(ThyBlackMan.com) Once Hillary Clinton became desperate over her all but certain loss to Barack Obama in the 2008 primaries, she began to continually allude to the assassination of Robert Kennedy during the 1968 primary. She kept repeating that mantra as justification for why she didn’t simply get out of the race. But the mere mention of this episode seem to drive Clinton supporters up the wall. They say it’s “water under the bridge,” and others try to make light of it as though I’m some sort of crazy conspiracy theorist – “Was Hillary Clinton also responsible for the sinking of the Lusitania, and by the way, where’s her birth certificate?” But the fact is, this issue is not funny, and it can’t just be fluffed off as water under the bridge. It should be seriously examined, because it strongly suggests that there’s a very dark sociopath lurking beneath Hillary’s public facade.
.
What made Hillary’s remarks seem much more malevolent than a simple gaffe was, as pointed out in a Keith Olbermann commentary below, someone had obviously told her that her mention of the word “assassination” was inappropriate, since Sen. Obama had been receiving death threats every since the day he threw his hat in the ring to run for president, so Hillary stopped using the word – temporarily. But as her situation became more dire and it was all but certain that she was going to lose to Sen. Obama, she began using the word “assassination” again.
.
And later, on May 11th 2008, while appearing on Meet The Press, Hillary’s campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, made the same kind of statement to Tim Russert. He said that in order for Hillary to win the nomination “something big” would have to happen. Then Russett asked, “An act of God, or something catastrophic?”, and he said, “Yes, something big would have to happen–absolutely.”
.
So how much farther did they have to go, say, “Calling all wing-nuts!
If somebody – ANYBODY – don’t kill this guy America could end up with a Black man for president!!!?”
.
So why did President Obama make Hillary his Secretary of State. That’s very simple. Obama had the good sense to understand that he needed to heal the rift within the Democratic Party so he threw her a bone. But while Bill Clinton was pushing for Hillary to be made Vice President, Obama had much better sense than to place her one heartbeat away from the presidency, because there’s one thing Barack has never been accused of, and that’s being a fool.
.
But this episode clearly showed that Hillary Clinton would do ANYTHING, no matter how horribly unconscionable, to appease her own ambition, and that’s not a good thing in any leader. It also showed that while Hillary Clinton saw fit to change her party to accommodate her ambition, she’s more than managed to maintain her Republican instincts – she has absolutely no hesitation to play dirty politics, and she also lacks a sense of limits. Those are distinctly Republican traits.
.
Hillary is quoted as saying, “I’ve gone from Barry Goldwater Republican to a new Democrat, but I think my underlying values has remained pretty constant; individual responsibility and community. I don’t see those as being mutually inconsistent.”
.
That sounds innocuous enough, who can be against personal responsibility and community? But it’s actually politispeak, a coded message to her corporate supporters that says, “they’re on their own.” Those exact words – “individual responsibility and community” – are a part of the Republican mantra; they could have come from the mouth of Paul Ryan. They imply that anyone who expect government assistance – like Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, or unemployment insurance – lacks personal responsibility. So as is clearly demonstrated in this very article, one has to listen to Hillary Clinton very carefully, because she’s always been big on subliminal messaging, and she’s extremely condescending toward the average American. She thinks we’re dumb, and unfortunately, many of us are.
.
So what does Hillary Clinton mean by a “new Democrat?” I looked it up for its exact meaning. According to Wikipedia, “New Democrats, also called Centrist Democrats, Clinton Democrats, Moderate Democrats, or Neoliberal Democrats, is an ideologically centrist faction within the Democratic Party that emerged after the victory of Republican George H. W. Bush in the 1988 presidential election. . . The New Democrat Coalition is a Congressional Member Organization within the United States Congress made up of Democrats who support an agenda that the organization describes as moderate and pro-growth.” .
So it’s Hillary’s intent to come over from the Republican Party and redefine what it means to be a Democrat. She wants to push the party to the right so it will be more receptive to the corporate agenda, which also means, less receptive to the people. But I don’t think most liberals are ready for that. They prefer the old Democrats, like Ted Kennedy, who fought for the people. So we need to send a clear message by using the primaries to get rid of these “New Democrats” as well, because all they are is old Republicans in Democratic districts.
.
So the fact is, I think that both Bill Clinton, and Hillary, are Republicans in drag. While they talk and act liberal, whenever they walk away, they always tend leave Republican policies behind, like NAFTA, that laid the foundation to outsource American jobs. They also managed to cut the throats of many poor Black, and White, welfare recipients and unskilled workers while in office.
.
“Clinton has been heavily criticized for overseeing the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which made it more affordable for manufacturing companies to outsource jobs to foreign countries and then import their product back to the United States. This policy caused a significant decrease in the amount of unskilled jobs in the United States.” But When Clinton signed NAFT into law (with a Republican majority), he said, “NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn’t believe that, I wouldn’t support this agreement” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement). Nevertheless, we see how it turned out.
.
So the fact is, Hillary, just like Bill, cannot be trusted. At the very least, she’s a fiscal conservative, and the only thing that she truly cares about is her own unquenchable ambition. Her every action is staged to manipulate “the little people,” and if you pay close attention, you’ll notice that even when she laughs it sounds forced and disingenuous.
.
Consider this. At seventeen years old she was working for the Barry Goldwater campaign, who pledged that if elected he would abolish the Civil Rights Act. Then in college she was not just a member of the “Young Republicans,” she was their PRESIDENT!
.
Hillary supporters claim that’s all irrelevant. They claim that she was only a child at the time. But when carefully considered, that makes it even more relevant. A teenager generally merely “leans” toward a particular political philosophy, but not Hillary. Hillary was so dedicated to the conservative Republican philosophy that she actually got involved in Barry Goldwater’s campaign before she was even old enough to vote, and then later in college – while most left-leaning students were demonstrating against the Vietnam war, and protesting for Civil and women’s rights – she was the president of the “Young Republicans.” That not only showed a deep commitment, but a deep dedication to conservatism.
.
Her supporters also try to fluff that off by saying, “Well, people change.” While that may be true, people rarely change a commitment that is as deeply ingrained in them as the commitment that Hillary demonstrated toward Republicanism. One’s politics is much like one’s religion – most people carry their predisposition to the grave, and there are many indications that Hillary is also doing just that, like joining forces with the neocons in her support for the invasion of Iraq, and her appeal to the “hard-working White people” during her 2008 campaign against Obama, and her cozy relationship with the corporate 1%ers. In addition, during her 2008 campaign against Obama, while trying to get Ted Kennedy’s support, it was reported by the New Yorker that Bill Clinton said to Kennedy regarding Barack Obama, “A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.” True progressives don’t talk like that. He was sounding just like a White Southern politician behind closed doors – which is exactly what he was, and is – dark glasses and saxophone notwithstanding. They don’t call “Slick Willie” for nothing.
.
Another indication of Hillary Clinton’s conservative predisposition could be observed in her behavior during her first high-profile position on the Board of Directors of Walmart. While she was in that position Walmart was undercutting labor unions, paying their workers slave-like wages, and discriminating against women by paying them less than they paid men for doing the same job, and Hillary didn’t say a word. The reason for that was simple – it wasn’t convenient for her to speak out at the time. Speaking out on behalf of women and the working class wouldn’t do anything to promote her ambition. It was a zero sum gain, and Hillary is not motivated by conviction; she’s motivated by self-interest. But all of a sudden – now that she needs the votes of the working-class – she’s trying to portray herself as a gladiator for the people, but that’ll only last until she gets into office. Then it’ll be business as usual – paying back political favors (like the $25,000 campaign donation that she received from Walmart), and building up future credits with other corporate elites for her next campaign.
