Hilary Clinton, Tea Partier

This is what Hilary Clinton said recently. Discussing global warming, she said that global warming will be a great thing because the arctic ice will melt enough so that ships will be able to cruise through the Arctic very easily without having to worry about ice. I guess the Nome to Oslo route will be nice and quick.

Hilary Clinton was a good liberal President’s wife under Bill Clinton in the 1990’s. If you read her work, she’s always been a good liberal. But something happens to US liberals once they get into office. They morph into rightwingers.

It’s interesting to ponder why this might be so.

The truth is that the US government is owned completely by the US rich, the corporations, the bankers and Wall Street. With Citizens United, this is more true than ever. Even Democrats have to take the cash from the corporations and the rich if they want to get into office. Note the recent $45,000 a plate dinner for “liberal” Barack Obama. These are the people who put Obama into office. These are the people who own him. He’s beholden to them, not to us. When he gets into office, they give him his marching orders.

Once a President of either party gets into office, they realize that they are controlled by the rich and the corporations who really run the country. Republicans realize this anyway, and they only work for the moneyed classes and corporations anyway, so they don’t care. But no matter how liberal a Democrat is, this is the reality that hits them in the face the day they walk into office. Reading Barack Obama’s published work before 2008, he seems to be the typical liberal university professor type. But once he got into office, that all changed, and he’s spent most of his time trying to out-Reagan Ronald Reagan.

The truth is that the same thing probably happened to both Hilary and Obama. Once you get in office, you realize who really calls the shots in the US – the rich and the corporations. They run the country, the run both parties, the entire US media – TV, newsmagazine, newspapers, the Pentagon, the US military – in short, they run this entire country as their personal feudal fiefdom. You can’t go against them. On domestic policy, you must obey your rich and corporate feudal masters. On foreign policy, the agenda is US imperialism. You must obey the dictates of your lords and masters or you will be destroyed and run out of office.

This is probably as good an explanation as any of why there is no US Left, why there is no opposition press in the US, why we have two rightwing parties – the radical rightwing Republicans and the moderate rightwing Democrats, and why the future of America is the same as the future of all countries controlled by the Right – hopeless and progressive Third Worldization.

Please follow and like us:

0 thoughts on “Hilary Clinton, Tea Partier”

  1. “the future of all countries controlled by the Right – hopeless and progressive Third Worldization”

    The communist regimes in Eastern Europe, Cuba, North Korea, and Maoist China were far better at 3rd worldization. Regimes like that of Augusto Pinochet in China or Deng Xiaoping’s rampant capitalism in China are good at pulling 3rd world countries out of it.

    1. This is absolutely not true. Whatever the problems of the Communist regimes, and there were many, creation of 3rd World shitholes and hellholes was not one of them.

      Pinochet is a piece of shit who destroyed Chile. He ruined that whole country. Chile is one of the worst countries on Earth.

      China is still a socialist state. 80% of the economy is still collectively owned. There are many problems though. For instance, millions of people are dying from lack of health care since Deng’s reforms. Anywhere from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of schools have been closed down since Deng’s reforms. Personally, I think that’s shit, but that’s just me.

      Furthermore, the Chinese government since 1978 has not been a rightwing state by any means. It’s still a very leftwing government with a very strong socialist element running an extremely mixed economy.

      1. I have to disagree with you about China Robert. The stuff you say about China was true during Mao’s regime which aimed at eradicating China’s ancient heritage and replacing it with communist ideology. I’d read that even Confucius’s tomb was desecrated. I don’t know how the Chinese just sat back and watched the rape of their proud heritage, but I digress. Deng’s dictum “to get rich is glorious” is far from socialist. Since the 1980s China has made rapid economic strides towards capitalism. A good chunk of the economy is still publicly administrated, but that’s changing rapidly. The Chinese strongly encourage private enterprise like you wouldn’t believe. My roommate used to visit China on business trips for his Importer buddy in Pakistan and was shocked to learn that the government pretty much pays the utility bills of new startup factories. This sudden reappearance of Confucianism is a reaction to the capitalist materialism that has invaded Chinese culture.

        1. @ Dota

          I agree with everything you’ve said.

          Calling China “Communist China” nowadays is about as misleading as the so-called “Holy Roman Empire.”

        2. @Dota

          I’d read that even Confucius’s tomb was desecrated. I don’t know how the Chinese just sat back and watched the rape of their proud heritage, but I digress.

          They didn’t hence the mass persecution under the cultural revolution under Mao and his psychopathic wife who directed violence against Deng and his reformers which was a major set back for China.

          Most of what we know about China is BS.



      2. Agreed that Pinochet is a piece of shit, but, like Franco’s Spain, the regime that he handed over to in Chile has developed into a genuine democracy. Although there is poverty, Chile is, by South American standards, quite prosperous and well-governed. By what criteria is it ‘one of the worst countries on earth’? I’ve been to plenty worse.

  2. H. Clinton didn’t say it’s “great”. Here’s the quote:
    “The melting of sea ice, for example, will result in more shipping, fishing and tourism, and the possibility to develop newly accessible oil and gas reserves,” Clinton said. “We seek to pursue these opportunities in a smart, sustainable way that preserves the Arctic environment and ecosystem.”

    Its just a statement of “cold” facts- all the countries are out to make big territorial and rescource grabs because of the changing conditions. There is a big fight over the Arctic coming up- and the U.S. is just saying that it has a stake in it too.

  3. Gay Area Guy
    Maybe tea partiers are in denial about global warming because environmental activism is closely aligned with (new) left wing activism. Environmentalism and Conservationism are important, but I wish Naomi Klein would stop injecting her world view into it. Like the commonly used cliche has it, we all share the same planet and environmental activism should be open to anyone whether West Coast hippies or Midwestern log cabin republicans.

    1. A lot of environmentalists are rightwingers. You might be surprised.

      The truth about our movements is that they are open to anyone. We would be overjoyed to have rightwingers join us in the environmental movement. They flat out refuse. That’s their problem, not ours. We are not driving them away. Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican.

      1. I’ve met a few republican environmentalists. I recall one who was fuming that Ted Kennedy refused the Cape Cod wind project because it would obstruct the view of the Kennedy compound. 🙂

        I was referring to republicans on the smaller, more non political level. They get turned off because environmental activism is closely associated with the new left. Some of the world’s foremost environmentalis are also advocates for other new left causes and Greenpeace is closely aligned with PETA, which is considered to be a terrorist organization. We have de-politicize environmental activism if we want more people to get on board.

        1. Rightwingers oppose environmentalism because conservatism at its core is always opposed to environmentalism. For the past 30 years, all US conservatives have opposed US environmentalism.

          Major US environmental groups generally try to stay clear of partisan politics. I think it’s preposterous, but that’s how they are.

          I have met many environmentalists who habitually vote Republican. Apparently they don’t understand how hostile the US Republican Party is to the very notion of environmental protection. This is because Republicans in the US have a fake “moderate” label on them. They are not moderates. They are not reasonable. They are not ok. Post 1980 Republicans are frankly rightwing fanatics, and it’s time to call them out.

        2. Environmental groups may stay out of politics, but many individual prominent environmentalists such as Naomi Klein are also left wing activists or just hippies. So whether the leadership is political or not, environmentalism is still associated with the new left.
          When I say log cabin republicans or tea party nuts, I am referring to the supporters not the actual party itself. I couldn’t get behind either idealogy right now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)