Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Hillary Clinton and her media lapdogs are misleading us

Hillary Clinton doesn't want the corporate media vetting and "highlighting" the fact that her foreign policy experiences are built on lies , or if you prefer to "gild the pill," you may prefer to say "numerous misstatements." Regardless of what you call it, Hillary Clinton is mis-leading us.

So Hillary throws the Rev. Wright ball back at her media lapdogs and her media lapdogs start chasing the ball again. Some of them "might" mention some of Hillary's foreign policy lies but it won't be "highlighted" and examined like the Rev. Wright affair has been.

The corporate media has already spent the month of March smearing Obama for "guilt by association."

Meanwhile, the majority of us are "sick" of this story and the blatant corporate media bias that is attacking Obama relentlessly while giving Clinton and McCain the kid glove treatment. At the same time, the corporate media is saying they've been "hard" on Hillary Clinton.

Oh yeah? It's hard to get the media to spend two solid days on a breaking story where Hillary herself (not some associate) has lied about her foreign policy experience numerous times and has gotten away with it, so far. It's NAFTAGATE coverage all over again. (There is now proof that Hillary has lied about her history with NAFTA--she actively supported NAFTA but this has not received the media coverage it deserved.)

The corporate media has been handed a major scoop. A candidate who has made foreign policy a major element of her fitness to become our president has been caught making numerous "misstatements" and there is no foreign policy experience.

According to Fact Check:
  • Clinton claims to have "negotiated open borders" in Macedonia to fleeing Kosovar refugees. But the Macedonian border opened a full day before she arrived, and her meetings with Macedonian officials were too brief to allow for much serious negotiating.
  • Clinton's activities "helped bring peace to Northern Ireland." Irish officials are divided as to how helpful Clinton's actions were, and key players agree that she was not directly involved in any actual negotiations.
  • Clinton has repeatedly referenced her "dangerous" trip to Bosnia. She fails to mention, however, that the Bosnian war had officially ended three months before her visit or that she made the trip with her 16-year-old daughter and two entertainers.
  • Both Bill and Hillary Clinton claim that Hillary privately championed the use of U.S. troops to stop the genocide in Rwanda. That conversation left no public record, however, as U.S. policy was explicitly to stay out of Rwanda, and officials say that the use of U.S. troops was never considered.
Clinton's tough speech on human rights delivered to a Beijing audience is as advertised, though Clinton herself has been dismissive of speeches that aren't backed by solutions.
See for yourself what the Irish think of Hillary Clinton's contributions to their peace talks.

Hillary Clinton loves to spread the myth that she's been vetted. But the corporate media has not covered her participation in NAFTA that has recently come to light. Nor is the corporate media adequately covering the fact that Clinton does not have the foreign policy experience that she claims. Hillary Clinton released the First Lady's appointment book section of her White House Records. But Clinton still refuses to release her telephone logs and her work on Health care and Health insurance are also being held back. Let's not forget that her income tax records (that is a standard release for all presidential contenders) remain hidden. (Barack Obama has released his tax returns from 2000 to the present day). Hillary Clinton is not being open, she is hiding too much from us. There is no way to "vet" a candidate unless the records are accessible. What smoking guns do these records contain?

Why won't the corporate media give us the coverage we deserve? Most of the voters in the next two upcoming primaries--Pennsylvania and North Carolina--don't have the information they need to make an informed vote.

"Maybe" the corporate media does not care if the voters have the information they need so that we can have a democratic election. "Maybe" the corporate media has their own agenda--a corporate agenda--and they are favoring the two candidates--Clinton and McCain--so the status quo remains and no real change occurs. Then the corporate influence and corporate welfare in Washington DC will continue unabated.

IF the shoe was on the other foot, and it was Obama who had done what Hillary Clinton has been caught would be a slam dunk and Obama would be out of the race. Unfortunately, the people's candidate--Obama--continues to have higher hurdles and has to live with a different set of rules than the other two "corporate approved" presidential candidates.

I also am incredulous that the Democratic party's "Super Delegates" are sitting idly by while Hillary Clinton's campaign continues their homicidal campaign against Barack Obama. A campaign that is also suicidal. If Hillary Clinton continues in this race it will result in Clinton making herself "un-electable" and unless the Democrats can come up with a viable candidate, John McCain could be our next president.

Heaven forbid.



Anonymous said...

There is a MUCH BIGGER story that the MSM is misleading the public with in regards to Hillary, you can read the entire article here:

Howling Latina said...

Nice picture.