#HillaryClinton, Money, and Foreign Policy: Good For Whom? | #Peace on Blog#42

Hillary Clinton recently gave two major speeches on Israel, one at the Saban Forum and the other at AIPAC 2016. When comparing the policies (actual ones) of all the primary candidates, with the exception of Donald Trump, there is very little one can distinguish in Clinton’s positions from those of the GOP field. I write with the exception of Trump because his policy statements on Israel have yet to be deciphered.

Clinton spoke at a yearly forum, called the Saban Forum, hosted by Israeli-American entertainment mogul Haim Saban.  Saban is yet another billionaire donor to the Clinton Foundation and the Democratic party. He is but one among many super-wealthy donors who are influential in American electoral politics. An easily recognized influential donor on the other side of the American political spectrum and Saban’s plutocratic peer, is Sheldon Adelson. Both men are active in US and Israeli politics, exerting influence on both. The Jewish Daily Forward, in a piece entitled “Does Hillary Clinton Have a Haim Saban Problem?” describes Saban’s views on Muslim refugees:

“Saban has himself shown some bluster when it comes to Iran. Last fall, Saban said that if Netanyahu found the Iran deal unsatisfactory, he should “bomb the living daylights out of these sons of bitches.” Netanyahu, of course, came out swinging against the deal, but thankfully hasn’t followed Saban’s advice. What’s more, Saban himself opposed the deal as well—though he later, again unconvincingly, walked back his denouncement of it. (Saban also hinted, based on, he claimed, conversations with Clinton, that she would oppose the deal. She forcefully endorsed it.) Does Saban still think that Israel should bomb Iran, despite the deal? We just don’t know. Even that question mark should be troubling to American liberals.”

This is a problem, especially when we know just how influential these moguls are not only in U.S. politics, but also in Israel. Saban and Adelson are only two living examples of how political corruption is perpetuated. If you pick up a copy of Forbes’ richest people, you will find there are at least 143 billionaires listed before Saban, each with his or her own pet interests and lots of money to spend on them.

Israel is no less polarized than America. Israel is in a tough spot, especially now that the Middle East is so completely unstable, due in no small part to U.S. interference, fueled in large part by special interests and money in politics. Israel is no less vulnerable than America when it comes to money in politics, but it also depends on America for much of its security and some economic assistance. Is all this corruption healthy for either nation with these oligarchs pushing both nations’ policies to the right? Of course not!

So, to the argument Senator Bernie Sanders makes about the influence of money in politics, one need only listen to Clinton in both of these speeches to decide just how much that money made a difference. Watch and ask yourselves how likely it is that the likes of Saban, Adelson, Charles and David Koch or Lloyd Blankfein expect in return for the millions they “give.” Add to that special interests such as the military-industrial complex, various tech industry special interests, and you have foreign, military and national security policies that continue to veer evermore rightward, without regard for the well-being of entire nations. How much better off would the Middle East have been without the proliferation of arms? Our physical involvement in conflicts? How much safer would we be from angry terror organizations that have sprung up since our war in Iraq? Would we have needed all this NSA surveillance?

So, please, watch and ask yourselves a lot of questions about how the Hillary Clinton foreign policy sausage is made. I’m willing to bet it’s just as ugly as what you see on How It’s Made.

Hillary Clinton’s Speech at The Saban Forum, December 6, 2015:


Hillary Clinton’s Speech at AIPAC 2016:


Bernie Sanders on Israel, Palestine, Netanyahu, and ISIS:


Bernie Sanders on whether Hillary Clinton is qualified to be president:

Now, consider the influence of money on the media:

Charles M. Blow on Anonymous Sources & Media Ethics: Right On! | MSM on Blog#42

Now, think about all of the other areas of policy and government that are susceptible to corruption…

How much, do you think, these sudden attacks on Senator Sanders’ competence and intellectual capacity have to do with undue influence on the media? By whom?

Sausage making is very ugly business and we’ve given into our impulse not to look at how it is made for far too long. As a result of our dereliction of duty as voters, democracy now hangs in the balance.

Message to readers: 

This site is powered by the generosity of readers like you. It is thanks to you that I am able to maintain this site and devote time and resources to keeping you informed. Your continued support is very much needed and deeply appreciated.

Thank you.

#HillaryClinton Just Went Negative On #BernieSanders. Will She Regret It? | #HillarySoQualified on Blog#42

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *