Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for September, 2018

Hillary Clinton made an appearance Saturday at the Fast Forward Women’s Innovation Forum sponsored by Seneca Women.

SENECA WOMEN & SENECA POINT GLOBAL

Seneca Women is a global leadership platform centered on the principle that advancing women and girls will fast forward us to a more equitable and prosperous world. Seneca Women focuses on driving impactful media and thought leadership, including at institutions such as the World Economic Forum, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the World Bank, the U.S. State Department and the United Nations, among others.

Seneca is led by co-founders Ambassador Melanne Verveer and Kim Azzarelli, co-authors of the best-selling book Fast Forward: How Women Can Achieve Power and Purpose.
Seneca Point Global is the world’s leading strategic organization focused on advising Fortune 100 companies and public sector institutions seeking to advance women and girls. For more than two decades, we have worked with companies, media, governments and non-profits to help shape global policy and business practices that create shared value. Seneca’s co-founders have helped launch and/or implement some of the largest media, philanthropic and business initiatives focused on women.

 

Fast Forward Women’s Innovation Forum

  • Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City (map)

Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton, Madeleine Albright and other notable speakers join an audience of leaders from the realms of business, government and philanthropy at Seneca Women’s annual Fast Forward Women’s Innovation Forum at the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Grace Rainey Rogers Auditorium in New York City. The Forum consists of an afternoon of conversation about power, purpose and innovating through technology to design our future.

Read Full Post »

How did I miss this? Damn! Oh, I know. I had my nose buried in Woodward’s Fear! Serves me right for not lightening up after this grueling day.

Hillary Clinton Guest Stars in ‘Murphy Brown’ Premiere as Secretarial Candidate

Hillary Clinton was the first big name cameo of “Murphy Brown’s” revival season.

Clinton appeared in the Sept. 27 premiere of the Candice Bergen-led sitcom — but not as herself. Instead, she was “Hilary,” a woman who said she is often mistaken for the former presidential candidate but actually spells her name with only one “L.” She arrived at Murphy’s new cable news show, “Murphy in the Morning,” to interview for the “secretarial position.”

“Your reputation proceeds you, but I want you to know I’m not afraid of hard work, I’m qualified, and I’m ready on day one,” Clinton said to Murphy at the start of her interview.

Murphy went on to ask if she had any secretarial experience (“For four years I was the secretary … of a very large organization,” she replied) and if she had experience with technology and teamwork.

“I do have some experience with emails,” she said. And on the topic of how many people it takes to run a production, she relied on another one of her campaign mottos: “Everyone works together, it takes a village.”

Read more >>>>

Read Full Post »

For her considerable contribution to the Northern Ireland peace process, Hillary will be awarded yet another honorary doctor of laws degree on October 10. Huge congratulations, Mme. Secretary! Well deserved!

Belfast university to award honorary degree to Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton is to receive an honorary degree from Queen’s University Belfast.

The former US Secretary of State will be awarded the degree for her public service and contribution to peace in the North.

“We are delighted to award an honorary degree to Hillary Clinton,” said Vice-Chancellor of Queen’s University, Professor Ian Greer.

“The former US Secretary of State is an internationally recognised public servant, who has developed strong links with Queen’s and Northern Ireland.

Read more >>>>

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

More than once in my life I have been told in a peremptory way by someone superior to me to do something I was already doing or just beginning to do. It happened often enough to become a pet peeve.

Why does this always happen to me, I wondered. Do I bring this upon myself? Turns out maybe I do since in hindsight I notice a pattern.

Once I identify a problem, I consider ways to address it which I might begin testing out and mention to a friend, colleague, or superior later. Or I might bring the problem and proposed solution to a superior for approval before implementing the solution.

More often than I’d have liked, the response of the person has been, “Well! You should do X,Y,Z!” “Yes,” my hurt response would be. “That’s exactly what I am already doing/was asking to do with your approval.” Then I typically would slouch off all bent out of shape and hurt.

This pattern in my past is perhaps the reason why I felt so angered and hurt this morning watching an America Divided episode about Appalachia on Epix when narrator Nick Offerman directed a snide remark at Hillary Clinton. The episode was specifically about the coal industry.

During her 2015-16 presidential campaign, Hillary said some sentences that were lifted from context and used as rallying cries against her. I guess this happens to many candidates. She was my candidate, so it bothered me.

What everyone heard was something like, “A lot of people are going to lose their jobs.” That was the sentence that was carried like a banner against her. It was the sentence that Offerman singled out. The only one.

What he and many missed was that she also proposed replacing fossil fuel energy with clean renewables and bringing that industry into coal country where miners could be retrained to work in clean energy production.

Later in the Epix show, Offerman interviewed a woman who was implementing exactly the kind of program Hillary had proposed. He was impressed. Small comfort for his “Geez HRC,” earlier. No comfort since he did not credit her with her suggestions.

Where was the disconnect? Many Hillary supporters have complained that the media did not highlight her agenda. Maybe that is it. CNN and MSNBC carried her major policy speeches and campaign rallies. But the next day on the plane, the questions from the press were not about the policies she was proposing. They always fell back on her email. Or John Podesta’s email. Or somebody else’s emails to her.

Did Offeman miss out on Hillary’s full coal country message? I guess, like many Americans, he did. As he is the host of a documentary show about politics in this divided nation, I hold him more responsible than most Americans to know what her full message was. It is, after all still available on her website.

I suppose it angered and hurt me personally because the whole gestalt so closely parallels my pet peeve. He dissed Hillary and liked what a program was doing when that program was actually following a blueprint Hillary had proposed. I would not be surprised to find that Hillary was in communication with those very principals during her campaign.

“She already proposed doing that,” I wanted to yell. But it was useless.

Hillary is not president and hasn’t done a single thing to hurt Appalachia. She did not shut down the coal industry. It did itself in, and cleaner, greener alternatives have arisen which Hillary proposed importing to areas hurt economically by the decline of coal.

So, GEEZ, Nick Offerman! Do your research before you go on camera with partial truths.

I could not help but notice that Gretchen Carlson is a co-producer on this show, so I am going to lay part of the blame on her, as well. Shouldn’t someone have familiarized themselves with Hillary’s policy before slamming her in this documentary? Can’t say I can vouch for their thoroughness or fairness.

Perhaps, given the title of the show, the intent is to ensure future seasons by misrepresenting facts thereby keeping America divided. Knowing the plan linked below is part of the job before you slam Hillary Clinton on this issue.

Here is the detailed plan Hillary put forth for coal communities >>>>

05-02-16-G-05

Read Full Post »

When Hillary visited The Late Show with Stephen Colbert Friday evening, she was greeted with a standing ovation. She addressed many of the same issues she spoke about with Rachel Maddow.  I will not revisit those.

On the subject of the Mueller investigation, she did say something on this show that she did not say the other night. It is an important point. She cited a difference between crimes committed prior to assuming office and those committed in office. It is an important distinction. She said a president can be the subject of a criminal investigation. When asked if he can be indicted, she made a distinction between actions before taking office and after taking office.  If before, she believes he can be indicted. If after, it then falls under the impeachment process.

While she does have a paperback edition of What Happened out that contains an updated supplement, her real reason, I think, for hitting the talk show circuit is to emphasize that: 1) indeed our democracy is in critical condition and 2) no caped crusader, including her, is going to come swooping in to save it. She made these points on both TV appearances.

We are the only ones who can save it, and there is only one way we are going to be able to do that: get out the vote. Notice I did not say “vote.” I said “get out the vote.” That means that we have to work as hard as we did in 2016 to get people to the polls. We have to convince them of the importance of this election and talk to them about the candidates who have pledged to address the issues closest to us. We have to remind people to register before deadlines. We also have to remind people to check their registrations to be sure they have not been purged – sad as that is to say. Finally, we have to make sure we get our friends, families, and neighbors to the polls. When Democrats vote, Democrats win.

Standing ovation

On the Judiciary Committee’s Watergate legal team.

Here is an article from The Daily Beast.

 

When Hillary Clinton sat down for an interview with Stephen Colbert set to air on Friday night’s Late Show, it was still up in the air whether or not Christine Blasey Ford would agree to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee next week about her sexual-assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

But stepping back to before she lost the 2016 election to Donald Trump, Colbert had a bigger-picture question for Clinton: “Do you think the nomination process in general is irreparably damaged following the Republicans not allowing Merrick Garland to be heard?”

“Well, it’s one of the reasons I think a lot of Americans are just fed up with the political process,” Clinton, who was promoting the paperback release of her book What Happened, replied. “Because in a democracy, you have to have at least enough trust to be able to work with each other and try to solve difficult problems. When the Republicans refused to give a distinguished judge, appointed by President Obama, even the courtesy of meetings let alone a hearing, that sent such a terrible message.”

Read more and see video >>>>

Read Full Post »

The Plot to Subvert an Election, from New York Times reporters Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti, does not contain everything we know about the Russian incursion into our culture and our 2016 election.  This compilation is, however, comprehensive enough to provide a good, quick survey course on the subject.

Because, as Rachel Maddow pointed out this week, Hillary Clinton was relentlessly in the bull’s eye of the Russian efforts, the entire anthology should be of interest to her 2016 supporters and voters and to Democrats in general. We know it has not stopped. We know they are still doing this in the run-up to the primaries that are almost upon us. Worse, we know that the primaries are not and will not be the prime target. 2020 will be. The presidential election will be – once again. We had better be prepared.

Here is a portion.

Putin Is Angry

The Russian leader thought the United States, and Hillary Clinton, had sought to undermine his presidency.

The Russian leader believed the United States had relentlessly sought to undermine Russian sovereignty and his own legitimacy. The United States had backed democratic, anti-Russian forces in the so-called color revolutions on Russia’s borders, in Georgia in 2003 and Ukraine in 2004. It had funded pro-democracy Russian activists through American organizations with millions in State Department grants each year.

With little evidence, Mr. Putin believed this American meddling helped produce street demonstrations in Moscow and other cities in 2011, with crowds complaining of a rigged parliamentary election and chanting, “Putin’s a thief!”

And Mrs. Clinton, then secretary of state, cheered the protesters on. Russians, she said, “deserve the right to have their voices heard and their votes counted, and that means they deserve free, fair, transparent elections and leaders who are accountable to them.”

Mr. Putin blamed Mrs. Clinton for the turmoil, claiming that when she spoke out, his political enemies “heard the signal and with the support of the U.S. State Department began active work.”

The two tangled again the next year when Mr. Putin pushed for a “Eurasian Union” that would in effect compete with the European Union. Mrs. Clinton sharply dismissed the notion, calling it a scheme to “re-Sovietize the region” and saying the United States would try to block it.

Read much much more and see video clips >>>>

We must remain wary of social media presences that play to the disaffected. What we saw, among many other ploys from Russia in 2016, were seemingly American accounts admonishing Bernie Sanders supporters not to vote for Hillary Clinton. Also from the article:

The Russian operation also boosted Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate who had dined with Mr. Putin in Moscow, to draw votes from Mrs. Clinton. It encouraged supporters of Mr. Sanders to withhold their votes from Mrs. Clinton even after he endorsed her.

If you are a disaffected Hillary voter, I caution you to be wary of “Hillary supporters” masquerading as Americans on social media. Typically, they praise HRC to the skies but also embed lies within their posts and/or the comment threads, e.g. claiming that Guccifer 2.0 was not Russian (refuted in the Mueller July 13 indictment and in this article) or that Russian organized crime deals exclusively in politics and money laundering and not in weapons or drugs. (They will sell you a mothballed USSR military submarine to transport drugs if you have the money. With a nuclear weapon if you have even more money. This is documented.)

There are several writers of varied levels of English Language Proficiency (ELP). The “ops,” i.e. sock puppets, trolls, bot controllers, access content from databases on cloud platforms as outlined in the July 13 Mueller indictment. The ultimate plan is very likely to skew the 2020 top line vote in ways that would dismay Hillary Clinton and re-elect Donald Trump.

This is not a short read, but it can be taken in episodes if necessary for a weekend read. It is rich with graphs, stats, videos.  It is well worth the time. You will not likely find this much information on the subject elsewhere all in one piece. It is probably also well worth a bookmark.

Have a lovely weekend. Fall is coming.

 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: