Mayor Bill de Blasio claimed that former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton created the platform for a “new progressive era.”
QUOTE : “We may be at the beginning of a new progressive era, and we need to do everything we can to capture this moment and build it, and Hillary created a platform that really speaks to that moment,” Mayor de Blasio said, adding that, “It’s very moving for me to help her because of what she stands for.”
- Hillary Clinton Campaign Declined Bill de Blasio’s First Offer to Help in Iowa [The New York Times]
By LOUIS FLORES
Updated 01 February 2016 08:55 a.m. ⎪ After former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was left reeling from a series of news reports questioning her commitment to fundamental Democratic Party values, Mayor Bill de Blasio (D-New York City) traveled to Iowa to ostensibly help shore up her credibility with the Left wing of the Democratic Party. To do this, Mayor de Blasio made the improbable claim that former First Lady Clinton has created a platform that represents the creation of a new Progressive Era.
Contrary to Mayor de Blasio’s assertion, former First Lady Clinton’s record on political, social, and economic policies is nowhere near being progressive. As such, she has not established a platform that speaks to a new Progressive Era.
As reported by Progress Queens, former First Lady Clinton misrepresented historical facts to justify her prior support for the Defense of Marriage Act, a discriminatory law signed by her husband, former President Bill Clinton. Former First Lady Clinton has also been targeted by Black Lives Matter protesters over her failure to commit to fundamental criminal justice system reforms. She has also faced criticism over her use of racist “super-predator” rhetoric during the Clinton administration that spread panic about crime rates, that contributed to a climate of heavy-handed policing and law enforcement that has run amok. Discrimination is not a progressive value.
Even though former First Lady Clinton had previously supported a universal healthcare system, after her initial efforts failed, former First Lady Clinton has pivoted away from advocating for a truly universal healthcare plan. In this campaign season now, former First Lady Clinton has defended the neoliberal healthcare system known as Obamacare, and she has hypocritically attacked the campaign platform of her insurgent primary challenger, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), for supporting a single-payer healthcare system. Making advances in public health by creating a universal healthcare system is a progressive value. Unfortunately, it is not one that former First Lady Clinton advocates.
Furthermore, former First Lady Clinton does not support a $15 floor for a Federal minimum wage. Meanwhile, Sen. Sanders does support the Fight for $15 campaign. Despite living through a new Gilded Age of extreme income and wealth disparities, Former First Lady Clinton has said that she believes that hard-working Americans only deserve to earn a minimum wage of $12 per hour. Improving wages is a progressive value, one, again, in which former First Lady Clinton does not meet the progressive standard.
As a result of her economic policies, former First Lady Clinton has been described as a defender of trickle-down economics, and she has been forced into an untenable position of self-anointing herself as a liberal whilst at the same time defending her $200,000 per hour paid speeches she has been making at Goldman Sachs.
On social media, former First Lady Clinton has faced criticism based on her neoliberal political agenda.
Former First Lady Clinton's policies do not represent progressive values. The social and economic impact of her political platform would not support sharing economic gains with people most in need, nor do former First Lady Clinton's platform address the unchecked damage being done by campaign, political, and corporate corruption. What is more, some of former First Lady Clinton's policies have been discriminatory. The sum of her policies do not establish a platform that would engender the creation of a new Progressive Era. Furthermore, the capital of her adopted state, New York, has been described as a "cauldron of corruption," and yet the former First Lady has been silent as waves of campaign and political corruption have shaken voters' faith in government all across New York -- from City Hall to Albany to Buffalo.
In summary, Mayor de Blasio made an inaccurate description of former First Lady Clinton’s political record, and The New York Times should have balanced the mayor’s statements with a recounting of facts to the contrary. If that would have been too complicated, then the least The New York Times should have done was to credit Occupy Wall Street for having put, as reported by Bloomberg, the subject of income inequality on the political agenda, because, if the nation is at the dawn of a new Progressive Era, then it will be because of Occupy activists, not because of former First Lady Clinton.
- As desperation sinks in, Clinton seeks help from de Blasio in Iowa [Progress Queens]
- Hillary Clinton's revisionist comments on DOMA and DADT roil the LGBT community [Progress Queens]
- Hillary Clinton Invokes 9/11 to Deflect Questions About Wall Street Ties [Time]
- With Bernie Sanders rising in polls, Hillary Clinton proposes campaign finance reform [Progress Queens]