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.


bigger

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


bigger

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

Comments
« previous page

@197 Siotu

Thank you West Bank settler tool for the liturgy according to Trump/Putin/Netanyahu!

Posted by: Circe | Feb 7 2020 20:50 utc | 201

"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


Well they did manage to bag and sideline two dirty tricksters and trump's fixer Cohen along the road to Russia Russia Russia. Won't be hearing much from Roger Stone or Manafort for a while.

Seem to have Rocking Rudy dancing on the head of a pin for dumpster diving in Ukraine too, so it wasn't a complete waste of effort and showmanship.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 21:18 utc | 202

To reiterate yet again, Sanders is explicit that both his POTUS attempts were about "us" as in "all of us" not about him being the center of a Personality Cult like Trump and Clinton. He's always said that to move forward the package of policy choices he favors requires a Movement as well as Congressional allies. The only other candidate to articulate anything similar is Gabbard. IMO, the package of Domestic Policies outlined by Sanders are those required to win the nomination and beat Trump, while the most important Foreign Policy issue to advance is withdrawal from the overseas empire and disengagement from the forever wars to finance the Domestic Plan.

Is Sanders ideal? No. Is anyone ideal? No. There are no perfect/ideal humans; we all have faults. Is Sanders the best possible candidate for the 60-80% of the people that have little or no wealth and whose wellbeing is under siege? Yes. Did Bloomberg declare his candidacy to defeat Sanders or Trump? Sanders. Are there activities available in our communities we could get involved with that make a difference and serve to improve them? Yes. Does the clear fact that the political process and overall narrative must be managed by the elite provide the truth that we must work to control them to enhance our political goals and good works? Yes. In other words, does being involved in the political process, which includes voting, make a difference? Yes. Will I need to repeat all of the above several times before the Convention in June? Yes. Will naysayers try to denigrate any or all of the above? Yes.

During his 2000 campaign, Ralph Nader said: "If you don't turn onto politics, politics will turn on you." Is that a true observation? Yes!

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 21:27 utc | 203

karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 21:27 utc | 203

Thumbs up! Sometimes reason is helpful.

Posted by: Hausmeister | Feb 7 2020 21:32 utc | 204

Siotu @ 197; The scenario you present is dark, but, probably valid. We'll see.

In the meantime, as one of the peons here in the U$A, all I can do, is what the elites do.

Fund the people and movements you believe in. Doesn't take much $ individually, but collectively, can make a difference. There are more of us than the elite rulers.

I'll say again, Death is certain in life, but that doesn't keep humanity from moving forward daily.

If each of us can do that, maybe some day, we in the U$A can have a REAL democracy.

Posted by: ben | Feb 7 2020 21:38 utc | 205

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 21:27 utc | 203

Sanders / Gabbard ticket would give people something to vote FOR, as opposed to the utterly depressing norm of voting just to vote against, not because you want the person or party you feel you have to vote for to throw the other bum(s) out. Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football type futility.

IMO, 2016 was even worse than the usual drill. Incompetent Hillary the horrible vs. deeply compromised lifelong conman and grifter, tabloid darling and self aggrandizing jackass Donald J. Trump. It's almost as if the Davo's / Bilderberger crowd were trying to set the stage to take advantage of people's cynicism so they could usher in the next level of the grand plan. Benevolent dictatorship. Benevolent..being a stepping stone, all options remaining open.

I don't engage in tin foil hattery, but I have been drawn to pondering the tea leaves from time to time.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 22:01 utc | 206

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 21:27 utc | 203

Sanders / Gabbard ticket would give people something to vote FOR, as opposed to the utterly depressing norm of voting just to vote against, not because you want the person or party you feel you have to vote for to throw the other bum(s) out. Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football type futility.

IMO, 2016 was even worse than the usual drill. Incompetent Hillary the horrible vs. deeply compromised lifelong conman and grifter, tabloid darling and self aggrandizing jackass Donald J. Trump. It's almost as if the Davo's / Bilderberger crowd were trying to set the stage to take advantage of people's cynicism so they could usher in the next level of the grand plan. Benevolent dictatorship. Benevolent..being a stepping stone, all options remaining open.

I don't engage in tin foil hattery, but I have been drawn to pondering the tea leaves from time to time.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 22:01 utc | 207

@karlof1 @171 The Allies wrote history and demonized Hitler and the Nazis. The US has been killing Iraqis continuously since 1990. That is 30 years of killing largely defenseless people. Or course the "native Americans" or what is left of them know the kind of "civilization" we have. There isn't anything that exceptional about Hitler and the Nazis. They fought for more power and control and lost. The USA thought after the collapse of the USSR that they had every right to rule the world. That the USA was the "exceptional nation". The last superpower. How is that really different from the Nazi claims of being some sort of master race?

Anyhow... it is interesting to go back to General Wesley Clark recounting his Paul Wolfowitz conversations.

"I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense's office. It says we're going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years. We're going to start with Iraq, and then we're going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran." Seven countries in five years. -- I was so stunned by this, I couldn't begin to talk about it. And I couldn't believe it would really be true, but that's actually what happened. These people took control of the policy in the United States -- then it came back to me, a 1991 meeting I had with Paul Wolfowitz. You know, in 2001 he was Deputy Secretary of Defense, but in 1991 he was the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy -- and I said to Paul, -- "Mr. Secretary, you must be pretty happy with the performance of the troops in Desert Storm." -- "Well yeah," he said, "But not really," -- "Because the truth is we should have gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and we didn't."-- "But one thing we did learn," he said, "We learned that we can use our military in the region in the Middle East and the Soviets won't stop us." --- "And we have got about five or ten years to clean up all those Soviet client regimes; Syria, Iran, Iraq, before the next great super power comes on to challenge us"

Really now... How different is the USA from Nazi Germany? Aren't we governed the same? Didn't we copy the centralized Prussian style of education to instill the martial spirit in Americans! How well does the excerpt from Milton Mayer's "They Thought They Were Free" fit?

"What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with XXXX, their trust in XXXX, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it.

"This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter."

Posted by: goldhoarder | Feb 7 2020 22:06 utc | 208

Read some extraordinary comments from William Barr today and am wondering if informed bar flies can offer input on whether this sort of commentary is unprecedented or not? Being that his position is Attorney General, not Secretary of Commerce or related, etc. The greater meaning of which should not be lost on people who live in a supposed dyed in the wool Capitalist / Free Enterprise system.

"The U.S. Attorney General said America should consider taking a controlling stake in European telecoms equipment makers Nokia and Ericsson to “blunt” Chinese firm Huawei’s “drive to domination.”

William Barr’s comments come after President Donald Trump expressed “apoplectic” fury towards U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson over Britain’s decision to allow Huawei limited participation in its 5G networks, according to a report from the Financial Times."

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/07/us-should-take-stake-in-nokia-ericsson-to-counter-huawei-in-5g-barr.html

And someone above referred to Sanders as a 'Communist'.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 22:26 utc | 209

@ben 195

Russia's involvement in our elections Notwithstanding, the nature of the Trump organization's dealings with Russia (both his private business deals and his re-election campaign) would be enough to warrant an investigation, especially as his personal lawyer, campaign chairman and two close personal advisers are already in jail in corruption-related charges involving Russia.

The reason they ran with the Ukraine thing is that it was so blatant that the whistleblower and others present could not ignore it. Trump could easily have clothed it in a few layers of deniability, but he was too ham-fisted to bother to do so.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Feb 7 2020 22:37 utc | 210

goldhoarder @208--

I've written numerous comparison's of the Outlaw US Empire's behavior as similar to Nazi Germany's. Indeed, the entire Anti-Communist Crusade killed far more than what the Nazis were accused of in the Holocaust. And the Death Squad Foreign Legions that started with former Gestapo and SS troops. What I'm aiming at in my research and writing is to show when the rise of anti-socialist dogma began, what interest was behind the propaganda, and how that coincides with the concerted effort to derail the Classical Economists efforts to destroy the last vestiges of Feudalism along with the subsequent altering/deletion of teaching economic history and its kin political-economy. The timing is the easy part--it began in the 1870s in the USA. It got to the point where if you wanted to seriously study the history of economic thought and political-economy you needed to go to German universities. We know the interest group served--bankers and other Rentier interests who are behind the overthrow of Industrial Capitalism and substitution of Finance Capitalism. But that's just a general sketch that as of now must be pieced together from numerous publications--there's no definitive work telling the public how it got screwed and by whom.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 22:58 utc | 212

Bubbles @209--

Barr's hysteria's telling. The one last industrial area the Outlaw US Empire led decidedly was computer tech or tech in general. That's now demonstratively lost, both to Russia and China. And what's worse is the neoliberal dogma of gutting support for the primary resource required to make any nation great--its human capital--is further eroding the Outlaw US Empire's ability to even keep pace, let alone regain the lead. Sometime ago, I wrote the obsession with Huawei was akin to the fear invoked by Sputnik. JFK proposed a remedy and Congress allocated the resources. But the required second phase of that plan--LBJ's Great Society/War on Poverty failed miserably and has yet to be resurrected, which is precisely what Sanders says is required. If I were Sanders, I'd use Barr's words to aid my campaign.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 23:15 utc | 213

Freddy Trump's favourite boy has his revenge on those who would dare cross him.

"Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council staffer whose testimony about President Donald Trump at House impeachment hearings angered the president, was escorted out of the White House on Friday afternoon, his lawyer said."

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/07/trump-impeachment-witness-vindman-escorted-out-of-white-house.html


Mr trump said he was not happy with him.


But don't forget to watch out for Bernie, he may be soft on some positions, not definitive enough for some, as concerned trolls here articulate to the best of their spinners ability.


Best link imo posted here today on the Dem situation is an analysis of Mayor Pete. It's long, I read it all.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/03/all-about-pete

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 23:24 utc | 214

@ralphieboy #195
Your points about Trump are valid; the problem is they are valid for Bill and Hilary Clinton as well.
I am therefore still unconvinced that attacking Trump for emoluments is anything but partisanship - much as Obama was barely protested against by the anti-war types.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 7 2020 23:29 utc | 215

For those who've written that Sanders is soft and doesn't attack, this one's for you "'Which Side Are You On?': Sanders Calls Out Buttigieg for Raking in Billionaire Donations":

"Do you think if you're collecting money from dozens of dozens of billionaires you're going to stand up to the drug companies and you're going to throw their CEOs in jail if they're acting criminally?"

Ouch! Sanders accuses Buttigieg of Obama's crime and the reason he committed it. Sanders could've make an explicit connection, but did this instead:

"Using the hashtag #PetesBillionaires, Sanders tweeted following the St. Anselm College event that 'this election is fundamentally about whose side you are on.'" [My Emphasis]

Yes! On the people's side or on the DNC/Billionaire's side! The message and class implication can't be made much more overt than that. And the debate's tonight. Bet he goes after him again with that Mantra.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 7 2020 23:39 utc | 216

I am therefore still unconvinced that attacking Trump for emoluments is anything but partisanship - much as Obama was barely protested against by the anti-war types.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 7 2020 23:29 utc | 215


Attacking her hillary and obama for Benghazi was opportunistic partisan politics. The GOP are all in for War in the ME, and pretty much anywhere else, they are pigs too, but they smelled blood in the water they could exploit to score anti obama / dem political points.

They have no principles, they should never criticize nor look down on sex workers.

Obama waged Imperial War by stealth, with the GOP's full approval. Shuck and jive Obama could do no wrong in the eyes of his special interest base. He was their Messiah. He was in fact nothing more than another tool for the right wing establishment, but he had charisma. An asset with immeasurable value in politics.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 23:49 utc | 217

Siotu #197

WRONG again. Predictably wrong every time by the look of it.

Bernies policies and priorities are demonstrated over many centuries to be successful in many societies and countries around the globe. Where the wealth of the state and its citizens is spent on improving the functional quality of communities,they prosper and are enduring.

When the wealth of a state and its citizens is squandered on endless wars (NOT defence) they are ruined and end in abject disarray and poverty.

Building public water quality systems, education facilities, transport corridors and systems, public health services, investment in science and knowledge development, building local manufacture and agricultural self sufficiency and export have been the cornerstone of quality human development.

The USA has systematically demolished every one of the above to the satisfaction of its banker class. There is the failure, there you will find the nest containing the Wall Street spivs and cheats snuggled up with the Repugnants and Democrats and all guarded by the MIC and its parasites.

Bernie Sanders proposes an alternative that is built within the existing framework. He is no revolutionary but he is a mighty effective process builder and changemaker. He is the President that the USA desperately needs in this hour of its abject poverty from usury. The userers(like that great wasp metaphor posted here) are eating the heart and mind of the USA.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 8 2020 0:01 utc | 218

karlof1 #216

Yes! On the people's side or on the DNC/Billionaire's side! The message and class implication can't be made much more overt than that. And the debate's tonight. Bet he goes after him again with that Mantra.

Thanks for that. I trust Sanders will drive pete the cheat into the ground.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 8 2020 0:12 utc | 219

Bubbles @209

Many people are dramatically underestimating how big a deal it is that the US has lost dominance in telecommunications technology. This is a field that the US has owned since Alexander Graham Bell. It is also not just a matter of market share or simple pride. Having its hand in basic communications infrastructure worldwide is what makes it easy for the US to dig dirt on influential people and blackmail them (Merkel with her fondness for underage bukake) or launch lawfare attacks on them (Rousseff and Lula in Brazil). Furthermore, it is more than that the US is losing this tool of imperial control with the rise of Huawei, but Americans habitually project their own villainy on others, so they expect China to take over the blackmail/lawfare abuse that is currently exclusive to the American Empire. Considering how deep and pervasive the corruption and evilness is among the US elites, this possibility terrifies them. Also, loss of control over the basic telecommunications infrastructure ultimately will lead to loss of control over narrative propagation on social media. This in itself will be deadly for the empire.

Defeating Huawei is life-or-death for the empire.

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 8 2020 0:13 utc | 220

Here's another Current Affairs article "The Bernie Sanders Movement is Achieving Things We Thought Impossible" that was published today. Sanders provides an:

"excellent opportunity to deepen a vision of a truly democratic society where working people own and control the economy and politics, all the while mobilizing behind an agenda which addresses our burning immediate needs." [My Emphasis]

There you go: Total Democracy equates to Socialism. The essay is part cheerleading, a recap of the campaign to-date, and a brief historical reprisal. I suggest it be read. I cannot agree more with the author's conclusion:

"This election will affect the lives of millions who can’t even vote or donate to the campaign. Given the stakes, we can afford to put our cynicism and dispassion aside. We can’t let the nay-sayers, the dirty tricks, the smears, or the fear of failure hold us back from doing our part. We are on the brink of achieving something historic, and we can’t let them stop us." [My Emphasis]

And we see here at MoA the efforts used to get us to quit. Those commentators are the genuine sheepdogs.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 8 2020 0:15 utc | 221

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 8 2020 0:13 utc | 220

Thanks for your input but the US could throttle internet access like China has done while it rose to challenge the US. But I get your point about US dominance in the field and it's significance.

What I'm still wondering is what the heck is going on with Barr stepping into a role that's far from his 'jurisdiction' as Attorney General? To quote the Donald, "We need to figure out what's going on?" That was just another meaningless statement from trump about Muslims and immigration, but it has intrinsic value here given the oddity of what Barr has said.

Does he feel like he should create the Dept. of Barr and authorize himself to do whatever he thinks is appropriate to guide America's future? What is he, some sort of George Soros type? People know he was birthed in the beginning of the neo con era, and should be suspicious of him.

The centre can't roll over for a free for all like that. A matter of survival too. Bad enough that anyone to the left of the far right is now accused of being a commie. If Eisenhower was still alive, they would accuse him of being a Red.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 8 2020 1:01 utc | 222

William Gruff @ 220

Merkel with her fondness for underage bukake

Now this is the kind of stuff I come to MoA to learn. :-)

I wouldn't try googling for corroboration. I would be put on some sex offender blacklist in two milliseconds.

I never heard a word of this. Then again, I wouldn't be trying to hear it.

But, seriously, is this a genuine charge or fact-based slander. I never heard anything in the faintest way salacious about Muti.

Posted by: john brewster | Feb 8 2020 1:21 utc | 223

Bubbles #209

"The U.S. Attorney General said America should consider taking a controlling stake in European telecoms equipment makers Nokia and Ericsson to “blunt” Chinese firm Huawei’s “drive to domination.”


Let me think back 5-6 years and list the most significant national security crimes in the USA that should be investigated.

1- The Clinton Secretary of State emails kept on an unsecured server in her home cupboard shared on the same server as Clinton Foundation files. One the most significant breaches of national security in US history -

William Barr and Trump not investigating!

2- The Debbiw Wasserman Shultz affair with the Awan family IT company and their access to 12+ Dem Congress members and their IT communications INCLUDING every strategic committee they participated in. Another most significant breach of USA national security pus congressional security and the potential for blackmail and espionage at the highest level of US democratic machinery -

William Barr and Trump not investigating!

I see a pattern, perhaps others do too.

I say that William Barr and Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and all her then staff and Debbie Wasserman Shultz and all her then staff PLUS the trolls who would like to bury these major judicial issues as being a fatal threat to the USA democratic institutions.

These people have committed and continue to commit crimes more dangerous to the USA than John Walker Jr, and Benedict Arnold.


And someone above referred to Sanders as a 'Communist'.


Well ho ho ho. Get a sense of proportion. Better in bed with Sanders and his proposals to bring fairness and equality to the USA.

Barr is hiding behind any BS he can and so is Trump. They are colluding with the treasonous Clinton/Wasserman Shultz cbal.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 8 2020 3:39 utc | 224

john brewster #223

I wouldn't try g--gling for corroboration. I would be put on some sex offender blacklist in two milliseconds.

Easy: use Qwant or some other anon search engine, maybe Startpage. Avoid the g word wherever you write and don't give them any credit or reference.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 8 2020 3:46 utc | 225

"The U.S. Attorney General said America should consider taking a controlling stake in European telecoms equipment makers Nokia and Ericsson to “blunt” Chinese firm Huawei’s “drive to domination.”

William Barr’s comments come after President Donald Trump ... Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 7 2020 22:26 utc | 209

Qualis dominus talis et servus (how master, so the servant). Didn't Trump wish to nationalize oil here and there by "taking over"?

The mechanics of the operation may be tricky. Can an aircraft carrier group cross the shallowish Danish Straits? Even if possible, it would be difficult and perilous maneuvers. Since Norway has border with both Sweden and Finland, I would consider it as a launching pad. However. south and western Norway is rather far from Sweden and even further from Finland. So we are sending a US fleet to northern Norway. Luckily, there are regular military exercises there, and US troops took part a few times. The first time there were problems with uniforms. Surprisingly, winter uniforms that were well tested in Iraq do not perform as well on the far side of the Polar Circle. Russian press was full of mirth. The next year GPS did not work, with the fault attributed to Russian interference. How did Russian dare to disturb the exercise how to invade Russia, do they have any sense of fairness and shame? But others attributed it to the distribution of GPS orbits that favors lower latitudes and the impact of ionosphere storms that are regular near magnetic poles. So next time Americans will have proper unifoms AND Glonass. After a leisurely crossing of Scandinavian Mountains, US troops will have to face fiscal offices of the Swedish Kingdom and Republic of Finland. The outcome may disappoint optimists like Trump and Barr.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Feb 8 2020 4:04 utc | 226

karlof1 #221

That is mighty good article you linked to at Current Affairs dot org and I just had to post this extract:-

With the exception of unions, poor and working people’s movements have again and again lacked the resources to sustain themselves financially. This is why Bernie Sanders’ contributions are so incredible. Bernie has the most contributions of any candidate in 46 states, the most contributions ever by any presidential candidate at this point in the race, the most contributions from forklift drivers, from bartenders and waitresses, from teachers and nurses, and from active duty military, as well as the most contributions by far of any candidate overall. The largest employers of his contributors are low-wage mega-employers Walmart and Amazon. Sanders has actually out-fundraised all the billionaire-backed candidates, something many predicted confidently was impossible to achieve in U.S. politics. And financial contributions from poor and working people signal something important—they are “putting their money where their mouth is” and demonstrating a depth of support and enthusiasm.


To his enormous credit, Sanders has assembled a sustainable system for the future electioneering from the grass roots. I was totally unaware of the depth of this structure until reading this story. Clearly after two attempts at the Presidency, rolling out and refining this structure it will become a lethal weapon against the oligarchy and its treacherous rock spiders.

Barflies will like this. Circe might smile at the sound of it. I would shout the bar if this were a speach in realtime. Thanks karlof1

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 8 2020 4:09 utc | 227

Just watched the Democratic Candidate debate.

Buttigieg was not asked about funding for the app that helped to ruin the Iowa results. And Bernie didn't bring up the app or how the turmoil in Iowa disadvantaged him. Instead, he made a point of saying that ALL the candidates were affected/harmed by the Iowa mess.

Silence is consent.

Bernie has, once again, made it clear that helping the Democrats to beat Trump is his overwhelming concern. He will not fight against the Party. Even when the Party fights against him.

IMO it couldn't be more clear that Bernie is a Democratic Party partisan first and a socialist reformer second (a distant second).

We know where this leads. Progressives will once again be implored to vote for the lesser-evil in the General Election. Anyone that objects to doing so will be denounced as a racist Trump supporter or worse.

Only a genuine independent Movement will actually change anything. Don't listen to the Democracy Works! propagandists that claim that all-you-need is to pick the cleanest dirty shirt amongst the candidates. It's a lie.

Lies work best when people WANT to believe them.

And people WANT to believe the Democracy Works! because they don't want to admit that they were fooled and don't want to do the HARD WORK required to restore/safeguard democracy.

<> <> <> <> <>

PS Tom Steyer and Andrew Wang had interesting things to say. Steyer brought up race and the high cost of maintaining the military. Wang talked of re-focusing how we measure progress from financial indicators to human and social measures.

But these two are very unlikely to win the nomination. They are likely gunning for cabinet positions.

Steyer seems more like a traditional progressive but his being a billionaire makes that a difficult "sell". Yang seems to have a good grasp of how technology is changing society but his cerebral approach fails to connect with Americans that are stuck in their traditional way of viewing things.

IMO the core establishment candidates are: Biden, Klobachar, Buttigieg. Once of these is likely to get the nomination - and then lose to Trump.

I'm expecting that the billionaires (Steyer and Bloomberg) and socialists (Sanders, Warren) will go at it in a future debate. The billionaires will defend their social conscience and their ability to create jobs while berating the socialists that rely on OPM (Other People's Money) to pay for their programs. The Democratic Party wants Americans to know that Billionaires are good people and American capitalism works.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 4:58 utc | 228

Jackrabbit #228

I'm expecting that the billionaires (Steyer and Bloomberg) and socialists (Sanders, Warren) will go at it in a future debate.


Warren! a socialist. ERROR. I would expect that sort of ridiculous statement from an oligarchs stenographer or a Trotskyist. At this rate Jr you will kill us all with laughter. Your fightback against Bernie is FUBAR'ing your writing style.

Warren is no socialist, she is a lying fraud and you know it.

Bernie is a plain old garden variety Democratic Socialist backing a fair capitalist system with a progressive income tax spent of social services. That works well in many parts of the globe. The French union movement and yellow vests are fighting to preserve it and have been on the streets for year in defense of it. That is how much it means to the working class of France and ditto many other nations.

The world wont end with a bit of socialism to rebuild the rotting institutions of the USA.

Spend a bit of time flogging the lying, stealing, corrupt oligarchy for a change. You might be out of your depth at this level of analysis.

The CIA and Military have been guzzling the income taxes for too long and wasting it on BS. Call them out and respect that Bernie Sanders proposals are minor compared the their anarchy.


Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 8 2020 5:28 utc | 229

uncle tungsten @229: Warren!

Warren is generally regarded as being the closest candidate to Bernie's "democratic socialism", but she uses a more traditional progressive rhetoric.

She apes Sanders policies and touts her ability to raise money via small donations.

But she is deceptive in many ways. The most important being that her presence actually pulls progressive women away from Bernie. This makes it easier for Party hacks to attack Bernie's campaign as predominately male and white.

Warren MUST KNOW that she undermines Bernie and Bernie MUST KNOW that he is being undermined. It's just one of the many ways that the Party uses to ensure that Bernie will not be successful.

It was clear during today's debate. While Bernie stressed Party Unity, All of the other candidates stressed that any Presidential candidate has to have broad appeal. This is a direct attack on Bernie's "problem" with women and minorities and his "problem" that his socialism will not appeal to independents and moderate Republicans.

<> <> <> <> <>

Bernie is a plain old garden variety Democratic Socialist backing a fair capitalist system with a progressive income tax spent of social services.

Yup, even Sanders is not really a "socialist". He's a progressive reformer. Which is similar to how Warren presents herself.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 6:04 utc | 230

re Peter AU1 | Feb 7 2020 9:47 utc | 137
I'm not familiar with the Yulenbu community - where is it? If it is as I suspect in WA, I'm not that suprised to hear Yolgnu may not be adhering to traditional culture, or they may as you said have different customs. Altho I hafta say that back before balanda fronted there was no dividing line between WA & NT and the northern coastal communities were often synched on a lot of stuff.
However the indigenous people of WA faced a very different set of problems than the NT mobs did. Territory blackfellas had been under federal control in the years leading up to Territory self government in 1978 which was limited in a lot of ways but real for Yolgnu.

A bloke by the name of Nugget Coombs had the ear of and sway over federal politicians and public servants. I never met the chap but I wish I had, my elder brother had & said even in his 80's Nugget was a really dynamic chap who knew how to get people thinking. Nugget had sleazy old Malcolm Fraser lying awake at night worrying about the future for Australia's indigenous people.

Anyway the thing is that thanks to circumstance apart from a few 'missions' granted the Catholic & Uniting churches back in the day when the Territory was being mal-administered by SA, the NT indigenous population didn't cop much interference. Up until 'orrible John Howard abolished it indigenous communities had the power to stop anyone (even police investigating whatever) from entering their community.
We used to have field officers from Kununarra come to our planning sessions from time to time and they had a very different set of problems to contend with than our mob had.
Many of the WA issues seemed to me to have arisen from too much contact with too many greedy whitefellas. Even when tribal or community councils barred alcohol, there would be greedy whitefellas rum running and the WA cops made little effort to catch 'em and put a stop to it, whereas in the Territory running booze to a dry community was up there with killing a crocodile, ie much worse than killing a human.

Urban indigenous people as opposed to remote mobs still living the traditional lifestyle face completely different issues. As far as I am concerned if any were sub-letting their houses I understand. Especially if you try to account for the plethora of different ways the likes of Laing Hancock & his large/lard arsed daughter ripped off the indigenous population of WA. Yeah people argue it keeps someone out of the house, but if the state and federal governments had built sufficient indigenous housing there wouldn't be a problem at all. They don't do that, instead they beat up stories about subletting to justify not keeping their undertakings.

here's a first a post disappeared and I actually have a txt dupe. Like everyone else I guess I have dupes of post that published but usually the ones that fall into the black hole I don't. I'm sure b will post it if he sees it in the spam trap but I shall post it again so Bernhard you don't need to. One more thing, the sun is well over the yardarm in Aotearoa right noe, but it wasn't when I made original post

Posted by: A User | Feb 8 2020 6:07 utc | 231

Jackrabbit #230

Bernie is a plain old garden variety Democratic Socialist backing a fair capitalist system with a progressive income tax spent of social services.

Yup, even Sanders is not really a "socialist". He's a progressive reformer. Which is similar to how Warren presents herself.


I have no problem with Bernie being "a plain old garden variety Democratic Socialist backing a fair capitalist system" because were a radical anti capitalist he simply would not be where he is. Bernie Sanders is a candidate of these times. In a parallel universe where Rachel Maddow grazes he must be a radical com. But the USA people are in Bernie Sanders universe and he in theirs. Bernie believes in the wisdom and rights of the working class and more importantly he speaks into where they are listening.

Not like Warren who addresses the privileged classes, the hip and the wankers. Warren is no member of the working class, no socialist in any way shape or form and to lump her craven dishonesty with Sanders is insincere or just plain crass propaganda. Warren only wants to regulate Wall Street she says. I heard Obummer whisper weasel words too before he was elected TWICE.

At least you point out that you get what Bernie Sanders is saying but don't flog the man because he uses jargon that you associate with other radical leftist positions. Bernie is too smart to tie himself up with weasel words, he calls a spade by its old fashioned name - a spade. Warren would call it an instrument of agricultural regulation or an equal opportunity heritage device.

What is the vital take-away with Bernie Sanders? He is sincere. He means what he says, he avoids hyperbole. He will likely flog the challengers into a pulp at this rate.

I am critical of his softness when I would use harder, condemning language - ok - but I cant walk in his shoes or know the subtle nuance of the debaters and players surrounding him.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 8 2020 7:14 utc | 232

@156

In the case of Corbyn, the evidence of fraud via the system is there, but no one is really talking about it here in the UK quick summary (postal votes doubled from 19% during 2017 GE to 38% during 2019 GE)

Which leads me on to Sanders. I can't begin to claim to know much about American politics, but I do know this.

After following the Corbyn effect, it is obvious that if Sanders is legit, then he has absolutely zero chance. The British establishment went into lockstep and attacked him endlessly, for everything. His replacement, Keir Starmer (Trilateral commission etc) _will_ win, and Labour will return to to Tory lite or the US style bipartisanship.

The US establishment will do the exact same thing (already seen accusations of anti semitism toward Sanders, not sure if it stuck).

The only success of the Corbyn experiment is that Labour is totally unfit for purposes and not a viable option. What will the Sanders experiment prove? He's certainly a strange one considering he runs as independent.

Posted by: Some Random Passerby | Feb 8 2020 10:55 utc | 233

Thanks for the links to Current Affairs. It is refreshing to read this type of content that should be mainstream journalism. I am beginning to lose my fear of Bernie.

His message of making it easy for unions to organize is one that is dear to my heart. It will play well in the battleground states.

Posted by: dltravers | Feb 8 2020 11:22 utc | 234

Elizabeth Warren as socialist is complete rubbish. By her own account she is and has always been a Republican. She only abandoned her true love because they kept moving to the right. If you are happy with the Republicanism of GHW Bush or Ronald Reagan then you fit in fine with Warren. At her most radical she has called for some detail changes to the retail services of banks. The banks are happy to have you focus on trivia while they rob you with both fists.

Anybody who was ever connected to formal socialist parties in US or was curious about them or had friends who got sucked into that knows that since beginning they have all been operated by the intellligence services. That CPUSA was a government job is now simply admitted. If Bernie spent decades of his life associated with that muck he was either very dumb or was an agent himself. My guess would be he was a witless dupe thinking mostly about his own career. Very hard to look at his words or actions and find more than a few traces of anything left of center. He currently employs the CIA to advise him about foreign affairs. But if you are on a scale where Warren is a foaming at the mouth communist anarchist then of course Sanders is a leftist.

Posted by: oldhippie | Feb 8 2020 11:26 utc | 235

The DNC would rather have Trump or Pence than Sanders. It is as plain as daylight. Iowa was the proof in the pudding. Sanders is the most popular politician in the USA> Gabbard is the most populsr piltician on both spectrums. Be it the LIberals or the old school conservatives. In fact independant polling shows Gabbard would beat Trump hands down for her only policy of definate distinction in foreign policy "Stop the wars and bring the troops home. " Punto e basta" but we l know it is all a game for western democracies have died and the finanialisation of our economies has introduced a Wieer Mier rpublic situation in the west debt and asset inflation.

Posted by: falcemartello | Feb 8 2020 11:30 utc | 236

oh so the hollywood 10 were all cia dupes. crock of crap. sanders is a new deal democrat, nothing more, nothing less, with the good and bad that that implies. to somehow imply the new deal is a cia concept (hint, it didn't exist then, even the oss didn't exist then) is witless historical revisionism. the new deal is miles better than what we have today, and sanders the only way to get adequate healthcare for a large majority of americans. medicare 4 all, some actual meaningful action against fossil fuel companies (those poor powerless victims of science), free or low cost college--these are not intel community backed positions, and those policies would help millions. they would help everybody in the u.s.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 8 2020 11:33 utc | 237

@24

Have you ever been to North Carolina (which would be correctly abbreviated NC)? Or lived in any mountainous area? Localized weather events happen all the time in such terrain.

Posted by: Jonathan Lester | Feb 8 2020 14:15 utc | 238

@Bubbles #217
I agree Benghazi was partisan, but that doesn't change the Trump impeachment.
All you've done is underscore the childish, inbred and elitist nature of American politics - all of it.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2020 14:15 utc | 239

@pretzelattack #237
I agree health care in the US is the single biggest problem; Sanders' position on Medicare For All is the only part of his platform I consider important and relevant.
I actually have no problem with regulation of fossil fuel companies - the difference is that I differentiate between regulation based on absolute societal need vs. regulation based on propagandistic fantasy.
Among other things: the biggest problem with corporations - all of them, particularly including the NGOs - is taxes (specifically, lack of taxes).
I would support fixing the transfer pricing legal tax evasion scheme. The oil companies in particular are guilty of this, but no more than Apple, Amazon, Google and the other tech companies.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2020 14:20 utc | 240

@237

In case you never noticed Hollywood is in the business of selling you stories. Some of us let them write directly on our brains.
Is the story sold to you about the Hollywood 10 a crock of crap? Yes, it is.

I couldn't possibly sit through a televised debate but still might watch the clips. Seeing Bernie accept The Embrace from Creepy Uncle Joe, and watching how Bernie just beamed, pretty sure Bernie knows what is in the script for him. And he likes the script. I am not in The Club and have not read the script. Could it include a few specks of nice New Deal goodies for the little people? It could. But these guys are all chums, best of friends, and they win every time.

Posted by: oldhippie | Feb 8 2020 14:35 utc | 241

oldhippie @ 235

Anybody who was ever connected to formal socialist parties in US or was curious about them or had friends who got sucked into that knows that since beginning they have all been operated by the intelligence services.

Not so much operated by but definitely infiltrated by. I have had the pleasure to know and work with some of them in my area in times past and they are not dupes by any means. They are true believers and have paid a price for their beliefs. There are some informers mixed in at all levels.

There was an article posted about how McCarthyism was used to take out the new deal leadership after the death of Roosevelt as he had assembled quite a collection of progressive reformers around him in high positions.

They were pushed out post McCarthy in the red scare. My dad was accused of being a commie just because he was a union organizer. The terror trickled down even into small cities throughout the country.

After they were done with McCarthy they burned him and ran Eisenhower to build the MIC and enshrine it in our society. Previously Truman enshrined the National Security state, a move he alter regretted and wrote an op ed about that pissed of that evil Wall Street Nazi statesman Allan Dulles.

During this time the Zionists Evangelical base was being built thru people like Billy Graham and others.

Kennedy tried to change directions and pull out of Vietnam with NSAM 263 and a few others. That policy was reversed immediately upon his death. All the leaders who opposed Vietnam died of bullets to the vital parts in the '60's.

Nixon was the desired candidate and he eventually won and bombed Indochina to pieces. He wanted to use nukes. It is interesting to note that Nixon was pushed into congress by the Dulles and the Bushes to take out a very progressive congressman in California named Jerry Voorhis. It was a vicious anticommunist vs. a true anti wall street progressive.

During this time the Zionists Evangelical base was being built thru people like Billy Graham and others.

Nixon was taken out in an intelligence operation called Watergate. There were sure to take out his VP as well and that placed Warren Commission member Jerry Ford in power who in turn teed up the NEOCONS. Reagan walked in with the evangelicals, the NEOCONS and the corporatism in full bloom. Reagan was almost assassinated a few months into his administration by a friend of the Bushes as Bush was supposed to win.

Just a thumbnail.


Posted by: dltravers | Feb 8 2020 14:55 utc | 242

@dltravers #242
An interesting view of history - particularly since Nixon is who withdrew from Vietnam starting in 1969 - after being elected in 1968. It was LBJ who approved Rolling Thunder - the North Vietnam heavy bombing.
And it was Nixon who started relations with China.
Just curious how you reconcile Nixon as deep state/wall street errand boy with ending the US Vietnam experiment and taking the US off the gold standard.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2020 16:02 utc | 243

uncle tungsten @232

I'm not trying to pretend that Warren is a socialist - it's Warren that's pretending that she is an progressive alternative to Bernie.

I'm pointing out how the deck is stacked against Bernie.

  • Buttigieg draws the gay vote.

  • Warren draws women.

  • Steyer seems to be using his money to draw the black vote. He's buying endorsements from black politicians. He was the first to bring up race. And he made a point of his support for reparations.

  • And the establishment candidates harp on "electability".

Bernie may really really believe in his "message" - he makes a forceful case (which I believe is 100% correct!) - but he's not fighting to WIN when he is silent about election-rigging and how his campaign was disadvantaged by it (even if he is ultimately determined to be the winner in Iowa).

Why are we pinning our future on a savoir instead of forming and joining Movements?
The progressive left has been played for three decades. It's long-past time that we WAKE UP and see that the Democratic Party is a dead-end for progressives.

Especially now now when we are on the brink of another war and the popping of another financial bubble.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 16:08 utc | 244

@Jackrabbit #244
What gay vote? The LGBTQ population is, maybe, 1% of the population. Even if you add a multiple of sympathizers, they don't matter. Compare, for example, with the 5.6% of Asians in the US.
As for women - I don't know if I agree that Warren = women's vote either. Trump did just fine with white women, in no small part because HRC is simply unlikeable. Warren is not much better in the charisma department.
And Steyer = black - what? He's the billionaire "enviro" candidate.

The real issue is that the entire Democrat presidential candidate list is less diverse than the 2016 Republican candidate list and has more billionaires.

I do agree machinations are in the works - but that's more Bloomberg than anything else.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2020 16:19 utc | 245

- Buttigieg & Sanders seems to be leading in New Hampshire and it seems Biden is "losing steam" over there.

Posted by: Willy2 | Feb 8 2020 17:37 utc | 246

c1ue @ 243

Nixon is who withdrew from Vietnam starting in 1969...It was LBJ who approved Rolling Thunder - the North Vietnam heavy bombing.
And it was Nixon who started relations with China.
Just curious how you reconcile Nixon as deep state/wall street errand boy with ending the US Vietnam experiment and taking the US off the gold standard.

Just like today, the DS had a piece of all the candidates.

Let's start with Nixon's main agent, Henry Fucking Kissinger, who was up to his eyeballs in Rockefeller land. Kissinger (and therefore Nixon) was also very much supportive of Israel, especially in the 72 war. So, its not like Nixon was fighting the DS on all fronts. Only some.

Its interesting you remember Rolling Thunder, but you don't rememeber the Christmas Bombings of Hanoi (Operation Linebacker) in 1972.

As for withdrawing from Vietnam, he said so in 1968; but when he got into office, he promptly widened the war by openly invading Laos (Operation Lam Son) in 1969, and then secretly invading Cambodia in 1970. Then Linebacker in 1972. After his first term, the war was wider than ever.

In case you didn't live through it, the Deep State was very divided at that time (shorthand: yankees vs cowboys). Part of the DS wanted to end the war because it was killing our economy. That's why Nixon had to go off gold. Again, at least some part of the DS would have been in agreement with Nixon's goals, if not his means.


Posted by: john brewster | Feb 8 2020 17:46 utc | 247

c1ue @245: The LGBTQ population is, maybe, 1% of the population.

By most assessments, the LGBT population is more than 5% of the population and most LGBT will be Democratic Party voters. If Democratic Party membership is a third of the population, then LGBT primary voters could easily be 15%. They are very committed to the LGBT Movement and very vocal, though some of them would prefer to vote for a women or a black candidate instead of a gay man.

Many women ardently want to see a women President. Many LGBT want to support their Movement in every way that they can. Black voters will gravitate to whomever they believe supports their empowerment (a cause that billionaire white-guy Steyer has taken up - LOL).

Bernie's 'message' against oligarchs cuts across all these groups but Bernie has to prove, over and over again, why his economic inequality issues are MORE IMPORTANT than supporting candidates that cater to the community that they most identify with. The most direct way, and almost certainly the most effective way, for Bernie to do that is to decry Democratic Party identity politics that play on divisions to the benefit of the establishment. Bernie hasn't done that. His joining in calls for Party unity against Trump undermines the Movement he claims to lead.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 17:56 utc | 248

@Jackrabbit #248
Sorry, your numbers aren't credible. When even the Gallup poll says 4.5% identify as LGBTQ (and Gallup is extremely liberal leaning), the real numbers are far, far lower.
Secondly, even the 4.5% number has increased over 1.0% in 6 years. Right, that's believable.
Then let's look at the LGBTQ demographics: how many of these are conservative, politically? 10%? less? How does it matter if they vote Democrat because they black, gay, bisexual, Asian, Hispanic or all of the above?
Let's compare with the 22% who are Catholic.
Color me unconvinced.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2020 18:02 utc | 249

Buttigieg cannot defeat Trump for these reasons:

1. He's a neoohyte and his inexperience really shows when he gets into policy at the debates and in his speaking events in the primaries. Trump will trounce him.

2. He takes money from Zionists/ billionaires and pacs. Big turn off for the Left.

3. He's a Neoliberal. His foreign policy views are interventionist and centrist Zionist. He's on record as such, but sometimes he pretends he's left of centre.

4. The black community don't trust him with good reason given his negative history with blacks as a small-town mayor. He has zero appeal with Latinos.

5. OF COURSE HE'S GAY AND MARRIED TO A MAN whom he naturally, affectionately went to hug after the debate. That's okay when you're in deep liberal white country, but it ain't gonna fly with blacks, latinos, the Appalachia states and the South! GET REAL.

6. He's NOT AUTHENTIC. He made sleazy moves; he's calculating in a sneaky way, yes, like a RAT. He sounds very rehearsed and tries to emulate Obama, and it comes off as FAKE. Again, Trump will eat his lunch, mock him in every way, and have no problem defeating him.

SANDERS WON THE DEBATE IN NH. He's leading Buttigieg by 7 pts. in a poll that just came out, so watch for Hillary to come out from under her rock again from now until Tuesday's primary.

FYI Tulsi is just behind Warren in NH. She's beating Klobuchar AND Bloomberg 6% to 3%!

About a week ago, Bernie was asked if he would name a VP before the Convention, and he said probably. When asked if he would consider a woman, he said yes, but he wants someone with his world view.

Could this be a hint that Tulsi is in the running???

She's very unpopular with Neolibs, but maybe she can make up the difference with Indies.

I'm starting to think that maybe Sanders/Gabbard could be a winner. I hope whatever choice he makes isn't a drag on his electability because SANDERS CAN DEFEAT TRUMP.

Also in today's poll Sanders passed Biden on electability and Buttigieg is 3rd.

SANDERS IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE THAT CAN DEFEAT TRUMP.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 8 2020 18:07 utc | 250

"OMG!!! SANDERS IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE THAT CAN DEFEAT TRUMP!!! WTF!!!" --Circe @250

True enough, but you are not doing him any favors with this shrill hysteria. Take a cue from Sanders himself and focus on the constructive policies that he stands for. Help Sanders put distance between himself and the negative campaigning. Stop associating him with Trump. Talk about the good things that Sanders intends to pursue and stop talking about him like he is a blunt instrument to destroy your own personal imaginary demons.

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 8 2020 19:52 utc | 251

SANDERS IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE THAT CAN DEFEAT TRUMP.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 8 2020 18:07 utc | 250


I beg to differ from yours and William's conclusion, I would bet $20 Bloomberg would beat trump. Not that I would prefer Bloomberg, just being realistic. He ticks so many of the necessary boxes in the American Citizens United political reality.

That said, William offers good advice. Keeping in mind tho, the likely impact of the bar flies thoughts and passions on the outcome in November. The outcome of the Greatest Show on Earth, at this moment in time as we can foresee it thru our computer screens. An unpredictable grifter in the Whitehouse who regularly succumbs to child like impulses with advisors of dubious quality makes reading the the cards that much more difficult.

Meanwhile Russia's Foreign currency reserves have recovered pretty much all that was lost after the US sanctions assault following it's putsch in Ukraine. Vlad the Autocrat is indeed an artful dodger and a much better checker player than trump. Cool in public too, kinda like the Fonz )

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 8 2020 20:20 utc | 252

c1ue @249

5% is not an unreasonable estimate.

50% of those identifying as LGBT are registered Democrats and the Democrats traditionally get about 3/4 of the LGBT vote in Presidential elections.

Democratic Party memberships is about 45 million - 30% of registered voters (I had over-estimated at 1/3rd).

Using only a 4% number, means that 2% are registered Democrats and thus 6.6% of the Party (2% * 3.3). But they are much more active than most Party members and would be expected to be especially so for the first openly gay candidate for President. In fact, there are a number of Reddit messages from LGBT people saying that they have registered and/or switched Party affiliation to support Buttigieg.

That means LGBT Democratic Primary voters could be as low as 6.6% (giving NO weight to the traditionally greater activity level and the excitement for the first openly gay Presidential candidate) to as much as 15%. I think 10% is more than reasonable as an estimate.

That is 10 times more than what you suggested and a bit less than what I originally suggested (because I hadn't adjusted for percentage of LGBT membership in the Democratic Party). The actual number will vary from state to state.

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

In a poll just before the Iowa Caucus, Morning Consult (a survey/polling organization) found that 12 percent of the 17,836 voters who indicated they may vote in the Democratic primary or caucus in their state identified as LGBTQ.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 20:26 utc | 253

Occasionally I wondered what the Q in LGBTQ represented and as there's a discussion above involving the term I looked it up. I wasn't all that curious to know but I have nothing better to do at the moment.

I found this;


"Queer is anything that exists outside of the dominant narrative," Cleo Anderson, a 26-year-old intern at GLAAD, a prominent gay rights group, told USA TODAY Network. Anderson identifies with the term.

"Queer means that you are one of those letters (LGBT), but you could be all of those letters and not knowing is OK," she said.

Minorities seem to identify with the term in particular because it also can be used to convey the nuances of race and culture and how that intersects with an individual's gender identity and sexual orientation, she said."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/06/01/lgbtq-questioning-queer-meaning/26925563/


Maybe they should just stick with the LGBT thing, people understand what that means. Adding a Q when even proponents of the 'movement' can't agree on a definition, projects an image of people who don't even understand themselves or their desired goals. A discombobulated collection of people who can't focus properly yet demand the vast majority respect their choices, undefined and erratic as they may be.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 8 2020 21:17 utc | 254

The gay community need to put principle over their selfish ambition. Pete Buttigieg is gay, but he won't deliver on issues that concern the Left as a whole. He's a Neoliberal and although he touts being an outsider, in fact, he's establishment because he takes money from Zionist billionaires, therefore he will be compromised in his loyalty to the will of the people. More importantly, he can not defeat Trump. It's just too obvious that he's not genuine, he sounds too rehearsed, he's a neophyte and Trump will trounce him. Trump will destroy him like he did with little Marco in 2016, and it'll be easier. Defeating Trump and getting big money out of politics are critical to implementing essential policy like Green New Deal, diplomacy such as reinstating JCPOA, reducing military spending, taxing the rich, universal healthcare, etc. and Buttigieg who took billionaires' money is indebted to them.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 8 2020 21:28 utc | 255

Circe @255: The gay community need to put principle over their selfish ambition.

Maybe you missed my comment @245:

Many women ardently want to see a women President. Many LGBT want to support their Movement in every way that they can. Black voters will gravitate to whomever they believe supports their empowerment (a cause that billionaire white-guy Steyer has taken up - LOL).

Bernie's 'message' against oligarchs cuts across all these groups but Bernie has to prove, over and over again, why confronting economic inequality is MORE IMPORTANT than supporting candidates that cater to the community that they most identify with. The most direct way, and almost certainly the most effective way, for Bernie to do that is to decry Democratic Party identity politics that play on divisions to the benefit of the establishment. Bernie hasn't done that. His joining in calls for Party unity against Trump undermines the Movement he claims to lead.

And from @244:

Why are we pinning our future on a savoir instead of forming and joining Movements?
The progressive left has been played for three decades. It's long-past time that we WAKE UP and see that the Democratic Party is a dead-end for progressives.

Especially now now when we are on the brink of another war and the popping of another financial bubble.


!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 21:36 utc | 256

Steve Bannon fights for Bernie more than Bernie fights for himself (ht ZeroHedge)

Bannon denounces the Iowa "debacle" and Democratic Party bias against Sanders.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 21:39 utc | 257

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 8 2020 21:39 utc | 257

Do you consider yourself politically astute?

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 8 2020 21:52 utc | 258

" Bernie has to prove, over and over again, why confronting economic inequality is MORE IMPORTANT than supporting candidates that cater to the community that they most identify with. "

That might be easier if folks were willing to think about and talk about hierarchy. Profession, education, bank account size, religion, sex, age, skin tone, etc. determine where each person is located in the matrix of hierarchy. All those various factors dilute and distract from the importance of social class. To Our Dear Leaders, that is a feature, not a bug.

Even within what is left of the "labor movement" there is a hierarchy. The old AFL was known as "the aristocracy of labor" and AFL members considered themselves superior to other workers, while the IWW promoted "One Big Union" and included women, immigrants, and workers of all skill levels.

I hope someday that workers will direct their ire at the top of the hierarchy instead of jostling among themselves to get a slightly bigger cookie. That won't happen if no one will talk about it.

I don't know why all the focus on Mayor Buttigig's private time. I certainly don't care and don't want to know who he has sex with or what kind of genitals he has under his clothes. Why do people think it's so important to shout from the roof tops who they sleep with and what's under their clothes and whether their genitals have been altered?

I remember when people used to talk about "keeping up with the Jones" and measuring their social status by their possessions. Perhaps that concept is being replaced with "keeping up with the Jones' genitals". I don't think that is progress...

Posted by: Trailer Trash | Feb 8 2020 23:08 utc | 259

@Jackrabbit #253
So you're asserting that the LGBTQ members are a major part of the Democrat party, and that they are more active, and that they therefore make a disproportionate impact.
I can agree with all 3 of these statements, but note that none of these 3 statements actually mean they have an impact overall.
After all, the Democrat party has traditionally owned the African American vote. That minority is 12.4% of the population and they are far greater uniformity in supporting the Democrats - 88% voted for HRC in 2016, as we all know how that turned out.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2020 23:40 utc | 260

c1ue @260: 88% voted for HRC in 2016

That's misleading. A good part of the reason HRC lost is that the number of black voters in 2016 was millions less than the number in 2008 (IIRC, it was at least 2 million less).

Black voters were energized by Obama's candidacy (the "first black President") and Hillary took the black vote for granted in 2016.

This just illustrates what I've been saying. Identity politics causes divisions that Sanders has to overcome. It's difficult to effectively overcome those divisions without taking on the Democratic Party itself - as it currently THRIVES on identity politics.

TO WIN Sanders must:

  1. call out election shenanigans that disadvantage him (embarrass the Party);
  2. decry identity politics (spotlight the Party's systemic gaming and failure);

I don't see him doing either.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 9 2020 0:05 utc | 261

Bubbles @258: Do you consider yourself politically astute?

Do you consider yourself rational?

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 9 2020 0:06 utc | 262

ONCE AGAIN

I'm not advocating AGAINST Bernie, I'm advocating FOR Movements.

People want to believe that Bernie is a savior and that nothing more than a simple vote is necessary.

That's deluded. The history of the last 30 years indicates that we can't rely on any savior. Obama's CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN was a lie. Bernie's candidacy in 2016 was also a lie (he acted as sheepdog; he wasn't actually in it to win).

So we can HOPE that Bernie has changed but the Party certainly has not.

We should expect that Bernie will lose (even if he sincerely tries to win) and we should expect that dembot shills will implore us to support the lesser-evil Democratic candidate. They may point to some silver-lining like popular VP candidate (Tulsi, for example). But it'll still be lesser-evilism.

Only genuine, independent Movements offer a sure way to effect change. The establishment 'wins' as long as they can forestall such Movements.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 9 2020 0:32 utc | 263

Matt Taibbi with the proper historical perspective (which comes at the end of his article):

Iowa was the real “beginning of the end,” to a story that began in the Eighties.

Following the wipeout 49-state, 512 electoral vote loss of Walter Mondale in 1984, demoralized Democratic Party leaders felt marooned, between the awesome fundraising power of Ronald Reagan Republicans and the irritant liberalism of Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition.

To get out, they sold out. A vanguard of wonks like Al From and Senator Sam Nunn at the Democratic Leadership Council devised a marketing plan: two middle fingers, one in each direction.

They would steal financial support for Republicans by out-whoring them on economic policy. The left would be kneecapped via “triangulation,” i.e. the public reveling in the lack of choices for poor, minority, and liberal voters.

Young pols like Bill Clinton learned they could screw constituents and still collect from them. What would they do, vote Republican? Better, the parental scolding of disobedient minorities like Sister Souljah combined with the occasional act of mindless sadism (like the execution of mentally ill Ricky Ray Rector) impressed white “swing” voters, making “triangulation” a huge win-win — more traction in red states, less whining from lefty malcontents.

Democrats went on to systematically rat-fuck every group in their tent: labor, the poor, minorities, soldiers, criminal defendants, students, homeowners, media consumers, environmentalists, civil libertarians, pensioners - everyone but donors.

They didn’t just fail to defend groups, but built monuments to their betrayal. They broke labor’s back with NAFTA, embraced mass incarceration with the 1994 Crime Bill, and ushered in the Clear Channel era with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Welfare Reform in 1996 was a sellout of the Great Society (but hey, at least Clinton kept the White House that year!). The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act gave us Too Big to Fail. Shock Therapy was the Peace Corps in reverse. They sold out on Iraq, expanded Dick Cheney’s secret regime of surveillance and assassination, gave Wall Street a walk after 2008, then lost an unlosable election, which they blamed on a conspiracy of leftist intellectuals and Russians.

Still, if you were black, female, gay, an immigrant, a union member, college-educated, had been to Europe, owned a Paul Klee print or knew Miller’s Crossing was a good movie, you owed Democrats your vote. Why? Because they “got things done.”

Now they’re not getting much done, except a lost reputation. That feat at least, they earned.

To paraphrase the Joker:

What do you get when you cross a political party that’s sold out for decades, with an electorate that’s been abandoned and treated like trash?

Answer:

What you fucking deserve!

Yet even this doesn't capture the full extent of 'Third Way' lies and deceit. And the incredible corruption at all levels.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 9 2020 1:16 utc | 264

karlof1 #171

Bernie fans who believe in change and creating a brand new day watch this from Kyle Kulinski at Secular Talk.

--- Biden abandons and flies away and Warren cancels adds in later primaries. Meanwhile elsewhere there is a chorus growing for Perez resignation.

Circe watch this and put on a smile. The rats are leaving.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 9 2020 2:42 utc | 265

Siotu #197

Whoever wins the Presidential election is not really relevant at this point.


What a pile of negative, defeatist tripe.

The world needs a break from the oligarchy, a relief from the iron grip of the mob that tries to drive the USA, the vultures that pick at the body of the living.

The people that yearn for a simple sufficiency to enable comfort and survival need this victory and the next and the next. The people desperately need to purge the political and financial class of the gangster parasites that would confuse them, dominate them, steal from them.

The BS negativism plus identity politics distraction that you and others spout here is a waste of your time and effort as many people have woken up to their responsibility and opportunity to act now.

Oddly enough it has been Trump that called out the lying media and reinforced the message that the lying MSM can be trash canned. Bernie has trash canned the oligarchs message and the people can see that taxes can be spent on people services not killing services.

It ain't revolutionary but the shell of the dominant paradigm is broken and here is the opportunity to cripple the instruments of domination and servitude that have been woven since 1945 or whenever.

Whoever wins this and every other Presidential election is critical to the wellbeing of USians and millions throughout the world. If you don't believe that take a journey to Indonesia and there you will be confronted with the fate of people that have had their future stolen by the oligarchy.

IF Bernie wins he can call out the thieves and name and frame the legislation that he needs the Congress to deliver for the USA. If the Congress cant deliver to his agenda they will be thrown out two years later. There lies the power of Bernies victory in 2020.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 9 2020 3:03 utc | 266

So tonight there was a big Democratic event in NH that was shown on C-SPAN and all the Democratic candidates showed up. The line-up was something like this order: Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Biden, Yang, Steyer, Warren, Sanders, Bennett, Patrick and last but definitely, not least Gabbard.

Every candidate had a section of the arena for their supporters. The loudest were the Warren and Sanders supporters. When Bernie walked into the Arena he got massive cheers and applause; not much from Warren's people. However, as his speech went on, he started winning some of them over and some stood and cheered with the Bernie folks others didn't. Let's not forget that in the Iowa caucuses when Warren failed to reach 15% in some precincts her supporters were given a choice to leave or support another candidate and half went to Bernie; the other half to Buttigieg.

It was all very nice, but what wasn't nice at all was that Tulsi had to follow Deval Patrick who practically emptied the arena and Tulsi was left only with her people, many Sanders supporters who waited for her speech and some Warren supporters who barely clapped (not nice). But what I found interesting is that some of Bernie's supporters held Sanders and Tulsi signs together. Tulsi is sadly not going to make it, but I'm hoping Sanders, if he wins, will bring her into his team in some important capacity. VP? Whoever he chooses as VP must be prepared to confront Pence and clean his clock. BERNIE'S VP WILL HAVE TO DEBATE PENCE. There's stagecraft involved; that person must be prepared to to stand up to Pence. Now if he criticizes her meeting with Assad; she can reply: How is that different from meeting with KIM who sent love letters to Trump?

▪▪▪▪▪▪▪

NOW THIS. WHY ARE ALL THESE BILLIONAIRES (A FEW WHO ALSO CURIOUSLY SUPPORTED TRUMP AND REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS) SUPPORTING BUTTIGIEG?

40 billionaires-backing-pete-buttigieg

Why would they support a candidate who would lose against Trump?

BECAUSE THOSE BILLIONAIRES WANT TRUMP TO GET A SECOND TERM.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 9 2020 4:29 utc | 267

Bubbles @258: Do you consider yourself politically astute?

Do you consider yourself rational?

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 9 2020 0:06 utc | 262


I'll conclude the answer is a no then given you chose to ask a question rather than answer one. Simple enough one at that.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 9 2020 4:48 utc | 268

Is Perez a Putin puppet?Could Buttigieg be a Bolshevik rat in the ranks?

I am sure Rachel Maddow is thinking these things as she prepares her next bout of hysterics in front of the cameras. That is how pathetic these apologists for the kleptocracy are in my observation.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 9 2020 5:26 utc | 269

Jackrabbit #263

Bernie is the movement for now.

That will do for 2020.

Isn't that achievable in your imagination? Why seek another identity when that is the name of desire and the name of a turn for the better.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Feb 9 2020 5:35 utc | 270

Bubbles @268

You asked to indirectly criticism my comment that said that Bannon was fighting for Bernie more than Bernie was fighting. The idea being that discord in the Democratic Party is advantageous for the Republicans.

But we've seen that partisan bickering only bolsters the establishment.

We can't rely ONLY on Bernie or anyone else to be our savior.

Why can't we have an independent Movement AND Bernie?

See my comment @263 and @264 for more.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 9 2020 5:43 utc | 271

uncle tungsten @270: Bernie is the movement for now.

So at what point do we look for solutions beyond Bernie? Wait for the Convention?

That will be too late.

The Democratic Party establishment has outsmarted the people for nearly three decades. Many people (not just me) say that is its purpose - to defeat the change that people really want. We should just forget about that history? It's "cynical" and unpopular to make note of this?

Why can't we have an independent Movement AND support Bernie? Has Bernie proven himself so completely that we can merely trust in his divine goodness? IMO the answer is: "no, he hasn't." I've described why that's so. And you've linked to a excellent post that urges caution about Bernie.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 9 2020 5:58 utc | 272

Caitlin Johnstone implies that a Bernie campaign openly destroyed by the Democratic Party would be far more useful for the future than a successful run in 2020. I sure agree with that, if it means it finally wrenches all these people from their demented addiction to the Party.

Bernie’s most important job is being a very reasonable thing that the people want and the establishment refuses to let them have. Force them to kill his run openly and you can wake more people up to the reality that they’re not living in the kind of nation they thought they were.

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/02/09/big-buttigieg-bloviations-notes-from-the-edge-of-the-narrative-matrix/

Posted by: Russ | Feb 9 2020 6:11 utc | 273

@273Russ

I disagree with her. I want Bernie to one day leave this earth a man beloved by many people for what he did to change their lives for the better, than a broken man who was twice denied his heartfelt ambition and stopped from making America and the world a better place.

Many people are already awake and I'm hoping that it doesn't come down to that and if Bernie gets the majority of state delegates, they'll stop the establisment from stealing the nomination by organizing a petition stating some kind of ultimatum like: Either you rightfully give Bernie Sanders the nomination, or millions of us will abandon and destroy the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 9 2020 6:44 utc | 274

Posted by: Circe | Feb 9 2020 6:44 utc | 274

"stating some kind of ultimatum like: Either you rightfully give Bernie Sanders the nomination, or millions of us will abandon and destroy the Democratic Party."

Now that might be interesting, though of course they'd have to follow through.

Of course, given Sanders's unilateral no-conditions pledge to support the Democrat nominee (same pledge as he gave and kept in 2016), these destroyers of the Democratic Party would have to do it without the support of Sanders himself, and probably against his disapproval. That doesn't seem consistent with their usual adulation.

Posted by: Russ | Feb 9 2020 6:53 utc | 275

@272 JR

The Democratic Party establishment has outsmarted the people for nearly three decades. Many people (not just me) say that is its purpose - to defeat the change that people really want. We should just forget about that history? It's "cynical" and unpopular to make note of this?

This neatly sums up the UK Labour party.

Posted by: Some Random Passerby | Feb 9 2020 8:13 utc | 276

they wouldn't have to kill his run openly if he were a sheepdog, russ. he would be perfectly acceptable, maybe a few cosmetic changes, then a hard turn to the right like obama.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Feb 9 2020 9:37 utc | 277

Just because the DNC has long seen Sanders as a very convenient prop in the Senate (which is why they've always withheld support from bona fide Vermont Democrats who wanted to run for that seat) doesn't mean they wanted him to run for or become president, even if it is on a self-appointed sheep-dog and/or turn-to-the-right mission.

Nor do all the corporate Democrats necessarily see Sanders as a good loyal sheep-dog anyway. After all, how many of these people really see things as they are? Are the corporate candidates really mustache-twirling villains in private, gloating over their part in looting the country and world? Well, maybe Biden is but the rest, most likely No.

In the same way, Sanders no doubt consciously sees himself the way his followers see him, as a sincere aspiring reformer. It's just that the whole structure of Sanders' mindset and actions goes against this intent and this goal and turns him objectively into the kind of "reformer" who unilaterally, no-conditions-imposed hands over the one real bargaining chip he has, the prospect of mounting an independent campaign. Most of the Sanders supporters here often have conceded how he's the prisoner of his own mindset and "circumstances". Which is the same thing since a fighting mindset would be looking to break out of the circumstances, not conform to them.

Beyond that, we have the general abuse the Democratic Party heaps on all "progressives". Corporate liberals think their "progressive" cousins need discipline and enjoy doling it out. In 2016 Hillary's fake show of negativity toward her longtime personal friend Trump was nothing compared to her sincere venom against "progressivism". And the progressives evidently like it because they keep coming back for more. It's part of their shared discipline routine, nothing authentically political, more like BDSM stuff.

And those who know Sanders is their guy still would prefer a straight-up corporate liberal. Sanders is supposed to be the sheep-dog for the Party and its leaders, not an aspiring president himself.

Finally, many of them straight-up hate him and all he claims to stand for even though they suspect or know it's a routine.------------

Posted by: Russ | Feb 9 2020 10:11 utc | 278

@Jackrabbit #261
The African American turnout was lower in 2016, true - but that doesn't actually mean those "lost" votes mattered.
Agree that Obama energized that demographic - also the youth - but his subsequent backstabbing reversed it. So it is more accurate to say that the African American turnout returned to (closer to) its historical norm.
Here's a historical survey overview

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2020 12:36 utc | 279

@Jackrabbit #261
As for the sheepdog: I think Sanders does believe in what he says.
However, that doesn't mean either that:
1) He can win
2) He can execute his platform if he wins
I listened to Sander's interview on Joe Rogan - came away extremely unimpressed. He sounded like the experienced politician he is.

I'm still open to having him as President; even his frankly unimpressive foreign policy and MIC/F35 positions are acceptable if he really pushes through US health care reform/Medicare for all, but his committee work has been more than unimpressive.
Essentially, you have to trust that he will act as President, completely differently than he has acted as a Representative and a Senator for 30+ years.
I have little faith in old dogs changing their spots that way.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2020 12:48 utc | 280

From a nightmare old Wally suffers from these...

The anointed see eye eh ringer the sodomite fink butterboi has a military record that's nearly entirely redacted...

"Think about that." Said the Devil, he went on...

"Media darling Pete Buttigieg was in unit that worked with the CIA in Afghanistan" (grayzone)...

magically dreamtransited to a rural delta bar. The bartender looks like Lenin... Two pigs stagger in...

Later somebody said they overheard a pair of spooks down at at Sammy's Tattle-Inn, well there were indications... the chatter? " ...or butboy was presumably managing the licensing arrangements and shipping schedules for the smack business."

Pay no attention, mindless chatter. I always check the toilet after drunk cops leave a bar...sometimes they forget a pistol.

Just a nightmare. Forget it...

Posted by: Walter | Feb 9 2020 13:13 utc | 281

#173,174

Bernie’s most important job is being a very reasonable thing that the people want and the establishment refuses to let them have. Force them to kill his run openly and you can wake more people up to the reality that they’re not living in the kind of nation they thought they were.

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/02/09/big-buttigieg-bloviations-notes-from-the-edge-of-the-narrative-matrix/

That's not how I read it. I think what she meant is (IF YOU) force them to... THEN YOU CAN STILL) wake them up...

Posted by: Catciofi | Feb 9 2020 13:28 utc | 282

The fake media keep touting Buttigieg as the fresh, new face and Obama-like. Whut? First of all he has a rat face, he has 40 billionaires supporting him, he's sleazy and he's a rehearsed inauthentic Obama wannabe.

If you go to the establishment school your young life that's churning out politicians for the 1%, then you're not a new fresh face, you're just a younger version of the stale, old establishment.

Upstart Buttigieg thinks he invented the wheel and can take 2 steps to power like the entitled elitest he really is when Sanders shovelled away manure for over 40 years to make it this far.

When life puts you in a room ie Congress with a pile of manure, get a shovel and work, cause there's a pony under there somewhere.

Sanders gets it, he worked hard for it, he's been an activist all his life, what you see is what you get, no billionaires saved him 98 steps on the road to power. This is his moment and he deserves to ride that pony straight into the White House and take everyone with him. No one, not a conniving Neolib upstart like Buttigieg, an old shady dog like Biden, or an establishment-approved socialist Warren or a Zionist Neolib like Klobuchar can stand in his way.

Sanders earned this moment, everyone except the 1% rulers trust him, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, SANDERS IS THE ONLY ONE RUNNING WHO CAN DEFEAT TRUMP.

Posted by: Circe | Feb 9 2020 13:43 utc | 283

It doesn't whose side they're on, far too many fanatical believers would sooner argue the hind leg of a donkey before they'd accept an argument that doesn't support their position.

Posted by: Carciofi | Feb 9 2020 13:53 utc | 284

@ Carciofi | Feb 9 2020 13:53 utc | 284 Yeah. "men believe what they will" is how, I think, Caesar put it. But Comrade Brother Harold Pinter put it better in 2005 Nobel Speech...

‘There are no hard distinctions between what is real and what is unreal, nor between
what is true and what is false. A thing is not necessarily either true or false; it can be
both true and false.’
I believe that these assertions still make sense and do still apply to the exploration of
reality through art. So as a writer I stand by them but as a citizen I cannot. As a citizen I
must ask: What is true? What is false?
..............

What a con, you're a lowdown nogud homo fobe ik disloyal fascist putinverstander commie spy if you doan wanna vote fer a fag in see eye eh.

Posted by: Walter | Feb 9 2020 14:02 utc | 285

Buttigieg was asked today on CNN about the 40 billionaires who finance his campaign and instead of being honest he resorted to his sleazy ways and said something like: Well Samders is a millionaire; I'd be happy to have him contribute to our campaign.

First of all, Bernie wrote several books and when you hit the NYT Best Seller list you sell a lot of books.

Buttigieg is financed by billionaires who got their wealth exloiting the average working class and Buttigieg takes their dirty money.

BIG DIFFERENCE!

Posted by: Circe | Feb 9 2020 14:39 utc | 286

Posted by: Russ | Feb 9 2020 6:11 utc | 273

But how long can the US ignore the rise of fascism in America and take a chance that the next 4 years won't be the point of no return? Destruction of the DNC and the facade it presents would result not only in it's demise and likely a 'new and improved' type replacement, it would also guarantee a victory for the Mussolini wannabe prictator in Chief and lifelong grifter trump, who is so obsessed with winning, being the pidgeon that gets to strut after the big match of pigeon chess is the ultimate measure of success.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 9 2020 15:13 utc | 287

Bubbles | Feb 9 2020 15:13 utc | 287 point of return

They crossed the Rubicon long ago, Friend. At this point it amounts to the denouement of MacBeth...far to0 late .

We gotta a ticket, we're taking the ride...

Posted by: Walter | Feb 9 2020 15:34 utc | 288

For your entertainment, Biden campaign releases ad called "Pete's record / Joe Biden for President".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3beFOnjBoE

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 9 2020 15:35 utc | 289

Walter 288

This recent article at Counterpunch touches on just about every point I made in a couple of recent posts and was written by someone who is close to my age and has some shared experiences. I recommend it.

"My Mother, who lived through the time and horrors of the second world war, told me when I was very young that if I ever was to see something like Hitler and the Nazi movement growing in our society that I had to do something. My mother was a serious woman and she meant what she said. If you see it you must do something."

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/07/fascism-in-america-and-the-rise-of-the-great-dictator/


And this; "A Fascist Coup Attempt in Germany"
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/07/a-fascist-coup-attempt-in-germany/

Sanders wants to pass new legilation to castrate the US Supreme Court's Citizen's United decision and even if he wasn't successful because legislators opposed his effort, that would produce a very similar effect as the DNC denying him the nomination only it would be far more effective as it would identify who stands with the people and who stands with the oligarchs on both sides of the aisle. A twofer!! Draw out all the rats, not just some of them.

Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 9 2020 15:49 utc | 290

Bubbles | Feb 9 2020 15:49 utc | 290

If only wishes were horses, dear friend.

The die was cast sometime in '43 or '44, when it was decided that there would be global empire post war, which is to say that the war was not to end, but begin anew with the demonstrations over Japan for the benefit of USSR. All that's happened since, germ war against china and korea in 50's, with napalm generously supplied,with numerous corrections (Wallace/Truman/the odd passing of FDR/the Kennedy corrections/ the Nixon / Ford coup, the Heroin from Southeast Asia (McCoy) and Vietnam and Yugoslavia and Cuba and and and...all mere inflection or wiggles in the paths of Global Imperial Quest ... Against this Bernie even as a Saint would be precisely how effective? Against the ketosis of the domestic economy and population what strength a wish?

We'll do our best. But without illusion.

Posted by: Walter | Feb 9 2020 17:09 utc | 291

We'll do our best. But without illusion.

Posted by: Walter | Feb 9 2020 17:09 utc | 291


The eternal battle Walter, good vs. evil. I'm not a church going man but I believe there's some mention of that in the Book.

The Centre must hold but the battle is wider now, Knights of good character fewer and the burden upon them greater. Reinforcements must come.

"A few honest men are better than numbers.
Subtlety may deceive you; integrity never will."


Re: the Bern, the best weapon against darkness is light, so let there be light.


Posted by: Bubbles | Feb 9 2020 19:06 utc | 292

Yeah, ya gotta keep trying for the best, but first ya gotta figure out what's going on. Orientation, rationality, but then for The Good... Do we need anyone to tell us what is good, and what is not good? (Phaedrus?)

Steinbeck in East of Eden put the words about triumph over evil in the mouths of Sages from China, remember...the Sun rises in the East... It was Hebrew, "Timshel" which they tell us means "thou mayest", more or less. Good name fer th' cat too, or a boat.

If a boat sinks, it looks better on the report if ya tried to save her, eh?

If election, then Bernie gets my vote, I already promised.

Best,

Wally

Posted by: Walter | Feb 9 2020 22:02 utc | 293

The Democrats are a foreign party nowadays, attempting to infiltrate the American system. THey can be no longer called the "patriotic opposition". Their is nothing patriotic about them. It seems they want to destroy America and bring her into the Communist/Socialists fold. They are complete fools and they have sold their soul to socialism and communism. I used to dislike the Democrats but now I find myself further hating what they have become. When I look at who the Dems have put in the running I have to laugh but there will be some idiotic Americans who want something for nothing who will vote for one of them. THey will lose and lose big. Pray for the country and pray that the democrats implode.

Posted by: carnac | Feb 16 2020 21:36 utc | 294

« previous page

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Working...