Originally Posted By DlandDug It was recently disclosed that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton returned a $5,000 campaign contribution to retail giant WalMart. <a href="http://money.cnn.com/services/tickerheadlines/for5/200603101212DOWJONESDJONLINE000777_FORTUNE5.htm" target="_blank">http://money.cnn.com/services/ tickerheadlines/for5/200603101212DOWJONESDJONLINE000777_FORTUNE5.htm</a> EXCERPT: >>With retail giant Wal-Mart (WMT) under fire to improve its labor and health-care policies, one Democrat with deep ties to the company - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton - has started feeling her share of the political heat... late last year, Clinton's re-election campaign returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing "serious differences with current company practices."<< Odd, considering that Hillary was once an enthusiastic member of the Board of WalMart. >>Clinton served on Wal-Mart's board of directors for six years when her husband was governor of Arkansas. And the Rose Law Firm, where she was a partner, handled many of the Arkansas-based company's legal affairs. Hillary Clinton had kind words for Wal-Mart as recently as 2004, when she told an audience at the convention of the National Retail Federation that her time on the board "was a great experience in every respect."<< Why, then would she return their kind contribution? >>...in recent months, as the company has become a target for Democratic activists, she has largely steered clear of any mention of Wal-Mart. And late last year, Clinton's re-election campaign returned a $5,000 contribution from Wal-Mart, citing "serious differences with current company practices."<< Ah. Doubtless, she feels that New Yorkers (she's a Senator there, you know) hate WalMart, leading her to make a politically expedient about face in order to placate the electorate. But wait, there's more! According to the New York Sun, 51% of New Yorkers like WalMart, and only 37% are actually opposed to it. <a href="http://www.nysun.com/article/27089" target="_blank">http://www.nysun.com/article/2 7089</a> EXCERPT: >>Talk about perfect timing. The same day Senate records disclosed that Senator Clinton returned a $5,000 contribution from the political action committee of Wal-Mart, Quinnipiac University released a poll of 1,072 New York City registered voters and found that 51% of them support Wal-Mart opening stores in the city, while a scant 37% oppose it. The poll found that even in union households, 63% said if there was a Wal-Mart in their community they would shop there.<< What could she be thinking??? Maybe the editorial voice of the Sun has an idea... >>We're not aware of any big differences between Wal-Mart's practices now and its practices in 1992 when Mrs. Clinton was part of the board responsible for its practices. No, the difference isn't Wal-Mart, it's Mrs. Clinton. When she was an Arkansas breadwinner and political wife she backed the company. Now she's not even pandering to New York voters - if she did, the poll shows, she wouldn't insult a company that a lot of us would like at least the choice to shop at. She's thinking way past the New York voters and has her eye on the labor union operatives and far left "netroots" moveon.org and Howard Dean crowd. Betraying Wal-Mart may help Mrs. Clinton appeal to the left-wing activists who will choose the Democratic Party's 2008 nominee...<< Lest you think this is just some "new" controversy dreamed up by the right, here's a blast from the past (May 24, 2000, to be precise): >>Twice in three days last week, Hillary Rodham Clinton basked in the adulation of cheering union members. Her record of supporting collective bargaining, however, is considerably worse than wobbly. Pity the thousands of unionists at last Tuesday's state Democratic convention who chanted her name, and the hundreds of retired Teamsters at Thursday's luncheon in midtown who had interrupted their Founder's Day meal to hear the corporate litigator turned union-loving Democrat deliver a campaign speech. They would have dropped their forks if they had heard that Hillary served for six years on the board of the dreaded Wal-Mart, a union-busting behemoth. If they had learned the details of her friendship with Wal-Mart, they might have lost their lunches.<< And more: >>Was Hillary the voice of conscience on the [WalMart] board for American and foreign workers? Contemporary accounts make no mention of that. They do describe her as a "corporate litigator" in those days, and they mention, speaking of environmental matters, that she also served on the board of Lafarge, a company that, according to a press account, once burned hazardous fuels to run its cement plants.<< Did some other mean old right wing rag write those gems? Those last excerpts were actually from the pen of those compassionate liberals at the Village Voice. <a href="http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0021" target="_blank">http://www.villagevoice.com/ne ws/0021</a>,harkavy,15052,5.html Hillary in 2008. What a ride it will be!
Originally Posted By mrichmondj You know what I find ironic with the whole Wal-Mart as a political hotbed issue? Both parties detest America's largest retailer. Democrats distance themselves because they don't like the sprawl of suburban strip malls with Wal-Mart anchors and concerns about health benefits. Meanwhile, the Republicans are engaged in a fight to prevent Wal-Mart from entering the banking business because Wal-Mart might just make the banking industry have to be competitive instead of playing by the same fat cat rules that have worked to the detriment of consumers for decades. Poor Wal-Mart -- where is the love?
