Hillary Clinton: A “Natural Politician”
Hillary Clinton said tonight during her debate with Bernie Sandsrs in Miami: “I’m not a natural politician”. Does she not realize how disingenuous and laughable that sounds, especially when the impression people have of her is a typical lying politician of the worst kind? Obviously, she knows that – that people know about her dishonesty and untrustworthiness; her advisors surely tell her that and that’s exactly why she says such a thing: to erase that impression. So, when she says that, it just reinforces the impression that she really is a lying scum.
I don’t support Bernie either because he and his brand of so-called “democratic socialism”, which is more common in Europe than here, is a typical pro-imperialist, pro-Zionist and pro-capitalist one and there is nothing “socialist” about it, just as there is nothing “revolutionary” about his campaign. Indeed, his is a brand that supports many of imperialist wars, supports the genocide by Israel and tries to alleviate and reduce capitalist excesses to make it last longer, through cosmetic reformss within the capitalist system, which in its imperialist stags is responsible for millions of deaths and devastation of entire nations.
But, at least, he didn’t apologize or back down from his defense of Fidel Castro or opposition to US intervention for the sake of regime change. Although he did unfairly criticize the Cuban leadership as being “authoritative and undemocratic”, he did say that the US should not attack and overthrow governments, which should be common sense, but it’s hard to expect common sense from a brainwashed population. Although Sanders’ defense of Cuba was extremely weak and insufficient and although he didn’t mention how imperialism and its intervention leaves Cuba with no choice, but to be diligent about defending its socialist (real “socialist”) revolution, which such defensive diligence is routinely attacked by imperialism as “undemocratic”, and although he didn’t mention the Cuban people’s impressive achievements in eliminating illiteracy, hunger, infant mortality, homelessness and income and wealth gap, among others, at least, he did defend Cuba for its accomplishments in healthcare and education and refused to attack Castro when pressed.
That doesn’t by any means mean he’s anti-capitalist, or a revolutionary – revolution can never be won by running in bourgeois elections to become the head of a bloody corporate empire responsible for war crimes, massacres and tyranny worldwide – and while he shamelessly supports Israel, at least, he does raise some issues that haven’t been heard, much less debated, by Americans, and wittingly or not, is raising the level of the conversation, much the same way the Occupy Wall Street movement raised the awareness about the 1%, or the Black Lives Matter movement raised the consciousness about police brutality.
I’m not suggesting Bernie’s influence is as big as that of those grassroots movements, but if there is a silver lining in these rigged and fraudulent elections, it is that the issue of the corruption and the oligarchy of the billionaires and corporations is being raised, along with corruption of politicians like Clinton. That may not be much, but for a population so thoroughly brainwashed by corporate media, it is something.
Hillary Clinton is exactly what she tries to deny. She really is a typical dishonest scumbag of a corporate politician, who easily and readily sells herself to the highest bidder (or to whomever is willing to pay) on Wall Street or on any other street, and would not hesitate to start even more wars than Obama and Bush for her billionaire buyers – in the real sense of the word “buyers”.
Although I don’t support any of the candidates of the two major corporate parties, I believe Sanders is at the very least a liberal and perhaps even progressive in some respects – that is if support for a genocide and voting to fund imperialist wars can be called “liberal” and “progressive”. At least compared to Clinton, who is a corrupt and “natural politician”, he’s a liberal. Today, there is nothing liberal or progressive about the Democratic Party or Democrats like Clinton. And whatever small difference you might find between Clinton and the other candidates from the Republican Party, that difference is more than made up for by her corrupt and disingenuous personality. With Republicans, at least you know what you’re getting. They openly say they’re not liberal or progressive and that they’re on the side of big business and against the working class and the minorities. With Hillary, not only she could be just as bad if not worse than any Republican, she presents herself as “progressive” and defender of workers and minorities. Not only she is a “natural politician”, she’s a politician of the worst kind.