Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 02, 2016

U.S. Election Thread 2016-03 - Yves Smith On "Not Hillary!"

Not Hillary!

Yves Smith of the Naked Capitalism explains why many of her progressive acquaintances will either not vote, or vote for Trump in the upcoming U.S. election. I recommend to read this in full.

For starters two excerpts:

Hillary's experience is one of failure. And she did not learn from it.

Hillary has a résumé of glittering titles with disasters or at best thin accomplishments under each. Her vaunted co-presidency with Bill? After her first major project, health care reform, turned into such a debacle that it was impossible to broach the topic for a generation, she retreated into a more traditional first lady role. As New York senator, she accomplished less with a bigger name and from a more powerful state than Sanders did. As secretary of state, she participated and encouraged strategically pointless nation-breaking in Iraq and Syria. She bureaucratically outmaneuvered Obama, leading to U.S. intervention in Libya, which he has called the worst decision of his administration. And her plan to fob her domestic economic duties off on Bill comes off as an admission that she can’t handle being president on her own.

And the conclusion:

The Sanders voters in Naked Capitalism’s active commentariat also explicitly reject lesser-evilism, the cudgel that has previously kept true lefties somewhat in line. They are willing to gamble, given that outsider presidents like Jimmy Carter and celebrity governors like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jesse Ventura didn’t get much done, that a Trump presidency represents an acceptable cost of inflicting punishment on the Democratic Party for 20 years of selling out ordinary Americans.

The Clintons, like the Bourbons before the French Revolution, have ensconced themselves in such a bubble of operative and media sycophancy that they’ve mistakenly viewed escalating distress and legitimate demands from citizens as mere noise.
If my readers are representative, Clinton and the Democratic Party are about to have a long-overdue day of reckoning.

To vote for the far right because the former center (left) has lost its bearing is a somewhat dangerous gamble. The U.S. has a relative stable, inertial system with lots of checks and balances that make this move less risky than similar moves underway in Poland, Germany or France. But unless the center left/right politicians recognize that they have lost their former majority there is no chance they will shun the neoliberal globalization nonsense they impose on their constituency.

Voting for a stronger movement towards a genuine left is be a better strategy than voting for the far right. But notorious lack of unity within the left, center-right control over the media and the absence of a successful current archetype will keep a majority away from taking that step.

I agree that the day of reckoning is a long-overdue day. But it may not bring the reckoning we want.

Posted by b on June 2, 2016 at 7:36 UTC | Permalink

next page »

b, 'To vote for the far right because the former center (left) has lost its bearing is a somewhat dangerous gamble.'

Unnecessarily dangerous. If it's the bird you want to flip to Hillary and the DNC, write-in someone you really would like to see as President. If it's to take the first step toward reclaiming the election process ... write-in someone you really would like to see as President.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 2 2016 8:55 utc | 1

Trump isn't even far right, he's just a populist. He's nationalist, but not national socialist. He's for diplomacy, not for invading every country the MIC identifies as "terrorist"(the new, politically-correct n-word for people we can kill with impunity).

Trump just represents people who want their jobs and their country back, and for you to malign these followers as far right is nothing short of elitism.

Posted by: Cahaba | Jun 2 2016 10:36 utc | 2

I looked up the comments and they look like almost like the spaces with strong right wing presence. They don't address any of the arguments, but rely on personal attacks, like good authoritarians. Liberals prefer to call anyone disagreeing stupid, while the right prefer terms like 'cuck' or other terms suggesting weakness.

The other commonality is arguing on basis of fevered projections. Trump is literally Hitler and will end democracy, electing Labour or whoever will lead to Sharia and white genocide.

It's the same way of thinking, just by a different faction.

Posted by: tony | Jun 2 2016 10:51 utc | 3

Trump will do an 'Alexander' on the US's Gordian knot of a political system.
At least that's the hope of the many frustrated and disillusioned.
And like Obama, Day-2 in the White House will business-as-usual according to the MIC-Wall St script.

Posted by: x | Jun 2 2016 11:33 utc | 4

The way to refute the argument that third party votes are wasted votes is for more and more people to vote third party. If Hillary is nominated, I intend to vote for Jill Stein (whom there seems to be a media conspiracy to ignore -- even when they're discussing what Sanders supporters might do, they never mention her).

Posted by: lysias | Jun 2 2016 11:44 utc | 5

"nation-breaking." I'll have to remember that. That is a very descriptive term for US middle-east policy in recent decades. Brzezinski and Kissinger may not admit as much but it's true; look at the results.

Unfortunately, lesser of evils at voting time has not resulted in lesser of evils Presidents. Every time I keep thinking that the new guy can't possibly be as bad as the last, he proves that he can be. Trump appears to be an outsider until you meet his foreign policy team or his economic advisers or watch his virtual oath of fealty to AIPAC to etc. Loose cannons can backfire. The only Never-Hillary alternative beyond Trump is Sanders. Would Sanders truly reign in the mid-east wars or continue R2P destruction? Can he stand up to Wall Street? I don't know.

Posted by: curtis | Jun 2 2016 12:09 utc | 6

@ U.S. Election Thread 2016-03 - Yves Smith …

Do you realise just what you're asking? To even click on that site I'd rather 'do' dishes; doing the "Black Plague" is preferable to doing dishes and root canal is just above that.

The only way to regain control of this political system is: Never vote Republican AND Never vote incumBENT Democrat. Why no one realises 95+ % of the problem comes from having 95+ % incumBENTs returned election after election. Stop that and the problem soon becomes manageable. Throwing your vote after unelectables just throws your vote away - to no discernible effect and is downright foolishness.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Jun 2 2016 12:13 utc | 7

Unemployment & underemployment are destroying the lives of US Citizens. Life expectancy of US Citizens is going down. Trump's plan to decrease the number of non-citizens in the US is highly popular among US Citizen voters.

Voting for Goldman Sachs' sock puppet Hillary Clinton is a vote for immediate self destruction.

Posted by: Anonymous 1 | Jun 2 2016 12:56 utc | 8

I do not think that Clinton's chief problem is with people who would rather vote for Jill Stein. Her problem is in the "middle", who are often "culturally" sympathetic to GOP but responding to a concrete populist message.

Today I read an example. Millions of Americans are scrapping by and rely on so-called payday loans. The Administration tightened regulations on those loans, Republicans oppose, Hillary promises to defend them. Bernie proposed a postal bank as exists in most countries which would eliminate most cases where such loans could start. Sanders plan is realistic, simple to understand and much more effective, and would hurt so called "pay day loan industry" much more, and this is too much for "bleeding liver liberals".

Trump has a realistic chance of winning in Ohio and Florida against Hillary, and thus becoming a president, and this is not because of wide awareness of how wrong Hillary was on Libya (her failed work on health care reform is known more widely, I presume). Actually, both cases are an indictment not of Hillary but of the liberal establishment in general. On Libya, Hillary basically followed the herd (from liberal think tanks). On health care reform, the methodology was liberal: improve the lot of the consumer without affecting the "industries" too much and concocting a "child that only mother could love", plus the particular child mothered by Hillary was torned to pieces by fellow liberals (certain Moynihan comes to my mind). "Single payer", like it or not, is something that somewhat clueless "centrist voters" can understand, and again, it works even as close to USA as Canada.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 2 2016 13:12 utc | 9

As I have written, There Are No Safe Choices and arguing over greater or lesser evils is an exercise in futility at best. The question is, how do we build our own forces of resistance? To vote for Hillary is to commit an act of unilateral disarmament. A massive write-in for Sanders would not be wasted, although the votes would not even be counted until weeks after the election.

A vote for Stein will immediately register. I am not a great fan of the Green Party, but a Stein vote gives us a tactic to organize our own resistance while we dig in and build something new.

Posted by: jeffroby | Jun 2 2016 13:38 utc | 10

Yves is lobbying Super-delegates on behalf of Sanders. That's why she doesn't mention Jill Stein or the Green Party.

The problem with Sanders is that he choose Party over principle. That's why he doesn't attack Hillary on her emails or Obama wrt black issues (Hillary gets the black vote largely because Obama supports her).

Although the legal issues are complicated, what we know for sure is that Clinton played fast and loose with National Security because she deemed that it was more important to secure HER OWN communications. This was NOT a 'judgment call' on a policy issue but a deliberate choice to ignore some of the most grave obligations of her office so as to advantage herself.

To any reasonable person, this simple fact is further evidence of Hillary's corrupt elitism and unquestionably disqualifies her for the Presidency.

But Sanders remains quiet about the emails DESPITE THE STATE DEPT INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT which showed that she has been dishonest and deceptive about her email server.

To better understand the legal issues, see: Do I really need to worry about Hillary's emails? Yes, she will be indicted.

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

Is it sufficient for Bernie to sit back and let Trump attack Hillary on the emails? Does it help him to 'unify the party' later? On both counts I would argue: NO!!!

1) The Democratic Party establishment is anti-Sanders. They like things the way they are. If Hillary is disqualified, they will find someone else to take her place. There are already serious rumors about Biden (Biden-Warren ticket?).

What the establishment really cares about is that Hillary beats Sanders in delegates and votes cast so that Hillary can be a King-maker if she can't be a candidate.

2) Bernie's silence:

> contributes to the view that the email server is just a partisan football;

> contributes to the view that it is just a question of judgement;

> undermines his 'man of principle' positioning;

> undermines his argument that Clinton is a flawed candidate;

> undermines his claim to have better judgement than Hillary (as explained above - her decision to operate a private email server is disqualifying);

Bernie's silence doesn't help him to win or to win over the Party. By pulling punches (once again!) Bernie is choosing Party over Principle. This seems to confirm that he is indeed just a sheepdog for the DNC as described by Black Agenda Report and Talking Points Memo.

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

One can only hope that this election season Progressives will finally WAKE UP and understand that the Democratic Party establishment is too corrupt and too entrenched for reform.

Bernie supporters and left-leaning independents should join/vote GREEN PARTY.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 13:46 utc | 11

I'll be voting Green Party and were there aren't any Greens I'll vote against incumbent Demodogs.

Posted by: jo6pac | Jun 2 2016 13:46 utc | 12

I recommend voting third party...any third party. In most states, the outcome is already known, because most states are reliably either Democratic or Republican.

In all but a handful of battleground states, voters are free to vote their conscience. Only in battleground states need they consider voting for the lesser of the evils.

Voting third party is important--it conveys a message of disgust with the establishment duopoly. OTOH NOT voting only conveys complacence and apathy, which the duopoly is totally OK with.

Posted by: JohnH | Jun 2 2016 13:52 utc | 13

She bureaucratically outmaneuvered Obama, leading to U.S. intervention in Libya, which he has called the worst decision of his administration.

This misconception is still alive and kicking. Killary wasnt the mastermind behind Libya's invasion, she was just a frontwoman for "color revolution" plans which were well under way before she come into power, and will continue when she fades into obscurity.

Another misconception is Obama's "peace-loving" nature, its just an illusion he and his PR people are pushing. "Obama is good, its these others who want war", and people still fall for that? :)) The only difference between Bush jr and Obama is that one likes to fight wars directly (US cant afford that anymore), and another through proxy terrorists and drones, its cheaper this way, and even more destructive.

Posted by: Harry | Jun 2 2016 14:06 utc | 14

Harry @13

Thank you!

The assumption of Obama's progressivism has been found to be misguided time and time again. It is a con. It is a lubricant.


He is ethnically half-white and culturally about 90% white.

Community organizer?

Wall Street bailouts and faux mortgage relief.

11-dimensional chess excuses for inaction (he had majorities in both houses of Congress when he was elected)

Bush tax cuts made permanent - poor get austerity.

Solution for inequality? More low-paying jobs.

Constitutional lawyer?

War on Whistle-blowers; assault on civil liberties; IRS scandal; etc.

Constitution-shredding, anti-democracy trade deals.

War without Congressional approval.

Nobel peace-prize?

Awarded for simply being NOT-Bush. Approved everything the neocons wanted and asserted the neocon mantra of American exceptionalism.

The faux conflict between Netanyahu and Obama over Iran is just for show. Sanctions weren't working and the Syrian conflict has dragged out longer than expected (they are not yet ready to take on Iran).

Note: The above list only scratches the surface of the deceitfulness.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 14:48 utc | 15

Far right?That's Obomba,Clinton,the shrub and HRC,the worst rightists in American history.
Trump is left,right and in the middle,a non ideologue,who will bring back American prosperity,get US out of this wacko world domination idiocy and protect our borders,all nationalist endeavors,and as right as rain.
The moron bubblehead says Trumps foreign policy aims will upset the world order.My God,shes a retard.
Never in the history of this planet has such an empty vessel ever sought such a high office.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 2 2016 15:10 utc | 16

Trump is far-right? It seems obvious that when it comes to foreign policy he's to the left of everyone; Clinton has already promised to "totally obliterate" Iran, lusts after confrontation with Russia & is clearly willing to hit the button. For his part, Sanders says "The Saudis (ISIS) should play a bigger role in the Middle East," and says the military option is on the table vis a vis Russia (which of course means nuclear weapons, since USA could obviously never win a conventional war with Russia - it can't even defeat a few thousand lightly armed Taliban). Far as I can see, Trump's the only person calling for diplomacy & a de-escalation of tensions with the Chinese & the Russians. His obsession with capitalism, making money & deal-making may paradoxically prove to be his best feature; if you blow up the world, no more deals!

strategically pointless nation-breaking in Iraq and Syria

Taking formerly unified & regionally powerful countries resistant to USA domination & turning them into defenseless mini-statelets is "strategically pointless"? It amazes me how progressives can look the strategy straight in the eye... and then deny it.

Posted by: Mark | Jun 2 2016 16:08 utc | 17

Naked C. Article is ‘factual’ within the US landscape from a certain pov..

Always said that:

1) Killary cannot win. Already a one time loser, not enough ‘base’, her and hubby’s past, corruption etc. etc.

2) that the PTB (deep state, military ind. complex, big corps, Finance..) could accomodate to a Sanders presidency but not a Trump one.

What Dem alternatives remain? If Killary is indicted for the homey-cellar-e-mail boondoggle, plus the fact she could not win (say, most likely, as article hints at) against Trump, the Dems need to put forward another candidate, Biden? Ensuring that the Dems lose the election but the overall system is maintained. (Keeping the lid on Sanders supporters, switching from Bernie to X (other candidate) will be a disaster.)

On the Repub. side the picture is the same. They can’t support Killary openly and to prevent Trump from triumphing they need to launch a candidate that splits Repubs. + conservatives votes, some X ‘respectable’ candidate getting some 6 better 9-10 or .. % of the vote, enough to throw the election to the Dem candidate. So that the Repubs. lose the election but the system is maintained (bis).

The prez. race has turned into vaudeville where different parties are fighting to lose while conserving their advantages within the status quo.

:) :)

All wll be done to keep the 2-party system alive and put a lid on ALL opposition.

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 2 2016 16:30 utc | 18

Mark @16

Great comment, especially wrt:

strategically pointless nation-breaking in Iraq and Syria

I have found that the US "Left" is generally anti-Empire and simply see any discussion of foreign affairs as mere details. They easily fall for the 'chaos' simplification/cloaking.

I have made the case that oligarchs and fundamentalism are global problems and that they reinforce each other across national and social divides. It's a complex dance that is destructive and anti-human. The details matter because opening people eyes requires examples.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 16:56 utc | 19


Iraq was hostile to Iran before the invasion and Saddam was easy to deal with. Syria used to be stable and sell oil. Now Iraq is aligned with Iran and Syria is a disaster and has given Russia an opportunity to demonstrate loyalty to allies and the effectiveness of the Russian military and weapons.

About Obama being an organizer. He seems to have fronted for the FIRE sector:

Posted by: tony | Jun 2 2016 17:05 utc | 20

"when I am president, rain will fall from the've never seen so much water." trump on the calif. drought, to which, like every problem, he himself is the solution.

that said, the only thing that matters is the entertainment value of the candidate. for which, Vote Trump. once any of them is in office, the ocean will roll on as has it since noah's flood.

Posted by: jason | Jun 2 2016 17:09 utc | 21

Thinking out loud.

All three candidates are anathema. The road we have followed, lessor-evil-dom, has led to where we are.
Maybe it is time to vote for THE WORST EVIL ... select the MOST ABHORRENT CANDIDATE POSSIBLE ... and hope the whole system collapses. That opens the gates to a possibility of real revolution and perhaps attendant reform.

Or not ...

What I do know is that the roughly 8% of the population that actually vote for whichever winner we've had in the past have done us in. More people voting isn't the solution ... more people making bad decisions is just that. We need to back away from the Mythistory of American Politics and realize that a rigged system can only be defeated by blood on the streets. Until then, all we are doing is re-arranging deck chairs. And the re-arranging is taking place on a ship that isn't even sinking ... the headway is taking us places we don't want to go but are powerless (by being complicit) to do anything except yammer mindlessly.

Posted by: rg the lg | Jun 2 2016 17:24 utc | 22

Mark 16 "strategically pointless nation-breaking in Iraq and Syria"

Taking formerly unified & regionally powerful countries resistant to USA domination & turning them into defenseless mini-statelets is "strategically pointless"? It amazes me how progressives can look the strategy straight in the eye... and then deny it.

Not strategically pointless by any measure! Complete Bullshit. Breaking States is essential and specifically mentioned in the Oded Yinon Plan for Greater Israel. The PNAC Plan for Full Spectrum Dominance with the Global War on Terror further reinforces and justifies the Yinon Plan.

NATO and The US acting as Aggressor (pre-emptive war & war for regime change) is illegal and Criminal - War Crimes as spelled out clearly in NATO Manifesto.

Posted by: fastfreddy | Jun 2 2016 17:27 utc | 23

Don't miss the event ... all signs are pointing towards the inevitable!

The Next Revolution: War On Inequality

Posted by: Oui | Jun 2 2016 17:35 utc | 24

This post supporting the ultra-bourgeois inane postings of NC/Yves Smith is why ALL of the quality commentators have left this and Yves' site long ago.

Seriously, I thought it was bad enough that b would actually lend credence to a racist/Confederate career-militaristic moron like Col. Pat Lang when discussing geo-politics from time to time but now he's going to give space to the rantings of a former Goldman Sachs employee and current Wall Street maven - i.e., Yves Smith/Susan Webber - as to how the US electorate should vote based on what her fellow GS alums/cronies think?

Wow, how insightful! Great. (eyeroll)

After originally gaining clicks by allowing quality insightful posts from a wide-range of critical commentators, both sites have purged their commentariat so that it only includes the most insipid/Establishment, dull content to be found anywhere in the fake-left Web echo-chamber.

NC and MoA now fit nicely after Huffington Post on most of the blog rolls of the fake left and the only question I can ask is when do we see the Buzzfeed links?


So...why would I still stop here and NC then?

Well, what better way to discern exactly 1) what topics the TPTB have selected for the fake-left community of the West to be upset about each week and 2) how that "anger" should be appropriately channeled and expressed.

Thanks for the marching orders - oops - I mean gentle nudges in the "right" - snicker - directions, Yves and b!


Posted by: Ron Showalter | Jun 2 2016 17:36 utc | 25

@Jackrabbit | Jun 2, 2016 10:48:38 AM | 14

Excellent! I couldn't do any better. The best comments at MoA, hope MoAers won't accuse you a racist and unkind words as they did to me.

However, missing extremely important points: Continue endless wars, Black and Palestinians lives doesn't matter. Israel Spy Jonathan Pollard freed After 30 Years, even Dubya refuses to released him under NeoCon pressured.

Bernie will continue after Obomo just as Obomo did after Dubya and I fear what he'll do?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 18:08 utc | 26

Part of the problem is that what you refer to as centrist is actually extreme conservatism bordering on fundamentalism in exactly the same vein as Wahhabism, only in the name of Christ.

I'm one who would certainly vote for Trump over Clinton explicitly to punish the faux left for perpetrating and perpetuating Obama's treasonous betrayal of every last vestige of progressive idealism.

As one of the many, many people who don't self identify with political terms like left, right, democrat and republican, it's not a matter of which camp wins, it's a matter of establishing a pattern of public policy that over the long term balances out the needs of varying constituencies in a manner that results in the greatest long-term benefit to the common weal.

Sanders clearly represents a needed swing back to sound investment in infrastructure and establishing necessary limits on a global oligarchy with no nationalist interests.

Unless a miracle happens and he gets past the concerted effort to defeat him, then Trump represents the best opportunity to diminish the effectiveness of the current cabal. There should be no illusions that Trump won't fall into line immediately though.

The reaction against Clinton is purely punitive. We don't need more status quo. Either way, there will be massive amounts of pain for all as we go through the death of the current paradigm - and it's coming regardless of who desecrates democracy and the Office of the President.

Posted by: Shh | Jun 2 2016 18:13 utc | 27

"Hillary's experience is one of failure. And she did not learn from it."

Really? This is not a Clinton speciality. It applies to every recent US president. None of the the main Democran or Republicrat candidates would be any different. SO the argument boils down to 'do not vote for any main candidate'. Trump or Sanders? Would they be allowed to or survive trying?

Posted by: Yonatan | Jun 2 2016 18:33 utc | 28

b my bro,

"I agree that the day of reckoning is a long-overdue day. But it may not bring the reckoning we want."

First and foremost, I want to see the destruction of the Democratic Party that include the Repug. I'm prepared and willing to vote for either Hillary or Thump to see it happens, even if unexpected consequences.

For me this election is not about voting for whom or lesser of evils, but voting against the Democrats! D day just 4-days away, can’t wait for that to happen.

California will decide on June 6 2016.

Kindest Regards

Jack Smith

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 18:41 utc | 29

The last president that tried to change things was murdered. Then his brother was murdered. Trump is a celebrity clown who runs off at the mouth & says some disturbing things. Hillary is a war criminal & in a sane world would have been tried & executed already. That's the difference for me. Vote for a clown where no one really knows what to expect or for a proven mass-murderer? You could run just about anything against Clinton & I would be confident voting against her record of evil & bloodshed.

Posted by: BDrizz | Jun 2 2016 18:53 utc | 30

@Jack Smit

"Israel Spy Jonathan Pollard freed After 30 Years, even Dubya refuses to released him under NeoCon pressure."

He was paroled according to US law. The Obama administration withstood AIPAC and pressure from Netanyahu and MK's for an early release. In 2012 Netanyahu wanted to make a bombing run on Iran's nuclear facilities ... history will show Obama vetoed Israel's decision. True, Netanyahu was compensated with additional arms deliveries and political backing at the UN. Obama's revenge was to sign the nuclear deal with Iran against the objections of AIPAC, neocons, GOP, Israel and the Arab Gulf nations. Thanks to Putin the US couldn't offer Assad's head on the altar of sacrifice ... the costs are the civilian toll of 100,000s Syrians and a wave of refugees crossing Turkey into the belly of Europe.

History in the making as hopefully the proxy wars will end in the Middle East and a stronger Iraq with Shia majority will be a scourge for the Arab nations (and Turkey) supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist extremists. Hopefully the Kurds are rewarded for fighting IS. Lebanon and Syria should be secular nations where there is no place for religion in running state affairs. Germany's Bundestag voted today to recognize the Armenian killings of 101 years ago as genocide in an affront to Sultan Erdogan's Turkey. Erdogan racking up defeat after defeat in his foreign policy of expansion of the influence of Turks as a regional power.

Posted by: Oui | Jun 2 2016 18:56 utc | 31

@rg the lg | Jun 2, 2016 1:24:01 PM | 21

THE WORST EVIL ... select the MOST ABHORRENT CANDIDATE POSSIBLE ... and hope the whole system collapses. That opens the gates to a possibility of real revolution and perhaps attendant reform.

I was thinking of that tooo. We need a second Revolutions, prefer the French's revolution where the Monarchy went to the guillotines. The democratic systems are too good for them they always lied or bought their way out.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 18:57 utc | 32

Why waste your time? Vote counts in the U.S. are entirely fictional. Have been for decades. Unless the money boys have changed their plan, Hillary will be installed. Following that, martial law will be imposed. Do you really think all those FEMA camps have been created for nothing? Or that the country is loaded with war equipment for show? Dream days are about over.

Posted by: Tony B. | Jun 2 2016 18:57 utc | 33

Ron Showalter @24

Like most drive-by shootings, your aim is wild.

What are your politics? What websites do you prefer? And why?

Strange how a critic of critics can't properly articulate what he's so worked up about.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 19:06 utc | 34

Clinton 'doubling down' on foolishness at this hour by giving important foreign policy speech right now.

Starts with describing importance of National Security. LOL!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 19:08 utc | 35


"Hillary's experience is one of failure."

This statement is very true ... HRC is a shill politician supporting Israel in the Middle East. Her vote for the Iraq war, her run as senator for NY with the backing of Rupert Murdoch and her abominable policy as Secretary of State versus Libya and Syria. She used the worst of advisors at State to run her affairs. The buck stop at Obama's desk, he is ultimately responsible for the decisions made.

Secr. Clinton's Embrace of Erdogan, Muslim Brothers and Chaos

Posted by: Oui | Jun 2 2016 19:11 utc | 36

@Oui | Jun 2, 2016 2:56:48 PM | 30

Unfortunately, I disagree are you apologist for Obomo? Yes, I read the arguments often elsewhere......

He should never release Pollard! Amen!

If Israel chooses to bombed Iran and destroy Palestinians, let it be - they must stop the endless killing! You talk of US's laws do Obomo follows the laws? You sound like Obomo, Bernie or Hillary?

Killing one, few or ten of thousands what's the different? All lives are precious just as Black and Palestinians lives matter!

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 19:14 utc | 37


Iraq was hostile to Iran before the invasion and Saddam was easy to deal with. Syria used to be stable and sell oil. Now Iraq is aligned with Iran and Syria is a disaster and has given Russia an opportunity to demonstrate loyalty to allies and the effectiveness of the Russian military and weapons.

I agree with your first point - a strengthened Iran was certainly one of the few *truly* unintended consequences of the invasion/destruction of Iraq - which Bush recognized/sought to address in his 2006 "redirection" plan - but I don't know to what extent the current govt in Iraq is "aligned with Iran." My understanding (admittedly limited) is that al-Abadi is mostly powerless to resist US dictates; for instance, after Russia intervened in Syria, he made some fuss about potentially requesting RU assistance against ISIS, but then ultimately backed down. The destabilization of Syria has enabled NATO to simply steal the country's oil via ISIS - a major win for USA.

Posted by: Mark | Jun 2 2016 19:17 utc | 38


I agree on pollard

Posted by: jo6pac | Jun 2 2016 19:26 utc | 39

@Oui | Jun 2, 2016 2:56:48 PM | 30

My sincere apology learned fren, dun mean to sound mean. To me the endless killing must end, Israel continue to mass killing including Palestinians teenagers and if the US cannot, unable or unwilling to do it.

It's the voters faults continue to votes for the Democratic party and Repug.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 19:26 utc | 40

Early take on Hillary's foreign policy speech: pot shots at Trump (easy), interspersed with scare-mongering, chest-thumping and neocon talking points like: "we never ever stop trying to make our country a better place" (how exceptional!).

Trump's response will be . . . entertaining.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 19:32 utc | 41

Clinton just demonstrated that she has no clue why people are upset with the establishment.

She seems to think all the fuss come from Trump's populist skills and his overblown ego.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 19:45 utc | 42

@jo6pac | Jun 2, 2016 3:26:20 PM | 38

Hi Bro Californian,

Donated to Jill Stein and will do it again. Very poor, cat's foods shortly. :-)

Disclaimer: not paid by anyone nor trolling. Just my honest and sincere opinion matter on Tuesday!

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 19:49 utc | 43

correction @40

The quote should be:

"we [Americans] never ever stop trying to make our country and the world a better place"

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 2 2016 19:50 utc | 44

jackrabbit: e-mail server issue is definitely partisan football

If Hillary Clinton is indicted, then Sanders should be the candidate, and it would be wise to nominate him anyway. But I do not see any necessity of Sanders pressuring the prosecution. Concerning the security of the state, DoS managed to have its own servers compromised to the benefit of Wikileaks and the world-wide public

I do not see that being an "issue candidate" is wrong in any way. There should be more discussion if Sanders is fine on the issues. The picture is mixed, but with more positives than I thought initially.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 2 2016 20:17 utc | 45

Using the farcical Patrick Fitzgerald vs. Scooter Libby case as a template, one would conclude that Hillary will not be indicted. Remember Rove wearing that cute button, "I am not a target".

All the King's horses (the MSM) and all the King's Men (the DOJ, et al) will ensure that she remains unscathed.

That said, in a fair fight (black box voting?!), she can't beat the Trump.

Posted by: fast freddy | Jun 2 2016 20:53 utc | 46

@ 24 Ron Showalter.. thanks for your post.. i hear what you are saying, but i think b's punchline which puts the rest of the post in context is in his last few comments here :

"Voting for a stronger movement towards a genuine left is be a better strategy than voting for the far right. But notorious lack of unity within the left, center-right control over the media and the absence of a successful current archetype will keep a majority away from taking that step.

I agree that the day of reckoning is a long-overdue day. But it may not bring the reckoning we want."

and in this regard, i am in line with @26 Shh comments, especially there last line, even if i do live in canada :

"The reaction against Clinton is purely punitive. We don't need more status quo. Either way, there will be massive amounts of pain for all as we go through the death of the current paradigm - and it's coming regardless of who desecrates democracy and the Office of the President."

i don't understand why b, or pat lang even bother with this ceaseless forever 'usa election monotone crap', but on one level i also understand.. when the whole world is consumed in something, it looks like this..

Posted by: james | Jun 2 2016 20:59 utc | 47


American liberals are right-wing. The only difference between them and the people commonly labeled right-wing is that liberals are willing to tolerate women, gays, and minorities.


I like how you dismiss her based on her history of working on Wall Street. Yes, she has. And she's written extensively and in-depth about how the culture there has changed over the decades, and about how it disgusts her. As for being a 'maven', oh no, someone with expertise who actually knows what she's talking about! We can't have that! Your screed makes it painfully obvious you don't actually read much NC or its comments section. The notion Yves Smith is some sort of out of bourgeoisie blind to the suffering of the world...have you actually seen what they post and discuss literally every single day? I don't even know at this point what you would consider the 'real left', since literally every place I can think of (Black Agenda Report, CounterPunch, World Socialists and so on) features prominently on NC.

And Pat Lang is definitely overly gung-ho, but he has extensive military knowledge and experience and his opinions are frequently (though not always) worth considering. You seem to have this bizarre attitude that even referencing or linking to him invalidates ones position.

As for people saying we should vote Green, the American Green Party is at best inept, at worst massively corrupt. They've made no effort to build a national party; they basically just crop up every four years to take a paltry few percentage points of the presidential votes and then disappear back into their cave. There's also been petty and vicious internal conflicts within the party that don't speak well of the participants, including Jill Stein. Absolutely the party duopoly in the United States needs to be broken, but the Green Party is a poor vehicle for achieving that. If there is a fracturing of the political landscape anytime soon it will be because one or both of the legacy parties internally split themselves, not because of anything a third party did.

Had Sanders run as an independent he would be getting literally no coverage and likely achieving very little success. As things stand now he's destroyed Clinton's image as inevitable and thrown into stark relief (so much so that even many lifelong Democrats are waking up) how corrupt and opposed to change the entire Democratic Party actually is. Even if he doesn't get the nomination (and he still may, if for no other reason than Clinton being indicted) the ramifications of Sanders running will have an impact for years to come (and may result in the party fracturing). If he ran as an independent this wouldn't be the case.

Posted by: Calathai | Jun 2 2016 21:11 utc | 48

Hillary Clinton an't gonna get indicted. I can guarantee it - Obomo short of throwing Hillary under the bus, he need Hillary cover his arse just as Dubya need Oboma covering his arse.

Simple language, Birds Of A Feather, Stick Together. liars, crooks covered each other arses. Most likely he'll be Hillary VP in November.

...Bernie Sanders will throw his support behind Hillary Clinton before the Democratic Party's nominating convention, predicted Madeleine Kunin, “His normal demeanor is grumpy,” she said, but despite the increasingly fractious tone, “I think he will do it,” said Kunin, who’s been critical of Sanders.

Bernie Sanders says he would support Hillary Clinton if she wins the nomination. This comes two days after Sanders called Clinton unqualified for the presidency.....

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 21:29 utc | 49

C'est posible that Bernie has been the intended candidate all along. Could all the vote-stealing from Bernie, balanced by the threat of a Clinton indictment have been a distraction? With no interference and an accurate vote-count Bernie would have long-since emerged as the candidate. In which case-- the microscope would have been on policy & the policies that we WANT. There might even have been a little attention left over to witness the continued subjugation of South America.

As it is, the US presidential campaign has been greatly side-tracked towards personality, and the illusion of a horse race. I daresay Bernie's controllable and he's it.

Hillary can go right on coveting Presidential power (of which there is precious little).

Posted by: Penelope | Jun 2 2016 21:39 utc | 50

@Calathai | Jun 2, 2016 5:11:27 PM | 47

Excuse me, diehard Bernie and/or Democratic party supporter?
Base on #31, leave me no choices would rather votes for Erdogan or Avigdor Lieberman other than Bernie

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 2 2016 21:51 utc | 51

I said it before ... most of you still believe is 'lessor-evil-dom.' How pathetic is that? The precise course to where we are now ... thinking the lessor-evil would excuse you from your complicity in the system.

What we need is a revolution ... blood in the streets ... total political collapse! The French and Russian revolutions got rid of the oligarchs of the time. Both places were better for it. Until people such as you, people who allegedly care, decide that the current system must be destroyed (and our comfort with it) we remain complicit. To put it bluntly you are Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter ... it isn't so much the system as it is your propagandized belief in it. It's time to wake up ... buy a pitchfork and hit the streets. Anything less is a cop-out and playing the game.

If I hurt your feelings, maybe that is a good thing. Someone needs to hit all of us hard enough to wake us up, or put us completely out of the game.

Posted by: rg the lg | Jun 2 2016 22:15 utc | 52


Libya had a revolution with a lot of blood on the streets and political collapse; I've heard people defend the current chaos by pointing to the bloodshed of the French Revolution and insisting that given the same time span, Libyans will come out better for it just like the French did.

Why are you so eager to spill other humans' blood on the street; so enthusiastic about "putting people out of the game"? How can it be that we're coping out if we're not killing people?

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jun 2 2016 22:39 utc | 53

Breaking down the 2 party system is tricky, but long term possible. States with initative processes need to enact preference voting (aka instant runoff) so that somewhat similar candidates do not wind up splitting the vote as they do with the first-past-the-post system.

After 4-6 parties regularly elect officials at the state and local level, there be enough infrastructure to flow up to the national level.

Top down pushes will collapse back to 2 parties. Hopefully, the TRUMP run will push all the 'gag' neocon/neolibs into the Democratic party of multicultural globalism. Lindsey Graham and John McCain would make wonderful Democrats. This would buy America some time, but is not a stable end state.

Posted by: Anonymous 1 | Jun 2 2016 22:41 utc | 54

The Bigger Nuclear Risk: Trump or Clinton?

I can't tell Tweedle-dum from Tweedle-dee

... The Tweedle brothers never contradict each other, even when one of them, according to the rhyme, "agrees to have a battle". Rather, they complement each other's words. ...

Girl with Daisy and Atomic Bomb Explosion (1964) - Lyndon B. Johnson Campaign Ad

Write-in the name of someone you'd actually want to be President/Senator/Congressional representative on November 8. The stakes are too high for you to stay home.

Let 2016 be the beginning. First time, everytime, write-in your candidate, work with your neighbors toward convergence. 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2024, 2026, 2028 ... if we'd set out in 2004 we'd be home by now.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 2 2016 23:12 utc | 55

@24 rs

Noirette's still here.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 2 2016 23:22 utc | 56

Seems Neocons loved HRC's Trump bashing speech as this recap details,

Posted by: karlof1 | Jun 2 2016 23:33 utc | 57


Because that's EXACTLY the attitude they express in their positions of power and privilege toward us.

Bourgeois blood is stolen, anyway.

Posted by: Jonathan | Jun 2 2016 23:44 utc | 58

Some Internet gossip that should not be readily dismissed, many facts do check out: elite team of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) assassins controlled by President Obama have gunned down the husband of a US prosecutor who was preparing to charge former President William (Bill) Clinton with crimes relating to his having had sex with an underage girl child kept as a sex slave by his close personal billionaire friend Jeffery Epstein...

In the “exact/near similar” location this CIA “hit squad” had been operating in ... and shortly after their departure from the Atlanta region, local police officers were called and discovered the body of Shahriar Zolfaghari who was the husband of Georgia’s statewide prosecutor for human trafficking Camila Wright—and whom Atlanta Police Major Adam Lee III reported had been shot twice in the chest at close range and said: “It’s a mystery as to why someone would harm him”...

the “possible/supposed” reason for Zolfaghari’s killing was a “death message” to his wife Camila to stop her from charging former President Clinton with child sex crimes and to cease her sex trafficking investigation all together.

As to Prosecutor Wright’s exact criminal case against President Clinton, ... it involves the “contracting/deal making” with a number of underage female girls living in the Atlanta region by New York-British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, Sarah Kellen and Nada Marcinkova—all three of whom were tasked by convicted pedophile, and billionaire, Jeffery Epstein to procure underage sex slaves for his private Caribbean island compound known as “Pedophile Island” that catered to the world’s rich and famous, including President Clinton and Prince Andrew.

Ghislaine Maxwell, who has been labeled as “Epstein's pimp mama”, ... was the main “dealmaker/contractor” for the underage Atlanta female sex slaves preferred by her close friend President Clinton during his visits to “Pedophile Island”—and which recently discovered flight log reports have shown him visiting numerous times, and many without his Secret Service detail.

to whom President Putin ordered this single Hillary Clinton email released to, it doesn’t appear to be that hard to figure out as one hour later the international, non-profit, journalistic organization Wikileaks, that publishes secret information, news leak and classified media from anonymous sources, sent out a Twitter message containing this email under the headline Is
this email the FBI's star exhibit against Hillary Clinton ("H")?


The grave implications to Hillary Clinton in regards to this email... is that it provides conclusive proof that she personally ordered top secret and other type classifications to be stripped from emails sent to her private unsecured computer server in violation of US law—and, also, directly contradicts what it says on her presidential campaign website: “Clinton only used her account for unclassified email. No information in Clinton's emails was marked classified at the time she sent or received them.”

... another Hillary Clinton statement on her campaign website that says: “Was it allowed? Yes. The laws, regulations, and State Department policy in place during her tenure permitted her to use a non-government email for work”, has, likewise, been exposed as being untrue by the US State Department’s Inspector General who last week said that not only wasn’t this allowed, he detailed how Jonathan Scott Gration, the former US Ambassador to Kenya, who ignored instructions in July 2011 not to use commercial email for government businesses, was forced to resign, in mid-2012, when then Secretary Clinton herself initiated disciplinary action against him, while at the same time she was doing the exact same thing, but keeping it secret.

...many US media news sites ... agreeing that the most serious US laws violated by her were Executive Order 13526-Classified National Security Information and 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f)-Gathering, Transmitting or Losing Defense Information of the federal code that make it unlawful to send or store classified information on personal email.

Also AangIrfan has been doing great reporting exposing the dirt on that sleaze-bag Trump:

Yet Trump, clearly a puppet of some powerful faction of the global deep state (most probably involving Rocefellers who are e.g. abandoning oil and want to legalize drug business, basically come out of this current war with clean hands on the victorious side), has been sending many confusing signals. Could it be that the goal of masters is too fool not the regular, 'good' people, but the enemies of the humanity (CIA, MI6, Rothshilde, Clinton, Bush, Petreaus, Romney, Koch, Adelson, Erdogan, Saudi, Netanyahoo, Kolomoiski cabal centered in the City of London living off the illegal drug trade since the opium wars)?

Mind you that we've already seen the "bifurcation" in the USG action in the Me, most recently when the Pentagon/Obama rebels been fighting the CIA "rebels".

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 2 2016 23:52 utc | 59

As far as I'm concerned, the Clintons and Bushes can all burn in Hell.

Posted by: Steven Starr | Jun 3 2016 0:05 utc | 60


Yes, clearly my calling the Democratic Party corrupt and utterly opposed to change means I'm a Democratic Party supporter. Obviously. Good job.

Posted by: Calathai | Jun 3 2016 0:13 utc | 61

@Calathai | Jun 2, 2016 8:13:54 PM | 60

"Yes, clearly my calling the Democratic Party corrupt and utterly opposed to change means I'm a Democratic Party supporter. Obviously. Good job."

Excuse me read again, diehard Bernie and/or Democratic party supporter?

If you ain't Bernie or Democrats supporter, my sincere apology. :-)

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 0:20 utc | 62

@Inkan1969 | Jun 2, 2016 6:39:02 PM | 52

Unfair hitting below the belt. What makes you think, getting rid of politicians shedding so much bloods here, Libya, Syria, Afghan... and blames others "so eager to spill other humans' blood on the street?”

You believe protecting motherfuckers (excuse me Hmmmm..) Liars, murderers, warmongers so no more blood on the streets? Understands, Enuff, is Enuff, the killing, lying, fake videos must end. This is not my view, majority Americans feel the same both sides of the fences, Dem or Repug. We are not the minority but the majority. The differences how to get rid these motherfuckers!!

To be clear, I'm a passive pacifist, believe in the rule of laws.

Asked many Blacks, you know what going on in Ukraine, Crimea, Syria or Greece? Most were clueless. Never heard of Ukraine etc. Otherwise - Its Putin Faults, Assad the regime must go, Its Repug faults, Congress faults but Never Obomo! More than 80% voted for Obama twice base on racial line. Now don't call me a racist. A Cop almost shot me after questioning him in public.....

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 0:37 utc | 63

BTW what happened to the Repubs wanting to STOP Trump from being nominated AT ALL COST theme?

Has everybody already forgot about that?

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 3 2016 0:58 utc | 64

@62 BTW Opera has switched to the Chrome engine some time ago...

And could you please share with us your list of the oligarchs - it could be some good starting point for discussing how to bring them to justice?

Posted by: ProPeace | Jun 3 2016 1:07 utc | 65

@raga the logo | June 2, 2016 6:15:07 PM | 51

"buy a pitchfork and hit the streets. Anything less is a cop-out and playing the game."

Dunno if you followed Kazzura, Anna News, Liveleak before and after Feb 2014 Maiden uprising they awakened the Separatists. Igor Strelkov, the shooter was fighting Kiev Regime, forced to leave Sloviansk with a handful fighter moved to Donbass. Farmers, doctors, mother, lawyers, grandfather and children with pitchforks and antique weapons guarding building, road blocks and checkpoints with burning tires tried to stopped advancing Kiev troops in Donetsk and Lugansk Obasts.

However, in Odessa, well-dress school children, women and men sitting calmly on the sidewalks, filling Molotov cocktails to massacre separatist holed up in the Union bldg.

Ask Neoliberal, the lesser of evils and apologists who were the blood thirsty killers?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 1:30 utc | 66

This election is all about the "fuck you" vote for the smart folks who know the score.

What will they do?

Posted by: Ziggy | Jun 3 2016 1:35 utc | 67

@63 "BTW what happened to the Repubs wanting to STOP Trump from being nominated AT ALL COST theme?

That was so last week.

Ryan just endorsed Trump...

"I feel confident he would help us turn the ideas in this agenda into laws to help improve people's lives. That's why I'll be voting for him this fall," Ryan wrote.

Posted by: dh | Jun 3 2016 2:00 utc | 68

Calathai @47

If Sanders had NOT run as a Democrat, it is likely that the Democrats would've found someone else to 'sheepdog' for them (and thereby guard their left flank).

Sanders silence on Hillary's email after the State Dept Inspector General's Report is very suspicious. It comes after other instances of his having pulled punches and conflicts with his own positioning/arguments as I noted in my comment @10.

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

The Greens are trying to expand their ballot access. Their policies are the best fit for Sanders supporters. Their policies are actually better because they add preference voting (making third-parties viable); and 50% reduction in military expenditures.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 3 2016 2:46 utc | 69

Reaction to Yves Politico article:

Pro-Hillary commenters have been harshly critical. Many say that potential Trump voters are NOT progressive and/or are comfortable elites that won't lose anything.

A large number of commenters have said that instead of Trump, they would support the GREEN PARTY!

At MoA
There has been concerns raised about 1) Sanders reluctance to attack Hillary and 2) the naivete of Yves': "strategically pointless nation-breaking in Iraq and Syria".

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

Note: Yves has explained that she initially tried to make the article into one that describes Sanders supporters anti-Hillary feelings. She says that editor(s) at politico guided the story to Sanders supporters that would vote Trump as it seemed to be a more dramatic story.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 3 2016 3:24 utc | 70

Holy cow, no one will believe me - Bernie advertises in RT!! First time ever, sneaking pass Ghostly blocker - reaching out to RT viewers.

The message... College should be free, tax Walls street pay for college education. Bernie you lying shit!! I'll never vote for you even if force to eat cat food.

This what John Pliger wrote in SOTT, 27 May of Bernie...

Stunning silence in America as it prepares to vote for one side of the same coin

"Sanders, the hope of many young Americans, is not very different from Clinton in his proprietorial view of the world beyond the United States. He backed Bill Clinton's illegal bombing of Serbia. He supports Obama's terrorism by drone, the provocation of Russia and the return of special forces (death squads) to Iraq. He has nothing to say on the drumbeat of threats to China and the accelerating risk of nuclear war. He agrees that Edward Snowden should stand trial and he calls Hugo Chavez - like him, a social democrat - "a dead communist dictator". He promises to support Clinton if she is nominated...."

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 5:09 utc | 71

Dahoit @ 15,
Trump: "«I didn’t come here tonight to pander to you about Israel. That’s what politicians do: all talk, no action… My number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran… We have rewarded the world’s leading state sponsor of terror with $150 billion and we received absolutely nothing in return… Iran is a problem in Iraq, a problem in Syria, a problem in Lebanon, a problem in Yemen, and will be a very major problem for Saudi Arabia. Literally every day, Iran provides more and better weapons to their puppet states… We will totally dismantle Iran’s global terror network. Iran has seeded terror groups all over the world. During the last five years, Iran has perpetrated terror attacks in 25 different countries on five continents. They’ve got terror cells everywhere, including in the western hemisphere very close to home. Iran is the biggest sponsor of terrorism around the world and we will work to dismantle that reach. . . . When I become President, the days of treating Israel like a second-class citizen will end on Day One."

Posted by: Penelope | Jun 3 2016 5:13 utc | 72

I have to agree with @1 that it is not at all clear that Trump is "far right".

He's a populist, sure, he is. Maybe he even fits the definition of a demagogue. But that doesn't place him on the "far right", it just places him "outside the system".

Trump appears to be all in favour of replacing a foreign policy that relies upon a robust military with one that is based upon active diplomacy i.e. that jaw-jaw is better than war-war.

Which certainly places him way, way to the left of many Democrats (certainly to the left of Hillary) and almost all Republicans.

He also appears to be all in favour of weighing up Trade Deals based upon what effect they have on the working and middle class of American society, rather than how much those deals enrich the 1%.

Again, that places him way, way, way to the left of most mainstream politicians in either party.

Sure, his "immigration" policies appear to be racist, and he doesn't appear to have thought thru many of his *ahem* policies.

But it is very clear to me that the major reason why he blew away a far-right crowd that contained repulsive Neanderthals as Rubio and Cruz is because he made a deliberate decision to run to the left of them. And I have no doubt that he'll seek to win the Presidency by running to the left of Hillary.

Not that it would be hard for anyone to run to the left of Hillary, but, still......

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jun 3 2016 5:22 utc | 73

Up Date - RT Live 7/24

Chris Hedges will be on RT On Contact soon.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 5:28 utc | 74

Oh, nuts! I just realized. I didn't follow the Egypt plane crash at all. Are they going to frame LIBYA & use it as a pretext to attack? I'm only just starting to look at it. Is this possible?

Posted by: Penelope | Jun 3 2016 5:54 utc | 76

@56, so Commentary Magazine, the cooking magazine for the neocon set, think HRC's Trump bashing speech was the cat’s meow.

Colonel Lang asked this question on his site tonight:

Am I correct in saying that HC's speech in San Diego was not made to some existing group but rather was an event arranged by her campaign staff in a hired venue with an audience created by them from her supporters in the area? pl

Someone in the comments said it was closed to the public, and another said it was attended by 200 donors.

Posted by: MRW | Jun 3 2016 6:10 utc | 77


What do you think of Gary Johnson as an alternative to the Repubicrat choices? He is antiwar and supports many of the same social issues that Jill Stein supports. He is also a proven manager, having served as a popular two time governor of New Mexico.

I share your opinion of the Green Party after what they did to Ralph Nader. There is also the fact that Green Parties in Europe are filled warmongers, especially in Germany.

Posted by: Krollchem | Jun 3 2016 6:52 utc | 78

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 2, 2016 9:12:38 AM | 9

The "middle" has been decimated enonomically. That's why traditional politics don't work anymore.

Actually, for Germany, Sanders is very much "middle". Hillary would be "right wing" minus the classism and racism. Trump is close to classical National Socialism with a very special US American "businessman" flavor (there is a traditional disdain for business in Germany). How he could prevail with US demography, economy/business interests, and mentality, apart from winning an election where everyone stays home out of disgust, I just can't see. But a large part of German Jews (and Social Democrats and Trade Unionists - they said let it blow over it will pass) did not see it coming in 1933.

So if I was "left" in the US - or just a normal citizen - I would vote Hillary and organize for my interests to prevail in Congress, in the Senate and finally in 2020 plus refuse to be separated on lifestyle choice.
My impression is that the Sandernistas will be doing just that.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 3 2016 7:43 utc | 79

So, I guess you could sum up the conclusion to all these comments that there is absolutely no one worth voting for because the electoral system is irrevocably broken due to psychopathic or ponerological "infection". You can thrash out the debate as to who is the greater or lesser of evils chosen for the parade this time around but it's a waste of energy since the foundations upon which elections are built have long been rotten to the core. So, voting for such theatre is surely perpetuating the scenario. The president is already chosen. Period. Maybe there's a bit of infighting between Establishment factions but I think it's a done deal. Similarly, any attempt to grow something truly creative and which actually lasts inside the toxicity of Western culture will inevitably fail for the same reason: psychopathy and lesser forms of pathology define our social systems at this stage and it's on an interminable loop that needs to be reset. (And I suspect Mother nature will have a hand in that fairly soon). Time to start building community outside of the state and realise just how much creative power we have away from authoritarian rule in all its guises.

Posted by: M.K. Styllinski | Jun 3 2016 11:11 utc | 80

@79 somebody.

Some folks would make exactly your argument against the rise of Hillary.

@80 MKS

Agree completely. Culture is larger than the politics, politics is part of culture and, as you point out, culture is a sum over all its parts. It's from beneath the larger, cultural arch that we can simply takeover politics, from the outside. My suggestion is write-in voting, a de facto implementation of open elections. There's much too much harm being done now by the broken political machine, we need to get it under control.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 3 2016 12:18 utc | 81

M.K. Styllinski

yes, presumably among our inalienable rights is the right not to vote, as the electoral process, in its present manifestation, can only impede our collective creativity.

The Tale That Might Be Told

Posted by: john | Jun 3 2016 12:31 utc | 82

What must be understood and highlighted is who the political class works for- the savage capitalists.

The US government is merely the front for the ruling class. It merely carries out the policies of the over-civilized, well-manicured capitalist thugs.

Anyone who thinks that simply "voting the bums out" (no matter how much Bern they been feeling lately) is a viable action in such a profoundly corrupt system is in deep denial as to the scope of our problems.

The system is not broken- it is working exactly as designed- by and for those who designed it.

In a bourgeoisie democracy the power of the electorate is a legal fiction.

Wasting energy on electoral kabuki Sanders-Style falls into that category belonging to all strategies based on "trying to push the Dems to the left." It can never happen. The Dems are officially sanctioned precisely because the business plutocracy is 100% confident that the Party can't be "pushed to the Left," even if the proverbial Apocalypse threatens. The Dem Party's essential political function is pretending to sound sympathetic to ordinary citizens, while actually doing the bidding of the financial elite.

In America, the ovens will not be disguised as showers; they will be marked "Voting Booth".

Posted by: Allen | Jun 3 2016 12:41 utc | 83

Reagan wqs a failed Governor and fake WW2 fighter pilot who embracedthe early PNAC after his first term Super Recession, then got elected by a landslide. Same with Bush2. So policy failures orcweak leadership has nothing whatsoever with electability, and you can vote red, blue or purple, the Clinton Cash Machine will still dominate the Selections in November.

Posted by: Guk Tahdar | Jun 3 2016 12:53 utc | 84

@MKS, @Allen

Wringing hands because there is "no democracy" or the duopoly candidates are so bad is a cop-out.

You have choices.

Personally, I would vote third-party instead of staying at home or write-in.

Also consider:

1) there are grass-roots organizations that are very effective - join one!

2) Hillary was supposed to be coronated. Her downfall (via email scandal) shows that things are not as hopeless/inevitable as some claim - don't lose heart!

3) A door has been opened. People see and talk about the 'rigged' political and economic system like never before.

4) You have to be a smart voter. TPTB rely on voter apathy and ignorance. Educate those around you! (carefully! a 'know it all' attitude or partisanship is counterproductive)

In USA only half of eligible voters actually vote. If everyone that gave up on voting were to vote third-party we would have a viable alternative.

Notably, the only Party that supports preference voting (which makes third-parties viable and greatly diminishes 'lesser-evil' voting) is the GREEN PARTY.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 3 2016 13:27 utc | 85

Breaking News in Central Valley D-day June 6, 2016.

It’s HOT in the Central Valley heat wave above 100 degrees F. Bernie was in Modesto courting millennial generation A Future You Can Believe in.

Unlike the 60s & 70s it was post war generations deaths in Vietnam, now millennial generation student debts to Banksters

Free college education can never happen while Banksters and politicians walk free with Bernie supports endless wars, needless death and military-industrial complex Most important funding Israel billion and billions.

It's clear Bernie is a clone of Oboma, time to enact total political collapse by voting Hillary or Trump on D-day.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 13:56 utc | 86

72;Ah Iran.Yes,Trump for some reason(Neocon votes?)has it in for Iran,but Iran is not central to American prosperity,far away and being a Muslim nation makes it a little inviting for American pol bashing,but hey,hopefully he'll stop this on election.
And yeah,he is trying to get the monsters on his side,or at least to stop the daily demonization campaign against him,which anyone can see,if they are honest.
He will win based on the economy(66,000 jobs in May,the worst in 6 years btw) and the feelings of patriotic Americans sick of being Zio boy toys,and sick of furriners coming here and rioting against American citizens.That got him a few more million votes.
America first,a winning hand,but anathema to the Zionists,our mortal enemy.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 3 2016 13:58 utc | 87

>> given that outsider presidents like Jimmy Carter
>> and celebrity governors like Arnold Schwarzenegger
>> and Jesse Ventura didn’t get much done,

Says who? They got us through 4+ years without heaping a ton of sh** on us. Reagan, Clinton, Obama, and Bush did a lot of damage, such that we wish they would've done less.

Posted by: dumbass | Jun 3 2016 14:05 utc | 88

77;I read that her speech was before the US Pacific Fleet,a bunch of military morons.
She is going full bore dominatrix.
She said Trump coddles dictators;Sheesh,you mean like Mubarak,Sissi,Saudis,Bahrain,Dubai and all points east and west thugs of
Clinton favor?
A moron,with hypocrisy enough to name a wing of a museum of political liars after her evil self.
Penelope;Yes,if Trump turns out to be a liar re his plans,the pushback will be the next election cycle,with an actual clone of Hitler as candidate.
We've had enough of these monsters,who use US and abuse US daily.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 3 2016 14:07 utc | 89

[If this double posts, I apologize. I was having some trouble with the post section.]


Jack Smith, what makes me think that? LG kept calling for blood in the streets and nothing less; how am I hitting below the belt then? Also, you say you're a passive pacifist. Why then do you want a French-style revolution in #32, since that'll bring a lot of guillotinings and terror?

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jun 3 2016 14:09 utc | 90

Ovens?Please stop the nonsense,as the ovens were crematoria to rid the camps of the dead which in turn infected the residents.We have them in every city in America.
Serial liars lie serially,and I give absolutely no credence to anything they spew,as they are worst humans in the history of this world,the real haters of humanity.
Look at their goddamn fruit,the world in flames.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 3 2016 14:10 utc | 91

With candidates like Hillary or Trump it is clear that the decline of US influence in the Arab world will accelerate.
The winners will the "sponsors of terrorism" : Syria, Iran and Russia while the real sponsors of terrorism Saudi Arabia , Qatar and Turkey will be busy dealing with their home grown terrorism, triggered by the humiliation of their political defeats in the region.

Posted by: virgile | Jun 3 2016 14:11 utc | 92

@ M.K. Styllinski | Jun 3, 2016 7:11:12 AM | 80

....there is absolutely no one worth voting for because the electoral system is irrevocably broken due to psychopathic or ponerological "infection". You can thrash out the debate as to who is the greater or lesser of evils....

Ahaaa, Not so, you have another choices. Votes for the MOST ABHORRENT CANDIDATE POSSIBLE, Erdogan or Avigdor Lieberman if they are in the running or Hillary or Thump.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 14:13 utc | 93

@jackrabbit #85

Better to place this action in an institutional context. The forces placed on the elected person by the state machinery and pressures from big business dictate the outcome. In the current system your vote is meaningless. You can argue all you want that "We need to keep up the pressure to demand Politician______ needs to listen to ordinary citizens, not to business" and you will rot on the vine as your words disappear into the indifferent air.

There is a difference between the state and government. The state is the permanent collection of institutions that have entrenched power structures and interests. The government is made up of various politicians. It is the institutions that have power in the state due to their permanence, not the representatives who come and go. We cannot expect different politicians to act in different ways to the same pressures. However, this is all ignored by the voting political consumer who wishes Politician______ was more a socialist, green, populist etc. and could ignore the demands of the dominant class in society while in charge of one part of its protector and creature, the state.

Who wins the election in the capitalist system makes no difference because all politicians in this system must do what the ruling class want. Elections are a scam whose function is to neutralize resistance movements and dupe ordinary citizens into thinking they have a say in matters of the state.

Elections in the capitalist system do not secure popular control over the state, they do help secure state control over the populace. Voting is a ritual that reinforces obedience to state authority. It creates the illusion that “the people” control the state, thereby masking elite rule. That illusion makes rebellion against the state less likely because it is seen as a legitimate institution and as an instrument of popular rule rather than the oligarchy it really is. Embedded within all electoral campaigns is the myth that “the people” control the state through voting.

Posted by: Allen | Jun 3 2016 14:23 utc | 94

>> Had Sanders run as an independent he would be getting literally no coverage and likely achieving very little success. ... If he ran as an independent this wouldn't be the case.

Not crazy. But, I disagree.

Implicit in your reasoning is this assumption: In an alternate timeline in which Clinton was *not* primaried, DNC primary voters would've been unaware of or overlooked her horrible record. But, that assumption is undermined by the record in the current timeline:
- We know Bernie has been pulling punches -- not making a big deal about her horrible record.
- Therefore, current-timeline Bernie supporters know about Clinton's record because they've been following it and been appalled by it independently of whatever Bernie has to say.
- These people would've abandoned the DNC as soon as "Clinton" became the presumptive nominee a year ago.

Posted by: dumbass | Jun 3 2016 14:26 utc | 95

Write in your vote, like jfl says.

Write it in, even if you want to vote for one of the names on the ballot.

Posted by: dumbass | Jun 3 2016 14:27 utc | 96

@Inkan1969 | Jun 3, 2016 10:09:36 AM | 90

I never believe LG wanna French revolution, me neither. As a passive pacifist I believe with liars, warmongers etc supporters running amok hitting each camps, sooner than later will lead to French Revolution.

It's clear Bernie supporters are no angle, fascist in sheep skins?

I hope we are clear and I'm sorry to have misinterpreted. No offences intended. :-)

Peace bro, PEACE

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 14:30 utc | 97

@rg the lg | Jun 2, 2016 6:15:07 PM | 52

"If I hurt your feelings, maybe that is a good thing. Someone needs to hit all of us hard enough to wake us up, or put us completely out of the game."

Well said missed this one.

Peace bro PEACE!

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 3 2016 14:37 utc | 98

Allen, I agree with much of what you write but I don't think it is as hopeless as it may seem.

I simply think that voting third-party is better than not voting.

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

PS Writing in a third-party candidate instead of casting a vote (as suggested by dumbass) means that your vote is less susceptible to tampering.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 3 2016 15:21 utc | 99

Allen @ 94 said:

"Who wins the election in the capitalist system makes no difference because all politicians in this system must do what the ruling class want. Elections are a scam whose function is to neutralize resistance movements and dupe ordinary citizens into thinking they have a say in matters of the state."

Well said Allen, and, I believe, true. I will however, vote, because I've always voted. The therapy is beneficial. So, in closing, vote people vote. Keeping in mind the subtle reminder below.

Posted by: ben | Jun 3 2016 15:32 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.