[NYTr] Clinton rakes in cash from the US weapons industry

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

[The reason she is acting like the "Presumptive President elect" and
why she is now Hillary the Hun:  Lots of bucks from the weapons
industry, including those who have been supporting George W. Bush.
The inescapable conclusion is, once again, that Eisenhower was right-on
in his farewell to the nation when he spoke of the military-industrial
complex. The fix is in, the Repubs will nominate some schlub who can't
be elected, Hillary will be seen as the "lesser evil" with her faux
health-care proposals, and it all will go on.  Unless and until people
are willing to give up funding, rooting and voting for the One Party
with Two Names. -NY Transfer.]


The Independent - Oct 19, 2007
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3075691.ece

Clinton bucks the trend and rakes in cash from the US weapons industry

By Leonard Doyle in Washington

The US arms industry is backing Hillary Clinton for President and has
all but abandoned its traditional allies in the Republican party. Mrs
Clinton has also emerged as Wall Street's favourite. Investment bankers
have opened their wallets in unprecedented numbers for the New York
senator over the past three months and, in the process, dumped their
earlier favourite, Barack Obama.

Mrs Clinton's wooing of the defence industry is all the more remarkable
given the frosty relations between Bill Clinton and the military during
his presidency. An analysis of campaign contributions shows senior
defence industry employees are pouring money into her war chest in the
belief that their generosity will be repaid many times over with future
defence contracts.

Employees of the top five US arms manufacturers – Lockheed Martin,
Boeing, Northrop-Grumman, General Dynamics and Raytheon – gave
Democratic presidential candidates $103,900, with only $86,800 going to
the Republicans. "The contributions clearly suggest the arms industry
has reached the conclusion that Democratic prospects for 2008 are very
good indeed," said Thomas Edsall, an academic at Columbia University in
New York.

Republican administrations are by tradition much stronger supporters of
US armaments programmes and Pentagon spending plans than Democratic
governments. Relations between the arms industry and Bill Clinton
soured when he slimmed down the military after the end of the Cold War.
His wife, however, has been careful not to make the same mistake.

After her election to the Senate, she became the first New York senator
on the armed services committee, where she revealed her hawkish
tendencies by supporting the invasion of Iraq. Although she now favours
a withdrawal of US troops, her position on Iran is among the most
warlike of all the candidates – Democrat or Republican.

This week, she said that, if elected president, she would not rule out
military strikes to destroy Tehran's nuclear weapons facilities. While
on the armed services committee, Mrs Clinton has befriended key
generals and has won the endorsement of General Wesley Clarke, who ran
Nato's war in Kosovo. A former presidential candidate himself, he is
spoken of as a potential vice-presidential running mate.

Mrs Clinton has been a regular visitor to Iraq and Afghanistan and is
careful to focus her criticisms of the Iraq war on President Bush,
rather than the military. The arms industry has duly taken note.

So far, Mrs Clinton has received $52,600 in contributions from
individual arms industry employees. That is more than half the sum
given to all Democrats and 60 per cent of the total going to Republican
candidates. Election fundraising laws ban individuals from donating
more than $4,600 but contributions are often "bundled" to obtain
influence over a candidate.

The arms industry has even deserted the biggest supporter of the Iraq
war, Senator John McCain, who is also a member of the armed services
committee and a decorated Vietnam War veteran. He has been only
$19,200. Weapons-makers are equally unimpressed by the former New York
mayor Rudolph Giuliani. Despite a campaign built largely around the
need for an aggressive US military and a determination to stay the
course in Iraq, he is behind Mrs Clinton in the affections of arms
executives. Mr Giuliani may be suffering because of his strong
association with the failed policies of President Bush and the fact he
is he is known as a social liberal.

Mrs Clinton's closest competitor in raising cash from the arms industry
is the former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who raised just
$32,000.

"Arms industry profits are so heavily dependent on government contracts
that companies in this field want to be sure they do not have hostile
relations with the White House," added Mr Edsall.

The industry's strong support for Mrs Clinton indicates that she is
their firm favourite to win the Democratic nomination in the spring and
the presidential election in November 2008. In the last presidential
race, George Bush raised more than $800,000 – twice the sum collected
by his Democratic rival John Kerry.

Mr Edsall's analysis of the figures reveals that, over the past 10
years, the defence industry has favoured Republicans over Democrats by
a 3-2 margin, making Mrs Clinton's position even more remarkable.