Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 03, 2016

Reward Clinton's Hawkishness Because Trump's Foreign Policy Is Uncertain?

For me, as a non U.S. person, the major issues of the U.S. presidential elections is always foreign policy. There Trump is not hawkish at all. He has somewhat confused, unlearned blustering positions on foreign policy but is basically a cautious, risk averse businessman. He consistently criticizes the war mongering in Washington DC. Hillary Clinton is a run-of-the-mill warmongering neoconservative compatible with the imperial "mainstream" of the power centers in Washington and elsewhere.

Trump has called up this contrast again and again (as do I). In a speech (vid at 53:20 min) in Grand Rapids Michigan on October 31 he again highlights these points. Some excerpts (taken from this partial transcript part 9, 10):

Hillary led us to disaster in Iraq, in Syria, in Libya. ... Hillary and our failed Washington establishment have spent $6 trillion on wars in the Middle East, and now it’s worse than it’s ever been before.

Had Obama and others gone to the beach, Obama could have gone to the golf course, we would have been in much better shape.

We shouldn’t have gone into the war, and she thinks I’m a hawk. Oh, Donald Trump.
Imagine if some of the money had been spent, $6 trillion in the Middle East, on building new schools and roads and bridges right here in Michigan.

Now Hillary, trapped in her Washington bubble, that’s blind to the lessons, wants to start a shooting war in Syria in conflict with a nuclear armed Russia that could drag us into a World War III.

Okay, folks. She – I’ll tell you what. She will get us into World War III. She will get us into World War III. I will tell you that. She’s incompetent. She will get us into World War III.

The arrogant political class never learns. They keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again. They keep telling the same lies. They keep producing the same failed results.

Trump may well be lying when he says he does not seek a conflict with Russia or anyone else. Trump surely lies on other issues. But those are mostly rather obvious lies and some are even a bit comical. He is playing Reagan on economic issues, promising tax cuts that can not be financed (and which Reagan had to take back in the end when he introduced the biggest tax hike ever). On many issues we do not know what Trump is really planning to do (or if he plans at all). But he has never given the impression that he is hawkish or willing to incite a war.

Clinton on the other hand has a proven record of being a proactive hawk. She is willing to go to war and to kill people because the U.S. can.


She is a political animal totally dependent on her sponsors. Economically she is pro-banks, pro-big-business and for further deregulation. A neoliberal. The only "liberal" standpoints she has are on some hyped identity issues relevant only for a very tiny group of people like transgenders. She told her real voters, the people who pay her, that her public standpoint on many issues is different from the one she will pursue. She did not mean that what she will pursue will be less hawkish than her public stand, or that she will be more progressive on economic issues than she openly claims.

Clinton assures us that Trump is Putin's puppet who will start a nuclear World War III with Russia. She doesn't say how that computes. Will Putin order Trump to give him asylum in Washington while Moscow and Washington get nuked?

With Trump the U.S. would get a president who is a pretty unknown factor but, in my judgment, a less dangerous one to the U.S. and the world than Clinton. With her the next useless and deadly wars are practically guaranteed.

Micah Zenko, who's opinion I value, agrees with my diagnose, Trump is less hawkish, but has a different judgement:

When it comes to foreign policy, Trump’s own positions make him the most immoral, poorly informed, and dangerous presidential candidate in recent American history.

If Clinton is elected, there will undoubtedly be troubling foreign-policy positions and actions which must be thoroughly questioned and scrutinized. I just deeply hope that citizens have the opportunity to hold a President Hillary Clinton to account.

The citizens of the United States now have an opportunity to hold Secretary of State Clinton to account for her "We came, we saw, he died" war on Libya and for escalating the war on Syria. The militaristic (and failed) pivot to Asia, the "regime changes" putsches in Honduras and Ukraine and the deterioration of relations with Russia are also to a large part her work. Should the voters reward her for all the death, misery and new dangers she created as Secretary of State by making her President?

Who would I vote for? Not Hillary. Not for Trump either. Some third party candidate - probably Stein of the Green Party. It would be a "useless and wasted" vote in the short term though such votes have some light influence on the programs of the big parties. In the long term the example of voting third parties will hopefully induce more people to do the same. If it becomes a more common, regular thing to do it might over time break the duopoly of today's consensus in Washington. It is a small chance, but possibly a big long-term reward.

Posted by b on November 3, 2016 at 19:22 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Meet the new Bo$$ same as the old Bo$$

Posted by: ALberto | Nov 3 2016 19:30 utc | 1

She is willing to go to war and to kill people because the U.S. can.

That works only on the third world hellholes. The problem with Hillary (and her circle) is that they don't really know the difference between those hellholes and a thing called in US military lingo "near-peer" or "peer". They say that they know but they don't, neither does most of "academe".

Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Nov 3 2016 19:37 utc | 2

IMO, this vote is the only way to hold her to account. Once she is in, the Clinton machine will be using "We the People" as door mats.

Posted by: Dean | Nov 3 2016 19:47 utc | 3

Trump's Treasury Secretary?

In addition to Goldman, Mnuchin also worked at Soros Fund Management, whose founder, George Soros, has funded many left-leaning causes. Where it gets even more bizarre is that Mnuchin has donated frequently to Democrats, including to Clinton and Barack Obama.

Posted by: ALberto | Nov 3 2016 19:58 utc | 4

IMO b, Trump is saying progressive and popular things,even sensible things, in order to attract many angry working class voters. His handlers are not stupid people. He has to say these things to attract working people, and its working. Once someone shows you who and what they are, you should believe them, and the Donald, as well as HRC, have done just that, over their long careers. Proven liars both. Buyer beware!

Posted by: ben | Nov 3 2016 20:00 utc | 5

"I have no doubt that Mrs. Clinton will be the next President of the United States, or that if Mr. Trump were to be elected, he would be rapidly eliminated."

Posted by: prez | Nov 3 2016 20:11 utc | 6

The domestic cost is not worth the international peace. It's a lesser evil argument but there it is.

Posted by: Northern Observer | Nov 3 2016 20:14 utc | 7

On domestic policy and economic policy, both candidates are abominable. Hillary is, even there I would argue, more dangerous because she actually understands the implications and effects of her policy positions and still holds them. Trump doesn't seem to have anything more than a thin grasp over any policy matter. He might get into office and forget about his giant tax cut.

On foreign policy, I have to agree that Hillary is far more dangerous. Even if Trump ditches his rational foreign policy positions for the standard inside-the-beltway neoconservatism, he has the advantage of being inept.

Posted by: Charles | Nov 3 2016 20:16 utc | 8

November 2, 2016
Prof. Michael Hudson on Hillary Clinton and the US Elections

worth a listen...

Posted by: ben | Nov 3 2016 20:24 utc | 9

no idea why you value this guy's opinion...typical FP neoliberal yuppie nonsense. the fact that he thinks anyone can or will "hold her accountable" after she gets voted in makes me wonder if he can even tie his own shoelaces. as for "immoral", that just tells me he places "locker room talk" at a lower moral realm than participation in genocide and plutocratic plunder.

how did that "hold me accountable" thing work out from 2008-2012? and when the voters had a chance to hold obama accountable for his first term what did they do? voted him in again and then went back to four years of paying zero attention to the world around them unless the MSM gave them an occasional Two Minute Hate or some "tragedy" they were instructed to feel sad about.

clinton has spent her entire adult life avoiding accountability. a cursory glance at the behavior of her cultish followers shows that anyone trying to hold her to any standard gets screeched out of the room (never mind getting on any mainstream news channel). every time she screws up it's "someone else's fault". it's putin or the FBI or some variety of "bro".

george carlin's "who owns you" should be required viewing for every US voter. not only will she say anything to get elected but once she's in will laugh at the notion of anyone telling her what to do. she has nothing but contempt for all voters and i wouldn't be surprised if she held her own supporters even lower. how can you respect a group that has so little respect for themselves or the truth?

Posted by: the pair | Nov 3 2016 20:24 utc | 10

@ALberto #4

shocking news, indeed...

Posted by: Dario | Nov 3 2016 20:29 utc | 11

What the hell is that?
they really get trolled by email?

Posted by: Mina | Nov 3 2016 20:38 utc | 12

On the subject of voting, & another case of your betters telling you any vote by the sheep plebes counts not for sh!t:

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The High Court in London ruled Thursday that the British government alone cannot start the process of leaving the European Union but requires the approval of parliament, in a landmark judgment that could delay Brexit.

Three senior judges said Prime Minister Theresa May's government does not have the power itself to trigger Article 50 of the EU's Lisbon treaty, the formal notification of Britain's intention to leave the bloc.

Posted by: schlub | Nov 3 2016 20:39 utc | 13

I agree with b's recommendation. Americans should not vote for either Trump or Clinton. "Too Big To Fail" political parties are being killed off all over the World. The sooner people stop voting for candidates proposed by big, secretive parties with hidden agendas, the sooner they'll lose their remaining legitimacy.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Nov 3 2016 20:41 utc | 14

@8, Charles

On foreign policy, I have to agree that Hillary is far more dangerous. Even if Trump ditches his rational foreign policy positions for the standard inside-the-beltway neoconservatism, he has the advantage of being inept.

Are you suggesting that Obama and what he has in his admin currently are not-inept? I believe last generation of American competent foreign policy professionals "died out" with Bill Clinton's Admin arrival. For the last 20+ year US foreign policy "establishment", including its "academe" and "analytical" branches, which work in concert with intelligence services is an embodiment of incompetence and is a definition of unmitigated disaster.

Posted by: SmoothieX12 | Nov 3 2016 20:47 utc | 15
"> Also, any idea whose fighters attacked Islamist positions in Tripoli,
> Libya?
> Worth analyzing for future purposes."

Posted by: Mina | Nov 3 2016 20:49 utc | 16

Dave Lindorff at Counterpunch makes essentially the same argument than I did above: The Problem With Hillary

The answer to being presented by the two major parties with a choice between two genuine evils is not to vote for the lesser of those evils, but to reject them both. There are, after all, other options, from voting for third party candidates, to writing in Bernie Sanders or perhaps some appropriate expletive.

Posted by: b | Nov 3 2016 20:52 utc | 17

I am surprised that when searching for leaks released today this one shows up, which we've seen before, isn't it?

Posted by: Mina | Nov 3 2016 20:58 utc | 18

The OldBomber evidently said he doesn't understand Trump's popularity ... It isn't that Trump is popular it is that, due in part to the OlBomber himself, the Killary is viewed as anathema.

My hope is that IF Killary wins a revolution is sparked by simple disgust at how venal she is ... or that IF Trump wins the dems (dims) provoke a disturbance that grows into a bloody damned mess.

Maybe, just maybe, the blood in the streets will be deep enough to make shoes squish with each step.

In the meantime, we've had light (really slight) showers here on the Llano Estacado.

Posted by: rg the lg | Nov 3 2016 21:00 utc | 19

thanks b..

if the choice is between which of the two is the better liar - i go with hillary... as a consequence, if i was in the usa, i would be voting trump or green depending on the location..

and, as you note - ..."as a non U.S. person, the major issues of the U.S. presidential elections is always foreign policy." and which one of the candidates is always talking russia 24/7 while claiming to serve the interests of the indoctrinated usa public? one would have to be brain dead to vote for hillary, in spite of what the lying msm says... a friend here in canada - an american living in canada - informed me this morning that he saw a poll saying that 9 out of 10 canucks would like to cut off relations with the usa if trump is elected.. kid you not.. i told him i was the other 10% and that i would like to cut off relations with the usa if hillary is elected!

Posted by: james | Nov 3 2016 21:03 utc | 20

rg and lg - the msm and establishment couldn't figure out brexit either.. it was like a slap in the face to the powers that be who want to continue to rule the world by an inverted type of totalitarianism..

Posted by: james | Nov 3 2016 21:06 utc | 21

If elected Hillary would have as much contempt for the electorate as she had for her staff. In an e-mail sent from Comcast after Clinton was interviewed by NBC’s Matt Lauer, Lauer came under fire after questioning Hillary on the e-mails, according to the technical crew after the show Hillary proceeded to pick up a full glass of water and throw it at the face of her assistant and then the screaming started, she was in full meltdown, she came apart literally unglued, she is the most foul mouthed woman I’ve ever heard, and that voice at screech level…”If that f—ing bastard wins we all hang from nooses! Lauer’s finished and if I lose its all on your heads for screwing this up”. She screamed “she’d get that f—ing Lauer fired for this”.
Donna Brazile was singled out by Clinton..”I’m so sick of your face, you stare at the wall like a brain dead buffalo while letting that fucking Lauer get away with this. What are you good for really? Get the f–k to work janitoring this I make myself clear”.

Posted by: harrylaw | Nov 3 2016 21:09 utc | 22

Russia is apparently positioning Middle East forces in order to strike a major military blow to parties who at this moment are unknown. As far as targets I would guess that the big pinata Saudi Arabia soon to be known as Arabia and the small pinata Israel soon to be known as Palestine are the intended targets. Aleppo can be handled with tactical nukes and thermobaric weapons.

Russia’s only aircraft carrier has arrived off the coast of Syria.
In a Russian Ministry of Defence video, the Admiral Kuznetsov is seen carrying out flight drills as it leads a fleet of eight warships.

Just my opinion

Posted by: ALberto | Nov 3 2016 21:15 utc | 23

Alberto @4.

Back in September, Trump was stated to have taken on some Israeli-firsters as his ME advisors. One advisor stated Trump would provide unlimited aid to Israel.

Posted by: Yonantan | Nov 3 2016 21:19 utc | 24

Some more spare rounds?

03 November 2016 16:28
VIDEO: Russia Warship Leaves Crimea to Boost Russia Presence for Syria War

The warship Admiral Grigorovich, which bears land-attack cruise missiles, will participate in operations from the Mediterranean Sea.

Posted by: schlub | Nov 3 2016 21:26 utc | 25

Here's my take........

With all the US election media hype going on and the hysterical anti Trump hate feeding frenzy. And the totally schizophrenic divide caused by news media hosts, pundits, announcers, and political experts, famous movie star celebrities, feminists, and leftist political activists alike, wall street tycoons and the entrenched political establishment, all coming out in full support of Hillary Clinton for the next US President, I've waded into this insane debate with the following comments, which I've been disseminating for several weeks now on various 'alternative' internet media blogs comment sections, being as how the outcome will deeply affect us all personally around the world no matter what country we happen to be from or live in.

Re: The US Presidential Elections , What is at stake and ’What is to be done’?

Reality dictates …abstaining or voting for anyone other than Donald Trump is in effect a de facto vote for Hillary Clinton.

As President of the United States and military Commander in Chief, she has declared her intentions of imposing a (Libyan style) “NO FLY” zone over Syria in support of her proxy terrorist there, to “OBLITERATE” “Iran” and “Russia”, confront China and continue to expand the globalization of the American economy and the rest of the world.

Thus the American electorate, either by default or by their own actions will have given Hillary a 'democratically' sanctioned mandate to do her will and thereby have become complicit in their own economic destruction, systemic political corruption, international war crimes and potentially the starting of world war three, possibly resulting in a planetary thermonuclear holocaust.

Striped of all other frivolous distractions, relatively insignificant and irrelevant none issue nonsense, the critically crucial choice that the American public are faced with making today on behalf of the entire world, is that simple. And one that will for all of eternity weigh on the collective souls of all mankind's conscience.

So for the sake of the justice, peace and the survival of all humanity, criminally indictable and certifiably clinically insane warmonger Hillary Clinton must be stopped and voted OUT on Nov.8 2016

Whether or not you personally happen to like Trump is a totally irreverent matter under the given circumstances. And I challenge anyone here to offer up any other viable options and a realistic alternative, other than to vote Trump IN. Before it's to late, and a totally corrupted Hillary Clinton dynasty destroys us all in her pathologically driven maniacal quest for more money and the attainment of absolute power and control.

As POTUS Hillary will hold the entire world at ransom with her trigger happy finger on the ' US doctrinal first strike policy' red nuclear launch box button.

Hence, the issue here is as serious as it gets and the electoral decision to be made by Americans in the coming days is not only one of the most important of this century, but potentially one made in the
entire history of world affairs.

Can what's actually at stake here be any clearer?

Posted by: RayB | Nov 3 2016 21:46 utc | 26

#20 James

Take the substring 'an' out of the word 'Canuck' and you hit the nail on the head.

Posted by: Quadriad | Nov 3 2016 21:46 utc | 27

Vladimir Putin – Straight From the Horse’s Mouth

Posted by: ALAN | Nov 3 2016 21:48 utc | 28

Hope the Americans don't vote that psychopath Clinton in, if they do keep her away from that football. The nuclear football (also known as the atomic football, the president's emergency satchel, the button, the black box, or just the football) is a briefcase, the contents of which are to be used by the President of the United States to authorize a nuclear attack

Posted by: harrylaw | Nov 3 2016 21:50 utc | 29

Who would I vote for? Not Hillary. Not for Trump either. Some third party candidate - probably Stein of the Green Party. It would be a "useless and wasted" vote in the short term though such votes have some light influence on the programs of the big parties. In the long term the example of voting third parties will hopefully induce more people to do the same. If it becomes a more common, regular thing to do it might over time break the duopoly of today's consensus in Washington. It is a small chance, but possibly a big long-term reward.

A nice idea, but there is no "long-term" in a thermonuclear holocaust. And according to the top scientists, even if Jill Stein was elected president on Tuesday and the Green Party swept away all of the Democrats & Republicans, there still would be no "long-term." So it's high time to give up the myth of "progress" or some deluded fantasy about a better future somewhere on the horizon. The planet likely has less than 5-10 years left of relative stability & then all bets are off. So the jig's up folks. Live it up while you still can.

Posted by: Mark | Nov 3 2016 21:53 utc | 30

Yesterday I missed my two minutes of hate session directed at Putin, can I be forgiven if I do a four minute one today?

Posted by: harrylaw | Nov 3 2016 21:54 utc | 31

ALberto @ 23

I doubt the KSA and Israel are to be targeted....that would be a mayor escalation.... but doubled and tripled down on Syria ......without a doubt.

Posted by: notlurking | Nov 3 2016 21:58 utc | 32

"...With Trump the U.S. would get a president who is a pretty unknown factor but, in my judgment, a less dangerous one to the U.S. and the world than Clinton. With her the next useless and deadly wars are practically guaranteed..


Excellent piece, I hold the same opinion of Trump, I'm undecided whether to throw my lot in with Trump or Jill Stein. Vote for Stein won't help her in California, Hillary too far ahead. But vote for Stein may help the Green Party, the 5% need to be in future public debates.

Even if I'm wrong and vote for Trump, Dem will obstructs Trump in every twists and turns, just they did to GW Bush. Whom should I vote?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Nov 3 2016 22:09 utc | 33

Might I reply to b, who quotes with approval this argument for voting neither of the main candidates:-

"The answer to being presented by the two major parties with a choice between two genuine evils is not to vote for the lesser of those evils, but to reject them both"

With respect, I believe that to be a false argument in these circumstances.

In rejecting both candidates your may well find yourself in effect voting for the worst. Abstaining, or voting third party, means withholding your vote from the lesser evil and thus making the greater evil more likely.

I voted Green In England for a long time because I felt there was so little difference between the two major parties here that it didn't really matter what one did with one's vote; so I might as well use a Green vote to send a message - a vanishingly weak one admittedly - about environmental issues that I felt the major parties were ignoring.

But surely it is not the case in this American election that there is no difference between the candidates. On the major issues that's clearly not so:-

1. Immigration. Less with Trump, more with Clinton.

2. Outsourcing. Trump against, Clinton for.

3. Corruption and cronyism. A cornerstone of Trump's campaign. Some indications from Clinton that she's for Main Street against Wall Street but few Americans seem to find that convincing.

4. Foreign Policy. Trump criticising past actions in Libya and Iraq and indicating a less aggressive attitude against Russia. Clinton markedly more hawkish.

Of course there's always the difficulty that no one ever believes a politician's promises, but if you push that difficulty to its logical end there's no point in voting at all. If there is any point, if the four differences given above are anything more than just words, then there's significant difference enough between the two to choose from.

Since they are significant differences then any voting action becomes significant. In choosing Trump you reject Clinton. In choosing Clinton you reject Trump. In sitting it out - i.e. abstaining or voting third party - you simply leave it to others to make that choice for you. And if, of course, the candidate you regard as the greater evil gets in, then sitting it out means you have actively chosen that greater evil simply by doing nothing or doing nothing to the point.

It's a forced set of choices, of course, and I think most people on this site wish there were some other set of choices. But there isn't. So unless one does take the view that there's little difference between the two candidates and the election's therefore not worth bothering with, then sitting it out is not a rational course of action.

To declare an outsider's interest, I hope Clinton loses for reason (4), Foreign Policy: it would not of course be proper for me to state my views on the other three heads except perhaps to confess that I think we need a Trump type movement here even more than in the States. But declaring an interest does not necessarily invalidate an argument, and I believe that in the circumstances of this election the argument against sitting it out is sound.

Posted by: EnglishOutsider | Nov 3 2016 22:35 utc | 34

In my book, the candidate I vote for must earn/merit that vote. Only Stein has done so. She alone understands and is willing to face the internal contradictions of the declining Outlaw US Empire and has proposed a program to being their rectrafication. But then I've been arguing that all year.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 3 2016 22:44 utc | 35

@30 Mark
Yes. Making America great again is not really an option. It is so riddled with corruption that it must fall first.

So the vote is for yanks is pretty clear: 'who will you choose to oversee the collapse of the US Dollar as global reserve currency, shortly followed by the IMF imposing our new global fiat...?'

Trump may slow the process... but a vote for Hillary is a vote for the globalists agenda in the Obama/Clinton neolibcon image. We all know about Obama's love for horrific, globalist, anti-sovereign shite like the TPP and his sad, obvious and failed anti-brexit visit to the UK... these are non-citizens who don't care if the U.S. on it's knees...and with her track record so clear, so evident, so destructive, Hillary is just the hawk to light the wick that busts the powderkeg. If she gets in, I'm back in the southern hemisphere.

The Greens, Libertarians, whoever... they should be part of a reformation so they should continue campaigning now for 4 years solid in order to keep the plebs reminded of how disgusting their 2016 choice was.

Even though he'll have the same deep state masters and employ a different mafia, a vote for Trump is the only anti-nuclear vote.

Great piece again b. Doug Casey's recent effort draws a good few parallels with yours:

Doug Casey: A Civil War Could Be in the Cards After the Election

Posted by: MadMax2 | Nov 3 2016 23:01 utc | 36

And yes, about the only thing "liberal" about Clinton involves identity politics. But if she is elected, all of her supporters who used identity politics based attacks to smear Bernie Sanders and his supporters (along with a good dose of that against Trump also) are going to be in for a very rude awakening. How easily in particular the gay and black communities forget the administration of Bill Clinton and what he and Hillary did.

Just as a start, Clinton ignored the identity crowd by picking somebody for VP that the identity crowd spent the previous year smearing the Sanders campaign over: Kaine is your prototypical straight privileged white male who has failed upwards. And not a peep from the identity crowd especially black leaders who more than any other group put Clinton over the top (forgetting the cheating for a moment). One of the early Wikileak revelations was a memo to Congressional candidates how to marginalize BLM if they were ever confronted.

If BLM acts up and damages her politically, a President Hillary will smash the leaders and movement in the same Obama violently smashed OWS. She will honor her "feminist" supporters by appointing the most violent and virulent warmongering women into positions of power so they too can like the men can decide which black and brown women and children to bomb. She will stab in the back such early supporters as SEIU by refusing to support min. wage increases. And women are disproportionately the base of min. wage workers. She supports Simpson-Bowles as revealed by Wikileaks and the Cat Food Commission recommended cutting social security. Guess which groups that will really hurt? Maybe the next groveling task for John Lewis will be to attack people who are against Hillary cutting social security.

Posted by: Erelis | Nov 3 2016 23:02 utc | 37

Oh well my twenty cents worth is that Trump doesn't have enough legislative support to do anything too drastic externally. yeah yeah I undertsand that as 'C in C' he can find an excuse to blow the world away but since there's not a dollar in that and most of his energy is gonna be directed at copping a good earner, he's not gonna waste time, energy or electoral capital shooting the shit outta unwhites - unlike his predecessor or his opponent.
Of course there will be a rush of greedy rethug assholes trying to line up for jobs in a trump administration but trump being who he is will rely heavily on yes men as he always has - he doesn't trust anyone sufficiently to delegate and lacks the ability to build a clinton style organisation full of rats ratting each other out to give him the checks & balances he would need to delegate effectively.

Some ambitious rethugs will definitely take it upon themselves to operate for 'sponsors' in spite of the donald but he must be used to that coming as he does from that grey area between gangsterism and allegedly 'legitimate' business. He won't appreciate types who cop an earn without paying him an 80% cut, so hopefully DC's exponents of 'wet work' will be kept busy purging the trump administration and won't have time to be sticking their noses into other nations and purging them.

The real issue of both candidates is their vice asshole nominee, cos I reckon which ever creep wins impeachment will be just around the corner. Of course Hillary is more likely to be impeached the open fbi investigation combined with an almost certain rethug majority in senate and a certain one in Congress means her odds of lasting the distance are not great.
Trump has a lot of work to do to prevent the rethug 'leadership' taking a big bung from the sponsors to impeach him for some misdeed or another. Remember this is the mob that got the other Clinton for copping a bj - hardly presidential (in the weird hypocritical amerikan view) but not illegal unless the whole rape culture thing is used and that I suspect even now to be a step too far for rednecked rethugs.
Trump is more likely to meet with an accident or suffer heart failure but the means don't really matter the reality is that in either case the veeps are highly likely to come into play.
In that case Kain & Pence - from what I can discern they are standard amerikan hawks complete with the required ignorance of the big wide world, assured sense of amerikan exceptionalism and love of watching what they cannot comprehend explode in a pink miasma of human body parts.
And they know how to keep sponsors happy which is why they were picked in the first place - so however bad things are gonna get under ClintonInc or theDonald the only certainty is that they will eventually get even worse.

Good one assholes

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 3 2016 23:03 utc | 38

notlurking @32

I doubt the KSA and Israel are to be targeted

Egypt flipped to Russian side. Check out the map. This war is mainly about $$$$$$$$. What happens when Iran, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon Iraq, either create a collective independent currency or trade only in Russian Ruble and/or Chinese Renminbi or both?

Posted by: ALberto | Nov 3 2016 23:14 utc | 39

Here's the thing on Stein. She's never been vetted. All we know is what she has chosen to tell us. That's it.

Back during the 2012 election I did make every possible effort to vet her and to learn if she met Article 2 Section 5 of Presidential qualifications. I could hardly find anything 'independent of what she tells us' to corroborate who she says she is. Her upbringing, the schools she attended, her parents, grandparents, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, sons and daughters. About the only independent source I found was something about her grandpa being a tailor in Chi-town. Every lead went no where.

She is someone who absolutely one hundred percent lacks any footprint whatsoever other than what detail she has provided on her resume and the always reliable NOT Wikipedia.

Like her or not, I could care less. But if you want to run as Pres of the U.S. you damned well better meet the three simple qualifications laid out under Article II, and I, as a voter should easily be able to confirm this without challenge. There is no independent info that corroborates her meeting A2 qualifications than what she's told us.

And you're damned right I'm a constitutional girl. There is a reason the founding fathers put in those very basic qualifications and if you haven't done your own due diligence to at a minimum learn if she's even qualified under the U.S. Constitution, well then shame on you. And to advocate a vote for her double shame on you.

We live in a land with founding documents that were prepared to protect this Republic and if you don't use them and respect them, well it's like Adams said following the 1787 Convention when a lady asked him what form of government they settled on. Adams said 'a republic if you can keep it'. The U.S. founding documents ARE what makes this country different, not special, just friggin different and b/c Americans have been so dumbed down the majority no longer even consults these docs. They should b/c they are the docs that govern everything in D.C.

Elections are not popularity contests and they are not about creating third, fourth, fifth parties. They are not about hopes and dreams. They are about governance. They are about policy positions. And RayB @26 and EnglishOutsider @34 are the only ones talking about policy b/c that's all the 2016 vote is and should be about.

Posted by: h | Nov 3 2016 23:56 utc | 40

h, that you'd rather listen to dead people and imaginary friends gives everyone else more than enough reason to ignore your idiotic team play-pretend game.

If you're a Constitutional girl, then you're an agent of oligarchy, and none of the blather you have written above is in the least relevant to real lives. Go away.

Posted by: Jonathan | Nov 4 2016 0:14 utc | 41

Voted Stein a few days ago. Your last paragraph was my reasoning almost to a T. She leaves quite a bit to be desired, but the two parties will not give an inch until they start to lose elections because of those "wasted" votes. No one should hold their breath waiting on this little plan to bear fruit.

Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Nov 4 2016 0:18 utc | 42

Today's humor:

US President Barack Obama has lashed out at Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s supporters, saying his popularity among working-class Americans is “frustrating.”

Posted by: schlub | Nov 4 2016 0:23 utc | 43


I don't listen to dead people. I have bothered myself to learn what those 'dead people's' reasoning was to use the words they used when founding the U.S. The country I live in. I happen to find said documents alive and vibrant. I'm sorry to learn you do not. They are there to protect you and me.

As with any founding document whether for a country, a business, a non profit or whatever the words chosen to explain said founding carries weight and meaning. You may choose to ignore said facts b/c in the U.S. you are most welcomed to do so. That does not mean the rest of us choose to do so and I choose not to ignore them.

Rather than attacking or belittling me prove me wrong. I'd more than welcome that. I just know when I went to vet Stein in 2012 and all leads led me to dead ends. That's all. And like I said, if I can't confirm with a simple search these days ones bona fides to qualify to serve in the most powerful position in the world, well, they simply don't register on my radar. Sad that they do for you.

Posted by: h | Nov 4 2016 0:40 utc | 44

And the hits just keep on comin' with the Abedin email stash:

"These emails, CBS News’ Andres Triay reports, are not duplicates of emails found on Secretary Clinton’s private server. At this point, however, it remains to be seen whether these emails are significant to the FBI’s investigation into Clinton."

Posted by: Thirdeye | Nov 4 2016 0:44 utc | 45

41 said

"If you're a Constitutional girl, then you're an agent of oligarchy, and none of the blather you have written above is in the least relevant to real lives. Go away."

Son, what country do you live in? If you're an American and you hold the position that the U.S. founding documents were built to support 'Oligarchy' I must ask, b/c you opened the door as to where you ever learned such nonsense.

If you're outburst is representative of America's younger generation, then my God man, we're sorely screwed.

Posted by: h | Nov 4 2016 0:51 utc | 46

@h #40 "They are about governance. They are about policy positions"
Yeah right that must be why yer hero has done so much to avoid talking policy over the last 12 months. ClintonInc attacked the bernie idjit personally just as they have with trump. That wouldn't be so important if anyone could trust ClintonInc to abide by stated dem policy but this is a low life scumsucking mob of no-hopers who put themselves on offer to the highest bidder - whatever the titular head of ClintonInc has said in the past or will say and do in the future is irrelevant to the eternal now - how much are you offering continuum - where she lives.
There is absolutely no point in listening to what any modern pol says, the reality they peddle is mutable, changing according to their needs. Such types can only be measured by what they have done in the past & in the case of Mrs Clinton that is a farrago of broken promises & sell outs to her sponsors.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 4 2016 1:06 utc | 47

@ EnglishOutsider, 34

"Since they are significant differences then any voting action becomes significant."

Exactly (provided you mean "more significant in the short term".)

I have corresponded with Bueno de Mesquita, a gifted political game theorist, on lesser evilism. See "THE JESUS CHRIST OF POLITICAL GAME THEORY ON THE STUPIDITY OF LESSER EVILIST VOTING" @

Although we didn't discuss it, and so I can't guarantee that de Mesquita would agree, lesser evilism as a voting strategy is stupid PROVIDED that the evils are of roughly the same level.

When it comes to foreign policy, I don't think that's true at all of Hillary vs. Trump. Hillary is MUCH more evil than Trump. Furthermore, Hillary's "evil" in this regard involves a greater chance of war with amply nuclear armed Russia. We're therefore dealing with an existential threat. Yeah, she finally dialed that back, somewhat, at her last debate with Trump. (Now she says she'll negotiate a no-fly zone with Russia.) That's good news, if it's really true that she was essentially bluffing about the no-fly zone in Syria. But if there's a 5% chance she wasn't bluffing/lying, then that 5% chance of an existentially threatening war scenario still relegates her to the "You must be kidding" category, in my eyes.

I'm voting for Trump, and make no apologies for doing so.

It's too bad that Trump is SO inept as a politician. While he's improved, he hasn't impressed, overall, with his snail's pace of improvement. He even botched the de facto coddling of ISIS oil caravans, spouting wild allegations of Obama and Hillary "founding" ISIS. IMO, if he had used his ample TV exposure to expose the Obama Admin's cozy, benign tolerance of ISIS, in it's early stages, Obama would be so toxic that a) he could not help Hillary, much at all and b) Obama's toxicity would rub off on Hillary. Trump could have used this horror story to virtually guarantee him a win. Instead he turned lemonade into a lemon, and still hasn't figured out what an opportunity he blew, nor how to recover.

Pretty damn dumb, if you ask me.

Unmolested ISIS oil caravan data was presented by the Russians; I listed references in my reddit post at r/the_Donald, "Trump Better Wake Up - New Report Indicates Why Trump's Failure To Correctly Attribute Blame for ISIS' Early Success Could Cost Him, Dearly" @

Posted by: metamars | Nov 4 2016 1:09 utc | 48

I haven't read where this has been posted yet but evidently the FBI took Clinton II up on her demand that all the emails be released

I am sure glad I went long on popcorn....should have enough to last through next Tuesday.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 4 2016 1:10 utc | 49

Thank you 'h' 40,44,46. The country that is somehow our 'spirit-guide' follows founding documents written some 2000-5000 years ago, and from which not a letter is to be altered. Hard to imagine that our Enlightenment inspired, classically-based, written documents including a mission statement, which have stood us through 230 years and an extremely bloody civil war, should merit such contempt. What techno-bolshevik nonsense is supposed to unite us as a people?

Posted by: S.H.E. | Nov 4 2016 1:19 utc | 50

I am sorry for not providing the FBI link which is below

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 4 2016 1:25 utc | 51

Jill Stein + Johnson are polling at around 10% in a lot states. People do not want to vote for these major party buffoons.

Trump's domestic policies are laughable with the exception of his stance on trade. Clinton would be a continuation of her husband's policies, you could say, that had the brakes applied a small amount by obama, after being turbocharged by W Bush.

More ineffectual liberalism will open up america to some really nasty political forces that I don't want to see. It might be better for the country for Trump to win than for hillary to continue the status quo. I say that as someone who identifies as a full leftist/anti imperialist.

Posted by: Cresty | Nov 4 2016 1:26 utc | 52

47 what on earth did I ever say that gave you the slightest impression I was as you say 'Yeah right that must be why yer hero has done so much to avoid talking policy over the last 12 months' which with the rest of your words conflates to a Hillary supporter? Whew! I need to clean up my language.

50 Say what? 'documents written some 2000-5000 years ago'...nuff said. Any other American out there want to take a shot at responding? I'm afraid I'd shatter this precious snowflake...

Posted by: h | Nov 4 2016 1:27 utc | 53

b, 'Who would I vote for? Not Hillary. Not for Trump either. Some third party candidate - '

Of course I agree with you b. I hope at least 1.6% X 10 voting on Tuesday do too. All those Bernie supporters ... hard to believe they'll all vote for Clinton. But Obama was elected, and re-elected ... with just a sorry 1.6% voting 'other' in 2012. I guess it's impossible to overestimate the effect of the TNC MSM on us, the electorate. We perform like the Lippizaners at the Spanish Riding School, blow the horn and we all obediently dump at the same place at the same time. Time after time. Well-trained animal flesh on display. Maybe this is the year we snap out of it. “The people can have anything they want, the only problem is they do not want anything.” Debs is dead. Or is he only sleeping?

Posted by: jfl | Nov 4 2016 1:28 utc | 54

@46 h, ' If you're an American and you hold the position that the U.S. founding documents were built to support 'Oligarchy' I must ask, b/c you opened the door as to where you ever learned such nonsense.'

An Economic Interpretation of The Constitution of The United States by Charles A. Beard

'If your outburst is representative of America's younger generation, then my God man, we're sorely screwed.'

Copyright 1913 and 1935 by the Macmillan Company,
Copyright renewed 1941 by Charles A. Beard.
This Digital edition created 25th July, 2006

Posted by: jfl | Nov 4 2016 1:37 utc | 55


We have to understand our situation and its provenance before we can rectify it.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 4 2016 1:39 utc | 56

I've been so pissed off at Mrs M.A.D. that i've avoided listening to the Der Drumpenfuerher. I listened to a bit of his lunchtime speeches on Fuchs news today. The man is ape shit nuts. Immigration policy is both foreign & domestic policy. US biz needs cheap "illegals" & Trump knows this. His "round up the illegals," along w/his doubling down on the drug war, is all about the further militarization of US society. He will double down on dismantling public education, use the loathsome ACA to further assaults on Medicare/S.S. He will "cut corporate taxes to rebuild the inner cities," etc., etc. There is so little difference on these issues you might as well flip a coin.

on FP, he said, "I will stop China from building 'fortresses' (sic) in the S China Sea." oh yeah, he's really going to be some radical departure from Obomba and the "pivot to Asia". The MSM so studiously lies about what the current admin is really up to that some things Trump says sound judicious. Like comments on the M.E. & defeating ISIS. and what do those comments mean? they mean doing the exact same shit we are doing right now. so much for saving "trillions." "we will rebuild our military." you know what that means. Does he ever talk specifically about US/NATO vs Russia, Ukraine, the Russian border, etc.? of course not. his "be nice to Putin" act is a bunch of BS in response to Mrs. MAD's goading & insulting Putin in order to save her political ass.

good luck Average American. It does not matter in the slightest who wins: you & the world lose.

Posted by: jason | Nov 4 2016 1:42 utc | 57

h, with as much respect as I can possibly muster for such a self-unaware, self-righteous American lickspittle, keep your religious crap and your psychological disorders to yourself and keep your rapey little empire game out of my sight.

We've learned a lot in 240 years. The reason we, as in ALL of us, have been unable to appreciate any of this knowledge or reap its benefits is because you sadomasochistic drama-queens like yourself will happily kill everyone around you so that you can reenact the past that makes your precious little pee-pee so big and strong, and so you can preserve the whiny pathos that forces people not to laugh you out of public life. In other words, you wannabe Protestant chuckleheads are the problem, not the solution.

Loyalty = misprision. Period.

Posted by: Jonathan | Nov 4 2016 1:45 utc | 58

Might not have been the right decision, but I voted for Trump, despite being thoroughly on the left. Trump's vilification by the globalist elite means that he has to be doing something right.

I'll also give this to him: he sounds like a sleaze most of the time, and this is a good thing because it means he's a normal human being. When a normal person tries to be a politician, they sound like Trump because normal people give themselves away when they stretch the truth. It's the dangerous psychos who sound good-natured and reasonable, because they can lie and don't feel a thing when they do it.

Posted by: wilk | Nov 4 2016 1:53 utc | 59

@41 Jonathan
All the answers are in the Constitution. It's pretty much a 'how to' guide on escaping the tyranny of financial slavery. Unfortunately, your comment says a lot about what regard it is held today...that of toilet paper.

For the US at least, the longer the constitution and rule of law is ignored, the further it gets away from freedom and self determination. For now, government is just the mouthpiece for the whims of banks and corporations.

'Agent for the oligarchy...' Did you really use that...? Looks like a zionist mind trick. Accuse one of an act which oneself is guilty.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Nov 4 2016 1:56 utc | 60

Hmmmm. Do all the Hillbottoms like pizza parties? With beans and eggs. And lots of cheese. Remember, remember the 5th of November. The pedo-queen won't EVER forget the date. Tick-tock.

Posted by: Take Me | Nov 4 2016 2:00 utc | 61

Are you serious, jfl?

The founding documents did not create oligarchy. Bother yourself and read the Act of 1810. Then come back and tell me the founding documents created oligarchy. And I'll add, that in the last 40 -50 years of governance in this country has for the most part utterly ignored said founding docs including A2.

The corrupt growing oligarchy we have today has everything to do with the Marrs family rolling back inheritance taxes in every state legislature in the union in the '90's and '00's plus the financial debacle of 2008 and incessant QE the Fed Res promoted, not to mention the repeal of Glass Steagall. The majority of the U.S. oligarchs today are not a product of adherence to the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights. No. The U.S. Oligarch we have today is relegating said law to the dustbin of history.

You and I both know sociopaths let alone narcissits could give a rip about founding documents of any kind, so to blame the founding documents for the mess we're in places emphasis on the wrong boogie man/woman when creating U.S. Oligarchs.

Posted by: h | Nov 4 2016 2:03 utc | 62

ahhhh, reason, informed normal @60. thank you.

Posted by: h | Nov 4 2016 2:13 utc | 63

You all seem to have blithely forgotten that Trump pledged 'The Wall'
translated to an IDIQNB National Security State in which anything can
happen at any time, as his 'Stand with Isreal' and 'Kill ISIS' means
total war in Syria, after he said John Bolton would be his SecState.

Generals bald as the capitol cupola
or with angular features like the Pentagon
Others with projectile shaped skulls
1,000 of them, then 1,000 Admirals too
and brains the size of a golf ball

And tell me
how could there be order in the world
If everyone were simply
to follow his conscience?

"Military objectives is any person, thing or idea..
the manual says
Military objective
anything an army man decides to attack
... or idea.

Bombing raids have now become a bit awkward
due to lack of residential districts to bomb
But if the wind blow from the north
you can tell from the white phosphorus
stench where the Americans have hit.

The war which the Cardinal of New York
called a 'camoflage love';
The war which the Pope in Rome said
no woman priest will quench its eternal
fires with her hot tears.

The world is desperately in search of theta.
The finger always on the button.
The Lear jets stuffed with gold bullion always overhead
winging back and forth from NY to London.

"An attempt to storm the heavens," said Lenin.

with apologies to Ernesto Cardinal

Posted by: chipnik | Nov 4 2016 2:17 utc | 64

Hey Jonathan - what MadMax2 said @60...pssst - it's a secret so don't tell anybody...I'm not a Protestant....sssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....

Posted by: h | Nov 4 2016 2:19 utc | 65

@60 mm2

The American constitution certainly has it's good parts. The first 10 amendments, for instance, the only way it was able to be ratified.

In any case it's what we have to work with, and a damn sight better than ... the Draft Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, for instance.

I propose that passage of

1. an Open election amendment,
2. a Recall, referendum, and initiative amendment, and
3. a Campaign finance amendment

be made a part of the United States peoples' virtual party platform after the election, by those who've voted 'other' on Tuesday, and that we immediately organize within each of our 175,000 voting precincts, nationwide, to devise our own methods of voter registration, paper ballot polling, verification, tallying, and record keeping and use those methods to effect our ends and to choose from among ourselves our spokespeople to serve within our representative government and so to realize our revolutionary aims using the means presently available to us. Eminently do-able in my view. And the process of doing so is the realization of its professed goal. Just do it, as the pitchmen say.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 4 2016 2:23 utc | 66


This is all of our stories. We all believe in the cargo cult of the Great White Father in WADC, who will shower our village with cargo from the sky, and Make (This Place) Great Again

More likely, the GWF will shower our village with white phosphorus, after it inducts all our men of fighting age, to gather up the tobacco, the women and the slaves.

Posted by: chipnik | Nov 4 2016 2:27 utc | 67

@62 h

Got a link to the 'Act of 1810'? And please do read Charles A. Beard yourself. I personally think the US Constitution is a great place to start, but that it has defects that need remedy :

1. it has no specification of elections and voting rights,
2. it does not acknowledge the ultimate sovereignty of the people, the peoples' precedence over government and ownership of the constitution, for instance, although the Declaration does, and
3. it does not mandate the separation of financial power from political power.

And it makes amending itself much more difficult that it need be.

All of those defects 'coincidently' favor the oligarchy that has arisen ... in spite of it, if you will.

Calm down and read Beard. Look at how the sausage was made. I used religiously to regard the US Constitution, as it stands, as the salvation of mankind myself. But it just ain't so. We can use it to fix it's shortcomings and to improve our lot substantially.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 4 2016 2:37 utc | 68

Voting for lesser evil makes that person part evil themselves. It's inescapably right there in its own definition.

And on the issue of trumps foreign policy, just look how quickly he supported the ongoing genocide of Palestinians by Israeli state terrorists when he was paid so by wealthy Zionist backers. Previously hardly an issue for Trump, to one where he supports genocide. And this guy is the lesser evil ? FUCK them both. Both Criminals who immediately should be put in jail.

I can't believe idiots think that a wanna be fascist like Trump is going to be good for Russia. Read history much ? Fascists still see the Russians as the Soviets. Now and forever, even if modern Russia is led by a Neo liberal whore.

I normally wouldn't support the Green party of Jill stein, But things are so desperate....

Posted by: tom | Nov 4 2016 3:03 utc | 69

@66 jfl
It's either number 3 as you mentioned or elected officials be forced to wear logos embroidered on jackets of the interests that support them for the punters to see...number 1, yeah, that's not even in question.

Decentralisation in all it's forms should be celebrated though - whether at state level, or precinct level... I like what North Dakota did. Took control of their money supply. Created their own State Bank, for agricultural purposes initially...but serves the wider community in limited function. The only state that didn't suffer in any ¼ since 2008. Basically insulated the state from any shock, kept the private banks in check. I am surprised that no other state followed suit and got involved in Public banking, though I know at least half a dozen other states were looking into it.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Nov 4 2016 3:07 utc | 70

And who actually thinks that Trump wouldn't launch wars across the world to save his sinking political popularity if he was POTUS ? Who ?

Posted by: tom | Nov 4 2016 3:07 utc | 71

MM2 70 precisely. given how far things have deteriorated, I think its the only path open. Not to be obscure, just don't want to write a dissertation. At the risk of being misunderstood, I'd say we are only a generation away from being too far away from the farm, or from skilled labor to be able to respond to that degree of individual responsibility.

Posted by: S.H.E. | Nov 4 2016 3:14 utc | 72

So here we are back at the sacred 'constitution' which altho he didn't draft it, Thomas Jefferson oversaw it's creation and the spirit that drove it sought its inspiration from Jefferson's declaration of independence, another document overflowing with fine words, flowery phrases and big enough gaps for any semi-literate slaver to drive a coach & horses through.
Jefferson's hypocrisy neatly represents the tenor of the slugs who spewed forth the constitution, - a fellow countryman of mine pretty much summed up Jefferson in a well worn YouTube vid that is accurate enough to be worth posting yet again - not least of all because it appears to have ended the Hollywood career of the man who wrote it.

I can never get youtube embed to work 100% if it doesn't the link is here

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 4 2016 3:23 utc | 73

h, if you believe in America, you believe in a mix of Judaic and Protestant values under some other name. You still believe in some imaginary friend from which you render service and receive salvation, again, under some other name. And that doesn't make those values or that authoritarianism any less odious, offensive, perverse or unacceptable. Do you not understand yet that people don't want to play your little clubhouse game anymore, and do like to enjoy the fruits of their labors without some liberal yentas up in their business creating drama and trying to improve (i.e. to recast in their own image) the whole of society?

Go find a church and leave us out of your faith crises. That's all a secular, pluralist federation of states would legitimately ask for.

Posted by: Jonathan | Nov 4 2016 3:23 utc | 74

Insomnia rules and recovering dilated eyes make reading difficult yet so most of the commentary is yet to be perused. It seems a decision has been made here, that is what the forum is for, reaching some understanding, but not necessarily agreement. What little my contribution may have played did not prevail; it is hard to see any effect at all actually. My contention was, without blatantly suggesting how to vote, to consider factors not being discussed relating to determine whom to vote for. Apparently I convinced far too few with my arguments. That is just the way it is.

There are several things I don't understand. Historically (late 19th, early 20th centuries) the Progressive movement was developed and parts were adapted to a great degree by both major parties as it suited. Today the equivalent 'faux-progressive' is attacking with intent to eliminate those parties, without a base of power, and expecting to have their policies adopted. I shall watch reality and how that plays out. Another related 'issue' is the belief that some non-existant construction or process that is yet to be developed and installed somewhere in the future that somehow will prevent human nature from doing exactly what human nature does when it comes to wealth and power. Do any actually know what human nature is? or how to contend with it? Have any actually read and understood Machiavelli's opus for instance? Do say. Still another confounding idea is how some hardly in the running slate of 'alternative' candidates who, in the aggregate, would be highly successful to garner 15% of the votes cast, even if those numbers were accounted accurately. On top of this, that they will make some definite difference some nearly half decade in the future. Such dreams, such delusions.

But, as the Chinese benediction has it, may you live in interesting times. Wisdom from the ancient Greeks, given sufficient lever and a place to rest it, the world may be moved. You have neither the lever nor the fulcrum and you think you shall move exactly what?

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Nov 4 2016 3:32 utc | 75

If elected Hillary will immediately have to spend long hours testifying in front of the FBI for the monster baby, the SERVER she engendered that has spread classified government email on an uncertain number of laptops, smartphones etc...
You may find classified government email in your laptop too!
She will have to spend other hours answering for the play for pay with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other "democratic" countries
A really exciting first 100 days!

Posted by: virgile | Nov 4 2016 3:33 utc | 76

I can't help but notice that no one here has seriously taken me up on the "challenge" I made in my comment see # 26 for "anyone here to offer up any other viable options and a realistic alternative, other than to vote Trump IN." And thereby "Hillary OUT"

Yet some 40 odd comments later, the discussions on the election issue here, still seem to harbor an unshakable illusions that there are any other real choices to be made.

I don't know what part of strategy voting for the one's own sake and for one's country's survival and world peace is so incomprehensible to so many here.

let's face it, when confronted with a clearly known evil and an unknown one, there is no other common sense and rationally logical choice to be made, other than to go for whatever chance we have that might cause the least harm.

We know exactly what evil Hillary will do, and if that starts a nuclear war, it's the end of the story and game over for all of us.

If Trump is not voted in, Hillary will win period.

After that we can spend the next four years just praying to God ever single day, that with her finger on the red nuclear launch button, she's not as evil, stupid and insane as she appears to be.

All thanks to those to ignorant or proud not to vote her out by voting Trump in.


Posted by: RayB | Nov 4 2016 3:51 utc | 77

What Trump doesn't realise (or is hiding) is that because of a thing called the Triffin Dilemma, 6 Trillion of domestic expenditure is not the same as 6 Trillion spent overseas. US dollars are in demand by non US entities because they are needed to pay for oil and to be held as reserves by other central banks (Including Russia if Starikov is to be believed) who's own domestic currency issues need to be backed by USD reserves. Oil sellers must take the USD they receive and invest it in US bonds thus completing the cycle. Oil sellers who don't do this get beaten up. Prior to 1971 the USD was backed by gold and any non-US person or entity could exchange their USD for gold. The US ran out of gold in 1971. The solution to this took a few years to put into place, during which the West had severe shortages of oil and Kissinger was involved. The Corbett report episode 810 covers this in detail. Without that 6 trillion of deficit spending the world may have run out of USD shortly after 2008, and the US would have been forced to live within it's means.

Posted by: Nobody | Nov 4 2016 4:04 utc | 78


Life Goes On

Posted by: chipnik | Nov 4 2016 4:05 utc | 79


I'm disappointed by your half-hearted endorsement of Jill Stein. Partly because I have written several times here that the best strategy is to vote Trump in swing states and Jill in all other states.

This is really the best strategy for moving the US to a sane foreign and domestic policy. And it sends 'the right message' wrt the corrupt Democratic Party.

I also think that you could've mentioned your previous support of Sanders as a cautionary/learning experience. Sanders proved to be a sheepdog and that shouldn't be forgotten or forgiven.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 4 2016 4:21 utc | 80

Advertising My Fucking Ass

All your fucking ripped-off life they have been pretending to be "selling" you tawdry consumer items. Bullshit!!! Hey YOU:

Hey you ! out there in the cold
Getting lonely, getting old, can you feel me
Hey you ! Standing in the aisles
With itchy feet and fading smiles, can you feel me
Hey you ! don't help them to bury the light
Don't give in without a fight.
Hey you ! out there on your own
sitting naked by the phone would you touch me
Hey you ! with your ear against the wall
Waiting for someone to call out would you touch me
Hey you ! would you help me to carry the stone
Open your heart, I'm coming home
But it was only a fantasy
The wall was too high as you can see
No matter how he tried he could not break free
And the worms ate into his brain.
Hey you ! out there on the road
Always doing what you're told, can you help me
Hey you ! out there beyond the wall
Breaking bottles in the hall, can you help me
Hey you ! don't tell me there's no hope at all
Together we stand, divided we fall.


You were not buying it!
(You were never buying their tawdry "products" unless you actually needed them.)

They were selling you something very quite different indeed. They were selling you on their invincible credibility.


(But most of you believed it. Because to believe anything else would have been a CONSPIRACY THEORY.)

Well now you will. NOW YOU WILL LIVE IT.

(There is a sucker born every minute.)

Believe their lies.

(Their "advertising is an excuse.) They are far and above that selling you a false reality.

A false reality that will lead you to nuclear DEATH.

(But they will live on in their Deep Underground Military Bunkers.)

Posted by: blues | Nov 4 2016 4:34 utc | 81


I think its crucially important to put Hillary's "We came, we saw, he died" gloating in context. Doing so is the best way to reveal who she really is.

In her 2008 campaign for President, she had to defend her vote for the Iraq War. That experience would have caused most politicians to be more circumspect wrt war/militarism but Hillary was just the opposite. She just can't help herself.

Strangely ironic then (in an evil twisted way) that she likes to say: "When someone shows you who they are, believe them!"

And the same applies for another of her favorite maxims: "When they go low, you go high". Clearly just BS for public consumption!"

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 4 2016 4:37 utc | 82

Agree with your statement b, with minor quibbles. I think Trump closer to HRC on foreign policy mainly because good sources reporting on his top advisors straight out of PNAC. If he's elected I'd be very happy to be surprised. Glad you mentioned Stein, people here consider you seriously... hope it gives some a bit of pause & reconsideration.


Glad to see the many who've spoken up voting for Stein. Hope you tell some of your friends, maybe send them Youtube links to some of her better talks. Might surprise you how they respond. Jill gets 5%, it's a big deal for 2020.


IhaveLittleToAdd @ 42

Voted Stein a few days ago. (...) She leaves quite a bit to be desired...

Curious to know what you believe she "leaves to be desired".


Posted by:

Posted by: jdmckay | Nov 4 2016 4:38 utc | 83

Pink Floyd - "Hey You"

Posted by: blues | Nov 4 2016 4:49 utc | 84

Things are getting even more fractious than usual round here eh!
It is most likely an indication of the frustration everyone is feeling about a process that may or may not be kabuki for the masses but which most definitely, regardless of the outcome, will put all human beings in a much worse place next year then they were last year.

The angst & frustration felt by non-amerikans is compounded by the knowledge that they don't even get the pretense of a say in the outcome, yet in many ways & due entirely to the misshapen construct we exist within, that outcome, for the prez '16 ugly contest, will probably effect us along with the poor fuckers in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya & Palestine more profoundly than any political change in our own nations could ever affect us.
This is nothing to feel proud of amerikans - if there are any amerikans around MoA whose chest swells at the thought of their political process impacting on all of us around the world who suffer amerikan taxation without a scintilla of representation. Somehow I doubt that there are any/many but that won't stop the search for the nearest convenient scapegoat.

Probably the largest single source of all our frustration is that it has been obvious to any who care to look that we have been inexorably moving towards where we are now for a very long time.

It seems like more and more people get the mess now that it is too late to do anything worthwhile about it - which is yet another source of worthless angst

That despair likely won't last - the creeps who pump out the indoctrination will begin papering over cracks as soon as the result is published, something many comprehend even if they are reluctant to own it - yet another source of frustration.
Those who do have a limited release, even as highly restricted as the opportunity to cast a vote in one of the many 'non-battleground' states would be wise to savour the opportunity lest it be the last.

I don't want to tell anyone which way to vote but FWIW I have no hesitation in suggesting how not to vote, ABC - anyone but clinton.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 4 2016 5:30 utc | 85

Poor old 'h' ... first off, let's face it, she was a good student in school (maybe even college) and learned the myth (called history) well. That she attempts to defend the oligarchy (and the oligarchs who created the constitution; that counter revolution to the Articles of Confederation) is built into why DuhMurriKKKans are able to sleep at night.

The suggestion that one read Charles Beard is spot on, especially: "An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States," and "President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War, 1941." The latter is a classic regarding what may be a classic 'false flag' to justify going to War (II) officially.

Posted by: rg the lg | Nov 4 2016 5:41 utc | 86

@73 DiD

Jeez, you couldn't find a better account of Jefferson's hypocrisy than that hollywood film? Gerald Horne has done a lot of fine work on American history, focusing on the black keys, The Counter-Revolution of 1776, for instance.

At a distance it's the ideas that have burned themselves into the consciousness that count, not the clay feet of the people that mouthed them. That's true not only of American hypocrites but of hypocrites world-wide and there pronouncements through the ages.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

1. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
2. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

One and two are the operative clauses there, regardless how unfaithful Jefferson was to his professed ideals. Two, especially, emphasizes the precedence of what the people see as most likely to secure their safety and happiness over established government, including the one they established via 'their' constitution thirteen years later. The Bill of Rights has burned itself into the consciousness of Americans as well, regardless the fact that the US was built on genocide, slavery and the slave trade.

And the fact that those 'fine words, flowery phrases' have burned themselves into the American consciousness and still remain 'sacred' to the vast majority of Americans, no matter how dishonored in reality, is one of the cornerstones a new 'revolution' can be built upon, to 'restore' a remembered state that never was.

We are not yet in the position of the Thais, where the attempt is being made to repudiate and expunge the very foundation of their revolution ... but we may well soon be.

Which is why I say there is no time like the present to set off on the journey of - not a thousand miles - but a solid decade's work to effect the overthrow of the alternating/unitary evil and to reconstitute, in the parts that require it, our constitution.

The process itself is the most important part, of course, being the embodiment of the professed goal at which it seeks to arrive.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 4 2016 5:47 utc | 87

yes, "we came, we saw, he died" was as unspeakably revealing as Obama's correspondents' dinner joke about droning his daughter's dates and/or GWB's pantomime of looking for WMD under the tablecloths -- genuinely obscene and unforgivable .. right up there with Tom Friedman saying that he never cared about WMD in Iraq because he was interested in turning Iraq into a free-market democracy on the theory that the rest of the region would follow ... apparently unconcerned about people dying, being maimed, and/or losing everything ...
I can barely look at Clinton ... or Obama or Bush -- they make me ashamed to be an American, to have them our elected leaders, tolerated. I hope Trump fails to "win by a nose" ... but after GWB was reelected soundly, I can't really believe it matters all.that.much. IRL.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Nov 4 2016 5:51 utc | 88

Hope the Donald has victory to build his wall in order to keep americans locked within - the world would be truly appreciative.

Posted by: Giap | Nov 4 2016 5:59 utc | 89

Two comments.

1. To those discussing America's beginnings I posit that the original motto of E Pluribus Unum (Out of many, One) being changed in the 1950's to In God We Trust speaks volumes to the intent of the original and cooptation reflected by the replacement.

2. The West is ruled by the global plutocrats that own private finance and everything else.....including both "leading" candidates for US president. If you have been following geo-political movement lately you may have noticed that Russia, with China's backing has stood up to the superpower controlled by the elite in Syria. Do any think that either of the two slimeballs, if (s)elected will be able to reestablish the US as sole super power in the world?...short of nuclear extinction, I mean. I think the answer is no and am speculating on what that means. To me it means that America and Americans will be thrown under the bus to save the global plutocrats and their world of private finance. I would like to be wrong and see private finance get taken down and out instead of Americans which weren't entirely bad people/country until the global plutocrats killed the American dream and are sucking the lifeblood (money) out of the body as they depart it for another victim.....China maybe?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 4 2016 6:19 utc | 90 is a great website that provides you trending news regarding virtual market and the application you should download for your gadgets. It definitely gives you the best articles regarding the apps that you would love to have on your system.

Posted by: movie apps hub | Nov 4 2016 6:41 utc | 91

So this is the right discussion to have now 4 days from the election. And my thought is this. If it weren't American ignorance that spawned these two choices I would say vote a third party because the trend might catch on and eventually do away with the duopoly. But reality dictates that Americans brought about this outcome with their weakness, hubris and stupidity. Let's not forget the top headline after the 2004 election in a British paper; Daily Mirror: How can 59...million people be so dumb? And they learned nothing since.

So the reality is that Americans are yes, still that dumb, therefore although it's the wise, noble and sensible thing to do, voting a third party; it's not what's needed to bring about the kind of enduring change this world needs and Americans deserve. Therefore they must achieve it the hard way; through pain brought on by their own stupidity.

This is not really a choice between the lesser of two evils; it's a choice between two evils. What we should be asking is: which evil will get us faster where we want to be in 4 years, if we're lucky, because it might take 8 instead, and the answer is: Donald Trump. Here's why: Hillary is the candidate of perpetual war abroad and delusion domestically while Trump represents the police state domestically and maybe war abroad as well; let's not forget who his biggest fan is: Rudy Giuliani. Therefore we can't really predict that Trump won't bed neocons; since his veep choice and best fan are exactly that! Everything Trump brings with him is the karma Americans need and asked for right about now. Hillary will couch the pain with social band aids domestically therefore impeding real change.

Trump is going to clean up America and blacks, Muslims and latinos will be targeted, profiled, hunted, deported and brought to order. Sheriff Arpaio might just be his immigration czar. He's bringing back torture and who knows how he's going to bend and twist the law. So if he'll treat Americans badly imagine what he might try to pull abroad. Trumps's all-American hubris. He's already feared by moderate leaders in Europe; and he may end up being reviled even worse than Bush world-wide. He'll be one part buffoon and two parts dictator. Democrats hate Trump viscerally. There will be outrage among the liberal elite; revolt among the lower class; and hopefully revolution; and that's a good thing. The more chaos comes to America; the less chaos Americans have time and interest to export abroad. Police, FBI and military (the cherished tools of fascism) will be busy imposing Trump's law. Trump will create deep, unsustainable division that might explode into civil conflict. Once revolution hits the streets of America; Americans will, like Gary Johnson, be asking: What's Aleppo? Because Aleppo will be the last thing on their minds as they'll have their own civil war to deal with. It could be worse than the civil unrest of the 60's. Only when Americans start to really suffer; to feel the pain they've been inflicting on others abroad might they be humbled into a higher understanding and sense of responsibility within the global community and move away from the imperial-driven agenda. Louis Farrakhan stated that Trump will take Americans on a rocket ship to hell, and I say, that's the best thing that could ever happen. It's necessary karma, so all you not-so-enlightened 59+ million...VOTE TRUMP!

Posted by: Circe | Nov 4 2016 6:50 utc | 92

Hillary Clinton is Extremely Dangerous! Critical facts all voters need to know! What Hillary emails reveal AND what her extremely dangerous plans on how she wants to respond to the email leaks!

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Nov 4 2016 7:43 utc | 93

psychohistorian | Nov 4, 2016 2:19:48 AM | 90

Nice; especially your #2 comm.
Pretty much wraps up our present and very likely, future.
Voting nationally (in the U.S.), is pretty much a Potemkin Village. It appears to work because of the shallow nature of the citizenry.
As long as that remains true, there is no hope of change. With the system as broken as it is, there is no fixing it; it must be brought down and built once again from scratch; no pain, no gain.

Posted by: V. Arnold | Nov 4 2016 8:05 utc | 94

All the good people of the world should be thankful to the Clinton crime syndicate, because they've collected on their donors lists (the Foundation, Global Initiative, ...) the names of the global corporations, institutions, and individual players who form the oligarchy that's been running the West and profiteering from world conflicts, wars, terrorism, and human suffering since last couple of centuries (not shying from satanism, pedophilia, human sacrifice). This includes of course current Syria, Ukraine bloodshed.

Almost all in one place, how nice of you Slick Willy and Hilldabi*ch!

Latest WikiLeaks Dump Includes Full List Of Fees From Clinton Global Initiative Donors | Zero Hedge

Posted by: ProPeace | Nov 4 2016 8:16 utc | 95

@jfl you're correct of course but that clip has a current accessibility unlikely to be found in non-fiction books or video. I don't see the constitution or the declaration of independence producing a revolution that wouldn't end up back in exactly the same place. amerika is simply too big and should be divided into many smaller pieces - at least until the inhabitants gain some much needed experience of being on the other end of the pointy stick.

That said @Circe while I agree with the sentiment I cannot wish the sort of violence you allude to on anyone. Yes amerika has done really really evil horrors to humans across the planet over the last couple of centuries and if they had real experience of the horrors they have inflicted on others it would make them considerably more reticent about visiting them on all the rest of humanity. The trouble is that acting that way ends up in making transactional violence. If 20,000 amerikans die to prevent 2 million Iraqis from dying - surely that is a good deal? No not really because that is thin end of the wedge stuff of the type which corrupts leaders and makes them tyrants like those amerika is already using.

I'm not trying to offer a solution or even a very firm rebuttal just attempting to say war creates more war and trying to stop horrors such as amerikan imperialism with deliberate violence is unlikely to make our planet more liveable.
These assholes go to war because they believe in doing so they will acquire power and it's best mate wealth - somehow the rest of us humans - the 99% have to devise a way of smashing that nexus so that going to war doesn't help assholes get either of those things.
Yeah I know very airy fairy n all but the other way of beating the bad egg into submission has been the go to method for thousands of years and thus far it hasn't got us sfa.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 4 2016 8:24 utc | 96

Breaking news: Bill Clinton hospitalized, Hillary withdraws from the race!

(just kidding :-))))

Posted by: ProPeace | Nov 4 2016 8:32 utc | 97

Trump's wall will further alienate Latin Americans from the USA.Whats not to like?

Posted by: anon | Nov 4 2016 9:00 utc | 98

@DID 96

"smashing that nexus" sounds a bit violent to me.

Posted by: anon | Nov 4 2016 9:38 utc | 99

If The British Empire of the City of London Crown Corporation says "2 years" it's probably sooner:

UK – Britain ‘would be ready for war against Russia in two years’

Posted by: ProPeace | Nov 4 2016 9:46 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.