Regarding Petfer Schweizer's forthcoming book, Clinton Cash, before getting too hot under the collar about: “The Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author to pursue the story lines found in the book,” one should consider the opportunity the Times will have to unearth distortions and downright lies, thereby trashing the book. Anyone who has minimum knowledge of politics knows Republicans will trash Hillary until they have to trash each other to death in their primaries. And anything Schweizer has to say, true or false, is already out there. We are not talking blockbuster revelations. Just as we do on our side, he is preaching to his own true believers.
Frankly, I do not favor Hillary Clinton; she is too politically centered and disconnected from the liberal democratic base. And yes (a cliché now) tethered to Wall Street. You don’t want to hear this, but I prefer Liz Warren. Yet I will vote for Hillary or any other Democratic nominee for president, merely to oppose a Republican. Why? Because, at least in theory and excluding conservative Dems, our side would oppose the right’s seemingly irrational need to destroy Obama, health care, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, wage increases, minority voting, pro choice, LGBT, and any mention of climate change or evolution. Which we know is not irrational, but rather the opposite—a quite rational greed-driven assault by those at the apex of power who believe that giving a fraction of a social inch is giving a mile.
If I appear too negative about the Clintons, the fault lies not with me, but with them, and others like them. Having had to suppress whatever liberal tendencies they may have held in order to succeed in a cynical political system, they found themselves, like so many others before them, auditioning for candidacy, in secret, before the world’s power brokers: The Bilderberg Group. Check this video: Press Sec. Robert Gibbs trying to explain Obama's absence (was auditioning): https://www.youtube.com/.... Forced to making decisions, which required of them an expediency that can result in a hardening of political hearts. Except for an abandoned liberal base, in too many ways (i.e. serving financial masters) the difference between the two parties has become paper-thin. Administration appointees and advisers are a weft and weave of government/business/financial--board members, CEOs and lobbyists. In the shadows lurks Quid Pro Quo. To deny this is to be delusional. Consider a typical career:
LARRY SUMMERS
Was: Professor of economics, Harvard.
Government: Chief economist at the World Bank. Undersecretary for International Affairs U.S. Dept of Treasury under Clinton. Deputy Sec. of the Treasury. Succeeded Robert Rubin as Sec. of the Treasury. Advised deregulation of the U. S. financial system—repealing the Glass-Steagall Act.
Back to Harvard: For 5 years ‘til resigning–conflict of interest. Made millions as partner at Hedge Fund D.E.Shaw, and for paid speeches at Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Chase, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Bros.
Back to government: Director White House U. S. National Economic Council for President Obama—economic point man for Obama’s response to Great Recession. Council On Foreign Relations and Bilderbergers.
Summers is just one of a big list I have on file. Considering the rest of us can’t participate in the major Quid Pro Quo involved in the government/business equation, where do we, the average citizens, factor in the decisions made by people like him and others in the beltway revolving door?
Yes I would like to see a woman in the White House, and I will vote for Hillary Clinton, but I won’t be cheering.