It seems that Hillary Clinton and Hugo Chavez speak the same language.
According to the AP, on Thursday Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez made the following statement:
“Private banks have to give priority to financing the industrial sectors of Venezuela at low cost,” Chavez said. “If banks don’t agree with this, it’s better that they go, that they turn over the banks to me, that we nationalize them and get all the banks to work for the development of the country and not to speculate and produce huge profits.”
Doesn’t this sound exactly like a speech given by Hillary Clinton to the DNC Winter Conference in February?
“The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence.”
At last week’s Democratic debate, Mrs. Clinton was asked about what she thought about hedge funds. The exchange was described by Jonathan Hoenig in an article in Smartmoney.com:
When asked about hedge funds, whose goal is making money, Clinton also passes on the chance to offer a full-throated endorsement of capitalism. Indeed, as the case with most politicians, every mention of business is coupled with an altruistic call to “give back,” reign in the financiers, or, in the case of Clinton, “set the rules.”
“I also represent a big state where there are a lot of poor people and people who have no access to health care,” she says. “They don’t have access to affordable college. They’re worried about their futures. So what we’ve got to do here is get back to having a Democratic president who will set the rules.”
This sounds eerily familiar to backers of Hugo Chavez and his authorization to “rule by decree” earlier this year. In an article in the Guardian (UK), the measure was justified by a member of the Venezuelan National Assembly:
Cilia Flores, president of the National Assembly, said the powers “will benefit the people, those who were excluded their whole lives. They are laws for inclusion and social justice.”
This sounds like the same language coming out of Mrs. Clinton’s speech to the California Democrats in San Diego last weekend:
Sympathizing with the poor and middle class, Clinton said many Americans simply “have become invisible” to Bush.
“They’re working as hard as they can and they’ve not made progress,” she said. “Wages have stayed stagnant, while CEO pay has gone up, corporate profits have gone up, the stock market sure has gone up.
“Health care costs, energy costs, tuition costs, all have gone up. It’s as though their president just looks right through them, these hard-working, middle-class families.”
The working poor, “soldiers at Walter Reed … the 90,000 victims of Katrina still living in trailers are all invisible,” she nearly shouted.
“Well … you’re not invisible to us. You’re not invisible to the Democratic Party and you will not be invisible to the next president of the United States.”
Words have meaning and these words by Mrs. Clinton sound to me like she really wants to be a socialist dictator. Are we ready to become the next Venezuela?