What a tangled web!

There are so many other ways that the MIC (military Industrial Complex) contribute to a particular candidate that this article doesn't mention. The funding of biased 'think tanks', media control through ad funding, lobbies and other forms of manipulation ensure that the reformists won't even be heard.
Wouldn't it be refreshing to see a column come out that shows which candidates received the LEAST amount of money from corporations? In retrospect that should serve as a ringing endorsement of a candidate who actually represents the common man.

"Vote for so and so because he/she was dismissed by corporate America (no donations) as non-subservient to their special interests!"

Mrs. Clinton is a world war waiting to happen. How any peace loving democrat could could vote for this hawkish warrior is beyond me.

With Giuliani's campaign stumbling, Ms. Clinton is emerging as the greatest threat to the future of the human race.

After securely fastening my helmet for the Daniel David bashing to follow, I'll tell you it's FINE and GOOD NEWS for Hillary to be getting contributions from all the nefarious contractors. All it means is that in the "real" bookmaking world, Democrats are seen as having a chance, and (2) Those same dollars did not go to Republicans.

Let me be clear that Mrs. Clinton is not my first choice among Democrats I'd like to see be president.
But she's far preferable to any Republican, and not nearly as trustworthy to give anticipated favors back to those contributing contractors as they may think she is. Let the dollars roll in, let the Democrats win. It's the only plan that citizens have for any odds to not just lose again.

It is very sad to see Clinton supporters making up reasons to support her corruption as if it was any better than the opposing side. How low can you go.

Although Hillary Bushlite is an exceedingly dull and boring agent of the corporatocracy, she is indeed the next biggest threat to life on Earth after Baby Bush.

First of all titling this article "Hillary's Defense Dough" is wrong its "Hillary's War Profiteering Dough".

Second how is this woman the frontrunner? Why is this ridiculous mantra/meme being repeated over and over in the MSM? So we accept it and see it as an inevitability? She's the DNC frontrunner but not the people's front runner but we the people don't get any say any more do we.

Third Hillary is pro-war on Iran and Iraq so there isn't any differences between her and Guiliani. They both take money from the AEI, Neocon, MIC, AIPAC crowd along with big pharma, big agriculture, and the rest of the dirty dozen from K Street.

Progressive Magazine like the Nation is part of the left gate-keeping crowd that wants us all to view the Democrats as our saviors. Last time I checked they still all voted for the Patriot Act and the Iraq war and are doing nothing for us orginary folk.

countess,

How low can we go? Let's see. Lower than rigged voting machines tilting conservative? Lower than a 2 trillion stolen Social Security Trust Fund? Lower than No Child Left Behind having nothing at all to do with actual education of children? Lower than Alito on the Supreme Court?
Wake up, dear. The corporate world is a tough place.
You're losing, and Hillary Clinton is not the enemy, even though Republicans are hoping to get the silly gooses of the far, far, far left to say she is. (Then they'll laugh at the silly gooses for being guess what? Silly Gooses. Happens a lot in monied circles, and sometimes the ones being laughed at never even know what the heck happened to them.)

DD will forever prescribe that a slow and orderly descent into madness and self-destruction, say 5 years like david bowie, is highly preferable to one that's impetuous and fool-hardy, say 1 to 3.

Weve got five years, what a surprise
Weve got five years, stuck on my eyes
Weve got five years, my brain hurts a lot

geoff29,

I don't think I mentioned descent or 5 years or david bowie. Would you care to either say something truthful or leave "DD" out of it?

Dirty is as dirty does

Daniel,

Not going to argue. Truthfully, unless a small informed group somehow manages to break off from the mainstream, I don't see either party solving the problem.

To me what it seems that you have is an authoritarian party hell bent on chaos, and a more moderate form of the same extremity.

I might have argued differently at one point on my mortal timeline, say 35 years ago, but the progression of events during that time has suggested otherwise.

But certainly, Daniel, you know I have always thought that you were entitled to your opinion. I just think that as you think mine is naive, so do I your's.

You know don't trust anyone under 35 these days.

but I love your enthusiasm! that is true.

Big Money decides who will be President. Some fucking democracy.

All those who haven't read Paul Craig Roberts' latest article should do so. See: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18784.htm.

Roberts does a good job of sizing up the Clinton and Giuliani clones:

"Both Hillary and Rudy are committed to the war. Both refuse to rule out expanding the war to Iran and beyond. Both are totally in the pocket of the Israel Lobby. Indeed, practically every Giuliani advisor is a member of the Lobby. Both defend the police state measures that "protect us from terrorism." And neither gives a hoot for the US Constitution and the civil liberties it guarantees. The Republican Giuliani is likely to overturn the Second Amendment even quicker than the Democrat Hillary."

Dennis is the only candidate who is fighting this country's rapid descent into fascism. Edwards or Obama are expedient pols who play the system, but not hopelessly corrupt war criminals or neo-fascists. Clinton is, and I'm not going to be an accomplice to putting a war criminal and neo-fascist in the White House. Would Hillary blow away millions of Iranian civilians in exchange for support from AIPAC? In a heartbeat. Maybe Americans deserve her, but the rest of the world doesn't.

"You've come a long way, baby" is now a mythological hybrid, as the female takes on the warrior garb to out-man men... just as sports create a nexus wherein women can compete like men, the areas in which females are spiritually endowed remain nonexistent, underfunded, and denigrated. There's a reason we have 2 genders, and our bodies have many polar components, sympathetic & parasympathetic systems, two brain hemispheres, etc. It's designed for balance! That balance--as is so tragically the case with respect to the health of the great Earth Mother--is completely off because societies have exalted masculine ideals like raw power and prowess so much so, that now women have to wear virtual dicks to prove themselves politically viable. It's a sell out on ALL levels, a travesty to the great cosmic design plan, and as others have noted in this thread and many before it... a danger to our world. Will they ask Bill about baking cookies next?

Ostrogoth November 29th, 2007 2:31 pm

was a faulty link.

I think you are referring to this:

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts11272007.html

Yep, the Counterpunch link works. Much preesh.

stop blaming it all on the men!

but I do think that women are capable of being cut throat and hostile in their own unique fashion completely regardless of whether you factor the male of the species into the equation.

both male and female are capable of aggressive survival instincts of uniquely different sorts, as well as crossing boundaries and imitating or adopting each other's behavioral patterns.

You need only look at the natural world to see examples of the conflicts that the female engenders - out of all the innocence of the checks and balances of the natural world.

But the balancing act required remains necessary to be sure.

Daniel David November 29th, 2007 1:29 pm

"Lower than a 2 trillion stolen Social Security Trust Fund?"

To put it politely as I can, you are naive in the extreme if you believe that the Republicans are the only one that have stolen from the Social Security trust fund.

Lobo Gris

Daniel David November 29th, 2007 12:41 pm

"But she's far preferable to any Republican, and not nearly as trustworthy to give anticipated favors back to those contributing contractors as they may think she is. Let the dollars roll in, let the Democrats win. It's the only plan that citizens have for any odds to not just lose again."

"Daniel David November 29th, 2007 2:02 pm

You told geoff29 to be truthful, I challenge you to hold yourself to the same standard you seem to expect from others. What evidence do you have that Hillary will not be nearly as trustworthy in giving back anticipated favors to big contractor donors? Do you think they are stupid giving away money with no hope of return?

Lobo Gris

re Lobo Gris, RichM and the other heavy lifters:

your tenacity is inspiring---like sysiphus, you keep rolling that stone up the hill, but to what purpose? there's no more chance of your changing the prolific poster's tune than of successfully nailing caviar to a wall.

the larger issues i see are these:

(1) by election day, the campaign will have been grinding on for more than a year. the corporate media are the only obvious beneficiaries (that's where all those campaign contributions go, in a self-stoking cycle), while the majority's eyes will have long since glazed over. this isn't democracy in its fullest flowering, it's tinsel. an election need take no more than 8 weeks, if a thorough airing of the issues is what really matters.

(2) regardless of who wins, nothing will change without pressure from the citizens. set your agenda, engage with your neighbors, persuade them to join you if you're able, and plan to get busy on inauguration day (remember those prescient folk who egged shrub's motorcade in 2001?) and the days after.

(3) corporations are not people, and must have no rights under the constitution that aren't subject to revocation.

Any who suggest GEOFF is not truthful, are either stupid or g-damn liars.___ Or both.

If we "HAD" to score Bush against Hillary, which one would get the most points? Be totally honest with your secret ballot _____ or humerous.

There is one good thing here, the Repulsives don't have the money and it don't appear they are gonna get very much. As far a Juliano goes, he is out of here, if that story about his mistress and his illegal use of loot that just hit the news is half way accurate. Of course if Oprah don't goof up and say something stupid, Obama will have a decent chance of being our first Afro-American prez.

A lot can happen between now and next November, among them a massive depression, a war with Iran and or, a King George ruling us serfs and snuffing a lot of treasonous bloggers, worthless elderly, begging street people and homeless vets. So it really is early for accurate predictions, but you can be assured, Hillary AND Obama, will likely recieve much more money from the gun and ammo makers. They and the other money people, like the 'pharma-suiticles', the oil and coal guys, insurance fellas, the cereal makers and 'Haveabillions' are usually careful to shell out to any who have a decent chance.

Thanks, Kem.

The other day I worked myself up into a tirade. I felt like you!! then realized that I was on sacred ground so left disheartened!

as the occupiers like myself ought now to confess, "we were at fault. This land was yours before I was here. I failed to take that into consideration and so must pay reparations of varying degrees down through the ages."

You know, the "sins of the parents are visited upon the children" becomes manifestly self-apparent nowadays.

WHAT! You are YOU Geoff! They don't come any better. You can occupy anytime bud and say anythg you damn well please. Don't be down on yourself, EVER!

I wish all had your goodwill, compassion for others, intellect, honesty and common sense. Of course many do, ___ not all though.

Kem said the "pharma-suiticles"

HAHAHAHA I love that line very appropriate! I'm gonna use that one too!

to the geoff29 defenders,

Go back and read the posts. There is nothing either truthful or civil about "DD will forever prescribe" and then wandering off to some writings from David Bowie. It's not a "truth", it's just an self-important whack on somebody else, done, as many do here, for sport, or (perhaps more likely) lack of energy to compose original thoughts that aren't negative takeoffs on something already said.

The wise old sages who "occupy" could do better, and they ought to -- for the benefit of the site.

Come on now Daniel,

You know I've always stuck up for you. Let's get back to the idea that your enthusiasm is positive.

so, in terms of the truth, now address the 25 posts since then.

I'm sorry for being flippant, however, Daniel. You deserve better I know. I've argued as much myself. It's just a kind of frustration. As many of us are feeling.

Yeah DD, you are ALWAYS right;___ right?

Me tu.

Wait, there is a mistake. Its not Defence money, its not Hillarys Defence Dough, its your money. The government prints the money, by selling bonds to the Chinese and others. It hands it out to the war machine. The war corporations are swilling in it, there is no accountability, so they can give large amounts selectively to the politicians that promise to keep them rolling in it.

Effectively money is votes, so the system has taken your money and used it to keep the war money machine going in perpetuity, vastly overwhelming the power of the individual voter. The money the government prints dilutes the value of US dollars in the residual USI economy and the rest of the world, reducing your real purchasing power and quality of life. Unfortunately it has not yet seemed to dent the USI production of greenhouse gases, and the amount of hot air coming from the mouths of politicians justifying their exalted position in the money game.

The end of the inflationary war cycle comes when the US dollar is near worthless. The very size of the vast sums being talked are telling that the real dollar value is getting low. Then its a choice between feeding the people and feeding the war machine.

You are correct, and it looks as if the people are going to go hungry. It don't matter, we will have that depression, and we will go hungry anyway.

geoff29,

Thanks for peaceful words. Accepted thankfully, with a pledge not to launch criticisms at you or anyone else except in defense, and even then only as time permits. There are lots of Daniel-bashers. As for frustration? I have it in spades over the prospect of more Republicans. That's why I advocate the others, aka Democrats.

As for addressing all the posts above, Hillary is a liberal trying to get past corporations and hawks to get elected. She will never be anything but a liberal at heart, and that's why I believe she will not give her corporate contributors the store. They are just buying access, and electing a Republican is not a proper response for us to make just because there are critics of Hillary's contributor list.

I struggle to put my trust in anyone who is an inveterate liar, skillful though they may be, either first to themselves and then by a greater degree, unto others.

I'm not sure what the experience of other folks has been, but involving yourself with people who cannot tell the truth even in the smallest of particulars are likely to inflict you with great pain if you, wishing to believe them, do so.

This is from personal experience albeit on a smaller scale than who one wishes to elect for president, or who is chosen for our considerations by vast sums of money to be elected, but I would wager a bet that the phenomena works itself out in the same way throughout human experience, and is not limited to the day to day lives of petty mortals.

Despair is climbing local peaks while staring wistfully at the big mountain in the horizon; bashing those who dare go for it is spiteful, if not downright evil.

HEDOLOGY says, "Then its a choice between feeding the people and feeding the war machine." Right on!

We have just witnessed what an apology and diplomacy can result in. It is far better than tossing a bomb. We likely all have seen bitter enemies end a dispute and end up as good friends, when one says, "I'm sorry,forgive me."

I agree with DD on the Hillary issue. If we want a strong president, one who will be at least half assed, and it is impossible to have Dennis, I'll chance Hillary and Billy, ___ as long as he keeps his zipper up in the back room.

I've read ALL of the comments above. I'm sorry to say that some of this discussion has devolved into arguement and useless political spitting. I have respect for everyone's contribution even if I disagree. Though I find it almost impossible to support Hillary, after what Pelosi/Reid did in August with FISA, I've come to my last straw with the Dems. I don't really think they stand for anything that comes close to "We the People", the rule of law, or upholding the Constitution. I can vote for an individual's integrity and platform, but I can't vote for a letter behind some candidates name. It's meaningless.

Besides, I'm not convinced that there is going to be an election in '08. I'm more concerned about what these idiots are doing RIGHT NOW to stop the implosion of our economy, an attack on Iran, impeachment, and holding these evil morons to account for their atrosities.

So, for my sanity, PLEASE don't lets be fighting with each other.

Thanks

And don't forget, Hillary---give Bush all the money, now, without question or conditions, or lots of civilians will lose their jobs and more of our sons will die and we'll all be in terrible danger. I love how the media dignify these phony fucking assholes in every word, no bottom to how cynical they are---They give "caveman" a bad name

Its just a game of poker... do you think the defense contractors would fuck up the repugs in the next election by giving them more?

The repugs/defense contractors have made their money already in Iraq, they are happy to let Hillery grovel for a few pennies that fell out of their bulging pockets so they can smear her.

Don't be fooled by politics as usual.

Democrats?

Democrats see ignorance as the Peoples strong suit. This fits their version of (people's strength) democracy. So long as the people are strongly ignorant the rats will play.

Representative government is obsolete. Made so by the vast organizational capacity that electronics represent, long so by the long standing proof that was the referendum to establish the constitution. Representative government has been obsolete since pen and paper enough for everyone to vote has existed.

http://ni4d.org <<Go here and VOTE YES for National Referendum. Vote for what matters, vote on law, rather than for criminals.

Here is a page/site that I put up which is a partial list of some of the problems that Hillary is tangled up in:

http://www.sonic.net/~taryfast/Hillary.html

I just looked up a quote attributed to Hitler, and all I found were recent recollections????

You remember when "big-eyed" buddy said go baby, fuck'm baby.

It is bad enough that we have the best government money can buy, but the politicians don't even get an agents cut of the action. They sell out for pennies on the billions. No wonder such a bunch of dumb crooks can't run the country. They can't even run a good racket.

hazmat November 29th, 2007 4:15 pm

re Lobo Gris, RichM and the other heavy lifters:

"your tenacity is inspiring—like sysiphus, you keep rolling that stone up the hill, but to what purpose? there's no more chance of your changing the prolific poster's tune than of successfully nailing caviar to a wall."

I'm not trying to stop DD from posting nor am I trying to change his tune. I am a true supporter of free speech. I just insist on challenging and/or correcting his most outrageous unsubstantiated statements. Not because of the people that post here who are obviously intelligent enough to see through what he is doing, but to reach the many that only read these posts that never post here themselves. I don't know if any of them will be swayed by his posts but I believe that he believes he will reach some of them, else why would he continue?

Lobo Gris

The money for these contractors is just pocket change, and they are spreading it around to all their potential customers. Just like a businessman giving pro basketball or hockey tickets to a customer, or a pharm company paying a doctor to attend a dinner/"lecture". A form of advertising.

The Clintons have never discriminated when accepting money. Why should they start now? The problem is, with or without the money, no one knows what Hillary will do when elected. What does she stand for besides getting herself elected?

The money for these contractors is just pocket change, and they are spreading it around to all their potential customers. Just like a businessman giving pro basketball or hockey tickets to a customer, or a pharm company paying a doctor to attend a dinner/"lecture". A form of advertising.

The Clintons have never discriminated when accepting money. Why should they start now? The problem is, with or without the money, no one knows what Hillary will do when elected. What does she stand for besides getting herself elected?

To those who defend Hillary as better than the Republicans: Is this the best we can do, to support someone who consistently has voted for war, to fund war, to continue war, to threaten new wars? Someone who has supported the bankers and the insurers over their victims? Someone who has supported the loss of rights that go back to the Magna Carta? Is this the best that the opposition can muster during the worst threat our nation has faced since the 1860s? Fighting the Nazis and Facists in the 1940s was less a threat than we face now, for now the enemy is us. And the best the Democrats can do is Hillary?