Element removed

Confessions of a former Hillary supporter.



•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

I had a "Ready for Hillary" logo as my desktop before she'd officially announced. I'm a lifelong progressive and loved Bill, voted for him twice and thought she'd be great at carrying on his legacy. The only possible pause I had was if Elizabeth Warren had entered the race. When that didn't happen, I was on board.I saw Bernie Sanders' announcement and didn't hear past the words "Democratic SOCIALIST" -- I think I laughed out loud that someone with that label was even running.I then started discussing it with a friend who supports Bernie (believing I'd win her over to being a Hillary supporter). It's human nature to defend one's positions, and I'm no exception. But there is a point where it's more important to do the right thing than to "be right" about an initial decision. I'm an attorney, and critical thinking skills and weighing evidence and, above all, seeking justice before coming to (or changing) a conclusion is what my life has been about for a long, long time.Why did I switch? Why am I urging you to?Give me the couple of minutes (or more if you follow the links) it takes to digest this page and you'll see. This election is like no other in our lives and your vote is important. You owe it to yourself, your kids, their kids, and to our country to think this through. Even if you're sure you won't switch, you need to consider the issues in depth.So - here's why:

*** 1. THE ENVIRONMENT: I live near one of the areas in Pennsylvania famous for the videos of water catching on fire and fields of dead cows and mutated animals. To say fracking is dangerous is an understatemnt. To say it's abomination against our environment and the rape of Mother Earth is a lot more accurate.

are window-dressing. They are a side-show; a distraction

Hillary got on stage in Flint, Michigan and said that fracking is okay by her (with several complex qualifiers). Ouch. I learned that it's true that Hillary not only has been a vocal supporter of fracking in the USA, but has lead the push to export the practice to other countries. According to Mother Jones (again, hardly a right-wing news source), Hillary championed the profits and minimized the risks to many developing nations during her time as Secretary of State.In other words, she adopted, in whole, the propaganda selling line of a multibillion dollar industry that is enriching its leaders with $30 and $40 million annual bonuses while poisoning the earth in ways that are just incomprehensible. Yes, 97.3 times out of 100, it causes no problems (except, of course, for the links to earthquakes) , but when it goes wrong -- which is sometimes -- it's devastating what it does to the groundwater and the environment - it will take tens of thousands of years to undo the damage from one mishap. The problem, and what HRC is focused on... is that 100% of the time fracking makes huge profits. Fracking has poisoned the earth and, aside from the global climate change it contributes to, is a deadly threat to our planet. One must choose: it's fracking or it's profits. There is no middle ground, and Hillary's choice is clear.THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE: For a host of reasons, the pipeline is a bad idea. The environmental implications of a problem are almost beyond comprehension. Hillary's own words on the pipeline speak for themselves. As secretary of state, when asked as to whether she supported it, she said "[W]e are inclined to do so. We're either going to be dependent on dirty oil from the Gulf or dirty oil from Canada." (This isn't a misquote, here she is saying it ). Now, she says she's against it .The fossil fuel industry (through registered lobbyists, PAC's, and Super-PAC's) has contributed over $3.5 million to HRC's campaign . I do not believe ("mark my words" on this) that she will curtail it.I do not believe Hillary will doto cut the $20 billion per year in corporate welfare they receive. WE MUST CHOOSE. WE CANNOT BOTH BE AN ENVIRONMENTALIST AND A HILLARY SUPPORTER. THE TWO ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE.2. PRESERVING AMERICAN JOBS / PEOPLE OVER CORPORATIONS: Hillary was a big fan of the North American Free Trade Agreement . NAFTA has lead to astounding corporate profits -- and the loss of a huge number of American jobs as corporations can now out-source labor to Mexico where the cost of living (and thus wages) is a fraction of what it is in the U.S. Her claims on her position are revisionist (if not Orwellian), now outrageously claiming that she has steadfastly been against it . Her support of NAFTA is creditted by many with generating support for Donald Trump in the many areas that have been devastated by it. The accomplishments she advertises (the Lilly Ledbetter Act, "feel-good" positions, etc). It's only when one finds the times when the contest was between the 1% and the working and middle classes that her true colors are revealed.Bernie has fought his whole life for the workers and the middle class. When NAFTA was being considered, he travelled to Mexico and the manufactoring states in the US. He saw what it would do. To the chagrin of Hillary's backers, Bernie forcefully spoke out against NAFTA and voted against it.

And Hillary ain't done with "trade treaties" that are a boon to the 1% and the destruction of the working and middle classes. Hillary was a vocal supporter of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). Whereas the cost of living in Mexico permits companies to pay $2.25 per hour wages, the cost of living in the countries involved with the TPP is less than a third of that. Again, the middle-class and workers in the US can't compete - cause, you know, it costs more than .86 cents per hour to raise a family here. And (until the buying power of the middle and workers is eventually wiped out as these policies move forwar), the 1% cashes in and we are sold out.

Like her position on NAFTA, Hillary again tries to back-peddle, apparently not aware that the internet saves things like speeches given as secretary of state, folks keep videos these days and that she's on tape 24 times of the at least 45 times she openly supported it. When confronted with another example of choosing to serve her backers and masters in the 1% and thus throwing the rest of us under the bus, she denies she was ever for it. And her friends at CNN are more than happy to try to help. I hope everyone is aware at this point that CNN is owned by Time Warner - which has (aside from any individual donations through employees and lobbyists) donated $400,000 to Clinton (other sources put the estimate of how much CNN cash has found its way to Hillary a lot higher. Is CNN acting with integrity by not mentioning this? Well...CNN ran an online poll asking users who was winning the first debate. When the numbers came back 81% (Bernie) / 13% (Hillary), CNN erased the poll, scrubbed it from their website, and instead ran an op-ed headline that Hillary had won. If it's not just downright scary that a "nuetral objective news source" would do that, I don't know what is.



So, do you trust that Hillary wouldn't flip-flop again on this issue, or as president (God forbid) would enter into a new "trade agreement" just as bad (or worse) - that would decimate American jobs in favor of unspeakable 1% profits? Well, the Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue, a top lobbyist for the 1% and the TPP, said in an interview that he is "confident" that Hillary will again "evolve on the issue" if she is elected.. Please, please people - THINK about what you're doing before voting!

Again, in yuge contrast, Bernie's entire life and career has been about standing up for the working and middle class in this type of conflict.

The "too big to fail" banks have funded her campaign. They crashed our economy once, and HRC will not reinstate the laws that made them keep (federally insured) banking separate from their investment functions (Glass-Stengal). What better example could there be? Sitting on the board of WalMart, the nation's largest employer who pays wages so low that a full time employee with one child qualifies for food stamps, while it's top executives earn multi-million dollar bonuses and its owners are worth ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY BILLION DOLLARS. There are times when we need to pick sides. We need to say "this is not okay", this is not the country I want to live in...and it's sure not the way I want to vote. Note that the Waltons just infused another multi-million dollar donation into Hilary’s campaign.

Add to this, of course, the refusal to release the transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs (etc). Her refusal to do this was a major turning point for me. She won't even reveal to us what she promised?

Come on!

This is a job interview, Madam Secretary - if you don't give the requested information, you don't get the job! (Or my support for it, anyway).

These huge corporate profits and the destruction / outsourcing of American labor is the biggest contributor to the disappearance of the Middle Class and destruction of the Working class. That's not who I am - I cannot support this.

*** 3. COMBINATION OF #1 AND #2: * MONSANTO * Her chief campaign advisor is Monsanto lobbyist Jerry Crawford. Do people not understand what Monsanto is all about? GMO food, fighting labeling of it, passing the "Monsanto Protection Act" providing that they can't be sued over GMO's - even if the European studies linking them to tumors are confirmed? Putting small farmers out of business and turning them into low-paid employees?

*** 4. UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE: There's a meme that sums it up, with HRC's picture reading "I was once a ferocious advocate for single-payer universal healthcare. Then the funniest thing happened... it started raining Insurance Industry and Big Pharma dollars." Another nearly $10 million into her campaign. I love Obama, but the ACA leaves our system as the only for-profit medical system in the world. 4% of Medicare costs go to overhead and administration. The healthcare and pharmaceutical industry pay average bonuses of $15 million in cash and stock to their CEO's. Hillary will not change this. There will not even be a public option. I promise, and my God how I will hate to say "I told you so." YOU CANNOT BE AN ADVOCATE FOR ENDING OUR SYSTEM OF FOR-PROFIT HEALTHCARE AND BE A HRC SUPPORTER. THE TWO ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE.

5. RACE: Based on her reaction to the Black Lives Matter protestor, her history of being a "Goldwater Girl", her taking money from private prisons -- I do not believe that Hillary has any fixed moral opinion on the issue.

This is not digging up ancient history. Recall in 2008 when running against Obama,

. If it were expedient for her to do so again, I am concerned that she would.

Bernie's life and the issues he's fought for disproportionatly affect the Black and Hispanic communities (starting with his being arrested 50 years ago for chaining himself to a Black woman to protest segregation). I believe Bernie is sincere. There is absolutely no doubt that electing a leader who will fight to change the rigged economy will go a long way to alieviating the damage that racism has caused through our country's history.

A minute and a half video worth watching:

US

None

*** 6. FOREIGN POLICY: When looking at it objectivly, one can only conclude that Hillary is a neo-con on foreign policy. One does not simply "apologize" for a complete lack of insight and wisdom on a vote that plunged our country into a disastrous war in Iraq, leading to the deaths of over 3,000 Americans and between 155,000 and 250,000 Iraqi civilians from violent deaths and perhaps 1,000,000 total deaths. If it was heartfelt and an abberation from one's usual record, maybe "I'm sorry" would pass muster. But I now believe it was neither.Iraq wasn't the last big test Hillary faced, and not her last failure. Even traditional liberal / progressive sources are acknowledging that the pro-war decision to bomb Libya has been disastrous , for many of the same reasons the Iraq vote was a failure of leadership: the creation of a power vacuum into which (once again) ISIS has stepped. And this is before one even considers the (little-covered in the mainstream media) "other (financial / oil) motives" that Hillary's emails have shown were a large part of her decision to attack Libya. While Israel is our ally, Obama has been right in standing up to them on some issues. Her unqualified, unquestioning support of everything and anything Israel wants to do is just plain scary. It is a receipe for disaster and war. I'm an Army veteran and have two friends who didn't come back and more than I count who came back damaged physically, emotionally, and spiritually. Military is not something that should be undertaken casually, and never something that should be done with profit motives rather than the protection of our vital interests and security.Perhaps this is why even the left-leaning "Neocon watch" has declared Hillary to be a "neo-con" on foreign policy issues. In sum, whereas I once saw her "experience" in foreign policy matters to be a reason to vote for her, I am now deeply afraid of what that experience has shown and where she would lead our country.*** 7. EMAILS. The problem here is very much like a reverse "boy who cried Wolf" -- there have been so many nonsense smears against Hillary over the years that people hear "private email server" and look no further.Folks, this is different. She openly lied during the debate when she said she had done the same thing that Powell and General Petraeus had done. They had sent a couple of inappropriate emails over their personal accounts. This is not what Hillary did – she freaking set up an email server for all official business and transmitted sensitive information over it.Additionally, when they did wrong, the current federal regulations requiring the use of only government email addresses for official business were not in place. And Anderson Cooper is fully aware that this was a lie, but asked no follow-up questions.She used the same email address to communicate with foreign entities seeking donations to the Clinton foundation as she did for communications as Secretary of State. Read the results of a Google search on "clinton boeing emails russia" . Or, at a minimum, if you're not following all the ethical implications of Boeing making a donation to the Clinton Foundation after a contract with Russia was steered its way by the then-Secretary of State, at least read this article" . This isn't exactly Bengazi or Monica nonsense - this is, obviously, a deep concern. I guarentee if you or I did something like this, we would would already have been indicted.This message is too long already – but I cannot strongly urge people to get out there, and see that this is not a nonsense smear.When this came to light, she had her staff go in and delete 30,000 emails. That is the very letter definition of "obstruction of justice."According to C-SPAN, there is a federal grand jury sitting and preparing to indict her. C-SPAN is hardly some right wing source.If you have anything of an open mind, take a few minutes and watch C-SPAN interview with a former Justice Department offical (and Democrat) for yourself. But put aside the criminal aspect. She lied during the debate by saying Powell and Petraeus "did the same thing", as they sent a few personal emails (before the now-existing laws mandating the use of government email addresses for official business) whereas HRC set up a private server, then erased 30,000 emails when the issue started coming to light. The Attorney General just granted one of her employees immunity -- hello? That's applicable to criminal investigation only. Using a secret, private server? Wiping it out of She may be indicted, but even if she isn't, putting aside the criminal aspects, HOW TRANSPARENT IS THIS?**** 8. I believe Bernie and I believe in what he wants to do, where he wants to take this country. I believe him when he says his plan is to physically go to the districts that elect the representatives who will fight his plans to change - he will not just disappear into the White House. I believe he will fight to really make this country what it could be - just.I respect Hilary’s accomplishments - the Lilly Ledbetter Pay Equity Act, to fighting for kids when she was a young attorney, sticking up for Women's Rights, but NONE OF THESE present a conflict between the people -- the middle class and workers -- and the 1% (the unrestrained, unregulated excesses of pure capitalism that threaten to destroy our free-market economy by completing the disappearance of the working and middle classes).Look, for example, at what Bernie and Elizabeth Warren have FOUGHT FOR - what they've stood up for:of HRC's positions do that. THERE WAS A MOMENT WHEN "THE LIGHT BULB CAME ON" AND I REALIZED I HAD TO SWITCH TO BERNIE.In sum, I switched to Bernie because I am a progressive and I share his vision for America. He is one of us, not a subsidiary of any bank or corporation. If any of you have read this far, I hope and pray that you'll do likewise and, when you walk into that booth and it's just you and your conscience, you'll decide that doing the right thing is more important than having been right.Who am I, by the way? In relevant part, a lifelong Democrat (although not sure I'll be one after NJ's primary) and, well, click here if interested