consultants are sandburs

Friday, June 17, 2016

Four Elizabeth Warren short video segments from hearings which collectively provide questions and a context for reading Ms. Clinton's Goldman Sachs transcripts, once she releases them to the public.

Once pigs fly? Can she get away with such shameful hubris? Likely, but unfortunate.

First segment - while GE has from time to time paid no federal taxes; what has the government been doing that yields it a substantial cash flow? Answer: screwing students on student loans. Ask Hillary about that shameful truth.

Further segments - no Wall Street criminal has been prosecuted; while too big to fail was a theme in bailout largess times; and what about all that stuff, Warren asks.

So somebody knows the questions, and asks. Will it not be reassuring to see the Clinton six-figure speech transcripts to see how she'd equally held feet to the fire as Warren would? Wouldn't that make the sun shine brighter and the birds sing finer?


The online Warren-YouTube items are here, here, here and here. A brief nobody fired as well as nobody jailed bonus item, here. A longer bonus item, Warren and Krugman, here. Don't be a wuss and dodge it because it runs longer than an hour. Last: Bernie, here.

Warren puts Ms. Clinton in perspective; with one credible and impressive, the other Clinton. More here.

Bernie. He questions oligarchs. The Clintons ARE oligarchs. Of that camp.

Representing that camp? Oligarchs can say much that ends up happening differently from what is said, earlier. Lying is lying, errors in prediction - changing circumstances - adaptation - all are, at heart, words that in hindsight can be used to deny lying. Would speech transcripts, if released, fit campaign rhetoric? That is a fine question. Will final post-convention campaign rhetoric be little but a constant din of what's wrong with Trump? We can guess and we shall see. Pop goes the weasel is my guess, but even more, pop, pop, pop, pop and more pop, pop, pop. A tireless weasel, rather than Warren-like good sense.

FURTHER: Clinton views of Obamacare [a.k.a. Romneycare] is step-wise incrementalism toward better ways; Warren, here, on healthcare perspectives you will not hear in Clinton campaigning. We're moving to better and better is something of a glide and slide whereas Warren addresses the elephant in the room. It's broken. It's not working. It's fiction to say be happy.

FURTHER: As to expectations, I expect not to be surprised by another Clinton presidency, should it come about. I expect others who have listened to Ms. Clinton's campaigning may be in for a jolt, (if they at all can feel the rain whereas most others will only get wet). There will be no more New Deal, with a stacked deck as with the Obama services to the rich, they will instead only play cards among themselves.

Try this; ask yourself, how many big payday speeches has Elizabeth Warren been invited to give to Wall Street?

Legitimacy matters. Warren has it. Contrasts exist.

As to legitimate and decent past conduct; Trump University, has less than Warren's record; while getting rich as a career politician has even less - Trump hustled chumps, chumps for Trump, whereas the Clintons took money out of politics - in their way, not as Bernie means when he says, "Take the money out of politics."

How it is, is not how it should be; and that AIPAC demo of Ms. Clinton's tell 'em what they want to hear accords with big money for Goldman Sachs speaking gigs. Of her promises, a belief that she will keep the ones Goldman Sachs bought is a sound outlook. To avoid future buyer's remorse know the product. If Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright would have been viewed as useful Clinton props at AIPAC they'd have been there. But AIPAC, while another speech given in anticipation of a payback; differed from the Goldman Sachs stints because the Wall Street money-making gigs, each of them doubtlessly like some of her university speaking engagements, were fully contracted for down to travel and lodging detail in advance - and for the Wall Streetsters, given behind closed doors.

When you see a woman as completely legitimate and entirely honest in her concern for the bulk of Americans as Elizabeth Warren is, and you see the political process giving us Hillary Clinton instead, something is wrong with that process. The 1% owns the process and the players in it, that might be a place to begin analysis, but Why NOT Warren??? Go figure.

FURTHER: We're being taken for a ride, again. Three short videos touching on the legitimacy vs. bought -&- quality vs. connectedness issues, in a logical sequence, and please look beyond the manner of the first video presenter to the substance of what he is saying; then Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! which we all should respect; last, a bit of a timely chuckle; here, here and then here.

This is the feature movie the Dem inner party wants to push upon us. Instead of Bernie who is as sincere and trustworthy as Elizabeth Warren although she'd likely make the better President. Inner party offensiveness? That's for you to figure out for yourself. Trump University promised the secret of how to make a fortune trading in real estate. While not too much a secret beyond withheld transcripts, the Clintons are a lesson in how to make a fortune trading in politics. Which offends more?

FURTHER: Two more video items. 1- Speeches and Transcripts. 2- Emails.

No comments: