|
Re: Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder
The criticism here was "how it looks" but implied was "how it looks to lefty Berners," a significant portion of which hate big banks. Heck, a non-trivial portion hates any bank.
|
Is it possible for me to criticize the Clintons from the left without being lumped with bank-hating Bernie Bros.? I would have thought so. I have defended the work the Clinton Foundation did on several occasions here, so I don't think my bona fides in that direction can fairly be questioned. But setting aside the good work that they did, you can't get away from the appearance that much of the money appeared to come with an implicit quid pro quo by which the public stature of the donor would be laundered by association with the Clintons, such as in this case (which I found somewhat randomly using Teh Google). On top of that, the promise of real social change is pretty much lost with any initiative that depends on the largesse of foreign autocrats. The parallels with the Clinton's approach to governance are not subtle. Sure it's better than the Republican alternative -- should that really be enough?
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
