Response to Robin Morgan Supporting Hillary Clinton

Heart posted an article Robin Morgan wrote in support of Hillary Clinton, Goodbye To All That (#2). Heart was thrilled to watch

the giants of our movement rising up to speak out against the horrifying misogyny and sexism in this presidential campaign.

While I agree Hillary Clinton is being subjected to grossly sexist attacks having nothing to do with her stands on issues, I have grave misgivings about many of her stands on issues, enough to make it impossible for me to support her. There was a reason Elizabeth Edwards could claim her husband was better on women’s issues than Ms. Clinton without sounding ridiculous. Remember the Clinton welfare reform. Ms. Clinton says she is proud of the record of the Clinton presidency. This does not lead me to believe she will be a better President than Bill Clinton, though I would not argue she would be worse than the current President. A stone would be an improvement; at least a stone could do no harm of its own accord. This was my response, comment 41 there.

Sigh. This is why I predicted Hillary Clinton would be a disaster for feminism. She is simply not representing anything new, besides the fact she is not male and on occasion speaks about women’s issues. Male Democrats have done that too, though she is more convincing. She is DLC through and through. She supports nuclear power, genetic engineering, and ethanol. If nothing is done to stop those first two, we can kiss the integrity of DNA and biodiversity goodbye. Ethanol from corn, which is what will be the source for this country for a good while, does absolutely nothing to solve global warming. Some environmentalists say it is worse than gasoline, but it will reduce our dependency on foreign oil!

Hillary Clinton is a typical politician, again, except that she is not male. Her equivocation on the Iraq war is disgusting to me. In the last debate, in Hollywood, she blatantly lied about the days of bombing of Iraq Bill Clinton carried out in the height of the impeachment fiasco. She said

We bombed them for days in 1998 because Saddam Hussein threw out inspectors.

Sorry, Ms. Clinton. It did not happen that way, and she of all people should know that. See What a Difference Four Years Makes–Why U.N. inspectors left Iraq–then and now from FAIR

Another bad sign was her taking Barack Obama to task for saying he did not think nuclear weapons would be necessary in his planned attack on Pakistan. This is the voice of experience? Yeah, the voice of empire making sure nobody assumes USA is not crazy enough to drop some more nukes!

I do not think Barack Obama is any better. My beef is not with either of these candidates, rather mainstream politics in general. I see the Democratic Party trying to capitalize on the worst Presidency in history, and they do not deserve to benefit from that. They have done virtually nothing to stop Bush, and since the 2006 election, they have no excuse. Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House. Liberal feminists are liberals first. There is not a radical bone in the body of Ms. Pelosi or Ms. Clinton. I want more than a cosmetic change, but that is all I see offered from any of these mainstream candidates. Must I settle for crumbs, yet again? I would rather throw away my vote.

Robin Morgan wrote a great piece. Too bad it had to be in support of Hillary Clinton. She is the visible one getting all this crap thrown at her, but is it really any worse than what any of us get? Thanks to Hillary Clinton, it is now in the spotlight for all to see. Why did it have to be a woman so hard for anyone with radical principles to support? Because the big corporations love her. They think they can work with her, just like they did with her husband. They are giving Obama plenty of money as well, because they think they can work with him as well. Either way, women and this Earth are screwed.

4 Responses to “Response to Robin Morgan Supporting Hillary Clinton”

  1. Shenonoymous Says:

    While you may be quite correct on the assessment of Hillary Clinton, it seems unfair to accuse her of being loved by corporations without naming those corporations specifically. It is a fallacy of omission.

  2. Aletha Says:

    Sorry, I thought that was too obvious. It is no fallacy to omit the obvious, wasted space. Open Secrets is one source. CNN Money has one about the drug companies. Bill Clinton was a big pal to Weyerhauser and Monsanto in particular. DLC is lousy with corporate money. This is not news.

  3. Isaac Martin Says:

    Ms. Morgan’s piece unfortunately ignores the truths of Hillary Clinton’s life.

    Mrs. Clinton spent many years on the board of Walmart, leaving that position only when she was forced to when Bill became president. During her time on the board, Mrs. Clinton did NOTHING to contravene Walmart’s union-busting and violations of workers rights. She never spoke up about Walmart profiting from goods made in China by child labor and slave labor. I guess her hefty Walmart salary silenced her conscience.

    Senator Clinton also voted for the war on Iraq. She did not have the street smarts, like I and all of my friends, to KNOW that Bush was lying about the alleged weapons of mass destruction. Instead of applying simple logic (that if there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, some of the 120 UN Weapons Inspectors on the ground would have found evidence of WMDs), Hillary voted her emotional illogical fear. She stuck her finger in the air to see where the political winds were blowing and voted that instead of her conscience, logic and common sense.

    We do not need another warmonger in the Oval Office.

    In the biggest and most important vote in her life and the biggest foreing policy issue of her time, Hillary was wrong, dead wrong. No to Hillary.

  4. Aletha Says:

    Mr. Martin, was that an Obama commercial? I will not dispute your facts, but you overstate your case, in my opinion. Perhaps it is just your hyperbolic style rankling me. Perhaps that phrase, emotional illogical fear. I think Obama is just as much a warmonger, if not more so. Lukewarm opposition to the war on Iraq, similar actual votes, both of these warmonger lite candidates. Republicans have no corner on belligerent patriotism passing for foreign policy.

Leave a Reply