If Hillary Clinton Is Not a REAL Democrat, then Neither Is Obama and Neither Was Kennedy

[McCamy Taylor]

Another poster made the case for why he believes that Hillary Clinton is not suitable to represent the Democratic Party. Here is my rebuttal:

She voted for both Patriot Acts. Does this place her at the right wing fringe of the Democratic Party? Hardly. Every Senator except Russ Feingold voted for it the first time. That includes Ted Kennedy. Are you going to tell me that Ted Kennedy was not a real Democrat? The second time she was joined by Obama--- and Ted Kennedy again. Is Obama a faux Democrat? Was Ted Kennedy a faux Democrat?

She Voted For the Iraq War Resolution: 42% of Democratic Senators voted for the War Resolution. Those include Biden, Dodd, Cleland, Kerry, Rockefeller. These are rock solid Democrats---not outer limits stealth Republicans disguised as Democrats. I don't recall anyone having a hissy fit in 2004 when our nominee was John Kerry. I don't recall certain posters at DU declaring he was unfit because he had voted for the war and for the Patriot Act. Why not? Why was it ok for Kerry to do it but not OK for Clinton to do it? Why the double standard. Why was Kerry a true Democrat and a patriot and Clinton is a "war hawk"? Because he was a man and a veteran and she is a woman? Because the war in Iraq was not yet massively unpopular?

She "cozied up" to Goldman Sachs : Question: which candidate got the most money from Goldman Sachs in 2008? If you said Hillary, you have been drinking the Hillary Haters Tea. The correct answer is our president Barack Obama. He got over twice as much as she did. Some of the other Dems who got money from Goldman Sachs include Charles Rangel, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, both Udalls, Barney Frank---the list goes on and on. Saying that Hillary Clinton is not fit to be president because she took banksters money is like saying that Obama should not be president because he took bankster money. Is that what you are trying to say? Are you trying to criticize the President by accusing Hillary of all the things that you would like to accuse Obama of doing?

She "got the ball rolling" on the Keystone Pipeline: This one is hardly even worth addressing. The pipeline was announced during the Bush administration. The Obama state department said that it could damage cultural artifacts and pollute groundwater. Clinton refuses to endorse it. Obama has vetoed it. Where is all this has Clinton gotten "the ball rolling"?

My verdict: Hillary Clinton is a middle of the road Democrat. She represents the exact center of this party---my party, the party of labor and civil rights and women's rights and gay rights. If people want to support left wing candidates, go right ahead. Just don't tell me that Clinton is not a Democrat.

[Fumesucker]

1. Not exactly what I would consider a rousing defense of the Democratic party establishment..

[McCamy Taylor]

2. Some of us do not feel that the Democratic Party needs to be defended.

I love my party. It has done many wonderful things since FDR took over and it will continue to do many wonderful things in the future, because it has an umbrella big enough for all of us.

[Stellar]

15. hear, hear!

[roguevalley]

68. given that my thoughts turn to FDR, HRT

and the legislative genius of LBJ, HRC does not even compute.

[MrMickeysMom]

83. Well, I do...

No idea how long you've drawn breath as one who'd seen the party or participated in what it is supposed to stand for, but it isn't hitting that mark now.

I don't "love" a party. However, I DO love what a party stands for. There's a difference.

[Sherman A1]

3. Okay

[Bugenhagen]

4. "We came, we saw, he died!" (Hooray?)

I wouldn't give anyone a pass on the PATRIOT Act or the Iraqi War Resolution. I won't vote for that. That is NOT okay. And I wouldn't go holding up President Obama as the patron saint of good judgement on military actions. Between a shit load of disastrous actions and drone-murdering the fuck out of everyone in sight, I think that will be the most shameful legacy of his presidency.

Do you think that the President has a good record on Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street? They loot brazillions without fear of prosecution. She helped deregulate them so that they could. Another shameful failure for the President and any other Dem who abetted it, and not really a Hillary rallying point.

[Scuba]

5. You've made a good case McCamy, that the party has been widely infiltrated by wealthy conservatives.

Time to wrest it away from them and put it back in the hands of the people.

[daleanime]

6. Party, then nation.

[Scuba]

7. Yep. Being loyal to the party but not to the party's principles is the worst kind of cheerleading.

[joshcryer]

8. Have you even read the Party Platform?

Really? Have you?

Hat tip: the platform defines the principles. And the platform is pretty fucking 95% progressive. And the platform in 2016 will be even more progressive than the 2012 platform. As that's how the system works. 2012 was pro-gay marriage. 2016 will be pro-marijuana / anti-drug war. What else do we got to deal with?

Get in touch with American politics, especially the Democratic Party Platform.

[Scuba]

9. Yes, and I really wish our party leaders would read and FOLLOW it. I certainly don't recall ....

... chained CPI being in there anywhere.

[joshcryer]

11. That never fucking happened.

So there's that.

Read the party platform. Stop being manipulated by idiotic narratives.

[Scuba]

13. "Stop being manipulated by idiotic narratives" says a chronic manipulator. When a twice-elected ...

... President of the United States who is also a Democrat puts chained CPI on the table it says a whole lot about the conservatives who have taken over our party. Doesn't matter that it hasn't happened. Yet.

[giftedgirl77]

36. Neither did the Keystone XL...

That certain individuals were certain Obama was down for hook, line, & sinker.

[Scuba]

38. It's not just about a single pipeline ...

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/03/20/3254081/pipelines-you-havent-heard-of/

While America Spars Over Keystone XL, A Vast Network Of Pipelines Is Quietly Being Approved

But while critics and proponents of Keystone XL have sparred over the last few years, numerous pipelines — many of them slated to carry the same Canadian tar sands crude as Keystone — have been proposed, permitted, and even seen construction begin in the U.S. and Canada. Some rival Keystone XL in size and capacity; others, when linked up with existing and planned pipelines, would carry more oil than the 1,179-mile pipeline.

[giftedgirl77]

43. I will concede that is shitty but of those pipelines 2

are in the states & correct me if I'm wrong on this but the one in CO was approved by the state & the other by the Army Corps of Engenieers using some shady regulations.

That however doesn't detract from the fact that the evil Obama predictions have failed to come through. Chained CPI isn't going to happen in the last 2 yrs of his presidency, it was a negotiating tool & it appears he's done playing those games.

[Scuba]

44. Are you suggesting the Army Corp of Engineers doesn't report to the Commander in Chief?

Having a twice-elected Democratic President put chained CPI on the table was a betrayal of the highest order, regardless of whether it went anywhere or not.

Why would he even suggest that Social Security be cut to help with the federal deficit at a time when the wealthy are taking ALL of the recovery gains while simultaneously paying historically low tax rates?

[Scuba]

59. The Army Corps of Engineers reports to the Secretary of the Army ...

... who reports to the Secretary of Defense.

The Corps of Engineers do not report to the Office of Management and Budget.

[giftedgirl77]

71. Jesus Christ, I can't believe I even typed that shit....

I knew better, you are absolutely right. No sleep too many meds.

[Scuba]

72. No problem.

[rhett o rick]

54. I noticed you only mention the social issues with which none of us will argue.

My problem is with the big war machine that kills and kills. HRC was fine with the invasion of Iraq and in fact she helped the Republicons promote it. Thousands died and millions of lives were ruined. That's not the middle of the road Democrat.

Some think that if one says they support LGBT rights, they can claim to be "progressive" even if the believe in supply side economics and continuous wars. I say we can find candidates that support social issues AND want to stop the wars and revitalize the middle and working classes.

"Get in touch with American politics, especially the Democratic Party Platform." Really? Do you think that your opinion is the only legitimate opinion?

[rhett o rick]

78. The platform is masterful. It can be seen as progressive but has holes through which we can fly

killer drones.

[daleanime]

16. Amen, if a nation isn't the people....

what is it?

[Fearless]

10. Umm, no.

[leftofcool]

14. Uh, yes. Everything she stated is fact. Google it!

[Fearless]

85. Uhh, not interested.

[CentralMass]

12. Yes, we know

[Fiftyone]

17. You cherry-picked issues

You left out a lot of votes.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. And yet you did not mention any votes that bother you. Why is that?

Were you upset about her CAFTA vote?

[Fiftyone]

53. First things first

Did OP mention votes she likes?

[shenmue]

18. Preach!

[Android3.14]

19. Those who actually pay attention

Those who actually pay attention know it is time to clean out these warmongering DINOs who, along with their Republican counterparts, brought about the greatest inequality we've ever seen.

You're saying, "Ooooooooooh, if you say something bad about Clinton, then you are saying bad things about Obama and Kennedy. (let's all wave our hand and look about with wide-eyed fear) Ooooooooooh!"

I'm good with that.

[BumRushDaShow]

20. It's ironic

that little is made of Elizabeth Warren's previous life as a full blown Republican. Her narrative and ability to speak to the "white suburban" world is remarkable, although this narrative has made little inroads into the urban & minority communities (near 25% of the electorate) in terms of messaging. I.e., there needs to be more to her focus than the 1-trick pony of "Wall Street banksters".

I am only lukewarm to Hillary as well (another former Republican, but from almost 50 years ago vs Warren's 20 years ago). However there needs to be more discussion here on DU about candidates beyond the nebulous "bankster", "TPP!!11!!1!!", and "NSA SPYING!11!!!1!1!" and inclusive of ways to deal with the day-to-day indignities suffered by large segments of the population that have nothing to do with any of that, including civil rights and the right to stand, walk, drive, and shop without being harassed, voting rights, policing, community-building and infrastructure enhancements (with government funding to foster this), affordable housing (including to help alleviate homelessness), food insecurity, and support of unions across the blue collar and white collar job sites (both private and government). Many urban dwellers have no banks, no supermarkets, and no medical facilities in their neighborhoods or even nearby, so "bankster" is irrelevant to them and such terminology is summarily tuned out. The same goes for anything going on with Al Qaeda, ISIL, and other "terrorists". In many communities, the "terrorists" are the police and the criminal syndicates, many run from outside the community and even from outside of the U.S. (an age-old problem over many many years).

The U.S. is not a country of cottage industries, with hundreds of thousands of streets lined with stalls of people peddling their wares and services. It is a mix of large corporations and single person entities eeking out a living, and it is also something that needs to be factored into any platform and narrative by a candidate. Eliminating "business" is suicidal unless you want to set up your stall out in front of your door and hope someone buys something from you.

[freshwest]

21. Well said!

[DCBob]

22. +1

[leftofcool]

26. +1

[greatauntoftriplets]

31. Excellent post!

[mcar]

34. Wish I could rec this post

Very well said.

[giftedgirl77]

37. Exactly....

[JoePhilly]

62. If Warren became President, they'd turn on her in the first month.

She'd take money from some one they don't like.
She'd invite some one they didn't like to the inauguration.
She make some deal that isn't perfect.

And the fact that she was once a Republican would suddenly become a very very important part of the story.

Same folks who deify her now, would crucify her as President.

[Bobbie Jo]

69. I have a bit of a different theory on that

Just like the leftier than thou contingent is all too willing to overlook her time as a full-fledged Republican, I have no doubt that many of them would tap dance around any untoward move she makes.

You see, she gets the benefit of the doubt that many other Democrats are not afforded. Ever.

You may be right, but past behavior tells me otherwise.

[JoePhilly]

75. What i've noticed is that some of the folks who hate Obama the most ...

... absolutely loved him before he became President. They saw what they wanted to see and heard what they wanted to hear.

Take his stance on using the military.

As a candidate he said he was not against all wars, just stupid wars. He said he wanted to be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. He said he was going to send more troops to Afghanistan. He said he'd go into Pakistan to get OBL with or without the permission of the Pakistani government.

They heard "There will be no more war, and no more use of our military if you elect me."

So now, they are angry at HIM because they feel tricked. And since he and Hillary held basically the same position on most issues, she's hated too.

Warren gets a pass now, but I don't think it would last long. Here again, they hear what they want to hear, and discard the rest. The hear her talk about the banks, and they think she's going to end capitalism. Which she'd never do.

And their search for a new, new liberal Messiah, would begin again.

[Spazito]

63. Well said!

[Bobbie Jo]

70. +1000

[OKNancy]

77. minor quibble.. Hillary was never a Republican

She was 17 and living in her parents house when she was a Goldwater girl.. By the time she was able to register and vote, she was a liberal Democrat.
Voting age then was 21. She was never a Republican.

[Number23]

81. Usually if someone does mention Warren's tenure as a full blown Republican well into middle age

it's usually countered with the face palm inducing "Well Hillary was a Goldwater Girl when she was 17!"

And you're right, Warren will need to SIGNIFICANTLY expand her arguments if she wants to expand her base.

I'm warmer than lukewarm to Hillary. I like her a lot but am not sure that I want her for president. But I swear I'm about *thisclose* to becoming a full blown cheerleader based on the two-faced, hypocritical BS that poses as "criticism" of her around here.

[BumRushDaShow]

82. What's worse

is that the same people insist that "Obama is a Republican" or "Republican-lite" or "is Bush" - this about a man who has never been a Republican. Yet the one they push WAS a Republican well into her mid to late 40s. Her waterloo moment being the further banking deregulation in the '90s, that had begun during the '80s with the party that she was a member of under Reagan. The same party that dropped the highest tax rate for the "1%" from 70% down to 28% and raised the lowest tax bracket for the "99%" to 15% from 11%.

She has also professed the dirty word/concept of "bipartisanship" -

Warren adds that she voted for both Republicans and Democrats and thought that neither party deserved to dominate. “There should be some Republicans and some Democrats,” she says. Brown’s campaign could make the same point. In a state dominated by Democrats, it might help to have a Republican providing some healthy opposition.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/24/elizabeth-warren-i-created-occupy-wall-street.html

I have no problem with her and know that she is able to articulate certain issues to a certain demographic that is very much a critical part of the Democratic base. But to argue that she is somehow light years different from any other potential Democratic candidate, including Hillary, is disingenuous. Perhaps her knowing her own history is why she has insisted that she does not want to run... Although she could easily do so by playing up her multi-party background to capture the important independent or unaffiliated voters, which would be anathema to many DUers.

[Number23]

84. Yes, yes. Absolutely

I just got a post hidden in another thread for noting that one of the "darlings" in GD runs around saying that he can't forgive Clinton for her Iraq War vote but is quiet as a fart in church about the policies that Warren supported, including those espoused by Ronald Reagan who she voted for.

The divisiveness is astonishing. I am actually starting to dislike Warren not because of her or her policies, but solely because of the truly revolting qualities many of her "supporters" on this web site possess. And that is not fair to her. She is new on the scene and is just starting to get her feet wet. She seems to have a lot of admirable qualities, in spite of the calibre of many of her supporters here.

that the same people insist that "Obama is a Republican" or "Republican-lite" or "is Bush" - this about a man who has never been a Republican. Yet the one they push WAS a Republican well into her mid to late 40s.

This is why I don't believe that any of these people are acting in good faith. They are certainly not worth engaging. And has been noted over and over again, they will adore her and sing her praises -- until the MILISECOND that she has to compromise or negotiate. Which in the real world is called GOVERNING.

Perhaps her knowing her own history is why she has insisted that she does not want to run...

I would not be surprised if there was some truth to that.

[truebluegreen]

23. True. So?

Last edited Sat Mar 7, 2015, 10:05 AM - Edit history (1)

[sendero]

24. Well you are right about.....

.... Obama, but Kennedy not so much.

[Autumn]

25. Of course she's a democrat.

She's a centrist democrat. Last thing we need is a continuation of the economic policies, endless war and the all out assault on labor the poor and the working class that we have endured for the last 15 years with the fucking RW nut cases. I don't say it's the democrats fault but the centrist bipartisan shit has watered down any needed legislation to the point to where it has been a band aid on a torn jugular.

[MannyGoldstein]

27. #2 is a total deal-breaker

And don't forget the TPP, turning Libya into a failed state, and the rest.

[Bluenorthwest]

33. So you did not vote for Kerry/Edwards obviously. Did you look the other way with Biden and

vote for Obama/Biden on the basis that Obama did not vote for the war?

[MannyGoldstein]

35. Primary or general? And

I'm still expecting an apology for your disgusting and wrong accusations: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6193133

[greenman3610]

28. "Because there's not a dime's worth of difference between Al Gore and George Bush"

Remember how that worked out?
How many times do we have to learn this?

[HereSince1628]

29. But, there are -NO- TRUE Democrats, just as there are no true Scotsmen.

I think it's time to come to that realization.

[99Forever]

32. So, excuses for ACTING like a Republican...

... are now qualifications I should accept in a Democratic candidate?

Really?

Maybe for you.

For me?

FUCK THAT.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. One correction or adjustment to your most eloquent post:

58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the Iraq War Resolution.

[MannyGoldstein]

41. 57% of Congressional Democrats voted against going to war against Iraq

Dem Votes For-Against:
House: 82-126 (39%-61%),
Senate: 29-21 (58%-42%),
Total: 111-147 (43%-57%).

So did 57% of Congressional Democrats have better information than Hillary? Or does she have a proclivity towards sending other people's kids into war?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. John Kerry and Joe Biden voted for the IWR ...

John Kerry and Joe Biden voted for the IWR and Barack Obama made them one and four heartbeats away from the presidency.. By your very own construction those gentlemen " have a proclivity towards sending other people's kids into war" and President Obama doesn't care.

[MannyGoldstein]

48. Yep. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

61. Manny, I admire your persistence ...

But have you ever just once thought that the Democratic party is a main stream, appeal to as many as possible, party, and not the left party that adheres to strict party discipline you and others that think like you want it to be.

[ananda]

40. I honestly think Obama has governed more to the right ...

... than Hillary Clinton would have.

[vi5]

42. Good point. The party really has fallen off in its values.

The past 15-20 years have seen it systematically compromised thanks to all those issues.

You've convinced me. Time to give up on it altogether and just vote for individuals who share my beliefs rather than assuming just because they have a D after their name that they are on my side.

Thanks!

[Motown_Johnny]

45. The fact that you can't be truthful is proof that you are wrong

Not that she isn't suitable to be our nominee. Just that she isn't the best nominee (by far).

The most glaring example here of your being misleading is that she simply voted for the Iraq War Resolution and then creating the false equivalency of her being the same as every other (D) who voted for it.

She didn't just vote for it. She was out there leading the way and urging those other (D)s to follow her and vote to invade Iraq.


Proof:

One hot minute (mostly lies)

Be honest about her. She is nowhere near being mainstream.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. How can a man or woman who votes with his or her party almost one hundred percent of the time...

How can a man or woman who votes with his or her party almost one hundred percent of the time be out of the mainstream of his or her party?

[Motown_Johnny]

50. by leading on fringe issues n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. What fringe issues?/NT

[cali]

46. but, but, but other people did it too, has always been a for shit argument

having said that, I think it's ridiculous for people to say Clinton isn't a democrat. She is, but that doesn't make her "good".

[wyldwolf]

51. How many times am I going to post this?

As many times as I want to.

Accepting that there is an imperfect fit between the Democratic Party and the furthest aims of left and progressive people, several things must be acknowledged.

First, it has to be acknowledged that left and progressive people really do not have solid ground to proclaim they and only they are true Democrats, or are the real base of the Democratic Party, and that people who are left of center or center-left or even centrists are not really Democrats.

Second, left and progressive people need to consider whether the tactic of attacking people who are perhaps a bit to the right of them, though generally well to the left of a national average, or of the average in the locale where they reside, as rightists who do not belong in the Democratic Party, is likely to expand and increase their influence in the Democratic Party, and advance the prospects of actually getting laws and regulations they would like to see adopted come to pass.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

52. Ok, I'll take your word that none of the three was a real Democrat if it makes you happy. nt

[BubbaFett]

57. Hillary voted for the Iraq War Atrocity

the Iraq War Atrocity is one of many reasons the US cannot claim moral authority ever again.

Prior to that, (at least in official histories), the US was a gallant SAVIOR of nations. Not a destroyer.

We know this is not really true, but the farce worked up until the Iraq War Atrocity.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

58. Which is why I vote for/against policies and principles rather than party or politician.

[rhett o rick]

60. The only real test to be a "Real Democrat" is to stand up and say, "I am a Democrat".

Just ask Lieberman, Miller, or Specter.

You say that HRC is the exact center of the Party. That means there are lots of people in the Party to the Right of her. Who would that be?

The Third Way was created for Conservatives to be able to call themselves Democrats. They decided that the Republicon Party was going too far Right for them. They are willing to give up some concessions on social issues to maintain their strangle hold on economics, the NSA/CIA Security State, and the support of the MIC.

The Third Way/ New Democrats/ DLC are the extreme Right of our Party. If you don't agree, provide an argument.

You glossed over the issue with Goldman-Sachs. The problem isn't with their donations to her campaigns but their "payments" that went directly into her personal fortune. She stopped by for tea and they wrote her checks for her personal fortune for $200,000, twice. Her and her husband's wealth exceeds $100,000,000 which puts them in the wealthiest 0.01% AND they "acquired" that in the last 15 years.

But the main issue I have with HRC is that she betrayed the Democratic Party and the American people when she helped her friend George Bush make the biggest mistake in our history. A mistake that was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and may have killed the American middle class.

We Democrats can do so much better. Support a Populist candidate and not a Corporatist candidate.

[greatlaurel]

64. Great post, well said. Here is some more information about the Keystone Pipeline and HRC.

"Clinton Denial of the Pipeline The Department of State did not issue a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline while Clinton served as secretary of State. Environmentalists suspected Clinton supported the project and was preparing to award it the administration’s stamp of approval. But that didn’t happen before Clinton left the administration and former U.S. Sen. John Kerry was tapped for secretary of State.

In fact, in 2012, Clinton's Department of State recommended President Barack Obama deny the Keystone KL pipeline after Congress set a 60-day deadline for the administration to review the project. However, that decision was rooted in the time constraints and not the merits of the pipeline plan itself."The president concurred with the department’s recommendation, which was predicated on the fact that the Department does not have sufficient time to obtain the information necessary to assess whether the project, in its current state, is in the national interest," the State Department said in January 2012."

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/CampaignsElections/a/Hillary-Clinton-On-The-Keystone-Xl-Pipeline.htm

Very creative in handling the politics of the Keystone. HRC manages to not insult the unions who are pushing the Keystone while finding a reason to deny it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

73. There is no error so monstrous that it fails to find defenders among the ablest men. Lord Acton

[Nye Bevan]

74. Hillary voted to invade Iraq; Kennedy invaded Cuba.

I guess there are parallels.

[McCamy Taylor]

79. Poor Teddy. How quickly they forget.

[AtomicKitten]

76. FFS because I KNEW this would happen.

From the OP:

She "got the ball rolling" on the Keystone Pipeline: This one is hardly even worth addressing. The pipeline was announced during the Bush administration. The Obama state department said that it could damage cultural artifacts and pollute groundwater. Clinton refuses to endorse it. Obama has vetoed it. Where is all this has Clinton gotten "the ball rolling"?

From June 2013: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023022353

Keystone and the Clintons.

So there is no misunderstanding now or down the road ... I hope the president nixes this project but I have no idea what he will do. He's being pressed by the GOP and corporate Democrats on one side and environmentalists and progressives on the other.

Hillary's Keystone Lobbyist Problem: http://www.desmogblog.com/hillary-clinton-keystone-xl-lobbyists




Bill Clinton advising Democrats to "embrace the Keystone pipeline":

[Oilwellian]

80. Open your eyes. The Dem populists are revolting.

Nominating another corporatist Dem will deepen the growing schism within the party. Not a bright move if they truly want to win.