Hilary Clinton is almost as far to the right as George W Bush
It concerns us that Hilary Clinton is playing very very safe. She voted for the Iraq war. She does not seem determined to pull American troops out immediately. According to the film Sicko she went back on her words to produce a truly National Health Service. The latest speech she classed Chavez Venezuala no different than North Korea, Iran, Burma, Cuba, Zimbabwe how gullible and ignorant. According to the Guardian Newspaper Chavez comes accross as a hero for his Country. The World According to Chávez

Friday, May 19, 2006 Print format
Send by email

By: Jonathan Steele and Duncan Campbell - The Guardian

Hugo Chávez, Venezuela's socialist president, remembers "with great affection" the day he went to see Queen Elizabeth II in 2001. in an interview with the Guardian yesterday, sitting beneath a portrait of 19th-century South American would-be liberator, Simón Bolívar - he ordered his staff to put up the picture - in his suite at London's Savoy hotel.

Chávez is in Britain at the invitation of London mayor Ken Livingstone and has been greeted rapturously by his supporters - from the Latin American diaspora to the British left, excited about a 21st-century success story. But his reception in most of the media here has been hostile, from wild accusations that he supports terrorism to suggestions that he is a despot who has done nothing to reduce poverty in spite of his claims.
before we leave he tells us, "I have an obsession with reading." Asked what is on his bedside table at the moment, an aide goes out and returns with Les Misérables by Victor Hugo. "I read it all the time. It is my companion. It is a monument to human beings," says Chávez.

nal source / relevant link:
The Guardian</TD
from the Guardian Newspaper
Chavez against all odds is really making sure that the wealth from the oil will reach his people and not be given away to the Multi National in the United States as Iraq is now doing.

gore vidal summed up american politics like this: "there is a right-wing party, and a farther right-wing party."

keep in mind that the federal constitution of the usa was modeled after the british monarchy of george III. the king and aristocracy are elected, but this does not create democracy, it creates oligarchy.

american society is owned by the rich, nowadays corporations. even the president must do their will, to get and stay in office.

DEMOS: "gore vidal summed up american politics like this: "there is a right-wing party, and a farther right-wing party."

Sounds applicable to another country far closer to home to me.

Was just thinking that CJ; then went on to read your post!

Thankfully we are to the right. Most left wing Governments deny even the right to free speech as seen by our Victorian State Labour party. Even Mr Rudd knows that it is fashionable to pretend to be to the left but their policies result in disaster.

Left or right, which is right? It seems that this age old question is still the most fundamentally debated aspect of contemporary politics. Recently I had a lecturer who raised the concept that the left v right political spectrum no longer really accurately described the era of centre politics, however I must disent from this opinion as it seems that the us and them mentality is still present.

Whilst I can't remember the exact segment, I was watching the 'Fox news' channel about two weeks ago when they had a segment about Mrs Clinton in which they basically chastised her for her radical socialist beliefs. They had dug up her doctoral dissertation (which was sealed while BC was in the White House) and the entire text was greatly skewed to the left.

For those people who believe that politics should be merely the presentation of your ideals to the electorate, I really do feel for you. Mrs Clinton campaigning on right issues is exactly the same as Mr Rudd stating that he is an 'Economic Conservative'. They need the moderate portion of the right vote, and when the left look around at the alternatives, they still have to vote for them. The US Democrats are anti war, however they are also anti proliferation. Therefore for Clinton to vote to go to Iraq under the circumstances that were aledged was probably not at all out of synch with her leftist beliefs.

Whilst I respect the views written here, I do believe that more thought should be put into the actual political context.

Left policy can work as well as right policy. The only difference is that true socialist societies need to be extremely technologically advanced and mature. There isn't a country that fits this criteria yet, but it does not mean that we cannot socialise the basics health, education and welfare.

Hillary sound similar to Mr Rudd. She does not mind if she is right or left as long as she gets elected. At least Mr Howard and Bush are consistent even if you don't like or agree with them. Mr Rudd is a 'Christian' but now he is a 'Christian Socialist'. Umm. Double language if I ever hear it.

"Hillary sound similar to Mr Rudd. She does not mind if she is right or left as long as she gets elected."

My thoughts exactly. Politicians are increasingly driven by expediency rather than principle or ideology.

Does anybody know what Hillary or Rudd actually stand for?

Some sensible input in this post everybody so far has come accross reasonable. Mustn't speak too soon we may some devils advocate from the Pauline Hanson stable join us later. Hilary Clinton worries me a great deal she is not a Bill Clinton. Arnie's wife Pam Shriver has made him a decent Governor. It is a pity that Steve Bracks retired because he did have a get together with Arnie on renewable sustainable energy let us hope that John Brumbie continues with these policies. Hilary has got herself into all sorts of trouble withthe Iraq war. Most of the Democrats are extremely Conservative so it will appear that this world may not be in safe hands. Time will tell.

I don't think Hillary's equation of Chavez's Venezuela with North Korea, Iran, Burma, Cuba and Zimbabwe shows that shes right-wing, it shows she has a brain.

Allowing for each governments uniqueness, they share a common contempt for democracy and the freedom of their peoples, a desire to be isolated from the world economy (against their peoples interests) and hostility to U.S. interests.

You might like Chavez's socialism, or his tenacity to survive the coup against him, but you'd have to have blinkers on to not see him for what he is, another would be third world dictator.