I hate Hillary Clinton. I voted for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries. But Trump must be stopped.
When I saw Donald Trump’s acceptance speech at the Republican convention this week, all doubt vanished.
If it were Hillary Clinton and, say, Jeb Bush, I would have likely voted for the Green Party. The difference between her and most Republicans seems more style than substance. Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum. But Trump is something different, darker. It is Tweedle-dee and Hitler.
The Constitution limits the damage a single president can do, but Trump seems to have slight regard for the Constitution. For that reason alone, he must be stopped.
I saw how Trump said “law and order” and “safety” and “we cannot afford to be so politically correct” and other racist dog whistles. I saw how the White people roared and chanted. I felt like I was watching a Nazi rally.
Over and over again, the threats to the nation took the form of darker-skinned people: China, ISIS, Syrian refugees, Mexican immigrants, Black Lives Matter protesters. Yet he said not a word about global warming.
When he turned to show his face in profile, like a Roman emperor on a coin, holding that pose as the crowd roared, somehow I felt I had slipped into an alternate universe where the US was being taken over by a dictator.
I will vote against Trump even if it is the last thing I do, if only for the sake of my children, grandchildren, etc.
This man must not just be defeated, he must be defeated BADLY. Humiliated. Both he and every Republican running. So that he does not try again. So that no one like him tries again. Every vote counts. Every single one. Even if you live in the bluest of blue states. Even if the polls say it will be a landslide. This is no ordinary election. He must be defeated as badly as possible – or win as narrowly as possible with the fewest number of Republican Congressmen. Every vote counts.
If you live in Pennsylvania, Ohio or Florida, your vote is extremely important: they are the largest swing states, the ones most likely to make or break Trump.
This man has no experience running anything bigger than a family business. He has never held elected office or any position of public trust. Never.
He would not even go to Vietnam to fight for his country. Not because he took a principled stand against the war, which I would respect, but because, apparently, he thought it was for other men to die far from home for his country.
He has no respect.
He has no respect for the US Constitution.
He has no respect for facts.
He has no respect for a free press.
He has no respect for Latinos.
He has no respect for Muslims.
He has no respect for Black lives.
He has no respect for women.
He has no respect for people with disabilities.
Why should this man be president? Why????!!!
– Abagond, 2016.
See also:
- REGISTER TO VOTE
- 2016 US election for president
- Obama’s campaign strategy in 2012 – how Obama won in 2012. Turn-out was everything.
- my past endorsements
- Barack Obama for President – February 2008
- Why I am voting for Obama – November 2012
- racist dog whistle
- The diseased host model of American society – the way many White Americans see the US, Donald Trump apparently among them.
- The future of race in the US – the way I see the likely future of the US.
579
He also has no respect for women. The two candidates will do ANYTHING to be elected. He even said that Bernie’s followers will vote for him. (?????) His wife showed that his employees are idiots. And take one for Texas. Ted Cruz did not endorse Donald Trump.and was booed because he asked people to vote their conscience. The world is laughing at us….
LikeLiked by 3 people
Why not Jill Stein of the Green Party?
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Joe
Because she has no serious chance of defeating Trump. This is tactical, not ideological.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sometimes you just have to bite that bullet.
I have hoped against hope that I would see a woman become president in my lifetime. I cannot bear the fact that it will be Hillary Clinton. For all the reasons Abagond wrote above and elsewhere on his blog — and also because it will set a horrible precedent in that her husband was president first. She will never be seen as having won completely on her own merits, it smacks of hereditary office just like the Bush father-son team, etc.
But it’s the bullet that I’m going to have to bite. I’ve voted Green Party before, but not in 2000 and I will not in 2016. The stakes are just too high.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Let him win. Black ppl need this wake up call. Prep your home with guns, knives, water, food ammo and the essentials. Trump is the son of a German immigrant, rich, and privileged. He is the new Barry Goldwater. Strom Thurmon. They fear America turning into Haiti or South Africa. They will vote the same way as Brexit mark my words. Hoard as much money as you can and get a passport for each family member. The West is preparing for an ethnic cleansing of anything dark and foreign. Hillary won’t save us. Barack could not save us in flint, detroit. Prepare to see an emboldened police . Prepare to see your jobs removed and college applications denied from “their” institutions. We have to economically fight for our lives or simply return to black nations. The only way to survive America will be to go off-grid. Watch banks, grocery stores and hospitals become privatized only for the rich when obamacare is repealed. Prepare to see thin, starving black ppl when welfare is snatched even prepare to see your disability cut. Prepare to see our rates of suicide rise. Prepare to see untreated AIDS up close and personal in Atlanta when the drugs are no longer affordable. We don’t have the numbers to defeat Trump we can only prepare for his arrival.
LikeLiked by 6 people
My, the hysteria! Let’s for argument’s sake grant you that Trump is every bit the fascist you say he is, a sensible claim, in my opinion. What makes you think that voting for Clinton will be the cure?
You seem to confuse process with personality. A more sober analysis would have been to try to identify the objective reasons why Trump is where he is today. Everybody dismissed him as a joke, but here he is, the standard bearer of the Republicans.
Your panicky reaction tells me that you hold on to the illusion that the problem is simply a matter of how presidents speak. Are you joking? For all of Obama’s fine words, the domestic and international components of the US murder machine have been working overtime.
We are living in a pre-war, of the world war variety, era. What happens next will be determined on the streets. It would be a good thing to try to figure out what kind of resistance will be required. The experience of the anti-war movement, that failed to stop the wars we’ve known since the late 1990’s, the BLM protests that only seem to react to the latest outrages, etc. must be critically evaluated.
Enough with the nonsense about some broad on a white horse coming to the rescue. Especially, when that broad is the poster child for all the trends that have led to Trump.
What will be will be, all one can do is play his/her part.
LikeLiked by 8 people
I’m glad that REASON has at long last dawned on people at this blog regarding the right attitude to take vis-a-vis the next presidential elections in the USA.
Choosing a candidate in any election in a democracy is not about choosing a perfect, flawless individual but about choosing the better one between the available ones.
I’ve already tried to say this in a previous comment in another thread:
Unfortunately I saw that in most comments, at that time (before the primaries), many people devoted much time arguing how each and every candidate was full of faults.
That attitude could make some sense but ultimately the most important thing is to use your democratic rights to help shape the future, at least for the next years.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Abagond
Clearly you believe that your vote counts. Did you swallow the BLUE pill?
Don’t you remember the election between Bush and Gore, and how the Supreme Court handed the contested popular vote from Gore over to Bush on the basis of “dimpled” and “pregnant” chads?
What about all the documented voting machine scandals, missing ballots, uncounted/illegally disqualified votes and many other fraudulent irregularities, dirty tricks – like deliberately sending voters to the wrong precinct on the wrong day?
If I learned anything from that time forward it was that no one’s vote counts. It’s all a ruse. A glittering media managed horse and pony show.
Every four years the Amerikan people are sold the same old bridge in Brooklyn, yet hardly anyone seems to notice, or remember.
Hillary, imho, is far more dangerous than Trump. Anywho, the Universe is fair and will see to it that Amerika will get the president it deserves.
Nonetheless, we can agree to disagree.
LikeLiked by 5 people
I will go the way of W. E.B. Dubois. My self respect is much greater than my fear of Donald Trump. There is no democracy here. LESSER EVILISM IS still VOTING FOR EVIL. This is a piece written in fear and cowardice. 40 million black ppl do not need to vote for Hillary but to come together to either repatriate and help Haiti, Liberia, Ghana or survive America with absolutely NO HELP of non-blacks. All this ripping and running and being afraid to death of Trump is pathetic and it shows that you are a coward. ESPECIALLY to young black children being taught o hate themselves just like I hated my blackness even now at 25. Stop brainwashing other black ppl to be fearful. Trump is just a man. Trump is 70.. Near about the grave. I will say this. A LOT OF US won’t MAKE IT. Too much debt, too much dependency, too much attention seeking. Too much ignorance, wreckless breeding, lost family values. Get back to basics black family. You are in for a bumpy ride.
LikeLike
@agabond,
What do you think about his attempt at getting support from the LGBT community?
LikeLike
I wouldn’t vote for Hillary if she were the last closet racist on earth. She’s so bad I’d vote for Trump before voting for her. Either way WWIII is a good bet.
I’m voting green.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I can’t stand Hilary, but dear Gob! I’m abso-f***ing-lutely terrified of Trump. Not him personally, but his followers, the kind of white people who will be emboldened by his election to run around terrorizing the rest of us. We think things are bad for us now but under his presidency, not a single person of color would ever have a moment’s peace if they were out in public anywhere. (And probably not in our homes either.)
I hate Hilary but this is a tactical decision. I have a niece who is 11 years old. I don’t want her living in any kind of world where that man and his mindless followers and enablers are in charge of anything.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I guess that is a wonderful thought when you don’t have any family or children to care about! I lived through the cold war 80s, and the nightmarish scenario of dying by nuclear fire. Those were some of the worse years of my existence wondering if I’d die that way, contemplating my existence as a human soul at the age of twelve and thirteen.
I’m not going back to that isht and I sure as Hell ain’t subjecting my 11 yr. old niece to what I went through then. I will swallow my f888ing pride and vote to live.
LikeLike
Clinton will pretty much keep America the way it is. However bad you think America is, to think Trump couldn’t make it worse shows a lack of immagination and historical knowledge.
LikeLiked by 3 people
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/index.asp
Racist, but not virulently or in most cases blatantly so. You may be able to make a go of it. P.S., come to Toronto or the GTA.
LikeLike
If you think Clinton is any kind of solution you’re nuts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All these apocalyptic fantasies are just that, apocalyptic fantasies. Donald Trump is a centrist nationalist reformer. Within the history of American politics, that is exactly where he stands. He intends for his nationalism to be inclusive. He said so and will endeavor to do what he says. Whether it will work or not is another question.
One thing should be clear though. The idea of inclusiveness is the counter idea to diversity. The two emphatically are not the same thing. Some people have said that Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” really mean “Make America White Again”. The problem is, even with the differences between America’s demographic past and its demographic present and future, whites will remain the largest demographic element in American society. And end to policies which seek to debilitate the existing and historic American population, and blacks are included in that, inevitably will lift the distressed elements of the white population as well and leave whites as still the flagship group in the American population and body politics.
No doubt, what Trump proposes represents a sea change compared to what has prevailed in American society since 1970. It will empower some people and disempower other if his impetus prevails.
But, in spite of the fact that he is bombastic and loud and starts out the process taking extreme position, that’s how you negotiate in business, that idea that he is an anti-constitutional aspiring dictator is absurd.
Another thing to thing about is that a Trump election would do something that Obama’s election did not do, end the epoch of Ivy League rule which began with George Bush in 1989. We’ve had 28 years of this, and what do we have to show for it? If anyone needs the list (G. Bush – Yale undergrad; W. Clinton – Yale law; G.W. Bush – Yale undergrad, Harvard MBA; Obama – Columbia undergrad, Harvard law; H. Clinton – Yale law).
Furthermore, was Barack Obama that much of a deviation? His father was a subject of the British Crown and his mother of British descent.
I understand, politics is political and very partisan. But I think, in reality (and I mean exactly that, in reality) the people who do not want Trump do not want him for reasons of substance. That substance being, he threatens to truncate the liberationist, identity and Popular Front politics which have had so much sway in America over five decades now. You build your life around something and someone threatens to rearrange the furniture in a serious way, yo uaren’rt going to like it.
LikeLike
Qelilah, judging by the people I speak to I don’t think the world laughs at you, we watch with fear. I used to laugh at Trump but suddenly it became apparent to me that he has a serious chance of being elected. Don’t know too much about Hilary Clintons policies but She has to be a better choice than that evil animal!
LikeLike
Abagond,
you’ll be alright, bro… it’s not that bad
if Trump does win…there is always a solution for that nasty problem
create a stalemate so that Nothing gets done for 4 years….again
what you and most Obama-haters are forgetting, is that the President cannot pass laws
only CONGRESS can pass laws
Obama has not been able to do anything for black or brown people, because not enough of you Americans, showed up to the polls to vote for the Senators and lawmakers sitting in the CONGRESS, who would represent Your interests.
Congress is the real power in the USA…they pass the laws that will make changes that affects the average person
the President is a figurehead that is supposed to represent that power (at home and worldwide)… but somehow that little fact gets ignored by everyone
The President has more strength outside of the USA because of the military, than he does in the USA, even though the President appoints Cabinet and Agency leaders.
Black Americans need to show up to the polls to vote for their State elected Congressmen who will be running the country in Washington, DC
a Republican president cannot move forward with a Democratic majority Congress blocking him at every turn, with a Democratic majority Supreme court backing up that blockade
The same way democratic Obama has not been able to do sh’t with a Republican majority Congress and Republican led Supreme court.
I’m not saying that black Americans shouldn’t vote for Hilary in order to defeat Trump, but the fight does not end with the President of the USA
black Americans need to show up to the polls to vote for their Congressmen — that is also super important
LikeLiked by 6 people
“Clinton will pretty much keep America the way it is.” An impossibility, everything changes with time, even the USA. History shows that voting for the lesser evil only weakens your will to resist evil. You can’t cure an illness if you don’t know what it is.
“I guess that is a wonderful thought when you don’t have any family or children to care about! I lived through the cold war 80s, and the nightmarish scenario of dying by nuclear fire.”
Don’t make me laugh, I lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, when the sky of Port-Au-Prince was crowded with US air force jets. When I asked my maid what the hell was going on, she matter-of-factly informed me that it was the end of the world since nuclear war would start shortly. One of the reasons that didn’t happen was due to a Soviet naval officer, Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov, refusing to launch a nuclear torpedo at the aircraft carrier USS Randolph, that accompanied destroyers, dropping depth charges on his submarine to force it to surface. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov)
The long and short of it is that what will happen will happen. Clinton has a longer history of stoking military conflict than Trump. Your claim that voting for Clinton is a vote to “to live.” is proof that ignorance and panic results in disaster. It isn’t Trump who’s pushing for the expansion of NATO to the borders of Russia but Obama and Clinton.
Trump will, likely, usher an era when Blacks and other minorities will feel the heat. On the international scene, he might try to do a deal with Russia against China, the way the US worked with China to undermine the USSR from 1969 onward.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Me548 said: “Let him win. Black ppl need this wake up call.”
You are correct young man, Black folks are too darn comfortable in their oppression. After centuries of trials and tribulations, chattel slavery and maiming, we as a people still think that the solution to our problems is to elect an individual of the so-called white race to the presidency (smh).
We have been completely destroyed as a nation of people and are still imbibing on the precepts of men, regarding this thing referred to as Dumbocracy!
Deuteronomy 28:45 Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be DESTROYED; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee:
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree with you.
LikeLike
She ain’t got to be a solution. She just got to be a grown-a$$ woman, rather than a petulant 3 year old. I didn’t say I liked her, or that she would solve my problems. I said I don’t want me and my kids to die in a fiery holocaust because Trump was being an a$$hole to somebody with nuclear capabilities.
LikeLike
Right now, David Duke, ex-KKK grand Wizard
just announced he is running for Congress representing Louisiana because he feels that the “time is right”
I hope to God the black and brown people of Louisiana come out and vote against him en masse — it’s not just about the Presidential election.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/david-duke-former-kkk-leader-announces-senate-run-n615006
Duke kicks off campaign demanding “respect for the rights and heritage of European-Americans.”
In his announcement video, Duke pledged to “stop the massive immigration and ethnic cleansing of the people whose forefathers created America.”
Duke also said, “I’m overjoyed to see Donald Trump and most Americans embrace most of the issues that I’ve championed for years.”
In his video, Duke said he believes in equal rights and respect for all Americans but “what makes me different is I also demand respect for the rights and heritage of European-Americans.”
In a lengthy speech, Duke talked of the “massive racial discrimination going on right now against European Americans,” and what he called a biased media working against him. He called the Black Lives Matter movement a “terrorist organization” and said he wanted equal rights for everyone.
David Dukes endorsement alone should be enough for any black American to stop and seriously think about voting for Trump.. where there is smoke, there is fire
and all these white Nationalist racists are excited and fired up about Donald Trump becoming the next President
LikeLiked by 4 people
Newworld3000 said: “He intends for his nationalism to be inclusive. He said so and will endeavor to do what he says. Whether it will work or not is another question.
LOL @newworld3000! I’ve never heard such contorted, ventriloquist rubbish. So tell me, was this also Stalin and Hitler’s idea of an “inclusive nationalism??”
LikeLike
Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
@Ikeke35, my first post wasn’t directed towards you or anyone in particular. I still enjoy reading your posts Sista! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your delusion is that you think lesser evilism is the way to go. Even when the evil ain’t lesser.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“vote to live” I didn’t see that part. That’s hilarious.
LikeLike
You forgot that he has no respect for women. Thinking some of them are pretty isn’t respect.
LikeLike
Leave these white folk politricks ALONE. We have had no luck in this country why keep running to the polls for ppl that HATE our entire existence? Just like the european fled europe we need to be ready to. Flee this 4the Reicht of a country. Learn a life skill, save money, prep for disaster, stay away from whites completely, leave their jobs, get off their programs and leave this Oyinbo country ALONE. We are cursed staying on this land. More of us will be forced into crime and poverty can’t you see!!!! There is no equality among them for us as a ppl. Never has been and never will be.
LikeLike
Added:
He has no respect for women.
LikeLiked by 1 person
To Abagond’s point. Normally Republicans and Democrats exist within a simular idiology, one of democracy, debate and of choice and compromise.
Trump represents a foreign idiology that is masked in making America great again. The problem is he isn’t planning on having much of a debate and will rule through executive order on a scale that will make Obama’s misuse of excecutive privilege seem tame by comparison. He will bypass Congress and the Courts. He will function outside the constitution while simultaneously claiming to be saving it.
The threat of facsim is real. Structurally the framework is already in place. The NSA, militarized police and the expansion of the Patriot Act all pave the way for Authoritarianism. Increase in domestic drones, limits on Free speech critical of his actions, shutting down parts of the Internet and the muffuling of the media through coercion all point towards an expansion of State power on the level of dictatorship.
BLM and other protest groups will be infiltrated and discredited. Abagond may have to shut down his blog along with anybody who openly critisizes Trump’s actions.
This all sounds surreal and paranoid but is a natural extension of Facisim.
Trump will have massive public work projects like FDR and he will supplimemt American business to create an American centric job climate. Economic facisim is the cooperation of Business and government meant to strengthen national identity and pride. This protectionism acts as an economic security for American born citizens at the expense of foreign born and those deemed “to lazy to work.”
Non whites will be policed and scrutinized for proof that their activities promote this new nationalized American exceptionalism. Some will rise in the ranks of the brown shirts as proof that America is not racist.
Abagond’s argument, that the lesser of two evils, Hillary, is the logical vote I think is pragmatically necessary. But I’m not quite ready to go their yet.
I have been pushing third party canidates in part because the two party hegonomy needs to be attacked and discrediting. I’m going to continue to push that line of attack. It’s possible that the presidency could be thrown into the House and Senate if enough voters vote third party and no one canidate wins enough of the electoral college. That’s a strategy and it’s still too early yet to see if that’s possible.
I accept their is much risk in getting Trump elected by going third party. So far the Greens and Libertarians are pulling more from the Democratics then the Republicans.
My sense is that Trump will get a bump out of the convention. Do not underestimate where his votes will be coming from. He will pull from some Democrats and from groups normally opposed to Republicans.
Their are issues that cut across ideology.
Their are a lot of people that want to see an end to immigration and think stopping immigration helps sucure their jobs. People who think like this are legal immigrants and a portion of non whites as well as whites.
Their are lots of people that belive that NAFTA and free trade agreements are why they are no longer employed.
Their are people who are seeking a “stong” authortarian leader because they want to feel great about their country again. They want to fly their flag with pride.
Fear is a great manipulator. Trump has over represented different types of crisis, both domestic and abroad, that he plans to fix. Selling stuff comes down to over representing the product and creating false value. Trump is effective in this sales strategy and has applied it to politics.
American conservatives have always been opposed to the left and have critisized Marxisim and communist ideas. Some conservatives like the Paul’s are genuinely interested in liberty. But most are blind to the rise of the right and can’t see the structural similarities between the statism behind communism and the statism behind facisim. Some conservatives as well as quite a few libertarians have embraced this rise of the right. It’s also inclusive of the Klan and David Duke as Linda pointed out. It embraces the rise of the Alt Right, that’s young and hip, and the race realists behind the American Renaissance movement.
Once Trump is in place it won’t be easy to displace him. He will have a cross section of support amongst the populace.
I’ve already begun scrubbing my FB page and will eventually shut it down. Whatever you have written, no matter how old the statement is, will be used against you if the State decides you have subversive intentions. Be wary of whatever digital footprint you have created and take protective measures.
LikeLiked by 3 people
@ Anne
It is all words. He needs the White Evangelical vote, as shown by who he chose as his running mate, Mike Pence, an infamously anti-gay-rights governor.
LikeLike
@ Linda
Yes, Congress is important too!
@ Fan
My single vote will not stop Trump. But it is millions of people like you sitting at home, sucking on your “red pills”, that will bring him to power. I am not taking part in that.
@ michaeljonbarker
If you are someone who would ordinarily vote Republican, then voting for Gary Johnson might be a good idea. If he gets enough Republican support, he could stop Trump. But at this point, Hillary is the only one who has a clear shot at stopping him.
@ gro jo
I hardly see Hillary Clinton as some kind of saviour. But four more years of the last 23 years seems a better bet than where Trump would take this country.
Part of what gave us Hillary Clinton in the first place was Ronald Reagan winning in 1980 and 1988. Trump would move the country even further to the right, into Pat Buchanan territory, at the least.
What politicians say does, unfortunately, matter. They make laws and make war. They spend billions of dollars. When Reagan declared the “War on Drugs” in 1982, crack was unknown, only 2% of voters thought drugs was a serious issue. You saw where that got us. Trump is pulling the same kind of fear-mongering.
LikeLike
@ newworld3000
D. Trump – Wharton (the Penn business school).
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond I know where Donald Trump went to school. Pennsylvania is an ivy, but he went to Fordham for undergraduate college. Fordham is a Catholic-affiliated college.
Pennsylvania, although an Ivy, is more peripheral to the Harvard-Yale nexus which has run the presidency since 1988, and the Supreme Court for longer than that. Compared to those two, Pennsylvania is just another school. By this standard, even Columbia, where Barack Obama got his undergraduate, degree is peripheral.
I would rather see how you handle to argument that Trump in the context of American political history is a centrist nationalist. I get that you a lot of other people do not want him seen as that, but that is what he is, sorry.
Wellesley, where Hillary Rodham Clinton went to undergraduate college is in the orbit of the Protestant Eastern elite in a way Fordham absolutely is not.
I am surprised you and a lot of people are not willing to consider that there might be a point to getting the control of the government out of the Ivy League orbit, particularly out of the orbit of the Harvard-Yale nexus.
LikeLike
It’s news to me that Reagan started the war on drugs. I attribute it to Nixon. Your hysteria is making you forgetful and careless.
” In June 1971, President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.” He dramatically increased the size and presence of federal drug control agencies, and pushed through measures such as mandatory sentencing and no-knock warrants. Nixon temporarily placed marijuana in Schedule One, the most restrictive category of drugs, pending review by a commission he appointed led by Republican Pennsylvania Governor Raymond Shafer.
In 1972, the commission unanimously recommended decriminalizing the possession and distribution of marijuana for personal use. Nixon ignored the report and rejected its recommendations.
Between 1973 and 1977, however, eleven states decriminalized marijuana possession. In January 1977, President Jimmy Carter was inaugurated on a campaign platform that included marijuana decriminalization. In October 1977, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to decriminalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use.
Within just a few years, though, the tide had shifted. Proposals to decriminalize marijuana were abandoned as parents became increasingly concerned about high rates of teen marijuana use. Marijuana was ultimately caught up in a broader cultural backlash against the perceived permissiveness of the 1970s.”
Reagan found the machinery in place, he and his wife just raised the volume of the propaganda machine. (http://www.drugpolicy.org/new-solutions-drug-policy/brief-history-drug-war).
As Nixon’s aide, John Erlichman, is reported to have said, the target had always been Blacks: “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” (http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/richard-mixon-drugs-war-quote/2016/03/24/id/720681/)
So all of you scared out of your wits, what you fear was planned nearly fifty years ago and implemented forty five years ago. The fact that you find the last 23 years to your liking and want 4 more years, tells me that you are quite comfortable with the present situation, nothing more. I hope Clinton is paying you for this nonsense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“My single vote will not stop Trump. But it is millions of people like you sitting at home, sucking on your “red pills”, that will bring him to power. I am not taking part in that. ”
@ Abagond
If voting is legit, why do things remain the same (or get worse).
Voting certainly isn’t saving unarmed Black people from being murdered in broad daylight! What doors have opened to Black people due to their collective votes??
Amerika is still at war with weaker and smaller nations because war (arms/weapons, aircrafts, uniforms, ships, caskets, OIL, heroin, hidden black budgets, hegemony, etc) is all very profitable for the super-rich and powerful.
What did voting for Obama change? Dropping more bombs in Pakistan on wedding, families and children… killing 12 innocents to take out 1 terrorist, a failing national health care system, a Black president unwilling to talk to his own country about racism in a meaningful way?
If voting could actually change things to benefit the people, voting would be rendered illegal.
Don’t be mislead by the mainstream media staged productions. Madison Ave and PR (public relations/advertising) firms are working 24/7/365 to control our thinking (keeping us confused and in a stupor) to work against our own benefit.
If you want to get something done in Washington, become a powerful (monied) LOBBY. Does APAIC sound familiar?? Votes don’t do squat.
Paying cash money to politicians does.
LikeLiked by 4 people
The last question asked is, “Why should this man be president? Why????!!!”
Trump supporters will tell you without wasting a breath that he ‘tells it like it is’. And that’s it.
If that’s the only reason people will give as to why they and everyone should vote for this ‘human’, it’s no wonder why he has amassed a significant following. America is a nation loaded with moronic a-holes like Trump, and apparently, they flock together with a moronic a-hole with money and power leading the way.
It’s frightening, but not surprising given how this country feels about race and women. The media bends over backwards to give Trump as much publicity as possible. It’s obvious they idolize him enough to want to see this d-bag win.
This country is on its last legs. Electing Trump may be the final nail in the coffin. And America has no one else to blame but itself, though it will deny any responsibility in it’s own suicide.
LikeLike
Linda makes a very good point. I can understand why some people feel that their vote for president makes no difference. But if you stay home, you are also forfeiting your right to vote for everything else on the ballot, which may include your federal and state senators and representatives, your governor, your attorney general, etc., all the way down to city mayor and local ward/parish representative, not to mention local tax hikes, bond issues to fund public schools and public works, school board members, state and local propositions, changes to local ordinance, and so much more. I know my vote matters in local elections; I’ve seen county and municipal issues that I cared about — that affected my life directly — pass or fail by extremely narrow margins.
I hope everyone already knows this, but just as a reminder: If you go to the polls in November and you don’t want to vote for anyone for president, leave it blank. You don’t have to vote on anything you don’t want to; it’s not going to invalidate your ballot.
But please, before you decide to just stay home, at least get a copy of the sample ballot for your precinct or look it up online, see what else is on your ballot, and go vote for those candidates you can support with good conscience and those issues that matter to you.
LikeLiked by 3 people
IIRC, years ago I made some posts on the cyclic nature of manifestations of American racism. I had mentioned how the resurgence of the KKK was linked to perceived gains by African Americans. I’m not at all surprised that the tea party and Trump has been part of America’s response to the Obama presidency. Interestingly, David Duke (former KKK “grand wizard”) announced he is running for the Louisiana senate on the same platform as Trump.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-supremacist-david-duke-announces-us-senate-run/story?id=40803322
I would definitely argue against complacency wrt the prospect of a Trump presidency. It certainly seems unwise, on the surface, to voluntarily surrender your right to vote esp. when there have been so many genuine attempts to disenfranchise black Americans. That’s not protest; it’s nonchalant capitulation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m less concerned about Trump being president and more concerned about how Trump’s presidency will affect the balance of the Supreme Court. At least with Clinton as president, there’s a greater chance that she’ll nominate liberal-leaning justices, as opposed to Trump nominating the most retrograde conservatives in existence. At this point, it’s all about damage control.
LikeLike
@Linda
“Obama has not been able to do anything for black or brown people, because not enough of you Americans, showed up to the polls to vote for the Senators and lawmakers sitting in the CONGRESS, who would represent Your interests.”
Absolutely not true. He didn’t do anything for black people because he was a deeply conservative corporatist that didn’t give a damn about black people.
“The same way democratic Obama has not been able to do sh’t with a Republican majority Congress and Republican led Supreme court.”
What was his excuse the first 2 years of his presidency.
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=broken+voting+machines+rigged+elections&t=ffsb&ia=web
Rigged elections? Happens a lot in the USA.
“THEY” can (and do) manufacture whatever outcome they desire.
Rigged elections are more common than most realize because no one is watching the entire process from the beginning to the end.
People assume that voting is honest … just like they assume that the Clintons are honest and the CIA didn’t deliver crack cocaine to Black neighborhoods to fund government overseas operations ala Oliver North.
Local, state or federal. Amerika is corrupt from top to bottom.
They may let some actual local votes/referendums get counted correctly from time to time to give the appearance of an actual working system, but that is how WHITENESS rolls. A little refinement here, a minor adjustment to voting box program, a little tweak in the registering process to maintain the status quo.
The top couldn’t be as corrupt as it is without those at the bottom going along and looking the other way. If the system was correct or fair, both Clintons would have been jailed long ago for their past and current crimes against the people.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ newworld3000
Now you are moving goalposts.
LikeLike
@ Fan
I did not say voting was some kind of magic cure. But all of these public prosecutors who let the police get away with murder did not come out of thin air.
If voting were as rigged as you seem to think it is, then there would be no need for voter suppression laws and other attempts to keep Black people from voting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ gro jo
That is not what I said and you know it. You made some good points in your first comment, but now you are just trolling.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond Not moving the goalposts. Focusing in on the issue. I guarantee you, Donald Trump is less Ivy League than any of the predecessor since 1989. Or Hillary Clinton. If he is elected, that ends the Ivy League dynasty. The Virginia Dynasty (Jefferson-Madison-Monroe) lasted only 24 years. This one is pushing for 36 years if they can get Clinton in. Her and the Democratic Party’s idea of diversity is one Yale law and one Harvard law on the national ticket.
Not mention, the more important idea I raised is that Trump in the historic context is a centrist nationalist. If that is true, his impetus is to restore the inclusive nationalism concept which prevailed in the Postwar (pre-1970) period.
The era post-1970 has seen the growth of plutocracy like no other known to anyone alive today. Or their parents or even grandparents.
Speaking of moving goalposts.
LikeLike
@ newworld3000
Just because Nationalism is “inclusive” doesn’t make it a good thing. It’s an expansion of State power at the expensive of the individual. I’m also skeptical that Trump’s Nationalism will in fact be inclusive with his “law and order” rhetoric about making America “safe” again.
Trump has no specific politicale idiology that he draws from other then his own personal narcissism and his need for power and approval. To suggest he is a centrist means that he posses some kind idiology to use as a measure. Their is none.
Trump went off on a rant the other day about how he was going to fund a Pac to destroy Cruz and Kasich’s political future. That is how he will handle political dissent. He will use a variety of legal stratagies to enforce coercion against his percieved enemies.
LikeLike
“If voting were as rigged as you seem to think it is, then there would be no need for voter suppression laws and other attempts to keep Black people from voting.”
@ Abagond
Murdering Black people is illegal too. Aren’t there laws on the books saying so, despite the fact that law enforcement murders unarmed Black people with astounding regularity?
Good luck to you, sir.
🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
“That is not what I said and you know it. You made some good points in your first comment, but now you are just trolling.”
I know nothing of the sort. What I see is someone coming up with bs excuses to justify his capitulation to Clinton. Your real name wouldn’t happen to be Bernard Sanders would it? In the service of your new mistress, you distorted the history and purpose of the war on drugs. I showed that it dated back to the 1960s as a response to the ghetto uprisings. Your reply to my facts is a pathetic attempt to evade the facts. Right wing forces are on the rise all over the world, why would the USA be exempt from that trend? Their rise was planned for as long as the war on drugs was.
You accuse me of being a troll. How is it trolling if I back my claims with facts. Maybe you should take up trolling yourself, you might make more cogent arguments.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@michaeljonbaker If I didn’t know better, I’d think you were talking about the Clintons. Destroying enemies within their own party. Then there’s the matter of the “expansion of state power”. Apparently, you have no idea what expansion of state power Hillary Clinton would like to bring about. Imagine such things as the state choosing what educational level a person is allowed to aspire to. Choosing a person’s occupation. Suppressing dissent by dispossessing dissenters through denying them professional and vocational licensing and necessary clearances to work. All of these ideas are encompassed within the legal theories of various leftist and feminists. Get with it.
Most politicians do not have distinct ideology, but rather a visceral feeling of who they are. Hillary Clinton is no different. So don’t say she is different than Trump. She may be smart (though not really smarter than any other “smart” person) but she is not an intellectual. She has no theory. Just an acquired stance.
The key element of Trump’s nationalism is economic nationalism. What” We don’t need a little? We don’t need a sea change in our national policies?
LikeLike
@newworld3000
But he isn’t talking about them now is he? Bringing up what the Clintons’ do does not make what Trump plans to do non-existent.
And no….I have no love for Hillary either.
LikeLiked by 1 person
newworld3000
Scroll farther up thread for my original post.
“Then there’s the matter of the “expansion of state power”. Apparently, you have no idea what expansion of state power Hillary Clinton would like to bring about.”
Clinton’s presidency will be an extension of Obama’s neo-liberal policies. She will be more hawkish and likely will squash the Iran deal even though a year out Iran has made good on the agreement so far. The changes made to the Democratic Parties platform are meaningless as they were made to placate Sanders supporters and Clinton has no obligation to honor them. Clinton’s feminism is commendable but that’s a separate issue from her political positions being up for sale.
“Imagine such things as the state choosing what educational level a person is allowed to aspire to. Choosing a person’s occupation. Suppressing dissent by dispossessing dissenters through denying them professional and vocational licensing and necessary clearances to work.”
Nothing new here. In the era pre-1970 era, we called that Jim Crow.
“All of these ideas are encompassed within the legal theories of various leftist and feminists.”
Similarly these ideas are encompassed within the legal theories of conservatism and the right. Structural power remains the same it is just the targeting that is different.
“Most politicians do not have distinct ideology, but rather a visceral feeling of who they are.”
If that was true then why are you arguing about the influence of “the legal theories of various leftist and feminists.” ? I do think your overall statement is generally true as Ideological purity tends to be more important to the base.
“The key element of Trump’s nationalism is economic nationalism. What” We don’t need a little?
Economic Nationalism is crony capitalism on steroids.Trumps policies may in fact create jobs in protected markets. Peter Thiel and other Trump supporters gain economic monopolies in key sectors of the economy with government acting as a partner. Trump CEO, the new founding father of fascism.
“We don’t need a sea change in our national policies?”
Yes of course. But Americas idea was laissez faire economics, not centrally planned economies with a corporate hegemony that has a monopoly on force.
Read Hayek’s. “Road to Serfdom”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom
LikeLike
“Why should this man be president? Why????!!!”
Hillary Clinton wanted ground troops in Syria to fight against Assad. Luckily Obama didn´t allow that. Trump wants maybe to fight IS together with Putin, but certainly no war against Assad.
Hillary Clinton still thinks the Iraq war was good, Trump doesn´t think so.
Clinton thinks the intervention in Libya was good, Trump doesn´t.
Clinton is open to more wars in the Near East, Trump is not.
Trump wants to pull troops out of Korea and Japan, Clinton wants them to stay.
Clinton wants US interference in the conflict in the South Chinese sea and in the conflict between Japan and China. Trump does not want that.
He wants more economic competition with China and less military competition.
Trump wants relaxation in the relationship to Russia, Clintons wants confrontation.
All in all Clinton is much more neoconservative than Trump and a little bit more neoconservative than Obama on foreign policy. Clinton is much more war-prone than Trump. That makes Clinton dangerous and Trump the safe option out of the two. Thats reason 1 for Trump against Clinton, and a very important one.
Reason two is that Clinton stands for very Wall Street orientated policies. Trump is much more able to stand up against Wall Street.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There could be some good come from him though. Sometimes something real bad has to happen before real change can come about. Or he’ll get impeached, a lot of rep. don’t like him either.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@newworld3000
Let’s not forget the other club these Ivy Leaguers belonged to. Indeed it could equally be called a CIA dynasty.
“You won’t find it mentioned in the embedded media, but every president since Ronald Reagan has had direct or familial ties to the CIA. And if either Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton are elected, the trend will continue.”
http://prorevnews.blogspot.com/2015/03/how-cia-has-influenced-presidency.html
In either case, it’s a criminal cabal.
LikeLiked by 3 people
The CIA coup and the beginning of the dynasty:
(https://youtu.be/Wap7YX1OeUs?t=24m49s)
LikeLike
And for all of the “Stop Trump” angst, consider this. If Trump becomes president it will be Hillary’s fault. I’m not voting for fracking, TTP or no fly zone Russia baiting in Syria. And not for more drone assassination of innocent people..
(https://youtu.be/BocCnTfQxVM?t=6m20s)
LikeLike
Van Jones on Hillaries VP pick.
(https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10154357785719910&id=30042869909)
LikeLike
Go Billary Go! Billary 2017 or is it 2018?
LikeLike
Abagond, how do you feel about former Pres Bill Clinton and Pres Barack Obama? Do you think they were good or bad presidents?
LikeLike
That may be partially true, I think it is at least as much Korea and Japan that want them to stay.
Could someone find sources for that claim?
I am right here on the edge of the South China Sea and hear the rhetoric coming out of China daily (ie, this argument), but I have never received that impression myself. I know that China (or more accurately, the CCP) uses that argument to steer attention away from itself and point to “foreigners” as the source of all their problems.
LikeLike
” Clinton wants US interference in the conflict in the South Chinese sea and in the conflict between Japan and China.
Could someone find sources for that claim?”
What would you accept as sources? Your mind seems made up in advance.
“I know that China (or more accurately, the CCP) uses that argument to steer attention away from itself and point to “foreigners” as the source of all their problems.”
LikeLike
The Devil or the Deep.
That seems to be the unpalatable choice Black Americans face now and every four years. The Devil represented by the Republican party menaces with threats of open violence, political repression and economic disaster. The Deep represented by the Democratic party beckons with a lovely, blue, sun kissed surface. However, from bitter experience Black people know once they make the plunge, they will be roundly ignored, lectured with speeches laced with racist dog whistles and ultimately betrayed with laws that impoverish, imprison and imperil Black lives.
So we stand at the edge of the cliff every four years. The choices are always the same; stand and battle the Devil or plunge into the icy, rock filled waters of the Deep.
Eighty-three years ago, historian Carter G. Woodson, wrote in his classic The Mis-Education of the Negro his views on voting as a tactic (pages 182-183):
Voting for the Democrats over the past fifty years have not yielded Black people full employment, stable communities, excellent schools, universal healthcare, high quality housing or an increase of civil liberties. The Democrats have betrayed Black people’s interests at every turn.
I know how high the stakes are now. They seem to get higher with every election. Somehow the Devil grows and becomes ever more menacing. Perhaps because the Devil (the Republicans) draw their power from the Deep (the Democrats) and we pretend not to notice that they are not two parties but one big party with two wings.
A Trump win will usher in a period of extreme violence and repression. Under the Obama administration we have already seen a dramatic increase of state violence tactics such as, police violence, secret repressive laws, activist and whistleblower repression, imprisonment, torture and assassinations. A Trump administration will likely add the mobilization of working class Whites as instruments of terror against its enemies.
In the 2013 Truthout article, Why Aren’t Americans Fighting Back?, writer E. Douglas Kihn described this tactic:
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/17498-why-arent-americans-fighting-back
➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣➣
High stakes or not, personal fears or not, I refuse to be stampeded into jumping into the toxic waters of the Democratic party. Four to eight more years of racist dog whistle speeches and betrayal is not worth my vote. I think it is time Black people organize themselves politically and stop being the despised stepchildren to the Democrats. We have acted like insane people long enough (doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results). If a political party wants Black votes, they need to answer this simple question: “What’s in it for Black people?”
Black people’s own agenda needs to be front and center in our community. Even in these very scary times. Especially in these very scary times. Now is the time to organize, plan and lay the ground work for a whole new approach to politics for Black people. One that creates a viable alternative to the Devil and the Deep. This year and into the future, Black people must vote our hopes, not our fears.
LikeLiked by 6 people
In the USA the hustle (politics) works with LOBBIES and cash money.
It’s the same way in law enforcement. If criminals give enough MONEY to the cops, the cops will look the other way, be elsewhere, get rid of competitive cartels, establish procedures that benefit certain kingpins, and so on. There’s an Internal Affairs division within the Police Dept but they never stop all the corruption. Neither do they stop all the bad cops from being bad/predator cops! There’s that good ole ‘blue wall of silence’ forever in effect! And so called ‘good cops’ who simply look the other way when witnessing malfeasance.
The crooks that work in the congress and senate operate the same way. Ya got to pay them to play (get yours)!
Votes are meaningless without strong lobbyists willing to donate (LEGAL bribes) to politicians pockets.
Like asset forfeiture laws – highway robbery – where cops will legally take your money under suspicion that you’re going to do something wrong with it and make you go to court to TRY and get it back. These laws are now LEGAL all over Amerika – if you are caught driving with a large amount of cash! Yet people everywhere can’t seem to see how corrupt Amerika has become, and still believe in the system. Zombies is what they are. Unable to see, think or reason.
LOBBYING been made perfectly legal and it’s how the game has been played for a long time.. and it seems that Blacks are the only group not playing it!
I’m not a fan of bribing politicians for representation. I’m only saying how the game is played and that Black people seem to be stuck in a bizzarro universe/reality that appears to block them from seeing how politics/life really works in Amerika. A life which everyone else plainly sees because everyone else is playing the lobby game.
LikeLiked by 5 people
@Afrofem
That’s why I’m not playing that game anymore. The Democrats had one last shot with me with Obama. And he blew it bigtime. He held all the cards in 2009 and he pissed it away in his service to the Man. I said it in 2009 when the villain revealed itself. The Democratic party must die! But hey, if you liked Obama, and especially if you continue to like Obama, after 8 years of betrayal, you’re gonna love Clinton. She’ll be Obama on steroids. So go for it. You won’t be rallying me to that cause. If Trump wins, don’t blame me. Blame Twiddledee and blame Twiddledum. Blame Obama for his betrayal and blame his tagteam identity politics partner Hillary.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/08/dont-blame-me-if-trump-wins/
I’m voting Green. And if that’s ‘throwing my vote away’, so be it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
gee i’m getting moderated a lot. its kinda irritating
LikeLike
Funny when people paint Trump as anti-establishment when he was a lobbyist. He was part of the establishment just on the other side of it.
LikeLike
There’s no convincing CNN brainwashed fools that what you support is the very essence of what you say you detest.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Fan
That is why zombie and vampire movies, etc. are so popular now.
99% of the population are acting like zombies; disheveled, ragged and shuffling mindlessly through the streets.
1% of the population is acting like vampires; soulless, hiding from the light of day and feeding on any warm blooded creature they can get their hands on under cover of dark.
Does art mirror life or does life mirror art?
LikeLiked by 1 person
If I thought the differences between Trump and Clinton were slight, I would vote Green Party too, as I did in 1996 when Bill Clinton ran for re-election. But as bad as Hillary Clinton will be, Trump will be far worse. That is why I am voting for her.
I agree Blacks should not be dependent on the Democrats, certainly not those of the Clinton strain, but in THIS election cycle, it is too late to set that right. The cards have already been dealt – in part by the huge Black vote that Hillary Clinton got!
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
Maybe you could do a piece on Obama’s half brother Malik and the fact that he is voting for Trump. http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/malik-obama-president-barack-half-brother-donald-trump-votes-republican-kenya-who-is-real-father/
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Afrofem
“a whole new approach to politics for Black people”
What do you envision that new approach as looking like? The creation of a new political party? Or throwing more support to existing 3rd parties? Strong lobbying efforts, as Fan appears to be suggesting? Increased focus on grassroots and local politics?
LikeLike
“The cards have already been dealt – in part by the huge Black vote that Hillary Clinton got!” In other words, Vox Populi, Vox Dei. That’s the oldest con in the political shill book. Now your negative take on Sanders makes sense. Not that I’m saying he was anything special, at least he was something new.
“I agree Blacks should not be dependent on the Democrats, certainly not those of the Clinton strain, but in THIS election cycle, it is too late to set that right.”
Is my memory failing, because I don’t recall any attempt by you to break Blacks from the Democrats, so, it was already too late from the beginning.
The next election cycle will play out the same way. The Nation magazine is the acknowledged master of this con game. They have used that excuse for at least a century.
LikeLiked by 2 people
^
I have not, nor have I suggested that Black people pay money to politicians.
I just laid out how the Washington DC lobbying process vs the voting process works since so many believe that voting is beneficial.
___________________
“99% of the population are acting like zombies; disheveled, ragged and shuffling mindlessly through the streets.
1% of the population is acting like vampires; soulless, hiding from the light of day and feeding on any warm blooded creature they can get their hands on under cover of dark.”
Afrofem,
Your quote above aptly describes BOTH Zombies and Vampires. They are basically the same, interchangeable metaphors… according to whichever script is used. They will either eat your flesh and/or drink your blood, because that’s what they are compelled to do!
I would guesstimate that 85 – 90% of people are asleep (sedated) – (Z & Vs) and perhaps about 15% are awake who can see the handwriting on the wall.
LikeLike
@ Fan
I misunderstood. I apologize for misrepresenting your position.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
Primarily the creation of a national political network focused entirely on Black people’s concerns. The greatest efforts should be on organizing and building power at the county and state levels, similar to ideas expounded by Fan and Black Sci-Fi on the Cosmo Setepenra thread.
Any political party that wants Black people’s votes or other support would have to work with the network, fulfill network demands for specific policies——and be held accountable by the network. The network could also be a great way to build coalitions with other groups.
LikeLike
Isn’t that why the NAACP formed?
This was their mission in 1911
How would this new political network be different? Is what is needed is a complete revamping of the NAACP? Because if that new political network has a similar objective, then it might not be any more effective than the NAACP. It looks like the NRA is many multiple times more powerful than the NAACP.
Well, the NAACP focused more on civil rights. This new one would focus more on power? So it is a resurrection of the Black Panther party? We know what happened to that. Do we think it would be much different this time?
LikeLike
I have a handful of Trump-loving wingnut friends. I receive many of their email forwards. They are so filled with racist hate it’s almost unbelievable. I used to try to respond to them but it’s like using a teaspoon to divert a tsunami.
LikeLiked by 3 people
@ Blanc2
Nice good & friends you have, Blanc2.
Obviously they think well of you enough to send you these racist hate messages.
Most Black people in Amerika are quite aware of the *racist mindset* in the majority of white people, even before Trump announced his run for office.
You may find that “almost unbelievable” but rest assured, we don’t.
We live in and experience this reality everyday!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Michael Moore predicts Trump will win
5 REASONS WHY TRUMP WILL WIN
(http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/)
LikeLiked by 2 people
I also predict Trump will win, just as I predicted last year that he’d win the Republican nomination. The reason is because his opponent is Hillary Clinton, a dangerous career politician and criminal.
Not just because she’s a serial liar (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftx7soJIaKg)
who has easily obstructed justice, lied under oath, and sold political favors to foreigners: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/06/10/abcs_brian_ross_do_newly_released_clinton_emails_show_quid_pro_quo.html, like when she named
But primarily because she’s exercised poor judgement that has cost the lives of millions of people–from her support of the Iraq War, which left over 1 million dead, to her personal overthrow of Gadaffi, which left tens of thousands dead according to the UN.
Assange said he has some very revealing documents about Clinton, and it could be the nail in the coffin for her campaign.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Jefe
Excellent article. Thanks.
LikeLike
@ Blanc2
Believe it. This is not a drill.
LikeLike
@ TeddyBearDaddy
Ugh. I think not. Thanks for the suggestion, though.
LikeLike
@ akim67
I do not like either of them. Bill Clinton for his crime bill and welfare reform, Obama because he does not care about Black people.
Obama went to Sandy Hook, Dallas and New Jersey (after Hurricane Sandy), but not to Ferguson, Baltimore or Baton Rouge. He could not even muster up that bare modicum of symbolism. He only cares about White people.
LikeLiked by 2 people
…I suppose if Hillary Clinton can make this election less about herself and more about women, then she still has a chance. She needs to step it up with the women card.
Yes, it will be tough, but her campaign’s message needs to be just like this for her to win: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/289064-new-pro-clinton-video-calls-for-more-women-in-public-office
LikeLike
@TeddyBearDaddy
Oh man, this is shameful. “When I go (to visit the White House) I go through the back door”. Thanks for the link. “cold” “ruthless” “turned his back on his family”. Probably not even related. He looks nothing like them. The claim that the senior was his father probably a CIA cover story. That’s why he feels nothing for his alleged African family. I don’t think he resembles Frank Marshall. But I suspect he came out of the same test tube as this guy:http://www.dailystormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/obama-brother-mark-obama-ndesandjo-600.jpg
LikeLike
Democrats against Hillary:
(https://youtu.be/rTo3UzjNazA)
LikeLike
You can always do it like brazilians: elect the worst possible president ever, and then go massively to the streets to impeach him/her.
LikeLike
@jefe
Response pending….
LikeLike
@Alberto Monteiro
Dilma Rouseff is hardly “the worst possible president ever”. There aren’t any credible corruption charges against her. She is dealing with a coup orchestrated by foreign interests and homegrown rightwingers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Abagond
“He could not even muster up that bare modicum of symbolism. He only cares about White people.”
So true. Some deluded Black people still worship him and make excuses for him.
He doesn’t care about all White people, just the wealthy ones.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There are people who usually vote democratic are unwilling to compromise and vote for Hillary even to avert a Trump presidency. Some even hope that a Trump victory, as undesirable as it would be, would spark a true counter-revolution away from the current status quo within the Democratic party. In the minds of some “progressives” Hillary Clinton has abandoned their principles and they can’t bring themselves to vote for her.
One thing is sure, they’ll have to put Hillary Clinton on suicide watch if she has the presidency snatched from her again…first by an African American then a wealthy loudmouth like Trump.
LikeLike
I would rather vote for Hillary than this reincarnated Hitler and his Black Shirts. This has already emboldened David Duke, who says “his time has come.” Hillary has served the American public and knows a thing or two about political agenda. Trump has his own agenda, and its basically White Supremacist.
LikeLike
America is like a monkey trapped because he can’t let go of the treat in the jar, the jar that will not release his fist clasping the two party system, the opening being too small. If he would just let go, he could relax his hand, easily slip it from the jar and be free. Voting for nobody is a vote for status quo. Heads Trump. Tails Clinton. Heads they win, tails you lose. It’s the same thing. Why would anybody vote for nobody? That’s worse than lesser evilism. And this time, in the Republican/Democrat duopoly, there is no lesser evil, If ever there was a time to vote third party it’s now.https://offgraun.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/owenjones.jpg?w=720&quality=80&strip=info
LikeLiked by 1 person
@dorisjean23
“I would rather vote for Hillary than this reincarnated Hitler and his Black Shirts. This has already emboldened David Duke, who says “his time has come.” ”
Well Hillary Clinton has emboldened Will Quigg, who says “For the KKK, Clinton is our choice”. She’s been in public office for decades, and what can blacks, Latinos, women, or the LGBT community say she’s done for them? Absolutely nothing.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@nomad
I like that imagery.
There is no lesser evil in this campaign. The choices are:
A. A bloodthirsty war monger who had the nerve to lecture the NAACP conventiongoers about how “the police are the law”.
B. A sociopathic narcissist who encourages his followers to violence and who will complete the ruin of the nation.
Some choice!
LikeLiked by 4 people
http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2016/07/25/hillary-clinton%E2%80%99s-new-tv-show
LikeLike
http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2016/07/20/i-love-lucifer-ben-carsons-new-sitcom
LikeLike
http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2016/07/18/mad-explains-the-republication-convention-logo
LikeLike
http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2016/07/26/mad-explains-the-democratic-convention-logo
LikeLike
http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2016/07/14/mad-exclusive-trump-makes-his-pick
LikeLike
For people who dislike Hillary because she will keep the USA in Asia, I unfortunately have to support her on this (which would be a continuation of the policy under Obama).
It is not so much the USA which has butted into Asia,but China’s neighbors which have pretty much begged to USA to maintain a presence there. Japan had to decide in 2014 to beef up their self defense, and it was not purely under instruction of the USA.
This article explains why it is mainly China that is drawing the USA into Asia. They miscalculated about America’s terminal decline after 2008 and why USA got pulled back into Asia.
How to Explain Xi Jinping’s Mounting Foreign-Policy Failures
(http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/21/how-to-explain-xi-jinpings-mounting-foreign-policy-failures/)
Xi has been doing the largest series of miscalculations. Instead of forming alliances with their neighbours, they have managed to piss them off, encourage them to build up their military, and drawing the USA in. It is no surprise that they turn to nations in Africa and small pacific island nations to form alliances.
In the past few years, they have given rise to Independence movements in Taiwan and Hong Kong. When are they going to realize that they are shooting themselves in the foot. In the attempt to control everything both domestically and abroad, they are attracting the very behaviour that they do not want. That means that each and every time, they have to step up their control (either of information or of their territorial claims).
The following has to be a great blow to China.
UN overturns decision keeping out press freedom watchdog to grant CPJ consultative status
(https://www.hongkongfp.com/2016/07/26/un-overturns-decision-keeping-press-freedom-watchdog/)
If Trump decides to pull the USA out of Asia, then it would not be good for the USA. He would have seriously miscalculated China and played right into their hand.
LikeLike
@Afrofem
“Heads Trump. Tails Clinton. Heads they win, tails you lose. It’s the same thing.”
Chris Hedges agrees with me.
“The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will be pushed through whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. The fracking industry, fossil fuel industry and animal agriculture industry will ravage the ecosystem whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. The predatory financial institutions on Wall Street will trash the economy and loot the U.S. Treasury on the way to another economic collapse whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. Poor, unarmed people of color will be gunned down in the streets of our cities whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. The system of neoslavery in our prisons, where we keep poor men and poor women of color in cages because we have taken from them the possibility of employment, education and dignity, will be maintained whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. Millions of undocumented people will be deported whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. Austerity programs will cut or abolish public services, further decay the infrastructure and curtail social programs whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. Money will replace the vote whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. And half the country, which now lives in poverty, will remain in misery whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton becomes president.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
@ nomad
“Money will replace the vote whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is president. And half the country, which now lives in poverty, will remain in misery whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton becomes president.”
.
Except money has already replaced the vote … I couldn’t agree more! Doesn’t matter which person is (s)elected (though I believe HillBillary have been set-up to win no matter the cost in money or lives – like the first time the gang from Arkansas got into office. Look up the Clinton Body Count. The count hasn’t stopped, yet millions in Amerika (including Black people) behave like as if there is no count. Just law abiding political business as usual, Surreal… smh
Corrupt and corrosive Amerika is destined to become toast, or worse, regardless of who gets selected to OCCUPY the oval office.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“This article explains why it is mainly China that is drawing the USA into Asia. They miscalculated about America’s terminal decline after 2008 and why USA got pulled back into Asia.”
Jefe, why are you addicted to spurious information?
first, you claimed that China’s tobacco policy was motivated by a desire to kill off Chinese citizens, ignoring the fact that most of the leaders were heavy smokers themselves! second, you claimed that the Chinese were in North America before Blacks, I had to set you straight on that claim as well. Now you come here with this nonsense quoted above!? Your article is from the mouthpiece of the USA foreign policy establishment, what else did you expect them to claim?
I’m going to provide more objective information on the topic, not to convince you, since, as I stated above, your mind is already made up, but to inform the unwary who might take the propaganda you’re pushing for the truth.
“Meanwhile, Beijing’s comfort level on the South China Sea situation as such has significantly risen. The Chinese diplomacy has rather successfully weathered a potentially ugly situation stemming from the July 12 award. The summit meetings of the ASEM and ASEAN in successive weeks refrained from criticising China.”
“The statement said China and 10 members of ASEAN “reaffirm their respect for and commitment to the freedom of navigation in and overflight above the South China Sea as provided for by the universally recognized principles of international law, including the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)”.
It also commits all parties to undertaking to “resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, without resorting to the threat or use of force, through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned.”
The statement calls for the “exercise of self-restraint in the conduct of activities that would complicate or escalate disputes and affect peace and stability including, among others, refraining from action of inhabiting on the presently uninhabited islands, reefs, shoals, cays, and other features, and to handle their differences in a constructive manner.”
China’s neighbors aren’t rushing to join the US crusade. Since you saw fit to have State Dept. types say what China’s game is, it’s only fair that people should read what the Chinese are up in their own words: “ASEAN should realize that maritime and border disputes should never prevail in its relationship with China. Resorting to international arbitration is an oversimplified approach to dealing with a strategic malady. China has managed to settle its borders with most of its neighbors after decades of negotiation and consultation. This experience will be successfully applied to addressing the current predicament if other claimants reach a consensus on bilateral talks.” http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/995201.shtml
LikeLike
@grojo,
Please stop saying that I claimed things that I did not. And following that, saying something that does not follow at all from the first.
I think that China’s tobacco policy is motivated mostly by tax revenue. It is a large source of income for the government, and China has by far, the lion’s share of the world’s smokers.
But I speculate that another reason might be that heavy tobacco smoking may reduce life expectancy, which will save the government some of the social problems that they will be facing when a large proportion of the population is elderly.
This is not at all saying that China’s tobacco policy is motivated by a desire to kill off its citizens. You are changing the words to mean something else.
Also, the fact that many of the leaders are heavy smokers themselves is completely irrelevant to the argument that tobacco may be a factor considered that can reduce life expectancy of the population at large and might be a measure (among others) to help them manage the demographic time bomb, or at least mitigate the effects. The PRC health care system is rather screwed up, so I do not think those patients over age 60 will get the treatment they need. How about if we call a side benefit.
I do read every day what the Chinese position on it is, including stuff from the Global Times, among others. The global times is straight from the CCP mouthpiece, so I do want to know what they say and I do pay attention to it.
But, i know it is very much pure propaganda, and at times, outright lies. I saw that first hand with the umbrella movement. I went to visit the protest sites many times and talk to people who spent a lot of time there and there are now books out on it (I am reading one now). I also went to China twice during that time and read their news notices and TV broadcasts, but also watch them in HK too. The depiction from the Global times was largely false, or at best, true but misleading. They did not mention about the failure of the justice system to handle the matter and they completely misrepresented what was happening on the ground.
I see the Chinese media stuff a lot more than you realize. And I have friends who work in mainland Chinese media organizations so I discuss this stuff with them all the time. That is why I know what kind of instructions they receive from the State Administration of Radio, Film, and Television (SARFT). Some scary stuff there. One friend of mine tells me that he always has to edit his reporting to fit the approved narrative. And as I do travel to China often, I can see exactly what information is available there and what is not.
For one thing, I don’t think there is a “US crusade”. That is PRC propaganda.
Another, the argument is largely beside the point. The main point is not China’s historical claim to the S. China Sea and about how they have historically resolved border disputes in the past. The point is that they agreed to abide by UNCLOS and the ruling from the Hague is strictly according to those principles, yet China is not abiding by the very rules that pledged to follow.
This, in my opinion, is much worse than the USA. Obama wanted to sign, but the US Senate blocked it. So, the USA recognizes UNCLOS but is not a signatory. So, they are less bound to abide by any Hague ruling.
China, however, is bound.
They initially refused to negotiate with the Philippines (or engage in bilateral talks, if that is your preferred term), and they refused to follow their pledges to abide by UNCLOS. Their approach so far can certainly not be termed peaceful. So, who really needs to be educated? How about the PRC minister of Foreign Affairs? They are missing the point.
By boycotting it, they refused to present their side and they refused to appoint the 2 judges that they were allowed and they refused to pay their share of the court costs. After the ruling, they claimed that the judges were biased against them and that the Philippines bribed the judges by paying for all the costs. Then they cannot stop mentioning the US conspiracy (and other foreigners who want to contain China). This is the type of stuff that the global times prints.
They should be thankful that the Philippines is still trying to engage in peaceful talks with them.
I really don’t want to have a long discussion about this with you. You do look up a lot of information, but you engage in discussion with people not to exchange information and ideas, but by trying to turning it into some kind of argument directed at people personally (as if for fun). No thanks.
LikeLike
Gee I do like it when people agree with me. I said “The Democratic Party must die!!!”. Margaret Kimberly agrees.
“Hillary Clinton has nothing to offer aside from not being Donald Trump. No one even tries to make the case for her without using his name as bogeyman of the moment. He is a useful foil but the Wikileaks documents prove to anyone who wasn’t already aware that the Democratic party is unreformable. The only solution is to jettison this corrupt project and start anew.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jefe, All I did was to point out that the article you linked to was US foreign policy establishment propaganda, nothing more. I pointed out that ASEAN isn’t looking to start something with China and the Chinese are in agreement with them. Not even the Philippines is all that hot for this fight. The hand of the USA is all over this judgement, as a sovereign state, China is not obliged to accept other people’s interpretation of what is in their interests. The USA ignores court ruling for the same reason. Remember the mining of Nicaraguan harbors? You are free to present US aggression as coming to the ‘rescue’ of the ‘weak’ and ‘defenseless’, but you don’t have the right to expect to do so in an open forum without being challenged. For the sake of ‘peace’, I’ll let stand you ‘imaginative’ reinterpretation of what you actually wrote on Chinese tobacco policy.
“I see the Chinese media stuff a lot more than you realize. And I have friends who work in mainland Chinese media organizations so I discuss this stuff with them all the time. That is why I know what kind of instructions they receive from the State Administration of Radio, Film, and Television (SARFT). Some scary stuff there. ”
Right, they’re the only ones doing it, every western journalist is just a disinterested seeker of the truth. Please. You wouldn’t be associated with that well known ‘humanitarian’ outfit headquartered at Arlington Virginia, now would you?
LikeLike
@nomad,
Abagond’s first line in this post.
I am sure that he would be the first to say that she is a snake and dishonest and a host of other negative adjectives.
But, unfortunately, your statement:
And the point of his blog post is that that makes a difference. It makes THE difference.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@jefe
we’ll have to agree to disagree. well, we don’t have to, actually. we just disagree.
Whatever difference it makes is so negligible as to be nonexistent. If anything she’ll be in aggregation worse than Trump. It’s like trying to decide which pile of this stinks more.
LikeLike
Hillary Clinton is a snake and is dishonest.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I do agree with you here.
China has already stated quite clearly that their “sovereign” territory in the S. China Sea is in their national interest. Of course it is.
The US has already stated quite clearly that the freedom of navigation in the S. China Sea is in their national interest. Of course they will feel it is in their national interest.
I also do not deny that the US is deeply and critically involved. I just would not call it (ie, this south China involvement) a “crusade”. Only the PRC would do that. The US are a bully too. The danger is that we have two bullies involved here with potentially very catastrophic consequences.
My point was that China pledged to abide by UNCLOS. The Hague accepted the case. China could have argued their point (even the point that UNCLOS does not apply in their case). They did not. They could have appointed 2 judges sympathetic with their interests to rule on the case. They did not. They accused the Philippines of bribing the judges, which was not the case. If the ruling is irrelevant, why are they so upset by it? Why don’t they just simply ignore it?
But no, they are waging a heavy international campaign to discredit it and the organizations involved. I cannot see how it is in their interest to discredit international organizations that they have joined and pledged to abide by. This goes beyond ignoring the ruling. I can understand their decision to ignore the ruling. But they should just do that.
The fact that the topic was not officially mentioned at those ASEM summits in Beijing was because Beijing strictly forbade it and they were the host. But of course, it was a big topic on the sidelines.
It was brought up at ASEAN too, but Beijing wooed Laos and Cambodia to take it off the table. I really don’t think most of the countries willingly did that, esp. all the countries bordering the S. China sea. It is not in THEIR national interest to do so (of course, they would do it in a peaceful manner).
The USA is no better for ignoring court rulings that they are bound to honour. They do not get a pass either.
Since you are such a good fact checker, when the USA ignored the Nicaragua ruling, did they say that it was due to judge’s biases, Nicaragua bribing the judges or to interference from another country (like Russia)? Did they go beyond stating that the case did not fall under the court’s jurisdiction in the case, but to discredit the organizations themselves? I really don’t know all the facts, but I feel China is screwing this one up.
Regardless of what China does at this juncture, the Hague ruling has now set precedents which China will be effectively powerless to change.
Regarding the press, I am not in the USA. I am in HK. Here we have daily access to the mainland press, the various local HK press (PRC CCP friendly, business friendly, government friendly, mixed reporting, and anti-government) and western press. I certainly do not blindly follow the western press and do not get most of my news from there.
But Global Times is scary. I trust Fox News much more than the Global Times. However, in either case, you can read between the lines to decipher the messages.
But, I have pretty much stopped reading the South China morning post. After it was bought by Alibaba, the editorial content has changed considerably. Sometimes I may read an article, but it now clearly toes the line.
LikeLike
@nomad
Sorry, what are we disagreeing on?
LikeLike
@nomad
Both Clinton and Trump are bad, but Trump is worse in an extremely dangerous way: he makes openly racist appeals to a majority that fears becoming a minority. He makes going after people of colour the answer to what is wrong in their lives. Race is the one thing that could tear the country apart from the inside or lead to the destruction of millions. Add to that his slight regard for an already weak Constitution.
The US is fully capable of forcing people of a particular race out of their homes and sending them to some God-forsaken place, if not kill them. The Supreme Court UPHELD the Japanese American internment. That stuff is still on the books.
LikeLike
Jefe, you’ve made your case and I made mine, let’s leave it at that.
LikeLike
Billary’s official portrait:
LikeLiked by 2 people
Maybe a post on Hillaries VP pick.
LikeLike
@ nomad
I liked both quotes. Chris Hedges and Margaret Kimberly are generally on the money.
My husband and I are at odds about this rigged election. His position is similar to Abagond’s. He threw a wrinkle into the discussion yesterday when he said to me, ” what about Pence?”.
Mike Pence, the VP pick, is a Christian Dominionist. Sort of Ted Cruz lite. Ted Cruz is even more a viper than HRClinton. (Quite an achievement, huh!) Even most Republican insiders hate him, including former House Speaker, John Boehner.
According to Politico, Boehner has blasted Cruz with the epitath:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/john-beohner-ted-cruz-lucifer-222570
Pence’s rightwing Christian bonafides are just as strong as Cruz’s. He just has a better personality…and a Christian Dominionist will be a heartbeat away from the presidency if Trump is out of the picture. I haven’t changed my position but Pence complicates things a great deal.
Your assessment?
LikeLike
@ Jefe
@ Afrofem
I was wondering the same thing about the NAACP. Isn’t this type of political networking and political pressure a big part of what the NAACP is designed to do? Has the NAACP become so ineffective that it cannot be salvaged and a new political network is necessary? How would this new organization differ in significant ways?
Would it help to have more big money behind the NAACP and/or a new group? One reason the NRA is so successful is it’s really a front for the firearms indu$try, not the grassroots club of gun enthusiasts that it pretends to be.
LikeLike
@Afrofem
I say “the Democratic Party must die”. But really, it’s already dead to me. Obama killed it. Some one back in the early days said that he was the best the Democratic party is capable of. And I believe it. In addition to a host of other despicable things he did this.
” Obama oversaw a 24-fold (2,400%) increase in the militarization of local police between 2008 and 2014. Even with the scale-back announced in 2015, Obama still managed to transfer a $459 million arsenal to the cops – 14 times as much weapons of terror and death than President Bush gifted to the local police at his high point year of 2008.
This was not simply a “surge” in militarization of the police; Obama escalated the war against Black and brown communities by several orders of magnitude. Based on these numbers, Obama is the biggest domestic war hawk in the history of the United States – bigger than Bush, Clinton and all his predecessors since the genesis of the Black mass incarceration regime in the late Sixties.”
Clinton is just going to extend Obama’s assault on the black community. So there is really no respite from the presumed intent of Trump.
What Obama did is the best Democrats can do. And it ain’t worth a damn. And look like the candidates they put forth for president are going to get worse and worse. So f–k ’em.
As for the other side. Pence or no Pence. I can’t influence what those mad men do. But I’ll not be held hostage to their madness. You want to blow up the world? Well I’m going to do everything I can to stop you, short of becoming an advocate of evil myself.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Correction: Boehner has blasted Cruz with the epithet…
LikeLike
@Solitaire
I will have a full response by Friday. This week is especially hectic…
LikeLike
@nomad
I wish I could say I was surprised. He had help from the Congressional Black Caucus…yes, the same group of rented negroes that are supposed to be looking out for their Black constituents. That worked out well.
I would like to see the article you quoted from. Can you share the link with me?
LikeLike
@Afrofem
my pleasure
http://www.blackagendareport.com/obama_reinforces_militarized_police
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
Oh, shoot, I didn’t mean to add any pressure to your hectic week! Sorry… Just saying that I’ll be interested in reading your thoughts if and when you have time to write them up.
LikeLike
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Obama_Backs_Off_Plan_to_Demilitarize_Police_After_Meeting_With_Lobbyists/52985/0/38/38/Y/M.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t like Trump’s rhetoric but after carefully researching Hillary Clinton’s record and thinking about it, I consider her a potentially more dangerous president. Trump is likely to be blocked and obstructed by Congress while hawkish, deceptive Clinton will be able get support to push her policies through. I agree with everyone who says there is no good choice between the two.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@jefe
‘@nomad
actually. we just disagree.
Sorry, what are we disagreeing on?’
uno. that whole flat earth thing
LikeLike
@ nomad
Thanks so much!
No one can slice and dice Obama quite like Glen Ford. I remember how reviled Ford was from 2007 to 2014 for daring to breathe a word of criticism of the “First Black President”.
Talk about a voice in the wilderness.
Obama’s covert and now overt support for police and banks, etc. is known by more people——and they don’t like what they see and hear. I don’t blame them, though they are a little late in waking up. Better late than never.
LikeLike
@ Solitaire
LOL! I’ve been gathering facts and writing bits and pieces for days, in between other projects.
Tomorrow….
LikeLike
@ Fan
Thanks for sharing the link. This falsehood floated to the surface:
Yeah, right. They want grenade launchers to launch grenades at peaceful protestors. They already have specialized tear gas launchers.
This reminds me of how police in Kashmir (between India and Pakistan) have been using pellet guns to blind and wound protestors by the hundreds. Pellet guns were touted as “non-lethal crowd control weapons” when they were introduced but blinding people and wounding vital organs is just as devastating and just as unnecessary as murdering people for protesting.
https://fsrn.org/2016/07/indian-troops-unleash-pellet-guns-on-kashmir-protesters-hundreds-blinded/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Something wicked this way comes
(https://youtu.be/YMHOcmDVBP0?t=38s)
LikeLike
@nomad
How strange.
LikeLike
@Origin
thanks. I didn’t want to get all spooky, but did you see those eyes turn black?
LikeLike
@nomad
I didn’t notice that. I found the seizure peculiar though. The poor reporter with the phone was wondering what the heck was happening. This has reminded me that Hillary Clinton fell and hit her head a few years ago and suffered a concussion. I wonder if that had any long-term consequences.
LikeLike
@Origin
Watch it closely. Something you could only see in slow motion. With each blink her eyes become darker and darker until they are black. Then lighter and lighter until they are blue again. Could be an optical illusion. I don’t know what it is, but nevertheless, it’s there to be seen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Lord of Mirkwood
Did you feel the Bern after your boy sold you out? Hahaha! What a joke he is for not standing up to Clinton/DNC corruption. It was great seeing him get booed for it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Lord of Mirkwood
This is not lordofmirkwood.wordpress.com. You’re not running anything here, pal!
You might still believe in Sanders, but he revealed his true colours when he sold you people out: he’s fake and a snake just like Hillary Clinton.
LikeLike
@ nomad
Probably it’s her eyes dilating. Not uncommon in a seizure for the eyes to dilate fully, to the point where the iris is no longer visible.
LikeLike
From one of the world’s biggest snake/chump/LIAR!
” Bernie Sanders Explains Why He Endorsed Hillary Clinton
I am writing you today to express my deep pride in the movement – the political revolution – you and I have created together over the last 15 months. When we began this historic campaign, we were considered fringe players by the political, economic and media establishment. Well, we proved them wrong.
We showed that the American people support a bold, progressive agenda that takes on the billionaire class, that fights for racial, social, economic and environmental justice and that seeks to create a government that works for all of us and not just the big campaign donors.
We mobilized over 13 million voters across the country. We won 23 Democratic primary and caucus contests. We had literally hundreds of thousands of volunteers across the country. And we showed – in a way that can change politics in America forever – that you can run a competitive national grassroots campaign without begging millionaires and billionaires for campaign contributions.
Most importantly, we elevated the critical issues facing our country – issues the establishment has pushed under the rug for too long. We focused attention on the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality in this country and the importance of breaking up the large banks who brought our economy to the brink of collapse. We exposed our horrendous trade policies, our broken criminal justice system, and our people’s lack of access to affordable health care and higher education. We fought aggressively to address the crisis of climate change, the need for real comprehensive immigration reform, the importance of developing a foreign policy that values diplomacy over war, and so much more.
We have shown throughout this election that these are issues that are important to voters and that progressive solutions energize people in the fight for real change. What we have accomplished so far is historic – but our work is far from over.
This movement of ours – this political revolution – must continue. We cannot let all of the momentum we have achieved in the fight to transform America be lost. We will never stop fighting for what is right.
It is true that in terms of winning the Democratic nomination, we did come up short. But this election was never about me or any candidate. It was about the powerful coming together of millions of people to take their country back from the billionaire class. That was the strength of our campaign and it will be the strength of our movement going forward in the months and years ahead.
In the coming weeks, I will be announcing the creation of successor organizations to carry on the struggle that we have been a part of these past 15 months. I hope you will continue to be involved in fighting to transform America. Our goal will be to advance the progressive agenda that we believe in and to elect like-minded candidates at the federal, state and local levels who are committed to accomplishing our goals.
In terms of the presidential election this November, there is no doubt that the election of Donald Trump as president would be a devastating blow to all that we are fighting for. His openly bigoted and pro-billionaire campaign could precipitate the same decades-long rightward shift in American politics that happened after the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. That rightward shift after Reagan’s election infected not just politics as a whole but led to the ascendancy of the corporatist wing of the Democratic Party – an era from which we are still recovering.
I cannot in good conscience let that happen.
To have all of the work we have done in elevating our progressive ideals be dashed away by a complete Republican takeover of Washington – a takeover headed by a candidate that demonizes Latinos, Muslims, women, African Americans, veterans, and others – would be unthinkable.
Today, I endorsed Hillary Clinton to be our next president. I know that some of you will be disappointed with that decision. But I believe that, at this moment, our country, our values, and our common vision for a transformed America, are best served by the defeat of Donald Trump and the election of Hillary Clinton.
You should know that in the weeks since the last primary, both campaigns have worked together in good faith to bridge some of the policy issues that divided us during the election. Did we come to agreement on everything? Of course not. But we made important steps forward.
Hillary Clinton released a debt free college plan that we developed together which now includes free tuition at public colleges and universities for working families. This was a major part of our campaign’s agenda and a proposal that, if enacted into law, would revolutionize higher education in this country.
Secretary Clinton has also publicly committed to massive investments in health care for communities across this country that will increase primary care, including mental health care, dental care, and low-cost prescription drug access for an additional 25 million people. Importantly, she has also endorsed the enactment of a so-called public option to allow everyone in this country to participate in a public insurance program. This idea was killed by the insurance industry during consideration of President Obama’s health care program.
During the Democratic platform proceedings in St. Louis and Orlando, we were victorious in including amendments to make it a clear priority of the Democratic Party to fight for a $15 an hour federal minimum wage, expand Social Security, abolish the death penalty, put a price on carbon, establish a path toward the legalization of marijuana, enact major criminal justice reforms, pass comprehensive immigration reform, end for-profit prisons and detention facilities, break up too-big-to-fail banks and create a 21st century Glass-Steagall Act, close loopholes that allow big companies to avoid taxes by stashing their cash in offshore tax havens and use that revenue to rebuild America, approve the most expansive agenda ever for protecting Native American rights and so much more.
All of these progressive policies were at the heart of our campaign. The truth is our movement is responsible for the most progressive Democratic platform in the history of our country. All of that is the direct result of the work that our members of the platform committee did in the meetings and that you have been doing over the last 15 months.
But none of these initiatives will happen if we do not elect a Democratic president in November. None! In fact, we will go backward. We must elect the Democratic nominee in November and progressive Democrats up and down the ballot so that we ensure that these policy commitments can advance.
It is extremely important that we keep our movement together, that we hold public officials accountable and that we elect progressive candidates to office at the federal, state, and local level who will stand with us.
As part of that effort, we still have a tremendous amount of work left to do in the Democratic Rules Committee that will be meeting in the coming weeks. We have to enact the kinds of reforms to the Democratic Party and to the electoral process that will provide us the tools to elect progressive candidates, to allow new voices and new energy into the Party, and to break up the excessive power that the economic and political elites in the Party currently have. As with our fights on the platform committee, that will only be possible if we stand together.
You should know that I intend to be actively campaigning throughout this election season to elect candidates who will stand by our agenda. I hope to see many of you at events from coast to coast.
In conclusion, I again want to express my pride in what we have accomplished together over the last year. But so much more must be done to make our vision a reality. Now more than ever our country needs our movement – our political revolution. As you have throughout this historic campaign, I ask for your ongoing support as we continue through the fall and beyond.
On a personal note, I cannot say with words how appreciative Jane and I are of the kindness, dedication and love we experienced from so many people across the country. We are deeply touched by it and will never, ever forget it.
Please let me know that you will stand with me to defeat Donald Trump, and to elect candidates who will stand by our agenda as part of the future of our political revolution. Add your name now.
Forever committed, forever fighting, forever forward,
Bernie Sanders ”
“Political revolution”? Yeah right! Reminds me a lot of Obomber’s “Change is coming” rhetoric. ROTFLOL
While I’m no fan of Trump, at least Trump is honest about his position. I’d rather be in the company of a racist/creep who’s aware that he’s a racist than be involved with a racist creep brigade of politicians (BERNIE, democrats and republicans) that pretends to be otherwise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sanders did sell out. You can’t claim to have certain principles then endorse someone who goes against so many of them. He’s “with her” now. That’s selling out.
I know Clinton is dangerous because she’s an untrustworthy liar and probably corrupt. While Trump has said some offensive things which have gotten media coverage it remains to be seen how dangerous he will actually be. It’s not even clear that Hillary is *that* ideology different though she is definitely more of a snake. Trump had a different kind of base to pander to for the nomination so he approached the task erm … “appropriately” from that persepctive.
Trump said Mexico was sending rapists, drug dealers and probably some good people.
HRC had said in the 90s that black children were “super predators” who had to be “brought to heel” in support of a “tough on crime” bill.
Trump said that a wall needs to be built on the Southern border.
HRC voted for a border fence in 2006. It passed but wasn’t fully funded.
Trump had called for a temporary ban or moratium on immigration from muslim countries.
Hillary has bombed muslims since she voted for the Iraq War, presided over regime change in Libya as Secretary of State and therefore helped to contribute to the ensuing refugee crisis.
I was rather anti-Trump but now that the choice is looming I’m not so sure Clinton represents a viable alternative. *If* Trump is really a nationalist is he really worse than a woman who may have sold out to foreign entities and large corporations?
A woman whose eponymous foundation has received many millions in donations from the governments of Saudi Arabia, Australia, Norway, Ireland, Kuwait and Germany.
A woman for whom the DNC possibly manipulated the outcome of the, supposedly democratic, nomination process.
A woman who was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to give speeches on behalf of Wall Street banks but refuses to release transcipts even in the name of transparency?
A woman who, as Secretary of State, used a private email server to hide her electronic correspondence from the state department, lied about the extent of the breach and got off scot free when Martha Stewart and Marion Jones went to prison for less?
A woman who clearly loves her privacy yet believes that whisteblowers like Edward Snowden, who exposed the extent of warrantless government spying, should be punished?
I’m gradually being won over by the side that insists that this is so bad that perhaps you can’t vote for either or that a Trump win might be destructive enough to the corrupt Democrats to make it worth it. When ideas that would usually sound crazy start to sound rational you know it’s bad.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BTW, I don’t think Trump is actually foolish. He may seem so due to his unconventional approach but I think he’s self-aware and knows what he’s doing. He definitely prefers being in the news for controversy to being ignored or written off. Remember that he was laughed at when he first announced his campaign now the joke is on the career politicians he beat for the republican nomination.
Trump prefers to say things that arouse emotion over repeating dry facts. He projects an air of superiority and confidence in any situation. He has a certain wit, a sense of humor, and quickness on his feet that he can use to neuter criticism. Popular example: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGkZgGFQQ3w) Once he makes the audience laugh with him any hope of seriously nailing him with a tough question is gone. He then dismisses Megyn’s query as trifling by alluding to the audience’s response (“we have a good time”) and going back to his emotional talking points. He’s teflon; it’s hard to make him look like he lost which is actually key to his brand. Another example occurs at 2:22 in this video: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63etuVmHT6E&t=2m22s) The audience boos his domination of Jeb Bush and he turns it around with humor while tossing shade.
It’s fascinating because he must know that while he’s running for public office everything he says will be picked apart but he doesn’t seem to care. He turns that into a strength by emphasizing that he’s not a politician. He knows he can sell his brand when put on the spot because he’s done it all his life as a businessman. Whenever people try to trip him up with a tough question he’ll just find a way to get back on message. This is no, barely functional, G.W Bush…and that guy actually became president, twice!
LikeLiked by 1 person
My other comment is in moderation (video links) but I want to add that in addition to branding himself positively Trump is VERY effective at burdening his opponents with negative brands. Jeb Bush became characterized as “weak”, “tired” and “low energy”. Ted Cruz became “Lyin’ Ted” and Marco Rubio became “Little Marco”. Now that he’s started to focus on the battle with Hillary Clinton she might get stuck with “Crooked Hillary”. They’re memorable phrases that serve as damaging verbal caricatures which overwhelm any nuanced assessment of the target.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Origin
“I’m gradually being won over by the side that insists that this is so bad that perhaps you can’t vote for either ”
welcome to the dark side
LikeLiked by 1 person
I said “the Democratic Party must die!!!” Then I said it was already dead to me. Paul Craig Roberts agrees with me. Kind of.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/07/29/the-democratic-party-no-longer-exists/
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“Probably it’s her eyes dilating. Not uncommon in a seizure for the eyes to dilate fully, to the point where the iris is no longer visible.”
You’re probably right. But I’ve been trying to go through frame by frame, and I don’t see any whites in those eyes between 0:45 and 0:50.
Like I say. Probably just an optical illusion, blurring or something like that. But it’s there to be seen.
LikeLike
@nomad
Yes, I’ve arrived.
BTW, we all know about David Duke liking Trump but I recently came across a vid of Louis Farrakhan (a black Muslim) apparently supporting him as well.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6LsL-G9Gb0)
Mike Tyson also believes Trump should be president and I think Ice Cube is a supporter too.
So perhaps Trump is actually building broad support across different demographics and white supremacists just happen to be one of the groups.
I wonder if this potentially broad appeal is due to his nationalistic platform and the fact that he is a wealthy businessman.
After all, most Americans will want the country to be “great” and Trump’s wealth makes him seem independent of the usual influences.
Anyway, I just said “President Trump” in my head to get used to it.
I’m not even panicking.
Corrupt, compromised Hillary isn’t loyal to America and could be a major disaster not only for the country but the world.
Even if Trump is particularly racist (debatable) I’m sure Hillary “super predator” Clinton is too in her usual snakelike way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Abagond
I left a rather long comment last night. It had several links and images.
Is it in moderation or should I re-post it?
Let me know if you want to edit it for length and clarity…it was a bit unwieldy.
LikeLike
@LoM
In the spring of 2015, Bruce Dixon, managing editor at Black Agenda Report wrote an unsentimental article about the Bernie Sanders campaign. In that article, Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders: Sheepdogging for Hillary and the Democrats in 2016, Dixon had this to say about the true purpose of the Sanders campaign:
http://www.blackagendareport.com/bernie-sanders-sheepdog-4-hillary
Sanders played it to a tee, spouting that “revolution” rhetoric till the very end. Now he gets to go back to his cushy committees, junkets and senatorial perks with no hostility from the DNC.
I have a feeling that his supporters will not be so easily demobilized. I think some of them will form the core of a true progressive party that is outside of the two corporate parties.
Who knows, we might see the total collapse of the uni-party within a few years.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Afrofem
That was amazingly prescient and seems like the right assessment of Bernie Sanders’ campaign. However, I think it’s possible that the major disaffection with the status quo and Sanders’ resulting high level of support surprised the DNC and they had to make sure that he didn’t actually become the nominee! That wasn’t part of the plan.
BTW, isn’t it something that Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the woman fired for possibly interfering in the nomination process to help Hillary was hired by her campaign? They don’t even care whether they look dirty anymore.
LikeLike
Origin said,
“BTW, isn’t it something Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, that the woman fired for possibly interfering in the nomination process to help Hillary was hired by her campaign?”
Hillarie’s VP pick, Tim Kaine, was the DNC chair when Hillary ran against Obama. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was head of Hillaries election campaign. After the election Debbie Wasserman-Schultz replaced Tim Kaine as DNC chair and some think Kaine’s VP slot is payback for this favor.
The DNC chair is suppose to be neutral and work towards ensuring a fair primary. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz should have stepped down because of the obvious conflict of interest but that’s not how politics is done.
Wikileaks has more dumps coming including voice mail messages taken over a six month period. The DNC is nervous and I’m going to presume some journalists within the major networks are as well as the collusion between the DNC and the media is going to be exposed.
If it gets ugly enough that might make an opening for Sanders to go Independent or Green.
LikeLike
@Origin
Bruce Dixon’s assessment was quite prescient. It was fascinating to observe people falling for Sanders performance as Left standardbearer for the Democratic party. The Dems really misdirected a lot of insurgent energy away from independent and third parties with the Sanders campaign.
I hope something unexpected happens this year to smash expectations…we shall see.
LikeLike
@michaeljonbarker
Do you really think Sanders would break ranks and go independent or Green?
LikeLike
@ Fan
Trump thinks he is one the least racist people there are.
LikeLike
@Afrofem
“Do you really think Sanders would break ranks and go independent or Green?”
I dont know. It depends on how damaging the emails ect turn out to be. I hear some of it links doners to political appointments. Lets say the next release damages Hillary in the polls and the evidence of collusion against Sanders mounts up, he might break from the DNC. He was obligated to endorse Hillary by contract but that’s done now.
I belive JulIian Assange is doing this for Sanders benifit not Trump’s. Its Assange who is building Sanders an escape route. I think strategically this first dump is not the most embarrasing we are going too see.
Assange is taking a big risk doing this. Their are people who now want him dead. The FBI could show up and drag him out of the Ecuadorian embassy.
LikeLike
@ Origin
Given the way Trump is about Russia and Putin, I would hesitate to call him a US nationalist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@michaeljohnbarker
It smacks of corruption just like Bill Clinton meeting with AG Loretta Lynch, before the FBI boss, Comey, recommended no charges against Hillary Clinton despite revealing her numerous lies in the email scandal.
I also suspect that more damaging information will be dumped closer to the election when it will hurt even more. Better to have the scandals this year so that the country won’t have to consider impeachment later.
@Afrofem
“I hope something unexpected happens this year to smash expectations…we shall see.”
I completely agree. I don’t want it to go according to script.
LikeLike
@ Origin
I already lived through one Teflon president. I do not care to live through another.
LikeLike
@abagond
Perhaps I missed something but I don’t consider Trump’s position on Russia unreasonable from what I know. I’d rather de-escalation and reasonable cooperation to pushing a nuclear power to see how much it’ll take.
The EU and NATO sponsored overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected government was absolutely hypocritical and was clearly part of an ongoing attempt to encircle Russia. Then they try to depict Putin’s response to secure his Black Sea military base in Sevastopol and support Crimea’s decision to split from Ukraine as an action befitting Hitler.
Yet history books tell us about the Cuban Missile Crisis. America would do worse if a hostile power overthrew Mexico’s elected government and installed a puppet regime across the border. I consider HIllary Clinton to be a Russophobic warmonger who would probably lead us into more dangerous territory with Russia than Trump.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Origin
It is debatable whether Trump is racist? How do you figure that?
LikeLike
@ Origin
Do you have sources showing that Ice Cube and Mike Tyson support Trump?
LikeLike
@ Origin
If the Koch brothers ran for office would they be “independent” too?
Trump has a different style but on substance he seems little different than politicians who are in the pay of the gun and fossil fuel industries. And he will need those very same politicians to get anything passed.
It was Bernie Sanders who was trying to do politics independent of the billionaire class, not Donald Trump. Trump IS a billionaire.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“I already lived through one Teflon president. I do not care to live through another.”
What I meant by “teflon” was that it is hard to make him look as if he is acting contrary to his brand. You can’t make him seem inconsistent or weak. From a political perspective he’ll definitely face opposition as President both from Democrats and certain Republicans. I think there will be more significant checks an balances versus a Hillary Clinton presidency since she’s more politically savvy.
@abagond
“It is debatable whether Trump is racist? How do you figure that?”
Debatable that he is *particularly* racist.
@abagond
“Do you have sources showing that Ice Cube and Mike Tyson support Trump?”
I was about to include them in my previous post but I didn’t want to have too many links.
Tyson in a video here:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZBJbMsEvqY)
Ice Cube was less explicit but he seemed to understand Trump’s appeal and disliked HIllary Clinton.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=367psk5ZdpU)
LikeLike
@ Origin
Re: The Sanders sell-out.
Bernie Sanders lives in the real world. He wants to move the ball down the field rather than stand on the sidelines enjoying a smug, self-righteous purity. A President Clinton will put him much closer to his goals than a President Trump.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“@ Fan
Trump thinks he is one the least racist people there are.”
@ Abagond
So what! Trump also “thinks” he has one of the most talented hair stylist ever known to mankind.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“Trump has a different style but on substance he seems little different than politicians who are in the pay of the gun and fossil fuel industries. ”
But the fact that he doesn’t seem directly beholden to these influencers is significant to some people.
Re Sanders:
He just appears contradictory now and he’s spinning too when he tries to depict capitulation as continued “revolution”. Unless the “revolution” he’s talking about is a 360 degree turn, that leaves you where you started, I don’t find his position convincing. A true revolution often involves taking real risks as history demonstrates. He wasn’t willing. He sold out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Afrofem
If it has not appeared by now, please repost.
LikeLike
Trump operatives approached the Koch brother’s about setting up a meeting and the Koch brother’s turned the meeting down. The Koch brother’s have a lot riding on the TPP trade deal.
Meanwhile the Libertarians Johnson and Weld are mirroring their positions to match the CATO institutes policies and that is the Koch brother think tank. Weld is the CFR beltway insider, Johnson is the nerdy N.M. governor who I believe is honest and well intentioned. If the Libertarians get some traction that’s where the Koch brother’s will park their money.
The Libertarian Party platform opposes the TPP but as we know canidates dont necessarly follow their platform. David Koch helped found the Libertarian Party but today they dont control it directly.
Some capitalist libertarians like Jeffery Tucker view Trump as a facist. This clip shows Tucker at “Freedom Fest” a conservative forum getting booed for calling Trump out.
Don’t underestimate Trump’s ability to get elected.
(https://youtu.be/y7fNDRS3lNI)
LikeLike
By the way, It’s interesting that Clinton insisted that Sanders’ ideas would not make it in the “real world”.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-jabs-bernie-sanders-ideas-make-real/story?id=36427762
Now he’s masking his capitulation in the same supposed pragmatism that Hillary used to dismiss his ideas.
So when Sanders says that in the “real world” he has to endorse HIllary Clinton I interpret that as cosigning Hillary’s brand of pragmatism. Therefore he is now untrustworthy as a fighter for the things he claimed to champion.
A real revolutionary would have stuck with the people who gave time and money to his campaign for the ideals he spoke of. He could have used his significant support in the primaries, Hillary’s being under investigation for impropriety, the damaging DNC emails, even the looming possibility of President Trump (which he instead used to justify endorsing Clinton when was often polling better than her against Trump), to make a strong case for being the best nominee. Instead he just folded without a fight and told his supporters to stop booing and vote for Hillary. I think the analysis posted by Afrofem, which suggested that Sanders was a “sheepdog” from the very beginning, is a reasonable explanation for his behavior.
LikeLike
@ Fan
You said you would rather deal with people who KNOW they are racist. I am pointing out that Trump does not appear to be one of those people.
LikeLike
@ Origin
Only time will tell whether Sanders sold out. It depends how serious he is about his successor organization. It could become the left-wing counterpart to the Tea Party. Or it could just be hot air.
LikeLike
Trump’s seeming skeptisim of NATO came out of no where but in thinking about it weakening NATO would be dialing back the Empire and that’s a good thing. I just want some other president to do that, not Trump. Origins observations about NATO, Ukraine ect I conjure with.
Johnson also has proposed cutting a deal with China entailing withdrawing the American military from South Korea in exchange for China dealing with North Korea’s nuclear program.
I think any effort to reduce American military presence or influence will make the world safer not more dangerous.
LikeLike
@abagond
I didn’t hear about his successor organizations so I looked it up. One source was a twitter link and the first respose made me chuckle.
”
@thehill successor organizations that steal money from supporters before betraying them? No thank you. #SelloutSanders
”
The bluntness is kind of funny but it helps to reveal why we don’t have to wait for time to tell. He lost credibility with his endorsement of HIllary Clinton.
Unfortunately, Sanders had said from the beginning that he’d endorse HIllary if he didn’t win the Democratic nomination. So he was harmless to the ordained one from the outset leaving Debbie Wasserman-Schultz free to sabotage his bid knowing his supporters would be delivered to Mrs. Clinton. Since Sanders gave advance notice that he’d sell out, sheepdog is probably the best characterization of his role. The fact that his supporters seem more upset about the DNC’s conduct than he does is telling.
I know Trump wanted the Republican nomination and he wouldn’t have stood for it if it came out that there were improper machinations to derail his campaign. At some point after it became clear that he had the delegates there was talk of a “brokered convention”. But if they’d robbed Trump they’d have been shooting themselves in the foot as he and his supporters wouldn’t have gone silently into the night. Heck, he was accused of threatening riots if they dared!
At the Democrats’ event, Sanders’ supporters were basically abandoned by their man as they tried to process the corruption that might have deprived him of the nomination. It was quite a spectacle and it was definitely a betrayal on multiple levels. Then was the opportunte time to start a sucessor organization not after you’d reaffirmed your commitment to a corrupt status quo. Now he can’t be taken seriously.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@jefe
The NAACP is now and has always been an organization with a bi-racial focus and bi-racial leadership. The majority of the founders were White.
At this juncture, the NAACP is a political shill organization that has become a tool for the Democratic Party. They consider their corporate donors their true constituents. They are top-heavy and ineffectual. They spend most of their time and money with glittering galas, conventions, issuing press releases, corporate fundraising and “image” awards.
This is exemplified by divisions between the national organization and some local chapters like the Bridgeport, Connecticut chapter and the national NAACP. A local official explained his concerns:
”Jimmie Griffin, a former Waterbury branch president, blamed the state and national branches for the local chaos. Local branch memberships are administered through the national office and the state branch serves a supervisory role over each local branch. “It’s just coming to the surface that the local branches have been neglected over the years,” said Griffin, who served as state NAACP president from 2001 to 2004.
He received a three-year suspension of his life membership for taking his complaints about the Waterbury branch public and forwarding emails to the media. He is also accused of making defamatory and false accusations on Facebook, he said.
“Anyone that stands up and says they need to change the way they (the national leadership) do business, they suspend them,” Griffin said. “It’s a hypocrisy to me that they operate the way they do. I think they’re more concerned with the brand name and fundraising than with the members.”
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/NAACP-in-turmoil-on-local-national-levels-4469554.php
◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉◉
The organization I have in mind would be organized by and focused entirely on the needs of ordinary Black people. It would function as an independent political organization, operating in ways similar to Jewish political organizations. A confederation of local Black organizations with a common purpose and goal: Black political power and accountability at the local, county, state and federal levels. That means making concrete demands of candidates. It also means helping to elect and hold accountable elected officials such as:
◉school boards
◉port authorities/commissions
◉judges
◉district attorneys
◉mayors
◉county executives
◉council persons
◉congress members
◉the president
This confederation would also work to prevent states and regional authorities from
grabbingannexing public infrastructure (airports, schools districts, ports, water systems, transit systems, roads and bridges) that majority Black cities and counties need to build an economic base to benefit their residents. One case in point is the current attempt in Jackson, MS to strip assets from the city following the sudden and mysterious death of Mayor Chokewe Lumumba. The Atlanta Blackstar noted the late Mayor Lumumba’s vision:”In 2013, attorney, human rights activist and Black nationalist Chokwe Lumumba was elected mayor of Jackson, with 87 percent of the vote. Lumumba — who co-founded the Republic of New Afrika and the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement — was a lifelong advocate of Black self-determination and called for an independent Black nation in the Blackbelt South.
As mayor, he had an agenda of increasing investment in downtown Jackson, which had lost 12 percent of its population since 1980 due to white flight to the suburbs. Further, he wanted to preserve the autonomy of the predominantly Black city — 80 percent Black and 27 percent in poverty — and prevent the type of emergency takeover and privatization measures that befell his native Detroit,”
Activist Kali Akuno described to the Atlanta Blackstar how the White governor and legislators in Mississippi are working to grab municipal assets from the citizens of Jackson, MS through a strategy of “regionalization”:
Other major goals include:
◉proportional Black representation in municipal, county, state and federal legislatures.
◉full enfranchisement of all Black adults, even those persons currently in prison. Two states, Maine and Vermont, allow citizens to vote while imprisoned.
https://www.aclu.org/map/state-criminal-re-enfranchisement-laws-map
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I am pointing out that Trump does not appear to be one of those people.”
.@ Abagond
Hmm… let’s see. He thinks Mexicans are rapists, Muslims shouldn’t be allowed in the country because they’re terrorists and Blacks are lazy.
He seems to be one of those people to me.
Just to be clear, I’m not a Trump fan. But I would feel much safer in his presence than in the presence of a Clinton.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Afrofem
Do you think it might be possible to harness some of the energy of the BLM movement into creating this type of political network? What about the local NAACP groups who are dissatisfied with the state and national hq — could the membership and leadership of those local groups theoretically break away from the NAACP and form a new organization like what you’ve outlined here?
Because it sounds fantastic! But what would it take to make it a reality? Is there already movement on the ground to create something like you propose, or is this still very much at the idea stage?
(Hmm, if only we knew of someone with experience in both community organizing and national politics who’s going to be needing a new job in January…. except, sadly, I don’t think he’d be interested.)
LikeLike
@ Fan
Trump is not aware that he is a racist! This is what I am trying to tell you!
When a Washington Post reporter asked him about his racism, Trump said:
When the reporter pointed out that a taxi driver thought Trump was racist, Trump said:
More:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-i-am-the-least-racist-person/2016/06/10/eac7874c-2f3a-11e6-9de3-6e6e7a14000c_story.html
LikeLike
@ Origin
So what would Trump have to do or say for you to think he was “particularly” racist?
LikeLike
@abagond
I just think he’s not that different from many white Americans except for the fact that he speaks so much. Even being unaware of his own racism makes him fit right in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Abagond,
He’s aware – on some level – that he’s a racist. It doesn’t matter to me that he *consciously* denies what he unconsciously does. I know he’s a racist.
LikeLike
Abagond,
Perhaps Trump suffers from multiple personality disorders, or some other type of mental condition which makes him confused/deluded and in denial.
Isn’t the latter (confused/deluded and in denial) kind of common among MANY white people??
LikeLike
@michaeljohnparker
“I think any effort to reduce American military presence or influence will make the world safer not more dangerous.”
Yes, some of Trump’s foreign policy positions are not as crazy as his persona. And for people who are against the TPP like Bernie Sanders, Trump’s opposition to it is more credible than Hillary’s flip-flopping. I don’t trust her farther than I can throw the combined weight of all the women Bill’s cheated with.
Which brings me to another point, the Clintons are vulnerable. Hillary was just under investigation for breaching national security; Bill was impeached as president for lying about his sexcapades in the Oval Office! Are they really going to attack Trump on how he treats women? They probably don’t want to open that door when people, like Juanita Broaddrick, have accused Hillary of helping to cover up Bill’s rapes. Trump WILL counterattack. This might be a negative campaign season the likes of which has never been seen before.
LikeLike
This just made me think that despite valid criticisms of Obama’s presidency his two terms have been free of salacious scandal. He would certainly have been ripped to shreds. I know gun stores will miss him though. He was good for business.
LikeLike
@Mirkwood
I’ve just realized why people have taken to calling him Drumpf (the original German last name of his paternal grandfather). I guess I was slow on the whole subliminal German/Mein Kampf/Hitler connection.
Interestingly, I looked it up and Drumpf seems to mean “trump card”. So the anglicization of his name is close to perfect and will prove kind of fitting if he does become president against many expectations.
LikeLike
Don King endorses Trump eh? that’s because they share the same hair stylist. Anyways, here’s Donald without his makeup!:
http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2015/09/10/celebrities-without-their-makeup-donald-trump-edition
LikeLike
Billary:
http://www.madmagazine.com/blog/2015/08/06/mads-next-cover-hillary-clintons-furious-road-to-the-white-house
LikeLike
@ Origin
Now the German word is spelled “Trumpf”. Wikipedia says it is dervied from “Triumph”.
LikeLike
@Herneith
“…here’s Donald without his makeup!”
Naughty, naughty! LOL,LOL,LOL!
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Solitaire
Do you think it might be possible to harness some of the energy of the BLM movement into creating this type of political network?
I’ve heard and read some BLM activists moving in that direction. BLM is already structured as a loose network focused on one issue: ending state violence against Black citizens.
The State at all levels is working to stifle and stymie the peaceful protest movement. They are subject to lots of harassment and violence from others. The propaganda effort against them is relentless and increasingly outrageous; from the dubious “Ferguson Effect” to blaming protesters for the actions of lone wolves seeking vengeance.
If they are able to survive this onslaught and move into forming a political network or confederation there will be both a steep learning curve and a tight slalom through internal and external obstacles.
One obstacle will be efforts by groups like the NAACP to attach itself to the budding network and dilute their effectiveness. The NAACP is already moving in that direction by co-opting messaging and trying to muscle their way onto the stage. This Guardian article describes the uneasy relationship between the two:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/18/naacp-convention-black-lives-matter-cincinnati
I hope this crop of activists navigates all of the obstacles and begins the work of organizing. As Sean Posey of the Hampton Institute think tank concluded in his 2015 article, What Time Is It?: Black Lives Matter, The Gary Convention, and Electoral Politics,
http://www.hamptoninstitution.org/BLM-gary-convention-electoral-politics.html#.V55_lY5qYu0
Rage can fuel the beginnings of a movement, but nihilism is a road to nowhere.
LikeLike
@Kartoffel
Thanks
LikeLike
“This just made me think that despite valid criticisms of Obama’s presidency his two terms have been free of salacious scandal.”
@ Origin
I who have an inherent distrust of all politicians (not named Cynthia McKinney) recall a Black woman being gunned downed/killed in her car while trying to crash through a security gate at/near the White House. There was a small infant in her car at the time of the shooting.
There’s likely much more to that story than we’ve been told aside from the spin (unknown) sources have put in the news to paint this woman as a mental case.
The frequency of coverups that happen in government is mind boggling.
LikeLiked by 3 people
in addition there’s all the false flag shootings and bombings. okay lets just call them bizarre.
(https://youtu.be/Az2neZzL6UA)
LikeLike
@Lord of Mirkwood
“Bernie did NOT sell out! ”
Maybe he’s just a chicken. After all, we saw what happened to that DNC data analyst who was executed less than 2 weeks before the email scandal.
“He’s not even a Democrat; he went back to being an Independent after the convention.”
Right, if he was such an Independent he would have run as one, and not as a Democrat. He sold out the moment he decided to do so.
LikeLike
To be honest, I don’t want any of these idiots to become president. Not…a…one.
LikeLike
@Fan …
@ Lord of Mirkwood
Dream on. Trump does not have a clue. In my experience, at least 95% of White people do not think they are racist. How has Trump shown he is any different? From everything I know about him, he is a million miles away from belonging to that 5%.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So true. Bush didn’t think he was a racist either. In fact most Republicans don’t think they’re racist. Hillary Super Predator Clinton doesn’t think she’s a racist. That obliviousness is a hallmark of the pathology.
(https://youtu.be/Az2neZzL6UA)
LikeLike
He’s probably no more racist than Hillary, come to think of it. Conservative racism vs. liberal racism. His is the blunt vocal kind. Hers is the stabyouintheback kind.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Dream on. Trump does not have a clue.”
Abagond
Trump has to have a clue!
WHY?
Because TRUMP KNOWS he’s inspires, pleases and attracts Skin Heads, Neo-Nazis, the KKK, Tea Party Biscuits (or whatever), David Duke, plus the ratchet white folks who want to *take back* or *return* their Amerika to its grand old days of yore!
Just because he may NOT call himself a racist, doesn’t mean he doesn’t know/recognize, on some level, that he IS a racist.
I find that you’re the one dreaming about Trump and the nature of the game – which is incredible because you seemed to once know that DENIAL is point one in the game of racism/white supremacy! Trump knows what he’s doing, and how he’s duping … playing the game! It is the nature of 99.999% of all politicians to lie so they can get (or remain) in office.
It’s amazing how Amerikans willingly don blinders and overlook their largely moral-less political class’ penchant for crimes and continual lying.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Expert report: Evidence proves election fraud and Bernie WON the Democratic nomination
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Expert_report%3A_Evidence_proves_election_fraud_and_Bernie_WON_the_Democratic_nomination/53118/0/38/38/Y/M.html
The above piece is for all you voters who still believes that your vote counts for what YOU say it counts for.
LikeLike
@ Fan
I agree Trump is a liar, but that is no excuse to believe whatever we want about him.
Here is how I think of it:
1. In my experience, the sort of White people who know they are racist are WAAAY less racist than Trump. It is not even close.
2, As far as I know, Trump has given no sign that he knows he is racist.
So, for now, I assume he does not know.
LikeLike
Trump does not belive he is a racist because he treats everybody “equally”.
That doesn’t mean people can’t view his actions or comments as racist.
LikeLike
@ Lord of Mirkwood
You have much to learn. Even David Duke thinks he is not a racist:
http://www.azquotes.com/quote/928988
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Lord of Mirkwood
Over and over again I have asked racist trolls if they are racist. They all say no.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Lord of Mirkwood
I am not saying that you and Fan hope he becomes president. I am saying you are fooling yourselves if you think Trump knows he is a racist.
LikeLike
Racism is pervasive. For example, I used to follow what I would call an enlightenment website. Higher consciousness and all that jazz. I was digging it. And then a guest post (not the host thank god) talked about the Tamir Rice shooting in terms of him being a thug. And of course the commentary continued in that vein. Not once did any of these seekers of enlightenment exhibit any empathy for this child, nor did the host interject. And of course none of these people would consider themselves racists. That kind of soured me on enlightenment. If this is the level of zen, then spare me.
Just thought I’d throw that in. But what I think should not be overlooked is the social engineering operation going on here in the Clinton/Trump conundrum. I get’s leery when I see public relations through the almost uniform voice of the mainstream media trying to funnel us into a particular choice. In this case using the threat of Trump’s obvious racism and vindictive nature to push us into voting for Clinton. He might get us into WWIII!!! So they say. Well Clinton, with her desire to antagonize Russia with a no fly zone in Syria is much more likely to start a war with Russia. So that’s a bogus reason for voting for Clinton. And she has proved her racism in the mass incarceration policies. She is arguably just as racist as Trump but in a more insidious way. So that goes a long way to negating that justification for voting for her. Stabyouintheback racism as opposed to blunt vocal racism.
Some choice. I’m tellin’ya. Vote Green.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Abagond
Next you’ll be stating that most “race realists” are unaware that they’re – race realists.
Or, monkeys don’t really know that they’re monkeys.
Most white people know on some level that it’s culturally/morally expedient (nowadays called Politically Correct – the GREAT PRETENSE) to be viewed on the right side of the racial equation.
Do you think Trump’s backstage (when he’s alone with his family, friends, closest associates) behavior is the same as his front-stage (in the PUBLIC) behaviors??
If you say yes, then you have some research/reading to do.
LikeLike
@Fan …
I agree that they know on some level but many don’t acknowledge their racism. That is, they don’t accept or admit it even to themselves. It’s possible to deceive yourself in such a way that it does not feel like a conscious decision. Social pressure is a great way to trigger that behavior and nobody wants to be labeled a racist these days.
I suppose that people who date and marry heterosexual spouses then later come out as gay represent another manifestation of self-deception under social pressure. They really had to have known on some level before getting married but they couldn’t acknowledge. Perhaps they thought a husband/wive would mean they’re not gay just as some white people think the black friend or relative refutes their racism. IMO, many American white people are “closet racists”, to stretch the analogy.
LikeLike
I want the “worst” that Donald can do quantified. If its short of sending black and brown folks to internment camps, i think we’ll manage for the next four years. And if “worse” is running the country into the ground, it is already. With Clinton, there will most certainly be another war that our children have no business entering. Continued investment into private prisons and the slave catchers who send us there. No change on the police brutality front. High black unemployment. Piss poor school systems. I think things will be significantly worse than what has been going on under Barack Obama.
LikeLike
^^related to the above
A History of White Delusion
LikeLike
should donald trmp become president that would be the end of america. terrorism will increase 101%
LikeLike
this trump guy makes me sick. he talks as though he is more american than someone. all his grandparents were born non-americans. his first ancestors arrived in america in 1885. does he know when hispanics arrived in america? u think its by coincidence that california, arizona, texas ,carolina are all spanish named? some of these were spanish owned territories. let him go and read history!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans
LikeLike
It’s not he KKK we have to worry about.
It’s “intellectuals” like these with their Ivy Leauge and Yale degress who’s ideas will lead back to Jim Crow, eugenics and genocide. This white supremacy extends beyond the U.S. to Europe where Nationalist Parties are making head way. Trump is an extension of this trend towards facisim.
I think National Socialism is white supremacies next play. Capitalism has allowed non whites upward mobility in spite of racism and State interference. National Socialism protects white economic interests and closes the door on the possibility of upward mobility of non whites, Muslims ect.
Facsim originally was a reaction against Communism. Today it is a reaction against Capitalism. White supremacy is circling the wagons and moving towards National Socialism on a global scale as a last gasp to lock down the economies and the natural resources Western “democracies” control. It will lead to genocide on a scale larger the Hitler.
The discussion between Taylor and Molyneux is quite troubling and will turn your stomach. These race realists view themselves as compassionate people.
Their push for National Socialism is their final solution.
Their is active talk about full scale genocide against Muslims trending within social media from people who originally identified as conservatives, libertarians ect. This idiology is growing within the undercurrent of American society far faster then any other political idiology. It’s not out in the open like the KKK but it is far larger in numbers.
(https://youtu.be/U2RVIi6M7oM)
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rage / loftus / John Almeida is banned as a sock puppet.
LikeLike
@Afrofem and Fan
“That is why zombie and vampire movies, etc. are so popular now.
99% of the population are acting like zombies; disheveled, ragged and shuffling mindlessly through the streets. ”
(https://youtu.be/4a6YdNmK77k)
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Rage / loftus / John Almeida is banned as a sock puppet.”
Hmmmmm
LikeLiked by 1 person
Clinton had no chance against Trump until he opened his mouth, he’s similar to a teenage smartazz .
I don’t like either one
LikeLike
@michaeljohnbarker
I think the equilibirum is unstable and the possibility of open genocide of non-white people is always present. Indeed, America fighting wars it cannot lose in the M.E yet causing millions of civillian deaths could be considered neo-colonialist genocide.
We should recall that Hitler was not terribly anomalous. The Germans themselves were carrying out genocide in Africa when Hitler was just a child. The history of America also involved open genocide. IIRC, Hitler was actually inspired by the way Americans treated “indians” including their being placed in “reservations”.
Hitler’s innovation was who he was able to target with genocide. He effectively used state power to bureaucratically eliminate people who were previously considered citizens. This turning inwards of the tendencies that had long been expressed in colonial contexts was the shocker. The apologies and criminal convictions that resulted from Nazi actions against the Jews lie in stark contrast to the denials and rationalizations other groups routinely receive.
Now, of course, there are countervailing forces within the system. After having achieved a global empire a need arose to consolidate dominance and to obtain buy-in from groups that were subjugated. This was especially true after internecine warfare weakened the empire and forced a more loose connection to former colonies. The global financial, political and religious structures that now exist have an air of “universal” legitimacy even when they operate in the interest of maintaining European hegemony.
Much like Bernie Sanders, the possible democratic party sheepdog, structures within the empire that purport to operate in the interest of fairness on behalf of subjugated people also serve to nullify or cannibalize any grassroots resistance movements. They are more effective at that than achieving the goal of eliminating inequality as statistics continue to show. However, even their stated goals are an anathema to the faction which believes that the empire has the might to quash any resistance and should therefore openly pursue its interests. Ultimately, they disagree on the means not the end.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Apparently the house of representatives has pushed the IRS to investigate Hillary Clinton for potential pay-to-play allegations relating to the Clinton Foundation which has received millions in donations from governments such as Saudi Arabia.
Hillary was also paid hundreds of thousands of dollars PER SPEECH she gave on behalf of Wall Street banks after leaving the State department. She made over $2.9 million from about a dozen speeches between 2013 and 2015. It certainly raises the possibility that they were disguised kickbacks. Also, the transcripts would probably be embarassing to someone who claims she isn’t in the banks’ pockets. She has refused to release them.
In an interview, Wikileaks’ Julian Assange claimed that more information that could be damaging to Hillary Clinton is in the offing. Who knows that that will entail. Since her private email server was not under the State Department cyber-security apparatus it may have been more vulnerable to a breach. These few months are going to be ridiculous.
Finally, a little levity. Newly released Pokemon said to resemble Donald Trump.
http://mashable.com/2016/08/01/pokemon-gumshoo-trump/#YzThy8DwTEqb
LikeLiked by 1 person
Donald Trump on Fox News in July 2015:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-im-not-racist/article/2567627
LikeLike
Woody Guthrie:
Guthrie wrote that in the early 1950s about Trump’s father. Guthrie lived in his Beach Haven apartment building in Brooklyn, near Coney Island.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/22/the-unbelievable-story-of-why-woody-guthrie-hated-donald-trumps-racist-dad/
Trump’s father was arrested in 1927 at a Klan rally. He was not some curious onlooker who got swept up by the police: he was dressed as a Klansman:
http://www.vice.com/read/all-the-evidence-we-could-find-about-fred-trumps-alleged-involvement-with-the-kkk
Donald Trump himself later got in trouble in 1970s for discriminating against Black renters at his apartment buildings:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/15/doj-trump-s-early-businesses-blocked-blacks.html
Despite that, in 1983, the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal found that two “Trump Village” residential properties, were 95% White.
LikeLike
And lest anyone think I am letting Hillary Clinton off the hook:
LikeLike
Despite all that, I am voting for Hillary Clinton, and I say that as someone who has voted Green in the past, even against Bill Clinton in 1996. I have zero love for the Clintons. But the US will get through four years of her: she will simply be Bush IV.
Trump, on the other hand, even if he does not cause a constitutional crisis, will almost certainly make US politics more violent, more openly racist and limit the press. We have already seen the beginnings of that with his campaign.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Abagond,
This IS whom you’re believing in (among those in the “system”) to be in power. I doubt you’ll click on the link (see below) because you think you already know all you need to know about HRC. Nonetheless I’ll say this about her. Relatively speaking, she makes Donald Trump look like a 7 year old choir boy. Even now Bill Clinton is being watched because of his very close association with a well known convicted pedophile who owns a private island that caters to the elitist rich and powerful. And that’s the least of the current ongoing scandals surrounding HRC (Hillary Rodham Clinton).
Years from now when you’ll look back at this time with regret and sorrow, you won’t be able to say with honesty – “But, but … I didn’t know where the floodwaters were!”
Well, you’ve been told where the floodwater is, even if you don’t see fit to drink it. That’s on you.
http://arkancide.com/
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Fan …
Absolutely. In addition voting for Clinton is like voting for a third Obama term. A horrible horrible war criminal. And Hillary the center of that Obama criminality. I can’t understand why somebody, seeing all of the damage Obama has done, would vote for four more years of it. Worse. Completing the Obama trajectory she is marching us right into WWIII. With Bernie as the sheep dog and Donald as the wolf, the media is herding us in that direction.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Up to the present, who has ruined more non-white lives? Clinton or Trump?
LikeLike
Clinton easily, even without counting her coups in Libya and Honduras. Trump may have kept some black people out of his apartments but a good number are probably in prison right now thanks to the polices Clinton championed back in the 90s.
BTW, Interesting infographic on the election voters from NYT
LikeLike
@ Nomad
To be clear, given the amount of voting manipulation/corruption I’ve observed in Amerika over several presidential election cycles, I haven’t changed my stance about voting.
Votes?
It’s like watching a Magic Show… now you see it, now you don’t!
Or, watching nothing get done about the people responsible about the bad water in Michican, or predatory mortgage loans, or cops who murder unarmed people. Or, any number of horrific war crimes politicians working for the war industry (along with other industrial complexes) get away scot-free.
It looks like a lot of things in Amerika are indeed rigged! Let’s see voting fix that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Origin
” The New York Times Just Accidentally Proved US Elections are Illegitimate
When counting only eligible voters, the number rises to a paltry 14 percent. This is the total between Trump and Clinton combined, which means the number of people who voted for just one of these candidates is actually much lower. While these statistics seem surprisingly low, the New York Times reminds us that the data on primary voters this year is nearly identical to figures on voter participation in the 2008 primaries. While many Americans may be disconcerted by these statistics, which show that a very small minority of voters are choosing the candidates who will eventually rule over the rest of the country, this is nothing new. “
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“will almost certainly make US politics more violent”
Was it not Hillary who said her worst “enemy” was Republicans?
And Hillary’s record of political violence is unparalleled:
And Sanders/Clinton/anti-Trump protesters have committed far more acts of violence than Trump supporters. It’s not even a close comparison.
“more openly racist”
Hillary has said her fair share of racist stuff in public. I’m fairly sure her record beats Trump’s.
“and limit the press. ”
Who needs to limit the press when most of the mainstream media is on your side? The reporting is clearly one-sided: don’t talk about Hillary’s f ups or lies, but smear Trump.
And the media is blacklisting people who speak out against Clinton, such as what happened to the CIA agent, Gary Bryne, who served in the first Clinton White House.
@MrTekKnowledge, Fan, Nomad
Totally agree and it’s a shame how that goes completely ignored or forgotten by the media and Clinton’s supporters.
LikeLike
*Secret Service agent
LikeLike
@ resw
Do tell.
LikeLike
@ resw
So you see no difference between this:
and this:
???
Or do you prefer Trump because at least he is more “honest” and “blunt”?
LikeLike
@ MrTekKnowledge
And up to the present, who has had more power to do harm? And who is actually promising to do harm once becoming president?
They will both do harm once in power, but the one who is already promising actual harm will probably wind up doing more of it in the end.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The most dangerous one is the one plotting war with Russia.
I actually like the idea that Trump ‘has a relationship’ with Russia. Maybe his won’t be such a bellicose administration. This Obama agenda of encroaching on Russia must end. And though I am not voting for either, better Trump than Hillary.
LikeLike
@abagond
Sure, here are a few examples, some you might recall:
The CPT joke made with DiBlasio, telling a Ferguson church “all lives matter”, the whole “super predators” reference, and my personal favourite: when she told a black congregation, the House “has been run like a plantation, and YOU know what I’m talking about”
Disparaging Indians:
Hillary said, ““I love this quote. It’s from Mahatma Gandhi. He ran a gas station down in St. Louis for a couple of years. Mr. Gandhi, do you still go to the gas station?”
Disparaging Native Americans:
“I have a problem with men who get off the reservation with the way they behave and how they speak”
@”So you see no difference between this:”
Well that’s apples and oranges. Plenty of Clinton hecklers have been forcibly removed too.
@”Or do you prefer Trump because at least he is more “honest” and “blunt”?”
No. I don’t think one flavour of racism is more preferable than another. But if your argument is ever, vote for Hillary because Trump is racist, then I have to wonder why you’re choosing to ignore Hillary’s racism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Let’s not forget the other reason for unified drumbeat against Trump coming from the establishment, which has much to hide. Trump earlier in his campaign indicated that he might be open to investigating 911 by his acceptance of documentation sent to him by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which the establishment candidates refused. The corruptoids have no interest in examining 911. Look how long it took Obama to release the 28 pages. 911 represents the greatest crime of treachery in US history. The criminal cabal that is in control of our government cannot allow a president to come to power that might examine that crime. I don’t know if Donald would do it or not. But there is that fear of it that has the criminal cabal running scared. Both Democrats and Republicans, Wall Street and MSM. Running scared. That’s why they’re pulling out all the stops. Throwing everything they possibly can at him and hyping it to the max. You’re a loose cannon, Donny. Better watch your back.
Plus he was a part of that Birther movement. If he picks that back up again Obama’s CIA connection will come under scrutiny (with his alias Barry Soetero, and multiple SSNs). It may lead to questions about how much influence the CIA has over the president. Awkward, to say the least.
LikeLike
” this post really isn’t about how good Hillary is. It’s about the fact that Drumpf is so bad, so Hitlerian, that he needs to be stopped, even if it means having to hold our nose and vote for an unsatisfactory centrist.”
baa..a…a…a….
LikeLike
@Lord of Mirkwood
“It’s about the fact that Drumpf is so bad, so Hitlerian, that he needs to be stopped”
That’s nonsubstantive, but if by “bad” or “Hitlerian” you mean, invading a country (Libya) and killing civilians, then Hillary is bad and Hitlerian. If you mean targeting a minority group for confinement, then Hillary is bad and Hitlerian. That’s why I call her Hitlery.
@nomad
Good point. He also re-shed light on the Clinton Foundation, and we see the IRS has recently opened an investigation. There is much more to come, and Assange said he has stuff far worse than the leaked DNC emails, which cost the life of a DNC staffer. And Trump is questioning why Clinton immediately hired Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was caught rigging the system, because God knows the mainstream media won’t ask any questions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. It would be different if you were asking us to stop Trump with a candidate that was marginally better than Trump. But what we are to stop him with is a candidate that is apparently worse. The likelihood of WWIII under Clinton trumps Trump’s racism. That’s what needs to be stop. And what is truly sad is that there appears to be no candidate that the Democratic party can put forth that is so bad that black people won’t vote for. No limit. No line in the sand. Where they can say this candidate is too incompetent, to corrupt, too evil that they will not vote for him’her. That’s a terrible prescription for the future.
It’s zero hour this election season. There is no lesser evil this go round. Time to leave the Democratic party.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Rage / loftus / John Almeida is banned as a sock puppet.”
probably sent here to stoke the fear
LikeLike
@ resw
Apparently not, since you seem to think that a CPT joke is on the same level as calling for a ban on Muslims. Neither is good, of course, but one is much worse than the other.
I have hardly ignored Hillary’s racism:
I am not making a bad guy/good guy Hollywood dichotomy argument. I am making a damage control argument.
Because Trump’s racism is far more open and because he has already promised harm, he is worse, way worse. To me that is not some kind of refreshing honesty. It is more like a husband threatening to beat up his wife. When someone threatens to hurt you, you have to assume they mean it.
That does NOT mean Hillary Clinton will not do harm either. Given her past, she probably will. But, from the way it looks now, not nearly as much. Trump has gone above and beyond her dog whistles or that of any US politician on the national stage since the fall of Jim Crow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ resw
Has Trump ever sat down and talked with Black Lives Matter? No. Instead he condones violence against them and calls for a police crackdown. Wow. There is a difference, an extremely important difference. It is not just one of “flavour” either.
LikeLike
@ resw, etc
The Reagan Revolution of the 1980s gave us the Clintons. I shudder to think what a Trump Revolution would give us.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
What is your take on Gary Johnson? I hear he is running third party. Would you consider him a better option?
LikeLike
I don’t think Putin being an “autocrat” should prevent the US from having a relationship with him. The US has both had diplomatic relationships with autocrats and removed democratically elected governments. Heck, Hillary, Bill, and Chelsea Clinton’s foundation accepted between $10,000,000 – 25,000,000 in donations from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country that’s an absolute monarchy where women can’t drive.
https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors?category=%2410%2C000%2C001+to+%2425%2C000%2C000
The pushing of Russia has nothing to do with morals and everything to do with geopolitics. The main “issue” with Putin is that he acts in Russia’s interest. And I think he has legitimate concerns about being encircled just as the US was concerned during the Cuban Missile Crisis. When he retaliates the media story is going to be that he’s a madman when the tensions have been building for a while.
Back, on the subject of the Clinton Foundation: it got over $25,000,000 in donations from the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canadian) and another >$25,000,000 donation from Frank Giustra’s Radcliffe Foundation. Look up Frank Giustra and you’ll learn than he’s a Canadian businessman involved in the mining industry, among other things. This is significant considering that the next President will have to make decisions concerning the Keystone XL pipeline. Clinton has both flip-flopped on the pipeline (now opposes) and claimed a position as an environmentally aware presidential candidate. Will the money talk?
The Clinton Gisutra Enterprise Partnership has also been criticized as a way to hide donors.
Perhaps if people are worried about Russia because Trump didn’t call Putin Hitler they should take a closer look at the trail of Clinton crookedness. All of this occurred in the context of a secretary of state that explicitly kept her email server out of the goverment’s direct control and deleted “personal” mail when an investigation started. Now there’s a chance she’ll be rewarded with a position of even greater responsibility and power from which to be corrupt even after probably cheating her way to the democratic nomination?
I don’t think Trump’s pandering to the racists is appropriate and he’s been doing it for a while. He was a vocal participant in the whole Obama birther conspiracy that primarily appealed to those who hated that a black family was in the White House. Though we know Hillary wasn’t above this kind of thing (superpredator) and Bill tried to paint Obama as a niche black candidate in South Carolina during Hillary’s last run.
Anyway, knowing also that Trump admittedly participated in the system as a lobbyist, my initial instinct was that there is no way he should be president. The problem is that when it has come to the point of making an informed decision, I cannot conscientiously support Hillary Clinton even though she’s the candidate with the best chance of beating Trump. The best argument for Clinton, that Trump is a greater evil, is actually debatable! Yikes.
LikeLike
@Sharinalr
Johnson would have to get enough of the electoral collage to throw the presidential election into the house and senate. So if he won a couple of states that might happen. Then the House would vote for who the president would be from the top three candidates and the Senate would vote on the vice president on the top two candidates. I believe the newly elected House and Senate would make the vote so if the Democrats made some gains we may end up with Hillary anyway.
An event like that might create a constitutional crisis lol
Tomorrow CNN will hold their second town hall meeting with Johnson and Weld. Johnson is not the greatest communicator and its hard to pin down exactly what he would do about Isis. That said he is the strongest anti war candidate. Johnson looks good on paper. Successful businessman, two term Republican governor elected in a blue state. He is an athlete and climbed Mt. Everest. He just seems like he’s stoned all the time.
Weld is the money man, CFR and belt way insider. They have a super pac that was originally intended for the Rand Paul candidacy. It expected to raise around 50 million which may seem like a lot but when you figure the other two parties are going to spend close to a billion dollars it really isn’t much.
For the moment he is an option for me but if he is not doing well in the polls before election day I may opt for Hillary.
Trump is by far the greater threat.
LikeLike
@Michael Jon Barker
Thanks for some insight. I have heard a few people bring him up and was considering giving a look at his policy, but wanted a second take on him. I am not sold on Hilary. Trump is a no and no some more.
LikeLike
@ sharina
I will be doing posts on both Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, the Green candidate.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Abagond said,
“The Reagan Revolution of the 1980s gave us the Clintons. I shudder to think what a Trump Revolution would give us.”
To build on that Hillary will be an extension of Obama, just as Obama was an extension of Bush and Bush an extension of Clinton that originated with Reagan. As Afrofem pointed out they are two wings from the same bird.
Trump on the other hand is a completely different beast. As Mr. Khan pointed out Trump has never read the constitution.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I posted this list on the Trump page, added some more and none of his positions resembles anything that is constitutional. It’s fascism and Americans cant recognize it.
1. Trump wants to deport 11 million humans and create a special deportation force to knock down doors and check papers. He also talked about deporting American born children of illegal immigrants.Trump wants to ban an entire religion from immigrating to this country “temporarily”.
2. Trump want to force American businesses like Apple to make their products here. He wants to add special taxes and anti trust regulations to break up companies like Amazon. He will favor companies owners like Peter Thiel who support him.
3. Trump will crack down on the Free Press. He already banned the Washington Post by revoking their press credentials. He will use the FCC to fine his critic, Rich Lowry. He will open up libel laws to silence his critics within the press. He will allow access to those in the press that write favorable stories of him.
4. Trump’s xenophobic descriptions of Mexican immigrants as rapists and murders collectives all Hispanics. All American born non whites will have their patriotism questioned.
5. Trump has no idea what Black Lives Matters stands for nor is he interested. In his mind Blacks and Mexicans cause crime.
6. Trump says the police are just “misunderstood” and has no empathy for the victims of police violence. He will exponentially increase the number of law enforcement across the board, from immigration agents, counter terrorism units, local police funding and increase State agent privileges. That is what he means by “cutting the red tape”.
7. Trump says he opposes Hillary’s foreign policy yet he will expand it in the “war on terror” and use the military no differently then neo liberals or neo cons. He will end the Iran deal. He will send more troops to the Middle East to “fight Isis” and continue droning.
8. Trump will bring back water boarding and torture as well as kill the family members of suspected terrorists.
9. Trump wants all Muslims to register in a national registry and will put all Mosques under surveillance.
10. Trump wants to restart warrantless searches and allow drones to spy on American citizens. Trump says he supports reauthorizing the Patriot Act and NSA Metadata Collection. “I assume when I pick up my telephone people are listening to my conversations anyway, if you want to know the truth. It’s pretty sad commentary, but I err on the side of security.”
So its OK if Trump listens in on your phone conversations and follows your social media.
11. Trump encourages violence against protesters and has a personal business history of discriminating against Blacks.
12. He says he is not sure whether he would have interned the Japanese but believes that FDR ultimately did the right thing.
13. “We’re going to put an end to that,” Trump said during a post-convention interview with The New York Times. “We’re going to federalize every police department in this country. We’re going to eliminate the red tape and it’s going to give police the ability to do their jobs effectively and, believe me, this is something that’s going to happen within my first one hundred days in office.”
Translation: The hammer is coming down. Once he follows through with this, crime rates will plummet due to sheer terror, and he will take credit for making America “safe” again even though crime rates have actually gone down over the last 20 years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We got AEDPA (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act) under President Bill Clinton after the Oklahoma City and WTC bombings and the USA Patriot Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) under President G.W Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks. They have been critcised for limiting habeas corpus and making it easier to search and surveil without warrants. It seems that those who have presumably read the constitution are doing their best to weaken aspects of it.
I agree 100% that Trump is a worrisome unknown quantity. However that has the effect of making me question whether some of my concerns are valid whereas with Hillary Clinton I know that they are.
LikeLike
@Michael Jon Barker
Good list. Nice to see it all laid out.
LikeLike
I hadn’t heard some of those things in the list so I had to look them up. The first one I checked, because it shocked me, was the idea that all American Muslims should register in a database.
I found this politifact article about it:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/nov/24/donald-trumps-comments-database-american-muslims/
The final analysis was that Trump didn’t exactly propose that and he eventually denied it saying that a reporter brought it up. However, I find this thing to be troublesome about him: he doesn’t explicitly disavow outrageous ideas like that when they are brought up because he doesn’t want to alienate the portion of the American public that would be 100% OK with it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Origin
I got that source from CNN.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/20/opinions/obeidallah-trump-anti-muslim/
LikeLike
Fear Trump? “the real damage begins on January 20, 2017 when Barack Obama hands over his office to Hillary Clinton, a violent and lying criminal and her equally corrupt compatriots. They are the people we ought to fear.”
http://www.blackagendareport.com/trump_russia_democratic_lies
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, you might want to fear him. For the same reason you should fear Clinton.
http://aanirfan.blogspot.com/2016/08/trump-and-war.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t see how Trump would be any less bellicose than Hillary. Especially domestically.
How much does he plan to reduce the size of the military? the police force? the national guard?
LikeLike
“The solution is to strongly oppose both the Saudis and Putin. ”
That’s bogus. All Russia is doing is resisting US and NATO aggression. US fomented the coup in Ukraine. US is bulldozing Syria. NATO is surrounding Russia with military bases. Putin would be a fool not to react to that. Saudi Arabia is an entirely different situation. It is indeed, in contrast to Russia, ” one of the worst regimes on the face of the Earth. “
LikeLiked by 2 people
@jefe
“I don’t see how Trump would be any less bellicose than Hillary.”
Fear them both. And vote for neither.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“‘Apparently not, since you seem to think that a CPT joke is on the same level as calling for a ban on Muslims.”
I don’t think race and religion are equatable. Regardless, Trump also said, “I’m looking now at territory. People were so upset when I used the word Muslim. Oh, you can’t use the word Muslim. Remember this. And I’m OK with that, because I’m talking territory instead of Muslim.”
And no, Trump’s discrimination against foreigners of a certain religion or territory is no worse than Hillary’s policies of discrimination of Americans of a certain race.
“Because Trump’s racism is far more open and because he has already promised harm, he is worse, way worse. ”
How is someone (Trump) who says something on the campaign trail that you consider harmful worse than someone (Hillary) who has actually done harmful things in real life?
“Has Trump ever sat down and talked with Black Lives Matter?”
Maybe it was not in Trump’s interest to talk to them.
But I don’t buy any politician’s rhetoric, including Hillary’s rhetoric that panders to black people because she needs their votes to win. And did she actually offer BLM anything? No. And if she did, how could she be trusted given her lengthy record of lies and flip flops?
She’s been in political office for decades and blacks have nothing to show for it except higher incarceration rates, especially for nonviolent offences.
“The Reagan Revolution of the 1980s gave us the Clintons.”
I contend that a weak conservative in Bush and a strong conservative third-party candidate gave us the Clintons. Any Democrat candidate could have won under those circumstances.
But we have to ask ourselves, in the midst of one of the biggest political scandals in history, the DNC rigging, why that news is not on the front page, but Donald Trump “shifting gears” is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lord of Mirkwood
“The same thing is happening with Russia and Ukraine”
What. You mean the US was supporting Nazis in those places too?.
LikeLike
I suppose the links you sited provide proof. But have no time to go there. It’s tangential. At any rate. Russia is not the aggressor in this case. Much of what you say seems Russophobic propaganda and I want trust it until I’ve had a chance to examine the info myself. And that’s a low priority.
LikeLike
Origin and nomad are right to point out that Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to leave the Ukraine, which is no different than when Britain voted to leave the EU, and the State Department planned and supported a coup of a democratically elected regime (btw, that’s $5 billion spent meddling in Ukraine’s affairs–$5 billion that could’ve been better spent in the US). The US propaganda machine always leaves that out of the discussion.
Just as they won’t tell you that the coup’s financial supporters, including Viktor Pinchuk, donated more than anyone else in the world to the Clinton Foundation when Hillary was Secretary of State from 2009-2013.
And surprise, surprise, the US supported the coup he wanted exactly one year after Hillary resigned. I guess Hillary thought a year was sufficient time to distance herself from that mess.
And Victoria Nuland, who served under Bill, and in Hillary’s State Dept., was caught on tape deciding who would serve as Yanukovych’s successor, in addition to the more infamous “Fu(k the EU” comment.
She will no doubt be a top contender for Secretary of State if Hillary wins. How she never got fired is beyond me.
But it goes to show how corrupt Hillary is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
FUCK whoever said “let him win” I’ll be damned if I’ll be subjected to violence and mayhem all because your ass wants to watch the world burn.
LikeLiked by 1 person
bullthis Lord of Mirkwood
LikeLike
@resw
Because if the Clintons can do all that with just dog whistles, think how much worse it will be if an open racist comes to power. Even apart from his policies, it will move the political culture in a markedly more racist direction.
You keep doing these false moral equivalences to avoid the fact that Trump condones political violence. Many countries have become inured to political violence. The US does not have to be one of them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“Because if the Clintons can do all that with just dog whistles, think how much worse it will be if an open racist comes to power. ”
Dog whistles??? Really? They have been openly racist, if not more so, and I’ve given just a few examples above as to Hillary (I can write a book on Bill’s racism). So they’re not hiding anything, and you saw how Hillary unabashedly proclaimed her friendship with the longest serving KKK member in Congress. And worse, they’ve put their racism into policies that still unfairly affect blacks.
Sorry, I don’t believe for a second that Trump will be any worse, and no I am not voting for him.
“You keep doing these false moral equivalences to avoid the fact that Trump condones political violence”
No, in response to your insinuations that Hillary’s racism is somehow tolerable, which makes no sense to me, I respectfully disagree because I believe all forms of racism are intolerable. And Hillary is much worse because I believe actions speak louder than words, especially some desperate politician’s campaign rhetoric.
And if you want to talk about political violence, how about the coup she planned in Ukraine, or the coup in Libya, or the many people close to her, from her dentist to her business associates to her friends, to her and Bill’s accusers who were all mysteriously shot to death.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ resw
That is an extremely misleading comparison because to date she has had way more power than Trump.
LikeLike
@abagond
No, Hillary’s actions serve as evidence of what she’s capable of doing. There’s no evidence to suggest Trump will be worse.
Trump has power too. He’s a billionaire. Is not money power?
We saw that it took a paltry $8.6 million donation to the Clinton Foundation from a Ukrainian oligarch to get the State Dept. to support a coup. It took only $100k to $250k for Raj Fernando, who had absolutely no national security experience to be appointed by Clinton to the State Dept’s Sensitive Intelligence Board.
I think it’s safe to say that if Trump wanted political favours, he would have got them from Clinton and others.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another thing to consider. Even if Trump gets elected, how effective can he be working against both the Democratic and Republican parties? That solidarity that the Republicans have been known for will be gone. It’s a divided party that will likely thwart Trump at every turn. How wickedly ironic! For eight years we’ve had a Democratic president that governed like a Republican. Now we’re about to have a Republican president that the Republicans disdain. Teh heh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The British separatist minority in Ireland SUCCEEDED in hijacking the six northern counties by illegitimate and undemocratic gerrymandering in 1921, keeping part of Ireland as a British colony and making the government of the Irish Free State fearful of antagonizing the UK. The same thing is happening with Russia and Ukraine.”
As usual, Lordy if full of it. Let’s review what happened in Ukraine. The elected government was overthrown by nationalist thugs backed by the USA. They wanted to impose their policies on the Russian regions of that nation. The Russian speakers weren’t having it, so they set up their own government unofficially backed by Russia. As for Crimea, the Russians, who have important military facilities there, took it outright with the backing of the people of that region. Moral of the story, don’t start a fight you can’t finish. The links Lordy provided above are just as bs as his argument of Russian invasion. Putin the new Hitler, ha, bs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Even if Trump gets elected, how effective can he be working against both the Democratic and Republican parties?”
Don’t forget that US presidents have the ability to create executive laws (an ability not explicitly given them by the Constitution, imo) with a mere swipe of their pens.
So much for checks and balances…
LikeLiked by 1 person
@resw
“Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to leave the Ukraine”
Indeed they did and this is a fact often missing from the media when they depict the situation as an “invasion” without any nuance. Crimea’s population consists largely of ethnic Russians, up to 65%, so it’s not surprising. When Kosovo unilaterally declared independence from Serbia in 2008 the US and UK, among others, recognized it while Russia opposed. Now the US is opposed to a similar situation just because Crimea’s aligning with Russia benefits Putin.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just saw an article on CounterPunch that discusses the pitfalls of “lesser evil” voting. Penned by Thomas Barker, the article, Why Lesser Evil Voting Fuels the Growth of the Right Wing, suggests that “lesser evil” voting actually fosters the growth of the right wing like Trump in the US and Farage in the UK.
One highlight from the article:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/02/why-lesser-evil-voting-fuels-the-growth-of-the-right-wing/
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Afrofem
A very interesting take on the “lesser of the two evils” mentality. I would like to fully articulate my thoughts on the matter, but I am not sure it will come out right.
LikeLike
@Afrofem
Thanks for that perspective. I watched a video yesterday where Kshama Sawant makes a similar claim.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvH72xKpFkQ)
LikeLike
A short quote from the Kshama Sawant video I posted:
LikeLiked by 1 person
She went on to say that the first step towards that is voting for Jill Stein.
LikeLike
The Democratic party must die!!!
LikeLike
@sharinalr
Thinking and writing are works in progress. It’s ok to express your thoughts and later evolve on a subject…that is a sign of strength, not weakness.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think their is a paradigm shift happening in the U.S.and Europe away from Capitalism and the mixed economies in Europe towards a socialist economy rooted in a right wing frame work of Nationalism, racism and Islamophobia. While the left works towrds a mixed economy of a softer inclusive socialism white supremacy is mutating towards National Socialism.
So I don’t see a worker revolution coming out of this with leftist ideals. Rather whites will embrace this closed economy police state because it insures their future. It will be white workers and those non whites who have assimilated a nationalistic identiy that will both support and benifit from such an arrangement.
What is happening is a back lash against multiculturalism, immigration, “free trade” and politically correct language and culture.
This coalition will welcome national health care, massive public work projects and government subsidised manufacturing.
LikeLike
@Origin
Thanks for daylighting that quote.
Sawant can be a complex figure. Sometimes she descends into jingoism and sloganeering and sometimes she is a deep, critical thinker/speaker.
During the last council elections, (in an unprecedented move) the corporate stooges on the city council publicly came out against her. She still won in a heavily White, affluent district.
Lately when something good happens through the city council, Sawant has a hand in it.
The city honchos really, really hate her and many of the citizens really, really love her. LOL!
LikeLike
@michaeljonbarker
You make some good points. There is a trend toward a “last stand” retreat by many Whites into rightwing nationalism. It is not yet a foregone conclusion that their “last stand” will actually materialize or stand for very long. Of course, they can inflict immense suffering in a few short years.
However unforeseen events can throw some serious curve balls in to the best laid plans.
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
I would love to see a new political party for the 99%. But it isn’t going to happen in time for the November elections.
The article you posted does make good points about lesser-evil voting, but in my thought process, I keep coming back to the 2000 election.
Many people then saw no real difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush. There was a similar sense that no matter which one got elected, nothing would change. I had a lot of friends and some family who voted Green that election, including in swing states. If I had voted my conscience, I would have as well, but I was very worried that doing so would just hand Bush the presidency.
And no one can convince me things would have gone the same rotten way under Al Gore. He might not have been all that different, but he would have been eons better than Bush. I don’t think 9/11 would have happened under Gore’s watch. As part of the Clinton administration, he knew how seriously they were taking Osama bin Laden as a threat — unlike Bush and his people, who ignored the advice of the outgoing adminstration. If 9/11 was actually a false-flag inside job, would Gore have done it? I don’t think so. Bush was the one who had personal reasons for wanting to take on Saddam Hussein and who was surrounded by neo-con hawks just itching for an excuse to invade oil fields in the Middle East.
So under Gore: probably no 9/11, no war in Afghanistan, no war in Iraq, no ISIS, no Guantanamo Bay, etc. We would be living in a much different world.
That is why my conscience won’t let me vote my conscience (i.e., Green). There is no way Jill Stein can win this election cycle. My vote for her would be a vote for Trump. I can’t see my way clear morally to do that. However much I dislike Hillary Clinton, I cannot agree that she is worse than Donald Trump.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Did anyone think about the implication that the next president would have on the supreme court?
Already, Congress has hold Obama hostage regarding appointing the replacement for Scalia. What would be the scenario if either got elected? Besides the current vacancy, we could have an additional 3 justices leave in the next 4 years.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
Left unanswered in discussions about “lesser evil” voting/tactical voting is why the rightwing veers off into wild extremes pulling the purported left and center/left rightward behind them? This goes on election cycle after election cycle.
Why are the Republicans (and the Tories in the UK) not chastened enough to make a course correction to the center?
What is the role of the Democrats and the UK Labour Party in the radicalization of their supposed opposition? Who benefits from the “lesser evil” theater we are forced to witness every four years?
LikeLike
Solitare said,
” I don’t think 9/11 would have happened under Gore’s watch.”
I’m not a “truther”. I belive it happened because of the history of U.S. intervention and policy going back to WW2.
The problem with “truthers” and false flag conspiracies is that they deflect away from the real reasons, the cause and effect, the blow back from American policies both foreign and domestic.
Instead it’s some internal conspiracy, the illuminati or secret societies and “it’s the government”. If such secret societies were to exist and one was to magically remove them, nothing would change because the problems are systemic both in how the State functions and how are economy is ordered.
Their would be vacancies within the corporatacracy which would immediately be filled by others lusting for power.
The only difference in a Gores presidency would be maybe he would have pushed for more green since global warmimg was his concern.
Would Gore have gone off to war ? Yes because both parties draw from the same intelligence personel. Gore would have went along with the same CIA Intel that Bush got.
It is hard for me to imagine how anything would have turned out different and I’m basing this in the fact that Obama preety much continued Bush’s foreign policy. Obama said he was the “anti war president” going in bit didn’t deliver. In fact he stepped up droning and opened up more military bases. Presidents expand the Imperialism regardless of what they say and promise.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Afrofem
I have difficulty believing the Republicans and the Democrats are secretly in cahoots on a national level. Who does benefit from it, if such is truly the case?
It wasn’t all that long ago that the Democrats were seen as veering too wildly to the extreme left, trying to fit too many disparate groups under their umbrella — that was the common explanation for why they couldn’t beat Reagan and were seen as rapidly becoming irrelevant.
LikeLike
@ Michael Jon Barker
“I belive it happened because of the history of U.S. intervention and policy going back to WW2.”
I agree completely with that statement. The reason I don’t think 9/11 would have happened under Gore isn’t due to conspiracy theories. It’s because I think his administration would have been paying closer attention and prevented the attack. It’s possible, though, that they would have failed to do so either on 9/11 or a subsequent terrorist attack. I do think Gore would have continued Clinton’s policies of sanctions against Iraq, along with the occasional air raid, which I opposed.
“Would Gore have gone off to war ? Yes because both parties draw from the same intelligence personel. Gore would have went along with the same CIA Intel that Bush got.”
I don’t believe for a second that the CIA tricked Bush’s administration into going to war. Rather, I think the CIA provided the administration with the cooked intel they wanted. What Bush himself believed, who knows? That doofus is a few bricks short of a load. But there is absolutely no way the CIA fooled Rumsfeld and Cheney.
Gore might have gone to war, but he might have instead focused on an intense manhunt for bin Laden. This would have admittedly still led to bloodshed and probably the loss of innocent lives, but not on the same scale. There’s a big difference between going after a mass murderer and declaring war on Afghanistan.
“The only difference in a Gores presidency would be maybe he would have pushed for more green since global warmimg was his concern.”
There would have been at least one more: Roberts and Alito wouldn’t be sitting on the Supreme Court.
“It is hard for me to imagine how anything would have turned out different and I’m basing this in the fact that Obama preety much continued Bush’s foreign policy. Obama said he was the “anti war president” going in bit didn’t deliver.”
I understand your point, and I am very disappointed in Obama’s war-mongering. But I think it’s much more difficult to get out of a war once it starts than it is to not get into one at all. I really think we had a much better chance not to go to war under Gore than under Bush, and if we had still gone to war, there’s a good chance it would have been a much different war with different outcomes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One of the greatest arguments against Trump, for me, is that his rhetoric emboldens avowed racists. A backlash to the Obama presidency was inevitable and Trump led the charge as a leading “birther”. Birtherism was really a racist dogwhistle for “that N shouldn’t be in the White House”. I think it’s despicable to claim that Obama has divided the nation then pander to racist sentiment for support.
OTOH, when will the Dems be abandoned for their own corruption? Will the Republican candidate ever be tolerable enough for people to take the risk? Solitaire (not to single you out) wouldn’t have voted Green in the Bush/Gore race because of concerns that Bush would become president. Now that the choice is between Clinton and Trump, the situation has repeated itself. If this continues then there really is no way out of the bind of supporting candidates that don’t actually represent one’s interests.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Don’t forget that US presidents have the ability to create executive laws (an ability not explicitly given them by the Constitution, imo) with a mere swipe of their pens.”
Somebody shoulda told Obama that. Sure it will be different for Trump, though. I doubt that he will be as spineless as Obama. Still, he’ll have a tough row to hoe. Unlike with Obama, liberals and black folk will be up in arms. Fighting back instead of being lullabied into total capitulation like they were with O.
At any rate, I ain’t running scared from Trump. Stop Trump Fundamentalists Can Bite Me
http://www.blackagendareport.com/bite_me_stiop_trump_fundamentalists
LikeLike
@ resw
So I gather that to you the election is meaningless: politicians are puppets of the rich and their words are meaningless. In that case comparing Trump and Clinton, much less voting, is a waste of time. Why are you here?
LikeLike
@Solitair
To be fair Bill Clinton and the Democrats thought Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Gore would have carried that over.
What Gore would have done different is speculative on both our parts. I’m just more skeptical I guess.
“So there was an organization that is set up to monitor whether Saddam Hussein had gotten rid of his weapons of mass destruction. And that organization, UNSCOM, has made clear it has not.”
– Madeline Albright, Bill Clinton’s Secretary of State, November 10, 1999
“The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons.”
– President Bill Clinton, February 17, 1998
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
– Democratic Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
“There is a very easy way for this problem to be resolved, and that is for Saddam Hussein to do what he said he would do … at the end of the Gulf War when he signed the cease-fire agreement: destroy his weapons of mass destruction and let the international community come in and see that he has done that. Period.” – Samuel Berger, Bill Clinton’s National Security Advisor, February 18, l998
“We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
– Letter to Bill Clinton signed by 27 U.S. Senators, including Democrats John Kerry, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Mikulski, Carl Levin, Chris Dodd, Tom Daschle, and others, October 9, 1998
“Saddam has delayed; he has duped; he has deceived the inspectors from the very first day on the job. I have another chart which shows exactly what I’m talking about. From the very beginning, he declared he had no offensive biological weapons programs. Then, when confronted with evidence following the defection of his son-in-law, he admitted they had produced more than 2100 gallons of anthrax. … But the UN inspectors believe that Saddam Hussein still has his weapons of mass destruction capability—enough ingredients to make 200 tons of VX nerve gas; 31,000 artillery shells and rockets filled with nerve and mustard gas; 17 tons of media to grow biological agents; large quantities of anthrax and other biological agents.”
– William Cohen, Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Defense, February 18, l998
LikeLike
Ever thought about how hard Gore tried to lose that race? It’s almost like he was under some type of threat.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
“I have difficulty believing the Republicans and the Democrats are secretly in cahoots on a national level. Who does benefit from it, if such is truly the case?”
I have no difficulty knowing that the Dems and the Repubs are openly in cahoots on a national level. The primary beneficiaries of their shared agenda are the usual suspects: the military/industrial/surveillance complex and the Billionaire Class.
They are in complete accord on a range of issues from prison expansion to letting Wall Street off the hook for their many transgressions against the American people.
Even now, the Dems and the Repubs are laying low on the TPP/TiSA/TTIP/
corporate governance“trade” bills until the lame duck session of Congress after the November elections. Then when many Americans turn their attention to friends and family, they plan to sign the sovereignty of this nation away——-Obama’s greatest priority.Both Dems and Repubs are invested in passing this travesty. Their payment? Jobs as lobbyists, corporate board members, tenured professors, rainmakers at law firms, media spokespeople and jobs for their kids and spouses.
To me, their supposed political differences are mere theater. Behind the curtain they serve the same masters.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Lesser evilism anyone?
“I say HRC may not even be the lesser evil. And if she is, it’s by so narrow a margin as to make it a non consideration in electoral choice. Please don’t assume I back Trump. He’s unleashed humanity’s basest instincts, as rightwing populists do. But what would I do if I were an American? I’d throw heart and soul into a real alternative to a phony democracy that threatens more of the same: warmongering and its legacy of chaos across the globe, the continuing export of American jobs to Asia, and the continual subordination of tackling climate change to the needs of profit.”
LikeLike
@abagond
Why make such assumptions? My original point was only that Hillary is guilty of the same, and worse, as Trump. And the double standards here are absurd.
If Americans did not feel so indebted to the Bloods and the Crips, we could actually rid our system of this pay for play nonsense. Stop putting these two gangs in power, and prosecute them for their crimes.
Hillary is terrible. Why you’re willing to elect someone you admittedly despise is beyond me. Since Trump is out of the question for you, why not consider a third-party candidate? And “they don’t have a chance of winning” is not a good answer! In a democracy you have a choice and are under no obligation to choose between the Bloods and the Crips.
LikeLike
It’s really weird. The only thing holding us captive is our belief in the two party system. If all of these liberals voted their conscience they’d be free tomorrow. By which I mean January 20 or whenever it is that the prez is inaugurated. The Green Party is standing for all of the things you say you stand for. And at this moment in time after the Obama administration has revealed the Democratic party to be a sham and when the two most despicable candidates in history are running for president. The time has come.
LikeLike
@ resw
You conflate everything and ignore stuff, so, yeah, for you Trump is no worse than Clinton. For me Trump is way worse. I know the US can weather a Clinton II (or Bush IV) administration. I am not so sure about a Trump administration. Making him president is like giving a two-year-old a loaded gun.
LikeLike
Only 15% of what Donald Trump says is true or mostly true. That is according to PolitiFact, which fact checked 211 of his statements.
Of the politicians I looked up on their website, Ben Carson was the lowest (7%), Mitt Romney was the highest (63%). For Hillary Clinton it is 50%.
More:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
Compare:
% true or mostly true:
84% Chuck Todd (out of 6 statements fact checked)
80% Stephen Colbert (5)
70% Michelle Obama (10)
63% Mitt Romney (206)
60% Bill Maher (10)
58% Jerry Brown (7)
54% Tim Kaine (32)
53% Michael Moore (15)
52% Bernie Sanders (106)
50% Lawrence O’Donnell (8)
50% Hillary Clinton (236)
48% Barack Obama (589)
47% George Will (32)
48% Jeb Bush (79)
43% Jon Stewart (7)
40% Gary Johnson (10)
40% Megyn Kelly (5)
40% John McCain (182)
38% Jimmy Carter (8)
37% Rachel Maddow (27)
36% Marco Rubio (141)
35% Sean Hannity (17)
35% Paul Ryan (60)
34% Rudy Giuliani (42)
34% Bill O’Reilly (21)
34% Juan Williams (6)
28% Chris Matthews (7)
22% Ted Cruz (114)
20% Al Sharpton (5)
20% Mike Pence (20)
19% Glenn Beck (31)
15% Donald Trump (211)
8% Ann Coulter (12)
7% Ben Carson (28)
6% Rush Limbaugh (35)
LikeLike
” Only 15% of what Donald Trump says is true or mostly true. ”
@ Abagond
Would you accept the testimony of someone with such a low rating?
Probably not. So why do you believe him when he claims he’s not a racist??
LikeLike
@ Fan
You are the one who said he was honest about being racist. That is why I brought it up, to show that he is not.
He lies like it was nothing, so no, I do not take what he says at face value. But I do think he thinks he is not racist: most racist Whites like him do not think they are racist and Trump shows no sign of having a clue that he is racist.
LikeLike
@ Afrofem
I have no doubt that Republicans and Democrats serve the same masters — maybe not the exact same people, but definitely the same wealthy class and the same corporate interests, as you laid out.
What I don’t see compelling evidence for is that they are in cahoots to the degree that all elections are rigged, that they trade off the presidency and other elected positions of power in secret backroom deals, that everything is arranged in advance by secret cabals.
@ Nomad
“It’s really weird. The only thing holding us captive is our belief in the two party system. If all of these liberals voted their conscience they’d be free tomorrow. By which I mean January 20 or whenever it is that the prez is inaugurated. The Green Party is standing for all of the things you say you stand for.”
The difficulty I have here is that in my opinion, there aren’t enough liberals to pull this off. For most Americans, the Green Party is way too far to the left. (For me, the Greens don’t go far enough to the left, but that’s a different issue.) If everyone whose conscience told them to vote Green in this election did so, I don’t think the vote would go over 15%. Other Americans, if they stepped out of the two-party system, would vote Libertarian or Constitution Party.
A viable third party is going to have to pull away much more support and many more votes to have any chance of taking control of the White House. At this point, it’s difficult for third parties to even win congressional seats.
LikeLike
@ Michael Jon Barker
“To be fair Bill Clinton and the Democrats thought Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Gore would have carried that over.”
I’m not denying that. I was referring to that when I said I believe Gore would have continued the sanctions and air strikes. That doesn’t mean he would have used 9/11 as an excuse for a full-out invasion and occupation of Iraq the way Bush did. Of course, it’s all conjecture; Gore might have done the very same thing. But then again, he might not have.
What if the fourth plane had hit the Congress building as planned? That would have changed matters immensely, regardless of who was president. I don’t believe this was all scripted in advance. Butterfly wings, etc.
LikeLike
Abagond,
You might do another poll/survey: How many people viewed the documentary, Loose Change?
LikeLike
@Afrofem
“For most Americans, the Green Party is way too far to the left. ”
Those are the people who hold the fate of America in their hands. I’m not talking about just those leaning Green. I’m talking every so-called liberal/progressive. Do you want a party that’s a little too far left? Or do you want Donald Trump? “Cause the rest of us ain’t going for Clinton. So if Trump wins, don’t blame us. Blame yourselves. It will be you middle of the roadsters (not you Afrofem, I’m addressing Democrats) you don’t wanna be too far lefties that’ll be to blame..
As Tyrel says in the first three minutes of this, only you give your vote its real power. Only you CAN give your vote real power.
(https://youtu.be/lUDbJWb2JDA)
LikeLike
@ Nomad
You were answering my comment, not Afrofem’s.
I didn’t say the Green Party is too far left for me. I said it isn’t left enough for me — which would not keep me from voting Green. I’ve done so before. But please do not mistake me for a middle-of-the roader.
“I’m talking every so-called liberal/progressive.”
Right, and I think that it isn’t enough. You’d also need all of the MOR’ers who sometimes vote Democrat. The ones who don’t consider themselves liberals but moderates. I don’t see the Green Party successfully attracting those voters.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
Sorry.
“You’d also need all of the MOR’ers who sometimes vote Democrat. The ones who don’t consider themselves liberals but moderates”
I’m talking them too. Blaming them. I’m an equal opportunity haranguer.
LikeLike
@Solitaire
Not calling you a middle of the roadster at all. I do this thing where I shift from addressing the commenter and start talking to the wider audience. Sorry it sounded like I was calling you a middle of the roadster.
LikeLike
@ Nomad
“I’m talking them too. Blaming them. I’m an equal opportunity haranguer.”
Fair enough. But does the blame entirely rest with those middle-of-the-road voters? Does the Green Party not bear any blame for not successfully presenting a platform, crafting an image, and delivering a message that attracts these voters?
LikeLike
@ Nomad
“Not calling you a middle of the roadster at all. I do this thing where I shift from addressing the commenter and start talking to the wider audience. Sorry it sounded like I was calling you a middle of the roadster.”
No problem. I caught that the third time I read it, but by then I’d already posted my reply. Sorry for the false accusation.
I understand your frustration with the MORs. Poll after poll has proven they are not really moderates, that they support progressive politics, but they refuse to identify as such and shy away from any candidate they see as “radical” and “socialistic.”
LikeLike
@abagond
“You conflate everything and ignore stuff”
Yes I rightfully conflated Trump’s and Hillary’s racism, but no idea what I ignored. I don’t defend what Trump says or does, but you’ve definitely made plenty excuses for Hillary.
“I do not take what he says at face value.”
Right, except the racist stuff, and his proposed policies you don’t like…
What’s funny is that Quigg (KKK) who endorsed Hillary is doing so because he does not take what Hillary or Trump says at face value!
LikeLike
It is sad and sobering that Rachel Maddow is just as misleading as Sean Hannity. I thought of Hannity as a transparent hack and Maddow as somewhat serious. Instead it was just that thing where people who agree with you seem more intelligent. Is there is a word for that illusion?
LikeLike
@ Abagond
I’m not happy with the sample size on many of the Politifact percentages. Fewer than 100 statements — that’s too small a sample to be statistically significant, too easily cherry-picked and skewed. And especially true for the ones that are based on only 5 or 10 statements.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Solitaire
Good point.
LikeLike
@ Solitaire
“Does the Green Party not bear any blame for not successfully presenting a platform, crafting an image, and delivering a message that attracts these voters?”
Not as much as the MSM does for not covering them or the duopoly for shutting them out of the debates.
LikeLike
@ Nomad
True. Point taken.
LikeLike
Worry not, Hillarites. Thou shall prevail.
“Now that the impossibility of reforming the Democratic Party from within has been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt, and now that the party’s moral and intellectual bankruptcy is becoming increasingly apparent, its demise is coming onto the political agenda. That will require a protracted struggle, however; one probably lasting years.
So, for now, frightened liberals can still take comfort in the fact that there is no way that anything could happen that would put Hillary’s election in jeopardy. If he doesn’t drop out first, Trump will get schlonged.
However, strong “third party” showings this November would help get the anti-Clintonite (anti-austerity, anti-war, anti-imperialist) struggles that are bound to erupt in reaction to Hillary’s past and future machinations off to a good start.
Better still, a strong showing by Jill Stein and other Green Party candidates could do more than Bernie ever could to make a movement for democratic socialism – and environmentalism and a foreign policy based on justice, not American world domination — a significant presence on the political scene.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/08/05/could-hillary-lose/
LikeLike
Is there is a word for that illusion?
Hooverism or bullshitology, take your pick.
‘ A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage’
Herbert Hoover via the Republican Party 1928.
LikeLike
Funny. Strange. I am amazed how the Democratic party has re-enslaved black people. Apparently the Democratic party is …like God. It must be trusted and always obeyed. Even unto oblivion. No matter what is said here. Out in the larger world, for black people voting for Hillary is a foregone conclusion. They have bought the Trump scare, hook line and sinker. Even though Hillary is at least as dangerous. Pointing that out in the black community automatically makes you a Republican and a follower of Trump. It is strange to encounter such fierce support among blacks for a candidate who has done so much harm to them and to brown and African people around the world. They see where this has been, what it’s leading to, where it’s leading to, yet they vote for it anyway. No wonder the Democratic party is often characterized as a plantation.
LikeLike
@nomad
“No wonder the Democratic party is often characterized as a plantation.”
Fear is a powerful motivator. Fear and lack of information.
For many people it is better the slave labor camp you know than the slave labor camp you don’t know.
LikeLike
#nomad
Donald Trump’s stance come out of a known political stream which might be called “inclusive nationalism”. Georgetown scholar Carroll Quigley, whom Bill Clinton claimed was one of his formative influences, wrote about this idea in the 1960s, though he termed it “inclusive liberalism”. In the Postwar, 1945-70, nationalism was the predominant theme in American politics, with the Democrats on the labor side of the equation and the Republicans on the business side.
Within the system of American politics, Trump’s brand nationalism can by jump start only through an appeal to the white vote. But by its inherent nature, once put into place as a policy system, it has to be inclusive. I am sure Trump would like to have some support from non-white minorities. But non-white choose to embrace identity and single-issue politics. If Trump had some minority support he could turn to his white supporters and speak of the necessity of inclusiveness. But he does not have that support to speak of.
Most people have the attitude, “better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know”. For non-whites particularly Trumps’s politics represent a step into the unknown. But non-whites can insist on their place, their share, within this new system, and they will be heard. The force that stands in the way is not white nationalist conservatives but upscale white liberal elitists and their self-serving demagoguery.
You have nothing to fear but fear itself, so said one of America’s great majhor politician once, in another context.
LikeLike
@newworld3000
I’ve always felt the Trump scare was overblown. And black people are scared of him for the wrong reason. His words about carpet bombing and torturing are much more frightening than his thoughts about race and building walls. And he is bombastic. His words are likely far bigger than anything he would actually do as president.
LikeLike
@ nomad
How some Americans and German politicians felt about Hitler before it became too late:
More:
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/03/early-warnings-how-american-journalists-reported-the-rise-of-hitler/254146/
Even Churchill, then an MP, was dismissed as a crank for warning how dangerous Hitler was – till it was too late.
LikeLike
@abagond
“Even Churchill, then an MP, was dismissed as a crank for warning how dangerous Hitler was – till it was too late.”
I know how he felt. I feel the same about Hitlary.
LikeLike
“I know how he felt. I feel the same about Hitlary.”
http://www.thedailysheeple.com/clinton-body-count-piling-up-5-in-just-six-weeks_082016
LikeLike
Fifty mid-level Republican national security advisers signed a letter that said of Trump:
More:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/national-security-gop-donald-trump.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Abagond
That letter is unprecedented. Those types rarely comment publicly about electoral politics. Trump is really scaring the pants off the Establishment.
Perhaps all of us should re-evaluate our positions.
(I still detest both candidates.)
LikeLike
@abagond
Yeah. I’m going to take the recommendations of establishment Republicans seriously. National security advisers you say? What they probably mean is Trump threatens to change their already disastrous Neocon agenda. I’m not sure that would be a bad thing, especially with regard to Russia. They’re not credible. Every one of the establishment Republicans that Trump bumped off, from Jeb to Ted Cruz, would have been equally bad on foreign policy.
But Okay. Let’s say that the fears about Trump are not overblown. Trump is the rebirth of Hitlerism. That’s horrible. Grievous as that is, Hillary represents something even more horrible than that. If Trump represents Nazi concentration camps then Hillary represents Hiroshima. Putin has already drawn a line in the sand and, unlike Obama, he doesn’t play. Hillary is determined to cross that line which will lead to Russian retaliation, as discussed in the Paul Craig interview I posted on the Korryn Gaines thread. That means a nuclear showdown with Russia.
What I think is actually going on here is an obvious gearing up for a war against Russia that Obama initiated. Trumps purpose is to scare everyone into lining up behind the designated prosecutor . of this war, Hillary.
Trump dangerous? Absolutely. But he has to be to coerce us down an even more dangerous path. These bogey men and women, the McCains Palins and such, have got to be scary. These greater evils. Otherwise they wouldn’t move us. And it seems the more rotten the Democratic candidate is, the scarier the Republican bogey man has to be. And Hillary is really, really rotten. So Trump has got to be really, really scary.
LikeLike
Nomad, you make sense. People want to forget that Trump and the Clintons were tight before this election.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I wonder if they are part of the crew who claimed that Obama should have intervened more forcefully in Syria? What has the “deep state”(https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Deep_state) worried so? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/world/middleeast/syria-assad-obama-airstrikes-diplomats-memo.html?_r=0
LikeLike
@Afrofem
” Trump is really scaring the pants off the Establishment.”
Indeed. Trump is definitely a part of the broader plutocratic establishment but he’s not a part of the political establishment. The intense opposition to Trump from media, political and business types isn’t due to any racism on his part. That’s not why they’re concerned. It’s really blatant when the media spends more time on Trump’s tongue-in-cheek remarks about a crying baby than HIllary Clinton’s lying to congress. The message is clear but it might even be too clear, to the point of backfiring.
LikeLike
@nomad
“Putin has already drawn a line in the sand and, unlike Obama, he doesn’t play.”
I don’t think many people realize how uncontroversial this is.
Putin, in his own words, warning the international press about the escalating situation:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqD8lIdIMRo)
Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) is a delicate game and one miscalculation could mean war and, at worst, nuclear war. I wasn’t around for it but I keep referring to the Cuban Missile Crisis to contextualize Russia’s valid concerns.
TBH, I don’t have much faith in MAD to prevent another major war. Continued efforts to take the ‘A’ out of it may embolden one side to push matters too far. Totalitarian domination of the whole world is this civilization’s ultimate goal and it will be constantly pushed to fulfill the potential of its asili (seed) to use a term from Marimba Ani’s Yurugu. Some people take issue with her whole analysis but here we are enduring the insanity of being “protected” by a threat of mutual annihilation instead of a genuine agreement of mutual respect, friendship, and cooperation for the sake of humanity and planet Earth. Why? Because they cannot trust each other due to “hypocrisy as a way of life” and the “rhetorical ethic”! Historically, Europeans have betrayed many non-European peoples who were naive enough to enter into agreements with them expecting them to keep their word. When their lack of credibility is understood, the parties have no choice but to put daggers at each others’ thoats while simultaneously yelling, “don’t move a muscle!”
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ nomad
No, no way: the Trump character is too buffoonish to be compared to Hitler.
This guy smiles and kids once in a while, but that one, at that time, never was seen smiling! He was full of hate and always deadly serious!
Trump himself seems not that dangerous to me, but as with every politician, he has a small inner circle that decides the things to say, the way to go, during this campaign, and probably beyond.
Remember also that not everything politicians (or some other public figures) say in public must be taken as an exact copy of they personal ideas. Part of what they say in public has an objective: to conquer the audience and win elections.
Remember that in one of the last public gatherings the Trump delegation invited a LGBT person as a speaker. I don’t think that happened because they are comfortable with homosexuality and similar things, but the invitation made sense as a way to gather more adherents to their cause and guarantee more votes for him next November.
As I said in another thread, Trump will try, if elected, to implement a few things he promised, and put other things aside (forgetting promises). All politicians do this. The real one million dollar question is: which things he said during the campaign, is he going to make it real, to bring to the world.
See, https://abagond.wordpress.com/2016/03/19/donald-trump-quotes-about-black-people/#comment-311889
LikeLike
I’ve never read Manufacturing Consent. But I have observed it.
LikeLike
@gro jo
“I wonder if they are part of the crew who claimed that Obama should have intervened more forcefully in Syria?”
I do remember reading about how HRC and the other ChickenHawks* dug deep into Obama’s backside about Syria.
The US military establishment, said “no, we are stretched too thin”. The ChickenHawks were screaming for war. Obama listened to the military. Ordinary Americans breathed a sigh of relief.
With HRC, there will be no listening to the military.
*ChickenHawks love war as long as other people are doing the fighting, dying and suffering. All they think about is power and money.
LikeLike
@munubantu
“No, no way: the Trump character is too buffoonish to be compared to Hitler.”
Trump is OTT. Over the top. The archetype of the glad-handing politician is they kiss babies. Trump yells “Get that baby out of here!” I thought that was hilarious. And symbolic of turning the political burlesque on its head.
LikeLike
@nomad
“If Trump represents Nazi concentration camps then Hillary represents Hiroshima. Putin has already drawn a line in the sand and, unlike Obama, he doesn’t play. ”
It’s scary that Hillary is already poking the Russian bear. Not just over Ukraine, but also by blaming Russians for the DNC email hack without a shard of proof. You’d think someone with secretary of state “experience” would have learned to be a bit more diplomatic.
And now she’s accusing Trump of having ties with Russia. Of course it’s smokescreen. Being the snake she is, she is just trying to hide her own shady dealings with Russian oligarchs like Viktor Vekselberg or her past effort to fund Russia military development in spite of FBI warnings against it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
“Hillary represents Hiroshima”
That’s one glass ceiling I hope she never cracks
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ nomad
Trump is right to point out that these are the very national security advisers that gave us the Iraq War. I have no love for them either. But please note that they are not making a policy argument. They are saying that Trump lacks even the basic leadership skills needed to make good decisions. It will not matter who his advisers or what his policies are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“They are saying that Trump lacks even the basic leadership skills needed to make good decisions. ”
Then he’ll fit right in with the rogues gallery of thieves, psychopaths and mass murderers that have held the office. Good decisions certainly didn’t deliver us to this sad height.
LikeLike
nomad, who will you vote for in November, or are you going to not vote?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@gro jo
I’m going to throw my vote away. Voting Green. Doesn’t matter. I live in a Republican state.
LikeLike
Assange (Wikileaks) suggests that his sources are nervous after the murder of DNC employee Seth Rich earlier this month. Robbery had been put forward as a motive but I remember reading that Rich’s valuables were not taken.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp7FkLBRpKg)
Now Wikileaks is offering a reward for information on his killer(s).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/wikileaks-offers-reward-in-killing-of-dnc-staffer-in-washington/2016/08/09/f84fcbf4-5e5b-11e6-8e45-477372e89d78_story.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Origin
And he’s not the only one. Probably just a coincidence though.
(https://youtu.be/xb_N02-vh8M)
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/08/9-minute-video-clinton-body-count-suspiciously-increases-five-last-six-weeks-whats-certain-hillary-war-criminal-rogue-secretary-state-election-fra.html
LikeLike
Looks like Assange is setting himself up as a player in DC politics. His comment amounts to an insinnuendo. http://definithing.com/insinnuendo/
LikeLike
@Origin
I immediately assumed Seth Rich was assassinated because he was shot in the back, execution style, and none of his valuables were taken. The fact that the mainstream media is refusing to ask any questions is alarming. Instead they spin it with statements like, “there’s been a string of robberies in the neighborhood”.
And the Shawn Lucas death has been almost a non-topic, SMDH. But what else can you expect from hypocrites who talk about Trump’s “2nd Amendment people” comment, accuse him of stoking violence, but turn a blind eye to the reality that people associated with Hillary and the DNC have been recently slain.
@nomad
Sure, it all can be just a coincidence. But taking just one of those examples, her “friend” Vince Foster talked to Hillary on the phone less than 2 hours before he was shot. Could’ve been just a coincidence, but if you did the same thing under those circumstances (call someone before they were shot), wouldn’t you be considered a suspect until you were cleared? Wouldn’t you have been brought in for questioning, at the very least?
LikeLike
Oh no, the return of the anti-Clinton rumor machine is back! Origin, nomad and resw, the stuff you’re pushing here is bs. Assange is just as suspect as Hillary for the deaths of the individuals listed in your links, given the facts known by the public. Hillary’s crimes are well known, you guys don’t need to add this bs to her account. Say, how much are you being paid to spread this manure?
LikeLike
Why didn’t the Clinton murder machine go to work on Obama and his crew eight years ago to secure the democratic party nomination for her?
LikeLike
I don’t buy the conspiracy talk about the supposed deaths of people who had associations with the Clinton’s. I’m pretty sure you could make up a list of people who Bush Jr. knew who are now dead.
It could be true the leak originated within the DNC which makes more sense then blaming it on the Russians. But if the leak is dead that doesn’t mean it was ordered by the Clinton’s or related to the leak. That’s speculative.
As far as Assange goes he has good reason to be nervous. If he dies mysteriously over the next couple of months that would point to a State sanctioned hit.
There’s a rumor going around that Snowden is missing.
LikeLike
@gro jo
Do yourself a favor and stop putting words in my mouth. I reported what Assange and Wikileaks was saying, PERIOD, and I thought it was relevant to the topic given that the DNC leaks are relevant.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@GRO JO The Clinton machine didn’t go to work on Obama because, one, he was too big, and, two, they didn’t take him seriously so didn’t develop a serious counter strategy early. Obama, lest people forget, early on had the Irish machinery behind him, notably the Daley machine in Chicago but later also Edward Kennedy. These were people who never liked the Clintons.
A few years ago, I read a disquisition on the issue of presidential machinery and who has it. The entities that do are Kennedy family and the Irish machines (though the Kennedys divided in 2008, Robert’s family going for Clinton), the Bush family and the Sunbelt Republicans. the Clintons and the Sunbelt Democrats, and the Eastern Establishment Republicans.
The Eastern Establishment Republicans are much weaker than in past era, but still managed to get Romney as the nominee in 2012, with help from the West.
Trump is disliked by many in his own party and detested by the Democrats because he is not part of the existing machinery. He already, just by getting nominated, has rearranged the political furniture, though perhaps a generation too late. He has made nationalism an open force again. That is what the subtext of the slogan “Make America Great Again” is.
LikeLike
@gro jo
“the stuff you’re pushing here is bs”
Just reporting the facts. Whatever conclusion you wish to draw is your prerogative.
“Why didn’t the Clinton murder machine go to work on Obama and his crew eight years ago to secure the democratic party nomination for her”
The most obvious difference is Obama had something called round-the-clock Secret Service protection whilst on the campaign trail. Did Seth Rich, Shawn Lucas or Vince Foster??
But you’re right they’re “conspiracy theories” because the mainstream media is not asking any questions about them. I forgot that Americans need CNN to tell you what is legitimately worth investigating.
@michaeljonbarker
We aren’t talking about people Hillary knew who all happen to be dead of various causes. People die every day…nothing unusual there. We’re talking about people close to Hillary and with knowledge of Clinton corruption mysteriously turning up slain–most commonly shot execution style. Big difference. All I’m asking is that real journalists and the police do their jobs and properly investigate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“All I’m asking is that real journalists and the police do their jobs and properly investigate.”
.
I hope you’re not holding your breath!
You may have to wait awhile as the “real journalists” are either dead, retired, collecting unemployment or have new (self-preservation) interests.
As for the police, well they seem to have more important missions of late…
such as investigating themselves and telling judges how much they feared for their lives…
LikeLiked by 1 person
“@gro jo
Do yourself a favor and stop putting words in my mouth. I reported what Assange and Wikileaks was saying, PERIOD, and I thought it was relevant to the topic given that the DNC leaks are relevant.”
Relevant how? Has Assange stated that Rich was one of his sources? No. Assange is just throwing crap out there to see what sticks. His insinnuendo is just as valid as the one against him accusing him of raping the Swedish women he slept with. Bs is bs whether it’s against or by Assange. Let him come up with some kind of credible tie between the crime and the Clintons, then you can pass it on. Do us a favor and stop repeating nonsense.
LikeLike
newworld3000, everything you wrote was pure speculation. When you don’t know what you’re talking about, the polite thing to do is to say nothing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The most obvious difference is Obama had something called round-the-clock Secret Service protection whilst on the campaign trail. Did Seth Rich, Shawn Lucas or Vince Foster??
But you’re right they’re “conspiracy theories” because the mainstream media is not asking any questions about them. I forgot that Americans need CNN to tell you what is legitimately worth investigating. ”
Well. you’re always good for a laugh. Didn’t JFK have “…something called round-the-clock Secret Service protection…”? What happened to him? I don’t care about CNN, if you have facts, not bs, connecting the Clintons to these deaths, I’m all ears.
LikeLike
Bush Jr. was president for eight years, why didn’t he let loose the department of Justice on the Clintons for “murdering” Vince Foster? Let me guess, the Clintons set up 9/11/2001 in order to throw Bush’s justice department off their trail? Assange is seating on the ‘evidence’, etc. There’s no end to this madness once you start.
LikeLike
@gro jo
It’s obviously relevant that Assange mentioned Seth Rich’s murder when asked about releasing additional information, whatever his motives were. But besides that, you have no authority to dictate what I post here. If the information isn’t relevant *to you* feel free to keep it moving.
But back to the topic of you insinutating that I said that Hillary Clinton was responsible for Rich’s murder. How’s that for nonsensical fabrication not supported by anything I posted? You should have let that bit of blather stay up your @ss to keep the stick company.
LikeLike
I’m not telling you what you can or can’t post. I’m perfectly entitled to call your post for what it is. Bullshit. I’ll be the one to decide what stays up my @ss to keep the stick company, not you. Your bs post got the whole conspiracy nonsense going. If you have a problem with people calling you out for your bs, just keep it to yourself. You and Assange have nothing, so far, you are just throwing shyt up to see what will stick.
LikeLike
Why don’t you tell us where all the investigations of the Clintons led to?
LikeLike
“Bush Jr. was president for eight years, why didn’t he let loose the department of Justice on the Clintons for “murdering” Vince Foster? Let me guess, the Clintons set up 9/11/2001 in order to throw Bush’s justice department off their trail? Assange is seating on the ‘evidence’, etc. There’s no end to this madness once you start.”
reduction ad absurdum. why why why? you’re deviating far off topic. but even so, why would it be wrong to ask why. I have two words for anti-conspiracy bullshitters…
LikeLike
You don’t like people calling bs on your post, just keep it to yourself. I don’t give a damn if you are offended.
LikeLike
@gro jo What I wrote is opinion. Not speculation. Opinion, interpretation and theory. What? Are you disputing that Obama had the Irish machines on his side in 2008.
The Chicago machine 100 percent supported Obama. They operate from the point of view that all politics is local. Having people from their machine who holding higher office is all good for them because it helps them locally. A Chicago pol was once actually quoted as saying regarding some issue, “That’s only national.”
LikeLike
@Fan…
LOL…totally agree.
@gro jo
“Didn’t JFK have “…something called round-the-clock Secret Service protection…”? ”
So what does JFK have to do with Hillary Clinton? You asked why Hillary didn’t go after Obama and I gave you my theory. If you want to discuss why and how JFK was killed, and there’s plenty to discuss, maybe there’s another thread for that.
“I don’t care about CNN, if you have facts, not bs, connecting the Clintons to these deaths, I’m all ears.”
I’ll reiterate, “All I’m asking is that real journalists and the police do their jobs and properly investigate.” Just as what would be done with anyone else in similar circumstances referenced above.
And FYI, your theories are no more credible than anyone else’s.
LikeLike
“And FYI, your theories are no more credible than anyone else’s.”
Sorry, I offered no theories. I don’t know if Assange has proof to backup his insinuation, when he backs it up with facts I’ll take him seriously. You claimed that “…something called round-the-clock Secret Service protection…” was sufficient to keep Obama from harm, I merely pointed out that it didn’t stop JFK from getting killed or Reagan from getting shot. No thanks, I’m allergic to conspiracy theories, so I’ll leave you with your JFK assassination conspiracy theories.
newworld3000, an opinion that leads you to a conclusion is speculation in my book.
LikeLike
gro jo said:
Exactly.
LikeLike
@gro jo I don’t think you are using the word “speculation” quite properly. I suppose people can speculate as to motives as well as to facts not yet exposed to the light of day. Opinion is something different. Generally, speculation pertains to things that can be proven. Opinion pertains to things that by their nature can never be entirely established.
Overall, I don’t think this is a useful discussion.
LikeLike
“Overall, I don’t think this is a useful discussion.”
Good, let’s drop the stupid right wing conspiracy theories and talk about real things.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Why don’t you tell us where all the investigations of the Clintons led to?”
1. Cover-ups!
2. Pay-offs
3. Censure (Impeachment)
3. Increasing number of dead bodies
4. Juanita Brodderick
5. Paula Jones
6. Mena Arkansas Airport Cocaine/Crack distribution Hub ala Oliver North
7. Ron Brown’s aircraft accident …. …..
8. Vince Foster’s supposed suicide
9. Webb Hubbell & whitewater loan scandal
10. Monica Lewinski diversion
11. Israel (the peak era of antisemitism…)
12. Accepting cash from foreign entities
13. Arkansas Prisoners-gate
14. Renting out the Lincoln bedroom in the white house for cash
15. Bill’s association with Jeffery Epstein, a convicted pedophile and trips to his private island …
16. Kathleen Willey
17. Bombing a pill factory in Libya as a diversion.
In no particular order these are just a sliver of the scandals they’ve gotten away with to date off the top of my head. Note the number and type of scandals in comparison to Barack Obomber/G W Bush’s neocons (whom I’m no fan of either).
The Clintons make the Obombers look like citizens of Heaven, relatively speaking!
“Why don’t you tell us where all the investigations of the Clintons led to?”
Nowhere.
For now…
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Clintons are not the Marcoses. They and the Democrats have NOT been contantly in power since 1993. Their enemies, of which there are many, have had more than enough power and opportunity to nail them. The only big thing that has stuck, to date, is Bill Clinton’s womanizing.
The Clintons do their dirt in plain sight – yet everyone, even Fox News, keeps looking in the shadows. Why is that?
LikeLike
@gro jo
“Hillary’s crimes are well known, you guys don’t need to add this bs to her account”
There’s nothing bs about stating the facts. Whatever conclusions you wish to draw, again is your prerogative.
“Sorry, I offered no theories.”
Showing your naivete as usual. “Origin, nomad and resw, the stuff you’re pushing here is bs” is a theory itself, FYI. But I have no doubt that many left wing nuts consider whatever they believe to be fact.
And on a separate note, Hillary’s pay for favors emails released today unsurprisingly are being buried by the childish mainstream media’s endless coverage of Trump saying “2nd Amendment People”. We see more and more evidence that should be used by the AG to convict her on multiple charges.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/newly-released-emails-highlight-clinton-foundations-ties-to-state-department-1470785910
LikeLike
“The Clintons do their dirt in plain sight – yet everyone, even Fox News, keeps looking in the shadows. Why is that? ”
Because it’s all political theater. The press doesn’t dig too deep because the truth would expose both sides of the aisle and the role that some media players have in the current economic order. It is not a conspiracy but more about ratings and carving out ideological markets and the competion between networks for viewership while balancing political access within the system.
The corruption runs deep in both parties with the same.power players (military, arms indusdtry, banks, foreign governments, Wall Street, oill ect) donating to both sides to keep America’s economic engine up and running insuring that the top wealth earners absorb more wealth.
The Clinton foundation took donations from Trump, the Saudis, the Russians ext but can you prove a direct link to arm sales and uranium deals ? Its all circumstantial including their long sordid history Fan posted out up thread. But the Clinton’s most damaging stuff like mass incarceration and “free trade” doesn’t get talked about. Instead it’s all this crazy talk about assinations ect. That’s a deflection the right throws out their to cover up their own participation in setting up our current political order.
How many prominent Republicans have foundations that act as tax havens so Americans don’t have to go to Panama to open one up? Both sides cut political deals with foreign governments, Wall Street ect.
Trump problem is he isn’t part of the politicale class and they can’t trust his temperament to keep the current politicale order stable. The Frankenstein Fox created has gotten out, Trump harnessed that ugliness and Authoritarianism and the political establishment knows it’s not good for business.
LikeLike
@gro jo
“You don’t like people calling bs on your post, just keep it to yourself. I don’t give a damn if you are offended.”
I didn’t say I was offended. I said your post was bs. And I said I had two words for it. You should not assume what the two words are. But in case you were wondering it’s ‘thought control’. Guess who’s doing it and guess who its being done to.
LikeLike
When I say bullshit I mean a particular approach to argumentation where obfuscation is the goal. In the case of kneejerk anti conspiracy theorists, Not really addressing the issue but casting aspersions based on a misguided sense of propriety..
(https://vimeo.com/thinknice/bullshit!)
LikeLike
The link to the Bulls–t video doesn’t seem to work. Can be found here.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/06/us-public-education-bullshit-train-stupefied-work-animals-introduction-defining-bullshit-demanding-comprehensive-objective-independently-verifiable-factual-accuracy-ever.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
@gro jo
Nomad, you make sense. People want to forget that Trump and the Clintons were tight before this election.”
On this point: Another conspiracy (theory).
http://gawker.com/the-astro-turfing-democratic-strategist-who-launched-do-1782292650
LikeLike
@gro jo
My post relating what Assange said was about the source of the DNC leak you hypocrite. Assange was suggesting that it came from a DNC employee not even necessarily the one that was recently killed. That was the point as someone with a brain, michealjohnbarker, rightly ascertained. You’re the one doing the insinuating by pulling a strawman out of your @ss and challenging me about your own fabrications. My post is there for everyone to see.
I gave you a chance to acknowledge that you misrepresented my post but instead double down on your nonsense. No time for your attempts at oneupmanship. Wasting my time winning an argument with an intransigent troll on the internet is the definition of pyrhhic victory.
LikeLike
Pompous jack@ss.
LikeLike
You’re free to comment on Assange’s credibility or dismiss what he said as irrelevant to you. You’re not free to shoot the messenger or claim I said things I didn’t. I won’t stand for that.
LikeLike
@michaeljonbarker
” Its all circumstantial including their long sordid history Fan posted out up thread.”
If you mean it’s only circumstantial and no connection to the Clintons can be made, then that’s also an opinion.
“But the Clinton’s most damaging stuff like mass incarceration and “free trade” doesn’t get talked about. ”
It’s debatable what constitutes her most damaging stuff, and maybe not many people on the right care too much about mass incarcerations. But her support for both NAFTA and TPP and only recent flip flops have been used often by the right. Both have received far more attention than the slayings of people connected to the Clintons.
“Both sides cut political deals with foreign governments, Wall Street ect.”
Please tell us who is currying political favors through their charitable foundation? You’d have to have proof for that accusation, and we certainly have proof for Hillary as of yesterday. While there might be other politicians who do the same, no one in history has done so on the same scale of the Clintons.
And If Hillary even thought it was OK, she would have surrendered all the emails from her private server related to political favors for Clinton Foundation donors. She deserves to be convicted of treason, obstruction of justice, perjury, several counts of fraud, etc. and the Clinton Foundation’s 501(c)(3) status should be revoked.
LikeLike
@gro jo There you go again, lighting up another one? First, you didn’t know the difference between speculation and opinion or interpretation. Now you don’t know the difference between conspiracy theory and opinon. Darn, what’s next?
LikeLike
“You should have let that bit of blather stay up your @ss to keep the stick company.”
“You’re the one doing the insinuating by pulling a strawman out of your @ss and challenging me about your own fabrications. My post is there for everyone to see.”
Origin, what’s up with the anal fixation? Listen up you backdoor bandit, you gay gangster, leave my @ss out of this. You are the one who introduced the whole conspiracy thing by linking to Assange’s interview by prefacing it with the following comment: “Assange (Wikileaks) suggests that his sources are nervous after the murder of DNC employee Seth Rich earlier this month. Robbery had been put forward as a motive but I remember reading that Rich’s valuables were not taken.” You don’t know anymore about this crime than Assange does, the last sentence of your quote is an invitation to speculate on a motive other than robbery. Since this is a thread on Hillary, your hint was echoed with a sober caveat by nomad: “@Origin
And he’s not the only one. Probably just a coincidence though.
(https://youtu.be/xb_N02-vh8M)
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/08/9-minute-video-clinton-body-count-suspiciously-increases-five-last-six-weeks-whats-certain-hillary-war-criminal-rogue-secretary-state-election-fra.html“, and picked up by the ever impressionable resw, who came up with this ‘gem’, taking us way back, when all the talk was of Vince Foster: “@Origin
I immediately assumed Seth Rich was assassinated because he was shot in the back, execution style, and none of his valuables were taken. The fact that the mainstream media is refusing to ask any questions is alarming. Instead they spin it with statements like, “there’s been a string of robberies in the neighborhood”.
And the Shawn Lucas death has been almost a non-topic, SMDH. But what else can you expect from hypocrites who talk about Trump’s “2nd Amendment people” comment, accuse him of stoking violence, but turn a blind eye to the reality that people associated with Hillary and the DNC have been recently slain.
@nomad
Sure, it all can be just a coincidence. But taking just one of those examples, her “friend” Vince Foster talked to Hillary on the phone less than 2 hours before he was shot. Could’ve been just a coincidence, but if you did the same thing under those circumstances (call someone before they were shot), wouldn’t you be considered a suspect until you were cleared? Wouldn’t you have been brought in for questioning, at the very least?”
It seems I wasn’t the only one who ‘read’ you wrong. but you don’t seem to ‘mind’ their, according to you, misinterpretation of what you wrote.
Now that you’ve all shut up about conspiracies, I can pat myself on the back and say “well done”.
LikeLike
resw,
“If you mean it’s only circumstantial and no connection to the Clintons can be made, then that’s also an opinion.”
To clarify you have to prove criminal intent or wrong doing. Its hard to do that in white collar crimes as evidence is harder to prove. Add the privileges state agents have from the police to the president and the threshold for investigation and conviction is much higher and increases the farther up the political scale you rise.
To add to Fan’s list their is the Clinton’s ties to Tyson Chicken back in Arkansas and inside trader information on stock options that they made money off of.
“Both have received far more attention than the slayings of people connected to the Clintons.”
The slayings “benefited” the Clinton’s but I don’t believe they had any personal knowledge or called for the “hit”. Keep in mind that power is shared and there are many behind the scenes capable of murder. Of course that is my opinion.
“Please tell us who is currying political favors through their charitable foundation?”
George Sorros, the Koch brothers, Bill Gates ect
The Ford foundation, the Rockefeller’s, The Carnegie foundation all have/had tremendous influence in the media, politics, academia ect.
Foundations act as tax shelters. The difference between foundations is whether they are their to amass wealth (the Clinton’s) or whether they are their to distribute wealth (Bill Gates) towards pet projects.
It’s been said that “history has been written by the victors”. Modern history has been written by billionaires whose foundations influenced academia.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Read me right, read me wrong. I can’t help how people read me. That’s kind of up to them. I just respond as I see fit.
At any rate , I find my position on Hillary vs Trump echoed here:
“Compared to Clinton, he’s the lesser of two dark forces. Give him credit for wanting rapprochement, not confrontation with Russia, provided he’d follow through if elected president.
…
Humanity’s top priority is avoiding another global war, likely with nuclear weapons if one erupts, threatening humanity’s survival.
Chances for the unthinkable are far too high to risk under Hillary if she succeeds Obama. Her deplorable record since the 1990s shows she’s a lunatic fringe war goddess, extremely hostile to Russia, China and all other independent sovereign states.
Her geopolitical strategy of choice is war. She supports use of nuclear weapons and US-led NATO aggression “to preserve our way of life.”
…
If Trump surprises and wins, he’ll likely not diverge much from longstanding US domestic and foreign policy. Candidates say anything to get elected. In office they continue dirty business as usual.
Yet unthinkable global war is much more likely under Clinton than him – why it’s crucial to oppose her candidacy for the nation’s highest office or any other public one.”
Stephen Lendman
http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html
LikeLike
@ nomad
Where has Hillary Clinton shown that she departs markedly from past US presidents in terms of nuclear doctrine? And what is Trump’s nuclear doctrine?
LikeLike
MAD dictates that the nuclear threat has to be credible so both Hillary Clinton and Trump have to be prepared to authorize the use of nuclear weapons. There was a bit of controversy recently when Theresa May of the UK was asked about nuclear weapons and she responded that she would authorize a nuclear strike that would kill over 100,000 men, women and children. That’s the insane world in which we live.
If another state attacked the US with nukes I have no doubt that both Trump and Clinton would respond in basically the same way. The question for me is, “Whose foreign policy is more likely to raise tensions with other nuclear powers?” As far as Russia is concerned, the answer seems to be Clinton. But there are admittedly many other uncertainties surrounding a potential President Trump’s foreign policy.
LikeLike
@abagond
“Where has Hillary Clinton shown that she departs markedly from past US presidents in terms of nuclear doctrine?”
She is discarding MAD, following Obama’s lead.
“And what is Trump’s nuclear doctrine?”
You tell me. “The question … is, “Whose foreign policy is more likely to raise tensions with other nuclear powers?” ”
Trump has indicated “he believes NATO is outdated and favors normalizing relations with Russia.” That makes him less likely to use the nuclear option.
http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-trump-threat.html
As for those Neocon policy makers who think he’s unfit. He is but Hillary is more unfit.
“A statement signed by Michael Chertoff (former DHS secretary), Michael Hayden (former CIA director), Robert Zoellick (former World Bank president, NED board member), John Negroponte (former National Intelligence director) and 46 other former Republican national security officials said “(n)one of us will vote for Donald Trump.”
“From a foreign policy perspective, (he’s) not qualified to be President and Commander-in-Chief. Indeed, we are convinced that he would be a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.”
Trump responded to the letter’s signatories, saying they’re “the ones the American people should look to for answers on why the world is a mess, and we thank them for coming forward so everyone in the country knows who deserves the blame for making the world such a dangerous place.”
LikeLike
@Michaeljonbarker
“To clarify you have to prove criminal intent or wrong doing.”
And it is your opinion that neither of those can be proven. Seeing as though there’s been no investigation, it’s just as theoretic as anyone else’s opinion to the contrary.
“The slayings “benefited” the Clinton’s but I don’t believe they had any personal knowledge or called for the “hit”.”
Despite your belief, what is the harm in asking questions and calling for a proper investigation, considering so many have occurred? Why is it that as soon as the facts, not theories, but facts are brought up, people start crying “conspiracy theory”? It is a fact that Vince Foster talked to Hillary less than 2 hours before he was shot. Again, if you were caught in the same circumstances, wouldn’t you be considered a suspect or at least questioned by the police at some point? Why does asking questions about this spate of events offend Hillary supporters so much?
“George Sorros, the Koch brothers, Bill Gates ect”
They’re not public servants. There’s nothing illegal about what they’re doing.
To be clear, who is doing what Hillary is doing? Obviously I used the term “currying favors” improperly. But who is granting political favours to donors of their tax-exempt foundation? That’s not something people not in public office can do.
LikeLike
Many people here have brought up the issue of America’s relationship with Russia and how this might differ between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
i know some general background which most people do not, so I would like to put it up here; My remarks were prepared for another forum, whether they are posted there, I am not sure. There may be technical problems there.
“Yes, but. The United States collectively ought to brush up on NATO. NATO was never intended to be an ever growing political octopus. It was a military alliance of the modern liberal democracies ringing the North Atlantic. NATO also always represented a cultural community of the same, with a few additional countries part of the cultural community but for various reasons not part of the alliance.
“In the mid-1970s, all of the nations of Europe and the North Atlantic participated in a post-World War II strategic settlement. The end of result of this process was the Helsinki Accords.
“As the result of these accords, they constituted a legal agreement rather than a treaty, all of the parties recognized the boundary changes which occurred as a result of the outcome of World War II. The West recognized the boundary of the Soviet Union and the boundaries of the East Bloc countries, notably Poland. The West recognized the Democratic Republic of Germany, aka East Germany, as an independent country. The Federal Republic of Germany, aka West Germany, gave up its claims to its former lands in the east. The Soviet Union in return recognized West Berlin as part of the territory of the Federal Republic. The East Bloc, as part of the price of obtaining these agreements, fatefully agreed to certain human rights protocols as well. The Soviet government rightfully represented the Accords as a great diplomatic victory. But the efforts the East Bloc had to engage in to adhere to the Helsinki human rights protocol played a considerable role in the political erosion of the East Bloc over the next 15 years.
“The Helsinki Accords, which are still in legal force in spite of the fall of the Soviet Union divide Europe into four de facto zones. These are, the West, Eastern Europe west of the boundaries of the former Soviet Union, the former Soviet Republics other than Russia, and the Russian Republic. The Russian Republic is the legal successor to the Soviet Union, responsible for the obligations entered into by the Soviet Union and due the obligations other entities have to the Soviet Union.
“American policy has de facto been to treat the breakup of the Soviet Union as a decolonization process akin to the decolonization process in Africa during the period of the late 1950s and 1960s. The Western-imposed national boundaries were treated by the outside powers as inviolable. The argument made was the the national boundaries cut across so many tribal, linguistic and cultural boundaries that once an attempt to rearrange them began, the process would never end and would leave the region in a terminal state of disarray.
“Recently, the West, meaning the United States, has attempted to insist that there can be no boundary rearrangement east of the boundary of the former Soviet Union. This pertains primarily to the recent Russian reannexation of the historic Russian territory of the Crimea. The West, meanwhile, already had arranged a change of government in the Ukraine and astoundingly sought to make the Ukraine part of NATO, Excuse the sarcasm, but that does raise the question, What part of the North Atlantic is the Ukraine located in anyway?
“The current situation in Europe calls for a diplomatic resolution which recognizes that Russia was our former ally in the war against Nazi Germany and the entity that did most of the bleeding and dying in this desperate struggle.
“What is needed in not an effort by the West to dictate according to some dubious principle what happens beyond the boundary of the former Soviet Union, but a second stage of the Helsinki process. Of course we have an interest in what happens beyond the boundary of the former Soviet Union, just as the Soviet Union in the 1970s had an interest in what would happen in the West. But the point is, one interest has to be recognized as the predominant one.
“We agreed to recognize the boundary of former Soviet Union. That boundary is still there, in the form of the eastern boundaries of the the Eastern European nations. There is not one shred of evidence that the Russian Republic seeks to rearrange those boundary. We need to restart the Helsinki process, and when we do, we can go into this with only a pair of preconception. One of them is that the independence and the boundaries of the Baltic Republics, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia be considered inviolable and the other is that inviolable borders be established within the territory of the former Soviet Union.
“Going on to the issue of the current American election, just consider carefully which candidate is more capable of accepting a valid theoretical framework for a settlement in Europe which also defines the purview and future of NATO. Donald Trump has no experience as an officeholder. His assets are that he is willing in his way to consider limitations and to rethink things and that no stage is so big that it could overwhelm him. Hillary Clinton has experience in government but her history has shown that in spite of her youthful capability in academics, she is no intellectual and not the one to see policy in the context of a theoretical framework.
“You decide.”
Parties to Helsinki Accords:
Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany)
German Democratic Republic (East Germany)
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Cyprus
Denmark
Spain
United States of America
Finland
France
United Kingdom
Greece
Hungary
Republic of Ireland
Iceland
Italy
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Malta
Monaco
Norway
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
San Marino
Holy See
Sweden
Switzerland
Czechoslovakia
Turkey
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
Yugoslavia
LikeLike
We may be able to vote our consciences after all. Some political observers think Trump is throwing the election to Clinton because he fears the financial disclosure and responsibility of the presidency. This article explores those themes:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/291286-is-trump-deliberately-throwing-the-election-to
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ newworld3000
Oh yes, it was Donald Trump himself who said:
Source:
LikeLike
“I hate Hillary Clinton.”
Abagond, with enemies like you, friends are a luxury.
LikeLike
“We may be able to vote our consciences after all.”
The voting system/mirage/illusion is designed to make you feel like you’re participating in the election process. This game is rigged. It’s set up against you and arranged entirely for their interests. The people are not controlling the government. It’s the opposite!
If voting is so genuine why are y’all looking at the two worst candidates in recent history. Either Americans are seriously dumb and dumber, or there’s some vote counting/manipulation going on.
“It’s Not Who Votes that Counts, It’s Who Counts the Votes …”
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Fan
Good points.
If Trump melts down completely, the pressure to vote for HRClinton will lessen. Perhaps more people will vote for Jill Stein of the Green party and position it for 2020 and beyond.
There is also the matter of building movements on the ground independent of any political party…that is where real power will be generated.
LikeLike
@Afrofem
“If Trump melts down completely”
His public statements continue to bring him a lot of negative media attention yet he won’t stop talking. It almost seems deliberate but the time for preaching to the choir (of racists, xenophobes etc) is over is over if he actually wants to win. Does he?
The latest one I’m hearing is that “Obama is the founder of ISIS”. The obvious interpretation is that Trump sarcastically meant that Obama helped create the vacuum for ISIS, which would be fair enough. However, Trump apparently went on a show and doubled down on the claim that Obama founded ISIS even after the host gave him the out. While his birther and “Obama is a Muslim” crowd no doubt loves that kind of rhetoric it seems likely to alienate anyone who was on the fence.
Related to that, I saw this video clip on twitter showing the audience behind Trump at a rally while he was saying that Obama founded ISIS. You can clearly see one gentleman become increasingly exasperated!
LikeLike
@Origin
“I saw this video clip on twitter showing the audience behind Trump at a rally while he was saying that Obama founded ISIS. You can clearly see one gentleman become increasingly exasperated!”
My husband pointed out that man in the clip. He was wearing red and his face continued to fall during the speech.
Trump seems to be terrified of releasing his tax return. Perhaps because he is not the billionaire he claims to be.
Hmmm…..who knows?
LikeLike
Another of the many hypocritical Hillary moments: when animal activists recently protested her rally, she said, “These people are here to protest Trump because Trump and his kids have killed a lot of animals.”
I guess she assumes no one remembers that time she said “People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s an important part of who they are…I’ve hunted. My father taught me how to hunt. I went duck hunting in Arkansas. I remember standing in that cold water, so cold, at first light. I was with a bunch of my friends, all men. The sun’s up, the ducks are flying and they are playing a trick on me. They said, ‘we’re not going to shoot, you shoot.’ They wanted to embarrass me. The pressure was on. So I shot, and I shot a banded duck and they were surprised as I was.”
And I guess she thinks no one knows her husband hunts:
LikeLike
@resw
“Another of the many hypocritical Hillary moments: when animal activists recently protested her rally, she said, “These people are here to protest Trump because Trump and his kids have killed a lot of animals.””
What I found more interesting and rather disturbing is what had happened just before she said that. She lost all comprehension of where she was and for a moment sputtered gibberish. I can’t find a clean copy of that so I’m not linking a video. It’s one of a several of what seems to be neurological malfunctions she’s exhibited lately. There is not much coverage of it, besides rightwing sources but these incidents suggest Clinton’s health may become an issue in the run up. Trump flagging. Clinton may be flagging to. For different reasons.
LikeLike
@nomad
While her health is an issue, all the major candidates are geriatrics not in optimal health, including Trump. I doubt it’ll be a real issue. Clinton should be more worried about the deleted emails to be released by the State Dept. A strong majority, as high as 58% thinks she should already have been indicted, according to surveys, including 30% of Democrats. Of course we’ll see if Obama’s State Dept will release them before or after the election.
LikeLike
Allow me to be the first to say this. Green is the new black. Actually, the Green party is what the Dem party is supposed to be. A left liberal progressive opposition to Republicanism.
“Liberals have joined Hillary Clinton’s “big nasty tent” in a very big way.
…
The degree of antipathy is actually quite useful. It tells us why the Green Party is so important and why liberals are such a dangerous enemy.
…
There is no longer any pretense of claiming a desire for systemic change or even calling themselves progressives. They are “with her” — as the slogan goes — and her illegal activities and record of mass killing don’t dissuade them from supporting her.
Liberals don’t want the Democrats to change. They cling to a bizarre hope for reform, nibbling around the edges while keeping the criminals in charge.
…
Liberals are now quite deranged and applaud a woman who will crush their feeble agenda as soon as she says the oath of office. Progressives and big money Republicans are now on the same page and that is why Stein and Baraka face so much scrutiny and so many big lies.
The Green Party’s existence is proof that the Democratic Party emperor has no clothes. The logical progression of success for the Greens is the end of the party which claims to be more inclusive and the champion of working people and human rights. It does none of those things while the party which actually articulates these policies has been designated an enemy.
In this case the enemies of the enemy are most definitely our friends. Far from being wasted votes, support for the Green Party ticket can be the beginning of the end for the Democratic Party.
There is no downside to that. The 2016 election is an opportunity to send scoundrels to the proverbial dustbin of history.”
http://www.blackagendareport.com/Dems_attack_stein_and_baraka
LikeLike
@nomad
I wish all blacks will vote Green and also Libertarian. But like a trusty old slave, they will cling to massa Clinton til the very end.
Also, here’s is a good article detailing the Clintons’ lies about Hillary’s classified material on the private server. There’s a lot of misconception out there since the Clintons are serial liars, but this clears things up:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/08/17/bill-clintons-misleading-claim-about-marked-classified-information-in-hillary-clintons-emails/?tid=sm_tw
LikeLike
People would be quite informed by watching one or two of the plethora of videos on youtube about the Clinton Foundation and its actions (thievery) in Haiti since the earthquake.
Haitian earthquake – a massive opportunity for Clinton & friends to make incredible profits for their pockets while failing to deliver promises made to rebuild Haiti for those devastated the most by the earthquake.
If only lying was their worst crime.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Origin
“The latest one I’m hearing is that “Obama is the founder of ISIS”. The obvious interpretation is that Trump sarcastically meant that Obama helped create the vacuum for ISIS, which would be fair enough. However, Trump apparently went on a show and doubled down on the claim that Obama founded ISIS even after the host gave him the out.”
In a way, Trump is right. The arise of something like ISIL in that vacuum was easy to foresee. Obama/Hillary proceeded with policies that they knew, or should have known, would give rise to such a beast. Perhaps this is what they desired Conveniently it arose just in time to use as a justification for bombing Syria..Convenient too a lot of US arms ends up in their hands. It smells of a clandestine operation.
I must confess, I always felt that Obama created ISIL. I thought I had read it somewhere. But then I thought, since everyone is calling it outlandish now, that I must have been mistaken. This article rings a memory bell.
LikeLike
@nomad
I agree that the adminstration’s policies in the Middle East helped the rise of ISIS and that’s the obvious interpretation of Trump’s remarks. However, Trump himself rejected that interpretation after he was handed it on a silver platter by Hugh Hewitt.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxOYKja8b0I)
Though he went on to say that the way Obama left Iraq was the cause of the problems he had first reiterated that he meant what he said: “Obama was the founder of ISIS”.
LikeLike
@Origin
No. I get that. The culpability is in knowing that the policies you willfully insist upon will give rise to ISIL or some other equivalent. There’s a difference in creating the vacuum by accident, as you suggest, and creating it on purpose to have exactly that (desired) result, as I presume Trump is asserting.. That would indeed be foundational.
LikeLike
Oh yeah. Now I remember. Putin said Obama created ISIL.
(https://youtu.be/gwLufaTK29s)
LikeLike
The sad truth is that if Trump had been president instead of Obama he would have “created” ISIS too:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VD5LeX8oIE)
LikeLiked by 1 person
So Obama is no better than Trump. I knew that already. In truth he’s worse. While Trump here insists on getting out of Iraq, thus creating the denoted power vacuum, he does not say arm and fund mercenaries which was the catalyst to the rise of ISIL. A volatile situation, the same as Trump would have had. He may have handled it as badly as Obama, or as cynically I should say. Who can say?
LikeLike
“a year after Obama and his European and Arab friends brought down Libya’s Gaddafi and shifted their proxy war of regime change to Syria, U.S. military intelligence saw clearly the imminent rise of ISIS — and that “this is exactly” what “the West, Gulf countries and Turkey…want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime.”
YES, OBAMA CREATED ISIS, with the enthusiastic assistance of Hillary Clinton”
http://www.blackagendareport.com/obama_clinton_created_isis
LikeLike
@Fan…
Any other charitable foundation would have had its exempt status revoked, its trustees fined and/or imprisoned.
@abagond
Obama’s administration trained ISIS or ISIL as he calls it, and yes he admitted it:
(https://youtu.be/mOYm_CCxxKk)
BTW John McCain said back in 2014 that “Hillary Clinton has described already the meeting in the White House over 2 years ago. Everyone on the National Security team recommended arming ISIS.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
@resw
LOL! Right out of the (Trojan) horse’s mouth!
LikeLike
Haitian activists: Clintons: enemies pretending to be friends.
(https://youtu.be/4PeO0SfCw5s)
Smiling faces show no traces of the evil that lurks within. (Well actually they do, but I love this song.)
(https://youtu.be/3GXSHRJYxTQ)
LikeLike
It seems The Economist, which is well to the right, has all but endorsed Hillary Clinton:
It says of Trump’s sort of anti-globalism:
More:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21702750-farewell-left-versus-right-contest-matters-now-open-against-closed-new
LikeLike
@abagond
In other words a vote for Hillary is a vote for globalism. It’s good to know what you’re voting for Disregard her feigned opposition to TTP. Everybody hold your nose. To the left, hold your nose and vote. To the right, hold your nose and vote. Everybody hold your nose and vote for Hillary Clinton.
‘we know …that the oligarchs, who sent America’s jobs overseas, who flooded the country with difficult-to-assimilate immigrants, who destroyed public education, who bailed out Wall Street and the “banks too big to fail,” who sacrificed American homeowners and retirees living on a fixed income, who intend to privatize both Social Security and Medicare, who have given the public killer cops, relentless violations of privacy, the largest prison poplulation in the world, and destroyed the US Constitution in order to increase executive power over the American people” to quote Paul Craig Roberts”
These are the people you are aligning yourself with, as you along with them hold your noses.
LikeLike
“Republicans who are serious about resisting the anti-globalists should hold their noses and support Mrs Clinton. … The future of the liberal world order depends on whether she succeeds.”
Why would Republicans be interested in a liberal world order? Probably a euphemism for some other world order. A future world order? Wouldn’t that be considered something New?
LikeLike
Every time I enter this thread I feel a heavy weight of futility. With all the talk of “holding noses” to ingest something foul, it seems this is a widely shared feeling.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Nomad
They probably use the term liberal in the classic sense, not the left-wing connotation it has in the US. They mean the world order of free enterprise and protected property and contracts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
PBS censors Jill Stein’s criticism of Hillary and TTP.
video here: https://politicalfilm.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/pbs-censorship-of-jill-stein-tpp-cover-up/
LikeLike
all our media shilling for Hillary. all of our media is shillaring
LikeLiked by 1 person
@nomad
“all our media shilling for Hillary. all of our media is shillaring”
The MSmedia is “ALLLLL ABOARDDDDDD” the Hillary train
(because the media is as compromised as she is. How? Because they both lie/cover up/and lie some more with reckless abandon.)
.
“Why would Republicans be interested in a liberal world order? Probably a euphemism for some other world order. A future world order? Wouldn’t that be considered something New?”
This made me laugh. You do a good tongue in cheek!
LikeLiked by 1 person
She shills for Hill on the TV show.
The shilling she shills on the show is for Hill.
So if she’s still shilling for Hill on the show
Surely the shilling she shills on the show’s still for Hill.
Hey, a little levity never hurts.
I think the media is a bit more deferential to HRC though. Granted, Trump gives them more ammunition. HRC hasn’t even held a press conference in over 250 days. I wonder if she’ll be more transparent as president.
LikeLike
Hillary. She sells political influence by the shill shore?
LikeLike
all our media shilling for Hillary. all of our media is shillaring
When you criticize her they gon’ cut you off and shut you up.
(https://youtu.be/yRLHa4Njhn4)
LikeLike
@Origin
“I wonder if she’ll be more transparent as president.”
LOL! Don’t hold your breath. Even the vaunted Obama couldn’t pull that transparency thing off.
LikeLike
@Afrofem
LOL. I was almost laughing at myself after I wrote that line and hit post. The lady who went to great lengths to cover up her correspondence as SoS probably won’t have transparency at the top of her agenda as president.
LikeLike
Billaring!
LikeLike
@nomad
By “liberal” The Economist means free institutions, not the US sense of left-leaning policies. The Oxford dictionary defines it this way:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/liberal
In particular, The Economist is thinking of free trade agreements and NATO (because it kept western Europe free from communist domination).
LikeLike
@nomad
You talk like someone who watches Fox News and thinks that it is magically somehow not part of the media.
LikeLike
@nomad
I am not voting for Hillary Clinton but against Donald Trump. I never nowhere said it would be sweetness and light if she wins. Never. If you disagree, then show me where I said otherwise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
so who are you voting for? i’m voting against Donald trump too. only I;m not voting for Hillary
no where did I say you said it would be sweetness and light if she wins. basically I said she was evil and more likely to lead us to war than trump. and I said that that trumps Trump’s apparent racism. I also said that she is at least as racist as Donald trump. just in a more insidious way. I’m glad he called her a bigot. it’s an indictment of the Democratic party’s long history of liberal racism epitomized, ironically, by Obama.
“all our media shilling for Hillary. all of our media is shillaring”
“You talk like someone who watches Fox News and thinks that it is magically somehow not part of the media.”
It’s not just Fox News that’s sHillaring. It’s across the board, from hip late night comedians to Tamron Hall. I’ve never seen anything like it. The all out PR push for Hillary is astounding!
As for the Economist, I don’t know much about it, but I gather that it is an organ of the elite. Globalists with a transcorporatist agenda. Quite naturally they’re endorsing Clinton. Holding their nose. Like you they are not really endorsing Clinton. They are afraid of Trump. Apparently, very afraid, judging by the all out assault on the donald.
LikeLike
And LOL on the Fox News angle. RT. That’s where I get my news. It’s much mo’ better than the propaganda American TV is shoveling. Want to find out what’s really going on in America? Watch Russia TV.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@nomad
RT is a shill for Putin. He is not a disinterested observer.
LikeLike
@nomad
Fox News is shilling for Hillary Clinton? How do you figure that?
LikeLike
that’s one man’s opinion
LikeLike
@abagond
“Fox News is shilling for Hillary Clinton? How do you figure that?”
Don’t know, since I don’t watch FOX, but I know that the left and right are two sides of same coin controlled by the same PTB. The establishment. And the establishment wants Clinton. Notice how all of the disaffected Republican establishment is flocking to her. Now the corporatists and plutocrats are united in a single party. It’s almost like the one party system of the Soviet Union. For the left and right arms of the oligarchs to come together against Trump means that they are really really frightened of a Trump presidency. All I can say about that is Bwwwwaaahahahahaaaa….
LikeLike
@nomad
From what I have seen of Fox News, it is anti-Hillary and pro-Trump. It is most certainly part of the media.
LikeLike
@nomad
Not just my opinion:
http://www.cjr.org/feature/what_is_russia_today.php
LikeLike
@abagond
“RT is a shill for Putin. He is not a disinterested observer.”
Even if that were so, Putin has the moral high ground. Our leaders are criminals. Russian propaganda reveals just how much of American News is propaganda. RT did/ does a much better job of covering issues facing black Americans, like police murders for example than American TV does. Ain’t that ironic? They do a much better job of reporting (explaining) economics and covering the various conflicts. They are just…..better. Much mo’ better than American news.
LikeLike
@abagond
“Not just my opinion:”
Okay then. One regime’s decree.
LikeLike
@nomad
“I’ve never seen anything like it. The all out PR push for Hillary is astounding”
It’s incredible. With all the scandals she’s in, you’d think these late night hosts and fake journalists that have her on their shows would ask her some relevant questions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“Fox News is shilling for Hillary Clinton? How do you figure that?”
Sorry. I misunderstood this in the flow of the discussion. I thought you were saying , by some miracle I hadn’t heard of (since I don’t watch Fox), that Fox was shilling for Clinton. Silly me. So maybe the phony left right system hasn’t completely broken down.
I amend my statement. All our media except for Fox is shilling for Hillary. But then, I don’t really know, since I don’t watch Fox. What’s a right wing muckraker channel going to do when the GOP establishment jumps ship for Clinton.. Do you stick with Trump and the Tparty faction, or do you follow the GOP establishment and start shilling for Hillary? What a conundrum.
LikeLike
But even Fox news, I would imagine, would inadvertently be shilling for Hillary in the way it frames the news. I don’t imagine the context is going be the Trump as Hitler narrative. This is the meme the MSM and alt media is promoting. I’m sure that Fox news buys into that at some point. For example, they probably covered the ejection of black protesters from Trump rallies. These were the images the media chose to represent the rallies. This left me with the impression that Trump rallies were inhospitable to blacks. That they were little more than glorified clan rallies. To the extent that this mem is reinforced this way it slanders Trump and hence helps or “shills” for Clinton. In fact rallies are quite different than the meme the media promotes , and that probably includes Fox, I have posted this video on the Trump Voters thread, but here it is again, a first hand account of a Trump rally from a fairly objective perspective.
(https://youtu.be/03Bt6b8PPP0)
LikeLiked by 1 person
correction–
But even Fox news, I would imagine, would inadvertently be shilling for Hillary in the way it frames the news. I — imagine the context is going be the Trump as Hitler narrative.
…
To the extent that this meme is reinforced this way, it slanders Trump and hence helps or “shills” for Clinton. In fact, the campaign rallies are quite different than the meme the media promotes , and that probably includes Fox News
…,
LikeLike
Actually I do watch Fox news, come to think of it. There is local news on the Fox channel. Its news reports are much the same as the other stations. Local media is definitely promoting the Hillgood/Trumpbad meme.
LikeLike
@nomad
The Fox News I mean is the cable news channel, the one with Sean Hannity, Megyn Kelly and Bill O’Reilly. THAT Fox News is very anti-Hillary. It beats Benghazi to death, but gives Trump softball interviews. Sean Hannity all but slobbers over Trump. Its only discernible journalist is Chris Wallace.
LikeLike
I’d like to see how Fox reports Clintonite NeoMcCartheist claims of Russia hacking the election. “We hate Clinton, but we hate Russia too. What to do? What to do?”
LikeLiked by 1 person
@abagond
“The Fox News I mean is the cable news channel”
Okay.
LikeLike
@Origin
“Trump is VERY effective at burdening his opponents with negative brands. Jeb Bush became characterized as “weak”, “tired” and “low energy”. Ted Cruz became “Lyin’ Ted” and Marco Rubio became “Little Marco”. Now that he’s started to focus on the battle with Hillary Clinton she might get stuck with “Crooked Hillary”. They’re memorable phrases that serve as damaging verbal caricatures which overwhelm any nuanced assessment of the target.”
FWIW, the Dilbert cartoonist makes the same point.
LikeLike
Hillary threatens Russia
(https://youtu.be/k4aIIpCDsLU)
LikeLike
All our media (except for Fox) and Google shilling for Hillary. Trying to disappear her health problems.
(https://youtu.be/YIKDja6mA6w)
Can you image the swarming media if Donald Trump had apparent seizures in public?
LikeLike
@resw
“While her health is an issue, all the major candidates are geriatrics not in optimal health, including Trump. I doubt it’ll be a real issue. ”
there is old and not optimal health. then there is old and sick. trump, by contrast, though older, seems healthy.
(https://youtu.be/gCx0x0rigeQ)
LikeLike
This is a ghastly cartoon. “I don’t feel no ways tired”
http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/4236/1676/original.jpg?w=800&h
LikeLike
@Lord of Mirkwood
I certainly hope so. Give it to the guy who would have won had not Hillary cheated. He will do much better against Trump than Hillary would.
LikeLiked by 1 person
First Hillary would have to resign as party nominee for health reasons ect. Then it would be up to the DNC who would replace her. It would be more likely a Joe Biden then a Bernie Sanders.
I dont believe the health conspiracy stories but I do believe she doesn’t have the stanima a younger canidate would have.
As always the Clinton’s try to hide things. As soon as she was diagnosed with pneumonia she should have told the press and taken the weekend off. That would have gained people’s respect rather then feed into all the crazy stories out there.that swirling around out there
LikeLike
He’s evil, with the continuing of the drone murder program and abetting of Israel’s atrocities, but he’s a genuinely lesser evil than Trump, which Hillary is not. In the Hillary against Trump matchup, the lesser evil might just be Trump. Folks like me, who could never be persuaded to vote for Hillary, might just turn out for Bernie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@nomad
“…Trump, by contrast, though older, seems healthy.”
“Seems healthy” are the operative words. Trump may seem more healthy than HRC, but just looking a video footage of him at the beginning of his run for the Republican nomination vs. now is striking. He looks tired, bloated and extremely unhealthy.
This presidential race might have more twists and turn than a highway in the Alps before it is over…and who knows what lies at the end of the road?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@nomad
“there is old and not optimal health. then there is old and sick.”
Well, I guess there was some substance to some of those “conspiracy stories” about her poor health after all. Pneumonia is very serious for someone her age. I read that pneumonia is the 4th leading cause of death for seniors and, while we don’t know her severity, the death rate for severe pneumonia among seniors is 55%.
“trump, by contrast, though older, seems healthy.”
But the media and Clinton campaign will just brush this aside and pretend it’s a little hiccup and she’ll be fine. As long as she’s alive, I think she’ll remain the nominee although she’ll likely lose some undecideds.
LikeLike
@nomad
“This is a ghastly cartoon. “I don’t feel no ways tired””
No that’s HILLARYous!
LikeLike
A true conspiracy theorist would think that she is taking advantage of the health thing to deflect from more serious issues.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“a true conspiracy theorist”
LOL
LikeLike
@nomad
My sentiments exactly.
LikeLike
‘A true conspiracy theorist would think that she is taking advantage of the health thing to deflect from more serious issues.’
Bill is having another affair!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Where is Herbert Hoover when you need him?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, for those of you buying the Friday diagnosed pneumonia cover story. Notice that vehicle that picked Hillary up. Not a limousine is it? It’s a vehicle acquired not to long ago, customized to her needs. Essentially a converted ambulance. This bespeaks a medical problem that has existed for a while. She’s riding around in an ambulance with a medical professional always nearby. What does that suggest? Notice that at every one of her “episodes” he is there. In the video aboveposted he’s opening the door to the customized ambulance.
LikeLike
Joe Biden. He played it just right.
LikeLike
I’ve had walking pneumonia before in my early 50’s. I took antibiotics and a medicated breathing thing and it went away in a few days. At 68 I’m sure it’s a lot harder on you. I had a friend who passed because he thought he had a chest cold and didn’t got to the doctor so it can kill you.
Johnson is probably the most fit president who has ever run. As a mountain climber and triathlon competitor he’s fit. I did the Machu Pichu trail (easy) and Kilomenjaro (harder) but Everest is a whole different category. That said his previous THC consumption shows in his ability to communicate well. Or at least it seems like he’s stoned sometimes. “What’s Allepo?” and gets a brain blank.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“That said his previous THC consumption shows in his ability to communicate well.”
That’s because he inhaled.
LikeLike
@michaeljonbarker
I’m not a physician so I won’t opine about the causes of one’s ability to communicate. But Hillary’s had her fair share of “brain blanks” too, like this one:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c9NUcY5JA4)
LikeLike
Why Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Is Over!
(https://youtu.be/vYgf0tvAMM0)
LikeLiked by 1 person
@michaeljonbarker
I’ve had pneumonia too. Twice. Almost died the second time (three years ago). I don’t know what ‘mild’ version of the disease Clinton had, but, from my experience, once it progresses to the point where you can’t walk, you don’t just pop up a couple of hours later bright and chipper. I distinctly remember lying in my hospital bed realizing that if the room caught on fire I would not be able to move. Whatever drug they gave her to make her pop up like that I wish they had given to me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m no doctor but Clinton seems more like she may have Parkinson’s Disease than Pneumonia. Politicians and their handlers are so prone to telling lies. Whatever. If their lips are moving chances are great they’re lying! With her propensity towards lying, I’m almost surprised that so many people are believing her non-stop hype,
The world might be a (little) safer place if she’s kept from occupying the presidency.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dammit, Jim, I’m a blogger not a doctor!
“The issue isn’t Hillary Clinton’s health per se; what is indefensible is her response to legitimate questions of the American public regarding her health.
Hillary Clinton has disqualified herself to be President of the United States because she is incapable of telling the truth about anything. There is no such thing as truth or transparency in the Clinton persona and campaign; everything is an ongoing experiment in perception management.”
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/09/time-bring-back-bernie.html
LikeLike
Post “Pneumonia” Hillary greeted appropriately.
(https://youtu.be/axCEJB0cDXE)
LikeLike
@Lord of Mirkwood How do you know Donald Trump is Hitler II? Every time someone claims to know something, there has to be a reason why they think they know it. So what is it?
LikeLike
“There is no such thing as truth or transparency in the Clinton persona and campaign; everything is an ongoing experiment in perception management”
That hits the nail on the head so much. All politicians do this, it’s just so apparent with her.
LikeLike
“So you would prefer to have Hitler II in the White House?”
@lom
Actually, what I prefer is to have people who push all things irish (/white on a primarily Black blog) NOT address me with their silly/asinine questions!
That’s MY PREFERENCE.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Lord of Mirkwood
“So you are voting for a woman who sold fracking to the world…who supported Keystone XL and opposed gay marriage until it was convenient to flip-flop on both issues – you support a woman who accepts money from private prison lobbyists? I cannot believe you. ”
Guess who said that?
LikeLike
Barack and Hillary. Close ties to Saudi Arabia
(https://youtu.be/keFogosvD-0)
LikeLike
@Lord of Mirkwood
“That was before the choice was between her or Hitler II.”
That of course is not true. There’s a choice between at least 3 candidates in 50 states + DC, and a choice between at least 4 candidates in 45 states + DC, in addition to the choice of writing in a candidate of your choice.
So you can’t blame anyone for your flip flop, or selling out to what you called a “Republican in a Democratic suit”.
LikeLike
@ nomad
This is not the first time you posted a video from WeAreChange, who call David Icke a “luminary”. According to the Wikipedia, Icke believes that:
More:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke
LikeLike
@abagond
How does that invalidate the information presented in the video?
LikeLike
“How does that invalidate the information presented in the video?”
Anybody who thinks lizard people are the cause of our woes can’t be taken seriously. A global conspiracy by aliens who inhabit human bodies are running the planet. Straight jackets anybody ?
The joke was that Hillary shed her skin after her fainting spell and that was why she was appeard fine later.
I haven’t seen the video so maybe he said things that were true but that is how propaganda and cultists operate. Mixing some truth to push a specific narrative.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilians
LikeLike
*why she appeard fine later.
All we gotta do is kill the Reptilians and everything will be fine. Lmao
LikeLike
@ resw
I did not listen to the whole video. There was too much shouting. He could be right, of course, but it would only be by accident. Calling Icke a “luminary” shows a serious lack of judgement.
LikeLike
Origin
““There is no such thing as truth or transparency in the Clinton persona and campaign; everything is an ongoing experiment in perception management”
That hits the nail on the head so much. All politicians do this, it’s just so apparent with her.”
She’s going to continue in the perception management vein perfected by Barama. There is no difference in their political outlooks. She’ll be worse because she’ll be wielding the increased executive powers expanded by Obama. It will be like Obama’s third term. It will be Obama on steroids. Perception management? Obama was the maestro.
That healthcare reform was a feat to watch. A masterpiece of mass manipulation. And don’t forget the inordinate amount of politically convenient (apparent) false flags that have occurred on his watch. And the betrayals!!! Trying to sellout social security! God damned “fiscal cliff”! He’s at least on a par in public deception with Nixon and Johnson. Probably out does them.
Oh! And let’s not forget this little gem. Like Trump said, he did create ISIS! But Americans don’t know about it. How’s that for perception management? The kid is an ace!
http://www.blackagendareport.c…
And Syria! Another Obama perception management project. Not failed, since he persists, but remember how we were supposed to be psyched into invading with a false flag gas attack? The guy is oleaginous
“President Obama has gotten a pass for almost eight years from self-styled anti-war elements that back his proxy war against Syria. Phony anti-warriors blame the Syrian government for resisting jihadist head-hunters in the pay of Washington and its allies. They have become supporters of state terror, and cannot comprehend that “there would not be bombs of any kind, sieges, starving children, or refugees” if the Obama had not launched his war.”
http://www.blackagendareport.c…
WE! BLACK PEOPLE! Have, thru him “become supporters of state terror, and cannot comprehend that “there would not be bombs of any kind, sieges, starving children, or refugees” if the Obama had not launched his war”
perception management – now he wants us to equate Putin with Saddam Hussein
i say Obama is the epitome
LikeLike
I think you can vote third party in heavily blue states and not worry about throwing the election to Trump.
Where it matters is swing states.
If Johnson can’t get into the debates it’s game over for the Libertarians. It looks increasingly like he won’t be invited because the poll numbers of “likely voters” are between eight and nine percent in the polls he needs to score a minimum of 13% in. It’s more election rigging.
In some states like Arizona and Texas, which are traditionally red states, Johnson voters may swing those states to Clinton. In the North East the opposite is true with Johnson pollimg more from Democrats swing the States towrds Trump.
LikeLike
Did I post something by Icke? Even if this site admires Icke and is wrong, it does not negate the truth presented here. Some times I want to curse about these malefactors but I’m too polite. So I let this guy do it for me.
LikeLike
@abagond
“Calling Icke a “luminary” shows a serious lack of judgement.”
I still don’t see how that invalidates what the WeAreChange video presents.
I think a lot of things people believe show a serious lack of judgement.
You once said you’re a Christian, so should atheists and scientists not take anything you write seriously because they think you’re foolish for believing in a God and a guy named Jesus (born by a virgin, I might add) who supposedly died on the cross to save you from your sins before coming back to life?
@michaeljonbarker
“Anybody who thinks lizard people are the cause of our woes can’t be taken seriously.”
And exactly what does that have to do with the information in the video nomad posted?
I don’t think the idea of lizard people is any more foolish than the idea that Satan is the cause of our woes, which many if not most of Americans still believe.
@Lord of Mirkwood
That doesn’t make you any less of a sellout.
You know, if all you socialists and the undecideds who like neither Trump nor Hillary, banded together to write in Bernie, he would have a strong chance of winning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I think a lot of things people believe show a serious lack of judgement.” Amen. By the way, I don’t think I have posted anything by Icke. Nevertheless I think he’s a visionary As well as a luminary.
LikeLike
We get information from both corperate and independent media. They are both biased in their own ways which means both contain truth but it requires parsing to extract what is actually going.
A lot of independent media is driven by conspiracy theory and fear. That don’t always break down along idiological lines. Some are more objective then others but all have a particular narrative that they are “selling” to there followers. Those with YouTube channels and blogs that ask for donations devolve into click bate to keep the traffic flowing.
Before I knew who Ickes was I remember coming across one of his Youtube videos and largely agreeing and then he took this left turn into Reptilians and I was like WTF ? LOL
LikeLike
@Lord of Mirkwood
“AND we got most of Trump’s supporters to defect to the left-wing”
You do not need most, not even a third. Trump is only polling between 38-42% including Johnson and Stein.
The problem with the socialists is you’re just too wedded to the Democrats to ever get a nominee who represents your values.
“And it’s too late now, with less than two months to go.”
LOL. Only in America would someone say that.
2 months is ample time. Last year, it took less than 2 months for Trump to go from 4% to 24% in the polls and become the Republican frontrunner. It took less than a month for Trump to edge out Hillary in the most recent poll (cough, cough).
LikeLike
@Lord of Mirkwood
“That might work IF all of us socialists and undecideds who like neither Trump nor Hillary band together to write in Bernie AND we got most of Trump’s supporters to defect to the left-wing. That would be a tall order, though. And it’s too late now, with less than two months to go.
That would have had to be done back around this time last year. For whatever reason, Bernie’s campaign didn’t devote so much energy to getting Trump supporters to register as Democrats and vote in the primaries. There might never have been any chance that those yahoos would listen to reason, anyway.”
Let’s put the blame where it belongs. The black voting block. Had they not been in the pocket of crooked Hillary, they would have been free to vote for the obviously better (domestic issues) candidate in the primaries. We would not be in this crisis. Bernie would win against Trump. Bernie had a movement. The black voting block, however, chose to remain on the Clinton plantation. Get that? Not just the Democratic plantation but the Clinton plantation. Clintonism. That’s what we had with Barack. That’s what we’ll have with…well…Clinton.
What is Clintonism?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/07/25/what-is-clintonism/
Smash Clintonism: Why Democrats, Not Republicans, are the Problem
http://www.counterpunch.org/…/smash-clintonism-why-democrats-not-republicans- are-the-problem/
Bernie’s Tragic Flaw: Too Soft on Clinton
http://www.counterpunch.org/…/bernies-tragic-flaw-too-soft-on-clinton/
What Next in the War on Clintonism?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/…/what-next-in-the-war-on-clintonism/
Imagine: No Clintons
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/26/imagine-no-clintons/
LikeLike
@nomad
Loved your “perception management” comment upthread. You knocked it out of the park!
Oleaginous is a mild term for that Brooklyn Bridge salesman. I wonder how working class Americans would feel about him if they knew how close he came to wiping out Social Security? Especially Black people who are bunking at “Muh Dear’s” extra bedroom because they were evicted from their house due to some Big Bank swindle.
Thank goodness (in this instance) that the Repubs were not cooperating.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@LoM
“…a majority of blacks were at least hesitant on Bernie if not openly pro-Clinton. This included the black political leadership like John Lewis, the black elite, and a lot of race-related blogs.”
A lot of the ” black political leadership like John Lewis, the black elite, and a lot of race-related blogs” are sellouts to the Democratic Party from way back. They constitute what Glen Ford of Black Agenda Report call the Black Misleadership Class.
Their main concerns are stuffing their pockets, cushy nepotistic deals for their kids and relatives and occasional “Civil Rights Veterans” posturing in the media. They could care less about the masses of Black folk.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I wonder how working class Americans would feel about him if they knew how close he came to wiping out Social Security?”
And our black press was not saying a thing. As far as I can tell. Crickets. Except for BAR. Our intellectual class failed to highlight and explain what was happening to the ordinary working class black American. Still today fails to explain to these people what a betrayal Barack Obama was and is. It is the absence of this understanding, it is the absence of this critique, that allows them to fall further prey to Clinton. Oh my brothers and sisters I say and I say again. You been had! You been took! You been hoodwinked! Bamboozled! Led astray! Run amuck! Our intellectual class needs to explain that that is what has just happened. Maybe we can then learn from that mistake. And see Obama’s handpicked successor in a different light.
LikeLike
“Strategists from Hillary Clinton’s primary super PAC have announced their intention to begin targeting voters who support Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein.”
“Apparently having abandoned any attempt to get their candidate to stop lying, obfuscating and alienating voters, her increasingly-nervous campaign promoters are now opting to blame third parties for Mrs. Clinton’s almost superhuman ability to consistently lose the trust and enthusiasm of the American public.”
Jill Stien tweeted,
“The more HRC’s Super PACs spend trying to bully people into failed 2-party system, the more it’ll strengthen our will to #BreakThe2PartyTrap”
In other news the New York Post published an article claiming that there has been a shift by Black voters towards Trump. They base this on an L.A. Times poll that shows 3.1% increase for Trump among Black voters. The 3.1% is within the margin of error and without other polls showing a similar correlation I wouldn’t put too much credence in there claim.
What Hillary is having a problem with are millennial voters and that has shown to be true based on a number of different polls. This weakness also shows to be true with Black and Hispanic voters though not on the same scale as white voters.
LikeLike
I forgot to insert link for above quotes.
http://www.inquisitr.com/3517866/floundering-clinton-campaign-set-to-attack-third-parties/
LikeLike
Addled Hillary waves to imaginary audience members.
(https://youtu.be/ouGHDEon4SM?t=1m59s)
LikeLike
video in mod. let me say that I am not advocating or agreeing with this guys conclusions, but waving at and pointing to a flag as if it were an audience is very strange behavior. well not for her, given the other things shes done. but strange to the rest of us.
LikeLike
Paternalistic Obama gon take it as a “personal insult” if blacks don’t vote for Hillary and preserve his glorious legacy. As far as I’m concerned he can consider himself insulted. Now if only we could prosecute this war criminal.
(https://youtu.be/vQAcSpKqDPM)
LikeLike
Reading the comments to the brilliant video above, I had to share this one.
“Obama: Vote for Hillary because I’m Black.” LOL
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Afrofem
“@nomad
Loved your “perception management” comment upthread. You knocked it out of the park!”
Thanks. I wish I had added how he went to Flint and drank the water. Pure perception management. Whatever became of Flint’s poisoned water? Anybody go to jail yet?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@nomad
“Whatever became of Flint’s poisoned water? Anybody go to jail yet?”
There is a lot of throw-people-who-followed-orders-under-the-bus theater and public wailing, but the decision makers are riding around in “impunity convertibles”. Their crimes are never mentioned and there seems to be no movement to bring them to justice.
LikeLike
http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/here-they-are-hillarys-22-biggest-scandals-ever/
Note: These are just the biggest scandals. They are not the full total of all of her scandals.
@Afrofem
“Whatever became of Flint’s poisoned water? Anybody go to jail yet?”
lol
That was a rhetorical question, right ??
LikeLike
it was me. and yep
LikeLike
🙂
LikeLike
I watched a small part of the Obama black caucus speech and he mentioned being upset that people are talking about their votes not mattering. It seems like the anger and apathy that exists is actually well known.
LikeLike
@nomad and Fan
Okay, Okay, I gave a long rhetorical answer to a rhetorical question. Oh well.
(chuckle)
LikeLike
Hillary guests on Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis.
This must be her attempt to appeal to millianials. I’m not sure if it worked. Awkward humor. Let’s hope he doesn’t end up on her kill list lol
(http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/b2fc974d1d/between-two-ferns-with-zach-galifianakis-hillary-clinton?_cc=__m___&_ccid=19de4c90-23a1-443a-bcfd-79d0b9895de8)
LikeLike
I stumbled on this video on “related videos” on youtube. I don’t know that much about what’s done to help Parkinson’s patients but what do you guys think about the 4:40 mark onwards?
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCDbboP00pY&t=4m40s)
It’s speculation and the channel is 100% for Trump but I thought the laser pointer thing was interesting.
LikeLike
With everything about Trump coming out, a “Humiliating defeat” seems increasingly likely. What do you think, Abagond?
LikeLike
I dislike each candidate an America overthrew the United States almost a century ago. If T wins; there will be an assassination. There will NEED to be one. She will win because lots want to see Bill back in the WH.
LikeLike
P.J. O’Rourke:
More:
http://www.npr.org/2016/05/09/477339063/conservative-author-pj-orourke-reluctantly-backs-clinton
LikeLike
Looks like Trump is going down badly on November 8th. He can go back to filing multiple bankruptcies with his spoiled brat children. And his supporters can take several seats for voting for an unqualified Bigot. Shame on the Republican Party for nominating this joker.
LikeLike
http://www.burrardstreetjournal.com/trump-contacted-lance-armstrong-advice-space-program/
LikeLike
I’ve changed my mind. lol Before I argued that in swing states voting for Hillary was a better option then voting third party as I belived Trump was the greater threat.
I think that both canidates are so badly damaged that if either gets elected the chances of either of them serving four years without resigning or being impeached is high.
Trump will break the law and try to rule like a CEO which will give him the appearance of a dictator. But I think he is very limited on what he can actually do. Unlike Hitler he doesn’t have the country behind him.
Hillaries email issues will continue to stalk her and it’s likely there are damaging emails in her close confident and assistant Huma Abedin devices.
In thinking about this it seems more important for both the Greens and the Libertarians to get the 5% they need in the general election so that they can get ballot access and campaign funding four years from now.
So vote your conscious.
LikeLike
Yes, Democrats, please be conscious when you vote.
(https://youtu.be/4a6YdNmK77k)
LikeLike
@michaeljonbarker
I cosign your decision. Since Washington state is likely to go for HRClinton, I plan to vote Green to help build alternatives for the future.
We will have to muddle through the next four years as best we can. By 2020, the Millennials will be a full one third of the electorate. They detest both parties and are ready to build something new.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Remember this comment?
on Mon 1 Aug 2016 at 15:08:20
nomad
Racism is pervasive. For example, I used to follow what I would call an enlightenment website. Higher consciousness and all that jazz. I was digging it. And then a guest post (not the host thank god) talked about the Tamir Rice shooting in terms of him being a thug. And of course the commentary continued in that vein. Not once did any of these seekers of enlightenment exhibit any empathy for this child, nor did the host interject. And of course none of these people would consider themselves racists. That kind of soured me on enlightenment. If this is the level of zen, then spare me.
This guy was recently outed as former member of a child abuse cult. Look him up. Zen Gardner.
LikeLike
re the p word
oh, I see. it was ‘moderated’. moderated as opposed to deleted as in the case of the p-gate comment..
LikeLike