Hillary Clinton

statusquobuster

A Disturbance in the Force
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Disappoints



Joel S. Hirschhorn



RFK, Jr. has disappointed millions of liberals, progressives and environmentalists by endorsing Hillary Clinton.



RFK, Jr. once said: “the Republicans are 95 percent corrupt and the Democrats are 75 percent corrupt.” This has been widely quoted because of its honest assessment of the corrupt two-party system.



He has also pointed out: "While communism is the control of business by government, fascism is the control of government by business. …The biggest threat to American democracy is corporate power. …our most visionary political leaders have warned the American public against the domination of government by corporate power. That warning is missing in the national debate right now. Because so much corporate money is going into politics, the Democratic Party itself has dropped the ball. They just quash discussion about the corrosive impact of excessive corporate power on American democracy."



Those these statements were made some time ago, a few days ago on November 28 he talked about the impact of industry on environmental agencies: “It’s been a revolving door of plunder.” Kennedy saved special scorn for “the negative and indolent press of this country,” which he said has become controlled by corporate interests in the last 20 years. “Americans have become the best-entertained, least-informed people on earth,” Kennedy said. He also said five companies control 80 percent of newspapers and almost all radio, and those corporations are not in business to tell news thoroughly or fairly. “The only ideology they represent is their own pockets,” Kennedy said. So his criticism of the corporate plutocracy seems as strong as ever.



Such honest views of the sad state of America have made Kennedy the darling of many people – independents, liberals, progressives and environmentalists.



But the news that this esteemed honest liberal has endorsed the candidacy of Hillary Clinton was startling. Now he says: “Hillary Clinton has the strength and experience to bring the war in Iraq to an end and reverse the potentially devastating effects of global warming. …Hillary will inspire the real change America needs." That Kennedy can see Hillary as an agent of change is a betrayal of all the good will that Kennedy has built up over many years.



Kennedy said he feels "very uncomfortable" about the amount of corporate money flowing into Clinton's campaign, "But I also think you can't come into this race with one arm tied behind your back." How’s that for convenient rationalization? There is no reason why any sane American should be very comfortable about the poisonous and corrupting amount of corporate money dumped into Clinton’s campaign.



In examining media coverage of Kennedy’s endorsement of Clinton I could find no references to his earlier critical remarks of Democrats and the corporatist plutocracy. But people commenting on the New York Times article often were aghast at his endorsement, noting that it would have made much more sense for him to endorse Obama or Edwards. Bloggers, so far, have also not been critical of the Kennedy endorsement. The progressive community seems frozen by self-delusion and unwilling to criticize their adored Kennedy.



Here is my take: Hillary Clinton represents the worst of the Democratic contenders. She is totally committed to take all the corporate money she can get and pay whatever that eventually costs, should she become president. She really is a hawk when it comes to the Iraq war and even voted the wrong way recently when it comes to Iran. She is incredibly dishonest and phony. The reason why there are millions of Hillary haters is that she inspires distrust. A Hillary presidency would pursue corporate globalization and the terrible trade policies of her husband that has done so much to destroy America’s middle class. Her views on universal health coverage do not seem focused on getting rid of all the insurance industry involvement.


One thing we know for sure: If Hilllary becomes president we will face an even harder time revealing 9/11 truth.



Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary just shows how the status quo political establishment can rig the system to get what it wants. What has Bobby been promised? Head of the US EPA? Support for replacing Hillary in the Senate? Who knows? But his endorsement stinks and puts a big blemish on his credibility and reputation.



[Reach Joel S. Hirschhorn through _www.delusionaldemocracy.com.]
 
Here is my take: Hillary Clinton represents the worst of the Democratic contenders. She is totally committed to take all the corporate money she can get and pay whatever that eventually costs, should she become president. She really is a hawk when it comes to the Iraq war and even voted the wrong way recently when it comes to Iran. She is incredibly dishonest and phony. The reason why there are millions of Hillary haters is that she inspires distrust. A Hillary presidency would pursue corporate globalization and the terrible trade policies of her husband that has done so much to destroy America’s middle class. Her views on universal health coverage do not seem focused on getting rid of all the insurance industry involvement.
I agree with so much of your take on Hillary! I'd like to share my take on Hillary and the Democraps.

I registered Independent however will vote for a Democrap, but only if Hillary is NOT the nominee. The way I see it, Clinton = Bush/Bush = Clinton - beneath all the rhetoric. Hillary in reality is none other than "Bush with Breasts" - a 100% recipe for a stalled do-nothing/bickering congress and scandal ridden White House while the Earth goes up in flames.

The Re-poop-licans will give her about 6 to 9 months of relative peace before they unleash an all out assault that will result in winning either the House or Senate in 2 years. “We the Idiots, In order To Form A More Imperfect Union", will again have a Clinton in the W. House and a divided congress – and history doesn’t repeat itself….yeah, right!?! We would do better as a nation if the "Hatfield and McCoy" sideshow would LEAVE the national/world stage for good and take their 'up and coming offspring' with them so We the People can get on fixing the mess their LIES have burdened us with.

FWIW, the Democraps will have an "opportunity" to lead the USA in a NEW/BETTER DIRECTION. Imo, an Obama-Edwards ticket would be unbeatable and the freshest pair of politicians Americans could hope for these days. Yes, Obama could be President…for Crisss sake after Gecko Bush, my deceased Grandmother(God rest her Soul)could be President and do a better job. Edwards is more suited for VP because I feel the health problems of his wife and the care of his youngest children would be easier on him and the nation – and if he is ever needed to step into the presidency, he would be fully prepared.

Aside from Hillary, the biggest obstacle for the Democraps at this time seems to be the split in the Afro-American vote. It appears many do not believe Obama has any chance in hell, or he is a puppet of the whites, or he isn’t black enough - given their history in the "Land of the Free", who can really blame them for thinking so.

I can only ask my Afro-American brothers and sisters to please believe me that Obama can win. He is more than capable. There are MANY white Americans who see IN him and his wife Heart + Intelligence combined with the Spirit to Serve All and not only the rich. And Obama being of both races, may best represent a final redemption - a final healing of wound between the black and white by Serving in the Highest position in the land. Think about it, if JFK had lived and had 8 years in the White House, and if MLK hadn’t been gunned down, do you believe that some of the points in my email would even exist…maybe, only to discuss Obama’s character, but not his running and/or winning. And frankly, what better justice for Afro-Americans who have had their vote taken for granted by the Democraps for decades, to now beat its “front runner” Hillary for the nomination!

The very fact that Hillary is running for the nomination shows you how out of touch and non-caring she and her husband are. Their disruptive continuance in trying to keep their iron grip on the party weakened Kerry and Edwards in 2004 and continues to weakened the Democraps who should be now focusing only on a NEW DIRECTION and not on the damn PAST. Perhaps, that was Billary’s plan from the very beginning for regaining the W. House?

Imagine if you will - a boxing match in which the Re-poop-licans look like DeNiro in the ending rounds of Raging Bull. The Re-poop-licans are so bloodied, they are one punch....one punch away from at least a 10 year KNOCK OUT, and just before the last punch is thrown, you hear, DING – the bell. The Re-poop-licans are saved by the bell. Well, that BELL is Hillary Clinton. The Repoops stagger back to the corner where their corner man Karl Rove stitches them up, gives them some water, towels them off, and yells at them new directions. The result is that they come out for the next round and beat the Democraps mid-term by retaking the House or Senate. The monkeys in the audience are shocked, but those who are able to SEE, are angry, yet again.
 
statusquobuster said:
Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary just shows how the status quo political establishment can rig the system to get what it wants. What has Bobby been promised? Head of the US EPA? Support for replacing Hillary in the Senate? Who knows? But his endorsement stinks and puts a big blemish on his credibility and reputation.
Yes, it IS disappointing, but having said that I don't see ANY change likely in the next election whether it be Hillary, Edwards, Obama or Guiliani, because they are ALL part of the elite and are ALL subservient to the man behind the curtain. They are actors on the stage to make it appear as though there is a democracy, as though change is likely, as though it matters who is elected president, when clearly that is not the case. It is way past that time,where it mattered. The 10 steps towards fascism, as Naomi Wolf describes in her book The end of America, have all been taken.

While the show is happening on centre stage with the music playing and all the ins and outs are being widely reported, the peoples attention is drawn away from the men behind the curtain. The men who pull the strings and who gives the nod to who best serves their purpose. A purpose that does not humanity's interests at heart.

Just as you in tennis or any other ball sport always have to keep an eye on the ball, so too do you have to continually keep an eye firmly on the man behind the curtain. Otherwise you end up lunch.

Or so I think.

Aeneas
 
This is only my opinions through observations, but AquariusRising, a politician is a politician is a politician. Hillary and the entire lot are of the same species. It's like expecting a rabbit to not be a rabbit, but more of a mountain lion.

Voting means nothing. It's just one of those myths of a concept that fell away long ago, myths like freedom. Either or who becomes 'president' is just leading us into more and more of the same.

It's always been up to the people to save ourselves. We aren't taking the job for various reasons, and for this the PTB are as gracious as psychopathic murdering people can be.

If forced to align myself with anyone, it would be Ron Paul. But I hold no expectation for him being elected, and even if he were, I hold no expectation that anything would change for the better.
 
This is only my opinions through observations, but AquariusRising, a politician is a politician is a politician. Hillary and the entire lot are of the same species. It's like expecting a rabbit to not be a rabbit, but more of a mountain lion. Voting means nothing. It's just one of those myths of a concept that fell away long ago, myths like freedom. Either or who becomes 'president' is just leading us into more and more of the same. It's always been up to the people to save ourselves. We aren't taking the job for various reasons, and for this the PTB are as gracious as psychopathic murdering people can be. If forced to align myself with anyone, it would be Ron Paul. But I hold no expectation for him being elected, and even if he were, I hold no expectation that anything would change for the better.
Nawd, thanks for the comments. I'll try to clarify my post. First, I couldn't agree with you more that a politician is a politician is a politician. I'm not asleep about such matters - my wake up call was in the mid 70's.

Next, I wrote: "FWIW, the Democraps will have an "opportunity" to lead the USA in a NEW/BETTER DIRECTION. Imo, an Obama-Edwards ticket would be unbeatable and the freshest pair of politicians Americans could hope for these days."

I put the word opportunity in quotes because, well ----I think we both KNOW why. And when I first typed the word NEW, I quickly thought twice because, well again---we both KNOW why - there really isn't a damn thing NEW in elizard-ist politics, so I added /BETTER DIRECTION. After 8 years of the Cheney Mafia from Hades, any direction would be BETTER, I feel. The USA has hit the low of the low...flat bottom sicko with Cheney and Bush: the damage they have wreaked around the world and here may be beyond repair. Do I think Obama could do better? Yes, I do. Even if he is a puppet, do I think he can do BETTER then Cheney and Bush? YES, I do. But I do not think that Hillary can/will do better. She is High Up the elizard-ist Ladder. Trouble follows her and Bill as well as the Bushes wherever they go.

The rest of the post was my take(and my venting ;) ) on how the SHOW may play out, and how I think/feel about Obama and his wife. I do like them because I feel they have Heart + Intelligence and a desire to Serve. Of course, if Obama wins, he will have to return some favors, but so did all the others before him...and yes, he will have scandal/s - both real and fabricated. He and Edwards though I think are the "freshest" politicians Americans could ever hope for these days since the stench is so overwhelming coming from Washington D.C.

Back in the 90's, I played around with Icke's idea to NOT vote. What would happen if nobody voted...than the PTB would not have any mandate to yada...yada...yada. And so I didn't vote for a while. Well, one man changed all that for me - Dick Cheney.

Nawd, I’m not under any illusion concerning politics - matrix - psychopaths – lizards – etc...etc...in fact, the terror of the situation has become clearer and clearer. Anyway, I hope I was able to clarify my post somewhat.....if just a bit.

Oh, and I like Ron Paul, too! He wasn't mentioned in my original post because the Republican Maifa would never let him win. I've been reading his Senate speeches via the Net for years. He has Heart+Intelligence and a desire to Serve. He's the only one in the Republican Mafia I would consider.


Cheers.
 
AquariusRising said:
I'm not asleep about such matters - my wake up call was in the mid 70's.
Well, fwiw, the fact that you think:

ar said:
After 8 years of the Cheney Mafia from Hades, any direction would be BETTER, I feel. The USA has hit the low of the low...flat bottom sicko with Cheney and Bush: the damage they have wreaked around the world and here may be beyond repair. Do I think Obama could do better? Yes, I do.
means that you're still a bit asleep. There is no 'better direction' as long as everything is going according to plan, which it is. Obama cannot 'do better' - Obama is a part of the system and whoever is 'selected' will be 'selected' because they will continue with 'the plan'.

Af said:
Even if he is a puppet, do I think he can do BETTER then Cheney and Bush? YES, I do. But I do not think that Hillary can/will do better. She is High Up the elizard-ist Ladder. Trouble follows her and Bill as well as the Bushes wherever they go.
Again, you are asleep if you think that anyone who is 'selected' will 'do better' - it is fixed - there is no 'do better' - there is no free election - it is all stage managed to the nth degree.


ar said:
The rest of the post was my take(and my venting ;) ) on how the SHOW may play out, and how I think/feel about Obama and his wife. I do like them because I feel they have Heart + Intelligence and a desire to Serve.
Then the progaganda and theatre are working wonders on you.

ar said:
Of course, if Obama wins, he will have to return some favors, but so did all the others before him...and yes, he will have scandal/s - both real and fabricated. He and Edwards though I think are the "freshest" politicians Americans could ever hope for these days since the stench is so overwhelming coming from Washington D.C.
Wake up - it is all stage managed - 'return some favors'? Any politician who reaches the level of running for president is bought and paid for - there is no 'freshest' - it is ALL theatre and stage managed and you have fallen for it. That's ok - millions of people fall for it, but, perhaps it's time to wake up a bit more and realize that.

ar said:
Back in the 90's, I played around with Icke's idea to NOT vote. What would happen if nobody voted...than the PTB would not have any mandate to yada...yada...yada. And so I didn't vote for a while. Well, one man changed all that for me - Dick Cheney.

Nawd, I’m not under any illusion concerning politics - matrix - psychopaths – lizards – etc...etc...in fact, the terror of the situation has become clearer and clearer. Anyway, I hope I was able to clarify my post somewhat.....if just a bit.
It's clear that you are 'under an illusion' if you honestly think that ANYTHING will change no matter which presidential candidate is selected - it is ALL theatre - all of it - and the only way any of these people will be placed in office is if they tow the line.
 
anart said:
It's clear that you are 'under an illusion' if you honestly think that ANYTHING will change no matter which presidential candidate is selected - it is ALL theatre - all of it - and the only way any of these people will be placed in office is if they tow the line.
Yeah, its sad, they all pretty much "suck" regardless of what label they have attached to them at any one time.

Do you find it bizare that Americans seem to be overly fond of labels?

I'm not really sure if this means I am still 'asleep' to some degree, or just more cynical.
 
anart wrote:
"...means that you're still a bit asleep. There is no 'better direction' as long as everything is going according to plan, which it is. Obama cannot 'do better' - Obama is a part of the system and whoever is 'selected' will be 'selected' because they will continue with 'the plan'."

"Again, you are asleep if you think that anyone who is 'selected' will 'do better' - it is fixed - there is no 'do better' - there is no free election - it is all stage managed to the nth degree."

"Then the progaganda and theatre are working wonders on you."

"Wake up - it is all stage managed - 'return some favors'? Any politician who reaches the level of running for president is bought and paid for - there is no 'freshest' - it is ALL theatre and stage managed and you have fallen for it. That's ok - millions of people fall for it, but, perhaps it's time to wake up a bit more and realize that."

"It's clear that you are 'under an illusion' if you honestly think that ANYTHING will change no matter which presidential candidate is selected - it is ALL theatre - all of it - and the only way any of these people will be placed in office is if they tow the line."
Thank you for the comments:

If what it comes down to in this “world” is to say that not destroying/shattering the lives of one and a half million men, women, and children can be labeled BETTER, than yes, I will say that Obama + Edwards will do better then Cheney + Bush. You might be correct that I am under an illusion or you might be incorrect. We shall have to wait and see.
 
Re: the Article originally posted, I think it's important to remember that RFK is likely being handled. Threats of violence, blackmail, etc are not beyond the capabilities of the psychopathic Powers that Be, so pretty much anyone who could have influence is being managed in one way or another.

Aquarius - I'm not sure what your positing. The entire system from day one (July 4th 1776) was penned by psychopathic elite and those they've conned. Going back further, we've likely been ruled by psychopaths for hundreds if not thousands of years. They've always been there, puppetting us from the background, pitting us against one another using religion, nationalism and economics as mass-mind control. Thanks to them we've been killing eachother off, and in the last fifty years or so you can only see this pattern getting more grandiose, more complex, and more deadly. It's a 'hidden holocaust' as other's have referred to it.

So given that, how can one candidate possibily make a difference? To be honest, I like Ron Paul, he talks the talk sotospeak. But even I realize he a.) has no shot at winning and b.) is likely being used to fulfill a role, to keep people like me focused on him in order to give credence to a system that has no validity whatsoever. Even if he did win, he'd be playing a role and catering to the PTB.

The only way to save our world is wake up the masses to psychological realities esp when it comes to psychopathy, and to rebuild government with that knowledge as the keystone.
 
ar said:
If what it comes down to in this “world” is to say that not destroying/shattering the lives of one and a half million men, women, and children can be labeled BETTER, than yes, I will say that Obama + Edwards will do better then Cheney + Bush. You might be correct that I am under an illusion or you might be incorrect. We shall have to wait and see.
Actually, part of the reason for the existence of the SoTT page is to see the signs, so one doesn't have to 'wait and see'. All you have to do is research history and pay attention to the current indications in order to get a very clear picture of exactly where we are are headed. No 'waiting to see' is necessary, really - at least not as far as the large trends are concerned.

The fact of the matter is that Obama has already pledged his full support to Israel, and in the broader perspective, that is all you need to know in order to See that he will not, nor will any of the other 'candidates' change anything, objectively, for the 'better'.
 
anart wrote:
Actually, part of the reason for the existence of the SoTT page is to see the signs, so one doesn't have to 'wait and see'.
Thank you for the comments.

I am glad it is 'only part of the reason'. If you have it all figured out, that is good for you. I will wait and see.

No 'waiting to see' is necessary, really - at least not as far as the large trends are concerned.
Hugo Chavez might beg to differ. I think a lot of people and Chavez himself thought he was going to WIN.

The fact of the matter is that Obama has already pledged his full support to Israel, and in the broader perspective, that is all you need to know in order to See that he will not, nor will any of the other 'candidates' change anything, objectively, for the 'better'.
Anart, I do not think "that is all I need to know". I will base my judgment of his character on more than whether he supports Israel. In a city(D.C)/nation where the Israel lobby is so strong would you have him as a strategy say he doesn’t give a hoot for Israel? Though, I can not speak for him, it is my opinion he really doesn’t give hoot about Israel. Religion is not a big “part” of his campaign or identity when compared to other candidates.


==================================


Cyre2067 wrote:
So given that, how can one candidate possibily make a difference? To be honest, I like Ron Paul, he talks the talk sotospeak. But even I realize he a.) has no shot at winning and b.) is likely being used to fulfill a role, to keep people like me focused on him in order to give credence to a system that has no validity whatsoever. Even if he did win, he'd be playing a role and catering to the PTB.
Thank you for the comment.

You ask the question, how can one candidate possibily make a difference? It is a good question. JFK made a difference before he was gunned down. Though, I am not comparing Obama to JFK, I feel out of the entire trash can of candidates who are running from "both" parties, Obama has the most to offer. I never want another Cheney to be unleashed on the innocents of the world.

I like Ron Paul, too. I wrote a few days ago: "....He wasn't mentioned in my original post because the Republican Maifa would never let him win. I've been reading his Senate speeches via the Net for years. He has Heart+Intelligence and a desire to Serve...."

If Ron Paul were to win, do you think he could make a difference? Possibly? How? He may/will have to cater to the PTB, however could he blow children to pieces with bombs? Could he shatter the lives of millions of families like Dick Cheney has? I think not........and that is the difference.
 
AquariusRising said:
anart said:
Actually, part of the reason for the existence of the SoTT page is to see the signs, so one doesn't have to 'wait and see'.
Thank you for the comments.

I am glad it is 'only part of the reason'. If you have it all figured out, that is good for you. I will wait and see.
It's ironic how you're continually thanking people for their comments only to throw them in the trash. You're not only ignoring the comments but also the Signs that show your opinions are completely invalid. The 'wait and see' attitude is a block in seeing reality and is one I'm sure the 'rapture ready' evangelist hold. It's not about having everything figured out but being open enough to take a serious look at the events going on around us and determine our false beliefs that may hold us back from being able to DO anything about our burning world.

AquariusRising said:
Anart said:
The fact of the matter is that Obama has already pledged his full support to Israel, and in the broader perspective, that is all you need to know in order to See that he will not, nor will any of the other 'candidates' change anything, objectively, for the 'better'.
Anart, I do not think "that is all I need to know". I will base my judgment of his character on more than whether he supports Israel.
So supporting the deliberate murder of men, women and children, the raping of land, the imprisonment and torture of innocents, and the starvation and economic destruction of a whole people is not an adequate measure of character?

AquariusRising said:
I never want another Cheney to be unleashed on the innocents of the world.
This is another illusion. Cheney, while the psychopathic blood sucking leech that he is, is not really pulling the strings. Obama or whoever only present a more effective mask.
 
Shane said:
It's ironic how you're continually thanking people for their comments only to throw them in the trash.
Actually, it's rather disingenuous and manipulative. AquariusRising clearly has some sacred cows that he/she is unwilling to put out to pasture, it's that simple. We know that until a person is willing to put ALL their sacred cows out to pasture, they cannot get past 'themselves' to see the bigger picture.

I do find it interesting that someone who has mentioned Icke and who seems to grasp the illusion of this reality enough to constantly reference 'lizards' still has so much blind faith in the political/governmental system in the U.S. Go figure.
 
AquariusRising said:
If Ron Paul were to win, do you think he could make a difference? Possibly? How? He may/will have to cater to the PTB, however could he blow children to pieces with bombs? Could he shatter the lives of millions of families like Dick Cheney has? I think not........and that is the difference.
You're framing the debate and excluding a lot of evidence about how our reality functions. There are no elections, at least not on a national scale, anyone who's been paying attention can see that 2000, 2004 were rigged. Given that precident it's likely that 2008 will be just as crooked. IF RP was to win, which he can't given the psychopathic nature of the PTB, he'd be removed from power or neutralized very quickly, because the changes he would seek to make would disempower the PTB, and they won't stand for it.

Secondly, and others have said it, but for reiteration - Obama backs Israel. Israel is quite possibly the most depraved, egocentric, and murderous nation on the face of the planet, perhaps second to the US, but I tend to see US-Britain-Israel as one entity anyway...

Nope, the only way to resolve our global issues is to wake up the planet to certain psychological realities (namely psychopathy and ponerology) and give them a history lesson. Our best avenue of attack is through information awareness and internet use, as it's still open, even if it is patrolled by thought-police in the form of internet trolls and detractors. So blogging, writing comments on various forums, doing book reviews on amazon, and visiting other's blogs and commenting when appropriate with links to similar info, is like launching a volley at the PTB. But it takes some tact, sensitivity and a heavy dose of external consideration.

...at least that's my 'working hypothesis'
 
Actually having Ron Paul as president could be very advantageous to the PTB, as far as credibility goes.
 
Back
Top Bottom