Why electing Hillary Clinton is equivalent to putting Monsanto in the White House

Saturday, June 18, 2016
By Paul Martin

by: J. D. Heyes
Saturday, June 18, 2016

You may be one of the millions of Americans who are not enamored by our choices for president during this election year, and if that is the case you are probably in the process of deciding who not to vote for – for any combination of reasons.

As for the GOP’s likely candidate, Donald J. Trump, he’s brash, he is often unrefined, he says what is on his mind at any given moment, and he lacks government experience.

His likely Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, comes with her own baggage as well, and in fact, to many, her vast government experience is seen as a hindrance, not a benefit. Millions of voters view her as a card-carrying member of the ruling “establishment” – corrupt, compromised and untrustworthy, as the first (likely) presidential candidate who is actively under criminal investigation by the federal government.

But Clinton has another negative against her as well: the fact that she’s a promoter of GMOs, and that one of the corporations that has her in their back pocket is Monsanto.

As reported by Global Research, a Canada-based think tank, Clinton’s views on GMOs are quite at odds with those of the current first lady, Michelle Obama, who reportedly insists that all White House meals be organic.

Hypocritical Hillary

The Rest…HERE

Leave a Reply

Join the revolution in 2018. Revolution Radio is 100% volunteer ran. Any contributions are greatly appreciated. God bless!

Follow us on Twitter