Hillary Clinton's Contempt for The Left Continues

The slow and steady stream of prominent Democrats endorsing Joe Lieberman continues.  This time, it's Hillary Clinton.  Now, to be clear, endorsing Lieberman is pretty bad, but it's not the end of the world.  The Senate is a club, and Senate Democrats are conforming to the norms of that club.  I've attacked both Harry Reid and Barack Obama for this patently elitist behavior, and we need to realize that these people are not always on our side.  But it makes some sense, in that Lieberman now owes them.  Lieberman is neutered in some fashion.  But there's a right way to endorse and a wrong way to endorse, and Hillary Clinton recent letter to Connecticut Democrats is particularly egregious.  Here's the passage that struck me.

Last year, right after the 2004 election, President Bush announced that privatizing Social Security was his highest priority.  Joe Lieberman fought tooth and nail to protect the guarantee of Social Security that this country has honored for seven decades to its senior citizens.

This is not true.  Let's go back to January, 2005:

[President Bush] described the perils of the current system, how it would be "exhausted and bankrupt" by 2042. From the Democratic side of the chamber came cries of "no" - unusually raucous behavior for this most traditional of forums. And when Bush urged Congress to consider changes, only two Democratic senators - Connecticut's Joe Lieberman and Nebraska's Ben Nelson - stood up and applauded.

And in February?

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., is undecided about the concept of using payroll taxes to fund private Social Security accounts, bringing to three the known number of Senate Democrats who have yet to publicly rule out the idea.

Joe Lieberman wouldn't even sign a letter with other Democrats resisting a phrase-out of Social Security until March, 2005.  Tooth and nail?  Whatever.  Lieberman wouldn't join the battle until it was basically over.  And now he's claiming credit for stopping privatization, and Hillary Clinton is backing and promoting this claim.

You can argue for right-wing policies.  You can argue for accomodationist policies.  But that's not what's happening here.  This is simply lying.  As I've said before and as I'll say in the future, Hillary Clinton thinks nothing of lying to Democrats.

She has contempt for all of us.

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman (all tags)

Comments

35 Comments

Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

Wow, now this Hillary obsession seems to be bordering on extreme.  She has the FIFTH most progressive voting record in the Senate (according to the National Journal), she stood up to BOTH Alito AND Roberts, filibusting both of them whilst others like Feingold were voting for them or talking about how foolish filibusters are (Obama).

Did you really think that any incumbent Democratic member of the Senate would NOT endorse any other incumbent Democratic member of the Senate club?  The idea she wouldn't is simply absurd.

I recall several articles and propaganda throughout the 90s highlighting the "contempt" Hillary had for the rightwing and even the FBI at the time (because they are mainly made up of conservative white males).  

Hillary Rodham Clinton may not be perfect, and I understand she's going to be held (even if subconsciously) to a higher standard than if she were male, but she has never earned or deserved such attacks.  Many say there's "DLC and Washington establishment pro-Hillary propaganda.  Well, I'll say there's an equal amount of anti-Hillary propaganda on the blogs.  It's not healthy, especially since she's as inevitable as Bush was on that side in 2008.  Deal with it.

by jgarcia 2006-05-14 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

Its not her voting record that some of us on the left finf grating,its her pension for providing fodder for the right with her rhetoric..

by tommy 2006-05-14 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

I am surprised that most people don't "get it."  Hasn't ever occured to you that she's playing a game?  That, in reality, she's bullshitting the Right and moderates to sound palatable to middle America and then wil govern towards the left once elected?

I am sorry, but I have read extensively on her life and college experience and have concluded that she's a lefy at heart.  Campaigning and governing are two different things.

Afterall, how liberal do you think the JFK and LBJ campaigns were?  They won.  How liberal were the McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis campaigns?  They lost.

I think she has earned the benefit of the doubt because of all the shit she had to endure from the rightwing.  Considering that, and her laudable attempt at healthcare, it takes brass balls to motherfuck her now.  NONE of the bloggers who attack her ethics and committment to "he cause" could have taken one-tenth the abuse that she has endured over the years.  

I, for one, appreciate what she has done and gone through.  The rest of people ostensibly on OUR side ought to be ashamed of indicting her so personally.  Well, I guess maybe I am optimistic about things.  Pessimism has never won an election.  

btw, I hate Joementum and have given (more than once) to Lamont.  But I never expected Democratic Senators to not support Lieberman.  The idea of that is pie-in-the-sky laughable.

by jgarcia 2006-05-14 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

yes it has occured to us and the right and just about everyone else that she is not authentic. That's the point.

by bruh21 2006-05-14 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

You can put lipstick on a pig... :-)

It is absurd to accuse liberals of hating Hillary because she is a woman and not wanting a woman for president.  I think any liberal, everything being equal, would be delighted to vote for a woman for president.

The main problem for Hillary is that she is and always has been a rightwinger like her husband no matter how liberal her voting record is said to be.

Another woman gave the best definition of a liberal I have seen:

"When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before." - Mae West

In the most unlikely event the Democrats choose again to nominate another corrupt rightwing hawk like Hillary Clinton for president, they will lose this liberal's vote as usual.

by terryhallinan 2006-05-14 12:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

Why are you so willing to take the lies?

by Matt Stoller 2006-05-14 12:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

Because I trust her.  I understand your hesitation and being burned before.  I am gay and latin, and, trust me, I feel abandoned all the time by people who are supposedly on our side.  

But I remember how the Right relentlessly savaged her.  And I just don't think they would have done it on that level for a moderate or "conservative" person.  I think their political antennae (sp?) is better than ours.

I could be wrong and I may very well be.  But people here could be too.

by jgarcia 2006-05-14 01:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

They did it because she was a fucking democrat,and they couldnt beat her on the issues,so instead, they  made it about her character,in much the same way you made it about her gender in your previous post.

by tommy 2006-05-14 01:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

American politics shouldn't be about trust. It should be about proof.

by bruh21 2006-05-14 01:09PM | 0 recs
Say WHAT????

 You are willing to tolerate her lies because you trust her?

 Words fail me.

 This is the kind of attitude one would expect from a Bush sycophant. Not a reality-based Democrat.

 You just blew your cover, buddy.

by Master Jack 2006-05-14 01:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Say WHAT????

I was about to write that.  You trust someone because she lies to you?

????

by Matt Stoller 2006-05-14 01:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Say WHAT????

Dude, what has she lied about?  

So one cannot trust any poltician ever?  Do you trust Dean?  Lamont?

I've been posting here for, I don't know, two years, and I am very progressive on everything (except guns).  Now, cuz I have the gall to defend HRC, suddenly people say I believe a liar and I get troll-rated?

Wow.  No wonder some people view the blogs with skepticism.  I can see why.  I come here because I like the posts and discussions and am a liberal.  I despise the DLC.  But I also like Hillary and realize that to win nationwide, a candidate cannot run as a lefty.  Hillary is a progressive and she's been progressive her whole life, except for following her old man as a Goldwater Girl.

by jgarcia 2006-05-14 03:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

 im guessing  there is a similar dynamic here with Hillary, that was working for the first five years of Bushes Presidency,where, any criticism of the president was written off as irrational left-wing hatred of the president.I find it troubling that many liberals drink from that same cup.You know, the    one that shielded Bush from criticism for five years, that among other things, led to the disaster in Iraq,and the destruction of New Orleans.  

by tommy 2006-05-14 01:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

Nice Republican tactic- deflect an argument by making it about her gender. Who says we cant learn from them when its good for her candidates.

by bruh21 2006-05-14 12:54PM | 0 recs
Please don't make this about gender

I have no feelings about DiFi.  I LOVE Barbara Boxer.  It's about sheilding the Repubicans from their bullshit.  

by Valatan 2006-05-14 01:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

Hillary is a lying Sack Of S&#T on the Social Security question.

Whats even funnier about the entire thing is that Tom Swan,Lamonts campaign manager, as the director of CCAG co-sponsored the event in W. Hartford on "Social security's Birthday" where we(we refers to Bloggers) made Joe come out against W's plan and in favor of Protecting Social security just like it is.I even had a piece of cake at the event.

Chuck Shumer said weeks later at a fundraiser in New York that one Dem Senator was still negotiating with Republicans on Social Security and used the name Judas (Everyone in the room new exactly who he was referring to) to  describe him.

by ctkeith 2006-05-14 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

Are you asserting that Hillary wants to privatize Social Security?  Or that Lieberman did?

I am sure that statement supporting Lieberman made by HRC was created by Joe's campaign and it was reviewed by a Hillary staffer and then approved.

Truly not that big a deal.

by jgarcia 2006-05-14 01:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for

u are not the only one here who likes hrc my friend! thanks for the posts. keep it up.

by art3 2006-05-14 04:13PM | 0 recs
Machiavellian Pandering, Lying, Betraying

What do you expect from one of the shrewdest leaders of the Corporate Whore Wing of the Democratic Party?

by trixter 2006-05-14 12:34PM | 0 recs
Hillary's contempt for the left

Hillary's contempt for the left is shared by the entire Democratic Establishment.  When was the last time any one of them said anything good about the left or the activists outside the Beltway?  They tell us to shut up, to forget what we want, to stop embarassing them with our noisy demands that they oppose Bush and the radical right Republicans.

by James Earl 2006-05-14 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for The Left Contin

The key is for the netroots to hate Hillary more than she and her DLC friends hates us -- then stuff it down her fucking throat.

by Bob Brigham 2006-05-14 01:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for The Left Contin

Okay, I guess anything I say on this subject is "unproductive."  I guess I will shut my mouth now.

by jgarcia 2006-05-14 01:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for The Left Contin

Great idea, if you have something to add I recommend you email Al From.

Meanwhile, I hope the netroots run a burn and salt the fields campaign against Hillary.

Any DLC candidate deserves what is coming.

by Bob Brigham 2006-05-14 02:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for The Left Contin

jgarcia, I applaud you for your zeal and loyalty for your candidate. I'm not sure that Hillary would be my first choice, but the Hillary-bashing on this blog has really gone to a crazy extreme. Chin up! I know it's really hard to deal with the Lynch Hillary Brigade--I've had much the same experience with the same kind of group in my own state attacking my Democratic Governor. It's demoralizing, very sad.

by Baltimore 2006-05-15 01:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for The Left Contin

Thank you.  Posts like yours are uplifting after being attacked relentlessly.  But I can handle it, haha.

Criticism is fine and indeed healthy but this level of vitriol is wasted on other Democrats when it should be directed at Bush and the other GOPers.

by jgarcia 2006-05-15 03:49PM | 0 recs
How do you know that she lies?

Senators have been wrong before.

by Populism2008 2006-05-14 01:08PM | 0 recs
Re: How do you know that she lies?

Hell, Hillary Clinton is wrong almost every damn time she opens her mouth!

by teknofyl 2006-05-14 02:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's

Should check out an interesting op ed by Andrew Sullivan:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,, 2092-2179062,00.html

by bruh21 2006-05-14 01:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt for The Left Contin

Hillary is the GOP's best hope for beating us in 2008. The right will promote her endlessly because they are so arrogant they think they can even pick the person they want to run against them. Plus, having a person like Hillary run makes it easier for Diebold et al. to rig the election. In any event it doesn't really matter anymore who the DC DEMOS nominate the Big Corps. have TOTAL control now and the all seeing eye sees all. With the enormous power they now have through the NSA project and even more secret spying projects they can destroy almost anyone. The repukes are playing the political game with 21st technology and rules while the hapless DC Demos keep thinking it's 1935 and all they need do is rally the faithful to the polls. SUCKERS

by Blutodog 2006-05-14 01:12PM | 0 recs
Alternately

I would say, at least she isn't endorsing Joe because he "takes the stand on moral issues that allows the Dem message to reach ALL voters" or some shit like that.  

This endorsement, as incorrect as it may be, and as fals her reasoning is, at least is phrased in the form "Joe backed dem value X, and therefore, I'm backing Joe."  Although she is lying, and not holding Lieberman accountable, she is at least advancing democratic values by phrasing her argument this way.

And that's as positivie as I'm going to get about HRC.

by Valatan 2006-05-14 01:18PM | 0 recs
And you're surprised?

Look Joe Momentum is part of the Dem system and the system will act to protect its own - it doesn't matter what kind of scum bag he is.

I'm curious what will be said when the DSCC attacks the Lamont campaign.  You know it gonna happen.  The only question is when?

by mwfolsom 2006-05-14 01:25PM | 0 recs
Re: And you're surprised?

No, I'm not surprised.  NO ONE IS SURPRISED.  Stop acting like you're smarter than everyone and than you are hard-boiled and we don't understand how the game is played.  I met with the DSCC THREE MONTHS ago to suss out this possibility.  

I would encourage you to focus on how to take her down, not that people in DC don't respect us.  I know they don't respect us.  These people need to be beaten.  We know that.  Figure out how.  Focus your energies there.

by Matt Stoller 2006-05-14 01:38PM | 0 recs
Hillary will not be nominated

2008 primaries are a long ways away. The world will change several times over in that time.

I am betting that the pendulum will swing left-wards again and the "center" much more left than it is now.

The secret surveillance of all American's communications, the deceit to war and quagmire in Iraq, the endless corruption, and wealth transfer from the middle class as part of the crony capitalism that exists in DC. This is what the "compassionate conservatives" abetted by the "moderate Dems" have accomplished.

The only politicians that will look up right are those that voted against the Iraq debacle and the Patriot Act and fought to investigate the warantless surveillance state and the erosion of the Bill of Rights and are focused on using the power of government to assist the middle class.

by ab initio 2006-05-14 02:32PM | 0 recs
Are you sure you want to die on this Hill?

Let's see: You can't tell whether a senator is left or right by their voting record? What kind of ideology is that?

And the focus on 2008 is ridiculous. I doubt I will support Clinton for president in 2008, but I want here to win big in 2006. Why?

Because there's a chance that she'll bring in 4 House New York Democratic House members with her. And if that happens, then the Dems take the House.

Save your anti- Clinton energy until there's a fight that's worth winning. That's in 2008, not 6 months before 2006.

by PDXPete 2006-05-14 01:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton's Contempt

Hey even I find HRC's support of Joe a bit much to stomach. But then again I doubt she's ever even heard of Lamont, never mind knows what he stands for.

With a bit of luck nobody reading the letter (other than Matt whose contempt for HRC is far greater than her contempt for the left) will take the slightest bit of notice.

by kundalini 2006-05-14 02:28PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads