LA Progressive

Smart Content for Smart People

  • Home
  • About Us
    • About Us / Copyright Info
    • Privacy Policy
  • Topics
    • Animal Rights
    • Climate Change
    • Economic Justice
    • Education Reform
    • Elections and Campaigns
    • Environment
    • Community Calendar
    • Healthcare Reform
    • Immigration Reform
    • Labor
    • Law and Justice
    • LGBTQ
    • Progressive Issues
    • Social Justice / Racism
    • The Media
    • The Middle East
    • War and Peace
  • Authors
    • All Authors
    • Steve Hochstadt
    • Charles D. Hayes
    • David A. Love
    • Diane Lefer
    • Dick Price
    • Jerry Drucker
    • John Peeler
    • Joseph Palermo
    • Tom Hall
    • Sharon Kyle
    • Sikivu Hutchinson
  • Scorecards
    • California Assembly Criminal Justice Scorecard
    • California State Senate Criminal Justice Scorecard
  • Events
    • Left Coast Forum
    • Event Calendar
  • Subscribe

Surprise: Hillary Lurches Right

Hillary Lurches RightFrom her call for a major air and ground war against ISIS to her attack on single-payer, observers note that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is rapidly shedding her “progressive” façade as she grows increasingly confident she has the Democratic nomination locked down (an assumption which, evidence shows, is debatable).

This trend comes despite her declaration during the first Democratic debate in October, after being pressed by the CNN moderator: “I don’t take a backseat to anyone when it comes to progressive experience and progressive commitment.”

Growing more hawkish by the day

In case there was any doubt, Clinton’s much-anticipated foreign policy speech on Thursday makes it clear she plans to run on her hawkish credentials.

From her call for a major air and ground war against ISIS to her attack on single-payer, observers note that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is rapidly shedding her “progressive” façade as she grows increasingly confident she has the Democratic nomination locked down.

Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Clinton called for a “new phase” in the fight against the Islamic State (referred to as ISIS or IS), including a major intensification in a bombing campaign; “ground forces actually taking back more territory;” an “intelligence surge;” and no-fly zones over Syria. “Our goal is not to deter or contain ISIS, but to defeat and destroy ISIS,” she said, in an implicit criticism of President Barack Obama as being too tepid on military intervention—and a signal that she intends to tack far to his right.

Since working under Obama’s White House—hardly the image of restraint—that’s exactly what Clinton has been doing. As Bob and Barbara Dreyfuss pointed out last year, Clinton used her secretary of state role to consistently advocate escalation of military force, from Afghanistan to Libya to Syria, making her the pro-war wing of the Obama administration.

Clinton has only moved further in the militarist direction after exiting the administration, expressing skepticism of the nuclear deal between world powers and Iran, escalating her rhetoric towards Russia, and proclaiming an “unbreakable bond” with the widely-reviled Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Clinton has stated publicly that she believes that her vote in favor of the 2003 invasion of Iraq was wrong and has been pressed on this issue during the campaign, including during Saturday’s Democratic debate, where she admitted: “I don’t think any sensible person would disagree that the invasion of Iraq led to the massive level of instability we are seeing right now.”

But as many others have pointed out, in the years since Clinton cast her vote in favor of the Iraq War, she appears to have learned nothing. “If Hillary Clinton wins her party’s nomination,” Vox‘s Zack Beauchamp warned in April, “she’ll be the most hawkish Democratic nominee since the Iraq War began.”

Attacking Bernie Sanders on Single-Payer Healthcare

Speaking in Dallas on Tuesday, Clinton launched an unbridled attack on Bernie Sanders’ plan for a single-payer, publicly-funded, universal healthcare program. “I don’t see how you can be serious about raising working and middle class families’ incomes if you also want to slap new taxes on them—no matter what the taxes will pay for,” she said.

Her statements were followed up by those of top Clinton aides speaking to media outlets. “If you are truly concerned about raising incomes for middle-class families, the last thing you should do is cut their take-home pay right off the bat by raising their taxes,” spokesperson Brian Fallon told Politico.

The push captured the ire of single-payer advocates, including National Nurses United. “Any politician that refuses to finance guaranteed healthcare has abandoned my patients, and I will never abandon my patients,” said NNU Co-President Jean Ross, RN.

According to Slate staff writer Jim Newell, Clinton is “essentially red-baiting about Bernie Sanders’ Wacky Taxes in her dismissal of a policy that, on paper, draws plenty of support among Democratic voters.”

Newell argued that Clinton, in fact, is going further than many in her own party by “appropriating one of the right’s central talking points against government-funded universal health insurance: Think of the taxes! She’s not just saying that a single-payer system is a political nonstarter with conservatives. She’s reciting the actual conservative talking point that would make a single-payer system a political nonstarter.”

Huffington Post correspondent Jonathan Cohn recently noted that Clinton appears to have intensified her tactic of attacking Sanders at the Democratic debate on Saturday. However, Cohn argued, “when Clinton and her aides talk about the Sanders agenda, they always leave out some critical context. The proposals on healthcare, college tuition and the like would yield benefits that, in many cases, would flow to the middle class and offset the impact of those new taxes.”

“In short,” Cohn added, “the Clinton campaign has made a conscious decision here. It is not merely criticizing Sanders for suspicious math. It is suggesting the test for any proposed initiative is what taxes it imposes, regardless of what benefits it might bring.”

Also on Saturday, Clinton—despite her vows to tackle Wall Street—reiterated heropposition to the Glass Steagall Act, which was repealed by her husband in 1999 and would break up big banks by splitting investment and commercial banking. Her position, in fact, is popular with Wall Street, but increasingly unpopular with those demanding economic equality and accountability for the financial institutions behind the 2008 financial crisis.

“The big six banks in this country have 43 percent more deposits, 81 percent more assets and three times the amount of cash they had before the financial crisis,” author and Demos fellow Nomi Prins said last month. “A major reason America has such an inequality problem is that it has a highly concentrated, establishment-supported casino banking system that disperses capital toward more risky endeavors than infrastructure building and small and mid-size business support.”

Meanwhile, Walmart workers on Wednesday took their demands for $15 an hour to the Brooklyn headquarters of Clinton, who refused their request for all candidates to address their demands at last week’s debates.

sarah-lazare-201“I was recently fired for my activism after working at Walmart for five years but I am fasting to try and improve the working conditions and wages for all of my friends still working at the store,” declared Tyfani Faulkner, a former Walmart customer service manager in Sacramento, CA. “I am going to Hillary Clinton’s office to demand that she speak up for me, for my daughter and for the tens of thousands of Walmart workers across this country working and living in poverty.”

Sarah Lazare
CommonDreams

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

By Sarah Lazare posted on November 21, 2015

DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed here are those of the individual contributor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the LA Progressive, its publisher, editor or any of its other contributors.

Comments

  1. CLO says

    November 23, 2015 at 1:35 pm

    “Progressive” has _never_ meant pacifist.

    Reply
    • Lori says

      November 24, 2015 at 4:04 am

      Pacifism and dovishness aren’t the same thing, either.

      Reply
  2. Joseph Rank says

    November 22, 2015 at 4:24 pm

    After working for over five years at Wal-Junk, I was ( unfairly ) fired ….despite rising up from night stocker to one of the most productive, and profitable, department managers in the store.
    The regional head of auto departments / service centers said ( after both the department manager AND the Associate manager had been fired, and not replaced, a month previous ) that I was his most valuable employee …and the best looking store of all in his purview …over 100.
    I was compensated at $11 / hour.
    Then, I transferred to the West Coast, and they lied to me about having a management position for me.
    SO, I went back to night stocking. Humiliation, but I now was earning $12.50 / hour; so I lived with it.
    After a year, I got ‘promoted’ to D manager of OTC pharmacy, and set sales records. Had national calls from various merchants and companies what was my secret.
    One particular ‘name-brand’ product outsold all others everywhere by 10X . They thought I was lying or fudging. I just knew how to mass market, and knew I had a good target clientele.

    But this made me lightening rod, AND it was discovered that not only was I an internationally published editorial cartoonist, but I was (shudder !), a Democrat and maybe even a LIBERAL !
    OH MY !
    { I’m actually much more than that. I think Nazi’s and fascists should be hung upside-down in the public square, or tossed out of airplanes at 10,000 feet without a parachute. }
    So, I was fired. Hallelujah !

    Haven’t held a ‘steady job’ since, and live in pleasant poverty ….but am grateful every day that I am not subject to the emotional slavery that Wal-Junk, and all bullshit corporations, dictate.

    I say NO ! I will NOT be moved.

    Reply
  3. James says

    November 22, 2015 at 1:52 pm

    “I don’t see how you can be serious about raising working and middle class families’ incomes if you also want to slap new taxes on them—no matter what the taxes will pay for,” she said.

    Hillary said this, as she lurched to the right, and lurched right off of my list of possible presidential candidates. Unless she disavows this comment, and commits to the concept of a single payer system, I vow to write in Bernie Sanders’ name if he is not on the ballot.

    Reply
    • Joseph Rank says

      November 22, 2015 at 4:51 pm

      Vote for Bernie in your primary / caucus. Work for him / donate in the meantime.
      IF Hillary is the Dem. nominee ….hold your nose and vote for her in the general. AND, vote for progressives down-ballot ! THEN, hold her accountable; with direct action by being visible and active.\
      You, Yes YOU, CAN do it ! YOU have the power !

      This nation will not survive another generation if idiot and fascist Republicans have total control and put their ‘Star-Chamber’ , Kangaroo Supreme Court justices further entrenched.

      We would have to have a bloody revolution if that were the case. ( Well, perhaps YOU would, I’m a greybeard that would be most pleased to kill as many American proto-fascists as I could before they killed me. )

      Don’t get me wrong …I want, and strive for, LOVE …universal, cosmic, omnipotent LOVE to win.
      But if I have to kill sociopaths and monsters before that ?
      HELL YEAH !!!

      Reply
  4. Rich Broderick says

    November 22, 2015 at 10:06 am

    And all along, we thought the GOP was not going to be able to field a right-of-center, establishment candidate likely to win the nomination.

    Little did the party realize that candidate would be Hillary Clinton!

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Refugees Begging Entry

Another Brick in the Wall

Royal We

Dear Mister President: The Royal We


The LA Progressive cannot publish without your support. Please donate. Thank you.
Trump Makes Dubya Look Smart

To Brits, Trump Makes Dubya Look Smart

Lance Simmens: “He has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace – all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed.”





Book-A-Bus



Please CLICK this donate button - we need your support. Thank you, LA Progressive

Article Categories

Africa | Animal Rights | California
Climate Change | Defense | Economic Justice
Education Reform | Elections | Environment
Events | Foreign Policy | Gay Rights
Healthcare Reform | Immigration Reform
Juvenile Justice | Labor | Latin America
Law and Justice | Los Angeles | Prison Reform
Progressive Issues | Science & Religion
Sexism | Social Justice | Terminal Velocity | The Body Politic
| The Media | The Middle East | Veterans
War and Peace | Wellness

The LA Progressive cannot publish without your support. Please donate. Thank you.

Los Angeles

LA County Construction Vote

L.A. Jail Vote: Wrong Side of History

Peter Laarman: Everyone in the auditorium on today could smell the bad faith in the comments of supervisors Barger, Hahn, and Ridley Thomas.

More Posts from Los Angeles

The Middle East

Anti-Semitism Claims

Don’t Let Bogus Claims of “Anti-Semitism” Derail the Pro-Palestinian Movement

Jim Lafferty: The pro-Israeli lobby is rapidly losing its propaganda campaign aimed at silencing those who dare to criticize the bad behavior of the Israel government.

More Posts from The Middle East

Economic Issues

Forex Market

How to Get Started in Forex Market

Daffa Zaky: Probably the number 1 thing you need to understand is to learn the basics first. Forex markets can grow complex as you invest more in the market.

More Posts from Economic Justice

Copyright © 2019 · Dick Price and Sharon Kyle · Log in