Do you like inadvertent humor? I do and William Greider had me buckled over in side splitting laughter with his latest column in The Nation titled "Hillary Clinton is Whitewashing the Financial Catastrophe". He's always unwittingly funny - for years at Rolling Stone and now at The Nation - in presenting seeming heterodox, but ultimately orthodox, Leftist perspective on US economic and political happenings. But last week he dove into turbulent waters to save something or someone, what it was I must confess is a mystery to me - perhaps it was Bernie Sanders or Pocahontas Warren or the "truth" as he perceives it - and drowned himself by uselessly flailing around and grabbing at rocks and branches that gave way with every tug of reason. I thought watching him glub, glub, glub was funny, anyway. Get a load of this opening:
"Hillary Clinton’s recent op-ed in The New York Times, “How I’d Rein In Wall Street,” was intended to reassure nervous Democrats who fear she is still in thrall to those mega-bankers of New York who crashed the American economy. Clinton’s brisk recital of plausible reform ideas might convince wishful thinkers who are not familiar with the complexities of banking. But informed skeptics, myself included, see a disturbing message in her argument that ought to alarm innocent supporters."
Could Hillary "STILL" be beholden to those NYC mega-bankers? Hahaha. "Wishful thinkers" think not, but they're "innocent". I mean, do I have to go any further into this routine - tears of laughter are streaming down my cheek as I write these word. How stupid are the folks who read The Nation anyway? Hey, they're not stupid, just "innocent". So why did her carpetbagging highness write the Times Op-Ed?
"In roundabout fashion, Hillary Clinton sounds like she is assuring old friends and donors in the financial sector that, if she becomes president, she will not come after them."
Whitewater, not the Whitewash. What Ms. Rodham learned early on in Arkansas was that bankers need the support of government to do business and GOVERNMENT can strong arm banks into doing almost anything - like, say, giving Susan Mcdougall $300K in a government backed loan so she could give some of that money to the politician who got it for her. Do that in Little Rock and you're a fuss-bucket lawyer in a backwater State gaming the political system to hedge your "investments" but move that ethos to Washington DC and implement it on a grand scale and you will (and did) collapse the entire house of cards. The wishful thinkers and innocents who read The Nation often complain that none of the evil bankers that destroyed the worlds financial system ever went to jail for there crimes and the US Tax payer was forced - FORCED - to bail them out, but there's a very good reason for why the bankers got a pass and it's because the bankers had direct links (meaning EVIDENCE) to Big Government "influence" (meaning coercion) on all their decisions. The Feds couldn't prosecute the bankers with out putting themselves in jail too - Mexican Standoff - so they took the easier, softer path of screwing the taxpayer.
Greider closes out with this howler:
This might sound hopelessly naive, but the Democratic Party might do better in politics if it told more of the truth more often: what they tried do and why it failed, and what they think they may have gotten wrong.If they ever told the truth and admitted what they "got wrong" the people of America would murder them - not figuratively at the ballot box, but literally with pitchforks and axes submerging the Washington Mall in blood.