Hillary says she is most proud Republicans are her enemy. Compares members of the GOP to NRA, health insurance companies, drug companies, and the Iranians.

.

If Republicans are her proudest enemy, what does that make Independents?

In the most recent Democratic Presidential candidates debate at CNN, CNN's Anderson Cooper asked, "which enemy are you most proud of?"

Clinton replied

“In addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians, probably the Republicans.”

Never has a presidential candidate demonstrated such polarization toward an entire group of politically affiliated people as Hillary did when she condemned the entire Republican party to being her enemy.

As for the Independents who are already fed up with political polarization, Hillary seems to have slammed the door on them as well.  Independents are already fed up with politicians and after Hillary spoke we know why.

Most polls show 50-75% of the voters are still somewhat undecided on who to vote for in the general election.  Well Hillary sent a clear and concise message to the Republicans and Independents in that category that she considers them the enemy.

Of course, that is just one half of the impact from what she said as her statement also included a holier than thou claim health insurance and drug companies are also enemies and she is proud of it.

As you will also note from the following articles, the health and drug companies have showered Hillary, and Bill, and the Clinton Foundation with millions of dollars in contributions.  Perhaps she should have said "now that I fleeced the health and drug companies, they no longer serve me any purpose.  I got the millions!", cackle, cackle.

Did anyone else note that she has developed a cackle like the Wicked Witch of the West?  I first noticed it in the debate.  You take millions and condemn the donors.  With all accounts paid up why not, it keeps the progressives and liberals from looking at her contributors since she is the newly incarnated Queen of Progressives, at least until she wins the democratic nomination.

Once she takes the big primary prize then she will start becoming a conservative like her husband who stole the Republican platform in 1992 to run on and to use while president.

It worked once for the Clintons, why not work again?  Still, there is something to be said for a little laughter in politics and the bevy of photos in this article show you the lighter side of the Washington drama kings and queens.

Hillary Takes Millions in Campaign Cash From ‘Enemies’

Clinton named the drug and insurance industries among her “enemies,” but has accepted millions in donations from them.

By Kimberly Leonard Oct. 14, 2015 | 4:25 p.m. EDT

When asked during the Democratic presidential debate what enemies she was most proud to have made, Hillary Clinton named pharmaceutical and health insurance companies at the top of her list. But that hasn’t stopped the Democratic front-runner from accepting millions of dollars in campaign cash from both industries in the course of her political career, financial disclosure records show.

Since her first bid for Senate in 2000, Clinton has accepted nearly $1 million from drug and health companies and more than $2.7 million from the insurance field and its related sectors, according to an analysis of public records from the Center for Responsive Politics. While the analysis did not include campaign finance figures for the 2016 cycle, some of the same donors and patterns can be seen in Clinton’s lone financial disclosure filed in July.

Contributions tied to some of the same firms that gave to her 2008 presidential campaign appear in the latest disclosure, including donations connected to pharmaceutical companies Pfizer Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.; and insurers Aetna Inc., MetLife Inc. and Centene Corp., the latter of which is among Clinton’s largest donors this year.  

In the course of her 2008 presidential bid, records show that Clinton was the third-largest recipient of campaign donations from drug and health product companies, receiving $738,359 in donations. The industry also contributed $86,875 to her 2000 Senate run, and spent $157,015 supporting her re-election in 2006.

The insurance industry – which includes health insurers and also car, life and property insurance – donated $1,260,400 to her 2008 campaign, making her the third-highest recipient of cash from the industry that year and also in 2006, when she raised $397,110 for her re-election to the Senate. During her first bid for the Senate in 2000, she raised $167,550 from the industry.

She was the second-highest recipient of cash in 2008 from the health services sector and HMOs, receiving $636,670, and the highest earner in 2006, at $183,770. In 2000, she raised $70,575. 

More recently, the Clinton Foundation has also benefited from these groups’ donations. Donors and grantors who have given between $1 million and $5 million include Pfizer, the Procter & Gamble Co., Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina and Humana Inc.

But Clinton seems to have turned on the pharmaceutical industry in particular in recent weeks, releasing a plan to improve on President Barack Obama’s health care law, the Affordable Care Act, by tackling drug costs. The plan includes allowing Medicare, the government’s health plan for adults over 65 and disabled Americans, to negotiate lower drug costs – a measure the industry heavily opposes.

Her policy proposal also stated that she plans to reduce the amount of time a pharmaceutical company has exclusive rights to biologics, which are drugs made of living cells that are expensive to develop and can be difficult for patients to afford. Though she supported the bill that led to a 12-year exclusivity while in the Senate, her new proposals say she would reduce the patent to seven years, allowing the drug to be copied by other manufacturers and therefore reducing its price. Drugmakers are against this proposal, saying they need to recoup the massive costs of developing the drugs and to invest in new treatments and cures.

When Clinton was secretary of state, she supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which includes provisions that strengthen patent protections for drugmakers. Last week, however, she said she opposes the deal.

When asked for a response to Clinton calling the pharmaceutical industry “enemies,” Tina Stow, a spokeswoman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, said the group has a long history of supporting and working with candidates and policymakers on both sides of the aisle.

“We will continue to do so as we look to advance a pro-patient, pro-innovation, pro-jobs agenda,” she wrote in an email. PhRMA has publicly come out against Clinton’s plan for prescription drugs, saying it would restrict patients’ access to medicines, result in fewer new treatments, would cost jobs and would end the country’s standing as a leader in biomedical innovation.

It’s unclear to what extent insurers and drug companies will continue to support her campaign, particularly after the comments during CNN’s debate, although it would not be the first time Clinton has been at odds with the industries.

Asked to explain the financial relationship between Clinton’s campaign and the industries, campaign officials pointed to the contentious war fought against Clinton when she was first lady and head of the Task Force on National Health Care Reform in 1993. The health insurance industry ran millions of dollars of ads against a health care plan she championed that would have overhauled the system, playing a large role in ultimately killing it. They also point out that her positions to tackle drug costs have been unpopular among pharmaceutical lobbying groups, which could help to demonstrate she ultimately isn’t beholden to the industry’s interests.

In total, Clinton raised $245.8 million for her 2008 presidential run, $51.6 million for her 2006 Senate campaign and $30.2 million for her 2000 Senate bid.

Pharmaceutical companies and insurers are typically generous with members of both parties, giving slightly more to Republicans. Clare Krusing, press secretary for America's Health Insurance Plans, says its political action committee supports candidates of both parties and, in particular, candidates who support policies aligned with the industry's priorities around affordability.

In recent years, both industries have contributed more to Democrats. Obama was the top recipient during the 2008 presidential election, and again during his re-election in 2012, with his Republican opponents – first Mitt Romney, then Sen. John McCain – receiving slightly less from pharmaceutical companies.

 International Business Times

Wednesday, October 21, 2015 As of 7:52 AM EDT

Democratic Debate 2015: Hillary Clinton’s ‘Enemies’ In Pharmaceutical and Insurance Industries Have Supported Her Campaigns, Foundation

By Andrew Perez @AndrewPerezDC andrew.perez@ibtimes.com
David Sirota @davidsirota d.sirota@ibtimes.com on October 14 2015 12:42 AM EDT

Bill Clinton famously tried to parse what the meaning of “is” is -- and now his wife, Hillary Clinton, seems to be challenging the precise definition of “enemies.”

In an exchange toward the end of the Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas on Tuesday, the candidates were asked who their biggest enemies had been over the course of their careers. Clinton responded by saying, “In addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians -- probably the Republicans.”

It is true that the National Rifle Association and the Republicans have been Clinton’s nemeses, and she has been involved in tense negotiations about international policy toward Iran. But health insurance companies and drug companies have been some of her biggest financial supporters.

In 2008, Clinton was the among the three biggest recipients of campaign cash from pharmaceutical-related companies, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. In all, the watchdog group reports that she raised $738,000 from employees of pharmaceutical manufacturers and companies classified as “Pharmaceuticals /Health Products.” The center reports that Clinton also raised more than $1.2 million from the insurance industry -- which includes health insurers.

On top of those campaign contributions, the Clintons and their family foundation have benefited from their ties to the pharmaceutical and insurance industries.

In 2011, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) -- the primary trade association representing drug companies -- paid Bill Clinton $200,000 for a speech, as the organization was lobbying the Hillary Clinton-led State Department. Last year, the Drug Chemical and Associated Technologies Association, a trade group whose members include major pharmaceutical companies, paid her a $250,000 speaking fee.

Meanwhile, the Clinton Foundation has received between $1 million and $5 million worth of donations separately from drug manufacturers Pfizer and Procter & Gamble, and from health insurers Humana and Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina. Some of those companies made donations as recently as this year, according to the foundation’s website.

That largesse was part of a friendship forged after those industries opposed her 1993 health care initiative -- and which continued after she won reelection to the Senate in 2006.

As secretary of state, Clinton repeatedly championed the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which critics say includes provisions that strengthen patent protection for drug manufacturers. (Last week, she declared that she now opposes the trade deal.) As a presidential candidate in 2008, she promoted the idea of a federal mandate effectively requiring Americans to buy private health insurance.

Those Clinton positions were strongly supported by the same drug and insurance industries that she now calls “enemies.”

. 

Obamaville July 28 - The Calm before the Storm - Dark Clouds on the Horizon

.

Campaign 2016

The clock keeps ticking with about 16 months left before the general election in November 2016 and already the political silly season has started.

The Republican candidates for president see nothing but Red and the Democratic candidates see nothing but Blue and I do not mean in terms of states on the election board.

Why is it the GOP gang of 16, 17, 18, or whatever cannot just leave Obama out of the election?  No one can change history and Obama did break a huge barrier when elected as our first African American president.  If he did nothing else, it was a significant historic achievement.

Many Americans did not approve of his agenda, his foreign policy, his intellectual indifference and other things but Obama is not going to be president any more.  American decency suggests the herd of candidates should focus on explaining what they would do as president, instead of threatening to tear down everything President Obama accomplished.

If I remember correctly, Obama got elected twice to serve as Commander and Chief of all the people and we owe our president respect if nothing else.  The GOP candidates seem incapable of giving us their agenda for the future choosing instead to mount goofy and demeaning attacks on every last thing the president says or does.

Of course, the National Republican Party just magnified the political partisanship when they limited the GOP debates to the top ten candidates leaving at least half a dozen out in the cold.  They could have had two debates of nine each to showcase all the candidates but no, that makes too much sense.

The only result was all the candidates turning up the volume and competing for who can make the most outrageous and incendiary sound bytes to the media in an effort to boost them into the top ten for the debate.

The GOP has no stranglehold on stupidity, however, as Hillary has flip flopped so many times already her Democratic base has no idea what she advocates.  She pleads she is a pauper with $200 million in the bank as she raises $2 billion for the campaign.  Duh...

Her wobbly and Pollyanna-like explanations for violating federal law by keeping top-secret files on her home computer, then erasing all the records before anyone could check her drive, may be one of the biggest blunders in presidential campaign history.  This was her election to lose and she is doing a very good job at it.

  

Running our Government

Now that the Republicans have control of both Houses of Congress, nothing has changed, much like Obama's first two years when the Democrats controlled both Houses.  It is a miracle when any little thing good happens in our nation's capitol and that is a very sorry state of affairs.

Campaign Finance Reform

The failure by Obama, the Democrats, the Republicans, and the presidential candidates to address campaign finance reform is tantamount to criminal neglect and insures the one to three percent of the people with all the wealth in America will continue to control our politicians like puppets on a string.

Foreign Policy Follies

The Obama administration foreign policy of negotiation with our enemies has resulted in a policy of appeasement and undermined whatever international credibility we might have had in the world.  Instead of a Super power, we are a Super wimp, and it may take generations to get past the morass.

Dark Economic Skies

After seven years of empty promises from Obama and both parties, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will still bankrupt our nation in time.  Our health care is the most expensive in the world and we still rank around nineteenth in terms of quality of service.

All the stock markets are the playground of the rich and pushed Joe six-pack out of the market with computers and crooks, crooks the Obama administration has failed to prosecute.  We still have a lot of corruption, discrimination, and even human trafficking, but we never miss a chance to blast other nations for their faults while ignoring our own.

International Terrorism

Terrorism thrives because of the foreign policy stupidity of both political parties.

Wish you voted different?

Economy

Our economy may very well be on life-support, as only the rich seem to have benefited from the economic recovery.  If the American public no longer has faith and trust in our many institutions it is for a very good reason, they do not deserve it.

Hope or a Dope

Still I have hope and remain optimistic that in the end the people will regain control of their government and force our politicians to fix the mess.

The Silent Majority

I never lose sight of the fact that when Obama won re-election in 2012 by the largest margin in his two campaigns, he still only won the overwhelming support of just twenty-six percent of the eligible voters in America.  An astonishing seventy-four percent of the eligible voters did not support him or his agenda.

One day all of our silent majority will finally register and vote and when they do all the money and professional politicians in the world will not be able to stop the tidal wave of reform the people will unleash on America.

.

Palin Must See TV - The Great Debate

If Obama was truly media savvy he would be debating Sarah Palin as she continues to be the star of the presidential campaign. Over 72 million Americans tuned in to watch her debate, a bunch cheering for her to beat the leftist media at their own game and a bunch waiting for her to self destruct. Once again, when her message cannot be diluted by the edit happy media like Katie Couric, Charles Gibson and the increasingly bitter David Letterman, Palin connects to the heart and soul of America.

Palin power pulled 20 million more viewers than the darling of the liberal media Barack Obama. For probably the first time in history a vice presidential candidate buried the presidential candidate audience in an avalanche of television followers and proved to the world that her experience and media savvy are far more powerful than Barack's inexperience and media manipulation when it comes to the typical American viewer.

Now the liberal leftist pundits say a candidate for vice president can never win an election for president but these are the same pundits who failed to warn us about the stock market crash, the credit crisis, the budget deficit and even the Yankees and Cubs being knocked out of the World Series. Their credibility to the general public is well below that of President Bush and threatens the Congress for having the lowest credibility of any profession in America. No one believes the media. No one believes the politicians.

I believe the vice presidential candidate can win the election when both candidates for president have the same standing in polls on issues like being prepared, qualified, trusted to be president, etc. and for now McCain and Obama are little different. What these same media pundits fail to say is that for the first time in our history women, not the bra burning feminists of 5th Avenue and Hollywood and Vine but the Main Street grandmothers, mothers and daughters who have watched in dismay as the media, politicians and Wall Street have sunk into the cesspool of corruption, back room deals and greed, these women can make things different.

These women you never read about in People Magazine or Crime Reporter have waited a long time for the men to get it right, the men of the left and the men of the right, and things are not getting any better no matter which way you turn. No, the seeds were planted long ago for a populist revolt in America and not just in Iraq but in Viet Nam. The people who run our government have been around for a very long time. But this time the silent women's majority has a choice to send a message so loud and clear it will knock the socks off the feet and the dirty cash out of the pockets of the entire male dominated establishment in the media, in Washington and on Wall Street.

Love her or hate her Palin is the only one of the big four candidates not contaminated by Wall Street, not contaminated by Washington insiders and not contaminated by a pandering media. She is the only candidate who is not a member of the most sacred men's club in Washington, in America,the US Senate. The people are truly fed up with the establishment, the existing order of things and the people who have brought us the mess we are in, and only one candidate is not part of that tainted establishment, Sarah Palin.

That is why she draws far bigger audiences, interest and even media attention than the big three. And if the silent majority of women decide for the first time in history that enough is enough, then the cocky candidates and cranky media will be in for the surprise of their collective lives when the Moose hunting momma kicks the butts of the mainstream media, the elite establishment and the executives of Wall Street come November 4.