Hillary Clinton Tells Wall Street She Believes Anti-Wall Street Rhetoric ‘Foolish’

[Ichingcarpenter]

Here we go again. According to a piece in Politico Magazine former Secretary of State and likely 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had some harsh words related to progressives in her $400,000 speeches for Goldman Sachs and friends. Clinton decided to use her speaking opportunity before the super rich to attack those criticizing Wall Street and its numerous criminal practices.

Ordinarily these masters of the universe might have groaned at the idea of a politician taking the microphone…

But Clinton offered a message that the collected plutocrats found reassuring, according to accounts offered by several attendees, declaring that the banker-bashing so popular within both political parties was unproductive and indeed foolish.

Foolish, as in you don’t get paid $400,000 for saying it? Why criticize Goldman Sachs when you can get paid $400,000 for talking to them the way they like?

Striking a soothing note on the global financial crisis, she told the audience, in effect: We all got into this mess together, and we’re all going to have to work together to get out of it. What the bankers heard her to say was just what they would hope for from a prospective presidential candidate: Beating up the finance industry isn’t going to improve the economy—it needs to stop.


http://news.firedoglake.com/2013/12/12/hillary-clinton-tells-wall-street-she-believes-anti-wall-street-rhetoric-foolish/


Lament of the Plutocrats

The bankers and their guests filed into a large room and turned their eyes to Hillary Clinton.......


Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/wall-street-white-house-republicans-lament-of-the-plutocrats-101047.html#ixzz3LnZQqUls



http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/wall-street-white-house-republicans-lament-of-the-plutocrats-101047.html?hp=t1

[monmouth4]

1. Statements like these from her make me dislike her more and more. Proceed Hillary...n/t

[still_one]

10. Not that it is invalid, you do know this is from December 2013, right?

[Ichingcarpenter]

15. So What!! ....... she meant ever word didn't she?

words matter.

[still_one]

26. of course. However, this is December 13, and the post implies that it is a direct response to

Elizabeth Warren's impressive showing yesterday

[PatSeg]

172. Since when do politicians

say what they mean???

Well, there are a few exceptions, but very few.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

188. No doubt Hillary can explain it away in typical "Third Way" bullshit fashion. Precisely why we need Elizabeth to be our candidate. . .

As they say, "the best candidate money can't buy!"

[Marr]

28. Oh yeah, a whole other ERA.

[yurbud]

231. Hillary should about Obama's mantra on war crimes, "We should look forward not back," for her

economic crimes.

[TBF]

51. So we should completely discount

everything she has said and only listen to her current pro-populist message? Look, her association with both Wall Street and Walmart speaks for itself.

[still_one]

157. Absolutely not. It is quite relevant. The only thing that might get confused that this was a direct

rebuttal to Senator Warrens tour de force yesterday, and though it is very timely and relevant, Clinton's views were based on her view that only minimal regulation was required for Wall Street, which time and again has be proven to be wrong

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

190. With these statements, Hillary has completely disqualified herself as the Democratic candidate as far as I'm concerned.

[TBF]

200. Well she's not my favorite BUT

she has huge name recognition (sometimes that is good, sometimes not so good!)

I have been wondering if Elizabeth, Bernie (my personal fave!), and Hillary are all past their prime. And I say this as an older lady myself. Of course Jeb Bush is 61 so maybe it will be an older field all around fighting for the boomer vote.

In terms of policy alone I am very left so I view Hillary as being conservative (Obama too for that matter), but she also would be excellent on LBGT and women's issues. Not so sure about human rights overall - she's been a bit of a warmonger.

I dunno. We will have to see how the primary season plays out.

[PeoViejo]

89. I wouldn't care if it was from 30 Years ago.

This is 'Old News', they say, brushing it off as if it had no relevance to the Present.

[still_one]

156. 1 year, 5 years, yes it is relevant toe the present. 30 years, not necessarily. A lot can change,

and has for people within 30 years.

However, 30 years isn't the point in this OP, and the one year time frame is very relevant.

[rhett o rick]

126. Yeah, but what's your point? You're not implying that we shouldn't pay attention to what was said,

what? A year ago? 6 months ago. What is the time period. In 2002 Bushie said that Iraq had WMD. I still hold him accountable for that lie. Oh yeah, H. Clinton also said Iraq had WMD.

The bottom line is that H. Clinton will side with the Republicans if she sees fit. She did it in 2002 and she will do it again.

[still_one]

155. nope not implying that at all, especially within a one year time frame. Even several years time

frame it would still be a valid criticism

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

192. Another disqualifying statement by Hillary.

[billhicks76]

232. Some Prolific Commenters Are Supporting Blackmail

Vote for Hillary or else!!! They can go to Hell.

[840high]

137. She hasn't changed.

[still_one]

158. you are absolutely correct

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

193. Never will.

[billhicks76]

180. Me Too...She's Revolting

My biggest worry is that she and her husband are colluding with the Bush Family. I do not trust them. We should be running on the Anti-Nepotism ticket not the Pro-Nepotism ticket.

[99Forever]

2. Thank you Ms. Hillary Goldman Sachs Clinton.

It's good to know exactly where you stand and with whom.

(As if we didn't already know.)

[closeupready]

3. As I've said before, a Hillary run is win/lose for her, win/win for the

guys who paid for her speech - if she wins, she continues to go easy on them, and giving them what they want at a measured pace, making attempts to sound Democratic while making moves that put her unmistakably in the corporo-3rd Way camp; if she loses, Jeb will give them exactly what they want, and probably faster than they can possibly hope.

And she is likely to be as successful inspiring voters to vote Dem as she was this year, lol.

[airplaneman]

93. good post - I agree with your thinking. n/t.

[Autumn]

4. You go Hillary!!!!

Way to win little friends in low places while sucking up to your high class friends in the Ivory Tower.

I hope with all my heart she doesn't run.

[INdemo]

204. If she doent run it will save her the disappointment of losing

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. I hope we can find some better candidates than this.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

199. How hard can it be? Any Dem not in Wall Street's hip pocket would be an improvement.

[mother earth]

6. "We all got into this together." Spoken like a true corporatist, she loves her TPP agreement too.

But then, she is speaking to her base, just like good ole GW, only this time Jeb will be the alternative.

Wake up calls to any sensible dems abound, TY, HRC, you are transparent.

[Enthusiast]

30. +1. The point being we all didn't all get into this together.

We didn't commit fraud.

[mother earth]

122. Exactly, apologies if I was not clear, I forget it's not always clear to those who still don't get

it. TY, enthusiast, I needed that.

[Enthusiast]

125. Oh, you were perfectly clear enough. I just felt like saying it again.

And again. And again. And Again.

[mother earth]

141. As we should.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

195. Thank you! My thoughts exactly. Hillary must think we're awfully stupid.

[vlyons]

65. No, we all didn't get in this together

You, your corporate pals and their lobbyists, and the greedy spineless corrupt politicians got us into it. Take some responsibility, lady.

[DonCoquixote]

135. asfar as we "got into this together'

what about the wall street pigs that howled when obama rightfully said "you did not build that" alone?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

196. Responsibility? LOL, you know that'll never happen!

[AikidoSoul]

107. Good points. I'm hoping that more and more Dems will wake up.

Why is it so difficult for some to see that she has sold her soul to Wall St. and Big Money in general?



on edit: added question mark.

[L0oniX]

134. If only she would give me a few million it'd make me feel like we are in this together too.

[tularetom]

7. Isn't this the point where a long post shows up

listing a gazillion reasons why Hillary Clinton is the most liberal, progressive and most of all, infuckingevitable presidential candidate that has ever lived?

I'm so used to that post I can see it when I close my eyes.

Oh yeah, that and the little graph that shows where Hillary stands on the Progressive/Conservative and Libertarian/Authoritarian axes.

I'll be amazed if it doesn't appear somewhere in this thread.

[Buns_of_Fire]

121. FWIW, it takes 14 "pgdn"s on my machine to get past it. I've counted. Several times. nt

[davidpdx]

136. Yeah I have too

Apparently spamming is permitted.

[Mnpaul]

166. but blatant fair use violations are not permitted

[davidpdx]

170. Next time you see one alert it and watch what happens

I'll put $20 on a no hide outcome.

[Mnpaul]

185. If DU wants to get sued

they can continue to ignore it but the policy of the site where the material is being stolen from(often with no attribution) has a policy stated on their homepage:

Reproduction of material from any OnTheIssues.org pages without written permission is prohibited.

[davidpdx]

189. Well that is an issue for the owners

All that we can do is alert them when we see them. Most juries will take a pass on it and leave it. Whether it's ignorance or the rah rah support of the specific user who knows.

[Mnpaul]

194. There is more we can do

We can call out said thief every time they do it.

I'm sick of that childish crap and want it gone.

[davidpdx]

202. While I agree with you

At the same time you have to watch your back.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

197. Yup, waiting on that silly post in 3, 2, 1... No one is buyin that crap. Hillary is toast before she even gets out of the gate. Bring on Elizabeth!!

[still_one]

8. Please make clear that this is from December 2013. That does not make the point invalid, but it

does question why in the OP you don't make it clear it is from December 2013. Yes, they can find it within the article, but coincidently since it is December 13, 2014, a lot of folks may miss that

Are you trying to be deceptive and give the impression that this occurred today, bearing in mind that Elizabeth Warren just presented a tour de force before Congress yesterday?

[Autumn]

14. I didn't miss it. That speech was when I stopped supporting Hillary and decided I will not vote

for her. It's an anniversary of sorts for me.

[still_one]

21. and that is valid. It is just that the OP should make it clear since it is worded in present tense

which is probably accurate with her views today, but still not presenting the story with full disclosure, with a date that can be easy missed, because December 12,13, is today, and 2013 to 2014 is easily missed

My post is NOT meant to support Hillary, or any other candidate, just to make sure that time frames are clear. It does not invalidate the point being made

[Autumn]

29. The date is right there for all to see. Those who have paid attention

know, and those who pay attention like you did will see the date.

[Rex]

16. Wow paranoid much?

Just don't like people seeing HRC in this light? I understand.

[still_one]

22. you are full of crap. If you read my post, I said it was a valid criticism. I just said that the

date should be made clear that it wasn't yesterday or today

Typical bullshit, throw everyone under the bus because you don't like a comment. What does "paranoid" have to do with it? What am I paranoid about?

I don't know who I am inclined to vote for yet in the primaries, but as of right now if Bernie runs as a Democrat he will get my vote in the primaries.

I do not believe Elizabeth Warren will run in 2016. Not only based on what she has said, but because she is feeling her mojo in the Senate

[benz380]

31. Not paranoid, maybe OCD for posting same message at least 4 times. nt

[still_one]

41. Whatever

[roguevalley]

45. it could be 2 yrs. ago and she would still be a dino

[Rex]

91. Wow you are paranoid.

Good thing we have you around to point out dates and other trivia.

[still_one]

106. Lol

[Ichingcarpenter]

18. Words matter .....including Hillary's

so one year ago she was kissing their asses

[still_one]

23. I agree. I just suggested to make the date clear

[TBF]

52. Sure, you have no other motive -

[still_one]

161. yeah, I have a super secret motive to get ted cruz elected along with clinton. Or perhaps I am just

the paranoid, obsessive compulsive, or some other mental issue that a couple of people in this thread have referred to me as

Fire away with whatever fantasy you want to attribute to me

[TBF]

201. Nah - you're just a more conservative

dem. Personally I don't think it is the direction to go but I can understand there are not a lot of younger dems who have the name recognition she has.

As a socialist I'm going to be forced between 2 parties I don't agree with anyway, but I do look for the party that will do the least amount of damage to working people. When you give me Hillary Clinton it isn't a lot to work with.

[still_one]

212. First of all I haven't decided who I will vote for in the primaries believe it or not

If Bernie Sanders runs as a Democrat, I am inclined to vote for him.

I do not believe Elizabeth Warren wants to run for president in 2016. She is starting to get influence in the Senate, and I think she believes she can achieve more there for the time being. When she said she doesn't plan to run for president, I take her at her word.

The other candidates that will most likely run on the Democratic ballot will be Jim Webb, Biden, and of course Clinton.

Jack Reed's name from RI has been floated around, and that would make things definitely interesting.

However, in the end I will vote for whoever the Democrats choose in there primaries, including Hillary.

The most important issue to me is the SC. As much as I had problems with Bill Clinton regarding his stands on deregulation, welfare reform, and trade, his judicial appointments were outstanding. Ruth Ginsberg is the most obvious one.

I also believe that any possible Democrat who runs against any possible Republican would make vastly superior appointments, and there will be at least one, and possibly two more. The next President will decide if we go full bore oligarchy, and whether civil rights, women's rights, and worker's rights are turned back 80 years, or if at the minimum the status quo is maintained, which isn't great, and possibly even reversed from its right wing direction.

I probably am a little more conservative than you, but I also am probably not as conservative as you think.

The only thing I would impress upon those who won't vote for the Democratic nominee if it is Clinton, is to at least vote. There are more issues than just the presidential race, and in fact the only way real change, progressive change, is going to occur is if the makeup of Congress is changed, along with local municipalities, and ballot measures in individual states.

I think sometimes we get side-tracked by the high profile races, and don't consider the long term goals

[TBF]

218. This is helpful -

thanks for clarifying as I think it will help folks in the thread see where you are coming from.

The thing with Hillary Clinton is that the reviews are really mixed. People seem to love or hate her. I'm not sure that is helpful in a presidential candidate. I will look up Jack Reed because I had not heard of him. I'm focused on Julian Castro from San Antonio now that I'm not living inside the beltway anymore.

I do agree with your comments on voting - even Engels felt we should participate in "any movement of the working class that, whatever its limitations, would help it to develop its own independent political party." The problem with our current constitution is that we have two strong political parties which are both supporting capitalism. Maybe there could be a way to build an independent socialist party and run it as such, but until then I end up voting for Dems/Greens.

[still_one]

225. As long as you vote that is all that matters. I agree and understand your point, they are well

thought out

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

84. I admit, I did at first think this was something new,

for the 15 seconds or so it took me to notice that all three links had 2013 in them, at which point I said, oh, it's last year's.

Really, anyone who reads the thing is going to notice that it's about the 2013 speech. If the poster 'wanted to be deceptive', they'd want to use something like bit.ly to alter the links so it wasn't completely obvious.

[still_one]

165. The reason I brought it up is because the timing coincides with Senator's Warren's speech, and it

could have been interpreted as an immediate rebuttal by Clinton to Warren if the year was missed.

It isn't that the criticism of Clinton isn't valid, it is.

[7wo7rees]

9. Yes, please, Hill, do go on........... and on.... n/t

[whatchamacallit]

11. If she becomes the nominee, we deserve to have our asses kicked

That is all.

[Nay]

56. Agreed. If we get railroaded into this, we deserve to live in a box under a

fucking (collapsing) bridge.

My fallback plan is to vote for a Democrat with a write-in vote. I'm out of solutions for this sad state of affairs.

[Rhinodawg]

70. Good... take "The Cali Pledge"

that is all.

[whatchamacallit]

80. Don't know what that is

but no matter, I won't be talking anyone's pledge. Don't you have some islamophobia to whip up?

[NorthCarolina]

187. I don't think we really have any choice in the matter.

She will undoubtedly be anointed the nominee, especially now when those in power are feeling attacked.

[Broward]

12. Throw in her vote for the Iraq War

and her candidacy should be a nonstarter. At least as a Democrat.

[Legalequilibrium78]

43. Your hero Elizabeth Warren

I wish she will run, and let's see how good of a politician she truly is. She can talk a good game that is all she ever do, and has done so far. People here give her so much adulation like she is the epitome of everything progressive/Liberal, hah!! what a crock of shit.

[RiverLover]

78. BS. Here's a link with her sponsored bills. She walks the talk. She's NOT Obama!!

http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=sponsored_legislation

[Legalequilibrium78]

83. She is a Senator from

The blue state of Masachusetts!! She is not the President, so of course she is not Obama. Invalid comparisons.

[RiverLover]

88. Invalid response.

She's not just words, like you said, she's action. She's genuine, proven by her actions. She's actually walking Obama's talk. At least someone is. He sure isn't.

And just trying to make some kind of logic from your response, how is that she's a senator from Mass relevant to our little discussion? What was the point you were trying to make?

[still_one]

162. Some of your points are valid, but it should be remembered also that Massachusetts elected romney,

and replaced Ted Kennedy's seat initially with a republican before Warren won it back.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

198. No, no, Hillary was duped! Dontcha know? Another reason we need to elect a more qualified candidate.

[joshcryer]

13. Sounds like she's running.

2016 should be a $4-10 billion dollar election.

[RiverLover]

17. No, she's not taking bribes from Wall Street, she's just making the rounds,

advising Goldman Sachs employees with all of her great expertise on investments...

[Thinkingabout]

19. IF it was about the money she would just continue to give speeches which used to be

$200,000 a speech and now has ballooned to $400,000 and forget about the $400,000 a year salary of the presidency. The large compensation she gets per speech is because she is able to get more for Goldman Sachs to listen to her than many others, you have to be in demand. sorry, some just do not rate.

[Marr]

33. Did you really read this as people being *jealous*?

Clinton can charge $400,000 because Wall Street wants to fund her. This isn't about some incredible insights being offered in the speech.

C'mon, you do know how fund raising works, right?

[Thinkingabout]

49. Yes, it does appear some are very jealous, they continue to rant about anyone who has

"more" instead of being happy a couple of middle class incomes is able to rise on the income ladder. Yes I am aware of fund raising and know if Wall Street and corporations do not donate to campaign funds it would be impossible to raise money as in Warren's $42m fund spent on her senate run. This was just one state and if you multiply this times two, one for the primary and one for the general election times fifty for the fifty states. I have ask here several times who is willing among us to put up this type of cash and I have not found someone starting a fund which can supply these needs.

[RiverLover]

60. No, its the Big Money that is controlling our "elected reps" & govt policies that is the problem.

Any Democrat would know this.

Its the rethugs who say we "don't like rich people." A total smear based on a lie. Thanks for sharing it here, with us!

[Thinkingabout]

61. You know you are talking about Bernie and Warren also, huh?

[RiverLover]

62. Do you get tired of doing this every day?

They are both fighting the good fight within the parameters of our current privately funded campaign system. They work for the good ones who donate & they don't have revolving doors for jobs with lobbyists, nor do they give $200K "speeches" to buy their influence.

I need to call my rethug brother & have this same conversation.

[Thinkingabout]

95. As soon as this endless baseless cognitive dissonance ends, yep that's when it will end.

If you think Bernie and Warren doesn't get funds from corporations and lobbyists you are sleeping through the truth.

[RiverLover]

101. Get with the program, look below, I proved you wrong. Trolls are the ones with

cognitive dissonance btw.

That's why they badger people & twist their words & argue to argue. What they believe doesn't match reality.

Bernie & Liz don't take money from banks. Period. See Liz's donors below.

[Thinkingabout]

117. Trolls, you must be thinking about the cognitive dissonance of others, I am not a troll,

Making an accusation is unacceptable, look at #113, I am not wrong, at least you should take Elizabeth Warren at her word, she admits she has Wall Street connections, it gives integrity to her, don't destroy her honesty.

[Dragonfli]

142. To be honest you do appear a bit like you could live comfortably in a "bridge adjacent" environment

Not sure yet about directly under, I'm still giving you the benefit of the doubt as you may just be drawn that way like Jessica Rabbit.

[Thinkingabout]

144. I would never go under a bridge, I leave troll invasions to others.

Why is it when some do not have a good explanation they turn to name calling, does it help?

[Dragonfli]

146. More a candid observation really, I wasn't trying to explain anything - good or otherwise.

[Thinkingabout]

147. Perhaps you could fine a more appropriate method than name calling, it dors not raise one's

Standard.

[AikidoSoul]

110. So who do you recommend to run for president, since you think

that Elizabeth and Bernie are just like all the other corrupt politicians who take money to run their campaigns?

[Thinkingabout]

119. Acknowledgement of facts oa everyone's part is good. Anyone who has the qualifications to be in the

Office of presidency can run. This attacking a candidate for one's perception a candidate they may back is not involved in the same crap should not be happening to Democrats on DU. It gets down to selecting a candidate with the possibility of first getting elected, working with others to get a desired agenda passed and the where with all to handle the many angles of being president, a well rounded person.

[Kermitt Gribble]

64. Can you supply links

that would show how campaign contributions from the financial industry directly affected Warren or Sander's votes?

Thanks in advance.

[RiverLover]

66. They don't take contributions from banks. Hillary does. Here's alist and a link for ya~

Hillary's campaign donors 1999-2014


Citigroup Inc $782,327 $774,327 $8,000
Goldman Sachs $711,490 $701,490 $10,000
DLA Piper $628,030 $601,030 $27,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $620,919 $617,919 $3,000
Emily's List $605,174 $601,254 $3,920
Morgan Stanley $543,065 $538,065 $5,000
Time Warner $411,296 $386,296 $25,000
Skadden, Arps et al $406,640 $402,140 $4,500
Lehman Brothers $362,853 $359,853 $3,000
Cablevision Systems $336,288 $306,900 $29,388
University of California $329,673 $329,673 $0
Kirkland & Ellis $311,441 $294,441 $17,000
Squire Patton Boggs $310,596 $305,158 $5,438
21st Century Fox $302,400 $302,400 $0
National Amusements Inc $297,534 $294,534 $3,000
Ernst & Young $297,142 $277,142 $20,000
Merrill Lynch $292,303 $286,303 $6,000
Credit Suisse Group $290,600 $280,600 $10,000
Corning Inc $274,700 $256,700 $18,000
Greenberg Traurig LLP $273,550 $265,450 $8,100

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019

[RiverLover]

67. And here's a list of Elizabeth Warren donors~

Senator has reported a total of 809 contributions ($200 or more) totaling $304,309 in 2013-2014. Search
Top 20 Contributors to Campaign Cmte
1 EMILY's List $507,095 $507,095 $0
2 Moveon.org $453,517 $129,540 $323,977
3 Harvard University $312,550 $312,550 $0
4 Massachusetts Institute of Technology $76,200 $76,200 $0
5 Boston University $73,700 $73,700 $0
6 Massachusetts General Hospital $72,060 $72,060 $0
7 University of California $71,750 $71,750 $0
8 Brown Rudnick LLP $68,077 $67,077 $1,000
9 League of Conservation Voters $55,551 $52,931 $2,620
10 Ropes & Gray $52,950 $52,950 $0
11 Commonwealth of Massachusetts $49,080 $49,080 $0
12 Thornton & Naumes $43,450 $43,450 $0
13 Mintz, Levin et al $42,600 $42,600 $0
14 Council for a Livable World $41,181 $35,100 $6,081
15 University of Massachusetts $41,150 $41,150 $0
16 Brandeis University $40,050 $40,050 $0
17 Google Inc $38,575 $38,575 $0
18 Berger & Montague $36,500 $36,500 $0
19 Bingham McCutchen LLP $35,000 $35,000 $0
19 Goodwin Procter LLP $35,000 $35,000 $0

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00033492&newMem=Y&type=I

[Kermitt Gribble]

74. Great links, RiverLover!

I was pretty confident Thinkingabout couldn't supply data to back up the bs claims.

[RiverLover]

76. I'm glad you didn't mind me jumping in KG!!

[AikidoSoul]

111. RiverLover you are a jewel! Thank you for this documentation.

I didn't know this. It shows clearly how much integrity the Woman has.

Love ya!

[Thinkingabout]

115. Warren admirs her Wall Street connections.

http://www.americancrossroads.org/2012/01/elizabeth-warren-i-do-have-donors-on-wall-street/

At least we can say she is honest about her Wall Street connections.

[rhett o rick]

130. The cash that Goldman-Sachs gave to H. Clinton-Sachs went directly into her pocket.

It wasn't a campaign contribution, like you listed. I hope you don't disagree that HRC is in the pocket of Goldman-Sachs?

[Thinkingabout]

152. Do you have a job?

[rhett o rick]

171. H. Clinton takes money from corporations to build her personal wealth.

Her speech was an assurance that when she becomes president she will treat Wall Street well. It's corruption.

[Thinkingabout]

174. Do you have or have you ever had a job?

[rhett o rick]

216. Why don't you make a statement instead of trying to manipulate me with silly questions?

HRC taking money for her personal fortune from corporations is a conflict of interest if she becomes president. It's graft.

[Thinkingabout]

217. This seems to be a really hard question for you to answer. You are using a filibuster

used so often by RWers rather than allowing a conversation to advance, a typical manipulation used very frequently by Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe when he knows the republicans are on the losing side.

[rhett o rick]

220. It isn't much of a discussion if you only ask questions. Are you afraid to lay out your opinions? nm

[Thinkingabout]

221. Well, if you can't answer the question I can conclude you may not know the value of work and the

Compensation for someone's services. Why do you say disparaging comments about someone who does work? Is this going to become normal to trash Democrats?

[rhett o rick]

222. See how easy that was. We got to your point w/o me having answer a bunch of inane questions.

I know the value of work that why I resent HRC getting paid $400,000 to get up at a meeting and tell Goldman-Sachs how she thinks that bankers are being mistreated.

As Dire Straits once said, "That ain't workin' that's the way you do it. Money for nothin' "

It ain't workin' it's graft plain and simple. "Graft, a form of political corruption, is the unscrupulous use of a politician's authority for personal gain" It's an investment by Goldman-Sachs for a little future quid pro quo.

[Thinkingabout]

223. Then if you was not paid for your work (if any) we should resent the amount you received.

I am not sure those receiving compensation for attending a meeting with lobbyists in the bank, energy and tobacco to find out how to treat those industries is okay or not with you.

[rhett o rick]

227. Your rationalization is becoming irrational. nm

[Thinkingabout]

228. I was finding your rational somewhat strange when you complain about Hillary being

paid for her speeches, that is why I wonder if you have or have ever had a job, thinking you would realize you expected to be paid and perhaps she does also. To think about the minimum wages going to zero is probably not acceptable by many. As far as Hillary getting paid for her speeches, those booking her for those speeches are doing so for what ever reason, it is a service in which she expects pay. I detect a little jealously some times.

[INdemo]

209. On the other hand Here is Hillary's list of Contibutors from her 2008 primary

and...Obama's contributions list of the top 20 looks about the same as Hillary's

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00000019

[Thinkingabout]

113. Here you are, now let's stop this war, it does not build the DNC.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0210/Dem_senators_spent_weekend_with_bank_energy_tobacco_lobbyists.htm


http://www.americancrossroads.org/2012/01/elizabeth-warren-i-do-have-donors-on-wall-street/

[Kermitt Gribble]

123. A link to Karl Rove's Super PAC? Really??

The other link is broken, btw. I asked if you could provide evidence that Warren's votes are influenced by financial industry campaign contributions.

And what "war" are you talking about? People questioning you because you run around DU shitting on EW posts is not a "war".

[delrem]

186. Karl Rove's Super PAC knows all about the "war" he or she is talking about.

It clearly knows all about Thinkingabout's tactic - hence the citation.
A go-to place, I suppose, for those who like those tactics.

[rhett o rick]

128. Someone keyed her in that blatantly taking bribes before and election doesn't sit

well with the honest folks. There will be plenty of time after her election to give her bribes.

[corkhead]

20. Seems like Wall St. is trying to destroy the Democratic party from within

I sure hope someone I want to vote for runs in the primaries. I don't want to contemplate the alternative scenario.

[still_one]

163. No, the Democrats have been doing that quite well by themselves for years.

[fredamae]

24. So, Clinton Believes "We're" Foolish?

Nice...and we are to Support and Vote for this candidate if she runs? hahahahahahahahahahahahahaHA
Or will she be appointed by our rulers in black robes?

[stillwaiting]

108. It would be very hard for me to vote for someone who called my political beliefs foolish. nt

[BeyondGeography]

25. This is how Hillary makes supporting her like voting for your boss

Each side has contempt for each other. The fun thing about politics is, unlike work, the little guy is allowed to say so and fight back in their meager way by not voting for you. You think after blowing her first chance to be President she'd have figured that out by now.

She does find a fair portion of the left to have their feet firmly planted in the air. If she were a better politician, she'd be able to mask her contempt a lot better. This is exactly the kind of stuff that made making her pay for IWR and supporting Obama so easy for me the last time around.

[BootinUp]

112. Oh Sure, except where is the quote I can't find it

[AikidoSoul]

116. Yeah.... what he said. Jeez... that's exactly how I saw it when she was a candidate.

I worry a lot that some Dems who insist that she is "the one" have a kind of myopic view that automatically edits what they see
and hear to fit something inside them (God knows what)... but strangely, that to me is how Republican's think. Repugs just can't bear to even try to see the whole picture of an issue.

Beats me. Wish I understood it better. Could it be some kind of brain wiring issues?

[undeterred]

27. Sounds like something Mitt Romney might say.

[Jackpine Radical]

37. She's triangulating him in advance.

[Rhinodawg]

32. I think everyone who hates HRC should follow Cali's committed pledge...

I won't vote for HIllary if she's the nominee and yeah, I'll gladly leave DU for the duration.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025075831


Cali is a person of deep principle. And I respect that .

[Robbins]

42. If she's the nominee

I am staying home on election day.

Here in missouri my vote for president is worthless the republican will carry MO no matter what.And too many MO dems are just
useless.I hope a lot of blacks stay home in 2016.They can reward the MO democratic party for how useless they are by not voting.

[Rhinodawg]

57. I hope no one else thinks like you.

Sorry

[Bluenorthwest]

104. I hope a lot of black people run for office in MO in 2016.

nt

[still_one]

167. so the only issue on a ballot in Missouri is the presidential election. That makes a lot of sense

stay home and not vote on any other issues that may be on the ballot.

That is how real change happens I guess in your view, if people don't like a particular political race on a ballot, ignore the entire election.

Yup, that will show them. Brilliant!!!

[treestar]

34. So the actual quote is not included in the OP

And we know how context matters.

[onehandle]

40. Truthiness in reporting.

Someone heard from some person at some event that another person said something.

That 'something' was described to someone.



I wrote an article based on that article describing 'something.'



Pulitzer, please.

[chrisa]

35. No regulations from me, guys! Continue to steal and crash the economy! Nudge nudge wink wink

I thought Hillary was broke and just like us? Maybe she lives in the same apartment as Mitt Romney.

[Zorra]

36. We will continue to lose to Republicans if we are essentially the same as they are,

particularly on this issue.

This type of statement leads me to believe the Democratic party is a lost cause for anything besides some social change.

Why bother? I can move to Hawaii and live out my days not banging my head against the wall thinking about politics. Future generations are going to suffer mightily, but with Wall St. candidates getting nominated no matter what I do, I may as well enjoy the rest of my life until they kill the planet or I die of natural causes.

Natural causes include despair driven late onset alcoholism caused by a complete lack of hope for change.

[Robbins]

38. This is why

I say there is no difference who wins if choice is between her and Republican.

Neocons and wall street wins whoever

She is for TPP and other trade deals.

If she has policies like her husband let's remember what Bill Clinton signed into law

NAFTA-one of worst things ever to 99%

welfare reform-which hurt poor mothers

cutting nutritional help new poor young mothers

telecommunications bill which has allowed for media consolidation

repeal banking regulation which put us on path to 2008 economic meltdown

DOMA-I will let him off hook for DADT but this was I won't

We also spent all this money and time training iraqi army and what did we get for it.Nothing.Now she wants to do same with syria with totally failed In Iraq

[1StrongBlackMan]

211. Nope,no doifference at all; except ...

well ... her positions on the minimum wage, abortion, gun control, paycheck fairness, and all the other issues that set her apart from republicans.

BTW: what are your impression of what her positions on welfare reform (didn't come up during her time as a Senatorand she didn't have a vote during her time as SoS), or cutting nutritional help for young mothers (she voted against the cuts during her time as Senator),or telecom (didn't come up during her time as a Senatorand she didn't have a vote during her time as SoS), or Banking regulation (I believe she voted for Dodd Frank)?

[TRoN33]

39. After reading this, Hillary has lost my vote for good.

I want my vote to actually have meaning for the good, not to vote for lesser of two evils. Hillary isn't evil but her politics and her philosophy to get richer on expenses of poor taxpayers are considered evil actions. She will make established Republicans very happy people in private.

Elizabeth Warren 2016.

[onehandle]

44. Year old links and 'news.' nt

[ForgoTheConsequence]

54. So she doesn't believe this anymore?

What a nonsense post. It's still relevant.

[Faux pas]

46. I can't call her a sell out

because this is who she is. What she is, is an ass. That is all.

[OldRedneck]

47. Well -- that rips it.

'Bye, Hillary.

The bumper sticker is coming off.

My big-ass, gas-sucking Ford F250 Super Duty is festooned with bumper stickers:
-- Vietnam Vet
-- US Army Ranger
-- US Army Retired
-- Remington
-- Springfield Arms
-- =
-- Spiritual people inspire me; Religious people frighten me
-- EMT on board
-- Proud to be a Democrat
-- Ready for Hillary

The "Ready for Hillary" sticker will be scraped off in a few minutes -- as soon as I order a "Warren 2016" bumper sticker. In fact, think I'll order two and put one on the Mini Cooper to match the one on the truck.

[Oilwellian]

94. Bravo!

[AikidoSoul]

118. Your post made my day and made me laugh heartily

Thank you!

[RiverLover]

191. Awesome bumper stickers!! Those are really great.

Except for the one you're replacing of course.

[LongTomH]

48. And is anyone surprised?

Really?

[gregcrawford]

50. Welcome to the cesspool of malice and mendacity

Come on in! The water's fine!

Ralph Nader said there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans. Do we need any more proof that he was right? The Democratic leadership has betrayed the nation just as surely as have the Republicans. Clinton's treachery cannot go unremarked. Warren would be vastly superior to this self-serving witch, and so would Bernie Sanders. A Warren/Sanders ticket, or a Sanders/Warren ticket would get my enthusiastic support. I wouldn't cross the street to piss on Clinton if she was on fire. Her support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership cannot EVER be forgiven, and that goes for anyone else stupid enough to think that fascism only comes in asinine uniforms. Now it comes in Armani.

[AikidoSoul]

120. Love the Armani part

RE: Hillary

Her support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership cannot EVER be forgiven, and that goes for anyone else stupid enough to think that fascism only comes in asinine uniforms. Now it comes in Armani.

[hifiguy]

124. BRAVO, sir, bravo!!!

You have cut straight to the crux of the biscuit.

[still_one]

160. On some issues, no question about it, but to ignore issues of women's right differences, civil

right differences, and other social differences between the Democrats and republicans definitely demonstrates flaws in nader's logic

Bill Clinton, who I have no doubt you would subscribe the same sets of similar traits to Hillary appointed Ruth Ginsberg, and other Federal judges which not only reflect a vast difference of what a republican would appoint, but those appointments, were as enlightened as they come.

So yes, Ralph Nader was wrong up his egotistical ass, as has been demonstrated by the appointments to the SC that george bush has made

[paleotn]

210. Spot on....

I couldn't have said it better.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

53. When progressives criticize Hillary = BAD! When Hillary attacks progressives: Not a problem!

I will not vote for this woman under any circumstances, she isn't not a friend of the working poor.

[cantbeserious]

55. HRC - The Progressive Candidate For The 1%

eom

[albino65]

58. We should stop beating up Wall Street bankers

as soon as they jail the crooks.

[DeSwiss]

59. K&R

- The DINO Clintons are the single worst thing to happen to the Democratic Party in the past 150 years.

And this is one goddamned vote her ass will NEVER get!

SICK!

[vlyons]

63. She knows which side her bread is buttered on

Why criticize Goldman Sachs when you can get paid $400,000 for talking to them the way they like?

[RedCappedBandit]

68. And people wonder why liberals don't want to support her. Lol. nt

[hifiguy]

69. Under no circumstances will I EVER

vote for this woman and this is why.

[KoKo]

72. Recommend...With all her New Money from Wall Street

it will be hard for her to recant what she said in 2013.

Thank you for posting this! We need to hold politicians accountable for what they say and do. No way Hillary is going to stand for the 99% when she's bankrolled by Wall Street and will probably be picking up more money from Defense Contractors.

[proReality]

73. I bought this woman's books

and now I'm sending them back to her. I think I'll paint all the pages black before I send them. I don't want anything of her's in my house. I don't want her or anyone like her as president.

[randr]

75. Foolish is what you call your opponent

when you have no argument.
Senator Warren points out the lack of clothes on the Wall Street crowd and they think she is behaving foolish?

[barbtries]

77. she's losing me

in leaps and bounds. which makes me sad.

[Trillo]

79. A huge problem is cross ownership of stocks.

It leads to a lot of issues, and was prohibited in the early days of the union (reclaimdemocracy.org)

Here's one economist's ideas regarding the problems (but there are a lot of other search results for "cross ownership&quot , he says it allows a investor who owns a minority of the cash flow rights has the ability to be controlling owner. So, these "minority" owners can own multiple stocks in various, even competing industries, control all of them, and the average person loses, concentration of capital results, and the loss of democracy occurs.

Here's an interesting quote, CMS stands for Controlling Minority Structure.

CMS structures are common outside the United States, particularly in countries whose economies are dominated by family-controlled conglomerates.

I'm reminded of the Swiss study, Who Runs the World.

[blkmusclmachine]

81. Clintons = the 1%

"We were dead broke."

[nikto]

184. Clintons = Top 1/100th of the 1%

ftfy

[Spitfire of ATJ]

82. She thinks you have to ask permission from Wall Street to run.

[cer7711]

85. Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders for President

'Nuff said.

"I-was-under-sniper-fire-when-I-arrived-in-Bosnia" Clinton surely did not "misspeak" this time.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/campaign.wrap/index.html?_s=PM OLITICS

[AngryOldDem]

86. And people here wonder why some of us cannot bring ourselves to support her.

Not that it makes a whit's worth of difference anymore, regardless of party.

This truly disgusts me. I have worked too long and too hard to have my savings and retirement used as speculative playthings by gazillionaires.

Go ahead and flame me. But I am going to need a lot of convincing to give her my support in 2016.

[LittleBlue]

87. She is disgusting.

I will not vote for her. Let her friends at Goldman find the votes.

[True Blue Door]

90. I will never understand what motivates Hillary Clinton.

If she wants to be a tool, she could make a lot more money as a private-sector tool than running for President under false pretenses as a Democrat.

[hifiguy]

98. What motivates her is

M-O-N-E-Y. That is all.

[True Blue Door]

150. But, as I say, she could make a lot more in the private sector.

So that's not a satisfactory explanation.

[L0oniX]

149. After you believe you have enough money it becomes a matter of power.

[True Blue Door]

151. What power is there in being a tool?

I still don't know what motivates her.

[Rex]

92. But this article is from last year derp.

Thought that means nothing, I just thought I would bring it up anyway...derp.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

96. “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Santayana

Been there, done that, with Bill and "triangulation". Don't want to repeat it.

[hifiguy]

102. Derpy would never say anything that foolish.

The mental gymnastics that are being performed by some around here the last few days (justifying that horrifying budget bill, the failure to prosecute war criminals and HRC's blatant corporatism) are at an Olympic level.

[Bluenorthwest]

97. Where is the actual quote from her? I do not accept characterizations of anyone's words.

When you want to damn someone for their words, it has to be their words not someone else's. This crap about playing Republican style reporting games seems to have washed in with some of those 'former' Republicans....

[ucrdem]

100. It's a paraphrase of a 2013 Politico paraphrase "according to accounts offered by several attendees"

Distant source:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/wall-street-white-house-republicans-lament-of-the-plutocrats-101047.html?hp=t1#.VIygyH-3bMS

Also in this issue:



Hey you asked . . .

[Ichingcarpenter]

103. White ... the one reporter worked for 9 years

for the columnist David S. Broder who President Obama called him the “most respected and incisive political commentator of his generation

So White had a good mentor.

I looked at both reporter's history and in my opinion that are fairly straight on their stories as compared to other politico hacks.

Clinton's had a year to rebut this story if she thought it was unfair or inaccurate.

[Bluenorthwest]

109. So it not really a quote and it is not current, now I'm up to date.

Changes the thing a bit. I think when damning a person for their words, it is important to use their actual words. It would be wrong, for example to claim a person who was a loyal Reagan voter who did not care about AIDS enough to vote against Reagan's ignorance has actually said "Fuck them, let them die, I'm making so much money and the markets are healthy!!!!' would be wrong. Even if it is self evident, it is still wrong.
I see what's the deal. The purge is on. Conservative social policy is coming to the Democratic Party in the name of money and the markets.

[Ichingcarpenter]

114. I've got enough history and facts with the Clintons

to know what they are really about and I wish I didn't .

Wall Street and banksters are evil .... they have plans to destroy democracy which I have documented from their own memos and are not any sane rational human's ally unless you are a psychopath. sociopath or their minion.

[Union Scribe]

148. ...so this is just more

of your bullshit crusade against Warren.

[riversedge]

153. yes, I do not see a direct quote in this year old Article.

[AtomicKitten]

99. She's a peach.

[AikidoSoul]

105. Look what Hill's husband did to undermine public protection from bankers gambling with public money

"It seems Wall Street has found its candidate, not surprising given that Bill Clinton did more to deregulate Wall Street than Ronald Reagan. It was President Clinton after all who pushed for breaking Glass-Steagall and fired his own CFTC Commissioner, Brooksley Born, to help ensure derivatives were not regulated. The 2008 financial crisis could appropriately be called the Clinton Crash. "

http://news.firedoglake.com/2013/12/12/hillary-clinton-tells-wall-street-she-believes-anti-wall-street-rhetoric-foolish/

I'll bet that many DUers don't have a clue about what Glass-Stegall was, and how dangerous it was for Clinton to work to get rid of it.

Here's the short definition of Glass-Stegall from the dictionary. It passed after the Depression devastated our economy and many people literally starved. It was written to keep banksters from investing public money, backed by publicly funded "bailouts". I think many would argue that the Act did a lot to reign in banking gambling, and helped created economic stability. Link found here:

http://www.yourdictionary.com/glass-steagall-act

"Glass-Steagall Act - Investment & Finance Definition

A law passed in 1933 in response to the banking collapse that occurred in the wake of the Great Depression. The law created deposit insurance, prohibited commercial banks from owning insurance companies or brokerage firms, and prevented banks from conducting underwriting activities such as raising debt and equity for companies. The terms of the Glass-Steagall Act that prevented banks from owning insurance companies and brokerage firms and underwriting activities were repealed in 1999 by the Financial Modernization Act."

Thank you IChingCarpeter for posting this thread!

Kick and recommend!

[RiverLover]

131. "Bill Clinton did more to deregulate Wall Street than Ronald Reagan." That is a sad fact.

Thanks for the informative post!

[Turbineguy]

127. It probably is foolish

since they have a stranglehold on the economy and can wipe out anybody with a bank account, mortgage or retirement.

For now, paying them their $1 trillion per year vig seems to be the only solution.

[Initech]

129. Translation: Move along nothing to see here!

[Dirty Socialist]

132. How Depressing

I find myself agreeing with Hillary on most issues, but she is on the WRONG side on this one.

[Kip Humphrey]

133. Gee... what a surprise.

No Clinton. No Bush. No More.

[sendero]

139. She's bought just like her husband..

... and she depends on the ignorance of 99% of the population who don't understand how the repeal of Glass-Stegall (thanks, Bill) and the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (thanks again Bill) paved the way for the economic debacle the country faces at present.

And now to give these criminal banks MORE power to rip off depositors and taxpayers, it's beyond disgraceful.

At this point I am truly done. I always thought I would hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils, but I will not vote for HRC, period.

[840high]

140. +1

[JEB]

143. Kind of a 47% type comment.

[DonCoquixote]

145. To the Hillary supporters

Yes, i know I get on here and seem harsh. However, let me tell you this, nobody, and I mean Nobody, would welcome an11th hour change in policy more than me, especially since Hillary is te one equipped to do so. If she were willing to call wall street out for it's mischief and malice, if she were willing to revisit the war policy that always ends up demandin whoever Bibi's enemies are our enemies, then I would jump for joy. But the fact is, she has the emans to say somethign different, to truly go to the FDR side of the left, the one that goes to Wall Street and says "I welcome your hatred!" . She could easily make speeches that say earler held positions were wrong, and make the point she is best equipped to change them. She will not, instead she plays silent, and simply counts on the overfed, over atteneded to rich ("aka i;m not comfrtable with calling myselfa republican, quite&quot types that NEVER show up come voting time. What is sad is that we all know that the current powers that be will NOT accpet her over a real GOP type, especially if they are clever and avouid the obvious suicidal techniques like nominating a Bush or Cruz.

[dburner2]

154. Wall Street Kissups

The Clintons as well as B.O. are firmly in Wall street pockets.

[creeksneakers2]

159. Did anybody notice

that the rest of this article is about how distant Obama is from the Wall Street crowd and how little he cooperates with them? It the opposite of how the Obama/Wall Street relationship is portrayed on DU. One key fact was Obama raised $16 million from Wall Street when he first ran for Senator but only $6 million as an incumbent president in 2012.

Almost everybody here believes the second hand information here which is negative about Hillary, but nobody is interested in the first hand information that makes Obama look good.

[Robbins]

164. Obama

Wall street doesn't like him since he called themf at cats and other names.Even though he has been soft on them they can't abide when he critizes them in public.That's why they like clintons better.They don't even pretend to be against wall street.Bill Clinton has defended going overseas to avoid paying taxes.

[Horse with no Name]

168. I'd rather see Bill Richardson run

and if anyone remembers how I felt the last round of primaries....

[whereisjustice]

169. Hillary stands as ready as Bush and Romney to fuck over the middle class, sending more jobs to Asia

and amping up our police state even more than it is amped up.

If you believe that we deserve lower wages, fewer benefits, fewer rights and freedoms, go ahead and support Hillary.

How fucked up is the Democratic Party that they are going to put up Clinton?

Watch - it's going to be Bush vs. Clinton.

Yes, that fucked up.

[Quantess]

173. She can go ahead and NOT run for president.

We don't need another sell out.

[Delver Rootnose]

175. Who is this fucking WE she is talking about...

...is that the royal WE. Because God knows I didn't cause the financial meltdown though I am certainly paying for it. For fucksake at least assign some fucking blame you pernicious ass kisser. (Directed at Hillary not poster)

[redruddyred]

176. unlike sanders, hillary doesn't believe that she can win on the basis of strong popular support.

I hope she's wrong, but probably she is right on the money.

hahaha pun.

[zentrum]

177. She was born a

....Republican and still is. Will vote for her to defeat Jeb or Rand or Cruz or whoever they throw up but it will be a vote of depressed despair.

[sabrina 1]

178. I'd like to disagree with her strongly. WE did NOT all 'get into this mess together'

But she probably wasn't talking about us anyhow.

Just wanted to make sure that THEY got into that mess, and without our consent, our supposed representatives, used OUR money to bail them out.

[Albertoo]

179. What could Hillary say?

Has there ever been a Democratic president 'against' Wall Street? Would it work?

In the rich countries, only Hollande played the anti Wall Street rhetoric, slapping a highest tax bracket at 75% for individuals. The percentage of big companies planning to invest in France dropped from 85 to 15%.

Isn't it wiser to follow the Obama path, i.e. not raising taxes just to pick a fight, yet getting very significant legislature passed like the Affordable Care Act? btw, HRC would be a good guarantee this Act takes root, since she chose to busy herself with health care during Bill's years.

In his memoirs, Robert Gates (not a Democrat fan of Hillary) gives HRC high marks for her statesmanship.

Well, a pragmatic woman with a good track record in high office and with a good likelihood of deepening Obama's breakthrough sounds much better than what I read on this thread so far.

[rhett o rick]

215. So you favor the "take it slow" approach. Like we've been doing for the last 30 years

while watching the middle class slip away. Don't do anything to upset the Authoritarian leaders and just keep our heads down and slowly slide into fascism. Struggling will only make it hurt worse. Is that what you are suggesting?

It isn't too much to ask to regulate Wall Street. If we don't we will see another trillion dollar bailout.

[jtuck004]

181. Mike Lux, who used to work with Hillary, points out the problem:

...
There is a fundamental disagreement over approaches to the Jamie Dimons and Lloyd Blankfeins of the world, and one approach, exemplified by a recent speech by Hillary Clinton’s recent speech to Goldman Sachs’ execs helped inspire (if you can call it that) the opposite approach from an organization I chair, American Family Voices. Partly inspired by one settlement after another where Jamie Dimon has sweet-talked prosecutors into no-criminal-prosecution settlements of things which were clearly criminal (the JPM settlements were by far the biggest in history money wise, which is a good thing, but so inadequate in so many ways they still are disappointing), and partly inspired by Hillary’s warm and friendly speech about Wall Street, we are putting out a parody of Rihanna’s video “Diamonds,” turning it into the story of that jewel of a guy Jamie Dimon- we think it is just the kind of hard-hitting and funny satire he and JP Morgan Chase so desperately deserve.

The thing is, the Democratic Party and American society in general are going to have to make a choice about the kind of economic and political course we are going to follow in the years to come. We’re going to have to choose between sucking up to Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein and the Wall Street masters of the universe with all their immense wealth and power on the one hand, and directly challenging the chokehold they have on our economy and our government through our policy initiatives, our political positioning, and cultural satire like this video on the other. Instead of being sympathized with, the Wall Street masters of the universe should be held accountable politically and legally for the role they played in damaging the economy and then keeping our economy from getting back on the road to recovery- and they should be mocked for their arrogance. American Family Voices doesn’t have the power to break the big banks up, or throw their executives in jail, but we can help on the mocking part and on the organizing part.
...

From: "Sucking up to the poor mistreated bankers" here.

Really don't need another bank president.

[drynberg]

182. SO THE RETHUGS WILL HAVE A BAGGER APPROVED CANDIDATE, AND THE HILL IS GOP NORMAL...

I'm thinking with these right wingers off the Dem ticket, Elizabeth and Bernie can get the "real" Dem votes and kick both the super right and the Hillary normal right's ass in Nov. 2016. These numbers of donors and amounts tell the tale, no?

[nikto]

183. Hillary is dead to me

I will not vote for her, if she is nominated.

[INdemo]

203. Ok DU Hillary supporters,do you still want Hillary as the nominee.?

But wait ..This speech she just gave to the Goldman Sachs could have been written for any Republican Tea Bagger in Congress and they could not have loved what they heard anymore.

[Madmiddle]

205. My question is,

Why does everyone see her a a viable candidate? She is, and always will be center right. Just like Slick Willy and just like Obama. She would be far worse than the Romney, she would not be a Democratic candidate if reality was something we all could see.

[kentuck]

206. Why do you think she leads everyone by 30% in the polls??

Surely you do not think they are manipulated by the monied class?

[Paper Roses]

207. Final decision. No vote from me for HC. n/t

[turbinetree]

208. No we did NOT

I do not and will not vote for this hypocrite, if she thinks that WE did this then she can take the $400,000 she gets in speaking fees from her corrupt cronies and should buy groceries for families that eat one meal a day, because of the greed, or take the money and put families in homes so that they are not sleeping in there cars with there kids.

In fact why doesn't she take the money and give it to the reservations to help out the first nation people that have the worst poverty in the country and violence to show that she cares really cares, but that is not going to happen on her watch our anyone else in her foundation.

And to scold WE the people that we have to stop trying to hold her ilk and others for kowtowing to the elite and powerful, and to support the oligarpghy class of plutocrats is not only demeaning on its face but just shows her contempt to the nobodies in this country and I mean nobodies is just disgusting not only on its face but in her morality to be a so called leader of the shenanigans which created this mess.

And if anyone thinks that she DESERVES this nomination you are just as corrupt has she is, because you also talk out of both sides of your mouth.
She sticks her wet finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing on a particular day and follows that wet finger into the wind to justify her cause of blaming we for the mess

I will Vote for WARREN---SANDERS

[fadedrose]

213. Hillary, you are your worst enemy

You say stuff that even those of us who don't want you to run wouldn't make up.

Keep it up.

[Indepatriot]

214. Tuzla Annie does Wall Street....

HRC is a lose/lose for progressives and I will in no way support her under any circumstances. I'm well aware of impending SCOTUS doom and Do Not Care. The Dems need to HIT BOTTOM before they can fix themselves and HRC is about as low as they can go. No Vote for HRC. No Third Way.

[woo me with science]

219. kick

[JonLP24]

224. She is such an opportunist

Hillary Clinton adopts a critical line on banks, big business

"She's trying to thread the needle, to say to progressives 'I'm your candidate', but also say to Iowa Democrats, 'I'm your candidate, too'," said Brookings Institution campaign analyst John Hudak.

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1631401/hillary-clinton-adopts-critical-line-banks-big-business

If she is elected the poll numbers & big money donors will run our country.

[Prophet 451]

226. One of my problems with HRC

is that she seems a bit too beholden to big money.

[Howler]

229. which is why..

I will NEVER vote for this person!

[yurbud]

230. Does she think the rest of us aren't paying any attention?