Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 06, 2020

Democrats Deserve To Lose Unless They Change

The Democratic Party seems to intend to lose the 2020 elections.

The idiotic impeachment attempt against Trump ended just as we predicted at its beginning:

After two years of falsely accusing Trump of having colluded with Russia [the Democrats] now allege that he colludes with Ukraine. That will make it much more difficult for the Democrats to hide the dirty hands they had in creating Russiagate. Their currently preferred candidate Joe Biden will get damaged.
Trump should be impeached for his crimes against Syria, Venezuela and Yemen.

But the Democrats will surely not touch on those issues. They are committing themselves to political theater that will end without any result. Instead of attacking Trump's policies and proposing better legislation they will pollute the airwaves with noise about 'crimes' that do not exist.

There is no case for impeachment. Even if the House would vote for one the Senate would never act on it. No one wants to see a President Pence.

The Democrats are giving Trump the best campaign aid he could have wished for. Trump will again present himself as the victim of a witch hunt. He will again argue that he is the only one on the side of the people. That he alone stands with them against the bad politicians in Washington DC. Millions will believe him and support him on this. It will motivate them to vote for him.

The Senate acquitted Trump of all the nonsense the Democrats have thrown against him.


Biden lost in Iowa and his poll numbers elsewhere are not much better. His meddling in Ukrainian politics will continue to be investigated.

Iowa caucuses count was intentionally sabotaged, first through an appn created by incompetent programmers on the payroll of a Buttigieg related company, then by a manipulated manual count by the Iowa Democratic party:

Chris Schwartz @SchwartzForIowa - 22:01 UTC · Feb 5, 2020

The state party is now being forced to walk back their error of giving @BernieSanders delegates to @DevalPatrick who received zero votes in Black Hawk County. Press can dm me.

We have known for over 24 hours as verified by our county party that @BernieSanders won the #iacaucuses in Black Hawk County with 2,149 votes, 155 County Delegates. #NotMeUs #IowaCaucuses


The whole manipulation was intended to enable Buttigieg to claim that he led in Iowa even though it is clear that Bernie Sanders won the race. It worked:

29 U.S.C. § 157 @OrganizingPower - 4:13 UTC · Feb 6, 2020

Post Iowa, Buttigieg has gotten a 9pt bounce in Emerson’s tracking poll of NH. A bounce based on a caucus he didn’t win.

All this is clearly following a plan:

Lee Camp [Redacted] @LeeCamp - 16:58 UTC · Feb 5, 2020

If a progressive is about to win #IowaCaucuses:
- remove final polls
- use mysterious app created by former Clinton staffers
- Funnel results thru untested app
- Claim app fails
- Hold results
- Reveal only 62% to give false impression of who won
- Refuse to reveal final results

But the cost of such open manipulations is the loss of trust in the Democratic Party and in elections in general:

In sum: We are 24 hours into the 2020 campaign, and Democrats have already humiliated their party on national television, alienated their least reliable progressive supporters, demoralized their most earnest activists, and handed Trump’s campaign a variety of potent lines of attack.

This so obvious that has to wonder if these outcomes are considered to be features and not bugs.

Buttigieg is by the way a terrible candidate. His work for McKinsey, the company that destroyed the middle class, smells of work for some intelligence agency. His hiring of a Goldman Sachs executive as national policy director makes it clear what his policies will be.

The other leading candidates are not much better. Sanders might have a progressive agenda in domestic policies, but his foreign policies are fully in line with his party. Matt Duss, Sanders' foreign policy advisor, is the son of a lifelong key front man for CIA proxy organizations. He spills out mainstream imperial blabber:

Matt Duss @mattduss - 2:38 UTC · Feb 5, 2020

The only thing that Trump's Venezuela regime change policy achieved is giving Russia an opportunity to screw with the US in our own hemisphere. That's what they were applauding.

Giving a standing ovation to Trump's SOTU remarks on Venezuela were of course the Democratic "resistance" and Nancy Pelosi. That was before she theatrically ripped up her copy of Trump's speech, the show act of a 5 year old and one which she had trained for. She should be fired.

Impeachment, the Iowa disaster and petty show acts will not win an election against Donald Trump. While they do not drive away core Democratic voters,  they do make it difficult to get the additional votes that are needed to win. Many on the left and the right who dislike Trump will rather abstain or vote for a third party than for a party which is indistinguishable from the currently ruling one.

Meanwhile Trump hauls in record amounts in donations and, with 49%, achieved his best personal approval rate ever.

Either the Democrats change their whole course of action or they will lose in November to an extend that will be breathtaking. It would be well deserved.

Posted by b on February 6, 2020 at 15:57 UTC | Permalink

« previous page | next page »

@ 97 the pair...

nathan robinson wrote a great article on pete buttigieg that b shared 1/2 a year ago.. it is worth the read..

@ 98 wg - maybe a combo of the 2? yours is a polite way of putting it..

Posted by: james | Feb 7 2020 0:42 utc | 101

it's actually closer to a year ago, but very good article offering insight into pete buttigieg..

Posted by: james | Feb 7 2020 0:44 utc | 102

@ Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 6 2020 22:16 utc | 81

For my money, the correct Trump analog from Italian politics is Berlusconi, not Mussolini.

Posted by: AshenLight | Feb 7 2020 0:44 utc | 103

This is very speculative, but...

Pepe Escobar pointed out once that certain members of the "Masters of the Universe" (as he terms the US elites who actually run things) supported Trump in 2016, and were opposed to other "Masters" who supported Hillary Clinton. Given that Clinton disappointed her "Masters" by losing and damaging her credibility with the whole "Russiagate" fiasco, perhaps they switched sides to Trump - especially given that Trump can be controlled and manipulated more easily (since he is an idiot and ignoramus) to start the wars the "masters" are yearning for to improve their corporate profits (regardless of his alleged desire to avoid wars - a fanciful story also told about Barrack Obama from the beginning as well, which resulted in Obama destroying four more countries than Bush during his administration.)

So now they've decided the Dems need to be kept out of it for whatever reasons of incompetent politicking or too much socialism for the "Masters" liking, or whatever. So they're arranging for the Dems to self-destruct this year.

Just a speculative thought, and I wouldn't put any stock in it absent any real evidence.

In the end, it doesn't matter. Absent Gabbard being nominated and elected, nothing will change in US foreign policy anyway. And to quote Percival Rose from the Nikita show about Gabbard's chances, "That ain't gonna happen."

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Feb 7 2020 0:54 utc | 104

A User@ 96 said in part;"The only way to challenge that is with concrete, comprehensible & relate-able strategies - something none of the dem candidates including Sanders have articulated."

Apparently, you don't think any folks apposing DJT articulate the right programs to appeal to more voters than not. Since your long winded rants run them all down, perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us here exactly what they should say.

I'm sure you could find the words, and just who you would support, even if voting did matter?

I like Sanders, Warren, Gabbard and Steyer. Your turn.

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 0:58 utc | 105

All this chaos will be create the impression that there's some problem with the existing candidates, so that they'll receptive to the idea that the D's need to bring in a true professional. Yup, it's still her turn. Wait for the convention.

Posted by: Farquad | Feb 7 2020 1:03 utc | 106

This is so much fun. It demonstrates a some of the stupid things people believe in like:

- Apps are a most effective, accurate and honest means of counting heads in a democratic mob.

- Democratic politicians are honest people who really and truly care about all other people.

Most amusing but when you stop laughing at this foolishness and look around some you'll find there is so much more. Much, much more. Here are some other fantastically stupid and imbecilic things people believe in and want you to as well:

- MCAS is a good and effective means to control pitch excursions in a well-known commercial airliner.

- Driverless cars are safe and efficient.

- In the future AI is going to do the work so there will not be jobs for most of the people to do any more.

- Guns are evil.

- You have a right to education, healthcare, jobs, funded retirement and respect.

- Diversity is our strength.

- Anthropogenic global warming theory is real and the it is going to end us all in ten years or so.

- Socialism is good. Socialism works.

Believe any of this and you are on the road direct to a wreck- a wreck with you in it.

Posted by: Siotu | Feb 7 2020 1:14 utc | 107

Jrabbit @ 100; There you go again on your anti-Bernie band wagon. I find your comments here mostly valid and relevant but damn, how about some concrete solutions besides generic answers like joining "movements". How about telling us who you would support IF voting did matter. Give us peons some specifics.

To reiterate a prior statement I made; Political engagement is like living; In the end you always die anyway, but we all keep striving to change our own paradigms...

Please enlighten me..

You know I like Sanders, Warren, Gabbard and Steyer..

As I said to A User; Your turn..

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 1:18 utc | 108

@ 107: Here's one I find valid and relevant; Mixed economies work.

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 1:22 utc | 109


Thanks for the post of the Jimmy Dore show. It pointed that Sanders is another Fascist when it comes to US foreign policy which is the one thing that the President can control as discussed by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, historian and Middle East expert, Stephen Kinzer in New Hampshire (time stamp 12:30).

As we all know, Tulsi Gabbard is misinformed when she states Assad is a dictator and was foolish to volunteer in the Gulf War. At least she calls for an end of regime change wars unlike any current Republican or Democrat in Congress and is willing to talk to any leader.

It is a shame when Gabbard is the only choice for those opposed to fascism. Fascism appears to be the main characteristic of the American way along with the desire for comfort and conformity.

p.s. Unlike Gabbard I didn't volunteer, but was drafted as Conscious Objector medic, medical lab specialist and clinical specialist and was born in the Kingdom of Hawaii.

Posted by: krollchem | Feb 7 2020 1:23 utc | 110

Farquad | Feb 7 2020 1:03 utc | 106:

IIRC, the deadline for filing your intent to run for office have passed (2019) for major political parties for many States. I don't believe a party can shoehorn an alternate candidate. But, there's still time to file as an independent where the deadline for most States is around August.

Posted by: Ian2 | Feb 7 2020 1:29 utc | 111

The Libertarian and Green Parties have presumably already qualified for being on the ballot in most states. They can choose whatever candidates they want. I see no reason why that could not be Sanders.

Posted by: lysias | Feb 7 2020 1:37 utc | 112

Jackrabbit @ 100 and Gruff...
I had seen the Jimmy Dore rant already. Matt Duss is showing his colors to us, unfortunately, on the Russia thing. In this, I disagree both with him and with his dad. In my interactions, it is clear that they believe the main premise - ie that Russia interfered. I make fun of that, and then they ignore me. Which is a bit understandable - I was in disagreement before on how much to work with expats vs how much to work with locals. But also, the Duss family has Ukrainian roots, and will be loyal to what that mindset can bring.
Now, over to what that strategy means within the Bernie campaign. Is it really so smart to be railing against the very core of everything that the DNC has been babbling about Russia over the last 3 years , when you are already an outsider? Don't we all know you have to 'choose your battles'? Sure, we can all look from our couch at this game and consider it a zero sum thing, but Bernie has been around a while. He may at this point think the whole Russia thing is fishy but he doesn't want to get into that. Because as all of us have found out: if you ridicule the DNC Russia mantra, they equate you with Putin, etc etc. Bernie, and Duss, probably believe part of the Russia story - a bit like Cenk from the Young Turks, bless his ignorance.
Next, Duss about Venezuela. I actually thought that was encouraging. Aaron Mate's comment will have made Matt think because he respects Aaron. All is not lost there. Bernie also has to build his offense now - and offense it should be - because most Americans don't know the difference between communism, socialism, democratic socialism. Venezuela is not communist. It has actually more sound elections than the USA. It is socialist. Bernie doesn't want to fight the socialist battle with foreign country associations - he wants to fight Trump because Trump is a socialist for his billionaire friends. So he should. Choose your battles.

Posted by: josh | Feb 7 2020 1:38 utc | 113

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 6 2020 17:47 utc | 31

Do not go gentle into that good night...

Thx for that... my fav Dylan Thomas poem

Posted by: xLemming | Feb 7 2020 1:52 utc | 114

@ 113; According to this link Venezuela is NOT Socialist, it's a mixed economy. The Same is true for most of the nations were're taught to believe are Socialist. Even China and Cuba are trying to convert to MIXED ECONOMIES.

IMO, the debate between Capitalism and Socialism is to scare people. Mixed economies, like the U$A, and most "advanced" economies work best..

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 2:08 utc | 115

Posted by: steven t johnson | Feb 6 2020 17:02 utc | 17

People constantly point out that if we did not have the electoral system, then Hillary would have won. I would like to explain why that is not necessarily the case. There are a set of rules for a contest. One contestant wins by the rules. The losing contestant says, 'if the rules were different, I would have won'. That is nonsense.

To put it in concrete simplistic terms. Trump is trying to win ... BY THE RULES. He knows that he cannot win California and its electoral votes. So, he barely campaigns in California at all, nor does he campaign in those states where he feels sure to win. He campaigns in the 'battleground' states ... those in which the outcome is not certain (or nearly so). In fact, that is what every sensible candidate does ... assuming they want to win the game, according to the rules.

If a straight popular vote determined the outcome, Trump would have spent much more time in California, for example. Not because he thinks he can 'win' California ... in fact that is meaningless under a popular vote system, but because he might get a lot more votes there. We cannot know how the election would have turned out, if a popular vote were the rule.

Get it?

Posted by: SteveK9 | Feb 7 2020 2:23 utc | 116

lysias | Feb 7 2020 1:37 utc | 112:

I don't know if you were responding to me or not. If so, Farquad@106 was referring to Hillary Clinton. I'm unsure on the filing requirements wrt major political parties. If there is no requirement for major political parties to submit a list of candidates within their party by the filing deadline (2019) then I suppose Farquad's scenario is plausible.

Posted by: Ian2 | Feb 7 2020 3:00 utc | 117

josh @113: Choose your battles.

Sanders can't chose NOT to fight for a fair electoral process.

Why should anyone trust a leader that accepts the kind of shenanigans we see in Iowa?


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 7 2020 3:39 utc | 118

I guess the CIA decided why bother doing all the work to blackmail politicians when they can just put in one of there own guys, buttgig

Posted by: Bob | Feb 7 2020 3:57 utc | 119

: ben | Feb 7 2020 0:58 utc | 105
No ben, I laid out one effective policy which had more in it than the vague hand-waving the dem candidates have espoused. If I thought for an instant that it mattered I would put out more, but it doesn't matter because even if one of these no hopers could defeat trump and did get to be prez while the dems controlled the lower house, we already know fromwhen Oblamblam had that for two years, nothing much will materialise unless the prez agrees to water down their policies with pork barrels, boondoggles and scams for each congresspersons favourite lobbyist.
Altho it did occur that trump did break new ground with his wall nonsense.
Prez dem drongo could put up a good argument that the homelessness epidemic is a national security issue and therefore the cost should be borne by the military by taking it outta the existing budget.

Even if the dem candidates wanted to fix any/many of the programs that have been destroyed over the last 50 years it is doubtful they could as we can see in the Iowa debacle most of their 'comrades' are riven with envy and only care about what they can screw for themselves.

The 'system' is too far gone, beyond repair, imagining a top down fix could be effective is merely delaying the inevitable. It makes far more sense to change from the bottom up for local communities to develop their own fixes for accommodation, than to wait in line behind the hundreds of trough guzzlers as they take their fill.

Posted by: A User | Feb 7 2020 3:58 utc | 120

There is no objectivity in politics. You try so hard, b, but it doesn't work. All your commentary tends to re-elect Idiot Trump. The Democrats are doing it all wrong. Nancy Pelosi is childish and should be removed. Why not just come out of the closet and say what YOU mean and stop this pretension of objective analysis? You like this demented libertine because he says what he means. That's why many Americans like him, too, because he's a bigot, a racist, a self-serving narcissist, a petty, vindictive lowest common American denominator. He does not represent the American majority. He represents that strain of the American electorate that hated FDR and the American dream of social democracy, embodied in the career of Bernie Sanders in particular.

The historical trend of the American republic is towards democracy. Trump is not a democrat. Tom Steyer may be the only billionaire capitalist who is. Trump is an oligarch and a fascist, a political non sequitor, and you consistently defend him and commend his superior political manipulations while deriding the ineptitude of the Democrats.

But your analysis is based on political expediency and little else, like principles. You emulate the geniuses of the oligarch-owned press that tries to tell voters that political activity is the same thing as political expediency.

It is not.

Posted by: jadan | Feb 7 2020 4:01 utc | 121

Jrabbit @ 118 said; "Why should anyone trust a leader that accepts the kind of shenanigans we see in Iowa?"

OK, so pick someone, even suggest someone, could be anyone. Following your advice, you give credence to the current status quo, or maybe that's your game.

I'm waiting...

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 4:07 utc | 122

ben @108

I have said that:

1) Bernie has the best policy positions overall;

2) I support Bernie to the extent that he fights for those policies.


3) I very much doubt that Bernie will fight.

Bernie's pro-Empire positions and his 2016 sheep-dogging are red flags that can not be easily dismissed or excused. And Obama and Trump's faux populism are disturbing precedents: the establishment has shown a willingness to PLAY US.

Some say that Bernie has to play the political game to be relevant; some say that he is right to place such a high value on Party unity (his supporters believe he aims to take over the Party).

These rationales only go so far. The fact is, if Bernie doesn't fight vigorously for electoral fairness, then he almost certainly loses and all the efforts and hopes of his followers are dashed.

The sooner we know if Bernie is willing to fight, the better. The possibility of an alternative to Bernie in 2020 is closing. The Greens may actually be the only viable alternative at this point. IMHO a protest vote is better than voting for corrupt Democrats or Republicans.

But whatever the outcome, it's difficult for me to see any real change happening without an independent Movement. Our democracy is too far-gone, too controlled, to be rescued by voting alone. There is no easy solution.

I agree with The Polemicist:

Bernie’s greatest achievement is that he has created the conditions for a break with the two-party duopoly; his greatest failure is that he will do “everything in his power”to block that from happening.[due to his nonsensical prioritization of Party unity]


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 7 2020 4:14 utc | 123


In the case of a hung convention all delegates are unbound in the second and subsequent votes. At that point even Hillery could get the nomination (at least for vice President). Can you imagine a Bloomberg/Hillery ticket?

Would you support a Gabbard/Kucinich ticket?

Posted by: Krollchem | Feb 7 2020 4:19 utc | 124

ben @122: so pick someone

I pick you ben.

You or any of a thousand different people that have shown that they are fed up with the system is better than a voting for a HERO that refuses to fight for what he believes in or candidates from a corrupt Party.

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

If we are being played to such an extent that Bernie is a phony then there's no easy answers for restoring democracy. Anyone that tells you otherwise is lying.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 7 2020 4:21 utc | 125

A User @ 120 said;"Even if the dem candidates wanted to fix any/many of the programs that have been destroyed over the last 50 years it is doubtful they could as we can see in the Iowa debacle most of their 'comrades' are riven with envy and only care about what they can screw for themselves."

OK, I can't argue with the truth, but, to wait for a magical up-welling from the masses and do nothing, gives credence to the ongoing paradigm.

So humor me, pick someone, anyone you could support, who fits your ideals, current or past.

I await your pick..

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 4:21 utc | 126

Jrabbit @ 125 said; "I pick you ben."

LOL rabbit, but you and both know that's a cop out.

Soooo besides bitching about the system, what are you doing to try and change it?

Are you giving anything of yourself except rhetoric? If not, why not.

In life, death is sure, but I'll bet you're not sitting around waiting for it:)

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 4:30 utc | 127

Siotu 107 "You have a right to education, healthcare, jobs, funded retirement and respect." < You should have the right to choose whether your tax dollars are spent for these important things that give life real meaning or for a bloated wasteful military that makes us less safe by trying to extend hegemony over the entire world. Your thinking seems to me to be the "wreck".

Posted by: LarsRagnar | Feb 7 2020 4:53 utc | 128

ben @127: .. you and both know that's a cop out.

And we both know that I'll be attacked for whoever I pick. Because Sanders supporters and Democracy Works! propagandists will decry any pick as being unworthy or unable to beat Trump. And they'll try to use my 'pick' to discredit my criticism of Sanders.

The whole 'pick one' exercise is superfluous. IMO only Movements that can lead to actually change. Movements can hold all political Parties accountable.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 7 2020 5:01 utc | 129

Thank you karlof,ben,and circe for your clear thinking and enthusiasm on your posts, they give me a daily injection of hope.

Posted by: LarsRagnar | Feb 7 2020 5:11 utc | 130

Jrabbit @ 129 said;"And we both know that I'll be attacked for whoever I pick."

People of REAL conviction don't care whether or not they're attacked. The point is, if you don't oppose a corrupt system, you help fuel the corruption.

Taking chances by supporting the people and movements you believe in, is how "justice for all" is achieved.

Peace out rabbit, thanks for the conversation...

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 5:35 utc | 131

ben 131: ... if you don't oppose a corrupt system, you help fuel the corruption.

But I am opposing a corrupt system by helping to reveal the corruption and advocating for a solution: independent Movements.

Not naming someone as an alternative to Sanders doesn't change that.

And, frankly, no one really cares about an alternative to Sanders until a sufficient number of people feel the need for an alternative. Are we there yet? I don't think so. But I think there are a lot of people are questioning if Sanders is the real deal and/or if he's up to the task.

Furthermore, I think the independent Movements that we need should stand separate and apart from politics - like the Civil Rights Movement and the Yellow Vest Movement. So for my way of opposing systemic political corruption - which I see as the only effective way - naming a candidate is not really necessary.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 7 2020 6:04 utc | 132

OK then ben, I pick the people - any group of people in any community who have the brains and tenacity to start fixing things from the ground up. Sounding like a scratched record, but that is the only way to change the totally screwed up amerikan paradigm.
The state is far too big to be able to have an honest well meaning representative democracy. As I have said ad infinitum the only way to keep a population as large as amerika's is, informed sufficiently to make good decisions, is via 3rd party media and that means the message will be selfishly distorted by that media.
amerika is so large that media outlets which can reach all amerikans are multi-billion dollar enterprises which have their own agenda and that agenda encourages wilful distortion.
There is no fix other than forging solutions within each community - that way citizens will know their decision makers properly, un-influenced by some 3rd party which has its own ax to grind.

This is the sixteenth year of the same debate here at MoA, aren't the dreamers becoming frustrated at the endless repetition of lies, distortions & evasions each time? I sure am & I try very hard not to buy into electioneering nonsense that is repeated virtually word for word every four years.

Posted by: A User | Feb 7 2020 6:04 utc | 133

@ 166 SteveK9.. thanks for articulating all that... steven t johnson is indeed a broken record on this topic bringing it up on every thread, or every other thread.. it would be nice to think you comment will make a difference here and he would accept your insight, but i somehow doubt it.. i need to be more optimistic here, lol..

@ 133 a user... the alternative is a complete breakdown in the system which would make a change in the system.. we seem to be going down that road at present..

Posted by: james | Feb 7 2020 6:20 utc | 134

I take the point that the Democrats need to change, but they're not going to - they're are simply fulfilling their role in the dysfunctional US kleptocracy in that they have (just like the Republicans) no policies to offer ordinary people as they serve solely (like the Republicans) their corporate masters thus, to keep up the appearance of Democracy, policy needs to be replaced by pantomime be it impeachment, Russian hacking or pandemics...the conclusion that should be drawn here is that the old Left vs. Right paradigm simply does not exist; in reality it's US versus THEM:

Posted by: Richard | Feb 7 2020 7:22 utc | 135

I have doubts about posting this but do it in the hope maybe someone will see it th way I did.

I really dunno if I'm gonna post this as it can sound as if I'm putting tickets on myself when I'm trying to say - 'See even a tiresome curmudgeon can pull this shit off - what are you waiting for'

In the vague hope anyone is listening who both lives in amerika and wants to give community based solutions a go. Here is something I got going on a number of indigenous Australian communities at a time when the State/Territory government came over all redneck because of the money allegedly being 'wasted' on housing for traditional remote communities.
I dunno what the current euphemisms are but back in the 80's n 90's as far as whitefellas were concerned traditional meant 'uncivilised', or for us mob who were less, shall we say convinced of whitefella superiority, it meant untainted by consumerism, dishonesty and TV addiction.

Remote meant way, way past the black stump likely only accessible by road certain times of the year.

The problem was major for indigenous Australians as communities grew and the state government's solution had been to build nice, suburban style split level bungalows in traditional communities.

Doubtless big earners for mega construction corporations 'n bugger the end user. The houses were completely inappropriate with no natural ventilation - which meant aircon 24/7 - ridiculous and as unhealthy as all get up - not to mention expensive & unreliable. Genny breaks down - everyone cooks.

So the families knocked out the glass windows & left the flyscreens in place, even after that there were problems because many of the tenants had been living nomadic hunter gatherer lifestyles just has their ancestors had for 60,000 years or so prior to 'civilisation' demanding they keep their arses in the same spot from now on.

Many clans will not live somewhere where anyone, but particularly a relative, has died
Within a community there is every chance everyone is related. There are complex skin designations which prevent in-breeding but everyone has a blood connection with everyone else - meaning when an old fella dies in a house, that house is now unsuitable for use as a home for community members any longer.

The state government - the mob who had responsibility for delivering Indigenous housing albeit funded by the feds, decided to misspend that money on looking after whitefellas in town.

The federal department I worked for had a few hundred million a year allocated for 'indigenous community development' - often an arts center as that was a good way to enable a community to move towards self sufficiency by providing tools and trainng that let em express themselves graphically, musically or even in clothes design everything sold t good prices nationlly and internationally. All those initiatives had gone a bomb but the community leaders would say "we need places for our fellas to stay - too many in one house is trouble".

In the end we developed a plan we couldn't pay wages directly but we could pay people to learn how to be builders & we could pay experienced builders to train them. Plus plant & equipment & 'training' materials.

So we bought a couple of manual mudbrick machines pretty similar to to this one all it needs as you can see is a bucket of dirt, water and a bit of cement.

Next we hired a couple of chippies (carpenters) who were happy to live in a 'dry' (no alcohol) community.

Then we commissioned a bloke to design a syllabus (an architect who came up with straightforward plans for two & three bedroom brick houses constructed on a concrete slab).
Then I took the carpenters out to the community to get to know everyone. The community had sent a an elder into town to help select the carpenters/blocklayers/builders altho I doubt it would be that easy to find one person across all those skills in 2020.

We discussed the plans which had been drawn outta a brief the architect had got from the community council - of course some things had changed - thank god this was pre-internet else we would be reticulating rj45 ethernet everywhere.

After that we put together a gang of 6 trainees to work on each house. Four of the guys/gals would be employed as long term indentured trainees working towards trades quals in blocklaying or carpentry and two were short term trainees who were from the family which would be the occupants. (I stole that idea from some god-bothering org who like the bureaucrats I reported to, did not trust anyone who wasn't a fellow traveler).

That was how this plan was sold to territory office and Canberra ,who were somewhat cynical to say the least. By getting people to build their own home they would be more invested in maintaining it. All bullshit, but necessary to convince racist whitefellas. If someone died in a home no one would stay no matter who built the house. Still, it only cost about $15,000 for materials for our beautiful mud brick homes, not the $100,000 plus that it cost to buy materials for a split level suburban nightmare and get them out to very remote out-stations & communities.

The scheme worked very well for at least three years after which we ran out of good carpenters & suitable, committed communities. One important lesson about community projects - they have a limited shelf life before everyone loses interest - usually because the initial demand is no longer there.

Jeez I loved that job - no matter what happened that day I would always come home with a smile on my dial - from knowing the day had been spent on things worthwhile.

I put together a lot of different projects, from training art-school drop outs to paint murals and in the process livening up dull walls all over town, to training traditional aboriginals in music recording processes, the end result of which was a hit album. There were many other less noteworthy projects that communities appreciated. We chose none of them, a community decided what they need and my job as bureaucrat was to find a way to make it happen.

But this isn't about me, indigenous australians or housing, it is about how a group of committed people can source resources likely designed for something completely different, then make projects of real benefit.

The only secret is "listen to what people tell you they want/need - never go in with a certain project in mind and try to sell the community on it."

Yes, resources can be difficult to obtain from a government that dedicates every shekel not promised to the good old boys, to war, but it can still be done - by making your organisation seem as though it is exactly right for support from some tax avoiding capitalist enterprise. I have done that here in tight arse Aotearoa, both times things got a little tense after the halfway mark but once it was completed the tax avoiding 'donors' forgot about that as everyone congratulated themselves on their innovative foresight.

This stuff can be done it takes more work than ticking a box but the outcome beats feeling guilty about feeling responsible for voting for yet another mealy-mouthed war-monger.

Posted by: A User | Feb 7 2020 8:49 utc | 136

A User debs whatever

Thanks for putting that up. At Yulenbu an old fella died and nobody abandoned the house. Different places snd people I guess. The educated blackfellas in derby that recieved ALC money all had a number of houses for rent in a high rental area. (Though a few farmers run center pivots from shallow bores, shit loads of water 30 meters under the pindan sand, council reckoned wasn't enough water to expand the town)
What pissed me off was that the people who had owned the land since whenever were expected to pay a grazing lease and run the property as a viable cattle operation. They asked me to manage the place but then they went for something else. That didn't work and now they are tourist attractions for Australian Wildlife Conservancy.
Not much has changed I guess During white Australia, the blackfellas were just part of the fauna.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Feb 7 2020 9:47 utc | 137

Hey Circe, cheer up

Bernie speaks his piece and claims 6000 vote lead. He is quiet on the issue of burning the DNC at the stake but then right now he is the winner and cheatin Pete looks like the guaido rat. Tom Perez is still trying to tighten the rigging but Bernie has sailed on to win New Hampshire.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 7 2020 10:37 utc | 138

karlof1 #73

responding to Circe:

IMO, if Sanders can beat the DNC, he'll easily beat Trump.

I reckon he will grind the DNC into convoluted apoplexy and wilder and wilder rigged and rorted processes until they are exhausted and exposed to ridicule and destruction. I just watched Bernie's presser and he is mad as hell about Iowa and yet he has to move on as New Hampshire beckons. Biden is dead and in the gutter and now Cheatin Pete is the dope to beat. Wont be hard and it clears the air.

Trump is setting himself up one hell of a kick in the arse from a tough Senator Bernie Sanders when/if the time comes.
IMO Pete will squash like a marshmallow on a hot rock.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 7 2020 10:54 utc | 139

Very insiteful and balanced analysis from interesting source

Touches on that and why dems dont really care to win.
Honestly, thats a bit obvious. I find the failure to acknowledge interesting.

Posted by: jared | Feb 7 2020 11:09 utc | 140

A User @ 133 says:

This is the sixteenth year of the same debate here at MoA, aren't the dreamers becoming frustrated at the endless repetition of lies, distortions & evasions each time? I sure am & I try very hard not to buy into electioneering nonsense that is repeated virtually word for word every four years

yeah, what's the old adage about repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result? quite obviously, there are essentially no practicable ideas on the table, and no 'movement' is afoot, even as economic and environmental rapine continue, and arms sales and continuous warfare progress unperturbed.

it doesn't take a genius to see where all of this is headed.

Posted by: john | Feb 7 2020 11:35 utc | 141

ben @105 to A User: "Apparently, you don't think any folks apposing DJT articulate the right programs to appeal to more voters than not."

I think the responses by A User have been insightful, but I would like to add my $0.02

No, the people making most of the noise about opposing Trump are not articulating any programs FULL STOP. As with our poor associate Circe, their rage, frustration, and indignation suck all the air out of the room. Every other consideration or issue is a distant second to trying to stick it to Trump for them. "We'll talk about a direction forward after we take Trump down!" is not a constructive attitude. Whenever any candidate mentions Trump I tune them out because it is just noise obscuring the signal. Unfortunately, in the case of most Democrats that means that when they are done talking I have not heard anything. After all of the noise is filtered out there is nothing left.

That said, I like Sanders and Gabbard. I think it would be fun to see them as a team in the White House, but A User is correct: That in and of itself will not fix things. A ground-up approach is needed to cure the real ugliness in the Empire of Chaos. Fortunately, there are tons of things you can be doing right now in that regard. Start with your workplace... why isn't it unionized yet, fercryin`outloud!?! You waiting for someone else to hand you workplace democracy on a silver platter? If you are in a union already, then why is it giving your dues to freakin` Biden?? Why is your local Internet provider still an evil mega-corp and not your municipality? Why are you not canvassing your community explaining that municipal Internet is even easier and cheaper than municipal water? Work together with your community and start the process of prying control of your lives out of the hands of big business. If you grow that effort from your town to your county and then to your state or province then defeating Trump, or whoever replaces him, isn't going to be a challenge.

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 7 2020 11:49 utc | 142

The real reason that this 'impeachment' went nowhere is that no-one really wants to call witnesses to establish proper facts and anything that looks like a proper trial. Republicans didn't, nor did the Democrats really, since that would inevitably make Biden look like the nepotistic dick he is. Neither of the duopolist Yankee political parties that own the system really wanted that.

If you go do that rabbit-hole, then I firmly believe that you'd open an enormous can of worms, a significant percentage of US Representives and Senators would exposed as the amazingly corrupt arseholes they are and would surely be indited for various crimes (foreign influence? Not Russia, you need look no further than Israel and AIPAC).

Losing faith in 'democracy'? Can't have that!

Having said that, I think the Democrats have set an amazingly low bar for impeachment. This will inevitably rebound on them, sooner or later.

Posted by: Ant. | Feb 7 2020 11:59 utc | 143

Posted by: jadan | Feb 7 2020 4:01 utc | 121

I agree.

Sanders is wise to make this a movement not an election that is about him.
He has a very good chance to win the Democrat's nomination.

Especially as Trump's strategy is directed against the Democrat's establishment, so it is Sanders and Trump versus the establishment before it is Sanders versus Trump and that should be interesting. Mind you everybody is going to fight tooth and nail, so there will be lot's of surprises.

One surprise is that Republicans seem to have got very good material out of Ukraine against Biden et al, which they can burn now as he begins to be non viable.

Check the videos in this thread of Kerry and Biden boasting of having got rid of a Ukrainian prosecutor - it is damning.

Iowa's caucuses by the way are one huge focus group and really useful as such. They are not an election.

Everyone interested knows know that Warren is not viable beyond academic circles, Buttigieg is the well-to-do choice, and Sanders is very viable with any discriminated ethnicity.

Posted by: somebody | Feb 7 2020 12:15 utc | 144

The Dems tried to kill the King. And failed. And lack even the sense to dismiss the would-be regicides from their councils. They keep digging the hole deeper.

Posted by: oldhippie | Feb 7 2020 12:56 utc | 145


Not mine son.

A few things to consider.

Respect is earned. It is not free. A man has to earn it from others. Respect resides in the mind of the observer. To force from him respect really means that he must be restricted in his ability to freely observe, develop a conclusion and express it, lest he judge you unworthy of his respect. In other words he is to be enslaved.

Education, healthcare, funded retirement etc. are not free. It all has to be paid for. You do not have the right to coerce or force someone else to pay, even if you can get a third party, a gang of enforcers, to make them pay. Similarly, a job is not a matter of forcing someone else to yield something to you.

Anyway, you've reminded me of a few more foolish things some blindly believe in (and would like you to believe in as well):

- members of the military "serve" for the protection of people.

- fighting them over there is so "we" won't have to fight them over here.

- soldiers and officers are honourable.

- involuntary taxation is moral.

- involuntary taxation is the price to be paid for "civilisation".

- government "serves" the common people.

- you have a right to other people's time, labour, property and the fruits of their productive lives because you need it.

Yet more wreckage to be had holding to those silly blind faiths. Goodness gracious, there are going to be some surprised and disappointed people around and about in the not so distant future.

Posted by: Siotu | Feb 7 2020 13:55 utc | 146

Pete Buttigieg is the establishment's candidate to spoil the election for the Left against Trump.

Pete Buttigieg is GAY. REALITY CHECK: A GAY MAN will NEVER be elected over Trump. NEVER. PETE WILL NOT BE DANCING AT THE INAUGURAL WITH HIS HUSBAND OR WALKING HAND AND HAND WITH A MAN INTO THE WHITE HOUSE, PEOPLE. Let's get REAL, half of America, especially rural America don't know this guy and especislly don't know he's GAY, so when they find out, he's finished. They'll stay home or choose TRUMP.

That's why Pete Buttigieg is being funded by Zionist financiers who really WANT TRUMP TO WIN, unlike BERNIE SANDERS who gets all donations from average people AND WHO HAS THE BEST CHANCE TO DEFEAT TRUMP.

Pete Buttigieg has a bad history with the black community in the town where he was mayor. If he couldn't do right by blacks in his town then how can he possibly understand the wider black community across the country???

Pete Buttigieg is a neophyte and Trump will eat his lunch and kick him to the curb!




Posted by: Circe | Feb 7 2020 14:03 utc | 147

DNC insiders are visibly cheating and defrauding. Amazing how the manipulations have been so inept that they could not avoid being revealed. Oh, the obviousness! And all this right from the very inception of the selection process. This is actually a very good thing since it makes it so clear what these creatures are all about, Bernie included. What we have here is mutual rorting. So entertaining. Just think, a crew that rort each other so viciously can't be expected not to engage in rorting the public at large. After this wee rort-fest how could anyone possibly believe the myths of the democratic political system any longer? A little thinking would have to raise the concern that since these very creatures are the ones running government then that entire edifice is shot through with rot, from top to bottom. Yeah, they sure care about you and yours!

I wonder whether it will end up as President Trump vs. Bernie Sanders in the 2020 Presidential election. It may do, but whatever the case, the present system is toast. The USA are heading further into disorder, unrest, violence and impoverishment. Things will be getting a lot worse yet unfortunately (hope not, but suspect so). Bernie is no solution. His schtick is failure.

Some years ago, around the time President Putin first ascended to office, the FSA provided a report wherein it was predicted that the USA would fall apart, eventually ending up as two or three separate states (or did they write nations- I do not recall which it was) and perhaps a few tiny off-shoots. Does anyone remember it? Reason I ask is I would like to locate it to re-read to see how prescient they may have been.

Posted by: Siotu | Feb 7 2020 14:29 utc | 148

@149 Siotu

Some years ago, around the time President Putin first ascended to office...

A Trump/Putin bot would portray his oracle of all wisdom, Putin, as the Redeemer ascending into office and Sanders as no solution for America so Trump, who's out to destroy America, can get a second term.

You're so transparent. YOU should get a new shtick.

Trump/Putin Ziobots are worried that Sanders CAN defeat Trump. Let me spare you months of anti-Sanders propaganda work:


Posted by: Circe | Feb 7 2020 14:52 utc | 149

It is amazing how the USA is protected in the internet. It's never the fault of the American system, but always of degenerate individuals who failed the system.

Do you think this kind of fraud is endemic to the DNC? Let's just remember: Al Gore won the 2000 election. George W. Bush only took the White House because the sacred SCOTUS undemocratically gave Florida to him - a state which was, at the time, governed by Bush's brother!

Fraud is endemic to the Western Democracies. One only needs to see the series of regime changes in the Third World, the political assassination of Jeremy Corbyn and other recent events to quickly come to that conclusion.

Capitalism (i.e. Western Democracy) isn't democratic; its greatest merit is to give the masses the illusion of free will. As the great capitalist Henry Ford once said: my consumers can choose whatever color for their cars they want - as long as they choose black.

Posted by: vk | Feb 7 2020 14:53 utc | 150

@Siotu @149

It is over-the-top, I believe, to say that "[Bernie's] schtick is failure". His moment is credible if only for the moral strength of supporters around his campaign who are lifting his effort. They are more knowing and grasp what is at stake. Otherwise I don't doubt the thrust of your argument; and certainly the decline of this society is showing. Dmitry Orlov has also predicted an economic catastrophe for this country similar to the one Russia went through in the Yeltsin years.

Bernie's battle for nomination (if he wins it) will be much harder on him and the country, compared to winning the presidency in November. All this has the advantage of buying more time, which is about all we can expect. As folks who are clinging to life for a while longer, there remains a chance that clarity and moral choices may be available as the struggle continues.

Posted by: Copeland | Feb 7 2020 15:13 utc | 151

Buttigieg is "The Great White Hope" to KO "populism" he is created in the image and likeness of Macron, who was the savior of France from the claws of populism; he is the favorite puppy of the US Kleptocracy, because if they do not like Trump, nothing compare to fear and hate they feel for Sanders

This is the last (peaceful) chance before releasing the dogs of CIA.


Posted by: DFC | Feb 7 2020 15:17 utc | 152

Posted by: oldhippie | Feb 7 2020 12:56 utc | 145

The problem is the two party system both ruled by elites. Democrats need crossovers like Bill Clinton or Obama to be viable. If they cannot do that they loose (I did no analysis on this but I assume because of people staying at home on election day). USians madly switch from party to party to keep them fighting between Congress, Senate and Presidency to prevent anyone from taking over.

Sanders may have found a way to be post politics with his campaign where labels like socialist, capitalist, liberal, conservative make no sense but decent services for people do. It is interesting to watch. In the end it all depends if he can convince poor people to vote.

Posted by: somebody | Feb 7 2020 15:25 utc | 153

@lysias #112
Did you read what you wrote? The Libertarian party supporting Sanders?

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 7 2020 15:29 utc | 154

The main reason Sanders is so popular with Millenials and Gen Z is that they are too young to realize Sanders is really a reincarnation of Lyndon Baines Johnson.
His platform is identical: Great Society domestically, Vietnam war for foreign policy.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 7 2020 15:31 utc | 155

Fraud is endemic to the Western Democracies. One only needs to see the series of regime changes in the Third World, the political assassination of Jeremy Corbyn and other recent events to quickly come to that conclusion.

Posted by: vk | Feb 7 2020 14:53 utc | 150

Fraud uses means that have to be system specific. For example, fraud in an absolute monarchy will undermine the rules of succession, as recently done in KSA (succession was going from brother to younger brother, senile dad of MBS made him Crown prince against that rule), which is often hard without an actual assassination as opposed to "political assassination". And with democratic rule, efficacy of actual assassination is smaller (e.g. there is no designated next in line who benefits) while "political assassination" works better. In a hypothetical system electing officials by lot there would be lottery fraud. I do not imply that resistance is futile, just that in any system one has to be alert to unfair methods.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 7 2020 15:52 utc | 156

Siotu 147 Respect should be given freely to all until proven that it is undeserved. Considering my advanced age, you are more likely to by "my son". By voting for reallocation of funds away from a wasteful military to education, healthcare, and retirement we would be exercising our right to have the funds we pay in taxes actually go to things that benefit us. We already pay for them. We just want taxation with representation as to avoid tyranny.

Posted by: LarsRagnar | Feb 7 2020 16:07 utc | 157

Supporting Democrats is a serious political disorder, like alcoholism or returning again and again to an abusive spouse who repeatedly lies to you. It's easy to fall off the wagon, to make excuses and rationalizations for it. The Democrats keep promising "the little guy" that they will keep us afloat as long as we tie our boat to their anchor.

It's long past time to dispense with the lie that the Democratic Party is "the party of the people" and that the Dems and Repubs are distinct entities. To understand the political system, one must step back and regard its operation as an integrated whole. This is very important to understand as once understood the capitalist machine is seen for what it is-a One Party dictatorship that represents the interests of big business.

The Democrats DO HAVE a coherent vision and ideology and certainly do have backbone. They ABSOLUTELY DO fight for what they believe in. WHICH IS: To preserve, protect, defend and extend throughout the globe CAPITALISM’S domination, rights, privileges, power, and (above all) PROFITS.

The Democratic Party is the face of the enemy. No amount of pining or soft-pedaling will ever change this. They represent their capitalist bosses interests just as do the Repubs but are better at pedaling the $nake oil. Any individual, any website, any institution that peddles the lie that the Democrats are of any value to the people is part of the problem- period.

It is the job, the central social function of the Democrats to always be dangling before the people's noses vague pseudo-hints of possible change, so as to keep them from bolting from bourgeois politics altogether. It is the Democrats' intention to never deliver meaningful change, but rather to keep dangling hints of it alluringly forever. This produces control -- a populace habituated to remain safely within the lines required by ruling class interests.

The central point is this: capitalist society permits the Democrats to be one of the 2 allowed parties for a very definite reason. It's not because the Democrats "serve the people." It's because in a subtle but effective way, they help the capitalists keep the populace under control by providing us with the illusion of possible change. TPTB don't want the people "served." They want us managed and controlled.

Posted by: Allen | Feb 7 2020 16:17 utc | 158

One of the guests on RT Crosstalk suggested that DPty was a corrupt criminal organization liable to RICO. That's fightin' talk in their ears, I'd say. Matters seem headed in increasingly dangerous direction, not that I am astonished. Just sad.

Posted by: Walter | Feb 7 2020 16:28 utc | 159

Circe @148

Stop hyperventilating.

Breathe slow and deep (No, seriously! Take a whole minute to inhale all the way and let your breath out in one smooth flow. Repeat X 100).

When your pulse slows and the fugue in your head dissipates, then read on.

Have you calmed down?

There is nothing wrong with a gay man running for President. If that gay man were a radical anti-establishment working class socialist who consistently emphasized class solidarity rather than representing the interests of the elites and wearing his "identity politics" grievances on his sleeve like some kind of warped badge of honor, then "white deplorable working class" voters would put him in office.

What you are claiming about the CIA stooge Butt-gig is no different than saying the Democrats ran with Clinton in 2016 in order to put Trump in office. That is not so. They honestly believe they can win if their candidate has a sufficiently credible claim to "identity politics" victim status. Many sincerely believe that is what being a "leftist" means.

I only want to make this distinction to prepare people to avoid the divisive mind trap that is being set up here. When Butt-gig loses in November it will absolutely not be because he is gay and "white deplorable working class" voters are a bunch of homophobes, just as when Clinton lost it wasn't because those voters were misogynists. They are neither misogynists nor homophobes nor racists. They are voters who merely think a candidate needs to bring something to the political fight other than their personal victim status.

You want to help cut across the impending doom of another Trump win? Then you need to think real hard about how to reach those "white deplorable working class" voters who, by the way, are not the misogynists, homophobes, and racists that you imagine them to be. Your hysteria cannot accomplish that.

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 7 2020 16:37 utc | 160

Josh @ 39. Of course you cannot expect Bernie to be fully wise on all the foreign policy issues. If he were on the same line (let alone outspoken) as many of us here on MoA, he wouldn't get elected. Look at how Tulsi is faring. Like it or not, the US foreign policy is ingrained not just in the American establishment, but it has seeped into the subconsciousness of the majority of Americans. There's few Americans that can say "putin is not evil' and have the brains and knowledge to defend that stand.

“One cannot expect Sanders to be fully wise about FP issues” message - no! he should know a lot, has piles of advisers, is over 70, etc. Of course it all depends on what one packs into ‘fully wise.’

“Sanders can’t get elected if he speaks like ppl on MoA” message - yes, calling names and insulting is not a good strategy — yes, Sanders is a pol and man-in-da-street discourse won’t serve, and no, many pols are more outspoken than some on MoA and are successful. (Actually Sanders might benefit from some careful uptake of some points posted here.)

“Look at how Tulsi is faring” - badly, you imply (correct), plus you imply she is outspoken, she is not. Merely, she is easier for the Dems to ‘silence’ shunt aside, than Sanders who has a long history, a following etc.

“US foreign policy has seeped into the subconsciousness of the majority of Americans” message.

Interesting - obv. since the Vietnam war there has been no effective anti-war type or tone it down Oppo (imho, ex. > mass demos against Iraq War) but why exactly is hard to say.

Not sure the American subconscious plays a role, though of course publically towing the Gvmt. line to preserve jobs / family etc. is operant, subservient comformity is as old as the hills.

Maybe the ‘subconsicous’ is a reference to cult-like behaviors that spring forth when orgs / tribes start to break apart? Such as Russia Russia Russia amongst 20% ers who have thrown in their lot with the Dems? I know 3 of them (US citz.) they are Followers of the TVTemple of Rachel Maddow, it is extraordinary. But not - the subconscious! They love the dame, she is famous, hard spoken, sorta good looking, a model, etc. etc.

As for, now direct quote: There's few Americans that can say "putin is not evil' and have the brains and knowledge to defend that stand.

Elitist crap. Saying Putin is evil, is that a true statement or dumb propaganda or .. -> that others have to deny, like he is NOT, evil? This is world politics not fairy tales for 4 year-olds, it is a false dichotomy.

Few Americans would have the brains/knowledge to defend that Putin is not evil…So is he not evil, but Americans don’t see it or can’t argue it because of lack of expertise ? Or, is it good that Americans have no brains and so can’t defend the statement that Putin is not evil?

Spare me… This is typical journo-Dem meaningless obfuscatory prose, absolute garbage. The only point is to appear to be cleverer than others and stave off criticism etc.

Cheers to the barflies. Apologies for the long post, orally at the bar would have been more fun. Have a drink on me Josh.

Posted by: Noirette | Feb 7 2020 16:42 utc | 161

SteveK9@116 thinks Trump was the stable genius who played the Electoral College game. This is Sharpie sniffing.

Bob@119 still imagines the CIA like gay guys. This kind of piss poor judgment seems to me to be motivated solely by homophobia. I don't like Buttigieg's childish faith in capitalism, but I dislike this kind of BS too. Also, as I understand it, Buttigieg has fewer endorsements from party politicians than every other candidate not named Sanders. At this point, Buttigieg bashing is meant to tar the Democratic Party to help Trump.

james@134 is also deluded enough to think a stupid idea of what his god Trump *would* have done in a popular vote system is an argument. It's not. It's a silly counter-factual, which is the polite way of describing something made up. There are many frauds here who claim to be against the rigged system...but the Electoral College is part of the rigging. The true corruption is what is made legal: Every defender of the Electoral College favor political corruption in order to fight political democracy. The honest ones like to point out, "A republic, not a democracy!"

uncletungsten@138 wants to pretend that Buttigieg rigged the Iowa caucus with the app, but also rigged all the paper returns, which of course should prompt honest people to ask why use the app in the first place? No reason of course, which means the whole idea is an irrational slander. Sanders won the popular vote by a hair, not by 30% as he falsely claimed. Buttigieg won the convention delegates which is supposed to be the point of the whole exercise. You can pick which one you want to call winning. What you can't do is claim that Buttigieg cheated. That's just a lie. All these half-witted conspiracy theories fail because Buttigieg was the one hurt the most, and Biden was the only one helped. Only Trump stooges are so shamelessly stupid.

somebody@144 inexplicably fails to note that tirades against socialism are very much a part of Trump's campaign. Pay attention people, socialism is supposed to be every bit as toxic as homosexuality.

circe@148 assumes no rich people are gay, or have gay relatives, which is not correct at all. The supposed bad relations with the South Bend black community explains why he was defeated twice when running for mayor. Unfortunately, he actually won, which makes this argument irrelevant, unless the real claim, that blacks are more homophobic than the rest of the population, is true. Nonetheless, despite all the caps, it is true: Buttigieg is a stalking horse, in the sense of a candidate by outsiders to split the party in the primary. Buttigieg of course wants to think a gay man can become president, because vanity and wishful thinking about how decent this country is. But I must strenuously disagree that Trump is behind this, because Trump is not that smart, he's just brazen. Also, the true Zionists are supporting Trump openly and don't think they need to waste their money on messing with Democrats, especially on a guy who isn't going to be nominated. If he won enough delegates for the nomination, the party leaders would split the party. (The Democratic Party is probably splitting anyhow.) And the result would be as favorable as Sanders splitting. The official parties have a built-in advantage. The so-called duopoly is corruption but it's legal. And no independent, not Sanders, not Buttigieg, can really hope to win. They can't even necessarily play spoiler!

vk@150 forgot that democracy is a form of class rule by the bourgeoisie, to resolve internal rivalries by an orderly (i.e., doesn't threaten their class) appeal to the petty-bourgeois while keeping the working class enlisted with one bourgeois faction, not acting independently. The nation is united in the struggle against other nations, starting with the native Americans in the eighteenth century, but continuing on today. That's what democracy is, and it is not a failure of democracy when the working class doesn't get even to pick which wars the nation fights. There is an ineradicable opposition between democracy and socialism. Every socialist who appeals to some pure, ideal, utopian vision of democracy is appealing for class collaboration, which means the subordination of the working classes to the bourgeoisie. That's why Trump is hitting the anti-socialist theme so hard, to get the other bourgeois and petty-bourgeois fired up to support him, especially with their control of the mass media. Deep State vs. democracy is Trumpery, which is why they need to manufacture villains. CIA golden boy of the Obama blacks and the Jews and Homintern chief Buttigieg, is merely the latest demon.

DFC@152 is simply wrong, because Buttigieg isn't the golden boy at all. That's why he was tarred with Iowa, and all the Trump worshippers are spouting this BS. Buttigieg is an embarrassment, and they no more want him as nominee than Sanders, though for entirely different reasons. Buttigieg may personally wish to be Justin Trudeau. But it's Elizabeth Warren who wants to be Macron.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Feb 7 2020 16:47 utc | 162

On the other side of the political divide there are more worrisome signs about the mental state of the "stable genius".

"Donald Trump ‘apoplectic’ in call with Boris Johnson over Huawei"

Reminded me of these;

More on the breakdown of institutions which once formed the foundation of trust in Western Liberal Democracy.

"OPCW responds to Douma leaks... by arguing whistleblowers are not credible & calling for tighter internal security measures "

Attacking the credibility of it's own highly qualified experts and circling the wagons isn't a very reassuring strategy.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 16:52 utc | 163

@ 162 steven t johnson.. i knew you were nuts, but thanks for the double confirmation.. if lying is all you have - you really have nothing..

Posted by: james | Feb 7 2020 17:04 utc | 164

Noirette 161

"“Sanders can’t get elected if he speaks like ppl on MoA” message - yes, calling names and insulting is not a good strategy —"

Donald trump and his supporters seem to think it is. Buttigieg descended to the "soft on dictators' "trope" when Gabbard called him out on stating he would entertain sending troops to Mexico if asked by their government. That's name calling too and he's a 'Rhodes Scholar' !

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 17:15 utc | 165

Have to agree with james, steven t. johnson's rant @162 is a real tour de force of trollery. There's no sponge big enough to absorb all the bullshit.

Posted by: Copeland | Feb 7 2020 17:33 utc | 166

Democratic Candidates:
Sanders (old Jewish communist)
Warren (old hag shrieking about trans-kids selecting Secretary of Education)
Pete BallGag (fake and phony;C_A;gay)
Biden (loves, just loves sniffing young girls and their hair; corruption)
Tusli Gabbard (DeepState backbencher; tranny; CFR; probably end up with a Senate seat--> she'll be useful in future to DS)

Deus ex-Machina Candidates:
Killary and/or Big Mike Obamma

I'd say the Democratic Party has 0 chance in November. They currently have a freakshow on display for the world. They need collective therapy as a party, starting with the First Step: I am insane and I need help.

I don't actually believe this last 3 years is real. I believe Nancy P and Chuckee S got marching orders to impeach and did what they were told. As did Adam 'What kid in the Std. Hotel?' Schiff. Nothing the Dems did made any sense. They are unelectable for now.
Trump, meanwhile, has been able to govern for the Rich and AIPAC (same thing right?) and betray the absolutely cr@p out of his base and STILL be electable. Wow. That is some 'Masterpiece Theatre'.

Personally, I am disgusted. I didn't think the bloodsuckers would actually completely and utterly cannibalize America but that seems to be the plan.

We are all Palestinians.
Nowhere to hide or run to.
We either solve this or it is over.
Epstein is in Tel Aviv.

Posted by: dorje | Feb 7 2020 17:35 utc | 167

dorje @167

THIS! The media-fueled fakery is clear to those that of us that have discarded the Rose-colored glasses.

We have a new word for eye-opening, tell-it-like-it-is honesty: “dorje”.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 7 2020 18:32 utc | 168

steven t johnson@162

Who wrote: "the true Zionists are supporting Trump openly and don't think they need to waste their money on messing with Democrats, especially on a guy who isn't going to be nominated."

In my reading of the current(?) situation as it has been unfolding in the USA, it would appear that the Zionist faction have so much splash-cash lying around that they would always have a bet "each way". Ensuring an "also-ran" dud is the DNC nominee in 2020 against "the best friend Israel ever had in Washington" is THE surefire way to victory for their team cause.

Once we start delving into the endemic media manipulation, Acronym, Shadow, and connections to the DNC and Buttigiegs' campaign, and so on, all of the trails seem to leading back to that particular lilly-pad in the swamp.

Maybe I'm confirming my own bias to a degree, but it surely doesn't "pass the pub-test".

Posted by: Jon_in_AU | Feb 7 2020 18:45 utc | 169

William Gruff | Feb 7 2020 16:37 utc | 160

They honestly believe they can win if their candidate has a sufficiently credible claim to "identity politics" victim status. Many sincerely believe that is what being a "leftist" means.
Many thanks, glad I came here today!

Posted by: Third Chimp | Feb 7 2020 18:57 utc | 170

A question for the Multitude:

What set of policy proposals is most likely to gain the D-Party nomination (discounting any DNC manipulation) and defeat Trump in November?

My answer's been articulated numerous times.

On an OT note, I want to direct barflies to an outstanding essay by The Saker, "Our fundamental disagreement about WWII, Hitler, Jews and race", and reflect on the excerpt as it also applies to the discussion above:

"How could a person (Hitler) and an ideology (National-Socialism) be both declared uniquely evil AND, at the same time, undergo at least a partial rehabilitation in the same society? Simple! The only condition necessary to make that happen is to condition people to accept cognitive dissonances and not to be too troubled when they happen. The average citizen of the Empire has been conditioned to accept, and even embrace, such cognitive dissonances quite literally since birth and he has become very, very good at that. But there is also a historiographical blowback in action here:" [My Emphasis]

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 19:02 utc | 171

Dems went into impeachment knowing that they would never get a 2/3 majority in the Senate.

They are playing the long game: they want to put the issue up to voters in November, namely: "The Senate had a job to do but refused. Now get out there and finish it for them!"

There is a big issue right now in that the GOP has no embarrassing primary to keep them occupied as they did in 2016, so the GOP ratf*ckers can concentrate on meddling with the Democratic nomination wherever they can and the press can go about picking every nit they see.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Feb 7 2020 19:12 utc | 172

That shrew-devil Hillary is at it again! She came out RIGHT BEFORE the Iowa caucuses to trash Bernie Sanders AND THAT B🤬ITCH is doing it AGAIN a few days before the NH primary. She appeared like a banshee out of hell on the Ellen show again trashing Sanders. She wants Trump to win again!

Here's what the DNC is up to. First they're going to push Buttigieg's card in NH, to try and steal Bernie's thunder again. Then they changed the rules to bring Bloomberg into the February 19th debate to attack Bernie Sanders. Then they're going to promote Buttigieg and Bloomberg, and they don't care which one makes it. BUT GUESS WHAT? NONE OF THEM CAN BEAT TRUMP.

If Buttigieg becomes the nominee; millions of Catholic latinos, Muslims, rural white people and religious black people will ensure A GAY man will not dance with his husband at no inaugural and enter the White House holding hands with another man. Ain't gonna happen! GET REAL.


So it appears the DNC would rather have Trump win than give the nomination to Bernie Sanders who can actually beat Trump!


Posted by: Circe | Feb 7 2020 19:21 utc | 173


Blindly believing, as you are doing, is childish. Assuming you are older than 13 years, it is unseemly and inappropriate for you to behave in such a manner. Calm down, put away the emotions and try to think.

Look, you may well love your man Bernie Sanders and blindly believe with all your heart that (if elected) his ascension to the Oval Office will lead to Nirvana or holy, perfect socialism etc. or that he will fix things up as you desire or whatever. You may believe but the reality is far different.

Bernie is no saviour. He is not going to rescue you, nor make America great again, nor govern for "us", nor deliver on any of the bromides he regurgitates for rubes to believe in. He don't know you and he never will know you. He don't care a whit about you personally. What he wants is getting as many people like you as possible to give him your vote and your money. Apart from that you are of vanishingly small use to him and his cronies. He is a politician after all. Do not forget it. That is his nature and at near 80 yrs of age he isn't about to change his nature for the likes of you.

Consider. There are people about who hold blind faith in President Trump. Their faith is almost exactly the same in form to yours. They believe their holy man, President Trump, will save the USA and make it "great again". They really do believe in their man, exactly as do you in yours. The difference between you and them is that their holy miracle man is a different person from the one you ascribe holy heroic man status to. Apart from that, it is near the same daft faith.

Anyway, in the end it makes little difference whether Bernie Sanders is the Democratic contender or not. It matters not whether he ascends to the Oval Office or not. The US system is toast. The Presidential election result of 2020 will not be respected by the losers and the USA are heading further into disorder, unrest, violence and impoverishment. Things will be go from bad to worse unfortunately.

Posted by: Siotu | Feb 7 2020 19:23 utc | 174

@Jon_in_AU #169
Agree. Why put all the eggs in one basket?

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 7 2020 19:28 utc | 175

@ralphieboy #172
Your theory might be more credible if Trump wasn't so hated by the Dems/progs that there should be no rallying required.
Far more likely is that the impeachment is the logical extension of the Russiagate narrative - a way to explain away the enormously embarrassing 2016 HRC electoral defeat, much as Russiagate was.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 7 2020 19:30 utc | 176

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 19:02 utc | 171

"What set of policy proposals is most likely to gain the D-Party nomination (discounting any DNC manipulation) and defeat Trump in November?"

The same set which won for Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton and so on: Vague nonsense.

Assuming it's true that Sanders is the only Dem who can beat Trump (short of Trump self-destructing, which didn't happen in 2016 and I won't hold my breath for it in 2020 either), what's he going to rely on - the vote of people so thoughtless that it doesn't occur to them that no Congress will pass Medicare for All? In that case even in his wonkishness Sanders would still be running on empty slogans and relying on the ignorance of voters, same as any other Dem or Rep.

I do think that a real insurgent could win by speaking truth (not in much detail - always a bad idea for real insurgents) about an anti-corporate, anti-globalist agenda and fully intending to hit the ground running with a pre-assembled executive team ready to aggressively push a program through the executive branch.

But Sanders looks like pretty much the opposite of that. If he were for real he must have a full cadre ready to go, a government-in-waiting, fully loyal to himself, in full agreement with his agenda, ready to become executive appointees and hit the ground running from day one aggressively pushing this Sanders program, at least in the executive branch.

After all, it's impossible to assemble such a cadre as an afterthought. If you're a real insurgent who would have to overawe and where necessary break the existing executive bureaucratic cadres and structures, you need to be ready to go on the offensive from day one. Most of all you can't expect to find allies or good intentions or conscientious advice waiting for you there.

But as we've seen with Bernout's repeated unilateral promises to serve his Democrat masters in the election, we can assume a president Sanders would genuflect in the same way and regard congressional Democrats as his masters.

So the rhetoric which could win for Sanders would be vague "progressive"-sounding nonsense, the mirror image of "Make America Great Again."

To say again, this is all entertainment for fanatical sports fans (the types that paint themselves the team colors and get in fist-fights with opposing fans) and for the broader masses (those who care only about the Super Bowl). There's nothing political about it. That's what fake neoliberal elections are.

We no longer get the bread, but we still do have the circus.

Posted by: Russ | Feb 7 2020 19:32 utc | 177

@ uncle tungsten | Feb 7 2020 10:37 utc | 138

Thanks for the link. I'm going to repeat it here,

because at exactly 14 minutes in he made a terrible mistake -- a brief but horrible grimace that will be seen as a still image in every one of Trump's TV commercials, should Sanders make it through the convention, and in many of Sanders' D opponents' commercials, for sure, between now and the convention.

I really, really, really wish he had not done that . . .

Posted by: AntiSpin | Feb 7 2020 19:32 utc | 178


"OPCW responds to Douma leaks... by arguing whistleblowers are not credible & calling for tighter internal security measures."
Sad and pathetic really, but not altogether unexpected. They are furiously trying to prevent exposure of all the other times they may have fudged the data for the DS.

I saw a lecture online by an English guy (can't recall name, will try to locate, was on YT) who had been involved in environmental and social-justice protest movements for many years. In every case of large-scale political/structural change since the French Revolution they had studied, it was found that if you can get an average of just 3% of the citizens in the relevant legal-political jurisdiction to drop everything and protest full-time the movement was guaranteed to win.
Yes, in every case they studied it averaged out to around 3%. We "the commoners" are far more powerful than we ever realise.

Posted by: Jon_in_AU | Feb 7 2020 19:41 utc | 179

To ‘merican fellers here,
I don’t know how many times it needs to be said; YOUR VOTE SIMPLY DOES NOT COUNT.
Now there, I said it again.
Oh and here is what’s happening to your country; being eaten from the inside by the lobbyist. No, yours is the spider, not the wasp in this fable.

A female wasp searches the ground and/or vegetation for a spider, and upon finding one, stings it, paralyzing the spider… Once the spider is paralyzed, a female pompilid makes a burrow or flies or drags the spider to a previously made burrow… Typically, a single egg is laid on the abdomen of the spider, and the nest or burrow is closed so the larva can develop without disruption by other parasites or scavengers… The egg hatches and the larva feeds on the spider, breaking through the integument with its mandibles. As the larva feeds on its host, it saves the vital organs, such as the heart and central nervous system, for last… In time, the spider will die, and the mature wasp larva will then pupate.


And yes, you are powerless to do anything about it, but to whine. That’s all.

Posted by: Sakineh Bagoom | Feb 7 2020 19:49 utc | 180

If the vote really didn't matter then the establishment wouldn't invest countless $billions in trying to manage it. These are businessmen running things, not moonbeam idealists splashing around cash for charity.

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 7 2020 19:59 utc | 181

the rhetoric that sanders uses to win is concerned with concrete material benefits, not vague progressive cliches. once again, the alternatives are 1.a hostile takeover of the democratic party or 2. some escalating resistance such as a general strike. 1. comes before 2. if the dnc was satisfied it was sanders master it wouldn't have tried to rig the election against him, now would it?

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 7 2020 20:02 utc | 182

there are things we can do about it besides whining. nobody has ever had a fully formed government ready in waiting, this is the u.s. not europe. sanders has an effective ground organization fighting against a corrupt political machine with two faces, republicans and democrats. for some reason some people expect this to be easy,

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 7 2020 20:06 utc | 183

lol there are lost of stills of trump looking stupid, or any politician. one brief grimace doesn't mean shit.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 7 2020 20:07 utc | 184

sanders is an old jewish communist??? whut.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 7 2020 20:17 utc | 185

vk @ 150 said;"It is amazing how the USA is protected in the internet. It's never the fault of the American system, but always of degenerate individuals who failed the system."

Yes, a consistent thyme for the Ayn Rand Rightists.

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 20:18 utc | 186

no congress would ever pass the civil rights act, or give women the vote, or (fill in the blank). when enough people take to the streets, or start burning cities, or camp outside the white house like the bonus army, change happens. it's easier if there is an inside outside game, maybe only possible under those circumstances.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 7 2020 20:21 utc | 187

LR @ 157 said;"By voting for reallocation of funds away from a wasteful military to education, healthcare, and retirement we would be exercising our right to have the funds we pay in taxes actually go to things that benefit us. We already pay for them. We just want taxation with representation as to avoid tyranny.

Yes, but, that reality will never resonate with the "we can't afford it" crowd.

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 20:24 utc | 188

at 176 you are correct, the impeachment was a farce designed to deflect attention from the real reasons clinton lost to trump. the long game is to maintain control of the political cash machine.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 7 2020 20:25 utc | 189

ben 186

Well, most people commenting on this evidently think it's a matter of individuals and not systems.

And look at their great coming hero: Even if Sanders were sincere and a real fighter for what he claims to want, what a lukewarm watery broth it is (and with all ecocide to continue, no less).

Clearly these are people who think the system is basically sound and just needs some fine tuning.

I started saying in 2017 regarding Sanders fans, Greens etc., that ironically this mode of voting indicates the most active, conscious affirmation of the status quo, since it takes the form of constructive criticism, loyal opposition. One votes this way to say, “I like the status quo but I think I want a few changes.”

Posted by: Russ | Feb 7 2020 20:27 utc | 190

That shrew-devil Hillary is at it again! She came out RIGHT BEFORE the Iowa caucuses to trash Bernie Sanders AND THAT B🤬ITCH is doing it AGAIN ... Circe | Feb 7 2020 19:21 utc | 173

Circe: a goddess of magic or sometimes a nymph, enchantress or sorceress

Old PUMA will not change. But she is past her "best use" date, and so is Biden. Klobuchar is a fine woman, but she makes Hillary look charismatic. Warren is a good cabinet material, where you can keep her far from what she knows very little. So we are left with Bootiegieg, cute, young and a strong believer in interagency consensus (a rather new religion) and Bloomberg who believes in something deeper and older (Davos-Bliderberg consensus?). The slogans just write themselves "Vote Bloomberg and America will stand proud and tall at the next Bilderberg meeting!". Anyway, there is some "surge" as some polled voters switched from Biden to Bootiegieg, but some switched to Sanders, the "Biden voters" are not particularly ideological. Among all that, how many wait for the latest words of Hillary?

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 7 2020 20:29 utc | 191

And this, which really applies in any election year thread:

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 20:29 utc | 192

one votes this way for the first real alternative since eugene mccarthy. sanders is fully on board with fighting climate change. he's being sabotaged precisely because the ptb think he might be effective.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 7 2020 20:31 utc | 193

dorje @ 167

Democratic Candidates:
Sanders (old Jewish communist)
Warren (old hag shrieking about trans-kids selecting Secretary of Education)
Pete BallGag (fake and phony;C_A;gay)
Biden (loves, just loves sniffing young girls and their hair; corruption)
Tusli Gabbard (DeepState backbencher; tranny; CFR; probably end up with a Senate seat--> she'll be useful in future to DS)

Deus ex-Machina Candidates:
Killary and/or Big Mike Obamma

There is a good deal of truth in your descriptions. However, I came to MoA to avoid the gratuitous, inflammatory language that you throw around. Why must you resort to insults, when you have facts? You do realize that this kind of language is exactly what will be picked out from the vast corpus of MoA to demonize it, don't you?

Why call Sanders a communist? He never was. He was a lukewarm socialist. Here's a Newsweek story (i.e., establishment) that says exactly that. Communist is a curse word, not a description. He is a sheepdog, not a communist.

Why call Warren a hag, when its clear she's an IdPol corporatist, and an incompetent campaigner at that. Just call her Pocahantes. Her Indian heritage kerfuffle was an "own goal" that she needs to own.

BallGag is "cute" - not. They want us to go for the gay slurs. They have that all gamed out. We all know MayorCheat is yet another IdPol corporatist.

Biden - Fair enough. The sniffing hair bit is fact based, and therefore not a slur, but the truth.

Tulsi - where did this "tranny" shit come from? I first saw it at ZH, and its about their mouth-breathing style. Ditto for the "Big Mike" moniker, which is just another way to say "tranny"?

Your vitriol takes away from your logic.

Posted by: john brewster | Feb 7 2020 20:32 utc | 194

@c1ue 176:

In a normal world, we would not need any sort of investigations, Trumps violations of the Emoluments Clause and his blatant conflicts of financial interests should be enough to have him removed. They want to "investigate" Hunter Biden while Trump's own children work at the White House and/or conduct business with foreign government with whom their father deals directly...

Posted by: ralphieboy | Feb 7 2020 20:38 utc | 195

p @ 189 said;" the impeachment was a farce designed to deflect attention from the real reasons clinton lost to trump. the long game is to maintain control of the political cash machine."

Absolutely. Our fellow poster Jrabbit has posted reams of relevant info about HRC's deliberate demise in the 2016 election.

And, she and her cohorts are at it again..

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 20:38 utc | 196


That Bernie Sander's shtick is failure does not mean he will necessarily lose the selection. Nor does it mean he will necessarily lose the 2020 Presidential election. Consider his ideology and the types of policies he promotes. All are proven failures, although they have an appeal to certain types (generally the envy ridden, the willfully ignorant and the failures in life, education, emotional control, career, financial situation, personality, etc.- basically those experiencing various frustrations, vexations and problems in their own lives and most usually failing to cope adequately in their own eyes). Most tragic, in particular as the envy is inevitably directed toward wrecking the lives of others. Hence disorder, impoverishment and violence. Failure. In the end the Chinese curse will apply and they'll get what they want (good and hard!), although it'll not make them happy, content or any better off for the most part. Failure. Complete and utter failure.

Whether Bernie Sanders wins or not is not really a key issue. Whoever wins the Presidential election is not really relevant at this point. The USA is descending a pathway worn smooth by many others. There is to be violence, dis-order, impoverishment and much suffering to come regardless of who is sitting in the White House Oval Office. Put it like this, governments all over the show are in the process of losing legitimacy. They are failing. The USA is no exception. It is in the vanguard.

There are people who dream of this sort of situation coming to pass. They can smell it coming. They seek to advance the chaos as they see that as the opportune moment to make gain for themselves. Some of them are dreamers and will experience the same suffering as near everyone else. On the other hand there are others who are ruthless carpetbaggers, mongers of of huge cruelty, expressing capabilities for criminality and working towards an establishment of absolute tyranny. Horrible people all, they lust for violent revolution, uprising and revenge. I have had the misfortune of knowing some of these creatures. They are shockers. They are also a lot more common than you'd expect. As people they are failures, every single one. Indecent.


There is no extra time to buy. The process of civic decline started in earnest some years ago. It is now at that stage where it accelerates relentlessly. As amusing as the election will be, the aftermath won't be good.

Posted by: Siotu | Feb 7 2020 20:38 utc | 197

karlof1 @ 171

That Saker/Unz piece is certainly worth a read. I started it on my cellphone, but it was just too long. I will get to it later. I got about 20% of the way through it, and still wasn't exactly sure if he was trying to make (a very long-winded) point or give a half-semester course in Eastern European history. (Dog knows we could use a counterpoint to the file demonization offered by Tim Snyder in "Bloodlands".)

I always wait until I've digested the Saker's articles. That is his, personally, not the entire site. He really has a grasp of history, but from a completely different POV than we get in the Western infosphere.

Posted by: john brewster | Feb 7 2020 20:40 utc | 198

That's vile demonization, not file demonization.

Posted by: john brewster | Feb 7 2020 20:41 utc | 199

@ 195"In a normal world, we would not need any sort of investigations, Trumps violations of the Emoluments Clause and his blatant conflicts of financial interests should be enough to have him removed. They want to "investigate" Hunter Biden while Trump's own children work at the White House and/or conduct business with foreign government with whom their father deals directly..."

Sorry for the redundancy, but, that can't be said enough. Pelosi, Schumer, and the DNC knew from the beginning, that the "Russia did it" meme was a loser, that's why they chose it.

IMO opinion...

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 20:49 utc | 200

« previous page | next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.