A miracle just took place in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. Hillary Clinton, who served
for many years on the board of Wal-Mart, a multi-national
corporation notorious for its anti-labor practices, just denounced
the outsourcing of American jobs abroad.
According to the Associated Press, April 2:
It’s not often that a centrist Democrat, who
promoted globalization, free trade, NAFTA, GATT, and deregulation
of the finance industry, uses language that sounds like Jesse
Jackson (“We must end the export of jobs to slave labor markets
abroad”) in the ’80s.
“Insourcing” is a new kind of song for Hillary
Clinton. Not long ago, in 2005, Senator Clinton promoted outsourcing
of U.S. jobs. In a much-publicized
address to wealthy business leaders in New Delhi, India,
she said: “There is no way you can legislate against reality.
Outsourcing will continue...We are not against all outsourcing,
we are not in favor of putting up fences.” (see The Washington
Post, Sept. 8, 2007).
Asia Times commented March 1st, 2005:
The India Review, a publication of the
embassy of India,
commented, April 1, 2005: “Senator Clinton allayed apprehension
in India that there would be a ban on outsourcing.”
If a video clip of Clinton’s
outsourcing remarks in India were played on TV before the upcoming primaries
in Indiana, North
Carolina, and Pennsylvania,
she could lose the elections, despite current polls. Not only
because blue-collar workers oppose outsourcing, but because
Clinton appears to play both sides of an issue, depending on her audience.
Clintons have a long history of posing as labor
populists during elections, only to become free trade deregulators
after taking power. Bill Clinton, with Hillary at his side,
made huge campaign promises to labor in 1992, and labor leaders
spent millions of dollars to put the Clintons
in the White House. Within months of their electoral victory,
the Clintons rammed Republican-initiated free-trade
bills - NAFTA and GATT - through a Democratic Congress. Outsourcing
of jobs to sweatshops in Mexico
actually accelerated under the Clinton
globalization agenda. The Clintons
increased subsidies for corporate mergers and relaxed regulations
that protect the public from abuse of corporate power.
Hillary’s globalization speech in India
would hardly be noteworthy today, except that, in her current
campaign for the nomination, she is saying exactly the opposite
of what she said in India She was a globalizer in India.
Now she is a protectionist in Pennsylvania.
The media are doing very little to inform voters
about Clinton’s globalization agenda. Will Hillary Clinton’s anti-labor record
catch up with her before Pennsylvania voters go to the polls in late April?
Not unless another miracle happens - the big
media awaken from their slumber and set the record straight.
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator, Paul Rockwell, is a writer living in the Bay Area.
He is also a columnist
for In Motion Magazine.
Click here to reach Mr. Rockwell.