Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 29, 2016

Sanders Must Offer Tulsi Gabbard The VP Slot. Now!

Tulsi Gabbard, a U.S. Congress representative from Hawaii, stepped down as a vice chair of the Democrat National Committee to endorse Bernie Sanders. In the video below the fold she explains her reasoning. It is Clinton's militarism in foreign policies that makes her take the other side.

Described as "libertarian-leaning progressive" the woman is smart, pretty and speaks well. She is also a former officer in the U.S. military with combat experience and an interest in foreign policy.

Politically her endorsement is manna from heaven for Sanders.

Sanders should IMMEDIATELY offer her the Vice-President slot. Her task in the campaign is to stand in on all foreign policy issues. Sanders then can continue to focus on inequality in the United States.

Hillary Clinton would have no chance to beat that team. Unlike the neoconned Clinton, a Sanders/Gabbard ticket can attract young voters which will be needed to beat Trump. If Clinton runs against Trump the large and growing "anything but Clinton" crowd would likely let her loose.

Someone tell Sanders that he better act fast to announce her nomination before Clinton collects more states and takes away the buzz that the Sanders campaign urgently needs.



Posted by b on February 29, 2016 at 19:41 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Couldn't. Agree.More! Now if not sooner!!

Posted by: Steve | Feb 29 2016 19:57 utc | 1

Right on Moon!

Posted by: Vollin | Feb 29 2016 20:00 utc | 2


Excellent! I agree completely plus ...

Robert Reich Endorses Bernie Sanders .. and More

Posted by: Oui | Feb 29 2016 20:02 utc | 3

b, I totally disagrees with you on this one...

NO Democrats under any circumstances. Bernie Sanders is and will continue to be a war monger and He (Sander) will continue to support Israeli for total elimination of Palestinians in Gaze, West Banks and in Israel.

You can dress a pig in any manner and it's still PIG, Period!

Proof me wrong and will gladly eat all my shoes.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Feb 29 2016 20:14 utc | 4

I agree, here is Tulsi Gabbard on CNN interviewed by Wolf Blitzer

Posted by: harry law | Feb 29 2016 20:20 utc | 5


Does a single Palestinian or American live matter to you or are you willing to vote for Sanders just to prevent Killary or Trump to become president?

Remember Rachel Corrie

b, or anyone here my position is clear NO Sander or any Democrats

Posted by: Jack Smith | Feb 29 2016 20:28 utc | 6

Not a former officer.

"Gabbard continues to serve as a major in the Hawaii Army National Guard" (wikipedia)

Posted by: Outrage Beyond | Feb 29 2016 20:30 utc | 7

What a fantastic idea, Moon. She is world class! I have seen her on television and she is impressive. Does Sanders want to win? He is too quiet about the loose cannon hillary.

Posted by: charles shamey | Feb 29 2016 20:33 utc | 8

"Sanders should IMMEDIATELY offer her the Vice-President slot. Her task in the campaign is to stand in on all foreign policy issues. Sanders then can continue to focus on inequality in the United States.....

Will the continue slaughter in the West Banks, Gaze and in Israel STOP even with Tulsi Gabbard? Remember....She is also a former officer in the U.S. military with combat experience.... another war monger and murder?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Feb 29 2016 20:36 utc | 9

Her drawback is her support for fascist BJP in India. But she would help defeat HRC and racist Trump.

Posted by: Red brick | Feb 29 2016 20:38 utc | 10

I just watched her clip again thanks to Harry. Can't anyone see whose side blitzer is on?

Posted by: charles shamey | Feb 29 2016 20:41 utc | 11

It would appear that b reads Counterpunch and saw Dave Lindorff's very similar article,

I agree that she would be an excellent choice for Veep. Her critique of Outlaw US Empire policy is withering, and she has bigtime Cred to do so.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 29 2016 20:43 utc | 13

And she is a surfer

Posted by: Joanne Leon | Feb 29 2016 20:49 utc | 15

Posted by: harry law | Feb 29, 2016 3:20:27 PM | 5

Thanks. I've never heard of Tulsi Gabbard, but if that's who/what she is then I understand b's enthusiasm. But I disagree. She'll unnecessarily delay the Nuke Cure for the world's AmeriKKKa Problem.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 29 2016 20:57 utc | 16

@Outrage Beyond #7

Not a former officer. "Gabbard continues to serve as a major in the Hawaii Army National Guard" (wikipedia)....

In another word still in the US murderer organization with more than a thousands bases around the world to protect us from Russia and China? (between them 3 bases Russia - Latakia, Tartus in Syria China - Spratly Islands)

Posted by: Jack Smith | Feb 29 2016 20:58 utc | 17


as nauseating as i find usa elections, i agree Tulsi Gabbard seems like a good person... i don't know much about bernie sanders... i wish the whole thing was over, as opposed to another 8 months of mots...

Posted by: james | Feb 29 2016 21:00 utc | 18

Add #18.
There's been growing realisation, here and elsewhere, that the POTUS is a tool of the 0.1%. If she can't change that then her destiny is "Best-looking assassinated V-POTUS."

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 29 2016 21:05 utc | 19

Deja Vu All Over Again!

Remember 2008 Obomo the CHANGE candidate, change you can believe in? Even got a Nobel Peace price before he started his presidency and turn out to be a Murderer-in-chief, Liar-in-chief, Warmonger-in-chief....

When will we the VOTERS wake up and never trust any politicians?

Am I the only smart or stupid one here?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Feb 29 2016 21:08 utc | 20

Might think about keeping the powder dry and options open - its early hours yet and the day is long,
and though the voice is sweet, maybe they don't know the words to the song.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Feb 29 2016 21:11 utc | 21


Am I the only smart or stupid one here beside Hoarsewhisperer?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Feb 29 2016 21:14 utc | 22

Tulsi Gabbard is well-spoken and pretty. Bernie is not. This makes a balanced (appealing) ticket. That she has rescinded her DNC creds for Bernie is wonderful for Bernie. It is imperative that Bernie does not look this gift horse in the mouth. He MUST appoint Tulsi Gabbard as his Veep NOW and run with it. If he does not, then he is a sheep herder for Hillary. This is what I suggested all along.

I also said that JEB! would be our next President. I am happy to be wrong about that. BUT You can't rule out the Bush Crime Family yet.

Posted by: fast freddy | Feb 29 2016 21:42 utc | 23

Thanks b. Bernie's foreign policy is moronic. If he can walk back the stupidity of his arm the Saudis to seek and destroy, I might consider voting for him.

Posted by: Nana2007 | Feb 29 2016 21:54 utc | 24

b: "Sanders Must Offer Tulsi Gabbard The VP Slot. Now!"


@charles shamey | Feb 29, 2016 3:33:31 PM | 8
"What a fantastic idea, Moon."

@Hoarsewhisperer | Feb 29, 2016 3:57:06 PM | 16
"Thanks. I've never heard of Tulsi Gabbard"

I love the name Tulsi b/c it is so easy to search. Plug it into the search window in this blog and you'll find a couple of dozen of us pushing Gabbard for some time. Thanks for waking up, b.

@Formerly T-Bear | Feb 29, 2016 4:11:43 PM | 21
"Might think about keeping the powder dry and options open - its early hours yet and the day is long,and though the voice is sweet, maybe they don't know the words to the song."

Gawd, I love that, ex-T-Bear. But the time is too short and the powder is too damp. We need to get this black-belt, Samoan, Hindu, Army Major, sufer-babe in the race, dude. Or Liz Warren.

Posted by: Denis | Feb 29 2016 21:57 utc | 25

. . . but we need to think this Tulsi Gabbard thing through.

With a president that would be 75 yo, the country would have a 34 yo VP that is just one busted aneurysm away from the most powerful position in the world . . . I mean, her surfing and karate credentials notwithstanding, what happens when she goes toe-to-toe with Putin? Or Bibi?

Personally, I don't really care if she would just do a Sports Illustrated bathing suit cover in the WH swimming pool. Or anywhere.

Posted by: Denis | Feb 29 2016 22:09 utc | 26

@Red brick 10
Keep on drinking the MSM kool-aid about BJP in India.
Gabbard is fantastic, one of a few genuinely non establishment politicians

Posted by: Ancient Archer | Feb 29 2016 22:10 utc | 27

. . . I mean, Bernie would be the oldest person elected president -- 5 yrs older than Rayguns when Rayguns was first elected. Those of us who suffered through Rayguns' senile years know how painful that was for everyone.

If Bernie keeled over the first day of his presidency, Tulsi would be the youngest president by 7 years. At 35 she would be just barely Constitutionally old enuf to hold the office. Teddy R. was 42 when he took over after McKinley was assassinated.

Of course, with Trump as the alternative, these extremes in Bernie's and Tulsi's ages don't seem so extreme.

Posted by: Denis | Feb 29 2016 22:30 utc | 28

This isn't the first time she has turned against the demodog elite but I really don't care. I'll be voting Green.

Posted by: jo6pac | Feb 29 2016 22:50 utc | 29

Aloha. I'm Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard. As a veteran of two Middle East deployments I know, first-hand, the cost of war.

I know how important it is that our Commander in Chief has the sound judgement required to know when to use America's military power and when not to use that power.

As a vice-chair of the DNC, I'm required to stay neutral in Democratic primaries, but I cannot remain neutral any longer. The stakes are just too high.

Thats why, today, I'm endorsing Senator Bernie Sanders to be our next President and Commander in Chief of the United States.

We need a Commander in Chief

  - who has foresight,
  - who exercises good judgement, and
  - who understands the need for a robust foreign policy, which defends the safety and security of the American people, and
  - who will not waste precious lives and money on interventionist wars of regime change.

Such counterproductive wars undermine our national security and economic prosperity.

As these elections continue across the country, the American people are faced with a very clear choice :

  - we can elect a president who will lead us to more interventionist wars of regime change, or
  - we can elect a president who will usher in a new era of peace and prosperity.

It's with this clear choice in mind that I am resigning as vice chair of the DNC so that I can strongly support Bernie Sanders as the Democratic Nominee for President of the United States.

And now I ask you. Stand with me. And support Bernie Sanders.

She's redefining Bernie's campaign, taking over foreign policy as Commandress in Chief of, not the United States, but the armed forces. And she's just about to turn 35. Openly saying give peace a chance. I was going to write-her-in in the TX Democratic primary, now I'll vote Bernie ... if he does the obvious, the only, correct thing. I'm afraid he won't though. I'm afraid the sheepdog is running to lose.

Posted by: jfl | Feb 29 2016 23:00 utc | 30

Yes, Jack Smith, voting is more than a waste of time, it empowers them all.

Don't vote - it only encourages them.

So what can we do? Nothing, except try to get over it. Abandon all hope.

Posted by: DM | Feb 29 2016 23:06 utc | 31

There's always beer :)

Posted by: DM | Feb 29 2016 23:10 utc | 32

Gabbard seems like a good choice but after seeing Red Brick's comment @ 10 and Googling her name with those of BJP and Narendra Modi (and finding numerous results), I must say I have my reservations about Gabbard and her funding sources. The US does not need any more foreign governments and crackpot fundamentalist religious movements (be they of Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Bahai, Jedi or any other origin) than it already has pouring money into individual politicians' election war-chests. That applies as much to Bernie Sanders and anyone he nominates as VP as it does for Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Jen | Feb 29 2016 23:12 utc | 33

#30 jfl, "who will not waste precious lives and money on interventionist wars of regime change" and "we can elect a president who will usher in a new era of peace and prosperity" sound like clichés. I'm sure many Dem candidates and even isolationist GOP candidates have said these things all the time. I noticed that there's no mention of any specific conflicts like Syria or Ukraine.

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Feb 29 2016 23:15 utc | 34

Agree that Sanders naming Gabbard as his VP pick would firm up his mediocre foreign policy since he has little interest in talking about it. Someone who's actually had to go fight might help the US stay out of wars.

Posted by: WorldBLee | Feb 29 2016 23:16 utc | 35

Sorry, if Bernie really wants to get votes, he needs to pick Kim Kardashian for running mate.
just kidding . . . Obama cured me of voting.

Posted by: Perimetr | Feb 29 2016 23:28 utc | 36

@34 Inkan1969, ' I'm sure many Dem candidates and even isolationist GOP candidates have said these things all the time. '

Peace? I think I'll require a link on that one.

@33 Jen

I certainly am skeptical of Gabbard. She's in the f*king Army. She was on the DNC. She is one ambitious creature, not unlike the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate/'Commander in Chief of the United States'. I think she's the Pentagon's horse in the race.

But The Donald vs The Hil is the chronicle of all our deaths foretold.

Posted by: jfl | Feb 29 2016 23:34 utc | 37

Uneasiness, emotional outbursts, withdraw-like symptoms, rage bordering with convulsions, bullying, these are emotional responses of most of Sanders crowd confronted with harsh reality of undeniably and fatally flawed Sanders' candidacy, mostly not even due to his personal failings but due to a deeply unfair and undemocratic electoral system he chose to accept and vowed to uphold.

Most of Americans, not unlike a cargo cult, are impatient, nervous, excited and scared sitting and waiting before an impregnable curtain of political manipulation of the ruling elite, turning to magic, superstition, appeasement or begging for mercy or praying for a caprice of good will to save them, while blatantly abandoning their unalienable rights to self-determination and democratic system of people’s rule, based on equality in the law, and one voter one vote principle.

This courageous woman will not save Bernie, swindled with his tacit approval, of otherwise very likely victory of his campaign of nothing more than moderate sanity.

Posted by: Kalen | Feb 29 2016 23:41 utc | 38

Bernie will likely lose the election tomorrow. The Southern States will vote for Clinton and they will decide the election. Its shocking and appalling that the deciding states will be states that the Democrats will never win in a general election.

I am holding out hope for Texas. A lot of young people will vote for Sanders and I hope that latinos will vote against Clinton. I can not understand why latinos would vote for a candidate that sends back young children and supports the policies of the Deporter in Chief.

I have had to hold back some rascist sounding rants lately. I am not a racist but it is hard to not sound like one when black voters are voting at 90% for Clinton. How can one hope to not stereotype when an ethnic group is voting at those rates. It'd be one thing if she did not constantly use "dog whistle" language.

O and on MSNBC, I watch it for background noise, had a 5-10 minute rally for Trump on TV.

Not a mention of the 40 cities that held Bernie marches or Tulsi Gabbard. Everything is about the republicans.

Corporate media will create a corporate state. I hope one day people will stop calling corporate media the mainstream media. It is corporately controlled media. It is not mainstream.

And finally, Jill Stein is a joke. She managed to win a city council seat. If you want to go with a third party check out the Justice Party. The Green Party is a bunch of well off white liberals that managed to chase a Civil Rights leader (Elaine Brown) out of the party. I do not know where Jill Stein stood on that issue. I doubt it was on the right side since many people left the party over that issue.

Posted by: AnEducatedFool | Feb 29 2016 23:47 utc | 39

REGIME CHANGE! She said the magic word!

In the official Western narrative a thing called "regime change" does not exists. It is basically Putin's propaganda, a pro-Russian false narrative that Putin's Troll Army is trying to insert into the discussion.

The concept is similar to "Color Revolution". Just two years ago Russian media, including RT, would always write "color revolution" in quotes. Now they are openly using the term.

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Feb 29, 2016 6:15:57 PM | 34

"...interventionist wars of regime change"

sound like clichés.

Any revolutionary idea, once it is universally adopted, becomes a cliché. We are still a long way from calling R2P by its proper name, regime change.

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Mar 1 2016 0:00 utc | 40

b, you are so right. That ticket wd be unbeatable-- and so much better than our present
choices. The only additional thing we need is PAPER BALLOTS w public hand-counting at each
polling place. If Americans wd stand up and win on just that one issue it wd be a wonderful
learning experience.

Posted by: Penelope | Mar 1 2016 0:00 utc | 41

@33 Jen

You're right, just one, two, three of those links are 'troublesome'. With an American Jew, mum on foreign policy/Israel, at the top of the ticket, and an American Hindu/closet BJP fascist, who bad-mouths Islam, as veep ... could be just another flavor of captured politicians and brutal betrayal for us Americans. All I'd heard were the good points of Tulsi Gabbard. Oh, so well polished those are though, aren't they.

I'm afraid I'm right... Write-in non-elephants/non-donkeys, first time, everytime. It's our only means of actual expression, and eventual salvation. If we'd started in 2004 we'd be home ... or well along the way ... by now.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 1 2016 0:05 utc | 42

Look y'all, Tulsi is my House Critter! She does have some baggage like the Modi/BJP actions, Syrian refugee remarks, and, some previous anti-LGBT actions. But, clearing up some of the ridiculous misrepresentations above: Her combat experience was as a Combat Medic(for which she was awarded her Cbt. Medic Badge), She currently is a Military Police Major. I don't thnk she's a good choice, and I like her right where she's at...!

Posted by: CTuttle | Mar 1 2016 0:05 utc | 43

@41 pen 'The only additional thing we need is PAPER BALLOTS w public hand-counting at each
polling place. If Americans wd stand up and win on just that one issue it wd be a wonderful
learning experience'

Now you're talkin'.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 1 2016 0:09 utc | 44

@40 That was exactly my reaction. A VP candidate speaking against "regime change" is a shocking turn. Absolutely shocking. I'll cross my fingers.

Posted by: Cresty | Mar 1 2016 0:16 utc | 45

This girl needs to be careful she's not on the wrong end of a preemptive strike...

Posted by: MadMax2 | Mar 1 2016 0:20 utc | 46


I never served but I was friends with a medic and Army Ranger. Neither came back the same. Special Ops do the worst things and medics see the worst things.

Medics treat soldiers and civilians. They give treatment at the front. I do not know if she was on the front lines but medics see action and she has seen some of the worst injuries and deaths. I do not doubt her credibility on this issue. I may disagree on some points but I do not doubt that she is actually aware of what is at stake.

Posted by: AnEducatedFool | Mar 1 2016 0:33 utc | 47

@34 Inkan1969 'there's no mention of any specific conflicts like Syria or Ukraine.'

On Syria, see H.R. 4108: To prohibit the use of funds for the provision of assistance to Syrian opposition groups and individuals.


To prohibit the use of funds for the provision of assistance to Syrian opposition groups and individuals.

1.Prohibition on provision of assistance to Syrian opposition groups and individuals

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds available to the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Defense, or any other agency or entity of the United States involved in intelligence activities, or to the National Security Council or its staff may not be obligated or expended to provide assistance, including training, equipment, supplies, stipends, construction of training and associated facilities, and sustainment, to any element of the Syrian opposition or to any other Syrian group or individual seeking to overthrow the government of the Syrian Arab Republic, unless, after the date of the enactment of this Act, funds are specifically authorized to be appropriated and appropriated by law for such purpose.

@38 Kalen, 'blatantly abandoning their unalienable rights to self-determination and democratic system of people’s rule, based on equality in the law, and one voter one vote principle.'

Yeah. That's our problem all right. You get a gold star for mentioning it. Care to take a stab at a solution?

@39 AEF ' I am not a racist but it is hard not to sound like one when black voters are voting at 90% for Clinton.'

Glen Ford's not a racist either. Don't blame the victims ... they've been voting the lessor of two evils since they've been 'allowed' to vote.

I'll take you up on corporate media over msm.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 1 2016 0:58 utc | 48

On the one hand; it amazes me to see the excitement about "possibilities" in the bread and circuses. There is always the shiny; in this case it's Tulsi Gabbard; she'll save Bernie.
The GOP is plotting against Der Fuehrer Trump, and Clinton's DNC is busy rigging elections.
But on the other hand; it's a sad example that most just cannot grasp the reality of what's really happened to the U.S..
Short of a genuine revolution (you know; in the streets, pitchforks and all) it's over. Your votes are a cruel joke to maintain the illusion.
But I guess it's just too horrendous to contemplate the present reality for most folks.
So, you remain compliant victims of your own sloth.

Posted by: V. Arnold | Mar 1 2016 1:12 utc | 49

ot - i see over at ssr b is being accused of "economic determinism." l.o.l. that is like the stamp of death on pl's site where you are not allowed to talk about the 0.01% (as @19 hoarsewhisperer mentions) having any existence whatsoever.. better not read joseph stiglitz 'price of equality' or 'the great divide'.. ssr folks have to go along with pl code instead... no economic determinism allowed...

Posted by: james | Mar 1 2016 1:31 utc | 50

@V. Arnold #49

On the one hand; it amazes me to see the excitement about "possibilities" in the bread and circuses. There is always the shiny; in this case it's Tulsi Gabbard; she'll save Bernie........

Yes, she will save Bernie...... But, but, but... the Palestinians will either be slaughters or driven from West Banks, Gaze and (Syria) Golan's Height will forever be part of Israel while America helping Turkey cut Syria into pieces (Plan B) and not forgetting Ukraine, an empire of USA...

Oops, China too will be destroy and SEA (South East Asia) will again becomes colonies of America...

Sad, so many here with pea brains, not looking beyond their noses... Tulsi Gabbard the saviour, how many more lives needlessly sacrifices for Bernie Sanders?

The endless wars continue....

Posted by: Jack Smith | Mar 1 2016 1:42 utc | 51

@50 I notice SST (why SSR?) has a piece about Hillary and Libya. Nobody has dared remind Col.Lang how gungho he was on that intervention yet. Or maybe it got deleted.

Posted by: dh | Mar 1 2016 1:43 utc | 52

I find it interesting that you posted this US political challenge to the Sanders camp. It is hard to not keep smoking that hopium stuff......if only we could nudge t he system a bit here or there and things will get better. I guess it is that or serious evolution and it may be too late for that to be effective for our species long term survival.

I was an early supporter of Sanders but have lost the energy to face the "no-one-is-good-enough Jack Smith types as well as the "Its Her Turn" types. I wonder how many are being paid to infect MoA with agnotology?

The next two weeks should be interesting as we see the machinations of the past political machinery react to and attempt to manufacture cohesion around the 2016 race for the puppet house.

Now it the haters/non-sharing types could be shut down as effectively as the Occupy folks were.........

Posted by: psychohistorian | Mar 1 2016 2:19 utc | 53

ot @52 dh... i said ssr, but mean - sst...thanks for pointing that out and good observation on his previous interventionist thinking as well, which i was unaware of...i've only visited pls site recently.. they all slavishly hold pl in such high regard, none would have the audacity or balls to challenge anything like that!

Posted by: james | Mar 1 2016 2:22 utc | 54

@54 He was all for sending the Turks into Syria at one point too. They were great fighters in Korea.

Posted by: dh | Mar 1 2016 2:29 utc | 55

Exactly right b!

If Sanders wants to win, he should appoint Tulsi as his running mate.

But she announced her decision YESTERDAY MORNING(!!) and he hasn't done so.

Now he has missed the opportunity for Super Tuesday (with 12 States voting).

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

Tulsi is perfect because she can appeal to women and people of color and she brings military/foreign experience that Sanders sorely lacks.

I hope that the failure of Sanders to seize yet another opportunity TO WIN will open the eyes of those that just can't believe that Sanders values his connection to the Democratic leadership (Obama, Hillary, Schumer, and more are 'friends') is far more important to him than winning. He really IS a sheepdog.

And Sanders is just fine with the neocon establishment foreign policy as I recently pointed out.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 1 2016 2:58 utc | 56

Makes perfect sense b, so it won't happen."Good cop, bad cop" ya' know.

Posted by: ben | Mar 1 2016 3:16 utc | 57

harry law @ 5: Thanks harry, for the Gabbard link, makes b's request for Sanders to sign her up for VP even more salient.

I'm still in shock her message was even aired on MSM.

Posted by: ben | Mar 1 2016 3:44 utc | 58

Once we understand that it is about what kind of a society we want to live in, other questions arise. How much is enough for each of us? How much is too much? At what point does someone’s amassing of what ultimately are our resources represent an unacceptable taking from the rest of us? When the moral and societal elements are given their rightful place in the discussion, it doesn’t take a lot to understand why modern economics and politics go to such lengths to excise any mention of them. Modern economics and politics are tools of the rich and elites whose purpose is to maintain their wealth and position at our expense. If morality is brought up, they have no defense. They lose. So they make sure it is never brought up. Problem solved.
Hugh, from Ian Welsh's blog - February 29, 2016

I thought this was a great statement of the U.S.'s dilemma; one which isn't being, and won't be, resolved.

Posted by: V. Arnold | Mar 1 2016 3:46 utc | 59

P @ 41 said: "The only additional thing we need is PAPER BALLOTS w public hand-counting at each polling place."

Yes! a thousand times yes, but don't hold your breath til' THAT happens.

Posted by: ben | Mar 1 2016 3:54 utc | 60

Psst, hey Jack, we get it. Now please, STFU. You're in a rut.

Posted by: ben | Mar 1 2016 3:57 utc | 61

@55 Yes. Tulsi Gabbard like Trump seems to have a tad of a Muslim problem. You can learn more about her position on Israel, Iran and Islam here:

The United States’ relationship with Israel must rise above the political fray, as America continues to stand with Israel as her strongest ally.

Tulsi Gabbard insisted that Islam is the source of violence, not socio-economic conditions. This is significant, because it demonstrates the Vice Chair of the DNC knows nothing about the Progressive worldview. True liberal values may be in decline because ‘mainstream’ Progressives have abandoned some of the core beliefs of a Progressive worldview.

She's particularly a favorite of right-wing media. Appearing with Fox's Neil Cavuto last week, she lashed out at the White House for holding an extremism summit with Muslim Americans, saying it's a “diversion from what our real focus needs to be. And that focus is on that Islamic extremist threat.” She criticized Obama for saying that “poverty, lack of access to jobs, lack of access to education” is contributing to radicalization. “They are not fueled by materialistic motivation, it's actually a theological, this radical Islamic ideology,” she said, throwing red meat to Fox viewers.

Posted by: Circe | Mar 1 2016 4:10 utc | 62

@Circe #63,

Thank you for the websites exposing Tulsi Gabbard as another NeoCon or Neoliberal. Beware someone will tell you to STFU.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Mar 1 2016 4:47 utc | 63

@ben #62. yes I got it and will STFU. I'm a rut.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Mar 1 2016 4:48 utc | 64

Bernie better do something fast as his campaign will quickly (meaning tomorrow) be on life support :-)

For all intents & purposes this going to be a contest between neocon/neoliberal Hillary Clinton & cipher Donald Trump in November.

There's John Oliver on Trump:

Posted by: ab initio | Mar 1 2016 5:08 utc | 65

According to Wikipedia on Iranian politics: Iran has an elected president, parliament, "Assembly of Experts" and local councils. According to the constitution all candidates running for these positions must be vetted by the Guardian Council before being elected.

But in the U.S., the constitution doesn't require that candidates running for elections be vetted. Instead they're vetted by the Lobby of a foreign state to which they are expected to pander, grovel, profess their love and loyalty to, and if necessary, send the American people's children to die in wars that the foreign state deems necessary to secure its ideological supremacy.

Posted by: Circe | Mar 1 2016 5:54 utc | 66

#MUSTREAD Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. explains the origins of the U.S.-Syrian conflict in a long article in Politico:

Why the Arabs Don’t Want Us in Syria

But all that CIA money failed to corrupt the Syrian military officers. The soldiers reported the CIA’s bribery attempts to the Ba’athist regime. In response, the Syrian army invaded the American Embassy, taking Stone prisoner. After harsh interrogation, Stone made a televised confession of his roles in the Iranian coup and the CIA’s aborted attempt to overthrow Syria’s legitimate government. The Syrians ejected Stone and two U.S. Embassy staffers—the first time any American State Department diplomat was barred from an Arab country. The Eisenhower White House hollowly dismissed Stone’s confession as “fabrications” and “slanders,” a denial swallowed whole by the American press, led by the New York Times and believed by the American people, who shared Mosaddegh’s idealistic view of their government. Syria purged all politicians sympathetic to the U.S. and executed for treason all military officers associated with the coup. In retaliation, the U.S. moved the Sixth Fleet to the Mediterranean, threatened war and goaded Turkey to invade Syria. The Turks assembled 50,000 troops on Syria’s borders and backed down only in the face of unified opposition from the Arab League whose leaders were furious at the U.S. intervention. Even after its expulsion, the CIA continued its secret efforts to topple Syria’s democratically elected Ba’athist government. The CIA plotted with Britain’s MI6 to form a “Free Syria Committee” and armed the Muslim Brotherhood to assassinate three Syrian government officials, who had helped expose “the American plot,” according to Matthew Jones in “The ‘Preferred Plan’: The Anglo-American Working Group Report on Covert Action in Syria, 1957.” The CIA’s mischief pushed Syria even further away from the U.S. and into prolonged alliances with Russia and Egypt.

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Mar 1 2016 6:05 utc | 67

Look I realise alla those people who think this is a great idea, genuinely believe it to be so but the links to vids of Gabbard is reminiscent of a thread in either MoA or its predecessor, the whiskey bar in which a wannabe senator from illnois created a stir at that years dnc convention. Among those posters who still believed that it was possible to succeed in the dem half of the imperial party and not be a sociopath monster, barack was hailed as a boy king - just the person to lead amerika outta the darkness and onto the path of righteousness.

The rest of us were gobsmacked at the ease with which the man eventually to be known as oblam blam blam reeled in the naïve. All he did was intone a handful of clichés about a coupla dem party leftie shibboleths and otherwise smart individuals became putty in his hands.

I have looked at a couple of the Gabbard vids and see exactly the same gambit in play.

I'm sorry folks (N.B. 'folks' © B & M Obama Pty) but it is vital to remember one simple truth lest unadulterated reality sets free kangaroos into your top paddock - that truth is simple and easily comprehended it goes like this - Anyone who is capable of gaining dem or rethug endorsement for a political position, is 100% unsuitable for that gig.

That isn't cynicism it is just reality - in order to succeed in the nest of vipers known as the us democrat party you have to be so heartless and focussed on yerself that no one else could or should ever trust you.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Mar 1 2016 6:14 utc | 68

Debs @ 69: I think most of the serious posters here at MoA, especially since the Obama debacle, adhere to the policy of " Buyer Beware."

Most probably, any candidate you choose, is an exercise in futility, at least here in the U$A, so consider it therapy. Many people here knew Obama was a "Trojan Horse" candidate, and still "voted". Six, or Half a dozen.

Posted by: ben | Mar 1 2016 6:35 utc | 69

@69 debs is dead.. thanks for saying all that. it bears repeating!

Posted by: james | Mar 1 2016 7:08 utc | 70

another war monger and murder?
Posted by: Jack Smith | Feb 29, 2016 3:36:36 PM | 9

she worked in the medical field it no murderer...but shame on you for your attack her character, when you know nothing about her

Posted by: brian | Mar 1 2016 8:22 utc | 71

Posted by: Debs is dead | Mar 1, 2016 1:14:20 AM | 69

that comment reads like cyncisism and dissapointment not realism.

who would u prefer? Hillary? Bernie may be another Obama....Tulsi strikes a different note

CLUE: Tulsi avoids the word when she talks of the Syrian govt (not 'regime')

Posted by: brian | Mar 1 2016 8:25 utc | 72

Posted by: Debs is dead | Mar 1, 2016 1:14:20 AM | 69

Actually, in his campaign Obama was very clear about what his position was and what he would do when you listened to what he was saying. What "the left" fell for was image and identity politics. Being black does not mean you have to be revolutionary.

Tulsi Gabbard probably represents the very rational and ethical part of the US army. "The left" all over the world has a problem when it comes to military jobs.

Posted by: somebody | Mar 1 2016 8:56 utc | 73

Maybe the move is by Democrats worried about their jobs, who see the increasingly likely outcome of a matchup between The Hil and The Donald : The Donald wins. They've already lost the congress.

The first time I heard the name Tulsi Gabbard was when she co-sponsored HR 4108 calling for a cutoff in support for al-CIAduh in Syria. The link there, posted by somebody, was to herself being interviewed - primed and boosted really - by Wolf Blitzer. I discovered then that she was a vice-chair of the DNC. In her thirties. She must have sold her soul to the devils of DNC already at that point.

Sorry I'm so cynical about anyone who is allowed to get as far as she has within the beast itself, but it seems the only prudent stance to take. Even though I want to believe that there is an alternative to The Donald/The Hil ... there simply cannot be one - a real one - from 'above'. I know that, knew that ... yet hope dies last.

The only workable action that I can see is as layed out in write-in elections, or something else along those lines ... but frankly, the silence is deafening. It's a decade+ 'fix', but it's taken several decades to get where we are today ... all my lifetime, I suppose. I was born in 1947, the same year as the CIA.

A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. There will be a tomorrow, no matter how horrid it is, and we need to prepare for it. Well the road will rise to meet us, prepared or no, so we ought to prepare. We are 300+ million Americans ... how can we not be able to gain control of 546 federal positions ... and all the rest ... if we just put our minds and bodies to the task?

It's a question of acting, or not. Simple as that. 'Not' entails a strict diet of death, devastation, destruction, and deceit. I'm always open to suggestions on the proposed actions to take. If we had begun in 2004 ... so let's finally begin today.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 1 2016 8:58 utc | 74

POTUS makes fuckall difference. Even if they were saints, the rest of the corporate political complex would eat them alive before they could institute any meaningful change. I simply can not imagine any positive outcome of any US election whatsoever. How many times must we watch this circus repeat itself before connecting the dots? Its ann utter waste of energy. Remember, these idiots only have power that we the people give them. Well, they are not getting any from me.

Posted by: dan | Mar 1 2016 9:11 utc | 75

AnEducatedFool says: voters are voting at 90% for Clinton

'yessa massa' Nehemiah rolls in his grave...

Look down the road
'Fer as my eyes could see
Hey-hey, yeah
'Fer as my eyes could see
And I couldn't see nothin'
Looked like mine, to me

(Nehemiah Curtis 'Skip' James, 1930 something)

Posted by: john | Mar 1 2016 9:46 utc | 76

john | Mar 1, 2016 4:46:20 AM | 77

Yes. Remarkable; the majority in the U.S. are dreaming (as in, not in the real world[it's a Buddhist thing]).
Refusing to see; which is why I agree with dan @ 76.
Alas, there is nothing to be done except to watch the inevitable...

Posted by: V. Arnold | Mar 1 2016 10:42 utc | 77

Might be too little too late as if HRC gives Bernie a tough defeat post South Carolina.

Bernie must have been much more aggressive against her record on foreign policy and studied his lesson as Obama did during his campaign pre-2008.

I'd also disagree for those against Bernie-Gabbard duo when the alternatives are Hillary, Donald and god knows may be Bloomberg.

Posted by: Truist | Mar 1 2016 11:17 utc | 78

Some wit - If voting were effective, it would be illegal.

Therefore: Make your vote effective - under no circumstance, ever, vote for any incumbent (note last four letters of incumbent); make
the owners spend their time, effort, and gold on teaching and training each new cohort of novice would be masters of governance,
bending them to the whim and will of said owners. Doing so will expose such education to the erosion from hubris, pride and ego of
their erstwhile students. Returning 95% of incumbents is how the system perpetuates itself. Do as you think best.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Mar 1 2016 11:36 utc | 79

It isn't cynical it is sadly realistic to state I do not believe that the rights voters have given up by ticking boxes/pulling handles on voting machines can ever be won back the same way. This isn't a situation that applies only to amerika or the west or whatever you want to call it, it is the nature of humans and their political structures.
Probably every power structure humans have created kicked off with good intentions (eg the first few clan leaders/early kings probably got the job because they were liked and trusted) but once a political system gets established and precedent is set that is when the greedy power hungry types start gathering around the trough. Very quickly they make the rules and every law that is passed has as its initial premise a dictate to reinforce the power of those holding it.
Once a system reaches that point as it has in amerika there is simply no way back other than going outside the existing structure.
Of course the divide and rule ploy which is reflected across the spectrum from redneck immigrant hate a la Trump to feminist polemic a la Hilary is used to keep the masses from coalescing - right up until they do. It is a truism to state the so-called culture wars in amerika, will cause the construct to fracture along geographic lines. That may be how it will go although I have an inkling that humans will like be lured into some sort of 'post-geographical' nation state construct. That just as geographically diverse communities with shared beliefs gather on the net, that people will attempt and likely succeed -initially with lots of assistance from what we currently call corporations, into forming physically diverse clusters of shared ideals and consumption patterns.

However people do re-organise it will start with the best of intentions and the first few iterations of the new structure will seem positively idealistic in comparison to what is currently on offer, but the process will begin again and slowly at first then as momentum gathers, more quickly, the greedy and self obsessed will form around the new structure.

Small is good - the smaller a society is - within reason and provided it isn't subject to duress from larger external political structures, the more difficult it is for the truly sociopathic to gain control simply because the degrees of separation between the rulers and the subjects is too small for snowing with mass media bullshit.

I just had an awful realisation - if this amerikan election runs true to the form of every other election since this this bar has been open, pretty soon - usually after the dem nomination has been finalised some contributor who has been around for the last year or so, will reveal to be a spruiker for whatever dem hack gets the nod. Yuk! why can't they shit on their own rug?

In some ways I would prefer a trump-bot it would be considerably more entertaining as the dem hack who is likely the same person different nym, over all these election cycles never owns to all the lies and deceits they threw out were challenged on the last time.
Because of course it always transpires that the MoA posters were absolutely correct and the dem hack was lying, lying lying.

Maybe the dems will refrain this time around and realise the entire exercise is a waste of effort and resources.

Still truthdig always cops it worse. Three years outta four truthdig is a site where normal humanists can vent their spleen, but the fourth year - the year of the election, the disconnect between the readers and the 'writers' grows large. Censorship there is loose outside of election cycles but that changes when the dem machine insists.
Maybe this time the dems will lean on financial contributors and try to cut off truthdig funding so there will be no 'embarrassments' for Hillary. Ain't merikan democracy grand.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Mar 1 2016 11:52 utc | 80

@81 Did,

I certainly agree with your observations on the behavior you describe but I think it is characteristic of all, not just purely political, human organizations. Religious, sports, scholarly, corporate, fraternal, ... any and all human organizations soon enslave their memberships, and get them to 'FEED ME!', as the Little Shop of Horrors had it.

It's an organic human problem. We all need to be cognizant of it, make it a topic of discussion, and try to structure all the organizations we create with their known, ineluctable defects in mind.

We ought to give all our organizations a date of demise at their foundation. Death is one of life's most self-sustaining qualities. All our 'creations' are at least potentially unnaturally immortal. That's certainly one of the chief defects of corporations.

We need a death penalty as well for organizations ... not one for real, living people, but one for fake, pseudo-organisms like corporations. All the major banks should have been put to death after the collapse of 2008. The CIA, NSA, FBI should all be put to death, at long last, this afternoon. The two parties should be long dead and buried. No one stone left upon another in each case,

The problem will never go away, we must always be on the watch, but there are ways to improve the structure of our organic laws regarding organizations that can certainly help.

The sine qua non is to develop a democracy, to remove power from our frankenstein creations and return power to ourselves. There does seem to be quite a few folks - even here at MoA- enjoining us to give it up ... admit resistance is futile ... but that is of course inertial guidance, a self-fulfilling prophecy. We can, we must, do better than that.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 1 2016 12:51 utc | 81

There seems to be some misunderstandings about my position.

1. I am not a U.S. citizen and have no vote. If I were I would vote for neither a repub nor a democrat.
2. I above give advice to Sanders to take Gabbard because that is the best and may be only way to prevent Killary from getting the job.
3. I don't care much about internal U.S. policies. All this identity stuff is nonsense to me. I do care about wars the U.S. wages. Those have to stop. Sanders and Gabbard are possibly a ticket to that. Trump may also be one. Clinton is, for certain, not.

Posted by: b | Mar 1 2016 13:36 utc | 82

b @ 83: I fall into your second category b, but in truth, and sadly, the U$A system is so very corrupt it'll only change
with torches and pitchforks, and THAT ain't happen'en any day soon. We're not at "rock bottom" yet. Maybe " the donald" will
provide it.

Posted by: ben | Mar 1 2016 14:43 utc | 83


I was not confused about your position, b. I had it pegged just about as you state it. I think most folks here did as well ... most folks who've followed you for a few years.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 1 2016 14:45 utc | 84

The state of e-voting in America:

Posted by: ben | Mar 1 2016 14:52 utc | 85

Love Tulsi Gabbard ----- Bernie more of the same regarding Palestinians and warmongers.

If not, he needs to speak up. IMO.

I am in the minority here, but I don't think Trump is a racist. I have a problem with open borders and I am hispanic. As for immigration from the ME, we have kicked over numerous hornet nests over there and then opened the doors to our home. Is this really a wise move?

As for Mexico, our policies of selling guns to drug cartels and training the paramilitary group Los Zetas has been the direct cause of the destruction of Mexico's tourist trade and created all the drug wars. Was it payback for Mexico nationalizing their oil? Destroying their economy? At first many companies moved to Mexico, but then they fled to China and other Asian countries. So now it seems as if selling drugs to the States has become a huge money maker for them. Sad. But, the States has had a role in that.

Posted by: shadyl | Mar 1 2016 15:14 utc | 86

I wouldn't vote for a crazy Hindu unless they renounced that stupid idol worshipping stuff and stopped being such militant bigots.They are very ambitious,too much so for my taste.How old is she?Old enough for the VP?(Constitutionally?)
Sanders is a prisoner of Zionism,unfortunately.
Trump is called a racist by the real virulent racists,the Israeli dual citizens.
Its all over the ziomedia,hits on Trump.

Posted by: dahoit | Mar 1 2016 15:25 utc | 87


1. I AM a U.S. citizen with 2/10ths of a vote (in my estimation). Like you, I will vote for neither a repub nor a democrat. The establishment duopoly is a scam that disenfranchises American citizens.

As proven by a Princeton University statistical study, what voters in the US want doesn't matter. We would have a very different society if citizen opinions really DID matter.

2. I agree with your advice to Sanders but not because it will prevent Killary from winning the nomination. That is already baked in.

The logic of choosing Tulsi is so compelling that Sanders' NOT picking Tulsi further demonstrates that he is not in the race to win. He is the sheepdog that Black Agenda Report (BAR) said he was when he entered the race.

We really have to stop falling for the duopoly's game. Sanders is just warmed over "Change You Can Believe In". Even his slogan reflects that: "A Future to Believe In". Keep believing the myths you are fed!

3. The fact is, the big money that is behind the duopoly cares as much, if not more, about the empire than it does about "internal U.S. policies". Our internal (we would say "domestic") politics reflects divisions in how to divide the spoils of empire / minimize dissent / etc.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 1 2016 15:26 utc | 88

john77;Yes,the black voters in SC just showed America that they are as antisemitic as whitey.
How can that be?Uh,the commonality of humanity?

Posted by: dahoit | Mar 1 2016 15:27 utc | 89

Posted by: shadyl | Mar 1, 2016 10:14:04 AM | 87

I agree. Trump is as racist as Sanders is socialist. Both are populists.

The only way to defeat the establishment is to be populist.

Sanders is actually more establishment than Trump. Sanders talks about Obama, Hillary, Schumer as 'friends', while Trump talks about how politicians are puppets.

At the end of the day, people NEED to stop allowing themselves to be GAMED by the duopoly


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 1 2016 15:32 utc | 90

Debs is dead:

if this amerikan election runs true to the form of every other election since this this bar has been open, pretty soon - usually after the dem nomination has been finalised some contributor who has been around for the last year or so, will reveal to be a spruiker for whatever dem hack gets the nod. Yuk! why can't they shit on their own rug?

Perhaps you didn't notice but we've already had one 'spruiker' outed: rufus magister. He describes himself as a socialist and criticized Trump as fascist but goofed and said a few things that implied that he supports Hillary. After some back and forth that futher clarified his partisanship, he now openly supports Hillary.

I suspect his support for her is strongly tied to his Zionism.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 1 2016 15:45 utc | 91

I’m not super familiar with Gabbard’s stances (if it is even possible to be so..), though I have seen two vids.
Certainly she is a more secure choice than Palin. McCain attempted the strategy - woman, young(er), sincere ‘voice’,
good looking, fresh face - it failed, it is *extremely* risky.

However, I’m almost certain that Sanders would never choose her. She is too young, has too little influence, is unknown,
and is too far removed from the "Democrat a “new”-New-deal I call myself a socialist" type.
If she is serious about an anti-war stance that won’t fly. Moreover, Sanders already has the ‘young’ vote.

Just my guess.

Posted by: Noirette | Mar 1 2016 15:47 utc | 92

@89 jackrabbit.. i tend to see it the same way as you have described it, but i am just going on intuition as opposed to picking it up from any article i read.. he isn't leadership material on some level and even he knows it.

Posted by: james | Mar 1 2016 17:13 utc | 93

Not to give Tulsi a chance would be the height of stupidity . She is entitled to show what she can do in high office .
We know what Clinton is like .
Hopefully Tulsi will one day run for US president

Posted by: Brian | Mar 1 2016 20:45 utc | 94

Rick Staggenborg
19 hrs ·

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) is a two-tour Iraq vet who has given the most blunt and accurate statements on what is really going on in Syria that I have seen from anyone in Washington.

She just resigned her position as co-chair of the DNC to formally endorse Bernie Sanders, specifically because of his anti-imperialist leanings and despite the fact that his record is inconsistent on the relevant issues.

With people like her advising him, it might just be possible to educate him on the realities of the "war on terror," what countries are behind them and why. Since Clinton is one of those behind them, those who want to dismiss Sanders for his inconsistencies on these issues might want to think again.

I called Gabbard's office today and invited her to join VFP. I hope my friends in Hawaii will email her and support the idea, and ask their friends to do the same. And if you are not in Hawaii, you can call her office and encourage others to do the same!

We would be very proud to have her become one of us.

Posted by: brian | Mar 1 2016 21:42 utc | 95

I have just found some news that Tulsi Gabbard may have personal links to a Hare Krishna cult known as Science of Identity (whose leader is Christ Butler aka Jagad Guru). Her Chief of Staff Kainoa Ramananda Penaroza and office manager Anya F Anthony are members of this cult. Rather than overload my comment with several links, I suggest everyone should Google the names I have just given.

I found out also that Gabbard opposed HR 417 which criticised the Indian government's handling of the Gujarat state riots in 2002 that left 2000 people dead and 100,000 homeless. At the time, Gabbard's buddy Narendra Modi was Chief Minister of Gujarat state and there are rumours that he looked the other way when the rioting broke out.

Text of HR 417:

By the way, I am not a US citizen.

Posted by: Jen | Mar 1 2016 22:03 utc | 96

Sanders Is The Choice of Young Americans

I listened to a discussion on Dutch radio with 4 students attending Webster University on Leiden campus in The Netherlands. Students were divided in 2 Republicans and 2 Democrats and were asked about the election and how they observed it from outside the US. All four were equally abhorred by the circus and show man Trump. The two Democrats would vote for Sanders and the two Republicans were split, one was for John Kasich and the other was split between Rubio and Kasich. If Trump would be the Republican nominee, one of the Republican students would vote for Sanders and with a Trump as president, one of the students said she would not return to the US but live abroad. A particularly strong showing for Bernie Sanders!

Why are there suddenly millions of socialists in America? | The Guardian |

    In 1906 German sociologist Werner Sombart wrote an essay entitled "Why Is There No Socialism in the United States?" that sought to explain why the US, alone among industrialized democracies, had not developed a major socialist movement.

    Today, however, we need to pose a different question: why are there socialists in the United States? In this nation that has long been resistant to socialism’s call, who are all these people who now suddenly deem themselves socialists? Where did they come from? What do they mean by socialism?

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 1:02 utc | 97

Oh just get the strategic simple score voting method! -- Or just stay home!!! (Why waste gas?) This single-selection ("plurality") and Rockefeller sponsored IRV is disgusting. Political "science" is disgusting. As is all the rest of "social choice theory". See for yourself:

Posted by: blues | Mar 2 2016 1:58 utc | 98

@jfl #1 While I don't disagree that eventual corruption (in the original sense rather than the naarrow dishonest intent that is most commonly applied to it) is the fate for all human endeavour there is an essential difference about political endeavours that bears consideration. Most of the things we humans get up to have some purpose other than mere continued existence attached to them. They make geegaws, educate other humans, house, clothe, feed or entertain, but political structures exist only for themselves.
What that means is that most of our endeavours do wither away once either the need for therm disappears, or a more efficient way of satisfying that need is developed. This never happens with political structures which continue on becoming more corrupt and concentrating power until they are physically stopped by external forces.

The catholic church is a classic example of this. AFAIAC catholicism is xtianity - all the off-shoots are merely attempts to divert the massive power the church has built up, so as to benefit local sociopaths who feel too distant from the seat of power.
If the church hadn't been smart enough to recognise that it could use it's position as arbiter of reality and sell its influence to political leaders, it would have died out over a thousand years ago as human knowledge increased and superceded xtianity's primitive superstition. Instead the pope's pronouncements on reality still influence the world view of tens of millions of other humans - simply because the church has always made a point of cultivating and supporting political leaders.
Nothing really threatens the catholic church the only way to get rid of it would be to destroy all it's physical structures, confiscate all its wealth and liquidate all catholic church employees. An improbable goal as the size of the organisatiion makes it unlikely that anyone could effect this strategy before the church managed to suborn key politicians from whatever movement was seeking to destroy them.
The church survives because it exists for only one real purpose the consolidation of political power and the difficulties involved with ridding the world of that particular menace need be heeded because very soon all the other seats of power, such as transnational corporate entities and imperial political entities will be equally difficult to demolish.

Encouraging the likes of a Sanders or a Gabbard only serves to decrease the likelihood of a successful intervention to rid the world of amerika's murderous regime before it becomes 'too big to fail'.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Mar 2 2016 3:27 utc | 99

Another of the wrong headed excuses to reject Tulsi Gabbard .
She's an American congresswoman not an Indian one .
Don't look the gift horse I the mouth or search for reasons to reject her

Posted by: Brian | Mar 2 2016 5:41 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.