Nahhh....he's dead. Won't stop him from voting democrat...
Posted on 01/19/2015 1:33:51 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
.........For many on the Left, the Arkansas company is emblematic of all that is wrong with corporate America. It is particularly detested by organized labor — a key Democratic constituency — because the company has doggedly fought all efforts to organize its workers.
Clinton's ties to Walmart go back to 1986, when she joined the company's board of directors. She remained there until 1992, when husband Bill Clinton ran for the White House. For years afterwards they both maintained close ties to the retail giant. More recently, Clinton has distanced herself from the company and criticized some of its business practices.
It is a delicate matter that the company and the candidate are both loathe to discuss. A spokesman for Walmart had no comment. A spokesman for the Walton family did not respond to a request for comment. Nor did Ready for Hillary. Don Soderquist, the board's vice chairman during Clinton's tenure, declined to comment. Clinton makes only a single, passing reference to her years in the board in her 2003 memoir, Living History.
Those ties, nevertheless, remain a cause for suspicion of Clinton among liberal activists, many of whom are concerned that her candidacy will keep the Democratic Party from going further in the economically populist, anti-Wall Street direction they think it should.
"It was 20 years ago but it does speak to a closeness Hillary Clinton has to corporate interests on Wall Street and beyond," said a veteran progressive strategist who asked to remain anonymous. "The base of the party is increasingly concerned about our political leaders being too tied, too close, and owing too much to corporate interests, whether those corporate interests are located on Wall Street or in Arkansas."
Numerous liberal organizations have called for a more economically progressive candidate to jump into the race.......
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
..................."Obama has made more populist gestures in the last two months than in his first six years as president. It’s why his popularity’s rising. Some say it’s the economy, but the economy rose for some time without the middle class or Obama’s ratings being much helped by it. Proposals to fund universal access to community colleges and tax Wall Street speculators to finance a middle class tax cut are catnip not just to the left but to the middle class. The question for us all is whether this populist charm offensive signals real change.
I believe that without a stronger, more independent left the Democrats’ rhetoric will remain just that. Proof is everywhere in the party, but since its congressional wing is its most enduring and influential component it makes sense to look there first. As always, the most relevant comparison is that between words and deeds.
After their worst Senate loss in 34 years and worst House loss in 86 years, not one Democratic leader in Congress got ousted. One can’t help but ask: What does it take to fire these guys? In 1998, Newt Gingrich lost four measly seats and got the ax. They say we should run government like a business — but if you’re a Democratic leader in Congress you can bankrupt the company and still keep your job............
.......Within hours of the Democrats’ own Dunkirk, Republicans were readying their 2016 cross-channel invasion. Republicans know governing is the key to winning. In Congress they opened with the Keystone pipeline, inflating by tenfold the number of jobs it could create. Next up: a budget that cuts taxes but not defense or middle-class entitlements, the viability of which they exaggerate by a factor of infinity. No one knows for sure what Obama will ultimately do on either front. We do know he has yet to offer a solid rebuttal to GOP propaganda, or a credible plan to grow jobs and lift wages.
How are Democrats in Congress preparing for 2016? It’s a trick question, of course. They aren’t. Apart from re-upping the contracts of their veteran leadership team, their every action mocks the populist image they sought to project in the campaign. It’s almost as if they don’t know we’re watching them."........
If Warren doesn’t run in 2016, it will be interesting to see just who on the left *does* step up to challenge Hillary Clinton. I believe it’s coming. The Democratic base and national Democratic Party are both hard left. Hillary’s feeble attempts to play Bill Clinton-moderate didn’t work in 2008, and I don’t think they will sell in 2016.
The question is, who will challenge? Right now, I’m thinking Andrew Cuomo might be the guy. He’s a two-term governor with some pragmatic window dressing on his record, but he also has made all the “correct” left wing rants about guns, etc. We’ll see, though.
No it doesn't, any more than Sharpton's Walmart ties do.
I saw a blurb on Drudge about a renewed interest in the inhabitants of the “top 1%.”
It made me wonder where The Messiah and the beeyotch and M/Mrs. Bubba rank as well as the second worst President of all time, and others. Surely, many of the Senators and Reps are in the top 1% also.
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors
The Clinton Foundation Contributors:
Donations greater than $25,000,000.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation *
Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) *
Fred Eychaner *
Frank Giustra, The Radcliffe Foundation
The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation
UNITAID
* Indicates a contribution was made by this donor in 2013.
Donations of $10,000,001 to $25,000,000
Donor name
AUSAID
Stephen L. Bing
COPRESIDA
Tom Golisano *
Government of Norway
The Hunter Foundation *
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Nationale Postcode Loterij *
Cheryl and Haim Saban & The Saban Family Foundation
The ELMA Foundation
Theodore W. Waitt
* Indicates a contribution was made by this donor in 2013.
Donations of $5,000,001 to $10,000,000
S. Daniel Abraham
Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi
C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, Inc. *
Commonwealth of Australia, DIICC *
Elton John AIDS Foundation
Government of the Netherlands *
Irish Aid
John D. Mackay *
The Victor Pinchuk Foundation *
Michael Schumacher
State of Kuwait
The Coca-Cola Company
The Wasserman Foundation *
* Indicates a contribution was made by this donor in 2013.
Donations of $1,000,001. to $5,000,000
100 Women in Hedgefunds
Absolute Return for Kids (ARK)
Jay Alix
Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa *
Alltel Corporation
Nasser Al-Rashid
Anheuser-Busch Foundation
Smith and Elizabeth Bagley *
Mary Bing and Doug Ellis
Richard Blum and Blum Family Foundation *
The Eli & Edythe Broad Foundation
Susie Tompkins Buell Fund of the Marin Community Foundation *
The Sherwood Foundation *
Richard and Jackie Caring *
Gilbert R. Chagoury
Cisco *
Citi Foundation
Clinton Family Foundation and William J. Clinton *
Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund *
Victor P. Dahdaleh & The Victor Phillip Dahdaleh Charitable Foundation
Robert Disbrow
Dubai Foundation
Duke Energy Corporation *
Entergy *
Issam M. Fares & The Wedge Foundation
Wallace W. Fowler
Friends of Saudi Arabia
Fundacion Telmex *
Mala Gaonkar Haarman
The James R. Greenbaum, Jr. Family Foundation
ICAP Services North America *
J.B. and M.K. Pritzker Family Foundation *
Sanela D. Jenkins
Robert L. Johnson *
Walid Juffali
Dave Katragadda
Kessler Family Foundation
Michael and Jena King *
Lukas Lundin
MAC AIDS Fund
Lakshmi N. Mittal
James R. Murdoch
Norad (Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation) *
OAS S.A. *
Denis J. O’Brien *
OCP Corporation *
Open Society Institute
PGA Tour, Inc. *
Presidential Inaugural Committee
Princess Diana Memorial Fund
Procter & Gamble *
Stewart Rahr
Paul D. Reynolds
Robertson Foundation
Salida Capital Foundation
Joachim Schoss
Bernard L. Schwartz *
Arnold H. Simon
Bren Simon *
Amar Singh
Carlos Slim Helú & Fundación Carlos Slim *
Michael Smurfit
Steven Spielberg *
State of Qatar
Sterling Stamos Capital Management, LP
The Streisand Foundation *
Suzlon Energy Ltd.
Swedish Postcode Foundation *
Swiss Reinsurance Company *
Nima Taghavi *
The Annenberg Foundation
The Boeing Company *
The ELMA Philanthropies Services (U.S.) Inc.
The Government of Brunei Darussalam
The Howard Gilman Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation *
The Roy and Christine Sturgis Charitable & Educational Trust
The Sidney E. Frank Foundation
The Sultanate of Oman
The Swedish Postcode Lottery
The Walmart Foundation
The Zayed Family
Torres-Picón Foundation *
T.G. Holdings
U.S. Green Building Council *
UK Department for International Development (DFID)
Verein Aids Life
The Walton Family Foundation
Gerardo Werthein
7 more category of donors [drop down lists for each donor group] at link.
Jeez...someone left of Hillary? Why not endorse the CPUSA’s candidate...?
The Alliance for a Green Africa? Jeez, a bunch of First World white liberals keeping Third world blacks down. What BS...
Duke Energy? The power company who liberals attack for giving Governor Rick Scott money? My gosh, what BS....
The Clintons are slick. Most every crooked dollar they get goes into their foundation where they don’t have the same kinds of tax implications as does the foundation.
They have control over a very large sum of money, the perks and benefits from it, and little personal liability. It’s really a sweet deal if you can get something like that.
As for WalMart and the pros or cons of the association they have or had with any of the Clintons, I’d chalk it up to bidness. Clintons would take money from anybody.
Probably. Look at it this way. He wants to go somewhere to make a speaking cash bundle. He also plans a golf trip, or an Epstein like visit to Fantasy Island. He meets some donors who have given to his foundation or the like during the trip or meets an "employee", and then chalks it all up to a Foundation approved outreach trip, executive jet, hotels, girls and amenities all paid for.
Nahhh....he's dead. Won't stop him from voting democrat...
Yet, I see their butt cracks in there all the time.
Indeed. Who needs personal wealth when you have access to a bottomless expense account.
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=24376
.....”Despite their life-long collaboration, Bill and Hillary Clinton are different political beings in the end. Her marital rages provoked by a mate whose adolescent lusts put their collective mission at risk are probably a good measure of just how different they are.
“In their way of thinking,” Noonan observes of the Clintons, “America is an important place, but not a thing of primary importance. America is the platform for the Clintons’ ambitions, not the focus of them.” The implication is that if they were principled emissaries of a political cause, the ambition to do big things for America would override all others. Instead, they have focused on themselves and consequently have made the American political landscape itself “a lower and lesser thing.”
They have “behaved as though they are justified in using any tactic in pursuit of their goals,” including illegality, deception, libel, threats and “ruining the lives of perceived enemies . . . “ They believe, she continues, “they are justified in using any means to achieve their ends for a simple and uncomplicated reason. It is that they are superior individuals whose gifts and backgrounds entitle them to leadership.” They do it for themselves; for the continuance of Them.
But the fact is they all do it. The missionaries of the big progressive causes, the Steinems, the Irelands, the Michelmans, the Friedans, and Hillary Clinton herself, were all willing to toss their feminist movement overboard to give Bill Clinton a pass on multiple sexual harassments, and on a career of sexual predation that reflects his utter contempt for the female gender.
Indeed, the Clinton-Lewinsky defense—accord which the feminists signed onto, can be regarded as feminism’s Nazi-Soviet Pact. Their calculation was both simple and crude: If Clinton was removed, Hillary would go too. But she was their link to patronage and power, and they couldn’t imagine losing that. Their kind was finally in control of the White House, and the conservative enemies of their beautiful future were not.
Almost a decade earlier—in the name of the very principles they so casually betrayed for Clinton—the same feminists had organized the most disgraceful lynching of a public figure in America’s history. Despite fiercely proclaimed commitments to the racial victims of American persecution, they launched a vicious campaign to destroy the reputation of an African American jurist who had risen, unblemished, from dirt-shack poverty in the segregated south to the nation’s highest courts. They did it knowingly, cynically, with the intent to destroy him in his person, and to ruin his public career.
Has there ever been a more reprehensible witch-hunt in American public life than the one organized by feminist leaders who then emerged as vocal defenders of the White House lecher? Was there ever a more sordid betrayal of common decency than this collective defamation—for which no apology has or ever will be given?
What was the sin Clarence Thomas committed to earn such punishment? The allegation—that he had talked inappropriately ten years before to a female lawyer and made her uncomfortable—appears laughable in the post-Lewinsky climate of presidential gropings and borderline rapes that the same feminists have sanctioned for their political accomplice. Thomas’ real crime, as everybody knew but was too intimidated by the hysteria to confirm at the time, was his commitment to constitutional principles they hated. They hated these principles because the Constitution was written for the explicit purpose of preventing the realization of their socialist and egalitarian dreams.”.....
Let’s create division on the left.....
Sharpton for President!!!
Yes.....a very extensive trial of intrigue, collusion and other questionable activities. Well documented for those that care to review (this doesn’t include Democrats or the MSM apparently).
It is a very odd history that actually exists in a fashion - a provenance of corruptness, if you will. Juxtapose that against a president who seems to have no provenance at all.
No less a Rodent than Jonathan Gruber cherishes his parrots!
And it is still very much a real threat to the survival of our nation and the Constitution.
C'mon, give the Dumbos a break.....
The Dumbo chorale groups is rehearsing night and day.
The group will join in harmony at their 2016 Loser Party, singing....... "Here Comes That Rainy Day Feeling , Again."
“how much of a terror hillary would be if she actually got elected.”
In early 2008, I knew that Hillary was to be our worst nightmare. That was before Barry burst onto the scene.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.