|
This isn't what I *think* this has been the positions she's taken in debates, on her site, and through the press. Her voting record and alliances also show me how to think based on what she's done, but I will engage you.
>>Prison Industrial Complex Reform - so she currently has a >high >>position campaign staffer who is a lobbyist for the private >>prison complex. >here's what she says she wants to do: > >PIC: >End the era of mass incarceration, reform mandatory minimum >sentences, and end private prisons. >Encourage the use of smart strategies—like police body >cameras—and end racial profiling to rebuild trust between >law enforcement and communities. >Help formerly incarcerated individuals successfully re-enter >society.
Nice, I've heard it before, from other progressives, and for her to be the driving force behind the Clinton campaign that looked to push the Democratic Party more to the right, and introduce 3 strikes law, and mandatory minimums for crack possession vs cocaine is much of HER doing and influence. I see nothing genuine about her about face on the issues simply because she says it. In fact I totally reject it because of the private prison money she STILL takes, and because she decided to get out ahead of this story for the PR'ness of it. Don't believe her.
>Health care: >medicaid expansion is part of ACA, btw. so if your girlfriend >resolved her foot injury using medicare- guess what? that's >ACA. And the way ACA was originally envisioned, it was as a >single payer system - so what bernie is saying isnt new. what >he needs to have been saying is *how* he would achieve this, >given that even Obama himself failed to get this (and clinton >before him, btw). >clinton: Defend the Affordable Care Act and build on it to >slow the growth of out-of-pocket costs.
So to clarify my point, it has been the point I have made with many Hillary issues: if you expand Medicare as a single payer system then my girlfriends foot would still be fixed. The ACA isn't a necessary component of expanding Medicare. It is there to protect private insurance and pharmaceutical companies to keep market rates high by excluding a majority of Americans.
>>Hillary says that >>we can not afford to make this a debate right now when 90% >of >>Americans are now covered, and we should push for 100%. > >its true though. there has to be enough political support- >otherwise we are back to where republicans did everything they >could to decimate and illegitimize ACA. perhaps this increase >in premiums *will* force the debate forward. >again, its not the what, its the how? none of y'all are saying >*how* and acting as though its a decision one person can make >independent of house and senate
This country can not afford to censor ANY debate. To say the ACA works and we should just deal with it and move on because it was a lot of work is like saying "hold on now, we just got over Jim Crow. Now yall wanna vote? Let's not throw this country back into a debate". If Medicare expansion is a component of the ACA, then when when Bernie says let's have Medicare for all does it conversation not become "yeah, let's implement that portion of the ACA" instead of framing it as an ATTACK on the ACA? It is specifically because to protect that private interest it must be postured that that notion is unrealistic and unattainable.
>>Stricter Gun Control - no one disagrees with criminal >>background checks, and some are open to a ban on assault >>rifles. Clinton has said that Bernie was against gun >>legislation > >he was. this is inarguable. he believes its a state issue. >well, thats the status quo. >this not about a vote on a bill. its about what he has stated >he can change his mind though, its allowed. > >here's what she wants to do on gun control: >Strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in >the current system. >Hold irresponsible dealers and manufacturers accountable. >Keep guns out of the hands of terrorists, domestic abusers, >other violent criminals, and the severely mentally ill.
What Bernie has done has said he WANTS to have the debate, and that their needs to be a comprehensive conversation about the role of guns in our society. The 2nd amendment exists, and it is being abused. But there are rural parts of the country that have a different relationship with guns than the urban areas. The Sandy Hook angle was total bullshit because you don't sue Toyota because someone got drunk and crashed their car into you. That is not the manufacturer's fault. But on gun control in general, he nor his supporters are against background checks and stronger, stricter regulation. For Hillary to boo hoo as a mom over gun violence is laughable when she drone striking mad brown people in the face breh.
>>Financial Reform - so Hillary cut her teeth as a lawyer >>helping WalMart become one of the largest corporations in >the >>world at the expense of working class families. > >have you read her policy prescription on reforming finance? >you should. its much more comprehensive than what anyone has >put out there. > >lets have a policy argument, not a discussion on what you >*think* her policies are.
so I base my positions of her positions from her site:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/plan-raise-american-incomes/
It is against THIS backdrop in language that I roll my eyes at her "policy" because again, for her to have an about face on these issue seems very disengenuous when taking these same companies' money. I don't disagree that she said it. I disagree that she will do it. Her trade related decisions and prospectus is NOT about main street. She defends corporate subsidies, and even voted for the Bush tax cuts. NOW all of a sudden she is going to do an about face? I still don't believe her.
>>Reduce Oil Consumption - "Reduce oil consumption" is another >>one of those empty rhetoric statements that she is famous >for. > >here's what she says on the environment; >Defend, implement, and extend smart pollution and efficiency >standards >Launch a $60 billion Clean Energy Challenge to partner with >states, cities, and rural communities and give them the tools >and resources they need to go beyond federal standards in >cutting carbon pollution and expanding clean energy. >Invest in clean energy infrastructure, innovation, >manufacturing and workforce development > >so im not sure what policies *you* are talking about >this sounds more like talking points. > >but its fine. vote for whomever you want to (thats democracy) >but at least be honest about the policies of the person you >decry.
Again, referencing here:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/climate/
(notice fracking isn't even listed, btw)
From HER stances, it is disingenuous. She is a master of skirting around the issues and saying just enough to sound in favor when in reality she is not doing an about face. If you can point me to where I am wrong I will GLADLY entertain it. But she is not anti fracking, she says single payer with NEVER happen, America's raise should be $12, not $15, arbitrarily, and that is IF she decided to hold onto those views heading into November. Naw, I'm good. ________________________________________________ R.I.P. Soulgyal <3 SUPA NERD LLC. Knowledge Meets Nature Musica Negra #13irteen
|