Hillary: Hypocrite When It's Profitable

[OhioChick]

Posted Jul 30th 2007 11:47AM by Patrick Casey
Filed under: President 2008, Democrats, Hillary Clinton

In the Los Angeles Times this morning there's an interesting article about Hillary Clinton, the defender of American workers and the poor, seemingly assisting what should be one of her natural enemies -- job stealing Indian companies. Why would she do this, apparently in opposition to her campaign rhetoric? You decide.

To many labor unions and high-tech workers, the Indian giant Tata Consultancy Services is a serious threat - a company that has helped move U.S. jobs to India while sending thousands of foreign workers on temporary visas to the United States. So when Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) came to this struggling city to announce some good news, her choice of partners was something of a surprise. Joining Tata Consultancy's chief executive at a downtown hotel, Clinton announced that the company would open a software development office in Buffalo and form a research partnership with a local university. Tata told a newspaper that it might hire as many as 200 people.

The answer to why Hillary would support an enemy of all of her natural Democratic allies, including labor unions, is simple. Money and political support.

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.

The problem with Hillary's 2003 deal with Tata Consultancy Services, however, is that it hasn't panned out. Today, four years later, the company project "landed" by Hillary Clinton "might" employ as many as ...10 people. I think that it's safe to say that they've probably outsourced more jobs than that.

Barack Obama's campaign made a big deal of this in June, highlighting Hillary's contradictory positions as savior of the American worker and supporter of outsourcing. Expect more soon.

http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/07/30/hillary-hypocrite-when-its-profitable/

[PATRICK]

1. Reviving the Clinton era

is more the point than anything new here. It shows a steadfast determination to overlook a host of abuses, perils and scoundrels in this buddy system with business. The Clintons both are part of a "bi-partisan" alliance with India and others on the big picture of global economic success. That approach is so outdated in light of the criminal dominance and ruin of so many possibly positive ventures as to be as weird as it is offensive- and dangerous to all including Hillary herself as candidate and moreso as president.

This is part of the real big reason for opposing her candidacy, setting aside the impunity of the corporate media hype that has crippled the Clintons away from a mandate for change and substantive. good globaliszation attempts. Wherever you want to put the crux, in her decision making process, record, electability, or policy intent, the baggage is tightly packed and locked.

Is a vote for her partly a vote for outsourcing? At least a watering down of any possibility for strong action? If not, what does gladhanding India business do to first serve our workers, then Indian slave laborers' interests?

Or are we just so nostalgically desirous of repeating our last successful presidential election so as to wave a magic wand over fraud, abuse, business interests, women's agendas only to have the GOP reborn, lose our majority and continue to nicely do the main GOP agenda until they can steal power back again? How much selective memory and palling with good old business allies makes us feel like it will all be rosier if we repeat the past?

[Maribelle]

2. Did you forget to say you and your colleagues will not vote for her?

You seem to say that a lot.


I hope I was helpful.

[OhioChick]

3. What?

Nothing productive to comment with?

[Maribelle]

18. "Tata Consultancy Services is a serious threat" only to those playing fast and loose with the truth

Tata would not exist if it were not for the American CEOs funneling through them. It's like blaming rain clouds for polluted rain, blaming bees for the bugs eating the flowers, blaming alligators for the swamps. All of it is illogical.

But then, logic does not seem to me to be high on the priority list of Hillary haters when something "productive" is measured by the amount of lines one can cut and paste.

[rhett o rick]

19. You toss out a lot of stuff there but fail to provide any facts. Does HRC

support keeping jobs in the US? Helping a foreign company move in to hire Americans isn't the solution for American workers. The profits go to India.

We are currently in a war of the corporatists vs. middle class. If the middle class dies, so does democracy. It isn't at all clear whose side HRC is on.

Furthermore, I resent it when HRC supporters resort to name calling. Just because I doubt that HRC is interested in helping the middle class doesn't mean i am a "Hillery hater".

I will never forgive her for supporting the Bushco War but I don't hate her.

[Maribelle]

20. Please show me where I called you a hillary hater?????

Otherwise, you might want to save all those resentments of yours.

And regarding "but fail to provide any facts" - -

do you need facts to prove American CEOs are using Tata, without them Tata would not exist?
or, do you need facts to prove consulting firms cannot exist unless companies use their services?
or, do you want to change the subject to another issue - - does Hillary support keeping jobs in the US? You talk about tossing?

Sheesh, please clarify what facts I am not providing you, and I will try to help you out here a little.

[rhett o rick]

21. I will ask again. Does HRC support American CEO's and Tata or does she support the American

workers?

[Maribelle]

23. In her own words, in her actions, and in her voting record - Hillary supports American workers

CLINTON: Well, outsourcing is a problem, and it's one that I've dealt with as a senator from New York. I started an organization called New Jobs for New York to try to stand against the tide of outsourcing, particularly from upstate New York and from rural areas. We have to do several things: end the tax breaks that still exist in the tax code for outsourcing jobs, have trade agreements with enforceable labor and environmental standards, help Americans compete, which is something we haven't taken seriously. 65% of kids do not go on to college. What are we doing to help them get prepared for the jobs that we could keep here that wouldn't be outsourced--and find a new source of jobs, clean energy, global warming, would create millions of new jobs for Americans.

Source: 2007 Democratic Primary Debate at Howard University Jun 28, 2007

[rhett o rick]

24. So you're saying that this post isn't true? She isn't wooing Tata and Indian

money?

[TeamJordan23]

4. If the Clinton Admin's policies continue, say TaTa to your job under HRC. nm

[rinsd]

6. What is Obama position on outsourcing and how does it differ from HRC?

[TeamJordan23]

8. For one, Obama has said he will renegotiate NAFTA. nm

[rinsd]

10. Hillary has also discussed that.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=atUKcP4eSEvY&refer=politics

Hillary has Bill in her corner as the specter of NAFTA and I may be wrong but Rubin is a key advisor to Obama and he was a big NAFTA advocate.

They both even recently co-sponsored a bill aimed at China. And both seek to have stronger environmental & labor provisions be part of any trade agreements.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

15. Rubin's son is also one of Obama's big Wall Street donors, allies

Presumably he is one of Obama's bundlers as well.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

14. It doesn't. His position is exactly the same as Hillary's

Like it is on every other issue. ;)

[rinsd]

5. Why do people post RW garbage?

Its not like this issue hasn't been discussed elsewhere but people have to go with a source who has written rw crappola.

http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/bloggers/patrick-casey

[ronnykmarshall]

12. Cuz ... if it's negative about HRC ...

It's A-OK!!!!

[gulliver]

7. We should just let 3-4 million Indian tech workers immigrate.

That way they'll make what they are worth, leveling the playing field with Americans. They will buy houses and spend their money here. They will make enough more money here that they can probably send more money home to India than they are currently getting while working in India. We would even be in a better position relative to European high tech companies, because they too could no longer hire cheap Indian tech workers. Most of them would be here.

Letting in all the Indian techies (I include programmers, of which I am one, accountants, and even radiologists) reduces the trade deficit, and adds to Social Security. They are primarily Hindu and highly intelligent, so they will trend politically away from Republicans. They are good folks.

The current form of border "regulation" is optimally bad ("pessimal") for U.S. tech folks. It's inefficient (the worker should be close to the boss/work), and it invites the kind of scurvy corporate game playing we currently see with immigration law, import/export of work products, etc. Move them all here. Our country would be better off.

Maybe crazy. Just a thought. India and the outsourcing companies might object, I suppose.

[Tom Joad]

9. mostly consistent really. that is what makes the prospect of her presidency so scary.

[The Backlash Cometh]

11. Geez. For someone who wants to be president, she sure does have a knack

of drawing controversy towards her.

[bvar22]

13. That knack

also draws the BIG Corpo Money to her.
Hillary is no fool, and she ain't cheap.
She just doesn't give a shit for those Americans who must work for a living.

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. I'm beginning to suspect you're right.

[OhioChick]

17. Bingo. n/t

[illinoisprogressive]

22. I've noticed how the rest of the msm is keeping this on the QT.

I thought the article would raise some good discussion for a change in the msm. Instead of them picking it up and taking some hard looks at hillary they swept it under the rug as usual.
You know if it was anyone else it would be all over the place for a week.