Hillary has to praise Obama—Clinton machine dominated his administration

Clinton and Sanders

Clinton and Sanders. (Snip from David Pakman video)

Morning news cycles made much of the fact Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail hearts President Barack Obama. A header at CNN about the latest debate between stealth socialist Hillary and open socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders said simply, “Clinton clings to Obama.”

Fact is, the Clinton machine has dominated Obama’s administrations, and media don’t seem to want to be honest with the public about that.

Sanders has complained a great deal about his party’s power brokers and their influence on the nomination. Fact is, he has a point. 

In a recent article, I pointed out numerous top appointees and staffers in Obama’s administration who also worked for the Clinton administration—“Clintonites.” If you look at that list, the dominance of the Clintons’ inner circle in Obama’s policy is indisputable.

The more I dig, the more my assertions are substantiated. Take Sid Blumenthal. Blumenthal worked for Bill Clinton when he was president and Blumenthal was also an adviser to Mrs. Clinton’s failed campaign for the presidential nomination the first go ‘round. Blumenthal’s association with both Clintons is well known. The operative/journalist/whatever drew anger from those who supported Obama when he and Mrs. Clinton were locked in a bitter fight for the 2008 presidential nomination. Discover the Networks recounted allegations from a professor at one of the colleges Obama attended:

“According to Occidental College professor Peter Dreier, Blumenthal in 2008 regularly distributed e-mails attacking ‘Obama’s character, political views, electability, and real or manufactured associations.’ In addition, Blumenthal also promoted the rumor that a highly inflammatory ‘whitey tape’ existed of either Barack or Michelle Obama derisively referring to white people as ‘whitey’—something that, had the tape ever materialized, would clearly have been toxic to the Obama campaign.”

As a matter of fact, many of the smear allegations about Obama in 2008 are believed to have come from the Clinton camp.

Those allegations may be one reason Obama refused to let Mrs. Clinton give Blumenthal a job in her State Dept.

That refusal mattered not a bit—Clinton still maintained ties with Blumenthal and his influence on US policy towards Libya have been the subject of much controversy. Blumenthal’s influence on the Clintons has been covered by both left and right media—it isn’t an anti-Hillary conspiracy.

Then there’s a pivotal figure in both the Clinton and Obama administrations. John Podesta. Yes, Obama promised to not have lobbyists in his administration. Remember how media attacked Mitt Romney for even talking to lobbyists in 2012?

Podesta worked in Bill Clinton’s administration and then helped found one of the most powerful lobbying firms in the world. He should have named it ‘Oligarchy International.’ Podesta currently chairs Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign. Podesta’s tentacles in the Democrats’ party are myriad. Even the chair of the South Carolina Democrat party “is a principal at the Podesta Group,” according to The Washington Times.

Podesta also served in the Obama Administration. None other than The Washington Post—left of center—said, “[N]o single person may be more responsible for shaping the ambition of Obama’s second term.”

WaPo admitted Podesta has ties to a number of White House officials.

Obama and Hillary also have donors in common. Among top donors to Obama in 2008 and top career donors to Mrs. Clinton are Citigroup, Inc., Goldman Sachs, and JP Morgan Chase and Company.

The L.A. Times said Hillary Clinton “mentioned Obama’s name 21 times during the two-hour debate” on Thursday. There’s good reason.

When Mrs. Clinton praises Obama, she is praising herself and her husband as well. Should she become the second Clinton to acquire the Oval Office, nothing will change for the better across middle class America. It’s odd when you think about it. Mrs. Clinton lost her bid for the Democrats’ nomination in 2008 but the Clintons won anyway.

Media made much of the influence of President George H. W. Bush’s inner circle on the second Bush in the White House.

Why, then, aren’t media covering the Clintons’ influence on Obama’s terms? Isn’t it logical to assume the Clinton machine is and has been running global politics?

(Commentary by Kay B. Day/Feb. 12, 2016)

Please consider a small donation to help keep our site online by using the PayPal link in the right column. We don’t run ads from major search engines or third parties.

And please share our articles on social media; indie sites don’t get much link love from search engines. Follow us on Twitter@DayontheDay. We are entirely funded by readers and the editor.

 

 

About Kay Day

Kay B. Day is a freelance writer who has published in national and international magazines and websites. The author of 3 books, her work is anthologized in textbooks and collections. She has won awards for poetry, nonfiction and fiction. Day is a member of the American Society of Journalists and Authors and the Authors Guild.

This entry was posted in 2016, Obama, US Political Parties and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Sound off!