Hillary and Bernie, Politics Oddest of Odd Couples – by Amanda S. Green
Hillary almost told the truth.
Or, as someone commented on social media, this is probably the closest she’s come to it in a long time. At least that’s the case when you talk HRC and politics.
No, this isn’t the opening to a new review of a book about the last presidential election. Nor am I returning to Clinton’s book What Happened. In fact, I’d planned on starting a new review today. I wanted to find something to snark. I wanted to have fun with a review. I spent time looking at possibilities. I wasn’t going to pay almost $15 for Amy Chozick’s book, Chasing Hillary: Ten Years, Two Presidential Campaigns, and One Intact Glass Ceiling. I sure as hell wasn’t going to try to wade through Dear Madam President: An Open Letter to the Women Who Will Run the World by Jennifer Palmieri. Instead, I thought I would live up to the nickname Sarah has hung on me and be the masochistic reader by picking up Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In by Bernie Sanders. Yes, you can all point and laugh. I swear I haven’t lost my mind and I’ll prove it.
I sat down this afternoon to start reading the book. By the end of the first page, I didn’t know whether to laugh hysterically or run to the bathroom to throw up. The laughter was because Bernie tries to hard to be serious and project concerned leadership while, at the same time, proving himself to be nothing but a bitter, spoiled old man.
Then there was the irony of someone who calls himself a democratic socialist referring to himself with the royal “we”. There are numerous references in the first two introductions – yes, two. One written at the time he first wrote the book and one added after his 2016 campaign for the Democratic nomination. Time after time, he wrote about how “we “ ran for president or how “our” campaign did this or that. No, he wasn’t referring to all the people taking part in his campaign. The context proves he wasn’t worried about them. It was all about him. It was and always will be the cult of Bernie.
The only thing that surprised me, other than the royal we crap, was that the intro added after he lost the nomination to Clinton dealt only with Trump and how evil he is and what a liar he is and how will be the downfall of our nation if we don’t raise a political revolution against him NOW! If he were a true socialist, or even a true champion of the people and more interested in exposing injustices than promoting his own agenda, he would have at least mentioned how the DNC and Clinton conspired to keep the nomination away from him. But no, he barely – if ever – mentions it.
Which means, in my mind, that he is still hoping to play the game and make nice with the DNC in the hope of getting the nomination in the next presidential election. If he truly was committed to his socialist roots, he wouldn’t be trying to keep in the DNC’s good graces. Hell, he wouldn’t keep all the millions he and his wife have accumulated over the years. He’d be redistributing his wealth, just as he claims the 1% should be doing now.
What happened by the time I got to the first chapter of the book is simple. I felt dirty. The slime fairly oozed off the pages of the book. Don’t get me wrong. Bernie – or his ghost writer – writes eloquently. If you aren’t familiar with the traps of socialism, it would be easy to fall for much of what he says, especially if you haven’t been a student of history. Fortunately, I can’t and won’t fall for his line of bull. Instead, I felt dirty. I wanted a figurative, if not literal, bath. There was no way I could get through more of the book, even for snarking reasons.
At least not this week.
So, I wondered what I should do. I didn’t want to leave Sarah high and dry for a post today. I had just about decided to go ahead and buy one of the books about HRC when I came across this article. It was as if the gods of snark had suddenly decided to smile down upon me. I had my topic.
According to the article, HRC is finally admitting she might have done something wrong in her campaign, something that might have cost her votes. Is it her actions as SecState regarding Benghazi? Nope. How about using her own private server? Nope, not that either. So what does she see as her mistake? Identifying as a capitalist.
Yes, you read that right. HRC, she of the Clinton Foundation, she who, along with her husband, have earned an estimated $240 million in the last 15 years. Of that, HRC is estimated to have earned $51 million. But she made a mistake saying she was a capitalist.
What that really means is she thinks she could have said she was a democratic socialist like Bernie and everyone would have forgotten her wealth, the huge speaking fees she demanded after leaving the State Department and the monies funneled into the Clinton Foundation. Yes, she really things the American public is that stupid. Not that it should surprise any of us. After all, she has insulted Middle America for supporting Trump. She has insulted women who voted against her, saying they only did so because voting as their husbands told them to.
“It’s hard to know, but I mean if you’re in the Iowa caucuses and 41 percent of Democrats are socialists or self-described socialists, and I’m asked ‘Are you a capitalist?’ and I say, ‘Yes, but with appropriate regulation and appropriate accountability.’ You know, that probably gets lost in the ‘Oh my gosh, she’s a capitalist!’ ” Clinton said.
Take a moment and think about what she said. Despite all the protestations of the DNC that their party isn’t just socialist leaning but racing hard toward full socialism, she just admitted that’s the truth. At least, it seems, for some states. If that doesn’t turn your blood cold and make you stop and think, it should, especially since these are the same politicians who want to put severe limitations on the Second Amendment.
According to Clinton, “reputation of capitalism is pretty much in tatters”, especially for young people. Not really, but not for want of trying on the part of liberals. Just as they want to destroy the Second Amendment, they have worked to destroy capitalism in this country for decades. Yet, even as they talk about income inequalities and the need for universal healthcare, among other pet projects, do you see them practicing what they preach? Hell no.
Bernie Sanders, the self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist and people’s champion, has a net worth of more than $1 million (in conjunction with his wife), according to The American Thinker. At the time the article was written, he and his wife owned two homes, one in Vermont and one in the D. C. area where the median home valuation was in the range of $700,000 plus. He might not be the richest member of Congress but, for a man who preaches about income inequality and such, he sure has a hell of a lot of money he could be sharing with the less fortunate.
Nancy Pelosi’s net worth is reportedly in the $140 million range. As a member of Congress and Minority Leader in 2017, she made $193,000. Is it any wonder she disparaged the tax breaks we’ve gotten under the Trump Administration? That $1,000 or so is nothing but crumbs to her. Gee, I wonder if you look up Pelosi or Clinton or Sanders in a thesaurus you find the word “hypocrite” as a synonym?
So pardon me if I laugh hysterically when Clinton blames losing votes on admitting she’s a capitalist. At least she was honest about one thing during her campaign. When Sanders writes about the “grotesque level of income and wealth inequality in this country”, (Our Revolution, pg. 2) I want to curse. How dare he? How dare any of them sitting on Capital Hill and proclaiming to be Democratic-Socialists or Socialists and who accept their paychecks? As of December 2014, members of Congress earn $174,000 a year. This doesn’t count all the benefits they receive, benefits that include, iirc, medical insurance. They don’t have to worry about finding affordable insurance after passing the atrocity that was the Affordable (or should I say Unaffordable) Care Act. That salary increases substantially if they are in a leadership position, such as Speaker of the House, President Pro Tem of the Senate or Majority or Miniorty Leader of either House.
Maybe Clinton did lose a few votes because she said she was a capitalist. But that isn’t the reason she lost the election. She lost because the American people didn’t trust her to sit in the Oval Office as our leader. They saw her double-standard for women. We remember how she condemned the women who spoke out about their relationships with Bill. How different her tune was when the man accused of sexually harassing – or assaulting – a woman was Donald Trump. We remembered Benghazi. We didn’t believe her excuses about her private server. She was also part of the political establishment, something many voters were tired of.
As for Sanders, he was seen as someone outside the establishment. He had a message younger voters hadn’t heard before. Well, they would have if they were taught history and not simply indoctrinated into liberal ideology in all too many schools. In some ways, he was the Democrats’ Donald Trump. But the fix was in. The DNC had no intention of letting anyone but HRC have the nomination.
When will she admit the truth about that? Or about any of the rest of it? I don’t know about you, but I’m not holding my breath to find out.