Skip to main content

View Diary: Clinton sponsors anti-flag burning law (461 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No (none)
    Not everything is either/or, as in either you get everything you asked for, or you don't seek anything.  That would be pure political idiocy, to not seek funding for anything else because you didn't get everything.

    And did you even spend two minutes online seeing if she had done anything on body armor?

    On the face of it, Clinton has tackled her duties with a sincerity suggesting she's in it for more than opportunity's sake. "It's not transparently obvious that what she's doing is paving the way for a presidential run," says Michael O'Hanlon, of the Brookings Institute, who tracks the committee's work.

    O'Hanlon thinks Clinton has stood out, especially as a rookie member. He cites her thoughtful critique of President Bush's Iraq policy--her concern about the extended use of Guard and Reserve members, about the lack of body armor, about the exit strategy. He also cites her support for New York's military families generally--pushing for better pay and improved health benefits for the Guard and Reserve. She has also visited all 13 military installations across the state at least once, some two and three times.

    "She's doing a fantastic job," O'Hanlon says, "and I'm not in any way a Hillary fan."

    The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.

    by Dana Houle on Mon Dec 05, 2005 at 08:43:59 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Ok.... (4.00)
      I'll put it like this and you can decide if she's doing something about the body armor issue:

      "Hillary can critique in one hand and spend $90M in the other and see which one fills up first."

      Critiquing is an empty gesture. Appropriating money is a concrete gesture. Obviously she finds the video game issue more important than the body armor issue because she's eager to appropriate money for the former and not for the latter.

      Body armor is just one example. What we're talking about is a US Senator requesting emergency spending for something she thinks is more imporant than all other issues. Don't like that example?....fine, pick another.

      How about $90M in emergency spending to provide neo-natal care for single, preganant poor women? Nope! Not for Hillary! She'll critique the lack of such funding (or maybe she won't) but did she ask for $90M in emergency spending to fund something so important?....Nope, it's just not as important to her as studying animated nudity in video games.

      How about $90M for emergency funding to house homeless folks in New York in a cold, harsh winter?....Nope....did she critique government response to that humanitarian crisis?....Mabye she  did....did she ask for $90M in emergency spending to aleviate it......Nope....at least not to my knowledge.

      Hillary is more concerned with frivilous issues than she is with concrete human issues. She's a US Senator. Critiquing is an empty gesture. Appropriating money is a a concrete gesture which really does something. Money talks and bulls*it walks......she's talking on the issue of video game studies and BS walking on real human issues.

      See the difference?

      Funding for legal representation for poor defendants in criminal cases has been slashed to the bone all accross the country.....Is she asking  working with other senators to reverse that?.....Nope....she's signed on to a bill to make flag desecration a federal crime.....which is more important?......

      Hillary is obsessed with the frivilous and superficial but utterly unmoved by things that cause real, immediate suffering for poor Americans....she proves it by the kind of legislation she proposes....and what she seeks to appropriate money for.

      She 'critiques' the lack of body armor but requests emergency spending to study video game nudity. She never requested emergency spending to get more armor for our troops.

      From the article you linked to:

      "In press releases last year, she took credit for securing roughly $125.5 million in defense projects statewide. This year, she has touted having already inserted $156 million in military construction projects in the fiscal 2006 defense budget."

      "Clinton has found the money in less dramatic ways as well. Her office puts out a steady stream of press releases highlighting military expenditures for the Empire State. None compare to the big-ticket Marine One deal, her aides say, but there are meaningful wins. Like the $16.8 million the senator managed to earmark for an upstate aircraft manufacturer last year. Or the $43.5 million in defense research grants she got for five universities. When it comes to fighting for such things, Israel says, "Senator Clinton has been an absolute pit bull."

      So...she got tens of millions of dollars for pork projects yet, the article states,

      "He cites her thoughtful critique of President Bush's Iraq policy--her concern about the extended use of Guard and Reserve members, about the lack of body armor, about the exit strategy."

      Tens of millions for pork for military aicraft manufacturers and.........a critique about body armor. Defense contractors get richer and our troops continue not to have enough body armor.

      Hillary is a cynical fool....and I'm being nice....believe me.

      •  Well said (4.00)
        Bravo!

        America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand-Harry S. Truman

        by wishingwell on Mon Dec 05, 2005 at 09:49:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site