The Humane Society Legislative Fund recently endorsed Hillary Clinton. Their justification for supporting one of the world’s biggest enemies of animals was predicated upon Donald Trump’s serial killer sons and the backgrounds of several of his advisers.
That his sons are despicable human beings is a given. But both Hillary and Trump support hunting. And unlike Hillary, Trump has never hunted.
HSLF takes Trump to task for his relationship to Forrest Lucas, a scumbag of the first order, who may end up being Trump’s Secretary of the Interior. Lucas has a history of opposing animal protection legislation and animal organizations.
You can read HSLF’s endorsement statement here.
Curiously, however, HSLF ignores the the fact that Hillary Clinton has named Ken Salazar to head her transition team. Salazar, Secretary of the Interior under Obama, was responsible for more wild horse and wolf killings than anyone in history.
The HSLF endorsement conveniently ignores Clinton’s position on trade agreements.
Trade agreements kill animals, hundreds of millions of them annually. Clinton supports our trade agreements, Trump opposes them.
More importantly, Trump has pledged to reject every trade agreement to which the US is a party. Hillary has pledged to enforce them.
Animals die under trade agreements because animal corpses are cheaper to produce using Third World labor. Cheaper production costs mean lower prices and increased demand. Ending trade agreements will raise costs, increase prices, and drive down demand. Imported corpses will face tariffs, Country of Origin labeling, and taxes to protect American producers. Domestic slaughter will decrease, as some foreign markets will be closed to US exporters, further increasing prices and reducing supply. The estimates of animals saved by ending all our trade policies are in the hundreds of millions of animals annually.
Trump’s objections to trade agreements are twofold. Firstly, they do not prohibit currency manipulation, which has beleaguered our trade with China. Secondly, they force US labor to compete with Third World labor.
As animal corpses are cheaper under our trade agreements because of Third World labor, any renegotiation of our trade deals to comport with Trump’s positions would necessarily benefit animals, even if unintentionally.
HSLF’s endorsement does not address the fact that neither Trump nor Clinton will be able to push anything controversial through a divided Congress. No border wall, no mass deportations (at least none more aggressive than Obama has done), no disbanding the EPA or repealing the Endangered Species Act. None of the ludicrous fantasies contained in the Republican platform could possibly reach President Trump’s desk.
HSLF also ignores the most critical consequence of Hillary being elected: Democrats will not be able to control reapportionment in 2020. Republicans will be able to gerrymander the House as they did in 2010. Republicans will control the House until the 2032 elections.
The party in the White House has lost every midterm election for the past half century. There is no doubt it will happen again in 2018. It is the most important consideration of this election cycle, as reapportionment in 2020 is dependent upon the 2018 and 2020 state races. Thirty two governorships are up in 2018. Those will almost certainly determine the makeup of those states’ legislative chambers. Additionally, some measure of effect will be made by the presidential contenders in 2020.
If Hillary is elected this year:
Republicans take the 2018 midterms by storm. They will certainly do better than they did in 2014 when they swept the midterms and most state races. Hillary will be the 2020 nominee, almost guaranteeing that no Democratic gains will be made down ballot, whether she wins or loses a re-election bid. Republicans will control reapportionment after the 2020 Census, and will gerrymander the House to assure Republican control until 2032. Win or lose in 2020, Democrats will not be able to nominate a true progressive until 2024. Even if we take back the Senate in 2016, and hold it in 2020 and 2022, the House is lost to Democrats for another decade.
Democrats will not have the opportunity to control the White House and both houses of Congress until 2032!
If Trump is elected this year:
Democrats will sweep the 2018 midterms, and likely retake enough statehouses and legislative chambers to control 2020 reapportionment. Democrats will draw congressional districts that will assure Democratic majorities in the House until the 2030 Census. With Hillary out of the way, Democrats will nominate and likely elect a true progressive in 2020. Even if we do not succeed in retaking the Senate in 2016, we most assuredly will in 2018. The great likelihood is that Democrats will control the White House and both houses of Congress by 2022.
2022 with a Trump win! 2032 with a Hillary win!
Hillary will cost the progressive movement at least ten years. Ten years of killing in foreign wars. Ten years of uninsured people in American suffering and dying. Ten years of unfair trade deals, of Americans out of work, of more factories closing. Ten years of Wall Street further destroying the middle class. Ten years of the oligarchy consolidating its power.
If HSLF is concerned about Republican policies and anti-animal legislation, it is only assuring that the Republicans will either control public policy, or at least thwart progressive policies, until 2032!
And as discussed, above, Democrats will thrive if Trump prevails. Not just Democrats, but PROGRESSIVES, who are much more likely to champion animals and the environment than are the Wall Street Democrats who currently control the party.
Never has the prospect of fundamental change in the Democratic party ever been as promising. But key to that change is cleaning out the current Democratic leadership.
A task much easier without an overbearing interventionist Wall Street shill sitting in the Oval Office, able to stack the DNC and thwart progressives at every turn.
HSLF’s endorsement focused primarily upon Trump, and did not examine Hillary and her record in any depth.
HSLF relied heavily upon Clinton’s HSUS score while a Senator to justify their endorsement.
To get an accurate reading on Hillary and her concern for animals, they should have looked instead at what she has done since leaving the Senate and what she is advocating now, It is hardly a stellar record of caring about animals, and is very discouraging if animals are your priority, or even a concern.
Hillary’s animal positions in the Senate were mere puffery and grandstanding.
After leaving the Senate, she became the second most powerful person on the planet. Secretary of State of the United States of America.
What did she do for animals with all that power and influence?
She was certainly capable of extorting money from foreign governments for the Clinton Foundation, but unable to secure anything for the animals from those same governments. Why?
Could it have anything to do with the fact that animals are not a priority for Hillary Clinton? That they are not even on her radar when she is not campaigning? That personal aggrandizement, wealth, and power are her concerns?
Imagine what she could have done in her position for animals around the world. Imagine how she could have raised public awareness, Promoted animal campaigns, forged alliances with activists and governments, commanded national and worldwide attention to whaling, sealing, bullfighting, trophy hunting, poaching, the slaughter of endangered species for trinkets, trophies, and voodoo medicines.
Did she do any of that?
Did she use her influence to change the Obama administration’s horrid record on animals?
Did she seek to end wild horse roundups or ban live horse export for slaughter? Did she use her weight to stop Japanese whaling, Canadian sealing, the dolphin murders in Tajii or the whale killers in the Faroe Islands?
Did she set up interdiction of wildlife trafficking or poaching? Propose sanctions on countries which import ivory and rhino horn?
Did she ever do anything for animals during her entire tenure as Secretary of State? Did she ever make a single public statement condemning any atrocity against animals that occurs daily around the world?
No, she did not.
Now she is supporting our trade agreements which cause the deaths of hundreds of millions of animals each year.
And we are supposed to be impressed because she got some meaningless score while pandering for animal people’s votes a decade ago? That she has a page on her website which spouts meaningless verbiage about her concerns for animals? That she strokes a few animal activists in private meetings?
What we must remember is that she is again running for office and is again pandering to animal people for their votes.
• I am unaware of any other blog with the Armory’s mission of radicalizing the animal movement. I certainly hope I am not alone, and that there are similar sentiments being expressed by comrades unknown to me.
If you know of other blogs dedicated to animal rights and the defeat of capitalism, please comment with a link.
• Be sure to follow the Armory and share it with your Facebook friends and email contacts, as well as on Twitter, Google, and all other social media platforms. Our influence and effectiveness is dependent upon you!
• If you are not already subscribed to the Armory, please do so before you leave.
There’s a button to Follow us in the upper right sidebar.
• Be sure to visit Armory of the Revolution’s new commissary and bookstore: The Supply Depot
You will find recommended reading on Animal Rights, revolutionary theory, politics, economics, religion, science, and atheism. There is also a section of supplies for animal liberationists, hunt saboteurs, and social revolutionaries. This is all brand new, and we will be adding lots more merchandise in the near future!
• Feel free to comment. I encourage open discussion and welcome other opinions. I moderate comments because this blog has been attacked by hunters and right wing trolls. I approve comments that are critical as well as those which agree with me. Comments that I will not tolerate are those that are spam, threatening, disrespectful, or which promote animal abuse and cruelty