Following Hillary’s Money

Justin Raimondo, October 19, 2007

Follow the money, as the old saying goes:

“The US arms industry is backing Hillary Clinton for President and has all but abandoned its traditional allies in the Republican party. Mrs Clinton has also emerged as Wall Street’s favourite. Investment bankers have opened their wallets in unprecedented numbers for the New York senator over the past three months and, in the process, dumped their earlier favourite, Barack Obama.”

The military-industrial complex is clearly betting on the Democrats, who, for the first time, are beating out the GOP in raising money from the war profiteers. What’s more, they’ve clearly settled on Hillary as their horse in this race, and here’s the numbers:

“So far, Mrs Clinton has received $52,600 in contributions from individual arms industry employees. That is more than half the sum given to all Democrats and 60 per cent of the total going to Republican candidates. Election fundraising laws ban individuals from donating more than $4,600 but contributions are often ‘bundled’ to obtain influence over a candidate.”

Yes, but, as she put it recently — I believe it was at the dailykos conference — lobbyists are people, too. They need to be represented — and Hillary will certainly do that. End the war? Withdraw from Iraq? Re-evaluate American foreign policy? Not on your life.




26 Responses to “Following Hillary’s Money”

  1. This is pretty consonant with her behavior re: the Iraq war, voting "with conviction" that it was "in the best interest of our nation." For the most entertaining view of this check out:

    Hillary Knew

  2. This doesn’t surprise me…it’s just a shame that so many people think that Hilary will be some kind of change from the current regime. Some Americans I talk to (I’m from Australia, the 52nd state) seem optimistic about the Dems getting in next year, but they don’t seem to realise, as Gil Scott Heron said, “America is always the same old s**t.”

  3. This doesn’t surprise me…it’s just a shame that so many people think that Hilary will be some kind of change from the current regime. Some Americans I talk to (I’m from Australia, the 52nd state) seem optimistic about the Dems getting in next year, but they don’t seem to realise, as Gil Scott Heron said, “America is always the same old sh#t.”

  4. Except for Ron Paul, I do think that she might be better than any of the other Republicans now running? Agree?

  5. All the Republicans scare the crap out of me…of course except Ron. She may be better than them, but I am not that excited for it.

  6. Big surprise. Mrs Clinton, d/b/a Bush III, has been the war whore from the git-go. When her her public service is over, one can see her sitting on the Halliburton board.

  7. I suggest we amend the Constitution to allow Hillary and Rudy to be King and Queen of Hell, with the stipulation that both will be in the front lines if they choose to attack Iran.

  8. I dont think hilary has chance. U.S . is not ready for a female president. I would go for ron paul. Better than any republican candidates? ya– you can say that but blindly supportive about some issues.

  9. How in the world might anyone become convinced that Hillary Clinton might be “better” than any of the Republican candidates except Paul? If its violence that provides the yardstick, many of the Republicans, while enthralled as she is with the authoritarian and the goosestepping, would not be as inclined to stick ice-picks into the brains of half-born innocents. You can say that for them. It would seem to be a choice of whether you prefer violence of the overseas variety or both that and the domestic variety as well. I’ll take neither, thank you, preferring non-participation to holocausts.

    John Lowell

  10. Oh my God!

    Hillary Rodham Clinton, the leading Democratic candidate for U.S. President, may be called as a material witness in the state of California, in what may be the largest election fraud in U.S. history. All news of this case has been effectively censored in the U.S. mainstream media. To read the full story, “For Clinton, 2000 Fund-Raising Controversy Lingers,” in The Wall Street Journal, click here.

    Hillary may have violated the law by not reporting large contributions to her successful 2000 campaign for the New York Senate. Mr. Peter F. Paul claims that his contributions were omitted from the public reports filed with the Federal Election Commission, and Hillary denies all knowledge of these contributions. See the latest ruling in Paul vs. Clinton.

    Hillary even denies knowing Mr. Paul, a three time convicted felon, who made the contributions to her 2000 Senate campaign. A video produced by the Equal Justice Foundation of America has been viewed more than 725,000 times. A case such as this would normally end any political aspirations for public office in the United States, and certainly raises questions about the fund-raising practices of the Clinton camp.

  11. There is so much at stake now; perhaps the future of our nation and world. Please get a brain ASAP.

  12. I apologize for “savaging” Savage; I forgot my manners. The fix is already in for Clinton: the Elite know that and want to make sure that they are on the winning side. So, the Roll of the Royal Houses shall run: Bush I, Clinton I, Bush II, Clinton II. Still think the game’s not rigged?

  13. And yet a Republican Congress couldn’t outlaw partial birth abortion.

  14. Nope. Other than the possibility of electronic voting machine hanky-panky, the only reason we alternate between evil Tweedledee and imbecile Tweedledum is because that’s just what the American populace wants.

    Both Clinton and Bush, even after exposed for what they are, were re-elected. Who needs conspiracies when the ignorance and boot-licking attitudes of Americans suffice to explain it all?

  15. The question is: after the next major terrorist attack on the US, will Rodham be able to keep us as scared as Lord Mush did for so long to foment the neo-neonut and vested interests' agenda?

  16. Or like their ReichsChurch supporters, Richard Neuhaus and James Dobson among others, manage any real opposition to George Bush’s infamous stem-cell compromise in 2001. You’re right, the appetite for violence currently being savoured by those in the Regime extends quite far, even beyond the grave it would seem. And their inability to mount meaningful opposition to it is a measure of their committment to both life and peace. I see disengagement as the only sane option.

    John Lowell

  17. America’s moral salvation will come when this wretched country goes bankrupt. When the dollar becomes nearly worthless, our troops will come home, the World will ignore us, and that parasite Israel will have to deal with its neighbors. So let us cheer big defecits, rotten trade balances and corrupt politicians like Rudy and Hillary. Finally, we are on the road to recovery.

  18. Richard: Recovery via totalitarian fascism? Oooooo-kkaaaaay! Bring it on kiddo!

  19. I think it was St. Anselm that at one point in his life spoke of the feliticity of sin. “Oh sin, most felicitous” or something along these lines. Would that others might avoid injury in the course of our leadership’s pursuit of it’s self-centeredness. Like children caught in the middle of domestic violence its the innocents that suffer and their’s undoubtedly the suffering of Christ. There is a whole world crucified in large part because of the blindness of those that lead and have lead us. They will not escape accountability.

    John Lowell

  20. Big difference between American government and America. Our government is total s**t, but we the people are not.

  21. Let’s go back to why Clinton voted affirmatively on the Iraq war authorization. Simply put, she had no idea what she was voting for. This is worse than just bad judgment; she wasn’t even paying attention! This news article speaks for itself:

    A Heated Exchange for Hillary
    April 14, 2007 2:52 PM

    ABCNews’ Eloise Harper reports: After fielding many questions ranging from mental health care to veteran affairs at a Town Hall Meeting in Hampton, NH, Senator Hillary Clinton received a heated question about Iraq. A woman who had traveled from New York asked Sen. Clinton if she had read the report given to her in 2002 on intelligence and the Iraq war.

    Clinton said she had been briefed on the report, and the woman screamed back, “Did you read it?!” Notably uncomfortable, the Senator repeated that she had been briefed. This exchange went back and forth about three times.

    The woman sat down and Clinton explained, “If I had known then what I know now, I never would have voted to give this President the authority.” Clinton also said she believed she was giving the President the authority to send U.N. inspectors to Iraq.

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/04/heated_meeting_.html

  22. Hillary doesn’t come close to representing the views or interests of the American public on foreign or domestic policy. By making the race about image, character and electability and by ignoring candidates like Kucinich, Ron Paul, Gravel and even Bill Richardson who don’t toe the War Party line, the media pushes dubious characters like Clinton and Giuliani and well-hyped nobodies like Edwards and Obama to the front and convinces people that’s what their menu is to choose from.

    One measure of how far out of line Hillary is can be found in the (admittedly unscientific) results of the ongoing “Pick Your Candidate” survey at

    http://www.dehp.net/candidate.

    If you haven’t taken this poll, you should; and then forward it to your mailing list. The results, for you and for the respondents as a whole, may surprise you.

    Another measure of the misalignment between voters’ views and Hillary’s can be found in the results of a survey of 800 broadly representative registered voters – 45% Republican and about 30% Democratic voters – conducted by Lake Research Partners on behalf of Change to Win (CTW):

    http://www.changetowin.org/fileadmin/pdf/american-dream-sep-2007-exec-summary.pdf

    The raw data is fascinating and worth perusing:

    http://www.changetowin.org/fileadmin/pdf/american-dream-sep-2007-topline.pdf

    There are some very surprising results here, which don’t at all match the usual verdict on the American people. The root menu with links to other surveys and analysis is at

    http://www.changetowin.org/features/the-american-dream-survey.html

    This is the portrait of an angry and disillusioned people ready for a change but deeply distrustful of their political leaders and well aware that their political system has been hijacked by the corporate rich. This pent-up demand for a new direction is not being tapped – indeed is being suppressed – by both parties, but there is a potential here for a political earthquake when the electorate finally gets shocked into action and discovers its power.

  23. 53rd state after England. Would like to offer my apologies.

  24. It’s not her gender. It’s her opinion on the continuance of war.

  25. Actually I am talking about recovery FROM totalitarian fascism. Just what do you think the American Empire is all about – spreading democracy?

  26. Ever notice that Hiilary was anti-war during the Nam era and more or less pro-war now? Could it be because of AIPAC?again the Israel Lobby is going to pick our leaders.This is a immoral war if ever there was one and yet the lemmings of the American public will drink the kool aid just like Jim Jones was serving it!Its enough to make a thinking person puke!