So, I'm not going to vote for Hillary Clinton, and I believe she is as far from progressive as the democratic candidates for president get. MoveOn just e-mailed me and angered me by advertising Clinton's new environmental policy. So I wrote them the letter below in response. I post it here in order to share my reasons why progressives should not vote for Hillary Clinton (keep in mind, before the 2006 election, her voting record was very close to Lieberman's, a man most progressives agree was as hawkish as democrats get). I would like a woman president someday, but I wouldn't vote for Lieberman just because he is Jewish, and I won't vote for Hillary just because she's a woman. The letter is below:
Dear MoveOn:
This is in response to your recent e-mail touting Hillary Clinton's environmental policy.
As a progressive democrat, who worked for you during the Kerry campaign, I beg you to stop advocating for Hillary Clinton. It's frustrating enough that the main stream press is giving little coverage to any other candidate. Hillary is not a good MoveOn candidate. Her environmental plan may be "pretty good", but Many of the other candidates (Edwards, Kucinich) have better plans.
Most importantly, as a candidate she offers no alternative direction for American foreign policy to the one we are stuck in now. When Israel invaded Lebanon, she went to a pep-rally in New York City to cheer on this illegal act--an act that even most Israelis recognized as being a mistake afterwards--an act that left many innocent people displaced or dead. She has backed the building of the wall between Palestine and Israel, despite international courts ruling that it is illegal. She also voted to declare Iran's army a terrorist organization, perpetuating the drum beat to war started by our president. I noticed that the headline on your website is "Help launch MoveOn.org's Campaign to Prevent War with Iran." You are not helping anything by advertising for Clinton. Her foreign policy perpetuates the already worsening relations we have with the rest of the world (especially the Arab world).
And as for the environment: after advocating that the nuclear power plants in the Hudson Valley near New York City be shut down a few years ago, Hillary came up to visit the nuclear power plants in Oswego, NY. Despite posing just as serious a risk to the people of central New York, Hillary completely reversed her position when it came to the Oswego power plants. Her logic went something like this: because there are less people in central New York, the dangers posed by the plants are acceptable. In other words, the people of Central New York are more expendable for the sake of energy. In fact, despite the serious dangers power plants pose, and the nuclear waste they create (much of which will be around for thousands of years--what do you do with that?), Hillary still advocates for Nuclear Power as a clean energy.
Hillary Clinton is the least progressive candidate in the democratic field. Please stick to your progressive roots and discontinue advocating for Hillary Clinton.