Hillary Clinton For President?


Hillary Clinton deserves to be president simply because she’s smart, extremely ambitious and has been in politics for so long? And because she’s been attacked viciously by simple-minded cheerleaders in the republican party for years? And because it’s time for a woman to be president of the United States?

While I agree wholeheartedly with the last statement, I don’t believe Hillary Clinton is the right choice. I believe this, specifically, because it would prevent the best possibility this country has had in decades for an intelligent, compassionate person (with a clear vision of where the country needs to go) as president. We should have had a woman as president many years ago. Eleanor Roosevelt would be my personal choice for who should have been the first female president of the United States. Back in the 1930s or 1940s, it would have been beautiful if U.S. citizens had been enlightened enough to realize that she had what it would take to lead the country. Eleanor Roosevelt was the heart of the FDR administration. She advised Franklin on many issues – particularly racism, the Equal Rights Amendment, poverty and the well-being of children.

However, we can’t undo history so I’d like to focus on the 2016 election.

While Secretary Clinton would be a far better choice as president than ANY republican (actually, any since Theodore Roosevelt), many of us are looking at this situation through corporate media-tinted glasses. We shouldn’t be discussing present day politics in terms of republicans versus democrats. We should be looking at it as corporate-controlled candidates versus people-oriented candidates. Or candidate, actually, in this presidential election.

There is only one candidate left who has the interests of the majority of the population at heart. That, obviously, is Senator Bernie Sanders.

Do we honestly want to continue allowing corporate executives to control our destiny as a nation? Do we truly want to continue allowing indiscriminate poisoning of our air, water, soil and food supply? Looking good in comparison to a savage barbarian like Ted Cruz or a ruthlessly dysfunctional buffoon like Donald Trump is not enough to be a viable choice as president. This is why we need to reevaluate a system in which we cede our power to corporate-sponsored politicians whether they are clowns or whether they appear to be reasonable.

Many supporters of Hillary Clinton condescendingly disparage Senator Sanders on many issues. Most claims have no basis in fact or are simply something along the lines of cherry picking a compromise vote on a particular bill in the senate. Often, they are merely shallow attempts at misdirection from corporate media hacks who stumble across carelessly fashioned opinions in the well-financed echo chamber known as mainstream media.

They proclaim her to be a far better choice to work on the important issue of race relations today. I find this of particular interest since Hillary Clinton claims to have been a “Goldwater girl” in the 1960s. Now, I’m not insinuating that a person’s political ideas can’t evolve. I only mention it because people claim Bernie Sanders to be inadequate on the issue of race and I have a few facts to help put that ridiculous idea in perspective.

When Hillary Clinton was supporting this pro-war republican who voted against civil rights legislation, Bernie Sanders was fighting for the civil rights of all people. As a member of CORE at the University of Chicago he organized protests at the university administration building over a racist housing policy, was appointed to a commission to make policy changes, protested the city of Chicago to show solidarity with members of CORE in North Carolina who were arrested for dining at a Howard Johnson restaurant, became the chairman of the school’s chapter of CORE & merged it with the school’s SNCC chapter, attended the 1963 March on Washington and, in August 1963, was arrested for protesting segregation at a Chicago South Side school.

Hillary Clinton? Her supporters point out that she switched to supporting Eugene McCarthy in 1968, but fail to mention that she also interned for Gerald Ford – the man who elevated people like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld to important positions in government – and worked for Nelson Rockefeller in his bid for the 1968 republican nomination (and attended the republican national convention). Again, people’s political ideas can change, but the point is to question the integrity of anyone attacking Bernie Sanders for supposedly having done nothing in race relations. And that’s only one issue on which many people are misinformed about Bernie Sanders.

Everyone knows that lack of oversight in the financial industry is what led to the economic disaster of 2007-08 under the George Bush Jr. administration. We also know that, though corporate mouthpieces proclaim the U.S. to be “the greatest country in the world”, we lead the world in preventable deaths. This is mostly due to the fact that we allow wealthy business executives to make a “killing” in the field of health care.

So, why is it that when Bernie Sanders points out the necessity for strong regulation with serious enforcement powers for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a tax on Wall Street speculation, a $15/ hour minimum wage and plans to institute a single-payer health care system, Clinton supporters join the chorus of GOP puppets and say it’s unrealistic? Are we to believe that a bailout in the obscene neighborhood of $7-8 trillion is acceptable for wealthy business tycoons who virtually destroyed the U.S. economy, but attempting to prevent continued manipulation of our economy, allowing people a living wage and considering health care a civil right is tantamount to treason?

Wow, corporate media is certainly very persuasive. They’ve got people living in poverty and people one paycheck away from poverty fighting each other and dying due to lack of health care in order to allow people like David Rockefeller, the Koch brothers and the Walton family to get tax breaks and tax subsidies. That’s amazing. With the Republican Party committing virtual cannibalistic suicide, it’s no wonder the Democratic Party is delving deeper into the murky waters of corporate control. The rulers of the U.S. will certainly not allow a political party “of the people, by the people, for the people” to attain power over what they consider their dominion. They will do whatever it takes to retain control over ANY political entity with power.

Another issue Clinton supporters like to bandy about is foreign affairs. Yes, Hillary Clinton definitely has valuable experience in diplomacy, but that skill in and of itself does not insure success as a head of state. It must come with a moral clarity that cannot be swayed by promises of power or personal gain. This is where I have reservations about Secretary Clinton. I hear her speak of love and kindness, but I see a calculating intelligence that speaks more convincingly of power and influence.

This is someone who calls war criminal Henry Kissinger a friend.

This is someone who would not allow children fleeing violence in Central America to stay in a country built on immigration with a relative abundance of resources. This is someone who promised the terrorist state of Israel that as president she would strengthen ties with them. (These are ties that have already caused the U.S. to contribute to war crimes – including crimes against innocent women and children).

And self-described “liberal democrats” are willing to continue the downward spiral into Corporatocracy that we’ve been so adeptly maneuvered into? This is extremely disheartening, to say the least.

I attended a rally recently for Bernie Sanders at a public park in the Bronx. After informative speeches by Rosario Dawson and musician Residente, Bernie gave an impassioned speech about subjects ranging from health care as a human right to economic injustice to the easing of racial tension in the country. Despite the hype from corporate media, I saw as diverse a crowd as you will see at a political rally. And I saw and heard enthusiasm from a crowd that numbered somewhere between 15,000 and 18,000 people. Barricades were set up and a large contingent of NYPD officers were present as if they expected violence. They must have been thinking about Donald Trump rallies.

One final point I’d like to discuss is probably the biggest perceived weapon in the arsenal of people trying desperately to get Hillary Clinton into the White House. That is the issue of electability. During the entire election cycle, mainstream media have been telling us that Bernie Sanders is a nice guy with nice-sounding ideas that just won’t work. They’ve been telling us that even if Senator Sanders were to win the nomination for the Democratic Party he wouldn’t win the election and then we’d be stuck with a dangerously arrogant prankster like Donald Trump or a sociopathic ideologue like Ted Cruz. Well not only do polls show that Bernie Sanders would defeat Donald Trump in an election more handily than Hillary Clinton, the enthusiasm of diverse crowds across the country are proving that his message is resonating with the people. And let’s not forget: it IS supposed to be “we the people”, not we the corporations.

3 comments on “Hillary Clinton For President?

  1. Wow, posting this essay has been quite an experience. I encountered dozens of “errors” and had to slow my typing to less than one letter per second. Stressful. An hour of writing took an entire day.

    No problem with other sites. Anyone else having problems with WordPress today?

  2. Not me, WP seems to be working as it normally does today. This is an exceptional editorial. It is very lucid, flows nicely, and is well written. I also happen to agree with all its points, opinions, and wholeheartedly agree that Eleanor Roosevelt should’ve been the first female president of the United States.

  3. Hey, thanks for the comment. I’m glad you enjoyed the piece. I’m glad it had a nice flow, too. I was a bit concerned because of the technical problems. It got progressively worse as I wrote – very frustrating.

    Yeah, Eleanor Roosevelt was quite a person. I believe she would have been an excellent president. At least she was a big influence on FDR and was able to soften some of his rougher edges, particularly about economic issues. He had Wall Street friends, but was considered something of a class traitor by many of them. Imagine his economic views today? He’d have been impeached quite easily.

    Thanks again for the comment.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: