.com.
“Unfortunately, mention the word Benghazi and most people don’t even know what your talking about.”
DavidM, Mention the word Benghazi and the 4 Americans that died (tragically) that day, to Fox Viewers, and it was worse than Pearl Harbor.
Benghazi was indeed a cluster of many BAD decisions. The primary one was the Ambassador choosing to go there undermanned that day (or at all).
I’m surprised you didn’t parrot Fox news denigration of the ACA.
How did you miss that trifecta?!! (Hillary, Benghazi, ACA)
Bought and paid for, just like every other member of the duopoly.
How intellectual!
A pig is still a pig regardless of how much lipstick it wears.
You have your Ted Cruz. He doesn’t need the congressional health care plan. You see, he is on his wife’s plan over at Goldman Sachs. You see there will only be the ILLUSION of choice. beholdapalehorse.tv
From the pen of the “dyspeptic” Chris Hedges.
… Mike Spindell, thanks for the new (to me) word.
…(excerpt)
Our shift to corporate totalitarianism, like the shift to all forms of totalitarianism, is incremental. Totalitarian systems ebb and flow, sometimes taking one step back before taking two steps forward, as they erode democratic liberalism. This process is now complete. The “consent of the governed” is a cruel joke. Barack Obama cannot defy corporate power any more than George W. Bush or Bill Clinton could. Unlike his two immediate predecessors, Bush, who is intellectually and probably emotionally impaired, did not understand the totalitarian process abetted by the presidency. Because Clinton and Obama, and their Democratic Party, understand the destructive roles they played and are playing, they must be seen as far more cynical and far more complicit in the ruination of the country. Democratic politicians speak in the familiar “I-feel-your-pain” language of the liberal class while allowing corporations to strip us of personal wealth and power. They are effective masks for corporate power.
The corporate state seeks to maintain the fiction of our personal agency in the political and economic process. As long as we believe we are participants, a lie sustained through massive propaganda campaigns, endless and absurd election cycles and the pageantry of empty political theater, our corporate oligarchs rest easy in their private jets, boardrooms, penthouses and mansions. As the bankruptcy of corporate capitalism and globalization is exposed, the ruling elite are increasingly nervous. They know that if the ideas that justify their power die, they are finished. This is why voices of dissent—as well as spontaneous uprisings such as the Occupy movement—are ruthlessly crushed by the corporate state.
http://www.alternet.org/revolution?page=0%2C2&paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
There isn’t a principled bone in Ted Cruz’s body either except for the bad principles.
There is a difference between amoral and delusional.
“Candidate of change? Style of honesty? Clearly we have a dumbed down populace. The Benghazi incident alone should disqualify her from the office of President in the minds of the majority of citizens. Unfortunately, mention the word Benghazi and most people don’t even know what your talking about”
ding ding ding winner, get yourself a chicken dinner!
Im not a big fan of Cruz tbh. But Id take him over Clinton.
Wonder how much money Lady Rothschild will funnel to her pal Hillary.
We have a totally corrupt government. Whats sad is the voters. Get 5 democrats together and talk about how corrupt Clinton and Obama are and they all will agree. But mention the Tea Party and they flip a switch and start defending Hillary and say we need to elect her. The hypocrisy is disgusting.
Roget’s lists only one antonym for “shocking” and that is “comforting”.
I’m pretty sure that more graft as usual is not comforting.
Nor surprising.
Nor beneficial.
Nor patriotic.
Nor desirable.
Nor democratic.
Neither will it do anything to remove us from the steady dissent into corporatism/fascism.
I wouldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances and this illustrates part of why.
There isn’t a principled bone in her body.
Its game on. The global elite are formulating their moves. Clinton vs. Jeb B./Cruz . Oh they will pretend its a honest horse race. But when the media is owned by 5 corporations…. This is article is spot on. They will get everyone huffing and puffing about “their” side. They will redangle their abortion and gays in front of the conservatives and progressive camps. Keep the real issues away. Agenda 21. NSA spying. NDAA. Reissued Patriot act. Shredded Constitution. Wars for Greater Israel. Yup game on.
Candidate of change? Style of honesty? Clearly we have a dumbed down populace. The Benghazi incident alone should disqualify her from the office of President in the minds of the majority of citizens. Unfortunately, mention the word Benghazi and most people don’t even know what your talking about.