This debate was an insult to the American people, and ABC along with Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos need to apologize to all who wasted their time on that nonsense! Senator Clinton was indeed in her element, and reminded me that her service as First Lady in no way qualifies her to be the President of the United States. Perhaps then she and Laura Bush should share a ticket. It would, however, be difficult to determine who of the two has the most experience to be President. After all, Laura Bush has traveled around the world and given her opinion regarding many significant issues. However, I don't recall Laura Bush, (as first lady) blatantly lying about being shot at in Bosnia, risking a possible US invasion of that country! Or lying about her daughter being near the twin towers when they got hit, and spinning an outlandish tale of how she (Chelsea) had to run for her life, just to win a seat in the senate! The fact is Senator Clinton is a liar! She lied when she said she put pressure on Bill to intervene in Rwanda, and she lied to the voters in Ohio as she now lies to the voters in your state, when she says she fought against NAFTA. As the White House papers show, there was no attempt to pressure President Clinton to put an end to the genocide in Rwanda, nor was she pushing against the institution of NAFTA. In fact, she was a huge proponent of NAFTA. And what about her top adviser? Mark Penn is not just a heavy hitting PR person, he's an unscrupulous PR person, giving advice to clients such as the tobacco industry, instructing them on how to target inner city minorities via smokers rights groups! Blackwater on how to effectively respond to questions from the 911 commission, to cover up their indiscriminate killing and torturing of men, women and children in Iraq! Advising subprime lending groups on how to move forward with their illegal agendas and deflect fallout while ruthlessly leaving people homeless and bewildered! Not to mention the Colombian Free Trade Deal. While Senator Clinton appears to have "demoted" Penn from chief strategist, she fell quite short of removing him from her campaign altogether--he will serve as one of her top advisers. Senator Clinton's retention of Mark Penn, exposes her contempt for the millions of Americans that have lost their jobs to NAFTA, and stand to lose their jobs to CAFTA! She will say and do anything to win this nomination and she has completely fabricated her foreign relations experience!
During Bill Clinton's presidency Senator Clinton was not qualified to speak in any official capacity, nor was she in a position to sign peace treatise or broker deals. It's absolutely absurd and offensive to the intelligence of thinking individuals to suggest otherwise. She was however given the official position to head and be the chairwoman of the Task Force on National Health Care Reform. As usual she attempted to secretly draft the bill, botched the job, turned Democrats against her and effectively galvanized the Republican Party to work in unity against the Democrats! Needless to say, for the first time in twelve years, the Democratic Party lost their majority in Congress
Now fast forward to the Clinton's tax returns revealing 118m gross income, much of it earned through former President Clinton's speeches, and the not so subtle lobbying of the insurance company responsible for halting the 1993 health care reform plan of the Clinton Administration. Health Insurance Association of America (HIAA), now America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), paid President Clinton $150,000.00 dollars in June of 2005, to deliver a speech to their board. I believe it should raise a red flag to those supporting/endorsing Senator Clinton to recognize the problematic relationship created by this. The language that now crafts Senator Clintons health care plan, mirrors AHIPs proposal in remarkably unsettling ways that warrant examination, particularly if these speeches point to the possible currying of future favors granted by Senator Clinton, "should" she become President. Robert Reich, Bill Clinton's secretary of labor and the head of Clinton's economic transition team has the following to say about the Health Care Proposal Debate:
"Both of them are big advances over what we have now.
But in my view Obama's would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC's. That's because Obama's puts more money up front and contains sufficient subsidies to insure everyone who's likely to need help -- including all children and young adults up to 25 years old.
Hers requires that everyone insure themselves. Yet we know from experience with mandated auto insurance -- and we're learning from what's happening in Massachusetts where health insurance is now being mandated -- that mandates still leave out a lot of people at the lower end who can't afford to insure themselves even when they're required to do so. "
Senator Obama has far more legislative experience than Senator Clinton. He served as an Illinois senator for 8 years and has only 2 less years of congressional experience than Senator Clinton. His honesty and integrity, coupled with his experience as a community organizer, civil rights attorney, Illinois State Senator and US Senator will enrich the position of President and bring about a positive change much needed in Washington.
Sincerely,
J. Taylor
Robert Reich Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-lo_b_75191.htm
America's Health Insurance Plans: http://www.ahip.org/content/default.aspx...
Recent Comments