Photo from the Washingtonian online - article indicates the Next two frontrunners - however, is there a difference?
An article this morning from newsbusters.org, highlights a recent “Meet The Press” segment where, former V.P. Candidate, and budget wonk of the Congress, suggested that if Clinton had been President, the fiscal mess the government faces would have been dealt with by no. (Paraphrasing). The articles goes on to note that they were not sure which Clinton Ryan was speaking of – however, one look at the way Hillary Clinton voted in her tenure at the Senate, (see Thomas.gov – search by congress, and then by name of Senator), she was a) bi-partisan, working with both Republican and Democrats on a variety of bills, secondly, she was more pro-military, and defense, working on bills with Hutchinson of Texas as well as Rick Santorum – keeping children safe, credits for small businesses, and the list goes on. It is no wonder therefore, that with the Progressives in control of the Democrat Party, a moderate, such as Clinton, who may, at times, trend to the Conservative side (which Democrats were at one point), was not going to be nominated, even if she did win the popular vote going into the DNC Convention.
Those talking heads, who are now saying Clinton would be a shoe-in in 2016, obviously have no idea of who the Progressives will choose to be the next woman to run on the ticket – but one might be watching the newly elected Senator from Massachusetts, the Oklahoman born, Elizabeth Warren – or the Progressives next Barack Obama.
That aside, one has to wonder, with the constant struggle in Washington, and the “deadlock” that is faced consistently – when one reads the Congressional record, one see’s a lot of bills sponsored, and co-sponsored by those on both sides of the ails, there appears to be some comradery – and the balance, as they say –is for show.
There was an interesting video shown on Fox News Sean Hannity with documentary producer Bannon – from the New York Times:
9 P.M. (Fox News) BOOMTOWN: WASHINGTON, THE IMPERIAL CITY In this edition of “Hannity,” the host, Sean Hannity; Peter Schweizer, the president and co-founder of the Government Accountability Institute; and Stephen K. Bannon, the executive chairman of Breitbart News and co-founder of the Government Accountability Institute, investigate what they call crony capitalism among the city’s power elite and the tactics used by lobbyists, bureaucrats and legislators to finance their lifestyles with taxpayer money.
In watching the program, which is segments of a file, followed by discussion, one begins to get the feeling that the “rapid Republican “Hannity, has gone over the Libertarian Ledge – or perhaps Occupy Wall Street, where there is a total disgust and distrust of the new Washington, where regardless of the party – lobbyists and politicians’ have combined to create the wealthiest and productive city in the nation – on taxpayers dollars. It’s shocking itself, the concept that there is now a permanent aristocracy that rules the U.S. and its money, and basically we, the poepole, send them “tribute”.
In other words, all of those who have tenure, (2 terms or more) are in this political class – and from the sounds of the program, there is nothing to be done!
(Unless, of course, the Public decides to throw them all-out, baby with the bathwater style, and start over.)
Most shocking take on this: From the New York TimesWashingtonEconomic Boom Financed by You”
We’re in trouble when Hannity, Bannon and the New York Times agree on something. The Premise of what has happened to our once valued institutions of Democracy is that using taxpayers funds, and lobbyist funds, there is a great divide between the haves and the have nots – specifically centered In Washington DC and around the government, where – as anyone with a brain knows, as Washington Produces nothing worth value, that can be sold or traded, then the taxpayer foots the bill. This created a political aristocracy, and it is a bi-partisan fleecing of Americans.
Or perhaps, the media itself, or certain segments, are now either so concerned or disgusted or both there will be additional stories about what goes on in the nations capital. Either that or Ailes now owns the New York Times.
One then finds those dueling senators and congressmen, through the congressional record, getting along just fine when it’s behind closed doors. Conspiracy theory or a situation where the public needs to think long and hard about changing the old for the new, from the top office down. At this point, taking people off the street might not be a bad idea.
Therefore, when Paul Ryan suggests that Hillary would have done a better job, be sure of it, he would know, he’s worked with her long enough, and with all the inner power struggles of both parties, there are occasional bright spots, that will be demonized for telling the truth about one another, in the typical partisan way. It is a shame and it is a sham at the same time.
Articles of Interest: The Alaska Dispatch – health care and Americas rising income inequality – Washington DC