Hillary is Talking out of Both Sides of Her Mouth

Great exchange in the Debate last night re. the unwillingness of Sen. Clinton to give a straight answer to a direct question -- something long evident in her political career which most Americans objectively despise about politicians. Keep on doing what you do best Hillary. But please do it in front of more people so they can get a better measure of how much you are a "candidate for change"... Snicker...

“Unless I missed something,” he [Sen. Edwards] said, “Sen. Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes. America is looking for a president who will say the same thing, who will be consistent, who will be straight with them.”

Barack Obama added: “I was confused [by] Sen. Clinton's answer. I can't tell whether she was for it or against it. One of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges that we face.”

Edwards assails the Clinton corruption machine

John Edwards summed up the "choice" Americans will have should Hillary Clinton become the Democratic Party presidential candidate: "Down one path, we trade corporate Democrats for corporate Republicans; our cronies for their cronies; one political dynasty for another dynasty; and all we are left with is a Democratic version of the Republican corruption machine."


Hillary Clinton represents a sort of "one America" (far different from that proposed by John Edwards). Hillary's "one America" is for the very greedy special interests...

Indeed, Clinton's so-called "Middle Class Express" bus tour could have been more aptly termed the "Throw the Middle Class Under the Bus" tour...

Time after time, Clinton has voted against the interests of most Americans and for the powerful lobbies which insist on re-making American law and American society for the benefit of corporations and the rich elites which control them.

Updates...

Hillary Clinton accuses rivals of desperation

"Will she be the person who brings about the change in this country?" said Mr Edwards.

"You know, I believe in Santa Claus. I believe in the tooth fairy. But I don't think that's going to happen."

Increasingly defensive, Mrs Clinton raised her voice to levels that may have made her campaign staff wince off stage [...]"

Is Hillary the one who is really desperate???

That is, desperate to avoid answering hard questions regarding her policy positions and legislative votes? Desperate to avoid being identified as part of the "culture of corruption" -- being a "corporate Democrat"... Hillary has been adept to obfuscation and avoiding hard questions. I'm pleased to hear John Edwards sharpening the debate and demanding some answers.

Republicans Against Free Trade, Democrats Posture

In 2003 - 2004, I was on the phones and on the internet urging Democratic presidential candidates to repudiate "Free Trade" and offshore outsourcing and the "guest worker" (H-1b, L-1) visa programs used to facilitate offshore outsourcing. The campaign managers and advisors kept activists like me at arms length. They wanted us to attack Republicans and deliver support (money and votes) while their candidates reassured business lobbies (as far away as India and China) that any positions they took were just posturing for the angry ill-informed workers.

Hell, when John Kerry had a chance to deal with the offshore outsourcing jobs issue in a national debate, he quickly stated that he would not "pander" to people who were opposed to free trade. (This went over real well with workers who were looking for something more than a slick facile slogan like "outsource Bush"; it may have cost Kerry the election.)

In short, Democratic Party presidential candidate Kerry tried to use the Offshore outsourcing/free trade issue in '04 but found that such positions upset his richy-rich business contributors so he backed off his "Benedict Arnold" rhetoric and tried to have it both ways. I noticed it, people on my email lists noticed, blog posters noticed it and even the business press in the U.S. and offshore noticed it. People do catch on...

And, where is John Edwards the sometime critic of NAFTA and "free trade" today? He's talking about "Two Americas" but nary a word about offshore outsourcing of American middle class jobs. Oh yea, he did have time to visit rich high tech CEOs in the Silicon Valley to explain how he supports their "need" for more imported "replacement workers", I mean, "guest workers" because there's such a skills shortage what with all the American IT workers who have been fired by the thousands. (Nah, Edwards didn't say that last part; I was just being sarcastic.

Sadly, Obama, is also courting the richy-rich business groups who are benefitting from offshore outsourcing American jobs and importing lower-wage "guest workers". Yea, his campaign was stupid, rude and irresponsible in the Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab) comments but it's unfortunate that Obama felt compelled to drop the whole issue of Hillary and Bill's ties to the elites benefiting from American job losses.

So, just because sometime Republican voters are disenchanted with free trade and offshore outsourcing, Democratic candidates have to be able to offer some credible alternative. They failed to deliver this in '04 and, at this point, they're not doing any better in '07. In fact, they're doing worse: they haven't even opened the subject.

Unfortunately, real democrats like Bernie (technically an "I") Sanders, Sherrod Brown, Jim Webb and Byron Dorgan are not among the presidential primary contenders. If they were, we'd have some people who could effectively and credibly debate the offshore outsourcing and worker replacement issues.

As it is, Hillary Clinton's alleged differences with her husband on trade and labor issues (played up and exaggerated in the WSJ) are unbelievable -- IMO mere positioning to win over labor and Democrats. Hillary is as "DLC" and tainted with pro-outsourcing lobby money as they come. She's even carved out a special niche supporting the expansion of the worker replacement visas...

Originally posted to Jonathan Tasini's site as a comment on, "Democratic Golden Opportunity: Republican Voters Oppose "Free Trade"

Who among the Democratic presidential candidates has the credibility to do anything about this?



Definitely, NOT HILLARY CLINTON.

The Rich Get Richer, We Get Poorer

In my last post, I commented on EDS permanently whacking another 12,000 middle class American jobs (Offshoring jobs to low labor cost nations). Afterward, I wondered how much money the current CEO, Ronald Rittenmeyer is paid given that EDS is allegedly so concerned with cost cutting.

Well, in 2006, Rittenmeyer received a salary of $770,000 plus a bonus of $310,000. Salary and bonus for CEO Rittenmeyer in '06 was $1,080,000 -- over a MILLION dollars. But that's not all: there's this "Latest FY other long-term comp." item totaling over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS: $4,318,694. The real total 2006 compensation for the cost-cutting CEO of EDS is $5,399,527. Look at that number real hard. That reads FIVE MILLION, THREE HUNDRED, NINETY-NINE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

Of course in 2006, Rittenmeyer was just a peon at EDS, merely the "President/COO/Director" -- not the "CEO". The CEO of EDS in '06 was Michael H. Jordan who received total cash compensation from EDS of $13,639,711 and stock options of $11,007,630. (Total: $24,647,341)

So, look what Rittenmeyer has to look forward to: there's some real room for income growth between $5,399,527 and $13,639,711. Hmm... if Rittenmeyer replaces enough American workers with cheaper workers in India, he can make a good case for pushing close to that THIRTEEN MILLION DOLLAR figure. And don't forget the ELEVEN "MIL" in stock...

EDS plans to hire lower cost workers in, among other places, India to replace the expensive middle class American workers. This is a well known situation: American middle class jobs being destroyed and American middle class workers without comparable job opportunities. This is how "free trade" really works. Corporations eliminate jobs and job opportunities for Americans until Americans are willing to accept the same Third World wages that Indians and others in low labor cost nations are willing to accept. Supporters of "free trade" and unrestricted offshore outsourcing (like Sen. Hillary Clinton) have publicly dismissed this as merely the workings of "global competition".


I note the peculiar injustice and hypocrisy of CEOs like Ronald Rittenmeyer and politicians like Hillary Clinton acquiring tremendous wealth while millions of middle class Americans face an endless "Race to the Bottom" in wages and living standards. While most business leaders and many political leaders claim that free trade is good for America, I think the truth is that offshore outsourcing American jobs is good for them and bad for us.

Clinton Hypocrisy: Bill "Giving" Himself Undeserved Praise...

I'm reading this...

The Hypocrisy of Bill Clinton's New Book 'Giving'

Summary:

Bill Clinton has written a new book about charity, a "fitting subject" for a president who betrayed the poor and led his party into the arms of corporate America.

Noteable Quote:

The misery sweeping across the American landscape may have begun with Ronald Reagan, but it was accelerated and codified by Bill Clinton. He sold out the poor and the working class. And Clinton did it deliberately to feed the pathological hunger he and his wife have for political power. It was the Clintons who led the Democratic Party to the corporate watering trough.

The Clintons argued that the party had to ditch labor unions, no longer a source of votes or power, as a political ally. Workers would vote Democratic anyway. They had no choice. It was better, the Clintons argued, to take corporate money and use government to service the needs of the corporations. By the 1990s, the Democratic Party, under Clinton’s leadership, had virtual fund-raising parity with the Republicans. In political terms, it was a success. In moral terms, it was a betrayal.

I'll add that while Bill Clinton is rightfully slammed for NAFTA, he also initiated the H-1b non-immigrant visa "guest worker" program with no "labor test" safeguards for American workers. This omission has permitted corporations to claim phantom labor shortages and import lower wage, more compliant foreign workers as replacements for middle class American workers. (There are obvious indicators of age discrimination here too; the imported replacement workers are mostly 20-somethings...)

H-1b has proven a highly effective tool for offshore outsourcing the very "information age" jobs which Clinton claimed Americans would fill in the wake of the loss of manufacturing and industrial job movement out of the U.S. due to NAFTA and future "free trade" agreements.

The fact that Bill Clinton makes regular free trade pilgrimages (junkets) to Davos where he continues to sing the praises of the corporate managed trade system (WTO) he helped ram through Congress is a source of endless disgust.

Bill Clinton's profitable relationship with corporations such Cisco which wholeheartedly embrace the offshore outsourcing paradigm is an indication of how little he cares about Americans who must work for a living.

In Opposition to Hillary Clinton...

Hillary Clinton supports laws, regulations and trade agreements which subordinate the broad general good of all Americans and the long term interests of the United States to the whims of corporations controlled by monied elites. Hillary Clinton believes in the same radical corporate-managed trade and labor policies supported by the Bush Administration. These radical pro-corporate policies, established in law and government regulation, enable corporations to destroy good paying jobs for Americans undercutting the very idea of a broad middle class society.

Indeed, Hillary Clinton has displayed a pattern of studied indifference to the plight of working Americans while eagerly accepting corporate gifts, favors, and financial reward. From support for UN-FAIR trade agreements to promoting corporate "guest worker" programs used to replace American white-collar workers with imported lower-cost non-Americans, Senator Clinton well represents the corporate interests of the Offshore Outsourcing lobby in the U.S. Senate.

However, effective advocacy and unwavering support for the interests of corporations and slavish devotion to business lobbies are not popularly-accepted qualifications for election to the office of President of the United States. While it is convenient for some to confuse the short-term objective of winning elections with the principles necessary to govern for the broad general welfare of all Americans, self-serving political opportunism must be recognized for what it is.

Therefore, "The Modern Patriot" opposes the candidacy of Hillary Clinton for the office of President of the United States and urges others to closely examine the beliefs and conduct of Senator Clinton. True democrats do not support policies which destroy the livelihoods of American families and lead to deteriorating living standards for all except the wealthy and well-connected.

Cross-posted to Raising Kaine on 09/18 and the Daily Kos on 09/19.

Hillary Clinton Supports Destruction of American Jobs, Takes Pay-Offs For Helping Outsourcers

Continuing on the theme of my previous posting re. Hillary Clinton's support for corporate programs to eliminate jobs for American workers, I read a comment by an angry Clinton constituent on Progressive Geek

The one-time Clinton supporter discussed Hillary's promise to work to improve the jobs situation in Upstate New York when she first ran for the U.S. Senate. Clinton has done just the opposite and cynically used the jobs issue for election but has no interest in helping American workers once in office.

Here's a brief part of the comment:

"Her entire career in upstate New York has been of a piece in a series of token gestures, creating 10 token window-dressing American jobs for Tata Consulting in Buffalo (what a great trade -- there are more than 10 Indian consultants right now just in my cubicle cluster in Albany!!). It's endemic up here, cheap token gestures like renaming empty streets leading to dead malls and empty office campuses "Computer Avenue" and "Silicon Way"; pointless PR campaigns "re-branding" upstate New York as "Tech Valley"; setting up a local non-union "Charter School" in technology with enrollments of 40 kids who probably spend more time being photographed with politicians than learning."


The comment came in response to a very important story of how the Clinton campaign was actively seeking the support of key U.S. and foreign "big money" in the Offshore Outsourcing business. The article referenced appeared in the LA Times, "Clinton woos the outsourcers feared by U.S. workers". This article is also well worth a read, essentially underscoring the tremendous reality lost in the much misunderstood Obama campaign claim that Hillary Clinton was essentially representing the interests of the Indian offshore outsourcing business elites.

Here's one fine quote from the article which gives some indication of how offshore outsourcing money is helping to power the Hillary Clinton campaign:

"Clinton is successfully wooing wealthy Indian Americans, many of them business leaders with close ties to their native country and an interest in protecting outsourcing laws and expanding access to worker visas. Her campaign has held three fundraisers in the Indian American community recently, one of which raised close to $3 million, its sponsor told an Indian news organization.

But in Buffalo, the fruits of the Tata deal have been hard to find. The company, which called the arrangement Clinton's "brainchild," says "about 10" employees work here. Tata says most of the new employees were hired from around Buffalo. It declines to say whether any of the new jobs are held by foreigners, who make up 90% of Tata's 10,000-employee workforce in the United States."

The quote from John Miano at the Programmer's Guild reminds me very much of the criticisms faced by Harris Miller in last year's Virginia Dem. primary:

"It's just two-faced," said John Miano, founder of the Programmers Guild, one of several high-tech worker organizations that have sprung up as outsourcing has expanded. "We see her undermining U.S. workers and helping the offshoring business, and then she comes back to the U.S. and says, 'I'm concerned about your pain.' "

TATA or TCS, the Indian Offshore Outsourcing and H-1b bodyshop mentioned in the article imports thousands of Indian guest workers into the US to facilitate offshore outsourcing of jobs to India or replace American workers in the U.S. with imported Indian workers also in the U.S. The key in both cases is the so-called "guest worker" programs (e.g., H-1b, L-1) supposedly created because of "shortages of American workers" (a widespread myth concocted at great effort and cost by outsourcing and anti-worker lobbies).

Hillary Clinton is all about LIES -- lies propping up bigger lies to help make the rich and powerful more rich and more powerful leading to the sort of sharply reduced living standards for the majority of Americans now increasingly in evidence all over the U.S.

Hillary CLinton's Offshoring Ties Face Scrutiny

It seems that contrary to Hillary Clinton's claim that there's nothing new to talk about re. her past, the Sept. 8 Washington Post has an interesting article, "Unions Press Clinton on Outsourcing Of U.S. Jobs", filled with information about Senator Clinton's ties to monied elites who profit from the elimination of American middle class jobs.

The Obama campaign's fumbled criticism of Hillary Clinton's ties to Indian outsourcing corporations (e.g., "Sen. Clinton, D-Punjab") and mainstream press failure to explore the facts, notwithstanding there's plenty of grist for the mill here.

Millions of middle and working class Americans want to know what the he!! an alleged "democrat" is doing allied with the people responsible for declining standards of living and rising inequities in America.

Assuredly, this is the conversation that Hillary Clinton does NOT want to have with American journalists and voters.

The reality is that Hillary likes the cash that comes from being the friend of business lobbies who wish to continue their middle class job-killing policies without government interference.

My suggestion to those interested in seeing whose interests Hillary is concerned with: follow the money. The money trail to Hillary leads back to corporate boardrooms and CEO mansions in the U.S. and offshore -- to people who have grown immensely rich while the lives of middle and working class Americans have deteriorated.

Isn't it interesting that Hillary Clinton is trying to downplay her offshore outsourcing lobbyist ties now? Voters in last November's elections put two outspoken critics of offshore outsourcing into the U.S. Senate: Jim Webb (Virginia) and Sherrod Brown (Ohio)

Perhaps Hillary realises that she has to get past democratic voters in states where her outsourcing lobby money may count less than it does in New York -- states like Virginia and Ohio. Democrats in these states have elected leaders diametrically opposed to the economic/jobs/labor policies that Hillary has joined Republicans in supporting during her time in the Senate.