Friday, April 1, 2016

Clinton Meltdown

Hillary Clinton doesn't do fake populism very well under pressure:

Politicians who are as well tested and vetted and seasoned as she claims to be simply should not lose their cool like this on the campaign trail. She is, of course, under extreme pressure. Not only is the FBI closing in on her over her email server, she is being forced to challenge Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders at the same time in her own "home" state. For once in her life, she is on the receiving end of triangulation. This must not feel very pleasant to a woman so used to being protected in a bubble for the past several decades.

Maybe she can use the Affluenza defense to explain her over-the-top reaction to Greenpeace activist Eva Resnick Day, who simply challenged Clinton to divest herself of political contributions from the fossil fuel industry. When Hillary sputtered that she has contributions from "people" in the polluting industry rather than contributions from the actual industry itself, she sounded just like Donald Trump. How many times does Trump, too, answer every difficult question with: "I have people?"

How many times does Trump, too, deflect difficult questions with claims that the opposition is always lying about him?

Rather than engage with her questioner, Hillary snapped: "I  am so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about me!"

The trouble is, Resnick-Day is not even connected to the Sanders campaign. (Hillary and her supporters in the  media are wont to pigeonhole all her critics as rabid "Bernie Bros") The trouble is, fossil fuel industry contributions to both the Clinton campaign and the Clinton family foundation have been well-documented.

Resnick-Day has written about her exchange with Clinton on the Greenpeace website:
Today, I said to Hillary, “Thank you for tackling climate change. Will you act on your words and reject future fossil fuel money in your campaign?” I was genuinely shocked by her response. But I want to make sure we are focused on the issue at hand: asking our candidates to take a stand to fix our democracy. Rejecting fossil fuel money sends a strong signal.
Greenpeace, 350 Action, and dozens of concerned activists have been attending events, rallies, debates, and fundraisers for many months asking Hillary Clinton to reject fossil fuel money in her campaign. This is by no means the first time that we asked her the question. In fact, last night, more than  40 activists gathered outside of a Clinton Fundraiser at the Dakota, asking Senator Clinton to come out and talk to the people she is fighting for.
She did not cross the street to talk to us.
To be clear, we are talking about more than just individual contributions from oil and gas employees. According to data compiled by Greenpeace’s research department, Secretary Clinton’s campaign and the Super PAC supporting her have received more than $4.5 million from the fossil fuel industry during the 2016 election cycle. Eleven registered oil and gas industry lobbyists have bundled over 1 million dollars to her campaign.
If she takes the pledge, she’ll be sending a strong signal to our country and fossil fuel companies that it’s time to keep it in the ground, not just for the future of our planet, but for people that are living on it.
Hillary Clinton's unhinged response to a polite request by an environmentalist -- to lead by example and to help save the planet --  should be the turning point in her misbegotten quest for the White House. She possesses neither the temperament nor the ethics to be president.

Even if she ultimately wins this rigged election, any popular mandate she boasts from her millions of primary votes is rapidly being squandered.


annenigma said...

My spies tell me that this morning Hillary was heard screaming and crying "You cursed brat! Look what you've done! I'm melting! melting! Oh, what a world! What a world! Who would have thought a good little Bernieman like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness? Oooooh, look out! I'm going! Oooooh! Ooooooh!"

Karen Garcia said...


Thanks, I knew I had heard that voice somewhere before but just couldn't place it.

Hillary seems to be going for a blend of two Margarets: Thatcher and Hamilton. Either that, or she's been slurping the Margaritas lately.

There is no free lunch. Your numbers simply don't add up, my pretty! Hiccup, cackle, finger-wag, forehead vein-pop.

Meredith NYC said...

Good for Eva, but what does anyone expect Hillary to say? Oh, sure if you want i'll divest from ff money in my quest to be president? Or, you know, you’re right, and I'm going to give your suggestion some thought.

Not when the campaign system is completely built on corporate sponsorship of ALL candidates. (except Sanders) and FF industry is one of the biggest donors. Along with banking, insurance, pharma, etc.

It may take thousands of Eva's, over years, to challenge thousands of candidates before we can hope to be like other democracies and use public funding with limits on private.

The media, which profits from big money for ads, doesn’t even report on the many groups trying to reverse Citizens United. So voters don’t know any better. They think we have to outspend other countries on elections and h/c also, in order to maintain our unique ‘freedoms’.

Somebody in the media will have to start covering campaign financing, not as a contest, but as the main block to the US becoming a modern democracy--some day.

Meanwhile Hillary will do as before like all viable candidates must. She's got her repertoire of comebacks, her script of reality denial and sales presentation.

The biggest irony is that Sanders, not taking big money, is the more realistic one in facing the truth of our problems, but he's labeled the idealistic, non pragmatic, left wing radical. While Hillary's labeled pragmatic,and can do, while she can’t acknowledge the reality of the nation's problems. She pretends phony outrage and determination, as if she's going to confront and challenge and make change.

Reality denial and sales presentation? That’s Krugman's column today....he goes further out in his rationalizations and hypocrisies. The subtext of his praise of Obama now is to praise Hillary, since she praises Obama, and she cites pk in her debates. It's like an interlocking corporate system. It's a political collective, really.

Prof Paul Pangloss is now an embarrassment to what was once regarded as the nation's top paper.

Meredith NYC said...

Thanks Karen... a blend of 2 Margarets--Thatcher and Hamilton? Lovely. You are out-witticising even Borowitz.

One of his best just came out inspired by recent Alice in Wonderland media.

"Media Unimpressed as Sanders Barely Gets Seventy Per Cent of Vote

(The Borowitz Report)—Bernie Sanders failed to impress major media outlets over the weekend as he barely managed to win seventy per cent of the vote in three western primaries.

The major cable networks briefly mentioned Sanders’s vote tallies in Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii but noted that he ran out of steam well shy of eighty per cent.

“There’s no point in sugarcoating it,” one analyst put it. “Rough night for Sanders.”

According to one cable executive, Sanders needs to “put up some big numbers fast” if he expects the networks to continue giving his campaign airtime.

“It’s going to be harder and harder to justify covering him while he’s stuck down in the seventy-per-cent range,” the executive said.
While Sanders campaign officials remain optimistic about the upcoming primary in Wisconsin, media outlets are calling it a “do or die” state after his sputtering finishes over the weekend.

“I think if he limps across the finish line with, say, seventy-five or seventy-nine per cent, it’s going to be time for him to reassess things,” one cable representative said. “That would have to be a wake-up call.”

A spokesperson for CNN could not be reached for comment, as the network was busy preparing a ninety-minute special on the birth of Donald Trump’s new grandchild."

Meredith NYC said...

Karen and all.....You might take a look at some of the great critical comments on Krugman’s flippant and disrespectful anti Sanders blog apr 1, Feel the Math. PK's rudeness is over the top, ordering Bernie to Stop Demonizing Hillary! ... and tell his campaign to stop it also. Truly classless tone.

Way more comments than any ever before, for the blog now at 1,381. They are letting him have it. Krugman is on an emotional fling of some kind that’s unbecoming. He’s a nobel but not a noble economist---can’t resist that.

He is deciding what’s “ appropriate behavior by Hillary’s rival.”

I'll quote his hyperbolic prose:
“...the Sanders campaign needs to stop feeding the right-wing disinformation machine. Engaging in innuendo suggesting, without evidence, that Clinton is corrupt is, at this point, basically campaigning on behalf of the RNC. If Sanders really believes, as he says, that it’s all-important to keep the White House out of Republican hands, he should stop all that – and tell his staff to stop it too."

(Krugman is scolding Sanders like an adult to a child, when Sanders is the only real adult in the whole campaign.Notice how wordy Krugman is. He has to pad his prose for effect, since it lacks basic sense.)

“Second, it’s time for Sanders to engage in some citizenship. The presidency isn’t the only office on the line; down-ballot races for the Senate and even the House are going to be crucial. Clinton has been raising money for other races; Sanders hasn’t, and is still being evasive on whether he will ever do so. Not acceptable”

“It’s important to realize that there are some real conflicts of interest here. For Sanders campaign staff, and also for anyone who has been backing his insurgency, it’s been one heck of a ride, and they would understandably like it to go on as long as possible. But we’ve now reached the point where what’s fun for the campaign isn’t at all the same as what’s good for America.
Sanders doesn’t need to drop out, but he needs to start acting responsibly.” (!)

Take that Bernie Sanders, says Dr. Paul Pangloss. Stop having 'fun' at our expense!

Karen Garcia said...

Krugman is an unabashed Clinton surrogate. If he isn't on her payroll, he's being terribly cheated. He simply echoes the talking points handed out to the professional thought leaders by the DNC/Clintonland: he is not even pretending to offer his own independent thoughtful commentary. For example, the canard that any criticism from the left is tantamount to enabling the right is as old as the Hills. Tone it down? What a joke. Every time they tell people to tone it down, the decibel level goes up. All I can tell Krugman and his snooty pals is to keep it up.... keep ginning up the elitist rage, and the people will only become more inspired, and win.

This is no longer just a presidential contest. This is so much bigger than Bernie. Neoliberalism itself is on trial, and the duopoly is in danger of going down in flames. The twin offerings of fear and feudalism are no longer acceptable to the electorate. Official panic is in the red zone. Danger danger danger: democracy alert!

Anonymous said...

(Earlier today in Nevada)

LIVE!! Bernie Sanders Supporters Being ARRESTED at NV Dem Convention

-- Reluctant Democrat

Cirze said...

If the primary voting chicanery denies the win for Bernie, I cannot see Hillary getting the votes she will need to win the general.

Not that I think people should vote for Trump (or whoever the Republican candidate may be).

It's just that I can't see the needed number of voters after this spirit-bruising primary battle who are willing after working so hard for the honest Bernie to vote for someone who has led the way in vote stealing and is proud of it (and hires people like Deb Was Sht).

Thanks for your ground-breaking reporting, Karen.

You have helped lead the way out of our moral morass.

annenigma said...

It's not just the deep pocketed donors who are expecting big rewards if Hillary is elected. The entire Democratic establishment is poised to cash in, and I'm sure many media figures are too. As far as I'm concerned, this is exactly why we need to deny her the Presidency.

'Democrats Angle For Power in Clinton Administration'
Lawmakers are raising money and campaigning with the hopes of landing jobs or amassing clout if she wins.

annenigma said...

"Before Hillary Clinton declared her candidacy she made like Don Corleone of “The Godfather” and put all the politicians and party bigwigs in her pocket."

'‘Godmother’ Hillary Shows Her Mob Boss Side'

Ste-vo said...

The Democrats angling for power in Clinton Administration? Peter Shumlin, the feckless Guv'na of Vermont, endorsed HRC shortly after Bernie, Vermont's Junior Senator announced his candidacy. There was a huge uproar and people are still commenting about it even as the super-delegates change their endorsements to Bernie.

Jay–Ottawa said...

"This is no longer just a presidential contest. This is so much bigger than Bernie. Neoliberalism itself is on trial …."

Right. And in about seven months we'll have the jury's verdict. Will the Neos swing or walk free?

annenigma said...

The Hillary Victory Fund is the epitome of campaign finance corruption (if you don't count the Clinton Foundation itself). We must deliver defeat instead of victory to Generalissima Clinton.

'How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties'

Meredith NYC said...

I caught this on CNN today, and was quite taken aback. My reactions in parenthesis:

Report on Politico---
“Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday dismissed criticism that he hasn't released his full tax returns, even though Hillary Clinton has released eight years worth.

Pushed by Jake Tapper on CNN's "State of the Union" over why he only released a 2014 summary of his returns, the Vermont senator said he'd release as much as he can, but said the process may take some time. (!)

"You know who does our tax returns? (no, who?) My wife does our tax returns. (really, how interesting.)
We have been a little bit busy lately," Sanders said. (is that so?)
Tapper told Sanders he was "kind of surprised" the Vermont senator hadn't "gone further on transparency."

Sanders said he would work to make as much of his personal tax information public as soon as possible, (as possible???) but said expectations should be tempered for what will be revealed. (Ok we won’t expect much Bernie)

"There ain't going to be very much exciting in that. I get a salary from the United States Senate," Sanders said.
(I’m not excited, just pissed off and suspicious.)

"Our financial situation, to the best of my knowledge, has not changed very much, but we will get out all of that information as soon as we can," he promised.”

Allow me to vent.
WHAT??? Promised??? Well, Bernie, how soon can you? You sound like Romney. It it hasn’t changed much, what’s the holdup? Just how busy can your wife be? What’s the state of your ‘knowledge’? Could you hire maybe an accounting student, with some of the millions your fans donated, to gather and copy them and hand them out to the media, since you want to be elected US president? Duh. It’s April 2016.

I guess Bernie from Brooklyn knows the meaning of the word SCHMUCK.