I have little to say about the US presidential race except that Hillary and Jeb represent the same people and US government is totally corrupt and can only cause harm, both on the domestic and international front.
Ten Ways Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush Are Basically the Same Presidential Candidate
By Jake
Anderson
17
June, 2015
Now
that Jeb Bush has officially announced his intention to run for
president in 2016, the most corporate-funded presidential election in
history is set to begin, headed by two prospective frontrunners with
eerily familiar names. It’s Bush versus Clinton—again! With third
party candidates certain to be relegated to back alleys, we see, yet
again, two of the prized families of the great American oligarchy
being trotted out as namesake party spokesmen and women. Their
purpose: to create manufactured consent for a failed two-party system
while furthering a pre-scripted, nationalist, and corporatist
narrative.
Are
there some differences between Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush?
Absolutely. Women’s rights are up there on the list, as Jeb Bush
has an appalling
history in
that realm. While we are sensitive to the reality of Supreme Court
nominees and the politics of personal identity, there can be no
delusion that the most toxic dangers to our country are large
sweeping economic and geopolitical doctrines that consolidate wealth
into the hands of the rich elite, who promulgate wars abroad. Even on
issues like the environment, while Clinton has a better record than
Jeb, her support of corporations and trade agreements that derail
environmental progress completely cancels out her hollow sound bytes
about renewable energy.
The
two candidates are almost identical on the major issues poisoning our
republic.
1.
They both have blatantly corrupt corporate ties
Like
virtually all mainstream politicians in Congress, both Hillary
Clinton and Jeb Bush are beholden to corporations. This goes beyond
simply receiving campaign funds from super PACs. We’re talking the
marriage of corporate interests with the government’s foreign and
domestic policies, from the military industrial complex to Big Pharma
and “too big to fail” financial institutions. As we work our way
down the list, corrupt corporate ties will resurface, but for now,
let’s simply list these two politicians’ major corporate ties.
Jeb
Bush has actually consulted 15 companies, seven of them for-profits:
InnoVida Holdings, for which Bush was a board member and consultant,
paid him $15,000 a month before collapsing into fraud and bankruptcy
(the company’s CEO, Claudio Osorio, is serving 12½ years in
prison); five
of the companies for
which Bush served on the board (or as adviser) have faced class
action lawsuits. Some of these cases are ongoing and involve fraud or
environmental damage.
Hillary
Clinton’s corporate ties include her six-year stint as director
of Wal-Mart,
during which time the company aggressively fought to destroy union
activity. In more recent times, Hillary showed her colors most
spectacularly by hiring a former Monsanto lobbyist to run her
campaign. She is also exceedingly cozy with some of the more corrupt
Wall Street entities, which we’ll get into later. For now, suffice
it to note that the
Clinton Foundation has
received donations of anywhere from $250,000 to $5 million from
Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America.
2.
They are both major war hawks
In
today’s America, anyone elected president who doesn’t want to go
the way of John F. Kennedy has to serve the interests of the
military-industrial complex. Even ostensibly non-hawkish presidents
like Barack Obama (who won a Nobel Peace Prize shortly before
authorizing military drone strikes that have killed almost 2,500
people)
must keep the war machine going.
Hillary
Clinton doesn’t even try to disguise her support for on-going war.
Her complete embrace of what The Nation calls “destructive
nationalist myths” has earned her the label of a “war hawk”.
The moniker is well-deserved. She was a vocal supporter of the second
Iraq War in 2003, despite the lack of clear evidence that military
action was necessary (and, of course, we now know that the entire
justification was a completely
manufactured web of lies bent
on taking advantage of the fear people felt after 9/11). She
also supported military strikes on Afghanistan. These two wars took
the lives of 174,000
civilians.
Despite
finally admitting her vote for war was a mistake, Hillary has not
lessened her push for war. As Secretary of State, she
was instrumental in
facilitating the use of U.S. airpower to decimate Libya. She then did
virtually the same thing in Syria. “The
results have been anarchy,
sectarian conflict and opportunities for Islamist extremists that
have destabilized the entire region,”
The Nation observed.
Jeb
Bush, of course, supported all of the aforementioned wars and
military actions with extreme bravado, then had the extra audacity to
claim everything had gone decently in Iraq until Obama ebbed the
surge. Hisrevisionism
and whitewashing over
the decimation of Arab nations post-9/11 is nothing short of
pathological.
3.
They both support the Patriot Act and NSA mass гsurveillance
Both
Clinton and Bush supported the Patriot Act from the day it was
secretly drafted, only days after 9/11. They both voted for its
reauthorization in 2006.
This
unconstitutional bill granted the government unprecedented powers of
civilian detainment, as well as access to private data. When the FISA
laws were updated by the Patriot Act, programs like PRISM enabled the
NSA to collect millions of phone records from Americans with no
suspected ties to terrorism.
Hillary
Clinton has expressed concern over privacy issues, but when she has
had the chance to take a real stand on them, she has
consistently avoided doing so. Meanwhile, Jeb
Bush applauded President
Obama’s expansion of NSA surveillance, proclaiming: “I
would say the best part of the Obama administration would be his
continuance of the protections of the homeland using the big metadata
programs, the NSA being enhanced.”
Fret
no more, cynics of the American political system. When it comes to
the erosion of civil liberties, bipartisanship is still possible.
4.
They both support fracking
This
one may strike some as surprising considering Hillary Clinton
has a fairly good record (maybe a C+) on environmental issues.
Unfortunately, the fact is that both candidates support hydraulic
fracturing, or “fracking,” a practice used by oil and energy
companies to extract gas and oil from shale rock by directing a high
pressure stream of water, sand, and chemicals underground. The
practice wastes incredible amounts of water and may contaminate
groundwater with carcinogenic chemicals. Recent studies have also
shown that fracking
causes earthquakes in
normally stable regions.
During
a keynote
speech at
the National Clean Energy Summit, Clinton made it clear she wanted
strong regulations on fracking, but as Secretary of State, she was
responsible for promoting the practice in countries like Bulgaria,
which are unlikely to enforce regulations. As it is, fracking is
barely regulated in the United States.
5.
They both support the Drug War
Hillary
Clinton has been very vague—even evasive—about her stance on the
Drug War. She supports the use of medical marijuana in some cases but
has consistently spoken out against the decriminalization
of marijuana,
particularly in the lead-up to the 2008 election. She also made a
mind-numbingly strange
remark in
regard to the black market trade, saying drugs couldn’t be
legalized because “there’s
too much money in it.”
Jeb
Bush has virtually the same history and position: support for
marijuana use in extreme medical cases but absolutely no
support for
decriminalization. When push came to shove on an actual ballot
initiative, Bush lent
his support to
opponents of a legalization bill.
Meanwhile,
$3.6 billion is spent each year busting and prosecuting people for
pot possession, ruining lives and families over a natural herb that
has never caused a death. With black people four
times as likely to
be arrested over marijuana, the issue is a socio-political travesty.
6.
They both aggressively support big banks and bailing them out
Unfortunately,
despite the fact that their reckless derivatives trading nearly
caused a complete global economic collapse, big banks and financial
institutions have the complete support of both Hillary Clinton and
Jeb Bush.
Interestingly,
if you remember Bill Clinton’s presidency, you may consider that it
was his move to dismantle the Glass-Steagall Act, undoing the
regulation of derivatives. His henchman on the repeal was former
Goldman Sachs CEO Robert Rubin. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Hillary
Clinton has repeatedly signaled she will not change course on
financial regulation. In fact, in 2013, Goldman Sachs paid
her $400,000
for a speech in
which she said that progressives and their anti-Wall Street rhetoric
are “foolish.”
Meanwhile,
the Bush family has a long and sickening history of colluding with
big banks, starting with George
H.W. Bush running
a deregulation task force with a former Merrill Lynch CEO. The lax
policy of bailing out banks has continued unabated. Jeb Bush is on
record as a huge supporter of bailouts for the Big
Six banks that
collectively rig our economic system.
Any
disagreement between Hillary and Jeb over this issue during the
debates will be for show only—they are both puppets on strings when
it comes to the banks.
7.
They both support Monsanto and GMOs
This
one is fairly obvious, seeing as Clinton hired a Monsanto lobbyist to
run her campaign. She’s also a supporter of GMOs, which some
evidence shows
could be harmful to humans yet are found in the vast majority of the
American food supply. Jeb Bush is also a GMO supporter and
even opposes
GMO labeling.
Clinton has been unclear on her position on labeling but supports the
idea of selling the whole idea to the public in a different context.
During a speech, she openly brainstormed ways to use different kinds
of propagandistic rhetoric—such as “drought-resistant” instead
of “genetically modified.”
The
support both candidates lend to Monsanto is deeply troubling as the
multinational agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
has monopolized the seed and food supply across the world
withherbicidal
and pesticidal toxins.
They also use heavy-handed legal tactics and litigation to force
local farmers to comply, even to the detriment to their communities.
8.
They will both spend billions on the upcoming election
Hillary
Clinton has openly stated her goal of raising $2.5 billion for her
upcoming presidential campaign. To put that in perspective, in 2012,
Obama and Romney combined spent over
$2 billion,
which is bad enough.
Jeb
Bush and the GOP will, of course, match or surpass this number, which
means the 2016 presidential election could cost $5 billion dollars.
Meanwhile, most Americans are in debt and 14.5% of the nation—45.3
million people—live
in poverty.
With
super PACs and Citizens
United allowing
for a virtually unrestricted flow of corporate money into our
elections, we are now seeing the full effects of a corporatocracy
running our “representative democracy.”
9.
They both support the secretive and dangerous TPP agreement
Though
initially voicing her support for the ominous trade deal at least 45
times while
Secretary of State, Hillary has backed off of her support for the TPP
now that it’s become politically advantageous. Basically, she
is still politically flip-flopping and will likely continue to do so
a through the election.
Given
that Clinton was a gung-ho supporter of NAFTA (an agreement that is
almost universally agreed upon as being responsible for millions
of jobs lost and higher income inequality),
it is highly unlikely she will take a stand against TPP. If passed,
it would essentially allow corporations to decide trade laws in
private tribunals and strip down both worker’s
rights and environmental protections.
To her credit, Hillary has voiced concerns—and if she reverses
course, I will be the first to gladly eat my own words.
Meanwhile,
Jeb Bush openly supports the agreement, which, one shouldn’t
forget, is so pernicious it was kept secret for years. We only know
about it because of a WikiLeaks
cable.
Bush once said, “We
must push privatization [of government] in every area where
privatization is possible.”
TPP would accomplish that with extreme measures.
10.
They both support the death penalty
This
one may be surprising as well. Not for Jeb Bush, as he is a proud
executioner. This was especially true in his earlier days, before he
leaned back to the center of political posturing. He once clearly
stated his plans on the death penalty: “I
want to accelerate, not slow down, the enforcement of the death
penalty in Florida.”
In
her earlier years as a constitutional lawyer, Clinton fought against
the death penalty and the corrupt criminal justice system. In more
recent years, she has lent it her “unenthusiastic
support.”
We will see if she hedges on this in the primaries, where she will
face staunch death penalty opponent, Bernie Sanders.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.