The Democratic candidates are attacking each other for supporting energy company...why exactly is that a problem?
WASHINGTON, April 4, 2016 – The media coverage of the 2016 presidential race has been primarily focused on the Republicans, and understandably so. Donald Trump is ratings gold, and the GOP is the only party putting forward new ideas rather than repeating the same mantra that has been in place for eight years.
But there have been a few interesting dust-ups on the left side, and one of the most fascinating has been developing over the last week or so.
Hillary Clinton has been criticized for accepting money from anyone who will give it to her, which really isn’t as big of a deal as people make it out to be, and Bernie Sanders has seized on the fact that she has accepted money from the fossil fuel industry. That probably doesn’t seem like a big deal to most rational people, but on the liberal left it’s a death sentence.
So Bernie levied the charge against Clinton that she does not support American energy independence and she really didn’t like that. In fact, she’s starting to borderline lose it whenever she is asked about it.
The latest development is that Bernie is demanding an apology from Clinton for implying that he wasn’t telling the truth about his fossil fuel claim.
Two candidates for the highest office in the land are arguing with each other about who hates fossil fuels more.
Just think about that.
This obviously begs the question, who cares?
In what twisted and ideologically rabid world is it a bad thing for a candidate to accept money from an industry that powers not only the entire world but brings an incredibly important number of jobs to a struggling economy?
There is no logical case to be made in favor of the argument that somehow accepting money from an oil executive is wrong or immoral. In fact, the opposite is true. Oil and gas companies are doing extraordinary things for this country, including but not limited to creating high-paying jobs, funding the development of more efficient production and furthering American independence from Middle Eastern countries.
You’d think that politicians would want to be on that side. It has become cool and trendy to say that you don’t accept money from big corporations, Wall Street or millionaires. But the glaring reality is that everyone does it and you are lying if you pretend otherwise.
Take Bernie Sanders, for example. He takes plenty of money from special interests but lies and says he doesn’t.
Candidates need to just admit, yes I take money from corporations, and corporations aren’t inherently evil so it isn’t a problem. Of course, no one should be beholden to corporations, and grassroots money is something to focus on and brag about but this idea that rich people can’t donate money is just absurd.
Also, what does being beholden to the fossil fuel industry even mean? You will look out for oil companies? You will be helping out the American worker? You will support researching cleaner methods of energy? Nothing about receiving money from an oil company is associated with anything nefarious.
But back to the argument between Mrs. pending federal indictment and Mr. 100 percent tax rate on the rich. This is just another example of how the left’s dishonest narrative on climate change has created a hostile political climate where oil companies are demonized and encouraged not even to participate in the political process of the country. It’s really scary stuff when you think about it.
Hillary Clinton literally bragged the other day about how many coal miners she is going to send to the unemployment line. In a clear thinking world, she would have been laughed off the stage. In today’s world, thanks to the factually inaccurate smears from the liberal left, that kind of thinking is encouraged.
While the left mercilessly attacks Donald Trump for wanting to secure our borders, fix our broken trade system and mend the economy, the Democrats are prepared to nominate two candidates who brag about killing jobs.
Who is the real radical here?Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Communities Digital News
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.
Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.