Why I can’t vote for Hillary

by twit

It has come to this. The zen-like realization, thanks to several insightful comments, that a side effect of mercilessly blogging about Hillary Clinton is that it feels impossible to vote for her, if she somehow manages to secure the nomination of the Democratic Party.

Recently, there has been “NAFTAgate,” with the Clinton campaign alleging that the Obama campaign assured Canada that his anti-NAFTA rhetoric was not sincere. It became the issue in the Ohio primary and NAFTA is expected to strongly influence the upcoming Pennsylvania contest. However, now we learn that it was actually the Clinton campaign reassuring the Canadian government that she stands by her earlier support of NAFTA, and she’s simply putting on a show for the voters.

This isn’t the first time that the Clinton campaign has been caught saying something when it was politically expedient, then completely changing course when it suited the constituency of the moment. For example, there is what happened in Florida, with all candidates agreeing to not campaign in the state, due to the early primary scheduled in violation of Democratic Party rules. The agreement to not campaign in the state didn’t stop Hillary, though.

It isn’t just the impossibility of trying to figure out what Hillary Clinton stands for. The behavior of her campaign makes it increasingly clear that the only consistent position she will take is whatever she thinks you want to hear. There’s an implied insult to the intelligence of the American people, as if we can’t watch television or work the internet well enough to see that she is playing fast and loose with her message by tailoring it so closely to the daily needs of the campaign.

Hillary’s campaign has been divisive, focusing on various demographic groups, including attempts to play women against men with her ludicrous assertion that it is her gender that has cost her the presumption that she would be the Democratic nominee. Nothing says ‘elect me’ like ‘I can’t win,’ but that apparently means little to a campaign making an appeal to specific demographic groups.

I also see the conduct of her campaign as a distinct warning about how her administration, if ever elected, would behave, not to mention how painful it would be to experience the meltdowns and infighting during the campaign for the general election. Clinton campaign insiders repeatedly run to the press en masse as they wage their wars against themselves.

Read more of this post

Advertisements

but will it give us superpowers?

by twit

It looks like there has been “widespread contamination” of the American food supply over the past 30 years, with arsenic, toxic heavy metals, PCBs, you name the nastiness and it may have found its way into milk, corn, beef, basically anything raised on a farm that has accepted the government’s idea of cheap fertilizer.

On March 6, 2008, the Associated Press reports on an ongoing “30-year government policy that encourages farmers to spread millions of tons of sewage sludge over thousands of acres each year as an alternative to commercial fertilizers.”

Why are we spreading sewage sludge instead of commercial fertilizers? “Giving it away to farmers is cheaper than burning or burying it, and the government’s policy has been to encourage the former.”

https://i1.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/58/WonderWomanV5.jpg/180px-WonderWomanV5.jpg

Also, the government has been claiming that the sewage sludge is safe to use. However, in a recent lawsuit, a judge found “along with using the questionable data, “senior EPA officials took extraordinary steps to quash scientific dissent, and any questioning of EPA’s biosolids program,” and that the sewage plant in the case “was sending out hundreds of truckloads of sludge daily with dangerously high levels of cadmium, molybdenum and chlordane.”

Read more of this post