Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Skepticism and critical thinking is not panacea, but can help to understand the world better

Tulsi Gabbard: as Russian asset and Putin puppet, Jesus of Nazareth  said about such people: "Blessed are the Peace Makers".

 
She is an amazingly courageous woman, kind of modern reincarnation of Joan of Arc fighting with neocons for the independence of the country instead of British (although British did invade the 2016 election ;-)  She has no fear of Clintons  mafia and neocon lobby.

Tulsi to me is like Ron Paul was in 08. A sane voice pointing out the stupidity of US foreign policy.
Campaign website: No Fear TULSI 2020.  We need to support her
Add your name. Stand with Tulsi
 

News Do the US intelligence agencies attempt to influence the US Presidential elections ? Recommended Links Tulsi Gabbard Elizabeth Warren Donald Trump2020 Bernie Sanders: A turncoat socialist ? Venezuella: another "bombs for oil" scenario after Libya? Two Party System as polyarchy
NeoMcCartyism campaign as a smoke screen to hide the crisis of neoliberalism Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite The Iron Law of Oligarchy Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Do the foreign state influence the US Presidential elections ? Obama administration participation in the intelligence services putsch against Trump DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin
Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism FBI Mayberry Machiavellians and CIA connected democrats Mueller invokes ghosts of GRU operatives to help his and Brennan case Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy Rosenstein role in the "Appointment of the special prosecutor gambit"  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" National Security State
US and British media are servants of security apparatus Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few New American Militarism The Real War on Reality The Deep State Strzokgate Steele dossier Trump vs. Deep State Brennan elections machinations
Media-Military-Industrial Complex Skeptic Quotations History of American False Flag Operations Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Cambridge Analytica data mining scandal Media as a weapon of mass deception Hypocrisy of British ruling elite Politically Incorrect Humor Etc
  #TULSI2020 Wants to:
  • Reinstitute Glass Steagall
  • Audit the Fed
  • End regime change wars of choice
  • Has concerns re the vagueness of the 'Green New Deal'
  • Reduce the New Cold War tensions
  • Rejoin the INF
  • Review FISA and Patriot Act infringements on the 4th
  • Support a $15 min/Living wage

Tulsi Gabbard  (twit Feb 17, 2019)

Russia-baiting propaganda is being deployed against our campaign along with anyone else, on the left or the right, who speaks out against regime change war or the new Cold War. The corporate media is doing everything they can to stop our campaign before it gets started -- including using fraudulent journalism and discredited sources to launch their biased attacks.

Tulsi Gabbard

Joan of Arc (French: Jeanne d'Arc; French pronunciation: ​[ʒan daʁk]; c. 1412 – 30 May 1431), nicknamed "The Maid of Orléans" (French: La Pucelle d'Orléans), is considered a heroine of France for her role during the Lancastrian phase of the Hundred Years' War, and was canonized as a Roman Catholic saint. She was born to Jacques d'Arc and Isabelle Romée, a peasant family, at Domrémy in north-east France. Joan claimed to have received visions of the Archangel Michael, Saint Margaret, and Saint Catherine of Alexandria instructing her to support Charles VII and recover France from English domination late in the Hundred Years' War. The uncrowned King Charles VII sent Joan to the siege of Orléans as part of a relief army. She gained prominence after the siege was lifted only nine days later. Several additional swift victories led to Charles VII's coronation at Reims. This long-awaited event boosted French morale and paved the way for the final French victory.

On 23 May 1430, she was captured at Compiègne by the Burgundian faction, a group of French nobles allied with the English. She was later handed over to the English[6] and put on trial by the pro-English bishop Pierre Cauchon on a variety of charges.[7] After Cauchon declared her guilty she was burned at the stake on 30 May 1431, dying at about nineteen years of age.[8]

Joan of Arc - Wikipedia
 


Introduction

This woman should be admired for her courage and willingness to challenge the sacred cows of US political discourse. Not that she always was consistent (see Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Russia Must Face Consequences for Continued Aggression in Ukraine Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard - a typical neocon statement. ) but still... 

Neoliberalism has vandalized the USA, and now it's  time for backlash. Voting for the alternative candidate became an active form of protest against neoliberalism. That's why Trump was elected in 2016. The reason for this is that many people continue to live with the illusion that a simple change of elected leadership in a Latin American country can bring a fundamental change for the region. I would argue that  due to the power of intelligence agencies demonstrated in 2016 and after in Russiagate witch  hunt, this is not possible. Still you can fight even without hope, and be stoic in case of defeat. This is the fight worth fighting.

The current neo-McCarthyism campaign make it very difficult fro any politicians to be anti-war. Neoliberal MSM became part of military-industrial complex.  Reaction of neoliberal MSM on withdrawal US troops from Syria (Trump is giving Christmas Present for Putin; Trump is abandoning Israel, abandoning Kurds) was abruptly disgusting.  So it need great personal courage to challenging the Washington consensus.  MIC (neocons are just lobbyists of MIC) ruled the USA for more then 40 years and the main premise of neocon foreign policy is the USA have God provided mandate to rule the global and prevent emergence of any rival who is able to challenge the US dominance like the USSR.  In the process like any empire they impoverish the USA population, lower the standard of living and committed numerous crimes. Since Carter any US president would be convicted as a war criminal by Nuremberg court. Even Carter conspired to supply radical islamist for fight Soviets in Afghanistan, giving them among other thing anti-aircraft missiles.  Essentially creating political Islam, or at least legitimizing and empowering it.

Defense apparatus became new class of imperial servant and they prevent any meaningful change as this engager their well being. This is a systemic issue. It's kind of ironic that the person who attack this empirical establishment is a woman. In this sense Tulsi Gabbard is the US version of Jane of Ark  who attacked British in France after a long  period when French army did not have any successes against them

As 2016 "re-awakening of the US" has shown people now reject neoliberalism and foreign wars for the maintenance and expansion of the US-led neoliberal empire, fought by the US people on behave of multinational corporation, for the expansion of their markets (Say Goodbye to Mitch McConnell’s America): 

“American democracy has never accorded all the people a meaningful voice,” writes Nancy Isenberg in White Trash, her scathing examination of ignored U.S. history. “The masses have been given symbols instead, and they are often empty symbols. Nation-states traditionally rely on the fiction that a head of state can represent the body of the people and stand as their proxy; in the American version, the president must appeal broadly to shared values that mask the existence of deep class divisions...

Mitch McConnell is a highly visible champion of that ideological deception, a deft practitioner of that stagecraft. The “essence of America” he [ spoke of ] certainly exists, but cunning politicians of his ilk are too canny to mention it in public. That essence — the belief that the nation and its population are a gilded platter to be gorged upon, a fertile field to be plundered and despoiled for profit with the people serving as replaceable tools for the aristocracy — is McConnell’s birthright, and he defends it with all the powers at his disposal, just as his colonial predecessors did.

...They want freedom for themselves, not for you. Their “freedom” is elite, expensive and jealously guarded.

Tulsi Gabbard does not yet has an elaborate economic or foreign policy program.  But from tidbits that  we know there is a lot to like in her program, and first and foremost her consistent anti-war stance. She is the only candidate with clear anti-war position in 2002 elections. that means that she automatically inherits antiwar republicans vote previously cast for Trump (who proved to be another master of bait and switch like Obama, essentially a republican Obama; Venezuela is just the most recent example of this betrayal).

Tulsi Gabbard is the only candidate with clear anti-war position in 2002 elections

While her platform will evolve as the race goes, you can already can get some tidbits from her  twits and meetings. See https://twitter.com

In previous presidential campaign Tulsi left her position of vice-chair of DNC to support Bernie Sanders. Just three prominent democrats stand for Sanders.  She did not endorsed neocon warmonger Hillary Clinton. Bernie Sanders and Liz Warred did endorsed Hillary Clinton. That's an important different between Warren, Sanders and Tulsi.   Sanders any longer can be trusted because in previous election  cycle he acted like sheepdog for Hillary.  Warren is difficult to trust became he tend to be "neocon light" on those issues.

Now progressive voters will be split three ways. Hopefully there will some mergers along the lines Tulsi/Bernie or Bernie/Tulsi. 

She introduced several important bills, which makes her anti-war stance more credible. After bat and switch" candidates like Barack Obama and Trump it is easy to became cynical and ignore elections. But currently I think that Tulsi is a real deal.

Tulsi oppose the neocon lobby which is occupying the USA

She can get neutral and Republican votes more than anyone for Democrats
~Purana Paapi Youtube comment

She was incredibly courteous to take on neocon lobby. This is almost a suicidal mission, and changes are the she will be quickly destroyed. Both neoliberal and neocon MSM are actively trying to destroy her. Whether she will win or not, she is the most important candidate in 2002 elections.  The only candidate who can unite part of Republican, "real" Democrats and Independent.  No other democrat focuses on Foreign Policy like her!

At the same time, after the Obama regime’s coup in Ukraine, she supported supplying the illegitimate far-right putschists (Provisional government of Yatsenuyk and Turchinov) with military assistance, shamefully saying America can’t stand “idly by while Russia continues to degrade the territorial integrity of Ukraine.” Hopefully her position evolved in five years since 2014.

She’s against what she called “counterproductive wars of regime change,” including in Syria.

She earlier said targeting Bashar al-Assad for regime change was “a thinly veiled attempt to use the rationale of ‘humanitarianism’ as a justification to escalate our illegal, counterproductive war,” adding:

“Under US law, it is illegal for any American to provide money or assistance to al-Qaeda, ISIS or other terrorist groups.”

“If you or I gave money, weapons or support to al-Qaeda or ISIS, we would be thrown in jail. Yet the US government has been violating this law for years, quietly supporting allies and partners of al-Qaeda, ISIL, Jabhat Fateh al Sham and other terrorist groups with money, weapons, and intelligence support, in their fight to overthrow the Syrian government.”

“The CIA has also been funneling weapons and money through Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and others who provide direct and indirect support to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda.”

She may be the only congressional member boldly stating the above remarks publicly to her credit.

In any case, her importance in oppositing "Permanent  war for permanent peace" is well understood by some commenters on YouTube

alorr4uz , 2 days ago (edited)

wow. that was just wow. when she said

"I am not someone who will go into the white house and sit back and rely on the foreign policy establishment in Washington to tell me what to do, I don't have to. I'm not intimidated by the stars that someone wears on their shoulders. I am not intimidated by the military industrial complex and what they're pushing for."

she literally could have just dropped the mic. I bet the aforementioned military industrial complex just peed themselves a little. This is why MSM and DNC hate her. And why we all love her. I'm all in on #Tulsi2020 .

Majdi Saadieh , 2 days ago (edited)

Hello, Mrs. Gabbard excuse my English which is my third language. I respect you so much, I'm from Syrian, I live in SF you are the only one who really stood up for the Syrian people by talking about the lies of the media toward my country, and also by meeting with The Syrian President who is the legal representative of the Syrian people by election. You had the honor to visit my country and saw the miserable situation caused by the war that was made and supported by the US; please if you become the president end this war and end the suffer of the Syrian people 

Brooks Rogers , 2 days ago

99 year Old Mother, WWII ARMY Nurse Corp Vet on the Comfort when it was hit by a kamikaze, "adores" you Tulsi. So moved when watching the CNN Town Hall. You are her hero!

That why neocon bottomfeeders like Kristol come after her.  Unlike this chickenhawk, Gabbard is an Iraq war veteran, which means that she knows what it means to be in the military trenches. That's why Megan McCain came after her. As she said

“Too often we have found, throughout our country’s history, we have people in positions of power who make offhanded comments about sending a few thousand troops here, fifty thousand there, a hundred thousand there, intervening militarily here, or starting a war there—without seeming to understand or appreciate the cost of war. If our troops are sent to fight a war, it must be the last option. Not the first.”

Gabbard once told talking head Donald Trump specifically to ignore “drumbeats of war that neocons have been beating.” By specifically calling out the Neocons she looks like a modern incarnation of Joan of Arc who took on 

Gabbard was also indirectly attacking the Israeli regime, which arguably is a powerful lobbyist of the Pentagon and war machine:

For decades, Congress has ceded its Constitutional responsibility of deciding whether or not to declare war, to the President. As a result, we have found ourselves in a state of perpetual war, without a declaration of war by Congress and without input from the American people.

“Since 9/11 alone, our country has spent trillions of dollars on interventionist regime change wars, costing the lives of many Americans, taking a toll on our veterans, and causing people in our communities to struggle and suffer due to a lack of resources.

“Our bipartisan resolution aims to end presidential wars, and hold Congress accountable so it does its job in making the serious and costly decision about whether or not to send our nation’s sons and daughters to war…

“Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the exclusive authority to declare war. But the last time Congress officially declared war was December 8th, 1941 – the day the US entered World War II.

“Ever since, Congress has failed to uphold their constitutional responsibility and have instead ceded power to the President. So, we remain in a state of perpetual war, led by presidents in both parties at great cost to the American people with no declaration of war by Congress and no input from the American people.

“The direct and indirect costs of these presidential wars are astounding. They take a toll on our troops, our veterans, and on the American people.

“Since 9/11 alone, we’ve spent trillions of dollars on regime-change wars and nation-building while people in our communities suffer and struggle because of a lack of resources here at home, what to mention the costs borne by our troops, those who pay the ultimate price, as well as those who come home with wounds that are visible and invisible. The American people deserve accountability.”

Philip M. Giraldi who is a good political analyst whose judgments I mostly trust thinks that she is for real anti-war candidate who wwill fight against neocon lobby; not yet another con-man like Bush, Obama and Trump proved to be  (and that why she probably will be burned at stake like Joan of Ark).

Here is his analysis: 

Tulsi’s own military experience notwithstanding, she gives every indication of being honestly anti-war. In the speech announcing her candidacy she pledged “focus on the issue of war and peace” to “end the regime-change wars that have taken far too many lives and undermined our security by strengthening terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda.” She referred to the danger posed by blundering into a possible nuclear war and indicated her dismay over what appears to be a re-emergence of the Cold War.

Not afraid of challenging establishment politics, she called for an end to the “illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government,” also observing that “the war to overthrow Assad is counter-productive because it actually helps ISIS and other Islamic extremists achieve their goal of overthrowing the Syrian government of Assad and taking control of all of Syria – which will simply increase human suffering in the region, exacerbate the refugee crisis, and pose a greater threat to the world.” She then backed up her words with action by secretly arranging for a personal trip to Damascus in 2017 to meet with President Bashar al-Assad, saying it was important to meet adversaries “if you are serious about pursuing peace.” She made her own assessment of the situation in Syria and now favors pulling US troops out of the country as well as ending American interventions for “regime change” in the region.

In 2015, Gabbard supported President Barack Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran and more recently has criticized President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the deal. Last May, she criticized Israel for shooting “unarmed protesters” in Gaza, but one presumes that, like nearly all American politicians, she also has to make sure that she does not have the Israel Lobby on her back. Gabbard has spoken at a conference of Christians United for Israel, which has defended Israel’s settlement enterprise; has backed legislation that slashes funding to the Palestinians; and has cultivated ties with Boteach as well as with major GOP donor casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. She also attended the controversial address to Congress by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in March 2015, which many progressive Democrats boycotted.

Nevertheless, Tulsi supported Bernie Sanders’ antiwar candidacy in 2016 and appears to be completely onboard and fearless in promoting her antiwar sentiments. Yes, Americans have heard much of the same before, but Tulsi Gabbard could well be the only genuine antiwar candidate that might truly be electable in the past fifty years.

What Tulsi Gabbard is accomplishing might be measured by the enemies that are already gathering and are out to get her. Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept describes how NBC news published a widely distributed story on February 1st, claiming that “experts who track websites and social media linked to Russia have seen stirrings of a possible campaign of support for Hawaii Democrat Tulsi Gabbard.

But the expert cited by NBC turned out to be a firm New Knowledge, which was exposed by no less than The New York Times for falsifying Russian troll accounts for the Democratic Party in the Alabama Senate race to suggest that the Kremlin was interfering in that election. According to Greenwald, the group ultimately behind this attack on Gabbard is The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), which sponsors a tool called Hamilton 68, a news “intelligence net checker” that claims to track Russian efforts to disseminate disinformation. The ASD website advises that “Securing Democracy is a Global Necessity.”

ASD was set up in 2017 by the usual neocon crowd with funding from The Atlanticist and anti-Russian German Marshall Fund. It is loaded with a full complement of Zionists and interventionists/globalists, to include Michael Chertoff, Michael McFaul, Michael Morell, Kori Schake and Bill Kristol. It claims, innocently, to be a bipartisan transatlantic national security advocacy group that seeks to identify and counter efforts by Russia to undermine democracies in the United States and Europe but it is actually itself a major source of disinformation.

For the moment, Tulsi Gabbard seems to be the “real thing,” a genuine anti-war candidate who is determined to run on that platform. It might just resonate with the majority of American who have grown tired of perpetual warfare to “spread democracy” and other related frauds perpetrated by the band of oligarchs and traitors that run the United States. We the people can always hope.

 

Support of Sanders in 2016

Gabbard’s record here is mixed at best. She formerly served as DNC vice chair, resigning in February 2016 to support Russophobe undemocratic Dem Bernie Sanders over Hillary. Which was a corageous act.

But after Hillary used dirty tricks in primary elections to steal the Dem nomination, Gabbard supported her candidacy. In other words she suuported a political figure who was probably the most ruthless and militalistic presidential aspirant in US history. The charaterization which can be  backed up with cold, hard facts about her deplorable record as first lady, US senator and secretary of state.

That's huge minus for Tulsi, but to survive in  Washington you need to compromize your integrity.

Gore Vidal explained how the dirty system works, saying no one gets to be presidential material unless they’ve “been bought over 10 times.” The same goes for top congressional posts.

Gabbard is suspect for similar reasons, voting along party lines too often since elected to represent Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district in November 2012.

 

Some bio details

She was born April 12, 1981 Leloaloa, American Samoa, the fourth of five children of Carol (Porter) and Mike Gabbard.  Gabbard would be the youngest US president ever if she wins; she'll be 39 on Inauguration Day 2021. In 1983, when Gabbard was two years old, her family moved to Hawaii. Her father is a member of the Hawaii Senate.  Her father is of Samoan and European ancestry and an active lector at his Catholic church. Her mother, who was born in Decatur, Indiana, is of European descent and a practicing Hindu ( Hare Krishna sect I think).

Tulsi chose Hinduism as her religion while she was a teenager. I doubt that she is overly religious as she got the university education. Gabbard was home-schooled through high school except for two years at a girls-only missionary academy in the Philippines. She graduated from Hawaii Pacific University with a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration in 2009.

Anti war stance

  “We must stand up against powerful politicians from both parties who sit in their ivory towers thinking up new wars to wage, new places for people to die, wasting trillions of our taxpayer dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives and undermining our economy, our security, and destroying our middle class.”

Tulsi Gabbard is best know for he anti-war stance, which makes her an outlier among the majority (bought by MIC and Israeli lobby, which is simultaneously is a MIC lobby)  US Congressmen/women.  Much like Ron Paul previously was Tulsi Gabbard Kicks Off Campaign With Anti-War Speech

Speaking from a beach in Waikiki, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard formally kicked off her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination with a speech cautioning that the United States is engaged in a “New Cold War,” telling a crowd of hundreds of supporters that every American pays the price of unrestrained militarism and interventionist foreign policy.

Wearing a white lei, Gabbard, a four-term congresswoman from Hawaii, asked those assembled to help her build a movement emphasizing “peace at home and abroad that will fulfill the promise of America.” Pointing to the Trump administration, which “claims to believe in America First, but who sells our troops, our weapons and our interests to whichever foreign country is the highest bidder,” Gabbard warned the crowd on Honolulu—many of whom were terrified by a false nuclear alert in Jan. 2018—that a nuclear war “could destroy our world in mere minutes.”

“Every American pays the price for these wars,” Gabbard, a longtime anti-interventionist, said, dismissing unspecified opponents in Washington as treating troops like “political pawns and mercenaries for hire in wars across the world... thinking up new wars to wage, and new places for people to die, wasting trillions of our taxpayer dollars.”

“I will bring this soldier’s values to the White House,” Gabbard vowed, closing her foreign policy-centric address with the promise that she would bring the Hawaiian value of aloha to the White House.

– Scott Bixby

Policies and positions

From positions - tulsi

Issue Position Details
Abortion Pro-Choice Tulsi has a 100% voting record with both Planned Parenthood and NARAL.
Affordable Care Act Supports Protect and improve Obamacare until Single Payer plan can pass.
Border Wall Opposes Dream Act must be independent of any border wall legistation
Campaign Finance Supports Wants to ban super PACs and does not take any PAC money.
Citizens United Opposes "The only way to restore public faith in our democracy is with citizen-led, grassroots-funded campaigns."
Civil Rights Supports Federal protection for discrimination of national origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious belief , gender.
Climate Change Green New Deal Tax incentives for wind, solar, biomass and wave energy. Regulating greenhouse gas emissions.
Dakota Access Pipeline Opposes Visited and supported protestors at DAPL. Also opposed Keystone.
Death Penalty - -
GMO labeling Supports Let Americans have a choice in their food purchases.
Green New Deal - -
Gun Control Supports Supports sensible gun control. Has 7% rating from the NRA .
Illegal Immigration Opposes Deportation Need fair immigration reform that doesn't break up families.
Environmental Protections Supports Lifelong environmentalist who started an environmental non-profit as a teenager, and has a strong environmental record.
Equal Pay Supports Supported legislation to level the playing field such as H.R.377 - Paycheck Fairness Act
Internet Privacy Supports Restrict how Internet providers use and sell customer data
LGBT Rights & Marriage Equality Supports Since being elected to Congress, Tulsi has been 100% pro-LGBT rights and for marriage equality.
Marijuana Decriminalize & Legalize Introduced legislation to take off federal controlled substances list. Supports Legalization.
Mandatory Minimums Opposes Reduce mandatory minimums for non-violent offenders
Medicare-For-All Supports Cosponsor of H.R. 676 the Medicare for All Act.
Minimum Wage $15 Supports Cosponsored the Minimum Wage Fairness Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act
Net Neutrality Supports "Maintaining Net Neutrality is Cornerstone of Our Democracy"
North Korea Talks Supports Supports diplomacy, ending the standoff and regime change wars including North Korea.
NSA Mass Collection Surveillance Opposes Strongly pro civil liberties, and reigning in, stopping mass collection and defunding the NSA
Nuclear Power Opposes Too dangerous and expensive. Better to phase it out and focus on clean, safe, renewable energy.
PayGo Opposes "just three Democrats voted it down: Khanna and Ocasio-Cortez were joined by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii"
Planned Parenthood Supports Supports funding and has 100% rating from them.
Prisons For Profit Opposes Has called to end the use of private prisons nationwide.
Refugee Ban Opposes Spoke against Trump's executive order banning refugees. Thinks vetting is sufficient.
Saudi Arabia Arms Sales Opposes Condemned the Trump Administration's $460 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia
Single-Payer Healthcare Supports Supports HR 676 and universal healthcare, Medicare and a public option
Social Security Protect Committed to protecting Medicare and Social Security. Opposes Privatization.
Space Exploration - -
Syria End the War End interventionist wars of regime change that cost lives and money and make things worse.
Trans-Pacific Partnership Opposes Has helped lead the opposition on this issue.
Veterans Services Expand Let veterans see private physicians, improve the GI Bill, incentives to hire veterans
Wall Street Regulation Supports Reinstate Glass-Steagall Act, ban naked credit default swaps, and breakup big banks.

 

Differences with Elizabeth Warren

Warren endorsed Hillary which makes her yet another neoliberal warmonger.  Big no-no for many voters.  She proved to be a malleable  coward.  That means it does not matter what issue she supports during election campaign. She will be easily coursed after election to continue traditional policies, especially foreign policy. 

Warren has more clearly defined tax policy, which is her specialty.  Here is an old, but still interesting discussion at Tulsi Gabbard Elizabeth Warren in 2020 Who Can Beat Trump

May 11, 2017 | www.youtube.com

BestAnimeFanservice , 1 year ago

Tulsi Gabbard is courageous and stands up against her own party regardless of the political cost. Elizabeth Warren is a coward; she never stands up against her party; she only fights the easy fights (GOP,Trump). Elizabeth Warren was a college professor she knows the words the young kids want to listen and she says them often. Mark my words 'Elizabeth Warren in 2020 will be the Walter Mondale of 1984'

Megan Parish , 1 year ago (edited)

Tulsi Gabbard. She supports Medicare for all and Elizabeth Warren does not. She's also really pushing the fake Russia story all over MSNBC. Tulsi was the only one who didn't endorse Hillary.

D. Martin , 1 year ago (edited)

Liz voted to get rid of Habeas Corpus and we're going to put her up for president now? Bernie and Liz will certainly maintain the Democratic Party line on the Middle East.

TheGr8stManEvr , 1 year ago (edited)

I'll never trust Warren again. She's a Fauxgressive, just like Obama. #FoolMeOnce

TheKeithvidz , 1 year ago (edited)

tulsi %100 but Warren supported Ben Carson & Hillary Rodham - to be fair she's far from the worse.

branden burks , 1 year ago

Mike don't be naive. The Democratic Party has learned NOTHING! They'd definitely cheat a true progressive in 2020. Have you seen ANY changes? Do you hear what their lawyers say about cheating Sanders on the record?

branden burks , 1 year ago

I'd take Tulsi Gabbard over Elizabeth Warren. Warren showed her true colors. Always too little too late and she doesn't do it by mistake. Gabbard just does the right thing because it's right. I don't think Warren could beat Trump. He can poke way too many holes in her.

Smear campaign from neocons and neoliberal MSM and public personalities

what is interesting, the most vicious attacks against Gabbard do not come from “conservative” media outlets or journalists. They came from neoliberal MSM and Clinton  wing of Democratic Party.  As one would expect those MSM are pretty far from liberal ideas. They are hell-bent on neocolonialism and wars for enlarging and sustaining global, led by the USA neoliberal empire. They just  use a pseudo-liberal rhetoric to advocate for foreign wars.  Those presstitutes know who butters their bread, and they likes theirs bread buttered.

In spite of a smear campaign encouraged by the political establishment, Gabbard has not backed down from protesting US support for terrorists in Syria. She sponsored legislation, the Stop Arming Terrorists Act (Tulsi Gabbard, A Rare Anti-War Democrat, Will Run For President )

During an interview for the Sanders Institute in September 2018, Gabbard said, "Since 2011, when the United States, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and these other countries started this slow drawn-out regime change war in Syria, it is terrorist groups like al Qaida, al Nusra, and Hayat Tahrir al Sham, these different groups that have morphed and taken on names but essentially are all linked to al Qaida or al Qaida themselves that have proven to be the most effective ground force against the government in trying to overthrow the Syrian government."

Gabbard opposes what she calls a "genocidal war" in Yemen, and she is one of the few representatives, who has worked to pass a war powers resolution in the House to end U.S. military involvement since Congress never authorized the war.

"The United States is standing shoulder to shoulder supporting Saudi Arabia in this war as they commit these atrocities against Yemeni civilians," Gabbard said during the same Sanders Institute interview.

Another war Gabbard questions is the war in Libya. In an interview for "The Jimmy Dore Show" on September 11, 2018, she spoke about the devastating consequences of pursuing regime change without considering what would happen after Muammar Gaddafi was removed from power.

"After we led the war to topple Gaddafi, we have open human slave trading going on, in open market. In today's society, we have more terrorists in Libya today than there ever were before."

Beginning of her political career

In 2002, after redistricting, Gabbard (as Gabbard Tamayo) ran to represent the 42nd House District of the Hawaii House of Representatives. She won the four-candidate Democratic primary getting 48%. Gabbard then defeated Republican Alfonso Jimenez in the general election, 65%–35%. At the age of 21, Gabbard had become the youngest legislator ever elected in Hawaii's history and the youngest woman ever elected to a U.S. state legislature. She represented the Oahu 42nd District, which covers Waipahu, Honolulu, and Ewa Beach.  She played a key role, along with her Ewa colleagues, in securing funding for infrastructure on the Ewa Plains. In 2004, Gabbard filed for reelection, but then volunteered for Army National Guard service in Iraq.

During her tenure Gabbard strongly supported legislation to promote clean energy. She supported legislation to expand tax credits for solar and wind, improve the net energy metering program, establish renewable energy portfolio standards, reduce taxes on the sale of ethanol and biofuels, provide funding for a seawater air conditioning project and make it easier for condo/townhouse owners to get solar.

Regarding the environment, Gabbard supported legislation to better protect air quality, the water supply, endangered species and avian/marine life, fight invasive species, reduce greenhouse gases, promote recycling of food waste and packaging, improve the Deposit Beverage Container Program (bottle law), and reduce illegal dumping. Gabbard previously held socially conservative positions more in line with her father, who sought for decades to pass laws against homosexuality, and who is against abortion rights. She shifted toward a more liberal stance in the early 2010s.

After returning home from her second deployment to the Middle East in 2009, Gabbard ran for a seat on the Honolulu City Council. Incumbent City Councilman Rod Tam, of the 6th district, decided to retire in order to run for Mayor of Honolulu. In the ten-candidate nonpartisan open primary in September 2010, Gabbard finished first with 33% of the vote. In the November 2 runoff election, she defeated Sesnita Moepono, 58%–42%, to win the seat.  As a councilmember, Gabbard introduced a measure to help food truck vendors by loosening parking restrictions. She also introduced Bill 54, a measure that authorized city workers to confiscate personal belongings stored on public property with 24 hours' notice to its owner. After overcoming opposition from the ACLU and Occupy Hawai'i, Bill 54 passed and became City Ordinance 1129.

United States House of Representatives (2013–present)

In the first session of the 115th Congress on January 4, 2017, Gabbard introduced bill H.R. 258 to prohibit the use of United States Government funds to provide assistance to Al Qaeda, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and to countries supporting those organizations directly or indirectly.

Gabbard won the general election on November 6, 2012, defeating Republican Kawika Crowley, by approximately 130,000 votes, or 168,503 to 40,707 votes (80.6%−19.4%).  In December 2012, Gabbard applied to be considered for appointment to the Senate seat vacated by the death of Daniel Inouye, but despite support from prominent mainland Democrats, she was not among the three candidates selected by the Democratic Party of Hawaii.

Gabbard was reelected in 2014, 2016 and 2018. Gabbard is the first Samoan American member of the United States Congress and the first Hindu member of the United States Congress.

In her first term, Gabbard introduced the Helping Heroes Fly Act, which passed unanimously in both the House and Senate. This measure seeks to improve airport security screenings for severely wounded veterans, and was signed into law by the president.  She also led an effort to pass legislation to assist victims of military sexual trauma.

2015–16 Along with Senator Hirono, Gabbard introduced the Filipino Veterans of WWII Congressional Gold Medal Act of 2015 to award Filipino and Filipino American veterans who fought in World War II the Congressional Gold Medal. The bill passed both the Senate and the House, in July and November 2016, respectively, and was signed by President Obama on December 15, 2016.  Gabbard also introduced Talia's Law, to prevent child abuse and neglect on military bases. It passed the House and Senate and was signed by President Obama on December 2017–18

In the first session of the 115th Congress on January 4, 2017, Gabbard introduced bill H.R. 258 to prohibit the use of United States Government funds to provide assistance to Al Qaeda, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and to countries supporting those organizations directly or indirectly. Announcing the legislation, she said:

"If you or I gave money, weapons or support to al-Qaeda or ISIS, we would be thrown in jail. Yet the US government has been violating this law for years, quietly supporting allies and partners of al-Qaeda, ISIL ... and other terrorist groups with money, weapons and intelligence support, in their fight to overthrow the Syrian government."


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Feb 23, 2020] Welcome to the American Regime

Highly recommended!
Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

4 hours ago

Is America a 'regime'?

In the language of the American Oligarchy and it's tame and owned presstitutes on the MSM, any country targeted for destabilisation, destruction and rape – either because it doesn't do what America tells it do (Russia), because it has rich natural resources or has a 'socialist' state (Venezuela) or because lunatic neo-cons and even more lunatic Christian Evangelicals (hoping to provoke The End Times ) want it to happen (Syria and Iran) – is first labelled as a 'regime'.

That's because the word 'regime' is associated with dictatorships and human rights abuses and establishing a non-compliant country as a 'regime' is the US government's and MSM's first step at manufacturing public consent for that country's destruction.

Unfortunately if you sit back and talk a cool-headed, factual look at actions and attitudes that we're told constitute a regime then you have to conclude that America itself is 'a regime'.

So, here's why America is a regime:

4 hours ago

America's Military is Killing – Americans!

In 2018, Republicans (AND Democrats) voted to cut $23 billion dollars from the budget for food stamps (42 million Americans currently receive them).

Fats forward to 21 December 2019 and Donald Trump signed off on a US defense budget of a mind boggling $738 billion dollars.

To put that in context  --  the annual US government Education budget is sround $68 billion dollars.

Did you get that  --  $738 billion on defense, $68 billion on education?

That means the government spends more than ten times on preparations to kill people than it does on preparing children for life in the adult world.

Wow!

How ******* psychotic and death-affirming is that? It gets even worse when you consider that that $716 billion dollars is only the headline figure – it doesn't include whatever the Deep State siphons away into black-ops and kick backs. And .America's military isn't even very good – it's hasn't 'won' a conflict since the second world war, it's proud (and horrifically expensive) aircraft carriers have been rendered obsolete by Chinese and Russian hypersonic missiles and its 'cutting edge' weapons are so good (not) that everyone wants to buy the cheaper and better Russian versions: classic example – the F-35 jet program will screw $1.5 TRILLION (yes, TRILLION) dollars out of US taxpayers but but it's a piece of **** plane that doesn't work properly which the Russians laughingly refer to as 'a flying piano'.

In contrast to America's free money for the military industrial complex defense budget, China spends $165 billion and Russia spends $61 billion on defense and I don't see anyone attacking them (well, except America, that is be it only by proxy for now).

Or, put things another way. The United Kingdom spent £110 billion on it's National Health Service in 2017. That means, if you get sick in England, you can see a doctor for free. If you need drugs you pay a prescription charge of around $11.50(nothing, if unemployed, a child or elderly), whatever the market price of the drugs. If you need to see a consultant or medical specialist, you'll see one for free. If you need an operation, you'll get one for free. If you need on-going care for a chronic illness, you'll get it for free.

Fully socialised, free at the point of access, healthcare for all. How good is that?

US citizens could have that, too.

Allowing for the US's larger population, the UK National Health Service transplanted to America could cost about $650 billion a year. That would still leave $66 billion dollars left over from the proposed defense budget of $716 billion to finance weapons of death and destruction   --  more than those 'evil Ruskies' spend.

The US has now been at war, somewhere in the world (i.e in someone elses' country where the US doesn't have any business being) continuously for 28 years. Those 28 years have coincided with (for the 'ordinary people', anyway) declining living standards, declining real wages, increased police violence, more repression and surveillance, declining lifespans, declining educational and health outcomes, more every day misery in other words, America's military is killing Americans. Oh, and millions of people in far away countries (although, obviously, those deaths are in far away countries and they are of brown-skinned people so they don't really count, do they?).

Time for a change, perhaps?

[Feb 23, 2020] Where Have You Gone, Smedley Butler The Last General To Criticize US Imperialism by Danny Sjursen

Here's a link to a free online copy of War is a Racket if anyone wants to read it. It's a short read. Pretty good too. https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
From comments (Is the USA government now a "regime"): In 2018, Republicans (AND Democrats) voted to cut $23 billion dollars from the budget for food stamps (42 million Americans currently receive them). Regimes disobey international law. Like America's habit of blowing up wedding parties with drones or the illegal presence of its troops in Syria, Iraq and God knows where else. Regimes carry out illegal assassination programs – I need say no more here than Qasem Soleimani. Regimes use their economic power to bully and impose their will – sanctioning countries even when they know those sanctions will, for example, be responsible for the death of 500,000 Iraqi children (the 'price worth paying', remember?). Regimes renege on international treaties – like Iran nuclear treaty, for example. Regimes imprison and hound whistle-blowers – like Chelsea manning and Julian Assange. Regimes imprison people. America is the world leader in incarceration. It has 2.2 million people in its prisons (more than China which has 5 times the US's population), that's 25% of the world's prison population for 5% of the world's population, Why does America need so many prisoners? Because it has a massive, prison-based, slave labour business that is hugely profitable for the oligarchy.
Regimes censor free speech. Just recently, we've seen numerous non-narrative following journalists and organisations kicked off numerous social media platforms. I didn't see lots of US senators standing up and saying 'I disagree completely with what you say but I will fight to the death to preserve your right to say it'. Did you?
Regimes are ruled by cliques. I don't need to tell you that America is kakistocratic Oligarchy ruled by a tiny group of evil, rich, Old Men, do I?
Regimes keep bad company. Their allies are other 'regimes', and they're often lumped together by using another favourite presstitute term – 'axis of evil'. America has its own little axis of evil. It's two main allies are Saudi Arabia – a homophobic, women hating, head chopping, terrorist financing state currently engaged in a war of genocide (assisted by the US) in Yemen – and the racist, genocidal undeclared nuclear power state of Israel.
Regimes commit human rights abuses. Here we could talk about…ooh…let's think. Last year's treatment of child refugees from Latin America, the execution of African Americans for 'walking whilst black' by America's militarized, criminal police force or the millions of dollars in cash and property seized from entirely innocent Americans by that same police force under 'civil forfeiture' laws or maybe we could mention huge American corporations getting tax refunds whilst ordinary Americans can't afford decent, effective healthcare.
Regimes finance terrorism. Mmmm….just like America financed terrorists to help destroy Syria and Libya and invested $5 billion dollars to install another regime – the one of anti-Semites and Nazis in Ukraine…
Highly recommended!
Some comments edited for clarity...
Notable quotes:
"... But after retirement, Smedley Butler changed his tune. ..."
"... "I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service... And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers." ..."
"... Smedley Butler's Marine Corps and the military of his day was, in certain ways, a different sort of organization than today's highly professionalized armed forces. History rarely repeats itself, not in a literal sense anyway. Still, there are some disturbing similarities between the careers of Butler and today's generation of forever-war fighters. All of them served repeated tours of duty in (mostly) unsanctioned wars around the world. Butler's conflicts may have stretched west from Haiti across the oceans to China, whereas today's generals mostly lead missions from West Africa east to Central Asia, but both sets of conflicts seemed perpetual in their day and were motivated by barely concealed economic and imperial interests. ..."
"... When Smedley Butler retired in 1931, he was one of three Marine Corps major generals holding a rank just below that of only the Marine commandant and the Army chief of staff. Today, with about 900 generals and admirals currently serving on active duty, including 24 major generals in the Marine Corps alone, and with scores of flag officers retiring annually, not a single one has offered genuine public opposition to almost 19 years worth of ill-advised, remarkably unsuccessful American wars . As for the most senior officers, the 40 four-star generals and admirals whose vocal antimilitarism might make the biggest splash, there are more of them today than there were even at the height of the Vietnam War, although the active military is now about half the size it was then. Adulated as many of them may be, however, not one qualifies as a public critic of today's failing wars. ..."
"... The big three are Secretary of State Colin Powell's former chief of staff, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson ; Vietnam veteran and onetime West Point history instructor, retired Colonel Andrew Bacevich ; and Iraq veteran and Afghan War whistleblower , retired Lieutenant Colonel Danny Davis . All three have proven to be genuine public servants, poignant voices, and -- on some level -- cherished personal mentors. For better or worse, however, none carry the potential clout of a retired senior theater commander or prominent four-star general offering the same critiques. ..."
"... Consider it an irony of sorts that this system first received criticism in our era of forever wars when General David Petraeus, then commanding the highly publicized " surge " in Iraq, had to leave that theater of war in 2007 to serve as the chair of that selection committee. The reason: he wanted to ensure that a twice passed-over colonel, a protégé of his -- future Trump National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster -- earned his star. ..."
"... At the roots of this system lay the obsession of the American officer corps with " professionalization " after the Vietnam War debacle. This first manifested itself in a decision to ditch the citizen-soldier tradition, end the draft, and create an "all-volunteer force." The elimination of conscription, as predicted by critics at the time, created an ever-growing civil-military divide, even as it increased public apathy regarding America's wars by erasing whatever " skin in the game " most citizens had. ..."
"... One group of generals, however, reportedly now does have it out for President Trump -- but not because they're opposed to endless war. Rather, they reportedly think that The Donald doesn't "listen enough to military advice" on, you know, how to wage war forever and a day. ..."
"... That beast, first identified by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, is now on steroids as American commanders in retirement regularly move directly from the military onto the boards of the giant defense contractors, a reality which only contributes to the dearth of Butlers in the military retiree community. For all the corruption of his time, the Pentagon didn't yet exist and the path from the military to, say, United Fruit Company, Standard Oil, or other typical corporate giants of that moment had yet to be normalized for retiring generals and admirals. Imagine what Butler would have had to say about the modern phenomenon of the " revolving door " in Washington. ..."
"... Today, generals don't seem to have a thought of their own even in retirement. And more's the pity... ..."
"... Am I the only one to notice that Hollywood and it's film distributors have gone full bore on "war" productions, glorifying these historical events while using poetic license to rewrite history. Prepping the numbheads. ..."
"... Forget rank. As Mr Sjursen implies, dissidents are no longer allowed in the higher ranks. "They" made sure to fix this as Mr Butler had too much of a mind of his own (US education system also programmed against creative, charismatic thinkers, btw). ..."
"... Today, the "Masters of the Permawars" refer to the international extortion, MIC, racket as "Defending American Interests"! .....With never any explanation to the public/American taxpayer just what "American Interests" the incredible expenditures of American lives, blood, and treasure are being defended! ..."
"... "The Americans follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous." - Jospeh Goebbels ..."
"... The greatest anti-imperialist of our times is Michael Parenti: ..."
"... The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power. ..."
"... If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort. ..."
Feb 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Danny Sjursen via TomDispatch.com,

There once lived an odd little man - five feet nine inches tall and barely 140 pounds sopping wet - who rocked the lecture circuit and the nation itself. For all but a few activist insiders and scholars, U.S. Marine Corps Major General Smedley Darlington Butler is now lost to history. Yet more than a century ago, this strange contradiction of a man would become a national war hero, celebrated in pulp adventure novels, and then, 30 years later, as one of this country's most prominent antiwar and anti-imperialist dissidents.

Raised in West Chester, Pennsylvania, and educated in Quaker (pacifist) schools, the son of an influential congressman, he would end up serving in nearly all of America's " Banana Wars " from 1898 to 1931. Wounded in combat and a rare recipient of two Congressional Medals of Honor, he would retire as the youngest, most decorated major general in the Marines.

A teenage officer and a certified hero during an international intervention in the Chinese Boxer Rebellion of 1900, he would later become a constabulary leader of the Haitian gendarme, the police chief of Philadelphia (while on an approved absence from the military), and a proponent of Marine Corps football. In more standard fashion, he would serve in battle as well as in what might today be labeled peacekeeping , counterinsurgency , and advise-and-assist missions in Cuba, China, the Philippines, Panama, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, France, and China (again). While he showed early signs of skepticism about some of those imperial campaigns or, as they were sardonically called by critics at the time, " Dollar Diplomacy " operations -- that is, military campaigns waged on behalf of U.S. corporate business interests -- until he retired he remained the prototypical loyal Marine.

But after retirement, Smedley Butler changed his tune. He began to blast the imperialist foreign policy and interventionist bullying in which he'd only recently played such a prominent part. Eventually, in 1935 during the Great Depression, in what became a classic passage in his memoir, which he titled "War Is a Racket," he wrote:

"I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service... And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers."

Seemingly overnight, the famous war hero transformed himself into an equally acclaimed antiwar speaker and activist in a politically turbulent era. Those were, admittedly, uncommonly anti-interventionist years, in which veterans and politicians alike promoted what (for America, at least) had been fringe ideas. This was, after all, the height of what later pro-war interventionists would pejoratively label American " isolationism ."

Nonetheless, Butler was unique (for that moment and certainly for our own) in his unapologetic amenability to left-wing domestic politics and materialist critiques of American militarism. In the last years of his life, he would face increasing criticism from his former admirer, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the military establishment, and the interventionist press. This was particularly true after Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany invaded Poland and later France. Given the severity of the Nazi threat to mankind, hindsight undoubtedly proved Butler's virulent opposition to U.S. intervention in World War II wrong.

Nevertheless, the long-term erasure of his decade of antiwar and anti-imperialist activism and the assumption that all his assertions were irrelevant has proven historically deeply misguided. In the wake of America's brief but bloody entry into the First World War, the skepticism of Butler (and a significant part of an entire generation of veterans) about intervention in a new European bloodbath should have been understandable. Above all, however, his critique of American militarism of an earlier imperial era in the Pacific and in Latin America remains prescient and all too timely today, especially coming as it did from one of the most decorated and high-ranking general officers of his time. (In the era of the never-ending war on terror, such a phenomenon is quite literally inconceivable.)

Smedley Butler's Marine Corps and the military of his day was, in certain ways, a different sort of organization than today's highly professionalized armed forces. History rarely repeats itself, not in a literal sense anyway. Still, there are some disturbing similarities between the careers of Butler and today's generation of forever-war fighters. All of them served repeated tours of duty in (mostly) unsanctioned wars around the world. Butler's conflicts may have stretched west from Haiti across the oceans to China, whereas today's generals mostly lead missions from West Africa east to Central Asia, but both sets of conflicts seemed perpetual in their day and were motivated by barely concealed economic and imperial interests.

Nonetheless, whereas this country's imperial campaigns of the first third of the twentieth century generated a Smedley Butler, the hyper-interventionism of the first decades of this century hasn't produced a single even faintly comparable figure. Not one. Zero. Zilch. Why that is matters and illustrates much about the U.S. military establishment and contemporary national culture, none of it particularly encouraging.

Why No Antiwar Generals

When Smedley Butler retired in 1931, he was one of three Marine Corps major generals holding a rank just below that of only the Marine commandant and the Army chief of staff. Today, with about 900 generals and admirals currently serving on active duty, including 24 major generals in the Marine Corps alone, and with scores of flag officers retiring annually, not a single one has offered genuine public opposition to almost 19 years worth of ill-advised, remarkably unsuccessful American wars . As for the most senior officers, the 40 four-star generals and admirals whose vocal antimilitarism might make the biggest splash, there are more of them today than there were even at the height of the Vietnam War, although the active military is now about half the size it was then. Adulated as many of them may be, however, not one qualifies as a public critic of today's failing wars.

Instead, the principal patriotic dissent against those terror wars has come from retired colonels, lieutenant colonels, and occasionally more junior officers (like me), as well as enlisted service members. Not that there are many of us to speak of either. I consider it disturbing (and so should you) that I personally know just about every one of the retired military figures who has spoken out against America's forever wars.

The big three are Secretary of State Colin Powell's former chief of staff, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson ; Vietnam veteran and onetime West Point history instructor, retired Colonel Andrew Bacevich ; and Iraq veteran and Afghan War whistleblower , retired Lieutenant Colonel Danny Davis . All three have proven to be genuine public servants, poignant voices, and -- on some level -- cherished personal mentors. For better or worse, however, none carry the potential clout of a retired senior theater commander or prominent four-star general offering the same critiques.

Something must account for veteran dissenters topping out at the level of colonel. Obviously, there are personal reasons why individual officers chose early retirement or didn't make general or admiral. Still, the system for selecting flag officers should raise at least a few questions when it comes to the lack of antiwar voices among retired commanders. In fact, a selection committee of top generals and admirals is appointed each year to choose the next colonels to earn their first star. And perhaps you won't be surprised to learn that, according to numerous reports , "the members of this board are inclined, if not explicitly motivated, to seek candidates in their own image -- officers whose careers look like theirs." At a minimal level, such a system is hardly built to foster free thinkers, no less breed potential dissidents.

Consider it an irony of sorts that this system first received criticism in our era of forever wars when General David Petraeus, then commanding the highly publicized " surge " in Iraq, had to leave that theater of war in 2007 to serve as the chair of that selection committee. The reason: he wanted to ensure that a twice passed-over colonel, a protégé of his -- future Trump National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster -- earned his star.

Mainstream national security analysts reported on this affair at the time as if it were a major scandal, since most of them were convinced that Petraeus and his vaunted counterinsurgency or " COINdinista " protégés and their " new " war-fighting doctrine had the magic touch that would turn around the failing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, Petraeus tried to apply those very tactics twice -- once in each country -- as did acolytes of his later, and you know the results of that.

But here's the point: it took an eleventh-hour intervention by America's most acclaimed general of that moment to get new stars handed out to prominent colonels who had, until then, been stonewalled by Cold War-bred flag officers because they were promoting different (but also strangely familiar) tactics in this country's wars. Imagine, then, how likely it would be for such a leadership system to produce genuine dissenters with stars of any serious sort, no less a crew of future Smedley Butlers.

At the roots of this system lay the obsession of the American officer corps with " professionalization " after the Vietnam War debacle. This first manifested itself in a decision to ditch the citizen-soldier tradition, end the draft, and create an "all-volunteer force." The elimination of conscription, as predicted by critics at the time, created an ever-growing civil-military divide, even as it increased public apathy regarding America's wars by erasing whatever " skin in the game " most citizens had.

More than just helping to squelch civilian antiwar activism, though, the professionalization of the military, and of the officer corps in particular, ensured that any future Smedley Butlers would be left in the dust (or in retirement at the level of lieutenant colonel or colonel) by a system geared to producing faux warrior-monks. Typical of such figures is current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army General Mark Milley. He may speak gruffly and look like a man with a head of his own, but typically he's turned out to be just another yes-man for another war-power -hungry president.

One group of generals, however, reportedly now does have it out for President Trump -- but not because they're opposed to endless war. Rather, they reportedly think that The Donald doesn't "listen enough to military advice" on, you know, how to wage war forever and a day.

What Would Smedley Butler Think Today?

In his years of retirement, Smedley Butler regularly focused on the economic component of America's imperial war policies. He saw clearly that the conflicts he had fought in, the elections he had helped rig, the coups he had supported, and the constabularies he had formed and empowered in faraway lands had all served the interests of U.S. corporate investors. Though less overtly the case today, this still remains a reality in America's post-9/11 conflicts, even on occasion embarrassingly so (as when the Iraqi ministry of oil was essentially the only public building protected by American troops as looters tore apart the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, in the post-invasion chaos of April 2003). Mostly, however, such influence plays out far more subtly than that, both abroad and here at home where those wars help maintain the record profits of the top weapons makers of the military-industrial complex.

That beast, first identified by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, is now on steroids as American commanders in retirement regularly move directly from the military onto the boards of the giant defense contractors, a reality which only contributes to the dearth of Butlers in the military retiree community. For all the corruption of his time, the Pentagon didn't yet exist and the path from the military to, say, United Fruit Company, Standard Oil, or other typical corporate giants of that moment had yet to be normalized for retiring generals and admirals. Imagine what Butler would have had to say about the modern phenomenon of the " revolving door " in Washington.

Of course, he served in a very different moment, one in which military funding and troop levels were still contested in Congress. As a longtime critic of capitalist excesses who wrote for leftist publications and supported the Socialist Party candidate in the 1936 presidential elections, Butler would have found today's nearly trillion-dollar annual defense budgets beyond belief. What the grizzled former Marine long ago identified as a treacherous nexus between warfare and capital "in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives" seems to have reached its natural end point in the twenty-first century. Case in point: the record (and still rising ) "defense" spending of the present moment, including -- to please a president -- the creation of a whole new military service aimed at the full-scale militarization of space .

Sadly enough, in the age of Trump, as numerous polls demonstrate, the U.S. military is the only public institution Americans still truly trust. Under the circumstances, how useful it would be to have a high-ranking, highly decorated, charismatic retired general in the Butler mold galvanize an apathetic public around those forever wars of ours. Unfortunately, the likelihood of that is practically nil, given the military system of our moment.

Of course, Butler didn't exactly end his life triumphantly. In late May 1940, having lost 25 pounds due to illness and exhaustion -- and demonized as a leftist, isolationist crank but still maintaining a whirlwind speaking schedule -- he checked himself into the Philadelphia Navy Yard Hospital for a "rest." He died there, probably of some sort of cancer, four weeks later. Working himself to death in his 10-year retirement and second career as a born-again antiwar activist, however, might just have constituted the very best service that the two-time Medal of Honor winner could have given the nation he loved to the very end.

Someone of his credibility, character, and candor is needed more than ever today. Unfortunately, this military generation is unlikely to produce such a figure. In retirement, Butler himself boldly confessed that, "like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical..."

Today, generals don't seem to have a thought of their own even in retirement. And more's the pity...

2 minutes ago
Am I the only one to notice that Hollywood and it's film distributors have gone full bore on "war" productions, glorifying these historical events while using poetic license to rewrite history. Prepping the numbheads.
14 minutes ago
TULSI GABBARD.

Forget rank. As Mr Sjursen implies, dissidents are no longer allowed in the higher ranks. "They" made sure to fix this as Mr Butler had too much of a mind of his own (US education system also programmed against creative, charismatic thinkers, btw).

The US Space Force has been created as part of a plan to disclose the deep state's Secret Space Program (SSP), which has been active for decades, and which has utilized, and repressed, advanced technologies that would provide free, unlimited renewable energy, and thus eliminate hunger and poverty on a planetary scale.

14 minutes ago
14 minutes ago

ALL wars are EVIL. Period .

29 minutes ago

Sadly enough, in the age of Trump, as numerous polls demonstrate, the U.S. military is the only public institution Americans still truly trust. Under the circumstances, how useful it would be to have a high-ranking, highly decorated, charismatic retired general in the Butler mold galvanize an apathetic public around those forever wars of ours. Unfortunately, the likelihood of that is practically nil, given the military system of our moment.

This is why I feel an oath keeping constitutionally oriented American general is what we need in power, clear out all 545 criminals in office now, review their finances (and most of them will roll over on the others) and punish accordingly, then the lobbyist, how many of them worked against the country? You know what we do with those.

And then, finally, Hollywood, oh yes I long to see that **** hole burn with everyone in it.

30 minutes ago
Republicrat: the two faces of the moar war whore.
32 minutes ago

Given the severity of the Nazi threat to mankind

Do tell, from what I've read the Nazis were really only a threat to a few groups, the rest of us didn't need to worry.

35 minutes ago
Today, the "Masters of the Permawars" refer to the international extortion, MIC, racket as "Defending American Interests"! .....With never any explanation to the public/American taxpayer just what "American Interests" the incredible expenditures of American lives, blood, and treasure are being defended!

Why are we sending our children out into the hellholes of the world to be maimed and killed in the fauxjew banksters' quest for world domination.

How stupid can we be!

41 minutes ago
(Edited) "Smedley Butler"... The last time the UCMJ was actually used before being permanently turned into a "door stop"!
49 minutes ago
He was correct about our staying out of WWII. Which, BTW, would have never happened if we had stayed out of WWI.
22 minutes ago
(Edited) Both wars were about the international fauxjew imposition of debt-money central bankstering.

Both wars were promulgated by the Financial oligarchyof New York. The communist Red Army of Russia was funded and supplied by the Financial oligarchyof New York. It was American Financial oligarchythat built the Russian Red Army that vexed the world and created the Cold War. How many hundreds of millions of goyim were sacrificed to create both the Russian and the Chinese Satanic behemoths.......and the communist horror that is now embedded in American academia, publishing, American politics, so-called news, entertainment, The worldwide Catholic religion, the Pentagon, and the American deep state.......and more!

How stupid can we be. Every generation has the be dragged, kicking and screaming, out of the eternal maw of historical ignorance to avoid falling back into the myriad dark hellholes of history. As we all should know, people who forget their own history are doomed to repeat it.

53 minutes ago
Today's General is a robot with with a DNA.
54 minutes ago
All the General Staff is a bunch of #asskissinglittlechickenshits
57 minutes ago
want to stop senseless Empire wars>>well do this

War = jobs and profit..we get work "THEY" get the profit.. If we taxed all war related profit at 99% how many wars would our rulers start? 1 hour ago

Here is a simple straightforward trading maxim that might apply here: if it works or is working keep doing it, but if it doesn't work or stops working, then STOP doing it. There are plenty of people, now poorer, for not adhering to that simple principle. Where is the Taxpayer's return on investment from the Combat taking place on their behalf around the globe? 'Nuff said - it isn't working. It is making a microscopic few richer & all others poorer so STOP doing it. 36 seconds ago We don't have to look far to figure out who they are that are getting rich off the fauxjew permawars.

How can we be so stupid???

1 hour ago

See also:

TULSI GABBARD

1 hour ago

The main reason you don't see the generals criticizing is that the current crop have not been in actual long term direct combat with the enemy and have mostly been bureaucratic paper pushers.

Take the Marine Major General who is the current commander of CENTCOM. By the time he got into the Iraq/Afghanistan war he was already a Lieutenant Colonel and far removed from direct action.

He was only there on and off for a few years. Here are some of his other career highlights aft as they appear on his official bio:

In short, these top guys aren't warriors they're bureaucrats so why would we expect them to be honest brokers of the truth?

51 minutes ago

are U saying Chesty Puller he's NOT? 1 hour ago
(Edited) The purpose of war is to ensure that the Federal Reserve Note remains the world reserve paper currency of choice by keeping it relevant and in demand across the globe by forcing pesky energy producing nations to trade with it exclusively.

It is a 49 year old policy created by the private owners of quasi public institutions called central banks to ensure they remain the Wizards of Oz doing gods work conjuring magic paper into existence with a secret spell known as issuing credit.

How else is a technologically advanced society of billions of people supposed to function w/out this divinely inspired paper?

1 hour ago

Goebbels in "Churchill's Lie Factory" where he said: "The Americans follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous." - Jospeh Goebbels, "Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik," 12. january 1941, Die Zeit ohne Beispiel

1 hour ago

The greatest anti-imperialist of our times is Michael Parenti:

Imperialism has been the most powerful force in world history over the last four or five centuries, carving up whole continents while oppressing indigenous peoples and obliterating entire civilizations. Yet, it is seldom accorded any serious attention by our academics, media commentators, and political leaders. When not ignored outright, the subject of imperialism has been sanitized, so that empires become "commonwealths," and colonies become "territories" or "dominions" (or, as in the case of Puerto Rico, "commonwealths" too). Imperialist military interventions become matters of "national defense," "national security," and maintaining "stability" in one or another region. In this book I want to look at imperialism for what it really is.

https://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/imperialism.html

49 minutes ago
"Imperialism has been the most powerful force in world history over the last four or five centuries, carving up whole continents while oppressing indigenous peoples and obliterating entire civilizations. Yet, it is seldom accorded any serious attention by our academics, media commentators, and political leaders."

Why would it when they who control academia, media and most of our politicians are our enemies.

1 hour ago

"The big three are Secretary of State Colin Powell's former chief of staff, retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson ; ..."

Yep, Wilkerson, who leaked Valerie Plame's name, not that it was a leak, to Novak, and then stood by to watch the grand jury fry Scooter Libby. Wilkerson, that paragon of moral rectitude. Wilkerson the silent, that *******.

sheesh,

1 hour ago
(Edited)

" A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."

James Madison Friday June 29, 1787

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_629.asp

"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789])

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs6.html

1 hour ago

A particularly pernicious example of intra-European imperialism was the Nazi aggression during World War II, which gave the German business cartels and the Nazi state an opportunity to plunder the resources and exploit the labor of occupied Europe, including the slave labor of concentration camps. - M. PARENTI, Against empire

See Alexander Parvus

1 hour ago

Collapse is the cure. It's too far gone.

1 hour ago

Russia Wants to 'Jam' F-22 and F-35s in the Middle East: Report

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-wants-jam-f-22-and-f-35s-middle-east-report-121041

1 hour ago

ZH retards think that the American mic is bad and all other mics are good or don't exist. That's the power of brainwashing. Humans understand that war in general is bad, but humans are becoming increasingly rare in this world.

1 hour ago

The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.

If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort.

https://truthout.org/articles/the-dangers-of-american-fascism/

2 hours ago
The swamp is bigger than the military alone. Substitute Bureaucrat, Statesman, or Beltway Bandit for General and Colonel in your writing above and you've got a whole new article to post that is just as true.
2 hours ago
(Edited) War = jobs and profit..we get work "THEY" get the profit..If we taxed all war related profit at 99% how many wars would our rulers start?
2 hours ago [edited for clarity]
War is a racket. And nobody loves a racket more than Financial oligarchy. Americans come close though, that's why Financial oligarchy use them to project their own rackets and provide protection reprisals.

[Feb 22, 2020] Tulsi's Populist 'Country-First' Anti-War Crusade by Hunter DeRensis

Notable quotes:
"... A combat veteran and major in the U.S. National Guard, Gabbard has made ending America's policy of "regime change wars" the core of her campaign platform. "She puts peace over war profiteering," said Carl Holland, introducing the candidate to unanimous applause. But on this occasion, foreign policy was not the focus of her stump speech. ..."
"... After her first debate, I watched CNN coverage of that debate on YouTube and noted the amount of coverage devoted to her. I was struck by how little was said about her. The story included her in a clip of candidates deriding Trump but gave her NO coverage of her other views, in spite of the fact that she did well in the debate and made some sound-byte worthy statements. In contrast, the mainstream candidates got lots of coverage. ..."
"... She completely botched the Assad - poison gas issue. She swallowed the propaganda whole cloth, and when it was proven she was just wrong she huffed off in denial. ..."
"... Actually, it appears that Americans and Western media bought the propaganda on alleged Assad use of poison gas (vice the al-Qaeda linked "rebels"): https://thegrayzone.com/202... ..."
"... Undoubtedly the finest candidate for president in the race. And by far the most presidential. Her campaign deserves more. ..."
"... HER core issue -- anti-foreign intervention, ending forever wars -- remain resoundingly popular. However, her relative low-profile as a Hawaiian congresswoman (compare her favorable support vis-a-vis Julian Castro, for instance), the constant mainstream media attacks (compare her to the Mayor Pete love-fest), and most importantly, her unwillingness to be reflexively anti-Trump, is costing her the support of a feverish, vengeful Democratic primary base. ..."
"... Hi, the main reason the major media went out to try to stop Tulsi's campaign: From the Dem leadership like Pelosi and Schumer, to the folks at CNN, MSNBC and all the network 'news' shows, they worked to stop her because: They are neocons! And she's talking ending wars over there and there! ..."
"... That goes against hardliners like AIPAC, and in mentioning CNN, for example, Blitzer is a neocon guy and he is foremost an Israeli supporter and so on. What, are we just gonna keep kidding ourselves? ..."
Feb 19, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Is there a better time for a presidential townhall than on President's Day? And is there a better place than the Old Town Hall in the heart of Fairfax, Virginia? Built in 1900, this small, neoclassical-styled building, with wood pillars sprouting from floor to ceiling in the middle of its main room, brings to mind the same communal assemblies that the Old Dominion was founded on 400 years ago.

It was here that Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii spoke Monday to over 200 supporters gathered ahead of the March 3 Democratic primary.

And gather they did. An hour before she was supposed to speak, a line was already forming down the sidewalk. A man near the front door held a "Tulsi 2020" sign out towards the road. When asked if he was on her staff, he responded that he wasn't even a volunteer for the event; he had brought the sign from home. The other attendees were similarly clad in Tulsi gear, holding signs, wearing shirts, and sporting "Veterans for Gabbard" hats. These were not undecided voters on a curiosity trip, but the enthusiastic base of a candidate most of the people driving past wouldn't even recognize.

A combat veteran and major in the U.S. National Guard, Gabbard has made ending America's policy of "regime change wars" the core of her campaign platform. "She puts peace over war profiteering," said Carl Holland, introducing the candidate to unanimous applause. But on this occasion, foreign policy was not the focus of her stump speech.

"What is it that makes people hate politics?" she asked the crowd after her customary "aloha" greeting. She believes it's the same reasons that she finds it off-putting: "I hate the pay-to-play politics that rules the day in Washington." She hates the hyper-partisanship, the politicians "who love to talk a lot but refuse to actually listen," and the leaders who carelessly "send our nation's sons and daughters off to fight in wars that have nothing to do with our country's national security."

Taking advantage of the holiday, she spoke about being inspired by Abraham Lincoln and his 1858 "House Divided" speech. She described a country still divided today, on matters of politics, race, gender, and even "what cable news channel you watch."

Briefly contrasting what she hates with what she loves, Gabbard said unreservedly, "I love our country. I love the people of this country." Multiple times she used the phrase "Country First" to describe her policies and her movement. The difference in intentions between her slogan and Donald Trump's "America First" would be hard to parse.

Gabbard's example of putting Country First was the First Step Act, a criminal justice bill passed by large bipartisan majorities in December 2018. The law enacted new dignity provisions for prisoners and resulted in the release of 7,000 people. Gabbard described members of her party who "did not want to give Trump a win, who stood in the way of this legislation passing." To those legislators who "put politics ahead of people, shame on you," she said.

For Gabbard, the corruption in the system doesn't stop with her fellow elected officials or the "high-powered lobbyists [who] stack the odds against the people." It includes those in "the corporate media trying to silence our voices because we dare speak the truth" about regime change wars. Like clockwork, when a woman in the audience asked about the OPCW whistleblower who has challenged the United Nations' conclusions about the alleged Douma chemical attack in Syria, members of the print media darted their heads up and scurried closer to the stage to try to get a potentially scandalous soundbite .

Gabbard responded by saying she has sent multiple letters to the OPCW inquiring about the whistleblower situation, but had not yet received satisfactory answers. She promised to keep trying.

The candidate closed her speech by telling the crowd, "You have my personal commitment that as your president, my sole mission every single day will be serving you and only you ." Her strategy for winning the White House would be "not taking people for granted, reaching out, and treating every American with respect."

After answering questions about health care, small business, and climate change, Gabbard stepped away from the podium and her fans lined up for pictures and a handshake. Meanwhile, her husband Abraham walked the room, chatting with people and recording the event on his phone.

In the unscientific poll of raised hands, the attendees were one third Democrat, one third Republican, and one third "independent, Libertarian, or Green." They were overwhelmingly from Northern Virginia or Maryland, with very few from Washington, D.C. Multiple families attended, some of whose kids presented Tulsi with homemade drawings. One family, with their two adolescent children present and husky dog tied up outside, drove all the way from West Virginia.

When everyone had dispersed, The American Conservative was given an opportunity to ask a question. Gabbard has been explicit in her condemnations of "radical Islam," and she's referred to the war on terror as an ideological war as much as a military one. When asked to specify whether she believes the terrorism against the West is the result of religious extremism or if it's a consequence of foreign military interventions and their subsequent blowback, she appeared to lean more to the latter.

"It's a combination of the radical, Wahhabi-Salafist ideology that serves as the fuel and the recruiting ground for terrorist organizations like ISIS and al-Qaeda, that motivates them in their terror actions." Gabbard told TAC , "But it's also when you see how our regime change wars have had a direct impact. Not in going in and defeating terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda, but actually serving to only strengthen them."

A Monmouth poll released the day after her townhall listed Gabbard's support in Virginia at 1 percent. This is similar to the national polls where she places last among the eight candidates still running for the Democratic nomination. Gabbard has previously announced that she's declining to run for reelection to the House (after four terms) and that she's taking her presidential campaign all the way to the Democratic convention in June. Where this will put the 38-year-old come January 2021 is anyone's guess. But whether in the White House or retired from politics, Tulsi Gabbard plans to continue putting Country First.

Hunter DeRensis is a reporter with The National Interest and a regular contributor to The American Conservative. Follow him on Twitter @HunterDeRensis .


JessicaR Martin Ranger 3 days ago
You are raising a valid question about why she is not doing better in the polls. While I have not done a statistical analysis of her press coverage, it appeared to me that the networks have largely shut her out.

After her first debate, I watched CNN coverage of that debate on YouTube and noted the amount of coverage devoted to her. I was struck by how little was said about her. The story included her in a clip of candidates deriding Trump but gave her NO coverage of her other views, in spite of the fact that she did well in the debate and made some sound-byte worthy statements. In contrast, the mainstream candidates got lots of coverage.

It is my impression that this trend has continued throughout the primaries.

It is reminiscent of the ways the networks treat other strong opponents of war. 1, Dennis Kucinich, NBC had a rule that to be on one of their debates-in 2004 if I remember correctly--a candidate had to finish in the top three in a primary. Kucinich finished third in Nevada. NBC changed the rules on him. He took them to court. The court ruled that NBC was a private business and could set their own rules. 2. Bernie Sanders in 2016. The CNN website largely ignored his candidacy until he started winning primaries. When they couldn't ignore him anymore, they ran unflattering photos of him with his mouth open--how else could he talk?-but did not do so for Clinton.

Anyway, that is my impression.

Osse JessicaR 2 days ago
I think the lack of press coverage is part of it. She is also demonized by most liberals and even some leftists. I say “ demonized” because I think at least some of the criticisms are false, but I am not sure about the others.
Alex (the one that likes Ike) MPC 3 days ago • edited
And I think you seriously underestimate the share of antiwar voters nationwide and overestimate the importance of those whom you, inexplicably from the Marxist point of view, call "left". Tulsi now holds a wild card.

She's still under forty, which is almost a senior teenager by modern standards, and already on her way to becoming a kingmaker through being able to guarantee either party's candidates the support of a serious share of voters from both and of independents for years to come.

MPC Alex (the one that likes Ike) 3 days ago

...I do think she would appeal to just the type of person the Dems want to peel away from Trump. She'd be a play for independents.

diverick MPC 2 days ago
I do think she would appeal to just the type of person the Dems want to peel away from Trump.

I would agree only, from what I have seen thus far, her appeal to a possibly significant number of previous Trump voters is seen as a negative in the eyes of Dem activists, pundits, other candidates, etc. The Dems don't seem to have any interest in winning over previous Trump voters, no matter what the reason was for their 2016 Trump vote.

I think a more accurate phrasing of the sentence above would be, "I do think she would appeal to just the type of person the Dems should want to peel away from Trump."

Alex (the one that likes Ike) Collin Reid 2 days ago
The only bridges she burned were those with the Democratic establishment, which is out of touch with reality and is doomed to soon repeat its Republican counterpart's inglorious end. Thus the fact that she burned those bridges actually shows that she, unlike so many other politicians, is capable of, at least, midterm planning. Not to mention that, as I've already said, she, given her strong cross-partisan appeal, can easily become a Republican now.

1) Did Sanders meet UN-recognized leaders of countries, against whom the neocon/neolib clique was waging illegal wars?
2) And that campaigning for Clinton cost Democrats the defection of many Sanders's voters to Trump's camp. Long-term planning, right.
3) 55% under a system which has recently shown how the votes are counted in all of its glory? Impressive.

RadicalCenter Alex (the one that likes Ike) 2 days ago • edited
I applaud Tulsi's anti-war comments and have observed that the establishment media shut her out of meaningful coverage. But there is no reason to think that she can influence any large block of voters and influence them enough to be a kingmaker. Not even close.

Andrew Yang, by contrast, could have some influence, though probably more in pushing the universal basic income idea than in inducing a particularly large number of voters to vote for this candidate or that. But he has achieved more influence than Tulsi for sure.

E_Conegliano MPC a day ago
Can you imagine the look on the face of AOC, Bernie's ambitious surrogate, if Bernie chose Tulsi for VP? IMO, Bernie has hitched his wagon to AOC's rock-star magnetism and Our Revolution's multicultural foot soldiers. No room for Tulsi, who favors closed borders and open discussions in contrast to open borders and PC lectures.
channelclemente 3 days ago
She completely botched the Assad - poison gas issue. She swallowed the propaganda whole cloth, and when it was proven she was just wrong she huffed off in denial.
Collin Reid channelclemente 2 days ago
Yea, that hurt her but the reality was it was crowded Primary with over 20 candidates and Gabbard had limited name recognition going into 2019!
Xanadu channelclemente 2 days ago
Actually, it appears that Americans and Western media bought the propaganda on alleged Assad use of poison gas (vice the al-Qaeda linked "rebels"): https://thegrayzone.com/202...
Osse channelclemente 2 days ago
What are you talking about? If you mean Douma or the OPCW, it is more likely the mainstream which is in denial.
Dodo 3 days ago
Neoconservatives' wars for their own ideologies have exhausted most Americans. They want to stop wars, regardless. In coming economic depression, this view will rampant Eventually, appeasement will happen again.

Neconservatives and their supporters (regardless reasons) deserve this result but how about other Americans?

EdMan 3 days ago
Undoubtedly the finest candidate for president in the race. And by far the most presidential. Her campaign deserves more.
dbriz 3 days ago
If, still a large if, Sanders gets the nomination Gabbard makes a lot of sense as running mate. She appeals to the very votes needed to defeat Trump. Antiwar, libertarian oriented moderates. Any VP candidate with ties to the DNC will work against Sanders.
Collin Reid 2 days ago
????? Gabbard is getting 2 -3% polls in the Democratic Primary and is sort of a candidate who is winning with Democrats that don't like the Party. Frankly I was Gabbard suspect early 2020 but I also realistic enough to know below 40 year candidate with little name recognition tend not to win Primaries their first try. And for a young Gabbard her true goal should have building her name in the current Primary that 20 other candidates. (And given that often incumbents win the Presidency, 2024 could have been a competitive Primary.)

1) Originally I thought her biggest problem was past positions on gay rights and she was definitely behind curve on that one. And getting this weakness out of the way in 'trial test Primary' isn't the worst goal for young House member.

2) Sanders has much more anti-war candidate in 2020 than he was in 2016 so Gabbard message was not a lone voice here.

3) The dumbest thing Gabbard has done is give up her House seat in the completely D safe district in Hawaii. So why would the Sunday shows book an ex-House member in 2021? And the liberal punditry network is not as nearly as strong (or well paying) as the conservative pundits.

Xanadu 2 days ago • edited
I am a former Democrat, grew up lower middle class, and a legal immigrant. While I don't agree with all of her policy positions, I find Tulsi Gabbard's single-minded focus on the costs of foreign intervention THE most resonant/substantive topic for the United States, especially in a political system where Congress/Courts pass domestic legislation, and presidents only have absolute control of foreign policy.

What sets Tulsi a rare breed apart from other progressive Democrats is that she's unwilling to do 180s on core convictions as a reactionary take on Trump. The "whatever Trump is for, I'm against" transformation of Democratic lawmakers and media wonks has led them to support prolonging wars (Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq); red-baiting nuclear stand-offs with Russia; sudden embrace of corporatist "free trade" like TPP; silcening any criticism of anti-women Islamic customs; and even libertarian wet dreams of effectively open borders. Even Bernie is wavering in his long-held convictions.

In response to why Tulsi's campaign hasn't resonated to higher polls, it's important to remember that HER core issue -- anti-foreign intervention, ending forever wars -- remain resoundingly popular. However, her relative low-profile as a Hawaiian congresswoman (compare her favorable support vis-a-vis Julian Castro, for instance), the constant mainstream media attacks (compare her to the Mayor Pete love-fest), and most importantly, her unwillingness to be reflexively anti-Trump, is costing her the support of a feverish, vengeful Democratic primary base.

RadicalCenter 2 days ago
She's a fool for giving up her Congressional seat. She would do better to win re-election to the House, make a national name for herself as the anti-war anti-military-profiteering voice in the Dem Party, and then run for the US Senate when one of the current white-hating establishment scum in the Hawaii Senate delegation finally retires.

Hirono and Schatz took their Senate seats only in 2012 and 2013 and aren't old, unfortunately, but Tulsi is younger at only 38. She can become a fairly senior member of Congress and run to succeed Hirono in say, 2030. Tulsi will then still be only 48.

Fayez Abedaziz 2 days ago
Hi, the main reason the major media went out to try to stop Tulsi's campaign: From the Dem leadership like Pelosi and Schumer, to the folks at CNN, MSNBC and all the network 'news' shows, they worked to stop her because: They are neocons! And she's talking ending wars over there and there!

That goes against hardliners like AIPAC, and in mentioning CNN, for example, Blitzer is a neocon guy and he is foremost an Israeli supporter and so on. What, are we just gonna keep kidding ourselves?

(he came from the Jerusalem Post, was a member of AIPAC.) What, something's wrong with pointing out facts? Shouldn't be.

steve Howell 14 hours ago
She is too liberal for me. And she is for gun control. so now ay would she ever get my vote. I do like some things she says.

[Feb 21, 2020] As an anti-war candidate Tulsi was not invited. She has been denied oxygen in the press, denied a platform in the debates and generally airbrushed out of the picture. No surprise there.

Feb 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hal Duell , Feb 20 2020 22:36 utc | 60

Bernie would prove to be such a disappointment. The other parrots on the perch not so much as they have brought nothing and will offer the same.

Tulsi was not invited. She has been denied oxygen in the press, denied a platform in the debates and generally airbrushed out of the picture. No surprise there. By speaking out against the forever-wars and against the prison gulag she committed the cardinal sin in US politics: You don't rock the boat, especially when pretending to do so! But how refreshing has her presence been in an otherwise dreary, dreary and predictable, landscape.

karlof1 , Feb 20 2020 22:38 utc | 62

b4real @47--

Thanks for your comment and question. Within US History, there are several such changes of direction, the first coming with the elections that ratified the 1787 Constitution. Second would be the 1800 election that elected Jefferson and ended what's known as the Federalist Era; it's extremely unlikely the Federalists would have made the Louisiana Purchase because of their enmity toward France. In 1828, General Jackson gained the White House amidst the Battle of the Bank, the importance of which is touched on in most survey US History classes but never examined as deeply as it demands. 1844 brought in Polk dedicated to expanding slavery who showed Congress couldn't stop the executive thus showing the vast--and foreseen--problems of an unregulated president as he provoked Mexico and stole 1/2 its territory; Polk was clearly the model for GW Bush. The 4-way election of 1860 showcased the break-up of the National Democratic Party into two factions; brought Lincoln, and the nascent Republican Party, who goaded the South's Fire Eaters to commence the Civil War. The 13-15th amendments greatly altered the national social fabric. In 1896, D-Party candidate WJ Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech elaborated the concept of Trickle-down Economics and firmly placed the D-Party as the party of the working-classes, which further compounded the D-Party's internal strife between its Northern urban political machines and Southern Segregationist politicos. 1912 again saw a 4-way race as T Roosevelt's split of the R-Party allowed Wilson to win and transfer the management of the government's financial affairs from the Treasury where they belonged to the privately controlled misnamed Federal Reserve Board, the woes of which we feel daily. 1920 saw the reversion from Wilsonian Internationalism to "Normalcy" as traditional US unilateralism regained ascendency with the rejection of the League of Nations. Although not perceived during the 1932 campaign since FDR didn't really know what he was going to do, a return to the social democratic republic commenced with the New Deal Era. 1944 didn't see an immediate change in policy course, but by June 1945 it was clear Truman was no FDR or Wallace; and by October, the Outlaw US Empire was born when the UN Charter came into force which was already being violated by Truman's government--we most certainly wouldn't have the CIA as a result of the 1947 National Security Act if Wallace had continued FDR's term, nor would there have been a Cold War. The only other change in direction (if it can be called that) was the adoption of Neoliberalism by Carter in 1978 and its rapid acceleration by Reagan/Bush which resulted in the Outlaw US Empire being even more aggressive than it was previously, a pace kept alive by the ascension of the Neocons in 2000.

Some of the directional changes occurred due to economic or social strife, but not all, nor arguably were they most important, IMO--1800, 1828, 1860, 1912, 1944. In 1932, if Hoover had regained his office, he would have had to get experimental just like FDR, and the evidence shows he was trying to get things to improve; it's been acknowledged by historians that neither had the intellectual tools required to fix the Depression. Here's a basic listing of the POTUS and there years in office. I should add 1876 as that election marked the end of Reconstruction and the beginning of big money corruption of the federal government. The loss by Bryan and the fused D- and Peoples Party in 1896 informed Conservatives like T Roosevelt and Taft that they had to listen to the people's demands for at least basic regulation of American Capitalism--remember, the first Progressives were Republicans, not Democrats.

Given more time to meditate on the question, I could probably cite further diversions in policy from one administration to the next. But the above provides a good overview. I should highlight Fedrick Jackson Turner's 1893 elucidation of his Frontier Thesis-- "The Significance of the Frontier in American History" --before the American Historical Association at Chicago's Colombian Exhibition since it made a huge impression on that era's elite and certainly prompted policy changes. A week's usually spent in grad seminar's discussing Turner's thesis.

[Feb 21, 2020] The fact that Bernie Sanders is one this stage with the other pro-war imperialists and Tulsi is not is no accident

Feb 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

JC , Feb 20 2020 23:37 utc | 70

Posted by: SharonM | Feb 20 2020 20:29 utc | 41

"Bernie Sanders belonged on that stage with the other pro-war imperialists. With him, we get affordable healthcare, while millions of people around the world will suffer through coups, invasions, bombings, mass murder, and mass displacement. There is absolutely NOTHING (nothing) for an anti-war advocate to get excited about with a Sanders Presidency."

Exactly! I'm surprise even Tulsi Gabbard not invited to the debate many here still wanna her for VP. I an't voting for anyone but Tulsi Gabbard, I hates the Democratic more than Trump and will vote for Trump if necessary.

JC , Feb 20 2020 23:41 utc | 71

http://brothernathanaelchannel.com/

Inside Bernie

Forgot to include Brother Nathanael

[Feb 21, 2020] There is no way Gabbard will be permitted as Sanders' running-mate unless she has totally sold out already.

Feb 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

A User , Feb 21 2020 3:04 utc | 101

Frankly some people here seem to be living in la-la-land where impossible dreams come true.

How about some realpolitik as practiced by both halves of the amerikan empire party when the VP decision time comes around. Does anyone imagine Kennedy wanted Johnson as VP or Bush I, Dan Quayle or Oblamblam the crookedest man in the senate, Joe Biden?

Of course not they were told to take these hacks as a way for 'the party' to keep the hairy eyeball on 'their' Prez.

Let's just pretend for a moment that Sanders came to conference with sufficient delegates that the hope of the DNC to override Sanders with superdelegates was simply too much for the dem party to achieve without alienating a sizable chunk of potential dem voters for life (the odds of that occurring are slimmer than a 2 year old Yemeni, but let's pretend).

Even if Sanders had sufficient delegates to obviate a brokered conference, it wouldn't matter, the DNC would still insist on a 'sit down' with the Sanders crew and insist he took a particular person as his VP. Sanders could refuse, in which case he could expect zero $$$'s for his campaign from the dems and worse the DNC would tell him that the party money, in many cases donated to the DNC by naifs who 'wanted to give Bernie a hand', was going to be spent 'down ticket' assisting all the dem pols up for re-election who were committed to opposing Bernie's favourite policies such as single payer healthcare.

Bernie would be screwed as even if he beat orange moron as he wouldn't stand a shitshow in hell of getting any of these "radical pinko policies" through, which would be justified by the rightist dem senators & congress-creeps saying "Democrat voters, voted for a democratic president not a Marxist president" over and over until the idiots among the public had been sufficiently indoctrinated to believe that tosh. There is no way Gabbard will be permitted as Sanders' running-mate unless she has totally sold out already.

Maybe Sanders should open the bidding with Gabbard, after which the DNC might offer up 'Pete the cheat' to ensure Bernie is defeated, or some other less power-hungry, more malleable dem lick-spittle.
If Sanders is smart enough to play this game, he will already have worded up one or two slightly conservative DC hacks on the qt, then make out he's making a huge compromise by selecting her/him.

He could conceivably get away with that as long as the DNC mobsters are blindsided - remember most of those DC lowlifes will leap at the chance of the veep's gig since it puts you in the inside running to be the prez after yer running 'mate'. And offering it quietly early on would give Sanders the right to insist on blind loyalty - which he prolly wouldn't get totally, but he would have something close to that

Trouble is I don't reckon Sanders has the smarts to pull a rort like that off - we shall see. Whatever he does do the odds are high of him being stymied every time if he does make it


Likklemore , Feb 21 2020 3:25 utc | 102

Posted by: Krollchem | Feb 21 2020 1:55 utc | 92

In reply to my comment on the process, you wrote

"Actually this is not technically correct
and then you quoted Article 2 Section 2 of the Constitution.

You ignored the process

I wrote on the process in which jim and jane mainstreet vote [the 2nd part of the process] to select the State electors to the Electoral College: from Link (Archives.gov) provided @ 24 and fully detailed below:

November 3, 2020 -- Election Day

During the general election your vote helps determine your State's electors. When you vote for a Presidential candidate, you aren't actually voting for President. You are telling your State which candidate you want your State to vote for at the meeting of the electors. The States use these general election results (also known as the popular vote) to appoint their electors. The winning candidate's State political party selects the individuals who will be the electors.[.]

Who selects the electors?

Choosing each State's electors is a two-part process. First, the political parties in each State choose slates of potential electors sometime before the general election. Second, during the general election, the voters in each State select their State's electors by casting their ballots.

The first part of the process is controlled by the political parties in each State and varies from State to State. Generally, the parties either nominate slates of potential electors at their State party conventions or they chose them by a vote of the party's central committee. This happens in each State for each party by whatever rules the State party and (sometimes) the national party have for the process. This first part of the process results in each Presidential candidate having their own unique slate of potential electors.

Political parties often choose individuals for the slate to recognize their service and dedication to that political party. They may be State elected officials, State party leaders, or people in the State who have a personal or political affiliation with their party's Presidential candidate. (For specific information about how slates of potential electors are chosen, contact the political parties in each State.)

The second part of the process happens during the general election. When the voters in each State cast votes for the Presidential candidate of their choice they are voting to select their State's electors. The potential electors' names may or may not appear on the ballot below the name of the Presidential candidates, depending on election procedures and ballot formats in each State.

The winning Presidential candidate's slate of potential electors are appointed as the State's electors -- except in Nebraska and Maine, which have proportional distribution of the electors. In Nebraska and Maine, the State winner receives two electors and the winner of each congressional district (who may be the same as the overall winner or a different candidate) receives one elector. This system permits Nebraska and Maine to award electors to more than one candidate.[.]

(empasis added)


psychedelicatessen , Feb 21 2020 4:04 utc | 103
Rob @ 99 - I don't think evidence of this form has been archived anywhere on the Internet. I would be particularly interested in seeing how much of a favorite Clinton was in 2016. I doubt she would have been more than 2/3, and the result not as shocking an upset were Trump actually 1/1. In any event, if the favorite an hour before the books closed always won, who then would ever consider the price on an underdog as an overlay? I'm not addressing any prediction of a winner; I'm observing the changes in public opinion as expressed through those who are willing to take a money position along the way. There would be no other prominent reason for Sanders to reclaim over Bloomberg in less than a week, the Democratic candidate top spot in betting odds, than his strong showing Wednesday night.

All of the legal gambling outlets will tend to keep fairly close in sync with changes in odds offered. Any one of them getting significantly out of sync is taking a position, attracting layoff action from one of the others. When someone makes an investment in this type of futures, it's with an eye toward spotting an overlay. That means a current line which is offering too strong a return on the investment. The books have several ways of adjusting. They can change the odds offered, lay off action with each other to balance their money position, or offer early resolution to certain ticket holders. For example, Trump opened at 5/2 and toward the end of 2018 had been bet down to 3/2. He is currently 8/13 which represents an extreme overlay if someone is holding a ticket with 3/2 odds. When this kind of situation occurs, all of the books are likely to sustain a loss. So, they will offer early resolution. A $2000 ticket on Trump at 3/2 will return $5000, however anyone holding this ticket may be offered $2750 today for early resolution. That's an immediate $750 profit for giving back their position.

Now to illustrate just how drastic changes in the futures betting can be, a few hours ago Sanders was 7/2, he's now 10/3. Bloomberg continues to slide, from 4/1 last week to 11/2 a few hours ago to now 7/1. Perhaps Bloomberg will be attractive enough to become an overlay at 10/1? I would consider that price might be worth taking a position on, if one thinks convention shenanigans will place him as the candidate. At that point (if correct) he'll drop to say 8/5 and will return a good profit from early resolution.

The changes in the betting lines appear more discernible to me, than a shift of a few percentage point amongst pollsters. Notice Pence is back on the board, so obviously some people think there's greater than a 300/1 chance Trump is deceased during this term.

Circe , Feb 21 2020 4:33 utc | 104
Aren't you being somewhat disingenuous by selectively nitpicking a few sentences out of Bernie's speech that merely express an opinion, not a declaration of political meddling, intervention or war, while leaving out the positive 90%, like his criticism of Bolsanaro, Netanyahu and Israel's racist unjust policies and his concern for the dire situation in Gaza?

He rails against Saudi Arabia and MBS and the war on Yemen. He's critical of Sheldon Adelson's influence, the Koch brothers and Mercer and the corruption of goverment and the greed they represent. He's critical of the massive amounts of funding spent on the military. That's great, no?

He's sympathetic to the unjust imprisonment of Lula da Silva and talks about the necessity of addressing climate change and poverty and much more. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT??? There's a Ziofascist in the White House right now who just brought on board Richard Grenell for DNI, (ironically mentioned in Bernie's speech last October... prophetic? Yes.), yet another Iranophobe! So you can guess what direction we're headed in?

Out of all the good that Bernie spoke you gripe about that small paragraph and use it to distort as still too aggressive his entire foreign policy vision and pov on issues few in Congress have the spine to address?

You think I'm just going to let slide this perversion of his message?

Just see how so many comments reek with that same type of distortion parotting YOUR CUE. Do you not feel any responsibilty to the truth and to the power your word may have to influence others to misjudge Bernie Sanders unfairly through your distorted lens?

I am sickened reading the comments that emanated from your small paragraph and bet you NO ONE BOTHERED TO READ THE ENTIRE SPEECH IN THE LINK AND RELIED INSTEAD ON THAT DROP FROM POISON PEN TO FORM A TOTALLY IGNORANT, BIASED OPINION.

I'm glad you at least gave him credit for defending well his positions in the midst of multiple attacks in the debate.

If Bernie can withstand the onslaught of unfair, disproportionate establishment and media attacks (your's included) and win the Nomination, it won't be thanks to the majority of you, but you will all in some way benefit from an improvement in foreign policy under a Sanders administration. OR DO YOU ACTUALLY PREFER TO DISCUSS WAR AND ATROCITY AND CONSPIRACY MACHINATIONS HERE ALL DAY, EVERY DAY IN PERPETUITY? Maybe that's the problem, maybe with Bernie as President you'll be less involved as armchair generals and have to settle for criticizing boring diplomacy for a change!

I don't know about you, but I really welcome most of what Bernie talked about and his vision for the future on this planet much more than discussing war with Iran, famine and climate disaster.

Bernie will make it in spite of haters, never Sanders, maligners, and distorters of the truth.

Oh, and he'll DESTROY Trump in November.

▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪
Jared suggests Bloomberg/Gabbard.

Gobbledygook!

I guess you don't really know what Bloomberg's about. And you especially don't get Gabbard! She wouldn't be caught dead working for that Neocon warmonger!

SharonM and Jackrabbit

Get a room you professional koo-koo spinbots...preferrably in another Solar System where you can't damage impressionable minds. Ugh.

Cadence calls , Feb 21 2020 5:04 utc | 105
I feel bad for the Bernie Bros.
He's gonna sell them out again.
Dude has zero pull with his "party", and is facing a steamroller in Trump.
I would be happy to have a small dinner with Circe and friends after the convention.
We can commiserate over a few wodkas and goulash.
SharonM , Feb 21 2020 5:14 utc | 106
@104 Circe

"SharonM and Jackrabbit
Get a room you professional koo-koo spinbots...preferrably in another Solar System where you can't damage impressionable minds. Ugh."

I'm against war. You're obviously just another loser imperialist.

Penelope , Feb 21 2020 5:30 utc | 107
Since medical care figures so prominently in the election, might be a good idea to know why it costs so much now:

The Oligarch Takeover of US Pharma and Healthcare by Jon Hellevig
"The Awara study shows https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/us-healthcare-system-in-crisis/ that in addition to the original sin of corporate greed, the exorbitant costs of the US healthcare system stem from layers upon layers of distortions with which the system is infested. Each part of the healthcare industry contributes to what is a giant monopoly scam: the pharmaceutical companies, medical equipment manufacturers, drug wholesalers, drug stores, group purchasing organizations, health insurance companies, doctors, clinics and hospitals, and even what should be impartial university research. And on top of that, there's the government as a giant enabler of monopolized corporations running roughshod over the American consumer and patient.

"But it is worse than that. All the monopolists (in official parlance, oligopolies) are in turn owned by the same set of investors in what is called horizontal shareholding. The same some 15-20. investors have the controlling stake in all the leading companies of the entire pharma and healthcare industry.

"That's not all. Two of the investors, BlackRock and Vanguard, are the biggest owners in almost every single one of the leading companies.

"Furthermore, BlackRock is owned by Vanguard, BlackRock's biggest owner being a mystical PNC Services, whose biggest owner in turn is Vanguard. Vanguard itself is recorded directly as BlackRock's second biggest owner. Moreover, BlackRock and Vanguard are the two biggest owners of almost all the other 15-20 biggest investors, which most are cross-owned and together own the entire US pharma and healthcare sector. Ultimately, then we might have the situation that the whole healthcare sector and Big Pharma are controlled by one giant oligarch clan (and the very real people who stand behind them), one single interest group of oligarch investors." -- http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52658.htm


PS: US is now 33d in life expectancy.

Circe , Feb 21 2020 5:45 utc | 108
Yesterday some dirty dog, Bloomberg or weasel Buttigieg, brought up the fact that Bernie has 2 million, and 3 homes, one in Washington, a house in Vermont his wife inherited from her parents and a cabin by a lake! OMG! QUICK! Call the Socialist police! He's 78, has a career in politics, wrote some bestsellers and he has to live like a monk otherwise, he's a hypocrite???

The hypocrites are the ones criticizing him and not Warren who appeared in Forbes cause she has two expensive homes, and 12 MILLION. But, at the debate she was coy and uncommonly silent when they attacked Bernie for what is perfectly normal given his career, success as an author and his age!

But Lizabeth, she cares so much about poor mothers and babies, and shares Bernie's platform, and yet is too chicken to call herself a democratic socialist. Yeah, with 12 Mil in the bank and different investments she's got a big stake in Capitalism! And someone mentionned that during the commercial break she was getting quite friendly yacking it up with Bloomberg, AFTER she put on the Non-disclosure artifice (watch out for hidden mics, Mike!). And she's not big on democracy either, since she would rather go to a brokered convention, than give Bernie the nomination when he gets the majority of pledged delegates. Screw her!

Oh Lizzie, you showed all your true colors!
DONE, put a fork in it!

▪▪▪▪▪

SharonM

Against war and for Trump? 🤣🤣🤣

Trust me, Bernie's not starting any war at his age, and he's from a bucolic state. If you think Bernie's for war and I'm an imperialist, then must be a real bad judge of character.

You fool no one. You hate Bernie for some other stupid reason.

Blue Dotterel , Feb 21 2020 6:19 utc | 109
Really, the Oligarch party composed of the Republican and Democrat branches will not make any significant changes to the status quo, even if Sanders is voted in to the presidency. Sanders' foreign policy is the Oligarch policy; Sanders domestic policy would never get past the Oligarch house without significant watering down to be totally irrelevant. Sanders only "threat" to the Oligarchs is that the presidency would give him a 4-year platform to continue to put forth his semi-socialist domestic views, seeding the brains of the ignorant masses with dangerous thoughts.

Voting for either branch of the Oligarch party is to vote for the status quo. All that is guaranteed are a few cosmetic changes of zero significance. Vote, but vote anyone but the Oligarch Party!

Piotr Berman , Feb 21 2020 7:26 utc | 110
A positive assessment of the chances of Sanders to win the nomination:

"Former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg's presidential campaign called on former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to drop out of the Democratic presidential primary race in a memo released on Thursday, warning that Bloomberg's presence in the race would propel Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to the Democratic nomination. "

Pete could be more incisive by pointing that unlike his much more financially successful colleague from the race of nomination, he has no track record on making unwanted passes on women, or jokes that cannot be revealed to the publics. More seriously, American establishment is so vast that it is internally divided into various groups or cliques that detest each other. Pete is a darling of CIA circles, Bloomberg is so rich that he nearly makes an influence group by himself., but he may be popular among Wall Street denizens who donate to Metropolitan Opera and snicker at Trump who could not tell Verdi from Barbie doll. On political positions, I wonder if there is an ounce of difference.

YnO , Feb 21 2020 7:41 utc | 111
There is a lot of criticism in these comments about Sanders not going all out against the Democratic Party and playing too nice, but a counterpoint to consider is that we have a perfect example to contrast his behavior with: Tulsi Gabbard. Tulsi was vice chair of the DNC and considered one of their "rising stars" in part because of the elites' insipid love of identity politics, and she is demonstrating the country what happens when you go nuclear against the establishment. She burned her political capital to back Bernie in 2016 and went on the attack during the debates she was able to get into. Would Sanders really get better results doing what Tulsi is doing, and if so, why would he going that course be different?
Krollchem , Feb 21 2020 8:27 utc | 112
Likklemore@102

What you describe is what is generally done. If the State legislature chooses to ignore the vote then your argument is not valid.

Please see the US Constitution that I linked...

james , Feb 21 2020 8:29 utc | 113
@95 sharon.. thanks.. that sounds reasonable.. however at present either one of the war parties is going to win.. i suppose some will think bernie i war party lite or something, but regardless if he gets the nod - which i highly doubt - the war party is still in control.. something bigger has to happen for this to change.. collapse is a popular fantasy for some.. i am not sure if or when that could happen too.. it is hard being reasonable in this atmosphere.. i am inclined to more radical thinking as the answer at this point..
BM , Feb 21 2020 8:58 utc | 114
"It's time to give the elites a bigger say in electing the President"

Under Trump Bezos lost highly profitable interests, and under a second Trump term he would likely lose still more. If any of the elites' choices get the Dem nomination, Trump is certain to win. Perhaps Bezos' reasoning was to try to provoke Dem supporters to reject the elites because that is the only chance of getting back the business interests he lost.

Bezos is a nasty piece of work indeed, but to his credit, maybe he at least sees the need of a more acceptable candidate.

Seer , Feb 21 2020 10:26 utc | 115
"They" have thrown down everything against Sanders yet he continues to rise. His support base is HUGE. Competition can't touch him. His victories will put him up so much that the DNC is rendered powerless.

Of all the candidates, Tulsi Gabbard is far away the closest in ideology to Sanders. She entered the race with Bernie's approval, before Bernie announced. Bernie knows that Tulsi is the only one (other than Nina Turner) that would totally have his back. I actually believe that Gabbard is the best candidate that the US has had in a LONG time. If she were selected as VP she would get a lot more exposure; the more exposure the more support she gets. I don't believe that Bernie needs to pick a VP in order to garner more votes; that is, it's not as strategically necessary as other candidates have required: I repeat: Bernie's base is HUGE. Tulsi is a BIG insurance policy. VP isn't a do-nothing position: it can cast a tie-breaking vote in the senate; it can act as collaborator with POTUS. In a more correct positioning of talents it would be Gabbard as POTUS and Sanders as VP. I'd be happy to see Nina Turner as VP but am worried that the pairing with Sanders would create too stark of a picture, one open to really ugly attacks: it's hard to attack Tulsi given her military experience (I hate that this needs to be played, but it's the reality we face). AND there's the VP debates: Tulsi vs Pence would be one for the history books.

Paco , Feb 21 2020 10:29 utc | 116
Turkey closed its airspace to russian airplanes flying to Syria and slowed down the so called Syrian Express. The straights would be closed in case of declared war but the flow can be slowed down by other means. Hard to think that war will be officially declared with all the joint projects in energy, but logistics would be a real problem for Russia if things get uglier.
http://www.ng.ru/politics/2020-02-20/1_7800_bosphorus.html
The second question of the 20 series to Putin is about Ukraine, as usual he comes across as well informed and with ease of verve.
https://putin.tass.ru/ru/ob-ukraine/
jared , Feb 21 2020 11:21 utc | 117
Circe

I guess you don't really know what Bloomberg's about. And you especially don't get Gabbard! She wouldn't be caught dead working for that Neocon warmonger!

Please advise - What is Bloomberg about.
In my experience he is a conservative moderate.
Do we just describe everyone we dont like as zionist?

Willy2 , Feb 21 2020 11:34 utc | 118
- The american writer Thomas Frank has put this way: The Democrats had every opportuniy to win the presidential election of 2016 by focussing on the people in "fly-over land", on the people who felt "left bhind" but instead they focussed on the "creative class" (laywers, the "professional class", hollywood and people from the tech sector (GOOGLE, Facebook, etc.).

- It was the presidential campaign of Trump who saw the chance to win over the people from "fly-over country".

Willy2 , Feb 21 2020 11:38 utc | 119
@Jared (#117):

- Yes, Bloomberg is a moderate republican but he is also an establishment figure/person. So, he won't be the one that will bring about MAJOR changes that are going to hurt that same establishment. Including the "zionists" (with or without quotation marks).

Willy2 , Feb 21 2020 11:47 utc | 120
- The people who are commenting on this topic should take into account one thing. Over the years the Republican party has purged the party of "moderate Republicans". As a result of that Republican party shifted more and more to the right side of the political spectrum.
William Gruff , Feb 21 2020 12:18 utc | 121
About Butt-gig...

If you were running a giant organized crime group with cash flow in the hundreds of $billions, with tentacles deeply penetrating all of the mass media, with connections at the top of all major western multinational corporations, and you wanted to "manage" the political system of the country that finances the military that you occasionally need, how would you do that?

Run you own candidates, of course!

So it is 2015. You've already gotten one of your candidates elected twice, and you are confident that mass media cultivated "identity politics" played a big part in getting him into the White House. Because of this you are now running another "identity politics" compliant candidate, but you have some tricks up your sleeve to guarantee she wins. Most importantly you have an utter heel running against her who cannot possibly win.

So you [big mafia don] are confident that you have the 2016 and 2020 elections sewn up, but even though it is only 2015, now is the time to be thinking about 2024. You've already used up the woman and Black man identity issues, so what next? The gay man "identity politics" angle, of course! So now you need to introduce to the public a gay candidate that is under your control so the public can start to get used to him and he can become widely known by the time campaigning starts in 2023.

Remind me now when it was that Butt-gig "came out" as gay? Oh, yeah, that's right! It was 2015. He then "married" in 2018.

"But Butt-gig is so young!"

Sure. Realize that he wasn't supposed to be running until 2024, when he would be in his forties. 2016 and 2020 were supposed to be Clinton's turn in the White House, but things went all sideways for some reason. Now you have to move up the timetable.

Butt-gig is CIA.

Willy2 , Feb 21 2020 12:43 utc | 122
- Bernie Sanders has promised FREE education/college and FREE Healthcare. Although I have SERIOUS doubts how he is going to pay for all that FREE stuff, the large support he enjoys shows very well how Joe Sixpack is thinking about his own economic situation.
- There were A LOT OF voters who voted first for Sanders in the primaries. When it became clear that Sanders wasn't going to be the Democratic candidate these voters votes for Trump in november 2016.
Piotr Berman , Feb 21 2020 12:50 utc | 123
Blue Dotterel is not satisfied: >>Sanders only "threat" to the Oligarchs is that the presidency would give him a 4-year platform to continue to put forth his semi-socialist domestic views, seeding the brains of the ignorant masses with dangerous thoughts.

Voting for either branch of the Oligarch party is to vote for the status quo. All that is guaranteed are a few cosmetic changes of zero significance. Vote, but vote anyone but the Oligarch Party! Sanders only "threat" to the Oligarchs is that the presidency would give him a 4-year platform to continue to put forth his semi-socialist domestic views, seeding the brains of the ignorant masses with dangerous thoughts.<<

But the oligarchy and sectors close to oligarchy are already worried exactly about that. For example, certain David Brook is almost morose. A nightmare that is at least 170 years old reappeared:

>>Bernie Sanders is also telling a successful myth: The corporate and Wall Street elites are rapacious monsters who hoard the nation's wealth and oppress working families. This is not an original myth, either. It's been around since the class-conflict agitators of 1848. It is also a very compelling us vs. them worldview that resonates with a lot of people.

When you're inside the Sanders myth, you see the world through the Bernie lens.
-----
This brings memories... agitators of 1848, revolution spread around Europe, Hapsburgs quelling a revolution in Vienna only to watch Hungary, nearly half of the empire, raising in rebelion that lasted until Czar send help a year later, stimulating dense Romantic poetry that till today children in Central Europe are forced to learn. Final stanza translated into English (it has a very compelilng rhytm in the original)

[the funeral of an agitator of 1848 turns into a march of specters that disturb comfortable city dwellers]
And we shall drag on the funeral procession, saddening sleeping cities
Banging upon gates with urns, whistling into the notches of hatchets
Until the walls of Jericho fall like logs
Fainting hearts shall be revived; nations shall clear their musty eyes

Onward-Onward

Clueless Joe , Feb 21 2020 13:04 utc | 124
William Gruff:
So, do you basically imply that the next run, after Black, Woman and Gay, would be Latino? In which case they actually planned well ahead and AOC could be their card for 2032? Or would that be too far-fetched? (she seems to go a bit too far into leftism for that after all)
SharonM , Feb 21 2020 13:14 utc | 125
@108 Circe

"SharonM
Against war and for Trump? 🤣🤣🤣
Trust me, Bernie's not starting any war at his age, and he's from a bucolic state. If you think Bernie's for war and I'm an imperialist, then must be a real bad judge of character. You fool no one. You hate Bernie for some other stupid reason."

Here are some relevant questions with Bernie's answers:

*Question: Would you consider military force to pre-empt an Iranian or North Korean nuclear or missile test?
Sanders: Yes.

*Question: Would you consider military force for a humanitarian intervention?

Sanders: Yes.

*Question: If Russia continues on its current course in Ukraine and other former Soviet states, should the United States regard it as an adversary, or even an enemy?

Sanders: Yes.

*Question: Should Russia be required to return Crimea to Ukraine before it is allowed back into the G-7?

Sanders: Yes.
https://www.greanvillepost.com/2020/02/14/sanders-tells-new-york-times-he-would-consider-a-preemptive-strike-against-iran-or-north-korea/

Don't care about your dumb opinion, Circe. But I don't want anyone else here to think I'm some supporter of the U.S. regimes two war parties. Bernie is just like Trump, Obama, the Bush and Clinton families--warmongering assholes all of them.

SharonM , Feb 21 2020 13:20 utc | 126
@113 James
I agree. An actual revolution here would probably require masses of people on the verge of starvation. But perhaps there's a trigger event that we can't foresee?
Victor , Feb 21 2020 13:49 utc | 127
As long as Sanders treats Latin America with respect, I will vote for him. He just said that he backs Evo Morales in Bolivia. That is a good sign.
john , Feb 21 2020 13:59 utc | 128
Willy2 @ 122 says:

Bernie Sanders has promised FREE education/college and FREE Healthcare. Although I have SERIOUS doubts how he is going to pay for all that FREE stuff,...

he's not.

and there's the rub, or the common denominator between domestic policy and foreign policy...i.e. lucre (and hellfire missiles are so much sexier , right?).

if a candidate is not clamoring loudly that the defense budget must be cut by at least 50%, he or she is being disingenuous, if not downright deceptive, about enacting any kind of national healthcare, education, or whatnot.

Jackrabbit , Feb 21 2020 14:10 utc | 129
james @113:
[If Bernie wins] the war party is still in control.. i am inclined to more radical thinking ... at this point.

When reasonable, level-headed people like james are "inclined to more radical thinking" then the establishment is really in trouble.

Will they take heed? Nah, they'll just send out more Circe dembots.

!!

Circe , Feb 21 2020 14:25 utc | 130
@125 SharonM

If you were an anti-war candidate running for President of a militarized security state that is so easily brainwashed by half a billion dollars in ads run by a war-mongering Ziofascist and one of the highest-circulated Zionist-run propaganda rags asked trap questions to test their definition of patriotism on you, you too would go through the motions and give them what they wanna hear so they would leave you the fock alone for the rest of the campaign.

Now, if you're looking to blow in 15 minutes your years in the making efforts to win the Presidency and use your power to change that security state mentality, then you would stupidly answer what you're suggesting.

You're a Trumpbot. AND I COULD GIVE A SHET WHAT YOU THINK.

Bernie wants to restore the Iran deal, and do diplomacy with Iran, and substantially reduce military spending. Bernie is as anti-war a politicisn as I've seen in my lifetime. I'll bank on his wisdom over your intellectual dishonesty ANY DAY, ANY TIME, ANY WHERE. Unlike you, a lousy judge of character, or just plain demonizing Trumpbot on a fool's mission, I am an excellent judge of character who had Ziofascist Trump pegged from day one and took two years of flak for it! Today, I've been vindicated in every way. Ziofascist Trump is the agent provocateur in the Middle East unilaterally, repeatedly resorting to multiple acts of war against the Palestinians, Syria, Iraq and Iran. If he didn't trigger war yet, it's not for lack of trying! Everyone is wisely on hold prevailing on their cool-headedness hoping Americans elect a SANE, and more humane President, and that President will be Bernie Sanders.

When Bernie shuts the door on that lunatic's orange-cake face the entire planet will breathe A COLLECTIVE SIGH.

Now go bark your fake purist bullshet at someone stupid enough to fall for it. I'm a firewall for the truth and you're barking up the wrong tree and messing with someone berning for justice.

PRESIDENT BERNIE SANDERS

Get used to it; it's happening.

clickkid , Feb 21 2020 14:40 utc | 131
@ Circe | Feb 21 2020 14:25 utc | 130

If Sanders actually got into the Presidency and threatened established interests, then he would be given a non-refusable invitation to vist Dallas and drive past the Texas Shoolbook Depositary.

clickkid , Feb 21 2020 14:43 utc | 132
Or even the:

Texas schoolbook depository

SharonM , Feb 21 2020 14:43 utc | 133
@130 Circe

Oh sure, Bernie is just playing 4d chess, right? We've been hearing that for years about Trump as he bombs countries, assassinates people, and overthrows governments. We'll have to relive it all hearing about Bernie's grand scheme to undermine the MIC by doing exactly what the MIC wants. You're just another fake following a warmonger.

Blue Dotterel , Feb 21 2020 14:49 utc | 134
Piotr Berman,

"But the oligarchy and sectors close to oligarchy are already worried exactly about that. For example, certain David Brook is almost morose. A nightmare that is at least 170 years old reappeared"

Well if Sanders does manages to get the Dem. nomination, then go ahead and vote for him. Just, do not expect anything to change during his administration.

Otherwise, if someone else gets it, Sanders will be put out to pasture, and no one will hear from him again. He was pretty quiet the past three years. For Sanders, and his domestic ideas to blossom, he needs to be able to win the presidency, not just run for it. This is why the Oligarchy will probably tank him. Right now, very few people in the US are politically active. It is only the primaries after all. They are mostly ignored by the vast majority of the electorate despite CNN's propaganda polls (which read only 52% interest anyway). In fact, US elections for pres are regularly ignored by almost half the population, anyway.

If anyone else gets the dem nomination, there is no point voting for the Oligarch Party.

Circe , Feb 21 2020 14:52 utc | 135
@117 jared

Do you realize the damage you're doing to your credibility and reputation tooting Bloomberg's horn here?

Bloomberg is a rabid Zionist who defied a flight ban making a cruel, pompous spectacle of himself flying into Tel Aviv during Israel's massive criminal assault on Gaza while vociferously supporting Israel's shelling of children, schools and hospitals.

Bloomberg is a Ziofascist Israel shill Neocon BUSH jr REPUBLICAN. Complete Presidential disqualification in one sentence.

Now run along with your leaky can of Bloomberg whitewash.

Sheesh, how pathetic!

Likklemore , Feb 21 2020 14:57 utc | 136

Posted by: Krollchem | Feb 21 2020 8:27 utc | 112

If the State legislature chooses to ignore the vote then your argument is not valid.

Please see the US Constitution that I linked...

And you continue to ignore Process. Well, in Constitutional Law courses that very scenario is addressed. In Law, Process matters.

if the State legislature choses to ignore the vote.."[..]
if not members of the Parties elected to the Legislature, pray tell how is the Legislature comprised?

You do know when (ahead of the general election) the Republicans and Democratic Parties appoint their respective representative slate of electors they take into account Party Loyalists who are pledged to vote the presidential ticket?

On pledges of the electors: 29 states have laws forbidding the electors to violate their pledges.

In recent history: December 2016, Trump had the required electoral votes and the Hillary Mob attempted a full-throated campaign to have some of the Republican electors switch their votes at the Electoral College!!

How did that work out?

There were 7 "Faithless electors" who ignored their pledges. Oeps of the 7: five defected Democratic-loser Clinton and two the Republican president- elect. [Cases are on appeal before the Supreme Court; to be heard in 2019-2020 term]

When the Electors' switchero campaign did not succeed, Russiagate was the lever to frustrate Trump's presidency. Russiagate will continue as long as the orangeman occupies the White House.

Walter , Feb 21 2020 15:03 utc | 137
WP > "...After a senior U.S. intelligence official told lawmakers last week that Russia wants to see President Trump reelected..."

UNZ> "...Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Vice President Biden are being told that if they do not get out of the race and clear the lane for the mayor, they will get a socialist as their nominee, and the party will deserve the fate November will bring -- a second term for Trump..."

Now then, when will the intel dudes claim Buttboi and Buyiden and Klob are commie agents? Why already Wally suspects Putin's on the secret Badenov Shoe-phone with his vast army of verraters... I mean, there must be Some Truth, right?

And if (mirabele dictu) Burner get's 'lected and avoids Dallas... if that, then how will they change the story and tell us Burner is a Putin controlled Putin versteher?

("We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." (CIA Director Casey)

Karlofi mooted Beard's "Republic"... A proud attempt by Beard, but, alas (!) it reads like a sad comic... Painful.

Perhaps one interesting point there though > Lincoln's first inaugural.

I'll leave that for K-Man to discuss, if he likes.

Jackrabbit , Feb 21 2020 15:08 utc | 138
I'm all for disrupting the Democratic Party by voting for Sanders in the Primary.

But anyone that thinks that Sanders will be allowed to actually win the Primary is smoking something. And anyone that thinks that Sanders isn't working with the Democratic establishment to accomplish their goals is snorting something.

Sanders is there as window-dressing and to lure young voters into the Democratic Party fold as a "Democracy Works!" ploy (a form of 'stay in school' PSA) .

The Democratic Party won't actually nominate him because Americans would vote for Bernie's anti-oligarch program in droves. Anyone with any sense knows that the oligarchs have too much money and too much power and that government services monied interests instead of the people.

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

We are now in a new Cold War. And we are on the brink of ANOTHER major war in the Middle East. It's long-past time to see through the bullshit propaganda, fakery, and scheming.

!!

Circe , Feb 21 2020 15:23 utc | 139
Copy/paste Jackrabbit who hasn't hatched an original thought in quite some time tries to project his professional troll gig on me. Dembot? Is that all you could come up with?

As with Bernie, I might be more like, hmmm... how would I describe myself?

The Dems worst nightmare⁉️ 😜

...soon to become the Trump-era TERMINATOR.

or, better yet, Circe unleashed.

Walter , Feb 21 2020 15:23 utc | 140
Jackrabbit | Feb 21 2020 15:08 utc | 138

"Smokin' ??"

"...This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it..."

Wally is a bit shocked...here's Lincoln saying the Revolution is a Right... And he wuz smokin...what?

But yes, context matters...read the entire document>

First Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln

MONDAY, MARCH 4, 1861
Fellow-Citizens of the United States: (avalon / yale / edu an' all of that)

Copeland , Feb 21 2020 15:55 utc | 141
All the slander being heaped upon Bernie is not going to drain one jot of energy from the momentum of his campaign. The trolls desire above all for a tide of chaos to wash over the country. The energy in this movement is going play out on the convention floor and beyond; and the spirit of the people is not about to be diminished or crushed.

It is best not to give up on the struggle, especially when the stakes have been made so clear as Bloomberg plants the flag of oligharchy in this election. Only Sanders and Warren had the decency to react with moral vigor to this outrage.

This is far from over. This is just getting interesting.

William Gruff , Feb 21 2020 16:29 utc | 142
Clueless Joe @124

Correct, as I see it that would be too far-fetched. I cannot see AOC being managed opposition, even if her behavior doesn't seem very leftish sometimes. The establishment's biggest concern with their management of the political process is to make sure that some of the things that AOC discusses remain outside the scope of acceptable political discourse. See Willy2 above with his "Free stuff!" narrative for how the establishment wants people to react... the establishment wants to prevent the public from even considering reallocating resources away from the military and corporate subsidies to so-called "Free stuff!" While AOC's ideology and support for Pelosi and such might leave some leftists unimpressed, the fact that she even discusses free-at-the-point-of-use healthcare and education as well as living wages strongly suggests that she is not part of the establishment's operation.

I honestly do not think the establishment has any plans for pandering very much to Latin American identity... there is far too much revolution in that identity. My guess is that the plans post-Butt-gig are to mix things up... say a Black lesbian or Black transsexual, for instance. Keep in mind this would be planned for 2028 (previously 2030) so whoever they have in mind would only be starting to get publicly groomed for the job now. The potential individuals may not have even had their debutante unveiling to the public yet.

fnord , Feb 21 2020 16:40 utc | 143
@Copeland, 141
The trolls desire above all for a tide of chaos to wash over the country.

Well, true, but we don't need much help. The Sanders campaign has been a gift to socialists who can piggy-back off of his demolition of decades of John Birch Society indoctrination against socialism. But as far as I'm concerned, that's the only good thing he's done. Him losing will be better for socialists - who can benefit from his supporters flocking to our organizations - rather than him winning and forcing us to take him in as "our guy" or us being tarred with any failures of his presidency.

William Gruff , Feb 21 2020 17:01 utc | 144
"[Sanders] losing will be better for socialists..." --fnord @143

Not good strategy. People are not ready to go for real revolution yet. They need to try half measures first and see those half measures fail or be attacked and defeated by the oligarchs. Sanders losing will cause many people to either drop out of the movement or switch to the far right. Sanders victory is needed just to show the masses that victory is possible. People pursue socialist revolution out of a sense of optimism and open possibilities, not desperation. Desperation leads to fascism.

Circe , Feb 21 2020 17:03 utc | 145
Uh-Oh, Jackrabbit just got scorched by Walter's bern brilliance.

I'm a lover of pithy truth, and here's one to describe Bernie's movement:

The real revolution is the evolution of consciousness.

Here's one to prepare for Trump's Bernie strategy:

When a narcissist can no longer control you, they will instead try to control how others see you.

(In other words, always keep in mind; they're coming at you from a position of weakness.)

In my words:

The key to triumph over evil is to take the fight into the light and INSPIRE ALLEGIANCE.

That's Bernie's strength, and that's why Bernie Sanders will become the 46th President of the United States.


Circe , Feb 21 2020 17:28 utc | 146
While Trump boasts he's the master of 4D chess; he will be outplayed by Bernie Sanders, the 4D Master of CHESED .

Bernie Sanders will defeat Donald J. Trump to become President of the United States.

[Feb 21, 2020] What are Tulsi chances to be Sanders VP or the Secretary of State?

Feb 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kali , Feb 20 2020 17:54 utc | 11

Many of Sanders supporters on Twitter will tell you that his foreign policy utterances are what "he has to do" so that the media doesn't increase their attacks on him. They say it is a con. A lot of others like the people at WSWS disagree completely. I don't know for sure, but it does make sense to play along with the establishment while you don't have power. And Tulsi is part of the Sanders Institute. As for Tulsi being VP, there would be unanimous outrage like you have never seen from so many liberals because Hinduphobia is rampant among so many of them. This explains how they have have been conned by a smear psy-op against Tulsi Gabbard: Anatomy of A Smear: How Liberals Have Become Willing Dupes of Foreign Political Psy-Ops

Adrian E. , Feb 20 2020 18:08 utc | 14

I find some of Sanders' answers about foreign policy extremely hawkish:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/politics/bernie-sanders-foreign-policy.html

The most extreme thing is that Sanders would consider military force to prevent even just a missile test.

He also says he would "consider" "humanitarian interventions" without saying anything about those "humanitarian interventions" based on lies that led to deterioration of the humanitarian situation.

Under normal situations, I would think that Sanders' foreign policy positions should disqualify him. But we are talking here about the United States of America, a country with extreme disregard for international law, and it is probably correct that all other candidates who have a chance of being elected would be even worse (compared to the extremists Biden, Bloomberg, Klobuchar, and Buttigieg, Sanders' hawkishness and aggressive rhetoric against Russia seems relatively harmless). Compared to Trump, Sanders is probably the lesser evil.

But I doubt he will be inclined to go against the neocons who dominate the foreign policy establishment and the secret services.

I used to think that if Sanders is president, Gabbard could be Secretary of State or vice president. But now, I think this is unlikely. First because of many jingoistic statements by Sanders, but second also because polls show that Tulsi Gabbard seems to be quite unpopular among the US population. It seems that, while in Sanders' case the smears in the media don't work well because people already know Sanders well enough, in Gabbard's case, the smears seem to have worked. Sanders probably will not want to burden his administration with someone who is so hated by a large part of the Democratic electorate.

I think Tulsi Gabbard will be needed for something else if Sanders is elected, for pressuring Sanders from outside the government.

NemesisCalling , Feb 20 2020 19:35 utc | 32
The question is not if Sanders should choose Gabbard as V.P., the question is why he wouldn't, and that my friends will tell you all you need to know about Sanders and his genuine interest in leading this country.

If Gabbard is left off his ticket he will lose. If he chooses her, it will excite the left like nobody's business and he will cruise to victory utilizing the antiwar vote that got Trump into office.

But...you do have the establishment left who may not want anything to do with the antiwar and populist conjoinment of Sanders/Gabbard. It may be too world-shaking for them and they may throw their lot in with Trump.

Either way, I think we are in good shape, barring a full Neocon push to colonize Trump's presidency.

bevin , Feb 20 2020 19:40 utc | 33
It is very curious that there seems to me something approaching unanimity-among the commenters- that Sanders is the candidate who is least trustworthy.
I note that Jackrabbit even wheels out his old "Bernie the sheepdog" routine despite the fact that the rest of the Democrats continue to do all that they can to sabotage his campaign, ensuring that his supporters, when cheated in Convention, are going to walk out. Which, for those unacquainted with the logistics of pastoral agriculture, is not what sheepdogs-employed to gather the flocks together and deliver them to be clipped or butchered-do.
Of course the issue is imperialism. But imperialism is not an ideological but a material matter: among the material bases of the Empire is the superstition that the United States is under constant military threat and that, unless Americans voluntarily impoverish themselves, by giving vast sums to the MIC, they will lose everything. And the world will disintegrate. To undermine imperialism in the United States it is necessary to empower the only forces that can defeat the MIC-the masses, taxpayers working hours a week for the trillion dollar defense budget and workers afraid to stop making the rich ever richer and themselves poorer, less secure and more vulnerable.

Sanders challenges this view. And he does so from a very old-fashioned position. He is arguing that social and economic security should be the first priorities of government and that, in order to defend the constantly threatened benefits that exist and to extend them to such popular areas as healthcare and free tuition, it is necessary to restore the freedom to organise that existed before Taft Hartley.
The DNC and the anti Sanders forces are the current iteration of the coalition of Republican reactionaries and the Tammany/Jim Crow bosses that brought about Taft Hartley and the Cold War, the twin foundations of imperialist politics in the United States for more than seventy years.
As to Israel Sanders' position is one that is utter anathema to the Zionists- a clue being the enormous resources they are mobilising against him. A call for 'peace' and an end to the 'conflict' being the one policy that not only appeals to public opinion but cannot be countenanced by any of the Israeli parties all of which have committed their all to eradicating all traces of Palestine and dominating the middle east.

Robert Shule , Feb 20 2020 19:44 utc | 34
In the Nevada debate I noticed how the candidates other than Bernie at many times were talking into the cameras and over the heads of the people in the audience while garbling out their resumes about how they are the best candidate to beat Trump as if that was the debate question put to them. In doing so, I think they are really out boot-licking for super delegates.
Piotr Berman , Feb 20 2020 19:46 utc | 35
Sanders is a pro-war imperialist, clearly.

Posted by: SharonM | Feb 20 2020 18:57 utc | 28

Sanders does not seem a pro-war imperialist, and he has SOME positive statements on foreign policy now, and according to my observations in 2016, we is not interested in foreign policy and he wants to fight on one front. He also detests the leadership of Israel, but given his roots etc. he did not want to say anything on that, just some isolated statement when confronted in meetings with voters.

Now that he expected to be a front runner he hired the most progressive chaps from the mainline Democratic think tanks, and clearly, you can take them from CAP etc. but you cannot totally remove CAP etc. out of them. Coming from environment where "muscular liberals" keep taunting "so do you love dictators", after few years you prepare "appropriate defenses".

"Yes" on "Would you consider military action if Iran or North Korea did X" was a typical weaseling. "Not considering war under ANY circumstances" is still a third rail in American policies. So one "Yes" was placed in the questionaire. But he also had a long paragraph about diplomacy first, last resort, requesting advise and approval from Congress, so it was formal "considering", not "willingness". Your can interpreted differently, and that was the whole purpose.

I would ask something about economic warfare, sanctions etc., like how he would weight "applying pressure on regimes" versus "welfare of the population", how much of deprivation is too much. And selection criteria for the list of "regimes". Do absolute monarchies get exemption, perhaps on the account of reigning by the grace of G..d? When do we "worry" about events during vote counting (no worry on Honduras, grave concern on Bolivia). And so on.

Jackrabbit , Feb 20 2020 20:05 utc | 36
bevin @33: It is very curious ...

Well, it's very curious that Sanders accepts the party line on Russiagate/Russian meddling.

And it's very curious that Sanders attacks Maduro as a Dictator that must be removed.

And it's very curious that Sanders' bill to prevent US support for the war on Yemen had big loopholes.

And Sanders' 2016 campaigning was also very curious for his amazing deference to Hillary.

Also curious: how Sanders' candidacy is used as Democracy Works! propaganda to shore-up a corrupt. EMPIRE-FIRST political system.

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

If WE can all see that the Democratic Party is scheming to have a brokered convention, WHY CAN'T BERNIE SEE IT? Well, of course he sees it. But he doesn't do anything about it. He plays into it by stressing his support for 'party unity'.

!!

lysias , Feb 20 2020 20:05 utc | 37
Gabbard as VP would be Sanders's best insurance against being assassinated.
Piotr Berman , Feb 20 2020 20:05 utc | 38
Jackrabbit, are you quoting someone or yourself, you use quotation paragraphs without attributing to anyone.

Concerning tactical advise, I do not think that you tested it on "focus groups" or in any other way. Identity politics is a third rail in the territory to the left and center of the political centrum. Some aspects are OK, like changing attitude to work place sexual harassment or even demeaning. Shaming homosexual is medieaval (going back to a ancient Greek attitudes could be a step to far).

But there is a need to avoid alienating working class people who do not ascribe to political correctness. But what would you like to give up as an issue? The right to terminate pregnancy? Sanders made a choice that I fully approve: prying guns from the hands of the working people is a futile, alienating, and he did not win so many elections in a rural state full of hunters by trying that. He is correctly accused of never advocating gun control. But you cannot run in Democratic party AGAINST gun control, not because of DNC and other sinister powers (although they love the issue) but there is a wide constituency for it. As a hiker, I appreciate extensive state forests and game reserves created because of the wide support from the hunters, and the fact that the hunting in my state is forbidden on Sunday. "And on the seventh day thou shall hike".

Once I thought about a compromise good for running in the South, namely, why not agree to hand some commandments in public building, say, 5 out of 10? One could make a referendum choosing the "top 5".

waste , Feb 21 2020 0:06 utc | 75
Thanks b for watching the debate for us :)

Even if sanders gets the nomination (a very very big if), don 't expect him to go all anti-systemic at all, more the opposite I would say. So Tulsi for VC is like a red herring, he would probably choose a "moderate" for VC.

The following article is a very interesting one, showing the type of socialist sanders is. His ideas about socialism are closer to the european socialdemocratic system after the 90s , and we all know what a trainwreck that is.

https://libcom.org/library/bernie-sanders-paradox-when-socialism-grows-old

M , Feb 21 2020 0:52 utc | 80
Tulsi won't be getting the hypothetical VP nod. Conservative voters may like her, but true-blue Democrats absolutely despise her. (You can thank the Clinton faction for both.) If Sanders picked her, the noisiest elements of the media would scream RUSSIA until their throats bled.

Sanders won't move very far rightward on the policy front as the general election approaches, which means he needs to appease the Sensible Liberals through other means. Bellicose rhetoric w/r/t Russia serves that purpose, and allows him to push back against insinuations that he benefited from or abetted Russia's Great Election Heist of 2016. Today's rhetoric may not become tomorrow's policy, though I won't be holding my breath.

The Jackrabbits who think Sanders doesn't stand a chance of being nominated are underestimating the ineptitude and unpopularity of the Democratic Party, the depth of which may somehow overcome even the most strenuous attempts at fixing the race's outcome. Sheepdog though he may be, I'm hoping to see Sanders herding politicians instead of voters come next February.

[Feb 21, 2020] This is a Class War, and we need everyone to come to the barricades and the polling stations!!

Feb 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Feb 20 2020 20:43 utc | 43

bevin @33--

Thanks for that bit of analysis!

I'll forever argue that the United States of America's government was designed to be a social democratic republic. Proof of this deliberate design is found within the rationale for the federal government as stated in the Constitution's Preamble:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

I'll argue that establishing Justice and insuring domestic Tranquility means not to promote policies that result in economic divisiveness and massive disparities of wealth--what that hell's tranquil or justified about Bloomberg owning as much wealth as @160 million people: almost 1/2 of the populous?!?! How is it possible to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity in the face of such unjust, immoral disparities?! And I could go on and rant a lot more, but I think my point's made. Clearly, the best political weapon and campaign asset Sanders could deploy is the Preamble and argue that the Oligarchs and their Establishment are UnAmerican at best and Traitors at worst.

As I wrote the other day echoing Solomon and Sanders, it's a Class War, and we need everyone to come to the barricades and the polling stations!! And the naysayers better get the hell out-of-the-way or be trampled underneath the masses clamoring for a huge change in direction, which we might call back to fundamentals.

[Feb 21, 2020] Democrat dog and pony is designed to bury Tulsi and Sanders

Feb 21, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Master Slacker , 20 February 2020 at 02:41 PM

The longer this Democrat dog and pony show continues the more I have a sense that it is a false flag operation whereby the most unelectable (Feel the Bern) is being raised while the most competitive (Tulsi Gabbard) has been shunted aside leaving no trace.
Tom Milton , 20 February 2020 at 04:51 PM
Master Slacker et al

Was privileged to attend a Tulsi Town Hall last evening in Colorado Springs.

Very impressive from start to finish. Estimate 300 attended, many young military, and many there identified as Republicans including a former CO State Senator.

Try to catch this wonderful candidate in person. Her positions are available in considerable detail on Wikipedia.

She may be shunted aside by the MSM, but she's leaving way more than a trace for sure -- a redemptive force for a troubled and divided nation.

Eureka Springs , 20 February 2020 at 05:06 PM
With exception of Sanders I can't imagine any candidate on the stage last night offering Gabbards a position in their administration.

If Bernie Sanders were President of say any South American country every other Democrat on stage last night would be delighted as president themselves to covertly and overtly destroy him and his nation. Think Honduras, Paraguay, Venezuela and Bolivia for the most recent examples.

This country is getting a very clear lesson in the fact not only is not a democracy, it's anti-democratic to its core. I hope at long last it finally sinks in among the half of eligible voters who still legitimize it with their vote.

divadab , 20 February 2020 at 05:54 PM
The US of A should do as EVERY other advanced economy did - and implement single payer healthcare and eject the profiteers from the medical system, which is a public good. Germany has had universal medical care since Otto von Bismarck implemented in the 1870's to unify the country - most other countries implemented it in the 20th century (UK just after WW2; Canada in 1963' and so on). This will liberate US Americans from the advanced world's most expensive and inefficient health insurance system, with administrative costs of over 20% compared to Canada's 2-3% depending on province. And Bernie Sanders is the only Dem candidate who unequivocally stands for Medicare for all - the rest are to some degree or other captured by health industry cartel payoffs, much as the Dem party is.

Bernie or bust! He's not a commie; he's a democratic socialist, in the model of FDR's New Deal. Yes he's bad on foreign policy - do you-all really approve of what Trump has been doing on behalf of "client states" who really run the foreign policy show in their domains? I'm not sure if this will ever change - no president wants to end up like JFK. But what is important is to improve the lot of all of us poor citizens who get to pay for all these shitshow foreign SNAFU's - will they ever end? Not while the likes of Pompeus Maximus is in charge....

[Feb 21, 2020] I don't think we should be delving on Sanders' foreign policy too much. Each President reliably betray his election platform

In France they used to say "Socialists who became ministers are not socialist ministers" ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... Sanders' 2016 campaigning was also very curious for his amazing deference to Hillary ..."
Feb 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
vk , Feb 20 2020 18:22 utc | 19
I don't think we should be delving on Sanders' foreign policy too much.

Obama was elected on a "hope and change" platform - mentioning removing troops from Iraq, Afghanistan, closing Guantanamo etc. and then, boom, Libya, drones, private contractors and Syria happened.

Also, we have the Deep State, which is the true dictator of American foreign policy. This is the team of "experts" and "advisers" who will "educate" whoever is newly elected to the WH. So it doesn't really matter what the candidates state about foreign policy at this point.

It really doesn't matter what Sanders says on the FP front.


Piotr Berman , Feb 20 2020 20:43 utc | 44

And Sanders' 2016 campaigning was also very curious for his amazing deference to Hillary .

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Feb 20 2020 20:05 utc | 36

I will not defend Sanders from basing his foreign policy on the progressive outliers of reactionary CAP. There is a distinct danger that he would be malleable on foreign policy, but also a hope... The hope is that he collected a lot of supporters who are less deferential to DC consensus than himself.

The deference to Hillary was a good tactical choice in my humble opinion. He leads the insurgents who do not favor the current DNC and party apparatus. To win a national elections he does need cooperation across party spectrum. PUMA is a real danger against that (search PUMA 2008 election). So he can (a) challenge and shame possible repeaters of PUMA (b) give good example (c) rely on his feared supporters who are guaranteed to be suspicious and grumpy.

Bloomberg as the champion of moderate democrats reminds me the candidate for Polish presidency that Nationalists put forth in 1922. He was the top aristocrat, with vast holdings. Nationalists had hopes of attracting the larger and very moderate peasant party, but moderate as they were, they just could not vote for Aristocrat Number One. A lot of Democrats prefer Sanders over Bloomberg, even the moderate ones. If Sanders becomes top in delegate count and Bloomberg second, brokering the convention against Sanders will be hard.

Bubbles , Feb 20 2020 21:30 utc | 51
I started out to say that Sanders can't compete in the American Political sham reality if he goes ball to the wall against Israel's aggression's and totally illegal behaviour which is supported by Democrats and Republican's alike because of the monetary power the Zionist fifth column in America wields with their "Benjamins"

Hat tip to that tiny girl born in Somalia for calling a spade a spade. Courage should be rewarded, not attacked by those who disrespect truth and decency.

Patroklos , Feb 20 2020 22:30 utc | 59
On Sanders' foreign policy: we shouldn't forget that democracies are belligerent, that the link between war and high citizen participation in decision-making was the hallmark of classical antiquity. More recently, the icing on FDR's New Deal was ww2. It doesn't surprise me that a shift to social democracy does not imply a decrease in external belligerence. In fact moderate right-wing libertarians tend on the whole to be the least fond of war, unless it's about protecting their interests. But when the interests at stake are understood by the deliberative citizen body (e.g. SPQR or ὁ δῆμος) to be those of the collective citizen body, then war is endemic. I am reminded too that one of the most left-wing institutions (in spirit at least) in the US is the Marine Corps: the polis is a warrior-guild (Max Weber)
waste , Feb 21 2020 0:06 utc | 75
Thanks b for watching the debate for us :)

Even if sanders gets the nomination (a very very big if), don 't expect him to go all anti-systemic at all, more the opposite I would say. So Tulsi for VC is like a red herring, he would probably choose a "moderate" for VC.

The following article is a very interesting one, showing the type of socialist sanders is. His ideas about socialism are closer to the european socialdemocratic system after the 90s , and we all know what a trainwreck that is.

https://libcom.org/library/bernie-sanders-paradox-when-socialism-grows-old

Jackrabbit , Feb 21 2020 0:27 utc | 78
karlof1 @62, b4real @73

Whether he realizes it or not, karlof1 is exposing a version of the establishment-friendly "best of all worlds" (BOAW) political theory

BOAW was popular when Obama the deceiver was President. It fits well with his neoliberal hucksterism aka "social choice theory".

BOAW says that if something is wrong or can be improved, it will get attention and be addressed because people will get behind the change necessary to make it happen.

But the Empire and great wealth disparity has distorted democratic processes into something garish - like fun house mirrors. BOAW is now recognized as simply hopium propaganda and is hardly ever even mentioned anymore.

!!

[Feb 19, 2020] The Democratic Zoo vs the Orange Showman

Notable quotes:
"... 7. Tulsi Gabbard. God bless her. I would vote for her but the Gays and the Zionists are both against her. This is not going to happen. ..."
Feb 16, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

1. Bernie Sanders is a Marxist who is not afraid to stand up in public for himself. His honeymoon in the USSR is not likely to be forgotten. He is a communist fellow traveler who has become a member of the rentier class. He wants to abolish private health insurance. Really! De Blasio and AOC, two more open Marxists are on his team? Really?

2. IMO Elizabeth Warren is an obvious serial liar who reminds me of a second grade teacher with enthusiasms for projects that the little children had better get on board for, or else! Another millionaire in socialist clothing.

3. And, there is Mayor Pete, the darling of the Wall Street population and all the world's bankers. Somehow the creatures of the coastal cities don't understand that the American electorate is not ready to elect a cute, openly homosexual man who will live in the White House with his husband and child. It is not going to happen this time around.

4. Amy Klobuchar - An obscure Mid-Western senator who shows signs of an idealism that might be a problem for the professional pols. She might do something not in their script.

5. Mikey Bloomberg - The People's Party is going to put forward a guy worth over $60 billion? Really? If that were not bad enough, the man has a long history of total ineptitude in human relations involving blacks and women? Really? Watch him try to mix with ordinary people in crowds. Sad.

6. Hillary? Old Deplorable herself? Trump beat her once already in the Electoral College, where the fraud in California's popular vote did not matter. A lot of people loath her.

7. Tulsi Gabbard. God bless her. I would vote for her but the Gays and the Zionists are both against her. This is not going to happen.

8. Tom Steyr - Ho hum. A taller version of Bloomberg, he made his money by investing in coal mines and now is a fanatic "climate change" guy.

9. Joe Biden. He was asked by Jorge Ramos "why did you and Obama lock up so many illegal kids on the border?" He replied "we were taking care of them." IMO he is and has always been a crooked, not too smart politician from a very small state. Hell! In Delaware you can know most of the electorate personally. He is done.

All of these folks are addicted to private jets that they hire if they do not actually own one or two. Naughty! Naughty!

-------------

And! On the other side we have the orange man. He will be quite happy to run against these guys. BTW I doubt that he has a billion in cash. That is probably why he doesn't want to release his tax returns. He came into office with little understanding of the differences between government and business and still knows little about that. He wants to believe that everyone in the Executive Branch is his personal employee. He is wrong about that.

**********

BTW. McCabe IS NOT "off the hook." The particular charge DoJ is not going to try him for is the least of his problems.

-------------

Ah! The Bonfire of the Vanities. pl


Flavius , 16 February 2020 at 10:10 AM

"BTW. McCabe IS NOT "off the hook." The particular charge DoJ is not going to try him for is the least of his problems."

So true...and he knows it. You'll notice they haven't yet indicted the FBI lawyer who made a material misrepresentation on the Page FISC affidavit either. Comey, McCabe, Clapper, Brennan are being investigated for their roles in having blown up the Presidential electoral process in the United States. The DoJ is not about to make itself up front look petty, vindictive, and stupid by indicting McCabe for spitting on the sidewalk. The Democrats would love to take advantage of that opportunity.

For those paying attention, this provides a welcome contrast to the way the political jihadists under Mueller conducted themselves - Flynn, Manafort, Stone, Papanobody. Ditto the Schiff impeachment debacle. Pure chickenshit made into red meat by an obliging institutional media.

It's heartening to see some evidence of judgement has returned to the Department.

divadab , 16 February 2020 at 11:35 AM
Sir - if Bernie Sanders is a Marxist so was FDR. They are both New Deal Democrats, representing the working people against the rapacious oligarchs.

Further, Medicare for All is a bare minimum of what is required to uplift the citizens of this nation. It seems increasingly that we cannot stop the warmongers in their desire to dominate or destroy so the best policy is to improve the lot of the citizens. That's what Bernie is about.

Incidentally, a proposed Bloomberg/Clinton ticket epitomises the corruption and stupidity and incompetence of the Dem elite. Contemptible scum.

turcopolier , 16 February 2020 at 12:02 PM
divadab

Oh, BS! FDR was nothing like Bernie. What, he created Social Security and that made him a commie? Medicare for all would beggar us unless we ration care like they do in places like Canada.

Jack , 16 February 2020 at 12:12 PM
Sir,

The optics of the non-prosecution of McCabe is not looking good when the DOJ have prosecuted Stone and Flynn for the same thing. There's no doubt we have a 2-tier justice system with a very corrupt prosecutorial system and a judiciary in lock step with them. The FISA court exemplifies this.

As far as the Orangeman is concerned he seems not much different than all the others. At the end of the day he hired Rosenstein, Wray, Sessions, Barr, Bolton, Kelly and Mattis. While he's got the prerogative to declassify he shirked each time and passed the buck. His shtick of being the representative of the Deplorables is just that. He only cares about his own skin.

He's completely in thrall of the Saudi bonesaw and Bibi's maximalist visions.

The bottom line in my opinion is we have a broken political, media and governmental system as the people the voters encourage to run it are as corrupt as in any tinpot banana republic.

Personally I'd like to see Trump vs Bernie as it would implode the Democrats and show clearly how polarized the electorate really is and how venal the media have become. What will they do when they hate both candidates?

NancyK , 16 February 2020 at 12:43 PM
divadad,

rationed care is better than no care at all or care that bankrupts the family. I think most Canadian's prefer their system than ours. Having said that I don't agree with Medicare for all but I do think that individuals and families who cannot afford medical insurance should have affordable options available to them.

Sam Iam , 16 February 2020 at 12:58 PM
Sir,

To help clarify Sander's world view, I'll present to this this snippet from a recent interview where he brings up modern-day China:

"It wasn't so many decades ago that there was mass starvation in China. All right? There is not mass starvation today and people have got -- the government has got to take credit for the fact that there is now a middle class in China. No one denies that more people in China have a higher standard of living than use to be the case. All right? That's the reality.

On the other hand, China is a dictatorship. It does not tolerate democracy, i.e., what they're doing in Hong Kong. They do not tolerate independent trade unions and the Communist Party rules with a pretty iron fist. So, and by the way, in recent years, Xi has made the situation even worse. So, I mean, I'll give, you give people credit where it is due. But you have to maintain values of democracy and human rights and certainly that does not exist in China."

D , 16 February 2020 at 01:06 PM
One bonfire that refuses to die and flamed up again today - Crowdstrike and the media's total refusal to even mention its name, which was the really critical part of the Ukrainian phone call. Not their phony quid pro quo.

All Democrat candidates need to questioned about Crowdstrike, since it led to two failed major Democrat-led actions against President Trump - The Mueller investigation and the Democrat impeachment.

Following article underscores what Larry Johnson has been reporting for years:

https://thenationalsentinel.com/2020/02/15/crowdstrike-claim-that-russia-hacked-dnc-server-remains-at-center-of-2016-spygate-scandal-hoax/

b , 16 February 2020 at 01:10 PM
Sander is a no 'Marxist' at all. I agree with this quote from Krugman (a Clinton guy):
The thing is, Bernie Sanders isn't actually a socialist in any normal sense of the term. He doesn't want to nationalize our major industries and replace markets with central planning; he has expressed admiration, not for Venezuela, but for Denmark. He's basically what Europeans would call a social democrat -- and social democracies like Denmark are, in fact, quite nice places to live, with societies that are, if anything, freer than our own.

The social democrat have always hated and fought against the communists who are the real Marxists.

D , 16 February 2020 at 01:13 PM
FDR strongly warned not to unionize government employees.

Sanders demands all workers shall be unionized, which is the backbone of the Green New Deal - mandatory union membership, creating vast slush funds of union dues going directly to the Democrat party.

Fred , 16 February 2020 at 01:16 PM
Divadab,

Just what has Bernie accomplished in 30 years in federal office, besides becoming a multimillionaire?

D , 16 February 2020 at 01:16 PM
What happened to the speculation that breaking the whole " Trump coup" conspiracy would take down all government agencies, including the Gang of 8?

Consequently, more than the Democrats are interested in burying any loose threads that could cause something much larger to unravel? Wolfe gets off. McCabe gets off. Page/Strozk leer smugly over glasses of wine. Clapper-Bernnan-Comey free as birds.

John Merryman , 16 February 2020 at 01:20 PM
The reality should not be so much about the personalities, as the processes driving them. We have this ideal of a nation of laws, not men, but the principle doesn't run that deep.

The medical situation, for instance, is rife with fraud and abuse. While some waste is necessary, the whole trial and error thing, our country's medical system is more about siphoning value out of the community, than effectively understanding the necessities of healthcare and trying to adequately provide for them, to the extent possible.

Which is not so much a healthcare issue, as it is a financial system issue. Here is a very insightful essay from Naked Capitalism, that could be applied across many fields;

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/02/ship-the-airplane-the-cultural-organizational-and-technical-reasons-why-boeing-cannot-recover.html
Focus on the people distracts from the real issues.

eakens , 16 February 2020 at 01:45 PM
Good luck getting rid of the private insurance companies, lobbies, lawyers, accountants, and other third party beneficiaries of the private insurance market. United Healthcare has revenues of nearly a quarter trillion dollars just by itself. It's better to focus on what is possible instead of what is noble.

It is the same reason we won't be able to end all the wars, and simplify the tax code in a meaningful way. Intuit (the maker of TurboTax) is one of the largest supporters of complicating the forms and processes by which to file taxes.

The bottom line is that these are massive, structural changes that they would take constitutional amendments to fix since every 4-8 years some carpetbagger shows up seeking to undo what the other carpetbaggers did, and the only thing they do is create another cottage industry regulated by an equally large bureaucracy.

If you want to champion anything, start with campaign finance reform since everything else is just noise.

james , 16 February 2020 at 02:53 PM
basically you're saying 'the usa is screwed." that is what it sounds like to me..
Dwight , 16 February 2020 at 03:17 PM
Our current system already beggars most of us. Expensive yet insecure coverage that potentially bankrupts us all from surprise billing. Incredible time-suck to protect yourself from such predatory practices. (Though it appears Medicare recipients are protected from such price gouging.).

Employer-based coverage constrains job changes, and leaves people without coverage when they get laid off because of illness. I see Medicare for All as enhancing liberty. Tying health care to your employer is kind of feudal. Take away the tax breaks at least so the market is fair. I wouldn't mind paying premiums and copays, with monthly maximum, but wouldn't mind paying through taxes either.

Diana Croissant , 16 February 2020 at 03:30 PM
I am sorry, but my comment to this summary of the Democratic contenders is totally facetious. (Perhaps that is because if find all but Tulsi people who have been put forward by an obviously facetious group of people running the Democratic Party now.

Does anyone else suspect that Elizabeth Warren is making money on the side doing the voice for Pinocchio in the GEICO ads?

divadab , 16 February 2020 at 03:42 PM
Whoa! Quite a few responses - will try to answer in order:

@turcopolier - well I have direct experience of the Canadian system and based on many experiences, the Canadian universal single-payer system is not "rationed" in any way wrt urgent care. Yes if you have elective surgery like an arthroscopic knee repair of which I've had two and my choice was wait 3-5 months in Canada or pay $5,000 stateside and get it done next week. I paid. The choice of paying for service should never go away IMHO and this is a flaw among many which I note with Bernie's plan. Nonetheless he is articulating a bargaining position to attain something I think essential to re-organize the US health insurance system. WHy as a society are we paying twice as a percentage of gdp than Canada? It's profiteering. ANd Inefficiency. Probably in reverse order of importance, but they each feed the other.

@NancyK - some mix of a universal medicaire-style system with extra insurance available for those who want to pay for it (private room, immediate service, that kind of upgrade) might work, don't you think?

@fred - well, since you ask, and tho I'm no expert in the history of Bernie I do know this - he was mayor of Burlington VT for quite a while and you should take a walk around and see how some of his intitiatives have made Burlington more livable. ALso he garnered between 20 and 40 % of the Republican vote in his long run as Congressman from VT. As Representative and Senator he is well known for his successful amendements to the benefit of ALL
rather than for the benefit of the few, or, himself. He is only recently a millionaire, I understand, as he wrote a very successful book which made him a couple of million. Other than that, he owns real estate - who of his vintage who bought real estate has not made money?

Anyhoo, Bernie or bust!

ISL , 16 February 2020 at 03:45 PM
Dear Colonel,

I find I agree completely with all your points, except (respectfully) the intensity of your Bernie blast. If medicare for all is such a bad idea, then I await Trump to propose revoking ALL the communistic gov't medical care programs (including the free one congress gets).

Spark!!! spark!!! spark!!! Third rail.

Also, I note that Tulsi's has many more enemies. I continue supporting her (she is doing better than Steyer and Yang) in the hope that Bernie has had her as VP in mind all along or else that she will spend the next four years building a support base for 2024.

Barring the economy cracking or a new ME mess (perhaps by an Iranian proxy in revenge), I agree that the Dems will get trounced outside their coastal enclaves, particularly if the Dems continue to cheat the process. Nothings says stay home like having your vote stolen.

In the economic regards, the Corona Virus is a potentially massive black swan event - the Fed already has been printing 100 billion per month to stave off economic collapse for five months now (socialism for the banks!!!! Get a pitchfork) and no intention to slowdown for the foreseeable future, so it's not clear they have the bullets to deal with a, at a minimum, Corona shutdown of US supply chains. With a up to 24 day before symptoms appear, and false negatives of up to 80% in the very few who are tested, efforts to date by the US are just security theater.

Dwight , 16 February 2020 at 03:49 PM
Even if Bernie were a communist rather than a moderate social democrat, we have checks and balances, and the Fifth Amendment protecting property rights.
turcopolier , 16 February 2020 at 05:10 PM
Dwight

Just kidding yourself about how much damage he could do while president. Do you feel that way about Trump?

turcopolier , 16 February 2020 at 05:12 PM
ISL
1. His plan would forbid insurance outside it. 2. The cost is massively prohibitive.
turcopolier , 16 February 2020 at 05:16 PM
James

No. Trump is doing a good job except in the ME.

turcopolier , 16 February 2020 at 06:12 PM
divadab

"wrt urgent care." What would you do if there were no available sources of treatment in the US?

turcopolier , 16 February 2020 at 06:16 PM
b (old adversary) You may not like to admits that I know a lot about various forms of leftism but I (like many other former USI officers know a lot about you) I personally recruited quite a few "Social Democrats" who were really agents of the USSR until they switched sides. They were tested a lot. I admit that Bernie evidently never voted for the Communist Party candidate for president as John Brennan did, but his honeymoon on an Intourist visa in the USSR speaks volumes. As I recall you were quite pro-Warsaw Pact and anti-NATO during the Cold War.
D , 16 February 2020 at 07:00 PM
Denmark retains its Lutheran sensibilities, if not their daily practice. It is very strict about immigration - very few are allowed in, closed borders, must speak Danish, turn over assets to the government, and no complaints about pork being on the menus.

Hygge celebrates thrift, simplicity and austerity. If you want Danish social democracy, you have to participate in the whole package. (Being of Danish heritage myself, I see nothin wrong with this but don't see many others living up to their unique lifestyle standards -

(NB: re-read Garrison Kielor's Lake Woebegon for further insights into Scandinavian heritage in the US - particuarly his footnoted treatise on 100 drawbacks being raised Scandinavian - US Scandinavians will laugh in self-recognition and also sadly nod in full agreement)

Danes laugh at our US welfare state and recognize it has nothing to do with their version of social welfare. Danish "socialism" provides workers with buy-in medical plans for more efficient delivery systems. It is by no means free government run health care or social welfare for all.

Norwegians are closer to this idealized model of "free stuff", but with even stricter about immigration controls and their system floats on massive amounts of fossil fuel extraction cash. Sweden, Finland, Iceland -- all have uniqiness in their social welfare systems that cannot translate to the US polyglot, poly-cultural model.

Danes also have suffered from high rates of depression and suicide. So Bernie, be sure to sign up for the whole package, and stop glossing over the missing details of your proposal for "Danish socialism".

Their system does work for the Danes and has a lot to like about it - but you have to plug in all the variables, so start by undoing the US welfare state plantation first and expect everyone to be a maker; not a taker.

Then give everyone a bike to replace their cars, and only then can you start handing out free health care - Danish style because their far more active lifestyle will define new models for health care needs.

[Feb 15, 2020] Tulsi's campaign is still alive

Feb 15, 2020 | caucus99percent.com

Bernie didn't win in '16. Rigging certainly but he had no nationwide general electoral opportunity to enter the WH. Instead, the Berniecrat progressive fire has continued burning slowly and steadily. Progressivism, in its various flavors, is now THE ascendant movement of the Left. It grew slowly, steadily. This is the comparison which is relevant to Tulsi's candidacy. Barring a miracle, Tulsi will not be the Dem nominee in November facing off El Trumpo. But she has lit a fire under hundreds of thousands which will continue to spread due to the gentle breezes of her campaign speeches. Perhaps 2024 is her year. If not, 2028 could realistically be the date she becomes POTUS.

My previous essay, It's the economy, was negative. Negative if one believes there is even a remote chance Saint Bernie gets to run against Trump. Yes, he, like the rest of the D's is running against Trump but what are the plans? Open Borders? Medicare for Illegal aliens? Bernie's got other proposals, meritorious ones deserving of support. But too much baggage. He is collecting baggage as adroitly as Liz Warren. Look what that's done to her campaign.

Kind-hearted Bernie is taking up survivors from the Warren life rafts, many of whom are armed with rubber penetrating pins.

Tulsi does not genuflect.

The same type of integrity-diminishing stances Liawatha has adopted, are now afflicting Saint Bernie. Pandering on open borders. Retreating before Culinary Union attacks without personally facing it down NOW--NOW when it counts.

The last man standing will be a woman. The rest are craven characatures of sincere humans, so phony that even a blind monkey could detect.

Who did Warren Harding defeat for President? Don't look it up--people don't remember losers. In 20 years, H. Rodent Clinton will be merely a bad dream, to be recalled in memory only by those interested in calamity.

Bernie started a movement. But, like Moses, he will never enter the Promised Land. His name will be remembered by even his opponents as someone who began steering the ship of state into better waters. But his portrait will not hang in the WH.

Tulsi is the future


on the cusp on Sat, 02/15/2020 - 8:10pm

I am not completely sure Tulsi is anything in the future.

She is not running for re-election. At the time of the next presidential election, she will be a private citizen.
She will have less leverage for endorsement of her colleagues than she does now.
For all we know, in 2 or 3 years, she may be out of the political realm completely.
I concede she is the type of person, or the sort of person that would take us forward, but she has little in the way of base right now, and will have an unknown base in a few years.
Bernie, no matter how I despise his foreign policy, is the poll leader, is a half-assed socialist, might actually improve/save lives of the working class and poor, and he is the start of a left swing we need now. Tulsi or some young leftie can knock it out of the park if we can just show people that social programs work, and work extremely well.

edg on Sat, 02/15/2020 - 8:14pm
Speculation about Tulsi's future...

@on the cusp

"The 2022 Hawaii gubernatorial election will take place on November 8, 2022, to elect the Governor of Hawaii. Incumbent Democratic Governor David Ige is term-limited and cannot seek re-election to a third term."

snoopydawg on Sat, 02/15/2020 - 8:23pm
Interesting

@edg

But why would she give up her seat in congress for being governor? She sees things in Hawaii she wants to fix or being governor is a better shot at being president? I admit that I don't know much about her congressional record. I just don't understand why people feel so strongly against her. Once upon a time they wanted the wars to stop. Now they are hung ho for warring with Russia through Ukraine.

#3

"The 2022 Hawaii gubernatorial election will take place on November 8, 2022, to elect the Governor of Hawaii. Incumbent Democratic Governor David Ige is term-limited and cannot seek re-election to a third term."

RantingRooster on Sat, 02/15/2020 - 8:39pm
Dude

Are you having a senior moment?

Don't get me wrong, there is much I like about Tulsi, but establishment democrats hate her, more than they hate Bernie. She openly defied them and quit the DNC on Bernie's behalf, and help bring down Debbie what-her-name as chairperson for the DNC.

[Feb 15, 2020] Write-in as a way of making a statement against the USA oligarchy corruption

Writing in Tulsi would probably be more a politically correct statement. She is a talented politician, a rare American gem. She speaks truth unlike the coward and lifelong conman Bonespurs
Feb 15, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Patroklos , Feb 15 2020 21:58 utc | 57

Tulsi is the new JFK. But seems America is not ready for decent honest politian with ideals and aspirations. She think America is capable of greatness. I doubt it. But I will write her name in if thats what it takes. For what its worth.

jared , Feb 15 2020 19:18 utc | 19
Does that mean that the US is now officially a 'shithole country' too? Long gone are the days when a national leader was a former railway engine cleaner who lived in a little house in a country town, a man who would go on to enact a legislative program that embraced a whole community recovering from war .

The West is very very broken.

[Feb 15, 2020] Some people want Tulsi to drop out and endorse Bernie. They are wrong.

Notable quotes:
"... Bloomberg is not going to get people to vote in large enough numbers to be a contender, he had zero write-in votes in NH. So he is about running to gain support just enough to force a second vote in order to for superdelegates to over turn the will of the people for Bernie at the convention. ..."
Feb 15, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kali , Feb 15 2020 18:54 utc | 7

Bloomberg is not going to get people to vote in large enough numbers to be a contender, he had zero write-in votes in NH. So he is about running to gain support just enough to force a second vote in order to for superdelegates to over turn the will of the people for Bernie at the convention.

Some people want Tulsi to drop out and endorse Bernie, like Kyle Kulinski, but those people are not thinking right because they act as if Bernie is not a VERY OLD man who has had health issues recently. If Tulsi drops out and endorses Bernie and then Bernie a few months from now has health issues which force him out---THEN WHAT KYLE? You want Warren who is a proven con artist and neocon?

See Tulsi Gabbard is The Steely Dan of Politics or: Perfection Isn't For Everyone

[Feb 09, 2020] The Democrats are denying a voice to their strongest candidate, Tulsi Gabbard

Notable quotes:
"... " Don't tell the Democrats, but they are ignoring their best candidate for president. That candidate is Tulsi Gabbard. She is the congresswoman from Hawaii who would have the best chance of picking up the votes of independents and even some Republicans in November. But at the moment she is being ostracized by party leaders." Mulshine ..."
"... Agreed. But she's anti-war, so no chance of being supported by "party leaders" ( those "leaders" is a bit of a misnomer) ..."
"... Tulsi bet all her chips on New Hampshire just like Mayor Pete did in Iowa. I was up in the Conway region last August and saw billboards for Tulsi all over the place. There was nothing for other candidates. She held well over a hundred town halls in the state. I'm hoping this strategy works for her. ..."
Feb 09, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

" Don't tell the Democrats, but they are ignoring their best candidate for president. That candidate is Tulsi Gabbard. She is the congresswoman from Hawaii who would have the best chance of picking up the votes of independents and even some Republicans in November. But at the moment she is being ostracized by party leaders." Mulshine

--------------

Yes. pl

https://www.nj.com/opinion/2020/02/the-democrats-are-denying-a-voice-to-their-strongest-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-mulshine.html


Daniel McAdams , 08 February 2020 at 10:47 PM

We had her on the program Friday: https://youtu.be/SlCeGEkWApk
Alex stumm , 08 February 2020 at 11:17 PM
Agreed. But she's anti-war, so no chance of being supported by "party leaders" ( those "leaders" is a bit of a misnomer)
The Twisted Genius , 08 February 2020 at 11:26 PM
Tulsi bet all her chips on New Hampshire just like Mayor Pete did in Iowa. I was up in the Conway region last August and saw billboards for Tulsi all over the place. There was nothing for other candidates. She held well over a hundred town halls in the state. I'm hoping this strategy works for her. I like EVERYTHING about her including her antiwar foreign policy stance and her genuinely progressive domestic policy.

I just received this message from her campaign:

"Tulsi is on the rise in New Hampshire and we need to be doing all we can right now to keep this upward momentum going!"

"First: Local paper The Caledonian Record yesterday released an online poll showing a whopping 67.3% of voters chose Tulsi as the candidate they would "like to see win the Primary.""

"Then: CNN/UNH polling released today shows Tulsi moving into 5th, within striking distance of Elizabeth Warren, with HALF of voters still uncommitted and up for grabs."

"It's the height of irony that CNN's OWN most recent polling shows Tulsi ahead of Amy Klobuchar, Andrew Yang, Tom Steyer and Deval Patrick -- all of whom were given nationally televised CNN town halls worth millions just this week, while the establishment network refused to let Tulsi speak. This blatant censorship denied New Hampshire voters (half undecided) the opportunity to hear from all the candidates, and then make an informed opinion about who to support."

I hope she does well in New Hampshire. It will be much harder for for the press to ignore her if she does.

james , 08 February 2020 at 11:33 PM
follow the money - usa state religion.. the donors are being looked after..

[Feb 08, 2020] Mayor Pete and Bill Maher - Sic Semper Tyrannis

Feb 08, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Bill Maher interviewed Pete Buttigieg a few days ago on January 31, 2019. Bill Maher said, "You are the only military veteran in this."
Buttigieg nodded along and said, "Yeah."

It was a critical test of character for Mayor Pete, and Buttigieg showed his true colors. Instead of acknowledging Major Tulsi Gabbard -- the first female combat veteran to ever run for the presidency, who volunteered to deploy twice to the warzones of the Middle East at the height of the war, who has served in the Army National Guard for 17 years and is still serving today -- Buttigieg chose to allow the audience to believe the falsehood that he was the only military veteran running for president because it benefits him politically.

Furthermore, when Buttigeig's campaign posted the interview on social media, they chose to cut out the first part of Maher's statement (i.e.


"You are the only military veteran in this.") C'est un arriviste : mon opinion

Check this article:

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

Before I dive into Shortest Way Home's account of the life and career of Peter Buttigieg, let me be up front about my bias. I don't trust former McKinsey consultants. I don't trust military intelligence officers. And I don't trust the type of people likely to appear on "40 under 40" lists, the valedictorian-to-Harvard-to-Rhodes-Scholarship types who populate the American elite. I don't trust people who get flattering reams of newspaper profiles and are pitched as the Next Big Thing That You Must Pay Attention To, and I don't trust wunderkinds who become successful too early. Why? Because I am somewhat cynical about the United States meritocracy. Few people amass these kind of résumés if they are the type to openly challenge authority. Noam Chomsky says that the factors predicting success in our "meritocracy" are a "combination of greed, cynicism, obsequiousness and subordination, lack of curiosity and independence of mind, [and] self-serving disregard for others." So when journalists see "Harvard" and think "impressive," I see it and think "uh-oh."

Posted by: The Beaver | 07 February 2020 at 02:03 PM DNC and Media have black balled Gabbard.
Thrashing Kamala and Hillary is an unforgivable sin for the current DNC.
Democratic party is poorly served by DNC corruption and incompetence.
The top of their ticket reminds me of the decrepit party hacks the politburo put forward in the early 80s.
Moral and intellectual bankrupt.
Noting that McCain and Romney were the previous GOP nominees does not inspire confidence either

Posted by: sbin | 07 February 2020 at 02:23 PM I'm not normally into conspiracy theories, but I am suspicious of his direct commission into Naval intelligence. His educational background and a few other things makes me think he might be a CIA stooge.

And yes, pretty dishonest and arrogant to not mention Tulsi.

Posted by: Eric Newhill | 07 February 2020 at 02:36 PM I had heard Mayor Pete had been an engineer in the military but in a The Atlantic interview he says he was Naval Intelligence. He also spent time as a consultant for McKinsey in the Afghanistan but in neither case was he in much danger--unlike Tulsi.
In his own words: "Four years later, Buttigieg would return to Afghanistan as a Naval intelligence officer. He stayed on bases for the most part, venturing out only as an armed escort on an occasional trip. On the McKinsey work, they were outside the wire more, but "there was no moment of great adventure or danger for me, other than just the fact of we drove from Kabul to Jalalabad. That was a little risky. But in Iraq we were on base, or at least in the Green Zone, almost all the time."

How does a mayor of a small mid-west town wake up one day and decide he is qualified to run for the highest political office in the land and believe he can win. He's either insane or has friends inm high places. After the fudging of the numbers in Iowa in his favor, I'd say the latter.

Posted by: optimax | 07 February 2020 at 02:41 PM I have a low opinion of his personal integrity. But then I have a lot opinion of the President's personal integrity. Its probably time saving to say who does appear to have integrity rather than doesnt. At the moment I am prepared to believe Steyer, Gabbard, Sanders and Yang have some decency. But I could easily be wrong about any of them.

Posted by: Harry | 07 February 2020 at 02:51 PM Ian Gabbard should run as an independent if she doesn't get the nomination. I believe Gabbard said she won't but I hope she change her mind.

Posted by: Ian | 07 February 2020 at 03:01 PM different clue Since my background is strictly civilian, I cannot state . . . anything. But perhaps I can ask, could we refer to this as " foam-rubber valor"? Or "cardboard-replica valor"?

And it confirms a new emerging nickname I am seeing here and there for Mayor Pete . . . Pete the Cheat, Cheater Peter, Cheatin' Pete.. .

Posted by: different clue | 07 February 2020 at 03:23 PM

[Feb 08, 2020] I support Tulsi for president, whatever the odds, but she was not allowed on the stage

Feb 08, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said 'This is mine", and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody.
--  Rousseau 1754"

------------

I gave up my Friday Night trivial enjoyments to watch the Democratic Party debate in New Hampshire. I did it for you, pilgrims, for you and because SWMBO forced me to do it.

As you can see, I support TG for president, whatever the odds, but she was not allowed on the stage. This morning she was on the TeeVee with one or another of the babbling anchors and when pressed over Trump's expulsion from his household of Sunderland, the EU ambassador and the execrable Vindmans from the NSC staff said reluctantly (and correctly) that the president has a right to whomever he wants as his subordinates in the Executive Branch. BTW, something generally ignored is that the two Vindmans are still US Army officers. What they have lost are their current assignments.

But, to return to the subject of last night's debate - it was evident that all of them (even Joe) are running on the basis of Rousseau's bald assertion that mankind has fallen from a "state of nature" in which humans existed in a classless economic equality and that said humans are hopelessly corrupted by the chains created by the notion of private property. To one extent or another all the Democrats in the debate say they want "social justice," meaning a basic re-distribution of goods, (well, maybe not their own goods) as well as a way of life (for most people) in which Mother Earth is not despoiled of her treasures. In such a world bison and bears would presumably roam Central Park in The Big Apple where they could be played with by shaggy men and women in costumes made from grass and other Vegan materials. In that world there would a somewhat higher incidence of infectious diseases but there would be balance in the universe.

It is no wonder that the absent Bloomberg (the littlest one) thinks he can win the nomination. pl

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau

[Feb 07, 2020] One outcome on Iowa might be the dems may well go crawling to Tulsi at the last minute begging her to save them from themselves.

Feb 07, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

I mentioned a while ago that the 2020 election will make the surrealism, and indeed idiocy, of the counter-Trump forces in 2016 look tame. It looks like the Democrats have decided to start right here and right now with the Iowa shambles and Nancy's tantrum, and it can only get better (worse). I suggest the circus has enough clowns on duty to ensure it goes on for much longer than a couple of days.

Will their attempts to clean up their appearances be based on trying to resolve their tribal differences, or to just paper over the cracks ? I think the latter, with one outcome being they may well go crawling to Tulsi at the last minute begging her to save them from themselves.
She might refuse, after all she has plenty of time to watch the dinosaurs die in their own tar pit.

Posted by: PRC90 | 05 February 2020 at 10:24 PM

[Feb 04, 2020] Sanders and Gabbard know the DNC is out to destroy him. And the question then becomes what's next?

Notable quotes:
"... Yes, Gabbard is polling low but if you look at poll numbers versus money spent and/or raised to this point, she's clearly got cache and the ability to build a real following. And as the field shrinks those distractions become irrelevant. Her poll numbers are rising the more the field winnows. ..."
"... Bernie is surging in the early states and panic is setting in with the DNC. And they must have a plan to stop him from running away with the nomination otherwise we could have two outsiders headlining this fall's reality show. ..."
"... Of the people running for President as Democrats the only person less acceptable to Wall St. than Elizabeth Warren is Bernie Sanders. Warren's entire campaign has been designed to push Bernie farther left by out-lefting him at every turn. Bernie says 70% top marginal tax rate, Warren says 77%. Bernie wants debt restructuring? Warren says forgive all student loan debt. ..."
"... Her job is to make Bernie as unacceptable to mainstream U.S. voters as possible. Unfortunately, that makes Bernie more and more acceptable to a lot of people voting in the Democratic primaries. And this Catch-22 is beginning to show up in the polls for Iowa and New Hampshire. ..."
"... there's the serious money behind Pete Buttigieg trying to create slightly gayer version of Barack Obama ..."
"... Gabbard is not running for re-election in Hawaii. She says she's committed to running for President. I don't think she's getting the nomination and, frankly, I don't think she is either. ..."
"... Gabbard denies any kind of third party run, getting the Ron Paul treatment from the media. But, she's a very acceptable person to a lot of disaffected Trump voters like myself. She speaks to them and can help carry Bernie as his running mate if he somehow makes it through the convention to be the Democratic nominee. ..."
"... So, yes, Gabbard isn't running for re-election because she's running as Sanders' Vice-Presidential candidate. ..."
"... Gabbard has burned all the bridges within the DNC she can, almost gleefully. That makes her a person of integrity, of authenticity, in a U.S. political wasteland of charlatans, reality show hucksters and outright thieves. ..."
Feb 01, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

Tom Luongo February 1, 2020 © Photo: Flickr / Gage Skidmore For months now I've been convinced that Hillary Clinton will be entering the fray that is the Democratic Party primary season. The affair to date has been a nothing short of high comedy.

Recent events have me more convinced than ever that she will be returning, like some zombie whose head we forgot to cut off, to haunt voters one more time this fall.

After the beginning of an obvious (and planned) PR campaign last week with the release of a big campaign ad documentary on Netflix and a big splash in the Hollywood Reporter Hillary finally stopped being coy. And she announced this week that she now 'has the urge' to run again against Donald Trump.

Save us, please, from Hillary's urges . Shudder.

And she did so making sure that everyone knew what she thought of the real front-runner for the nomination, Bernie Sanders.

As various anointed ones have dropped out of the race – Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Robert O'Rourke – others have faltered despite huge ad spends while the media and pollsters do their level best to convince us all that Joe Biden's a serious candidate to take on Donald Trump this fall.

In fact, the only reason Biden is still in the race is to make the impeachment theater going on right now seem relevant and cogent. But, like Biden himself, it is neither.

Then again neither is Hillary, but never underestimate this woman's narcissistic solipsism.

If you look back on the race to date it's clear that most of the people running are there to try and distract voters away from the two candidates that resonate most with voters, Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard.

Yes, Gabbard is polling low but if you look at poll numbers versus money spent and/or raised to this point, she's clearly got cache and the ability to build a real following. And as the field shrinks those distractions become irrelevant. Her poll numbers are rising the more the field winnows.

Neither of them is acceptable in any way to the DNC. They are outsiders within their party. I'm no fan of Bernie Sanders. In fact, I think he's a terrible candidate -- because, you know, commie! -- but that's not the point of this article.

Bernie is surging in the early states and panic is setting in with the DNC. And they must have a plan to stop him from running away with the nomination otherwise we could have two outsiders headlining this fall's reality show.

And that plan starts with the impeachment and potential removal of Donald Trump.

The impeachment is a distraction for Trump but it is a real problem for the Senators running for the Democratic nomination. They have to spend all day listening to Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler lie while they could be out campaigning and raising money.

This hurts Bernie the most because Bernie is the one who will get zero help from the DNC's big donors. None of them are behind him and with good reason. He's hostile to most of them (and most of us as well, but that's a different article).

Of the people running for President as Democrats the only person less acceptable to Wall St. than Elizabeth Warren is Bernie Sanders. Warren's entire campaign has been designed to push Bernie farther left by out-lefting him at every turn. Bernie says 70% top marginal tax rate, Warren says 77%. Bernie wants debt restructuring? Warren says forgive all student loan debt.

Her job is to make Bernie as unacceptable to mainstream U.S. voters as possible. Unfortunately, that makes Bernie more and more acceptable to a lot of people voting in the Democratic primaries. And this Catch-22 is beginning to show up in the polls for Iowa and New Hampshire.

Then there's the serious money behind Pete Buttigieg trying to create slightly gayer version of Barack Obama. Again, he's just another distraction to suck support away from Sanders and keep the field relatively close and the odds of an uncommitted primary season high.

Because the goal is to get to a brokered convention this summer. So, the impeachment was slowed down to hurt Sanders, Warren and Amy Klobuchar and help give Biden the bump he needs to get some momentum coming into Iowa.

It's not working.

But I also don't think it's going to matter. If you keep watching the headlines the attack dogs are out in full to discredit and hurt Sanders. They know he's a real force to be reckoned with. And worse, his attack dog, Gabbard, has been muzzled by keeping her off the debate stage so she can't take anyone else out, like she roasted that pig Kamala Harris last summer.

But I truly feel the DNC is looking to steal the nomination again from Sanders. And the impeachment of Trump continues to somehow, against all odds, get worse for him, even though his party is supposed to be in charge of the proceedings.

I told everyone back in September when Nancy Pelosi announced she was going through with the impeachment process that this was all about getting rid of Trump. But it was in October when Hillary went after Tulsi Gabbard that Gabbard's response was beyond epic and I wrote about it then.

Great! Thank you @HillaryClinton . You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain. From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a

-- Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) October 18, 2019

concerted campaign to destroy my reputation. We wondered who was behind it and why. Now we know -- it was always you, through your proxies and

-- Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) October 18, 2019

powerful allies in the corporate media and war machine, afraid of the threat I pose.

It's now clear that this primary is between you and me. Don't cowardly hide behind your proxies. Join the race directly.

-- Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) October 18, 2019

Gabbard throws down the gauntlet here outing Hillary as the mastermind behind the DNC strategy of allowing the current crop of future losers to fall all over themselves to alienate as many centrist voters as possible.

This paves the way for Hillary to swoop in on her broom, pointed hat in hand, and declare herself the savior of the Democratic Party's chances to defeat Donald Trump next November.

So, Hillary's running, the DNC is trying to stop Bernie and Tulsi Gabbard is still an also-ran in New Hampshire and Iowa, polling between 5% and 7%. So what?

Well, I feel at this point it's been game-planned by Gabbard and Sanders that they know what's coming. I felt the endorsement from Joe Rogan of Sanders was timed to distract from Hillary's attack on Bernie in that Hollywood Reporter piece.

Rogan is far more influential than the dead tree media Hillary's publicist works with. And her attack dogs were out in full to attack Rogan and smear Sanders with their typical guilt-by-association nonsense.

I don't tweet much folks, but this one gets to the truth of what's going on in the murk and slime of Democratic Party politics.

If you ever wanted proof that hyper-sensitive identity politics was nothing more than a cheap political tool of the worst kind. I give you Joe Rogan is a Nazi.

Wake up, get unwoke profit https://t.co/la7bgSKS7f

-- Tom Luongo (@TFL1728) January 24, 2020

Sanders and Gabbard know the DNC is out to destroy him. And the question then becomes what's next?

What do they do to combat this? Gabbard is not running for re-election in Hawaii. She says she's committed to running for President. I don't think she's getting the nomination and, frankly, I don't think she is either.

She just filed a defamation of character lawsuit against Hillary for the smears Hillary threw around I linked to above. She puts financial pressure on Hillary knowing that the Clintons couldn't drum up support and dollars last year during their expensive speaking tour no one went to.

Gabbard denies any kind of third party run, getting the Ron Paul treatment from the media. But, she's a very acceptable person to a lot of disaffected Trump voters like myself. She speaks to them and can help carry Bernie as his running mate if he somehow makes it through the convention to be the Democratic nominee.

So, yes, Gabbard isn't running for re-election because she's running as Sanders' Vice-Presidential candidate.

And it may not be for the Democratic party in the end. That's the part you have to factor in here.

Game-planning this out, these two are running a real insurgency within the DNC to either get the nomination or split off and run as Independents. This is Bernie's last kick at the can. He's already gotten the gold watch from the DNC in 2016, living the high life only a high member of the Politburo can.

Gabbard has burned all the bridges within the DNC she can, almost gleefully. That makes her a person of integrity, of authenticity, in a U.S. political wasteland of charlatans, reality show hucksters and outright thieves.

The quicker she climbs out of the basement in Pelosi's House, the better off she'll be.

... ... ...

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

[Feb 01, 2020] DNC affirms one dollar -- one vote principle

Notable quotes:
"... "Thankfully seeing Bloomberg speak can only hurt his standing," ..."
Feb 01, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) announced Friday afternoon that the criteria for making the debate stage will no longer include a requirement about individual donors -- allowing Bloomberg, whose campaign is largely self-funded, to join the candidates if his polling numbers reach the new threshold.

Comedian and writer Jack Allison took a wry look at the changes and what they mean about the party. "Remember when they wouldn't even think of changing them for like Cory Booker," Allison tweeted . "This is what we mean when we talk about the DNC cheating, obviously and out in the open."

"Thankfully seeing Bloomberg speak can only hurt his standing," Allison added, "but still."

But it was outspoken filmmaker Michael Moore that really went off on the DNC's decision. Speaking Friday night at a Sanders rally in Clive, Iowa, Moore went on an expletive-filled rant against the party.

https://youtu.be/sMnS9eP4uPY

Coram Justice , 17 minutes ago link

Gosh Bernie, haven't you read about yourself in Profiles of Corruption . If you can be corrupt why can't the DNC be corrupt? It's only fair. How do you expect the people running the DNC to become millionaires like you? Shouldn't they be able to pocket a little of Mike Bloomberg's $325,000? Don't be a poor loser. Maintain dignity.

[Jan 31, 2020] The swamp only sorta fears Tulsi Gabbard. Bernie is an annoying blowhard to them. Plus Bernie doesn't want to win, just fill the coffers of his PAC

in 2016 Sanders behaved really despicably betraying all his voters who stretched their finances to support him.
Jan 31, 2020 | www.unz.com

Old and grumpy , says: Show Comment January 31, 2020 at 1:18 pm GMT

@TG The swamp only sorta fears Tulsi Gabbard. Bernie is an annoying blowhard to them. Plus Bernie doesn't want to win, just fill the coffers of his PAC. Maybe get another house. Understandable since his wife's source of easy money went belly up.

[Jan 27, 2020] CNN latest move was to not allow Tulsi Gabbard to participate in CNN's "Town Halls" series from New Hampshire Feb. 5-6.

Jan 27, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kabobyak | Jan 26 2020 16:03 utc | 5

CNN no longer attempts to hide its efforts to sway the elections (while doubling down on the "Russian interference" psy-ops BS). Their latest move was to not allow Tulsi Gabbard to participate in CNN's "Town Halls" series from New Hampshire Feb. 5-6.

Tulsi polls higher than three of the invitees. Deval Patrick(!!!) was invited of course.

[Jan 23, 2020] Tulsi as Sanders VP is an interesting, "anti-Warren" option

Tulsi unlike chickenhawks in Congress did spend dome time in the war zone.
Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
lysias , Jan 23 2020 18:34 utc | 45
Sanders needs to choose a running mate who is less congenial to the powers that be than he is. JFK's mistake was choosing LBJ as running mate, so he lacked that insurance against assassination.

Who could Sanders choose that would fill this role and not hurt his election chances better than Gabbard? I can't think of anyone. She is half-Samoan, female, a veteran, good-looking, articulate, and courageous. I think that as running-mate she would help Sanders's election chances immensely.


Carson , Jan 23 2020 18:49 utc | 49

pretzelattack @11

Bernie's stances on fp are stronger today than they were in 2016, so I have hope that he is teachable. He's not perfect, but its the best serious alternative to date.

Kali , Jan 23 2020 19:09 utc | 55
The media is going to try to get revenge on Tulsi for upsetting their plan to bring Bernie down, expect a massive negative reaction to Tulsi going after Hillary yesterday ( Gaslighting Tulsi ).

T here is a lot of people who see Bernie Sanders as lacking what it takes to take on the neocons and MIC. That may be so, but maybe he is following the advice in Sun Tzu's Art of War which prizes deception as the most effective tactic to win a war. Which is why the establishment doesn't care if Bernie Sanders acts like he is one their side, they don't believe him, they believe he is deceptive and would be like Tulsi if he gains power.

It is interesting how the media was ramping up a massive anti-Bernie campaign with Warren attacking him and Hillary attacking and then Tulsi Gabbard does what she can to counter their attacks ( The Ballad of Tulsi and Hillary ).

The Russiagate conspiracy theory is still going strong with the impeachment trial going on with Trump, a weird thing about Russiagate is that the it is the mirror image of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory on the right ( The Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory Trump exploits for his fanatical support began as a reaction to the Beats and Counterculture of the 1960s ).

Duncan Idaho , Jan 23 2020 19:13 utc | 56
It is interesting how the media was ramping up a massive anti-Bernie campaign with Warren attacking him and Hillary attacking and then Tulsi Gabbard does what she can to counter their attacks
Corporate Dems would rather have Trump than Sanders.
Trailer Trash , Jan 23 2020 19:35 utc | 64
The idea that Bernie will "take on the CIA, deep state, etc." is a fantasy. He refuses to even protect residents of his hometown of Burlington, VT from harmful levels of noise from F-35 warplanes:

Many Burlington residents have resisted the Sanders-endorsed project, which would bring an Air National Guard base to the city's airport and bring several of Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II fighter jets along with it.

The jets are expected to significantly increase noise heard in Burlington, Winooski and other nearby communities that are located under flight paths.

According to an estimate by the Federal Aviation Association, at least 2,640 homes will experience increased noise through 2023, something that local governments are expecting to decrease the value of both quality of living and homes.

Burlington residents have already endured extreme noise from F-16s for the past 30 years. The F-16s are being retired, only to be replaced with new jets that are four times louder. That's progress for ya!

Ole Bernie the sort-of-but-not-really socialist won't lift a finger to protect his own neighbors but he will save us from Uncle Sam's War on the World. I don't think so.

Piotr Berman , Jan 23 2020 19:58 utc | 74
Yes, many here want Gabbard but she is not viable in the race since she has not gained any traction. <- Circe

I contributed to her campaign, but realistically, because we need a visible, telegenic, articulate person to champion sane foreign policy, end of wars, sanctions etc. For Sanders, these issues are quite a bit afterthought. After Hillary, with her uncanny sense of politics, said "nobody likes him [Sanders]", Tulsi twitted #I_like_Sanders. For an official position, one has to consider that she has a lot of common sense, but education and managerial experience is not that impressive. Ambassador to UN would be perfect, low on management and large in communication. Given visibility of the position, it would be a powerful signal that USA changes the policy.

Anyway, to truly feel deplorable one has to contribute to Tulsi.

A P , Jan 23 2020 20:05 utc | 75
Tulsi Gabbard is the only sane candidate to show up to date. That makes her unelectable, even more so than her non-Anglo, non-African heritage and religion. Plus she is still an active Reserve soldier, which will scare the willies out of the Pentagram. I wonder how many current US generals have actual front-line, battle experience (and not just directing the action from behind the lines or 1000s of miles away). We know virtually none in Congress have any actual combat experience.

The US Congress, bureaucracy and top generals... Chickenhawks R US.

Circe , Jan 23 2020 20:06 utc | 76
Don't get me wrong, I like Gabbard for VP, she's a fighter, she would be great, but I'm just worried that she's the establishment Dems whipping child, and has been branded a Russiabot. She's very misunderstood. Sanders should secure the Presidency before bringing her on. Not sure. Nina's a safer bet, and would assure 90% of the black vote, but I'd like to see someone with AOC's charisma and spirit, however, she lacks experience.

Bernie said it won't be an old white guy. He wants someone young, so Warren might not make the short list, especially after what she pulled before the debate.

First he has to win in the primaries. SANDERS MUST WIN.

Carson , Jan 23 2020 20:07 utc | 77
Anytime I find myself thinking that Tulsi might not be qualified for the VP slot, I just do a quick mental comparison between her and Sarah Palin.
HD , Jan 23 2020 20:07 utc | 78
@ A P # 75. Spot-on, unfortunately. :/
A P , Jan 23 2020 20:12 utc | 79
A Carson.. Sorry, Palin was not sane when she ran, not sane now. Gabbard has her head screwed on straight, and no amount of screeching about her time on the NSC or that she's going to "grab our guns" changes that.
A P , Jan 23 2020 20:15 utc | 80
@ Circe: Not experienced? And Obomber was? Try another excuse not to vote for the best POTUS candidate. And I'd take Gabbard's experience IN A WAR ZONE over some paper-pusher lawyer.
A P , Jan 23 2020 20:41 utc | 85

Sander's job in the last election was to sheep-herd the anti-Clinton Dems, to keep them from jumping to the Rep side. He also got screwed by the Clinton camp, but only after he looked like he might win the nomination.

Otherwise he is no different in any meaningful way from all the other old white guys or puppets-in-waiting.

[Jan 23, 2020] Bernie winning and appointing Tulsi as a VP would be a good thing, considering all alternatives are really bad

Notable quotes:
"... Editor's Note: Bernie Sanders, at best a weak-spined FDR Democrat, is now carving his own political grave through his usual method, a cowardly implosion. And while many people, probably out of desperation, continue cut him a lot of slack arguing that he may be somewhat naive about what he's dealing with, a rather naive assumption in itself, I refuse to see him in that light. I think Sanders is too smart to be that foolish, and that includes his presumed innocence about the true nature of US foreign policy, the Russiagate hoax, and the system that controls the USA. Maybe he simply likes to be in the spotlight. But whatever makes him tick, good will, ethical principles, thirst for publicity, whatever it may be, if this is the Great Electoral Hope on which so many progressives pin their future, the rotten system they would like to destroy has absolutely nothing to worry about. -- PG ..."
Jan 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

pretzelattack , Jan 23 2020 16:35 utc | 17

well if bernie does win, he can appoint her. he needs a good vp, too -- not somebody like lieberman, or some other shill. the ptb much prefer character assassination to the real thing, imo. it's easy to arrange hits in prison, and maybe the odd senator in a small plane. presidents and sos are another matter imo, and people are wiser to them, now. the mighty wurlitzer is their weapon of choice, and people are increasingly skeptical of that, too.

Kabobyak , Jan 23 2020 16:56 utc | 21

pretzelattack @ 17

Agree that Bernie winning and appointing Tulsi would be a good thing, considering all alternatives are really bad. Here's Patrice Greanville's take on Bernie: (from the excellent greanvillepost.com)

Editor's Note: Bernie Sanders, at best a weak-spined FDR Democrat, is now carving his own political grave through his usual method, a cowardly implosion. And while many people, probably out of desperation, continue cut him a lot of slack arguing that he may be somewhat naive about what he's dealing with, a rather naive assumption in itself, I refuse to see him in that light. I think Sanders is too smart to be that foolish, and that includes his presumed innocence about the true nature of US foreign policy, the Russiagate hoax, and the system that controls the USA. Maybe he simply likes to be in the spotlight. But whatever makes him tick, good will, ethical principles, thirst for publicity, whatever it may be, if this is the Great Electoral Hope on which so many progressives pin their future, the rotten system they would like to destroy has absolutely nothing to worry about. -- PG

[Jan 23, 2020] One and a Half Cheers for Tulsi Gabbard by Daniel Lazare

Dec 22, 2019 | www.strategic-culture.org
There are lots of things to criticize about Tulsi Gabbard's "present" vote in the impeachment charade. Her invocation of Alexander Hamilton in her "House Divided" statement was ridiculous. Why this constant need to invoke a statesman who died more than two centuries ago? Do British politicians invoke Edmund Burke or William Pitt at every turn?

The same goes for her statement that impeachment is "a partisan process fueled by tribal animosities." What's causing the great American meltdown is not partisanship so much as a 232-year-old Constitution that everyone claims to adore – especially during impeachment time – but which grows more rigid, dysfunctional, and undemocratic with every passing year. The more farcical the cult of the Constitution grows, the more ridiculous are the politics that flow out of it.

Finally, her plea to Americans "to make a stand for the center" in order to "bridge our differences" is too little too late. Centrism is dead because "moderate" politicians like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Tony Blair killed it by unleashing havoc on the Middle East and generating a refugee crisis whose reverberations are still being felt. It's dead and gone, and there's no point trying to revive it.

So it wasn't Tulsi's finest moment. But what a relief from the crazed warmongering of Adam Schiff, the Hollywood neocon in charge of impeachment who has been working nonstop with the intelligence agencies to throw Trump out of office – for all the wrong reasons, one might add.

His thirteen-minute harangue during the impeachment debate was typical. It began with the obligatory nod to Hamilton before moving on to a parade of half-truths and distortions.

"Over the course of the last three months," he said, "we have found incontrovertible evidence that President Trump abused his power by pressuring the newly elected president of Ukraine to announce an investigation into President Trump's political rival Joe Biden with the hopes of defeating Mr. Biden in the 2020 presidential election and enhancing his own prospects for re-election."

This was nonsense. Sure, Trump wants to enhance his re-election prospects – what first-term president doesn't? But even though he has a political interest in taking down Biden, the American public has an equal interest in investigating a man who allowed his son to rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars from a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch at a time when he was supposedly rooting out Ukrainian corruption. Biden was part of the problem he was supposed to solve, yet Schiff seems to think he deserves a free pass merely because he's running for president.

Schiff then assailed Trump for undermining "a nation at war with our adversary Vladimir Putin's Russia" by withholding $391 million in military aid. In fact, withholding aid from the neo-Nazis of the Ukraine's Azov Battalion was one of the few good things Trump has done since taking office. Rather than undermining national security, he was doing the opposite by keeping the US out of another pointless conflict.

Besides, how do we know Russia is "our adversary" – because Schiff says so? Has Congress taken a formal vote on the topic? Did it declare war and then forget to inform the rest of us?

Finally, there was the Russiagate baloney that is the specialité de la maison:

"As a candidate in 2016," Schiff said, "Donald Trump invited Russian interference in his presidential campaign, saying at a campaign rally, 'Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,' a clear invitation to hack Hillary Clinton's emails. Just five hours later, Russian government hackers tried to do exactly that. What followed was an immense Russian hacking and dumping operation and a social media disinformation campaign designed to help elect Donald Trump. But not only did candidate Trump welcome that effort, he made full use of it, building it into his campaign plan [and] his messaging strategy . This Russian effort to interfere in our elections didn't deter Donald Trump. It empowered him."

It's as if Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller had never issued his verdict of no collusion. Trump's statement about finding Clinton's mails – delivered at a July 27, 2016, press conference , by the way, not a campaign rally – was clearly a joke. It had nothing to do with Russia's hack of the Democratic National Committee, which in turn had nothing to do with WikiLeaks's massive email dump. ("We have upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton," Julian Assange announced six weeks earlier, three days before hearing from alleged Russian conduit Guccifer 2.0. So how could Russian intelligence supply WikiLeaks with emails that it already had?) With just $45,000 worth of Facebook ads prior to Election Day, the social media operation mounted by a private Russian firm known as the Internet Research Associates was also the opposite of what Schiff says it was – puny rather than massive. Moreover, Mueller made no effort in his February 2018 indictment of the IRA to connect its efforts with the Russian government, no doubt because he knew he could never prove any such connection in a court of law.

So there's no evidence that Russia supplied WikiLeaks, that the IRA social media campaign was anything more than minor background noise, that the Kremlin did anything to spur its efforts on, or that Trump colluded, directly or indirectly. Schiff made it all up. But truth means nothing to such people. All he knows is that his campaign war chest has more than tripled from $2.1 to $6.8 million since he emerged as point man on Russiagate and that he'll never have to worry about re-election again as long as he continues playing the Russia card. If "all that matters to this president is what affects him personally," as Schiff said of Trump, then what is there to say about the congressman from Northrop Grumman – that all he cares about advancing his own political interests as well?

So congratulations to Gabbard for refusing to take part in an impeachment sham that is nothing more than an imperialist war drive in disguise. It's a shame that her follow-up statement was so weak since she missed a golden opportunity to slam the warmongers who have caused one disaster after another for the last twenty years and are seemingly intent on causing more. But least she took a stand, which is more than one can say about hundreds of other Democrats on Capitol Hill. Daniel Lazare December 22, 2019 | Featured Story One and a Half Cheers for Tulsi Gabbard There are lots of things to criticize about Tulsi Gabbard's "present" vote in the impeachment charade. Her invocation of Alexander Hamilton in her "House Divided" statement was ridiculous. Why this constant need to invoke a statesman who died more than two centuries ago? Do British politicians invoke Edmund Burke or William Pitt at every turn?

The same goes for her statement that impeachment is "a partisan process fueled by tribal animosities." What's causing the great American meltdown is not partisanship so much as a 232-year-old Constitution that everyone claims to adore – especially during impeachment time – but which grows more rigid, dysfunctional, and undemocratic with every passing year. The more farcical the cult of the Constitution grows, the more ridiculous are the politics that flow out of it.

Finally, her plea to Americans "to make a stand for the center" in order to "bridge our differences" is too little too late. Centrism is dead because "moderate" politicians like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Tony Blair killed it by unleashing havoc on the Middle East and generating a refugee crisis whose reverberations are still being felt. It's dead and gone, and there's no point trying to revive it.

So it wasn't Tulsi's finest moment. But what a relief from the crazed warmongering of Adam Schiff, the Hollywood neocon in charge of impeachment who has been working nonstop with the intelligence agencies to throw Trump out of office – for all the wrong reasons, one might add.

His thirteen-minute harangue during the impeachment debate was typical. It began with the obligatory nod to Hamilton before moving on to a parade of half-truths and distortions.

"Over the course of the last three months," he said, "we have found incontrovertible evidence that President Trump abused his power by pressuring the newly elected president of Ukraine to announce an investigation into President Trump's political rival Joe Biden with the hopes of defeating Mr. Biden in the 2020 presidential election and enhancing his own prospects for re-election."

This was nonsense. Sure, Trump wants to enhance his re-election prospects – what first-term president doesn't? But even though he has a political interest in taking down Biden, the American public has an equal interest in investigating a man who allowed his son to rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars from a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch at a time when he was supposedly rooting out Ukrainian corruption. Biden was part of the problem he was supposed to solve, yet Schiff seems to think he deserves a free pass merely because he's running for president.

Schiff then assailed Trump for undermining "a nation at war with our adversary Vladimir Putin's Russia" by withholding $391 million in military aid. In fact, withholding aid from the neo-Nazis of the Ukraine's Azov Battalion was one of the few good things Trump has done since taking office. Rather than undermining national security, he was doing the opposite by keeping the US out of another pointless conflict.

Besides, how do we know Russia is "our adversary" – because Schiff says so? Has Congress taken a formal vote on the topic? Did it declare war and then forget to inform the rest of us?

Finally, there was the Russiagate baloney that is the specialité de la maison:

"As a candidate in 2016," Schiff said, "Donald Trump invited Russian interference in his presidential campaign, saying at a campaign rally, 'Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,' a clear invitation to hack Hillary Clinton's emails. Just five hours later, Russian government hackers tried to do exactly that. What followed was an immense Russian hacking and dumping operation and a social media disinformation campaign designed to help elect Donald Trump. But not only did candidate Trump welcome that effort, he made full use of it, building it into his campaign plan [and] his messaging strategy . This Russian effort to interfere in our elections didn't deter Donald Trump. It empowered him."

It's as if Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller had never issued his verdict of no collusion. Trump's statement about finding Clinton's mails – delivered at a July 27, 2016, press conference , by the way, not a campaign rally – was clearly a joke. It had nothing to do with Russia's hack of the Democratic National Committee, which in turn had nothing to do with WikiLeaks's massive email dump. ("We have upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton," Julian Assange announced six weeks earlier, three days before hearing from alleged Russian conduit Guccifer 2.0. So how could Russian intelligence supply WikiLeaks with emails that it already had?) With just $45,000 worth of Facebook ads prior to Election Day, the social media operation mounted by a private Russian firm known as the Internet Research Associates was also the opposite of what Schiff says it was – puny rather than massive. Moreover, Mueller made no effort in his February 2018 indictment of the IRA to connect its efforts with the Russian government, no doubt because he knew he could never prove any such connection in a court of law.

So there's no evidence that Russia supplied WikiLeaks, that the IRA social media campaign was anything more than minor background noise, that the Kremlin did anything to spur its efforts on, or that Trump colluded, directly or indirectly. Schiff made it all up. But truth means nothing to such people. All he knows is that his campaign war chest has more than tripled from $2.1 to $6.8 million since he emerged as point man on Russiagate and that he'll never have to worry about re-election again as long as he continues playing the Russia card. If "all that matters to this president is what affects him personally," as Schiff said of Trump, then what is there to say about the congressman from Northrop Grumman – that all he cares about advancing his own political interests as well?

So congratulations to Gabbard for refusing to take part in an impeachment sham that is nothing more than an imperialist war drive in disguise. It's a shame that her follow-up statement was so weak since she missed a golden opportunity to slam the warmongers who have caused one disaster after another for the last twenty years and are seemingly intent on causing more. But least she took a stand, which is more than one can say about hundreds of other Democrats on Capitol Hill.

© 2010 - 2020 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal www.strategic-culture.org . The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. There are lots of things to criticize about Tulsi Gabbard's "present" vote in the impeachment charade. Her invocation of Alexander Hamilton in her "House Divided" statement was ridiculous. Why this constant need to invoke a statesman who died more than two centuries ago? Do British politicians invoke Edmund Burke or William Pitt at every turn?

The same goes for her statement that impeachment is "a partisan process fueled by tribal animosities." What's causing the great American meltdown is not partisanship so much as a 232-year-old Constitution that everyone claims to adore – especially during impeachment time – but which grows more rigid, dysfunctional, and undemocratic with every passing year. The more farcical the cult of the Constitution grows, the more ridiculous are the politics that flow out of it.

Finally, her plea to Americans "to make a stand for the center" in order to "bridge our differences" is too little too late. Centrism is dead because "moderate" politicians like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Tony Blair killed it by unleashing havoc on the Middle East and generating a refugee crisis whose reverberations are still being felt. It's dead and gone, and there's no point trying to revive it.

So it wasn't Tulsi's finest moment. But what a relief from the crazed warmongering of Adam Schiff, the Hollywood neocon in charge of impeachment who has been working nonstop with the intelligence agencies to throw Trump out of office – for all the wrong reasons, one might add.

His thirteen-minute harangue during the impeachment debate was typical. It began with the obligatory nod to Hamilton before moving on to a parade of half-truths and distortions.

"Over the course of the last three months," he said, "we have found incontrovertible evidence that President Trump abused his power by pressuring the newly elected president of Ukraine to announce an investigation into President Trump's political rival Joe Biden with the hopes of defeating Mr. Biden in the 2020 presidential election and enhancing his own prospects for re-election."

This was nonsense. Sure, Trump wants to enhance his re-election prospects – what first-term president doesn't? But even though he has a political interest in taking down Biden, the American public has an equal interest in investigating a man who allowed his son to rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars from a corrupt Ukrainian oligarch at a time when he was supposedly rooting out Ukrainian corruption. Biden was part of the problem he was supposed to solve, yet Schiff seems to think he deserves a free pass merely because he's running for president.

Schiff then assailed Trump for undermining "a nation at war with our adversary Vladimir Putin's Russia" by withholding $391 million in military aid. In fact, withholding aid from the neo-Nazis of the Ukraine's Azov Battalion was one of the few good things Trump has done since taking office. Rather than undermining national security, he was doing the opposite by keeping the US out of another pointless conflict.

Besides, how do we know Russia is "our adversary" – because Schiff says so? Has Congress taken a formal vote on the topic? Did it declare war and then forget to inform the rest of us?

Finally, there was the Russiagate baloney that is the specialité de la maison:

"As a candidate in 2016," Schiff said, "Donald Trump invited Russian interference in his presidential campaign, saying at a campaign rally, 'Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,' a clear invitation to hack Hillary Clinton's emails. Just five hours later, Russian government hackers tried to do exactly that. What followed was an immense Russian hacking and dumping operation and a social media disinformation campaign designed to help elect Donald Trump. But not only did candidate Trump welcome that effort, he made full use of it, building it into his campaign plan [and] his messaging strategy . This Russian effort to interfere in our elections didn't deter Donald Trump. It empowered him."

It's as if Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller had never issued his verdict of no collusion. Trump's statement about finding Clinton's mails – delivered at a July 27, 2016, press conference , by the way, not a campaign rally – was clearly a joke. It had nothing to do with Russia's hack of the Democratic National Committee, which in turn had nothing to do with WikiLeaks's massive email dump. ("We have upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton," Julian Assange announced six weeks earlier, three days before hearing from alleged Russian conduit Guccifer 2.0. So how could Russian intelligence supply WikiLeaks with emails that it already had?) With just $45,000 worth of Facebook ads prior to Election Day, the social media operation mounted by a private Russian firm known as the Internet Research Associates was also the opposite of what Schiff says it was – puny rather than massive. Moreover, Mueller made no effort in his February 2018 indictment of the IRA to connect its efforts with the Russian government, no doubt because he knew he could never prove any such connection in a court of law.

So there's no evidence that Russia supplied WikiLeaks, that the IRA social media campaign was anything more than minor background noise, that the Kremlin did anything to spur its efforts on, or that Trump colluded, directly or indirectly. Schiff made it all up. But truth means nothing to such people. All he knows is that his campaign war chest has more than tripled from $2.1 to $6.8 million since he emerged as point man on Russiagate and that he'll never have to worry about re-election again as long as he continues playing the Russia card. If "all that matters to this president is what affects him personally," as Schiff said of Trump, then what is there to say about the congressman from Northrop Grumman – that all he cares about advancing his own political interests as well?

So congratulations to Gabbard for refusing to take part in an impeachment sham that is nothing more than an imperialist war drive in disguise. It's a shame that her follow-up statement was so weak since she missed a golden opportunity to slam the warmongers who have caused one disaster after another for the last twenty years and are seemingly intent on causing more. But least she took a stand, which is more than one can say about hundreds of other Democrats on Capitol Hill. The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. Tags: Congress Impeachment Russiagate Tulsi Gabbard United States Print this article See also November 10, 2019 When Did Tulsi Gabbard Become a Russian Asset? October 11, 2019 Is Trump's Syria Withdrawal Gambit an Anti-Impeachment Card? How Trump Uses This to Win in 2020 August 2, 2019 The Empire Is Coming for Tulsi Gabbard February 5, 2019 Gabbard Reveals the Bankruptcy of American Left January 13, 2020 Impeachment: Does Anyone Even Care? January 21, 2020 How Michael Bloomberg's 'Journalists' Propagandize for More U.S. Aggressions January 20, 2020 Bernie Sanders Walks Straight Into the Russiagate Trap January 19, 2020 Flynn's Guilty Plea Reversal Signals a Very Different Trump Second Term January 15, 2020 Americans Beware! Russia Can Hack Your Brain, Make You Believe Joe Biden Unfit for Oval Office January 9, 2020 The Kerfuffle War - Trump's Iran De-escalation Succeeds January 3, 2020 New York Times Reveals America's Weapons-Makers Drive Trump-Impeachment January 3, 2020 The Three Main Reasons Trump Can't Lose 2020 – Dispelling Nonsense Polls and Wishful Thinking December 29, 2019 Russiagate Investigation Now Endangers Obama December 28, 2019 'Because You'd Be in Jail!' The Real Reason Democrats Are Pushing Trump Impeachment? December 26, 2019 Impeachment Is a Distraction: Heavily Scripted Vote Demonstrates That Democracy Really Is Dead December 22, 2019 The Fake Impeachment: Pelosi's Botched Ploy Helps Trump Towards Victory December 20, 2019 Trump Impeachment Slapstick Diversion From Reality December 13, 2019 Impeachment Drama Doomed to Fail From Bad Casting December 9, 2019 Score One for Tulsi November 3, 2019 Hocus Pocus Halloween Horror! Hillary Clinton Still Hopes to Ride Her Broomstick into the White House October 28, 2019 US Has Officially Gone Insane October 25, 2019 The Democratic Party's Umpteenth Nervous Breakdown October 22, 2019 A House of 12: Debate Four Shows Dems Have No Platform – Biden Stands No Chance January 23, 2020 Things are Getting Harder for the US's Global Military January 23, 2020 An Army for Hire: Trump Wants to Make Money by Renting Out American Soldiers January 22, 2020 The United States: a Record-Holder in Political Assassinations January 21, 2020 Drone Strikes Leave Innocent Widows and Orphans January 20, 2020 The End of U.S. Military Dominance: Unintended Consequences Forge a Multipolar World Order January 17, 2020 Democrats Will Not Give Up Their Russophobia January 15, 2020 Trump Steps Back From the Edge. Neocons Rage Accordingly January 5, 2020 2019: The Year the Neocons Failed January 2, 2020 The Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act: Why Washington Is Both Corrupt and Ignorant October 22, 2019 Tulsi Drops Hammer On Red-Baiting Hillary Also by this author Daniel Lazare Daniel Lazare is an American freelance journalist, publicist and blogger. Bernie Sanders Walks Straight Into the Russiagate Trap Impeachment: Does Anyone Even Care? Who Created the Persian Gulf Tinderbox? American Collapse You Can't Fool All the People All the Time Sign up for the Strategic Culture Foundation Newsletter Subscribe See also November 10, 2019 When Did Tulsi Gabbard Become a Russian Asset? October 11, 2019 Is Trump's Syria Withdrawal Gambit an Anti-Impeachment Card? How Trump Uses This to Win in 2020 August 2, 2019 The Empire Is Coming for Tulsi Gabbard February 5, 2019 Gabbard Reveals the Bankruptcy of American Left January 13, 2020 Impeachment: Does Anyone Even Care? January 21, 2020 How Michael Bloomberg's 'Journalists' Propagandize for More U.S. Aggressions January 20, 2020 Bernie Sanders Walks Straight Into the Russiagate Trap January 19, 2020 Flynn's Guilty Plea Reversal Signals a Very Different Trump Second Term January 15, 2020 Americans Beware! Russia Can Hack Your Brain, Make You Believe Joe Biden Unfit for Oval Office January 9, 2020 The Kerfuffle War - Trump's Iran De-escalation Succeeds January 3, 2020 New York Times Reveals America's Weapons-Makers Drive Trump-Impeachment January 3, 2020 The Three Main Reasons Trump Can't Lose 2020 – Dispelling Nonsense Polls and Wishful Thinking December 29, 2019 Russiagate Investigation Now Endangers Obama December 28, 2019 'Because You'd Be in Jail!' The Real Reason Democrats Are Pushing Trump Impeachment? December 26, 2019 Impeachment Is a Distraction: Heavily Scripted Vote Demonstrates That Democracy Really Is Dead December 22, 2019 The Fake Impeachment: Pelosi's Botched Ploy Helps Trump Towards Victory December 20, 2019 Trump Impeachment Slapstick Diversion From Reality December 13, 2019 Impeachment Drama Doomed to Fail From Bad Casting December 9, 2019 Score One for Tulsi November 3, 2019 Hocus Pocus Halloween Horror! Hillary Clinton Still Hopes to Ride Her Broomstick into the White House October 28, 2019 US Has Officially Gone Insane October 25, 2019 The Democratic Party's Umpteenth Nervous Breakdown October 22, 2019 A House of 12: Debate Four Shows Dems Have No Platform – Biden Stands No Chance January 23, 2020 Things are Getting Harder for the US's Global Military January 23, 2020 An Army for Hire: Trump Wants to Make Money by Renting Out American Soldiers January 22, 2020 The United States: a Record-Holder in Political Assassinations January 21, 2020 Drone Strikes Leave Innocent Widows and Orphans January 20, 2020 The End of U.S. Military Dominance: Unintended Consequences Forge a Multipolar World Order January 17, 2020 Democrats Will Not Give Up Their Russophobia January 15, 2020 Trump Steps Back From the Edge. Neocons Rage Accordingly January 5, 2020 2019: The Year the Neocons Failed January 2, 2020 The Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act: Why Washington Is Both Corrupt and Ignorant October 22, 2019 Tulsi Drops Hammer On Red-Baiting Hillary The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. Tags: Congress Impeachment Russiagate Tulsi Gabbard United States Print this article Sign up for the Strategic Culture Foundation Newsletter Subscribe


To the top
© 2010 - 2020 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal www.strategic-culture.org . The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. <div><img src="https://mc.yandex.ru/watch/10970266" alt=""/></div>

[Jan 22, 2020] Tulsi Gabbard Sues Hillary Clinton Over 'Russian Asset' Remark

Jan 22, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has filed a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, accusing the former Secretary of State of defamation for remarks characterizing the Democratic presidential candidate as a Russian asset .

Filed on Wednesday in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Gabbard's attorneys allege that Clinton "smeared" Gabbard's "political and personal reputation," according to The Hill .

Tulsi Gabbard is suing Hillary Clinton and the first page of the filing is WILD AF pic.twitter.com/DXHLPfy016

-- Alec Sears (@alec_sears) January 22, 2020

"Tulsi Gabbard is a loyal American civil servant who has also dedicated her life to protecting the safety of all Americans," said Gabbard's attorney Brian Dunne in a statement.

"Rep. Gabbard's presidential campaign continues to gain momentum, but she has seen her political and personal reputation smeared and her candidacy intentionally damaged by Clinton's malicious and demonstrably false remarks."

In a podcast released in October, Clinton said she thought Republicans were "grooming" a Democratic presidential candidate for a third-party bid. She also described the candidate as a favorite of the Russians.

Clinton did not name the candidate but it was clear she was speaking about Gabbard.

"They're also going to do third party. I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate ," Clinton said.

" She's the favorite of the Russians, they have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far , and that's assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not, because she's also a Russian asset. Yeah, she's a Russian asset, I mean totally. They know they can't win without a third party candidate," Clinton said. - The Hill

Read the filing below:


GotAFriendInBen , 1 hour ago link

Go Gabby Go!!

Smack that smirk off that face

Ulna P Radius , 2 hours ago link

I love Tulsi. She's done more to attack the Democrat globalist neo-Con scumbags than Trump and the GoP put together. What a hero.

Maxamillia , 2 hours ago link

Best Wishes. Tulsi. Better Hope You Draw A Sympathetic Judge...

This Black Witch Hillary R Clinton... Has Been Under Satan So Long, His Radar Has Nearly Made Her Untouchable..

Except When It Comes To The Majority of American Voters...

[Jan 22, 2020] Who is a real "Russian asset" is an on-trivial question ;-)

Jan 22, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

pparalegal , 1 hour ago link

Stay out of Arkansas.

Best President Ever , 2 hours ago link

Nobody likes Hillary even liberals like myself won't vote for her and that is why Trump won. She is the Russian asset.

RG_Canuck , 1 hour ago link

Please don't insult the Russians like that.

[Jan 21, 2020] Tulsi Gabbard and Rigged Elections by Kurt Nimmo

Notable quotes:
"... Tulsi is spot on about the "debates," which are nothing of the sort. Indeed, they are a form of televised bread and circuses -- bread because most Americans receive some kind of support from the government, and a circus because all circuses are comical, theatrical, and well-scripted. ..."
"... Elizabeth Warren will be unable to break the corporate stranglehold on America. It is pure insanity to believe otherwise. The Democrat and Republican parties -- one party disguised as two -- will not savage corporations with taxation and redoubled punitive regulation, not if they wish to remain in Congress and receive money to run obscenely expensive campaigns. ..."
"... It will take more than a "debate" boycott to send the message. It will take a revolution to finally drain Trump's swamp, end the endless wars, and force transnational corporations and foreign governments (most egregiously Israel) out of the bed they have shared for so long with our "representatives," who are largely nothing more than self-seeking sociopaths on short leashes ..."
"... Kurt Nimmo writes on his blog, Another Day in the Empire, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. ..."
Oct 11, 2019 | www.globalresearch.ca

Tulsi Gabbard , who has at best minimal support by Democrats (around one percent), and zero from the corporate DNC, posted the following video earlier today.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/dPcGFjyGxI4

There are so many of you who I've met in Iowa and New Hampshire who have expressed to me how frustrated you are that the DNC and corporate media are essentially trying to usurp your role as voters in choosing who our Democratic nominee will be.

This, of course, is nothing new, but thanks to Tulsi for reminding us of how "elections" are conducted. In fact, the state long ago corrupted the process and has selected candidates for long as anybody can remember.

How is it possible a cognitively challenged and corrupt hack like Joe Biden is number one in the running -- or was until Elizabeth Warren took that spot away from him? It's possible because Biden is a trusted asset eager to do whatever he is told, same as Obama, Bush the lesser, Clinton (a "brother by another mother"), Bush the elder, Reagan on and on, down the line. Like Hillary Clinton, the Democrat establishment believes it is Biden's "turn" to read the teleprompter. All the others, well, they're spoilers.

They are attempting to replace the roles of voters in the early states, using polling and other arbitrary methods which are not transparent or democratic, and holding so-called debates which are not debates at all but rather commercialized reality television meant to entertain, not inform or enlighten.

That replacement happened decades ago. Trump won the election because our rulers left the election process intact, arrogantly confident their handpicked candidates will win because only those who have come up through the system are permitted to run. It's left intact as a public relations gimmick designed to fool the proles who are, regrettably, all too easy to control -- or were until Trump appeared on the scene.

Just Rumors or Is Hillary Clinton Seriously Considering Another Run for U.S. President in 2020?

Tulsi is spot on about the "debates," which are nothing of the sort. Indeed, they are a form of televised bread and circuses -- bread because most Americans receive some kind of support from the government, and a circus because all circuses are comical, theatrical, and well-scripted.

As for being informed, that's the last thing the ruling elite want. They have us believe in fantasies so absurd they may as well be props in a Luis Buñuel film -- for instance, killing people in foreign lands is humanitarian and the economy is doing great (never mind the unemployed, the homeless, and record debt, both governmental and personal).

In order to bring attention to this serious threat to our democracy, and ensure your voice is heard, I am giving serious consideration to boycotting the next debate on October 15th. I will announce my decision within the next few days. With my deepest aloha, thank you all again for your support.

This is commendable, although, sadly, an almost transparent blip on the political radar screen. Big corporate media will certainly not take notice, and if they perchance do it will be with snide commentary.

The soft totalitarian machine rejects the socialist palliatives of Elizabeth Warren. She appears to be anti-corporatist, and that is inexcusable. Many of our political and social problems are related to the domination of corporations, most of the crony variety.

Elizabeth Warren will be unable to break the corporate stranglehold on America. It is pure insanity to believe otherwise. The Democrat and Republican parties -- one party disguised as two -- will not savage corporations with taxation and redoubled punitive regulation, not if they wish to remain in Congress and receive money to run obscenely expensive campaigns.

Warren will be overshadowed by the Hildabeast, Hillary Clinton , who is determined to be president. She will enter the race sometime next year, overturning the apple cart of other hopefuls, all spouting the same wealth distribution nonsense because, after all, a well-trained and ceaselessly indoctrinated public, most on a modern version of the Roman Cura Annona grain dole, love free stuff (stolen from others).

No way will the DNC accept Elizabeth Warren as the nominee. She will be subverted, the same way Bernie Sanders was.

Most Americans don't trust or like Hillary, but that hardly matters.

The days of Trump may soon be over. If he's not impeached on spurious grounds, he will enter the race under a toxic cloud of accusation and unproven high crimes and misdemeanors greatly amplified by a propaganda media. Polls consistently show he is losing traction, and the MAGA crowd is increasingly disillusioned, unable to realize its populist agenda.

I'm sorry, Tulsi. Your effort to unmask the subversion of the election system will largely fall on deaf ears. As of this morning, the above video garnered a mere 800 views.

It will take more than a "debate" boycott to send the message. It will take a revolution to finally drain Trump's swamp, end the endless wars, and force transnational corporations and foreign governments (most egregiously Israel) out of the bed they have shared for so long with our "representatives," who are largely nothing more than self-seeking sociopaths on short leashes.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Kurt Nimmo writes on his blog, Another Day in the Empire, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

[Jan 19, 2020] The cost of Trump rabid militarism

Jan 19, 2020 | journal-neo.org

The United States has spent about $6 trillion on combat operations over the past 20 years, according to Brown University studies . If the warfare ends by 2023, researchers estimate the total cost will be $6.7 trillion at least, not counting the interest on debt.

In total, almost half a million people have died as a result of the wars.

The cost of 87 major programs for the purchase of weapons and military equipment conducted by the US Department of Defense exceeded $2 trillion in 2018, according to the Pentagon's Selected Acquisition Reports (SAR), which detail the implementation of major defense purchases. The combined cost of all procurement programs was determined by the Pentagon to be over $2 trillion. This is equivalent to almost 10% of the annual gross domestic product of the United States ($21.3 trillion).

Trying to justify such exorbitant spending on the army, the US military and political elites actively promote their interests, advertising the national armed forces as the main fighting force. Recently, Joseph F. Dunford, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared that 'there are no forces today capable of resisting an attack by the US Army.' Unsurprisingly, the Department of Defense (DoD) desires even more money, although there is no logical explanation as to why the most powerful army on the planet is in need of improvement when everyone else is clearly lagging behind.

But what is the real face of the US Army today and how does the public feel about it?

Global Research correctly remarked that, despite the largest military budget in the world (five times greater than in six other countries), the highest number of military bases in the world (over 180) and the most expensive military-industrial complex, the United States has failed to win a single war in the 21 st century.

Every year, Pew Research Center publishes hundreds of studies on a wide range of topics. Concerning the current problems of the US military, Pew studies note that most American veterans and the majority of the general US public believe that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not worth fighting. Over 60% of the American public is convinced that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not paid off, when the costs and benefits are weighed. Responding to questions about the US military campaign in Syria, 55% of veterans and 58% of the American public said that this campaign failed to pay off as well.

Frustration with the country's military policy has now become a big problem among active US servicemen, veterans, and even among young soldiers who haven't participated in real combat.

The incautious question 'How has serving impacted you?' posted by the Pentagon's official Twitter account, has revealed the deep chasm of the US military's problems. So deep, in fact, that the Pentagon had to urgently close and remove a huge number of subsequent replies, most of which turned out to be very depressing in nature. US Army soldiers and officers shared the shocking consequences of their service, including drug addiction, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorders and nightmares – some admitting they had repeatedly wanted to commit suicide.

Currently there are up to 19 million retired veterans 'in the most belligerent democratic country in the world.' Every day, about 20 of them commit suicide. The causes of suicide cited by experts are diverse, the main ones being depressions, nervous breakdowns, spiritual and psychological devastation coupled with guilt for killing innocent people, post-traumatic stress disorder, increased military operations, medical abuse, and personal financial problems. Social media are full of horrific stories about how injured soldiers weren't provided necessary medical attention during military operations, which drove them to shooting themselves in the head. Meanwhile junior army members state that they are basically expendable for their commanders, and all of them combined present an endless means of earning money for the highest elite.

[Jan 19, 2020] Now BoneSpurs Opened the Pandora's Box of Open State Level Assassinations Not Ethical - Inhumane and Imbecilic, really. That's why I am voting for Gabbard this Time. A 2nd Gen Navy Vet. Been to War Zones in the Gulf.

Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

IronForge , Jan 18 2020 3:03 utc | 93

The MIC were running about without leashes.

Once they delved into "Conquest and Exploitation", the Military were OverScoped and Few People thought of rebuilding/modernizing Civil Infrastructure and Economy of the Conquered.

Also, IMHO, every Govt-Job that affect the Military and Veterans' Lives should be held by Veterans. Need them to be where the Rubber Meets the Road before sending others into harm's way. I'd go as far to require WH, Congress, Supremes to be Previously Assigned to Combat Units/Hot Zones (FatBoy Pompeo Fails here) - and have Combat Eligible Family be in Active Duty or Drilling Reserves - ready to be sent to the Front Lines should they call for War while running the Republic-turned-Hegemon.

That would include BoneShards' Adult Children and Spouses.

WH have been on a PetroUSD/MIC/PNAC7/AIPAC Bandwagon - which drive down Non-Yielding Nation-States with Sanctions.

Now BoneShards Opened the Pandora's Box of Open State Level Assassinations using Diplomatic Peace Missions as Venues. Worse? Against a Nation-State which can Respond in Kind - AND Develop+Deploy Nuclear WMDs. Not Ethical - Inhumane and Imbecilic, really. That's why I am voting for Gabbard this Time. A 2nd Gen Navy Vet. Been to War Zones in the Gulf.

lysias , Jan 18 2020 3:24 utc | 97

This retired Lieutenant Commander of the U.S. Navy has also been donating to Gabbard.

[Jan 19, 2020] The frantic attempt to deflect attention from US foreign wars and mainly derisive media coverage of Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?

Highly recommended!
Trump has been a kind of part deranged, part clever political monkey wrench thrown into the works of the USA military machine
Notable quotes:
"... I begin with the premise that the United States is a longstanding cultural catastrophe, and is far along the way in the process of destroying itself, after having destroyed or damaged the prospects of much of the planet. ..."
"... Within the context of the attack on Indochina, on the ground and taking place within the spaces left alive after the B52 bombers et al, there was the 'Phoenix Program'. euphemism for the CIA's ambitious program of technocratic torture, assassination, bribery, corruption, and so on, with tens of thousands of murdered victims. And the military destroyed uncounted villages, a la My Lai. ..."
"... Note then that Trump has almost patented the 'fake news' meme. The idea that the msm is lying about and hiding the truth, non-stop propaganda, is an idea that Trump has pushed repeatedly. Most people on the MofA etc are well aware of that. But for many 'normies', that's not quite as obvious. ..."
"... And yes, he himself could be described as the liar in chief. But doesn't deflect from the great collapse in the status of the msm propaganda machine. And that propaganda machine has been very much associated with the CIA via operation Mockingbird and its generations long progeny. ..."
"... So the attack on the media via fake news is a direct attack on the basic indispensable control mechanism of the deep state, and CIA. ..."
"... Note too that after three Years of Trump, the long standing criminality and corruption of the FBI has never looked as obvious. Again, we don't have to give Trump credit. But it happened on his 'watch'. ..."
"... We're not talking miracle cures here. But Trump has been a kind of part deranged, part clever political monkey wrench thrown into the works. As to whether his disruptive arrival has provided openings for more sensible political and cultural innovations remains to be seen. ..."
"... Many of the internal difficulties that the US faces are distinct from militarism, but related to militarism in the sense that a police state keeping control via surveillance and bs, etc, and spending its money on empire, is not going to prioritize clear honest discourse. In the end, one overarching question for the US like the rest of us is: can we achieve honesty and common sense? ..."
Jan 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Robert Snefjella , Jan 17 2020 23:50 utc | 64
Previously, most discussions of the Trump presidency reflexively proceeded to either visceral disgust etc or accolades of some species. Trumps words and manners dominated. As things developed, and actual results were recorded, a body of more sober second thought developed. And a variation on these more experience/reality based assessments is what b has delivered above.

Some of my points that follow are repeats, some are new. On the whole I see Trump as a helpful and positive-result really bad President.

I begin with the premise that the United States is a longstanding cultural catastrophe, and is far along the way in the process of destroying itself, after having destroyed or damaged the prospects of much of the planet.

As one aspect of this cultural catastrophe, let's refer back to the United States attack on Indochina, which accomplished millions of dead and millions of wounded people, and birth defects still in uncounted numbers as a legacy of dioxin etc laden chemical warfare. The millions of dead included some tens of thousands of American soldiers, and even more wounded physically, and even more wounded 'mentally'.

Within the context of the attack on Indochina, on the ground and taking place within the spaces left alive after the B52 bombers et al, there was the 'Phoenix Program'. euphemism for the CIA's ambitious program of technocratic torture, assassination, bribery, corruption, and so on, with tens of thousands of murdered victims. And the military destroyed uncounted villages, a la My Lai.

When asked what it was all about, Kissinger lied in an inadvertently illuminating way: "basically nothing" was how he put it, if memory serves.

During and after the attack on Indochina, the US trained, aided, financed, etc active death squads in Central and South America, demonstrating that the United States was an equal opportunity death dealer.

Now this was a bit of a meander away from the Trump topic, but note that Trump came to power within the above cultural context and much more pathology besides, talking about ending the warfare state. Again, this is not an attempt to portray Trump as either sincere or insincere in that policy. In terms of ideas, it was roughly speaking a good idea.

Another main part of the Trump message was 'let's rebuild America'. And along with the de-militarization and national program of rejuvenation there was the 'drain the swamp' meme, which again resonated. And once again, I am not arguing that Trump was sincere, or for that matter insincere. That's irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make: which could essentially by reduced to: what will be the actual meaning and potential impact of Trump?

Note then that Trump has almost patented the 'fake news' meme. The idea that the msm is lying about and hiding the truth, non-stop propaganda, is an idea that Trump has pushed repeatedly. Most people on the MofA etc are well aware of that. But for many 'normies', that's not quite as obvious.

And yes, he himself could be described as the liar in chief. But doesn't deflect from the great collapse in the status of the msm propaganda machine. And that propaganda machine has been very much associated with the CIA via operation Mockingbird and its generations long progeny.

So the attack on the media via fake news is a direct attack on the basic indispensable control mechanism of the deep state, and CIA.

Note too that after three Years of Trump, the long standing criminality and corruption of the FBI has never looked as obvious. Again, we don't have to give Trump credit. But it happened on his 'watch'.

Now the deep cultural, including political, pathology in the United States, in its many manifestations remain. We're not talking miracle cures here. But Trump has been a kind of part deranged, part clever political monkey wrench thrown into the works. As to whether his disruptive arrival has provided openings for more sensible political and cultural innovations remains to be seen.

The frantic attempt to deflect attention from and give mainly derisive media coverage to Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?

Many of the internal difficulties that the US faces are distinct from militarism, but related to militarism in the sense that a police state keeping control via surveillance and bs, etc, and spending its money on empire, is not going to prioritize clear honest discourse. In the end, one overarching question for the US like the rest of us is: can we achieve honesty and common sense?

[Jan 16, 2020] Tulsi: Truth scares those who traffic in lies

Jan 16, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star

January 14, 2020 at 5:03 pm

https://www.youtube.com/embed/BG5sG2Ou-vY?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

[Jan 16, 2020] Good (long) discussion with Tulsi who talks IRAN with Guests Stephen Kinzer Dennis Kucinich - Intro by Kim Iversen - Concord, NH

Jan 16, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Krollchem , Jan 15 2020 7:25 utc | 135

Good (long) discussion with Tulsi who talks IRAN with Guests Stephen Kinzer & Dennis Kucinich - Intro by Kim Iversen - Concord, NH
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-W9b-_K_Xo&feature=youtu.be

Bernie , Jan 15 2020 8:04 utc | 137

Gen Wesley Clark on US going to war in 7 countries in 5 yrs. This is an interesting YouTube video. It's not if we go to war with Iraq...but when. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTbg11pCwOc


/div>

[Jan 12, 2020] When the bullets start flying and the bombs start dropping, terrible things can happen that no one has planned for. This is one of the great tragedies of war. Unintended consequences and so-called "collateral damage."

Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mao , Jan 12 2020 8:46 utc | 389

Tulsi Gabbard:

When the bullets start flying and the bombs start dropping, terrible things can happen that no one has planned for. This is one of the great tragedies of war. Unintended consequences and so-called "collateral damage."

[VIDEO]

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1216173675998633984

[Jan 04, 2020] Will Trump welcome the ejection of the US from Iraq - He should by Colonel Lang

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Somehow the Ziocons around Trump have forgotten that the present state of Iraq refused to yield to Obama's demands for a SOFA and in effect expelled the US from the country. ..."
"... The Iraqi parliament is going to vote in emergency session over the issue of the death of al-Muhandis. Will they vote to expel the US from their country? ..."
"... What a lot of commentators seem to overlook is that America has basically declared war on Iraq, while our soldiers are hosted on joint bases with Iraqi soldiers. ..."
"... "We need to get out of Iraq and Syria now. That is the only way that we're going to prevent ourselves from being dragged into this quagmire, deeper and deeper into a war with Iran." Tulsi Gabbard. ..."
"... Assassination of generals, one from an allied country, one from a country with which we have no declared war, and both assassinations performed on the territory of an allied, sovereign country without permission? This is piracy. Why should anyone trust the word of a country which does not honor the most basic of international law? ..."
"... Will we go if they vote that way? I'll go with no. The Neocons desperately want us in Iraq to protect Israel and stick it to Iran as much as possible. They have a laundry list of prepared arguments and we have the dumbest, most compliant, state media in recorded history. We also have a President who believes that intnl law is for weaklings and loves saying 'take the oil'. ..."
"... Take a look at this interview to David Petraeus by FP on yesterday´s summary executions...What you make of this? https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/03 He sounds as if he were the brain behind this operation on summary executions..along some other think tankers.. ..."
"... Whoever is President we will have war. The President is just a feckless puppet controlled by the Zionist. I'll never vote again. It's a waste of time and a farce. Hillary or Donald no different just a matter of timing. Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. Bush II the simpleton and his fairy tale WMD lie. I've lost all respect for whatever "the republic" is suppose to be. On top of that the masses are too stupid for democracy to work. ..."
Jan 03, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Qasem Soleimani was an Iranian soldier. He lived by the sword and died by the sword. He met a soldier's destiny. It is being said that he was a BAD MAN. Absurd! To say that he was a BAD MAN because he fought us as well as the Sunni jihadis is simply infantile. Were all those who fought the US BAD MEN? How about Gentleman Johhny Burgoyne? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Sitting Bull? Was he a BAD MAN? How about Aguinaldo? Another BAD MAN? Let us not be juvenile.

The Iraqi PMU commander who died with Soleimani was Abu Mahdi al Muhandis. He was a member of a Shia militia that had been integrated into the Iraqi armed forces. IOW, we killed an Iraqi general. We killed him without the authorization of the supposedly sovereign state of Iraq.

We created the present government of Iraq through the farcical "purple thumb" elections. That government holds a seat in the UN General Assembly and is a sovereign entity in international law in spite of Trump's tweet today that said among other things that we have "paid" Iraq billions of US dollars. To the Arabs, this statement that brands them as hirelings of the US is close to the ultimate in insult.

Somehow the Ziocons around Trump have forgotten that the present state of Iraq refused to yield to Obama's demands for a SOFA and in effect expelled the US from the country.

The Iraqi parliament is going to vote in emergency session over the issue of the death of al-Muhandis. Will they vote to expel the US from their country?

Will we go if they vote that way? We should. If we do not, then we will be exposed as imperialist hypocrites.

Trump should welcome such a vote. He wants to get out of the ME? What greater opportunity could we have to do so?

Let us leave if invited to go. Let the oh, so clever locals deal with their own hatreds and rivalries. pl


phodges , 03 January 2020 at 02:20 PM

What a lot of commentators seem to overlook is that America has basically declared war on Iraq, while our soldiers are hosted on joint bases with Iraqi soldiers.
Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 02:39 PM
Thank you, Pat!

But...Elora guesses you are being rhetorical here...because... if he would have died by the sword...would not have he had the opportunity to defend himself against his enemy/opponent?
Instead...he was caught on surprise...unarmed...and hit by an overwhelming force...he was going to some funerals...

Cameron Kelley , 03 January 2020 at 02:56 PM
Thank you, Colonel. We don't know, we don't care, but we can kill - that's not a recipe for success.
Jack , 03 January 2020 at 04:09 PM
"We need to get out of Iraq and Syria now. That is the only way that we're going to prevent ourselves from being dragged into this quagmire, deeper and deeper into a war with Iran." Tulsi Gabbard.

https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/1213168223127949313?s=21

Would we get out if Iraq asks us to do so? I don't think so. There will be a hue & cry about appeasement of terror!

ex PFC Chuck -> Jack... , 03 January 2020 at 05:25 PM
It took Tulsi about 18 hours to get that brief statement out. Can't help but wonder what that delay was all about.
Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 04:14 PM
Some impressive images worth thousands words...just to remember everybody that this man was an appreciated human being...doing his duty....for his motherland...and his God....
Elora Danan said in reply to Elora Danan... , 03 January 2020 at 05:07 PM
To better understand the pain of that elderly yazidi woman in the video, some testimony by Rania Khalek on the role of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis ( the other militia commander killed who is being as well slandered as terrorist along Soleimani ...) in stopping yazidi genocide in Iraq when nobody else was giving a damn, less any help, for this people...

https://twitter.com/RaniaKhalek/status/1213198497668833280

divadab , 03 January 2020 at 04:17 PM
Assassination of generals, one from an allied country, one from a country with which we have no declared war, and both assassinations performed on the territory of an allied, sovereign country without permission? This is piracy. Why should anyone trust the word of a country which does not honor the most basic of international law?

And am I alone to be disgusted to see the senior members of our government lie blatantly and constantly, when they're not fellating the nearest likudnik....

Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 04:20 PM
Tulsi...may be our last hope...

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1213168223127949313

Tulsi for president!

ISL , 03 January 2020 at 04:27 PM
Dear Colonel, seems you find yourself in Tulsi's (good) company.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=kToUJaOVgTA&feature=emb_logo

prawnik , 03 January 2020 at 04:32 PM
Trump should, but he won't. Might as well quote Bible verses to a robber.
turcopolier , 03 January 2020 at 04:38 PM
ISL

I have been giving her money every month.

Factotum , 03 January 2020 at 04:57 PM
We go where we are wanted and appreciated. We have no skin in Iraq. Build the Wall and protect our own borders. Concentrate our resources on cyber-security.
A. Pols , 03 January 2020 at 05:48 PM
Tulsi makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately that disqualifies her for the presidency, not because she couldn't execute the functions of the presidency, but because neither the party apparatchiks nor the voters would give her the chance. These days either nationalistic claptrap or promises of more freebies are what carry the day. Quelle domage, eh?

As for the Iraqi parliament voting to expel U.S. forces? That's an interesting question. If they did, they'd better vote to expel the "den of spies" at the embassy and insist on our having a normal sized legation (as all countries would be well advised to do). But if they do, would we leave? I personally doubt it even though it would be best if we did and let the Iraqis do what they will, which would probably be reverting back to some sort of strongman govt, of a type more suited to their cultural traditions and inclinations. It's high time we afforded the rest of the world the type of cultural and political autonomy we claim to revere so much.

So, we leave? A good thing for us and for them and the world at large.

Or, we don't? Then we expose the truth the rest of the world already knows, but we at least expose the truth to our own people who have been fed a steady diet of mendacious BS about what we've been doing over there all these years.

That attack on the "airport limo" vehicles leaving Baghdad airport sure took some nerve on our part to think that we could sell something like that...

And, did Trump actually order it, or did someone else in the MIC order it first and Trump laid claim to it afterwards? Uncle Joe, if he had ordered it, would have afterwards announced the execution of a fall guy and denied any complicity! If Trump didn't order it, he should throw whoever did under the bus instead of crowing and wrapping himself in the flag. I wonder about what actually happened in planning this hit job on prominent military people on their way to a funeral for 31 people who may or may not have had anything whatsoever to do with the death of a single American mercenary in Iraq in an attack by persons unknown on a small outpost.

J , 03 January 2020 at 06:01 PM
It's times like this I wish I was a fly on the wall, listening to what the Russian General Staff conversations regarding this assassination are at this moment.

Trump IMHO would do well to seek Putin's counsel on how to exit the corner that Trump has backed US into. While this spells problems for our US, it also creates additional problems for Russia in the ways that could cause them MAJOR problem as well as in a full blown Mideast War with many players in the mix. Not a good mix either.

Israel can't handle a full blown Mideast War, no matter how much their narcissistic national psyche thinks they can. Israel is a mere postage stamp in a sea of rage, which tsunami waves could very easily consume them. Sheldon Adelson and his Likud/NEOCON blowhards have no concept of what is on the short horizon, that can go one way or the other.

I'm glad I'm retired in this instance. My glass of bourbon is more palatable than the grains of Mideast sand that fixing to get stirred up.

God help us all.

Pat, why does the US military always get left with the shit-storms to clean up after? Why?

Christian J Chuba , 03 January 2020 at 06:32 PM
Will we go if they vote that way? I'll go with no. The Neocons desperately want us in Iraq to protect Israel and stick it to Iran as much as possible. They have a laundry list of prepared arguments and we have the dumbest, most compliant, state media in recorded history. We also have a President who believes that intnl law is for weaklings and loves saying 'take the oil'.

I can hear the talking points already ...
1. 'Obama made the same mistake and it created ISIS.'
2. 'Iran has taken over Iraq, it's not a legitimate request' (look at how we selectively recognize govts in South America and no one blinks).
3. 'Iran will use Iraq as a base to attack us' (yeah, its about 100 miles closer).

I can't stand what we have become, the jackals have taken over and the MSM attacks the very few who are not jackals.

turcopolier , 03 January 2020 at 07:05 PM
A Pols

OK. Who do you think would have had the power to order the strike? Not the CIA, the military would not accept such an order. Not the chairman of the JCS, he is not in the chain of command. That leaves Esper, SECDEF. Really? He looks like a putschist to you? You are ignorant of the American government.

Elora Danan , 03 January 2020 at 07:18 PM
Take a look at this interview to David Petraeus by FP on yesterday´s summary executions...What you make of this? https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/03 He sounds as if he were the brain behind this operation on summary executions..along some other think tankers..
Harlan Easley , 03 January 2020 at 07:20 PM
Whoever is President we will have war. The President is just a feckless puppet controlled by the Zionist. I'll never vote again. It's a waste of time and a farce. Hillary or Donald no different just a matter of timing. Obama destroyed Libya and Syria. Bush II the simpleton and his fairy tale WMD lie. I've lost all respect for whatever "the republic" is suppose to be. On top of that the masses are too stupid for democracy to work.

[Jan 04, 2020] Tulsi on Trump assasignation of Iran military commender in Bahdad

Jan 04, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Elora Danan ,

Tulsi...may be our last hope...

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1213168223127949313

Tulsi for president!

ISL , 03 January 2020 at 04:27 PM
Dear Colonel, seems you find yourself in Tulsi's (good) company.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=kToUJaOVgTA&feature=emb_logo

A. Pols , 03 January 2020 at 05:48 PM
Tulsi makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately that disqualifies her for the presidency, not because she couldn't execute the functions of the presidency, but because neither the party apparatchiks nor the voters would give her the chance. These days either nationalistic claptrap or promises of more freebies are what carry the day. Quelle domage, eh?

As for the Iraqi parliament voting to expel U.S. forces? That's an interesting question. If they did, they'd better vote to expel the "den of spies" at the embassy and insist on our having a normal sized legation (as all countries would be well advised to do). But if they do, would we leave? I personally doubt it even though it would be best if we did and let the Iraqis do what they will, which would probably be reverting back to some sort of strongman govt, of a type more suited to their cultural traditions and inclinations. It's high time we afforded the rest of the world the type of cultural and political autonomy we claim to revere so much.

So, we leave? A good thing for us and for them and the world at large.

Or, we don't? Then we expose the truth the rest of the world already knows, but we at least expose the truth to our own people who have been fed a steady diet of mendacious BS about what we've been doing over there all these years.
That attack on the "airport limo" vehicles leaving Baghdad airport sure took some nerve on our part to think that we could sell something like that...

And, did Trump actually order it, or did someone else in the MIC order it first and Trump laid claim to it afterwards? Uncle Joe, if he had ordered it, would have afterwards announced the execution of a fall guy and denied any complicity! If Trump didn't order it, he should throw whoever did under the bus instead of crowing and wrapping himself in the flag. I wonder about what actually happened in planning this hit job on prominent military people on their way to a funeral for 31 people who may or may not have had anything whatsoever to do with the death of a single American mercenary in Iraq in an attack by persons unknown on a small outpost.

[Jan 01, 2020] Tulsi Gabbard Defends 'Present' Vote; Warns Impeachment Will Backfire

Tulsi proved to be amazingly talented politician. Viva Tulsi. Down with old neocon and war criminal Pelosi
Jan 01, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
by Tyler Durden Tue, 12/31/2019 - 11:15 0 SHARES

Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D) has taken flack from the left after voting "present" during last week's formal House impeachment vote, and now says that the process may only "embolden" President Trump and increase his chances of reelection (which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned about before she caved to her party).

"I think impeachment, unfortunately, will only further embolden Donald Trump, increase his support and the likelihood that he'll have a better shot at getting elected while also seeing the likelihood that the House will lose a lot of seats to Republicans," said Gabbard in a Saturday interview with ABC News in Hudson, New Hampshire.

Tulsi Gabbard: "Unfortunately the House impeachment of the President has greatly increased the likelihood that Donald Trump will remain the President for the next 5 years... Furthermore the House impeachment has increased the likelihood that Republicans will take over the House." pic.twitter.com/gQIPssX0nS

-- The Hill (@thehill) December 31, 2019

Gabbard also told CBS News that impeachment may allow Republicans to regain the majority in the House after the 2020 election.

WATCH: I sat down with @TulsiGabbard to discuss her "present" vote on impeachment. Gabbard says the Senate trial will strengthen President Trump.

Most Gabbard supporters I've spoken with in New Hampshire approve of her vote, particularly independents.

🔗 https://t.co/SOsvF9jsHQ pic.twitter.com/hDi7JoI4Kg

-- Nicole Sganga (@NicoleSganga) December 31, 2019

Gabbard -- a 2020 president candidate -- noted that the prospect of a second term for Trump and a Republican-controlled House is a "serious concern" of hers, adding that she's worried about the potential ramifications that will be left if Trump is acquitted.

She told ABC News that it could leave "lasting damage" on the country as a whole.

The Democratic congresswoman -- who is known to be an outspoken critic of her own party -- was the lone lawmaker to not choose a side on impeachment, and has faced intense criticism for her choice. - ABC News

Gabbard defended her decision to vote present, calling it an "active protest" against the "terrible fallout of this zero sum mindset" between Democrats and Republicans. She told ABC News that her vote was "not a decision of neutrality," and that she was indeed "standing up for the people of this country and our ability to move forward together.


A rope leash , 4 minutes ago link

If she isn't the Democratic nominee, the Democratic Party will cease to exist.

She is clearly the only uncorrupted adult running, including Trump.

She is running on foriegn policy. Those worried about her domestic policy forget it will go nowhere in a Republican Congress.

She's the only anti-war candidate. You want Tulsi or you want war.

GALLGE , 12 minutes ago link

DiGenova: Comey and Brennan were 'coup leaders'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Oea0Dz0w4U

Vince Clortho , 15 minutes ago link

Observe Tulsi while you can. She is the last of a dying breed -- a relatively moderate democrat. In today's Glo-Bol-Commiecrat party you have to be completely onboard with their 4 sheets to the wind extremist platform or you are the enemy.

ddiduck , 48 minutes ago link

Not to worry folks, if Tulsi is announcing president Trump and a majority in both the house and senate it is safe to say things are right on track. However, HERE COME THE CIA and NSA orchestrated false flag distractions and diversions I.e, Iran.. Also expect a much amped up domestic terrorism by the MKULTRA radical nut jobs they will be using to divert attention. Also creating a civil war starting in Virginia is examples of the allegiances to the satanic fraternity by certain governors. These retards will also becoming out of the woodwork.

ddiduck , 48 minutes ago link

Not to worry folks, if Tulsi is announcing president Trump and a majority in both the house and senate it is safe to say things are right on track. However, HERE COME THE CIA and NSA orchestrated false flag distractions and diversions I.e, Iran.. Also expect a much amped up domestic terrorism by the MKULTRA radical nut jobs they will be using to divert attention. Also creating a civil war starting in Virginia is examples of the allegiances to the satanic fraternity by certain governors. These retards will also becoming out of the woodwork.

Polymarkos , 50 minutes ago link

I wish you conspiracy twits would drop the MKULTRA nonsense. MKULTRA was an UMBRELLA PROGRAM that covered hundreds of classified operations, almost NONE of which had anything to do with anything you people think it did. Head out of ***, please!

emmanuelthoreau , 34 minutes ago link

Oh, yeah, MKULTRA was totally cool, normal stuff, really. Just the Dulles Brothers and a bunch of other psychos throwing people out of windows in the name of protecting Amurica from the dirty Reds.

Glad to know a self-identified former intel person is on here making death threats against Gabbard, by the way. Guess you have a get out of jail free card, huh? Why don't we find out?

MauiJeff , 51 minutes ago link

She is my Congresswoman. Tulsi is not perfect but she is good enough. Both the Democrat Senator (Schatz and Hirono) don't support her on our only other Democrat Congressperson does not support her. She is also despised by the national Dem party. This means she is doing something right.

Savyindallas , 1 hour ago link

Leave Tulsi alone. She's the best of the group by far. Some of you sound like all the George Bush supporters I knew who loved young Bush because he was so "pro-life". Give me a break. She has socially conservative roots. Unfortunately she has had to take on some of this progressive **** to be elected in a Democratic District. I have heard her views repeatedly on abortion, gun rights and immigration. She doesn't worry me at all. I trust her on all these issues more than Trump or any other establishment republican who I know are owned by the elites and who will sell us out when they are told to.

This is the real Tulsi. Look at her Christmas eve video--enjoy:

https://www.tulsi2020.com/updates/2019-12-25-special-holiday-message?sourceid=1014165&ms=em191225&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=em191225&emci=bb9e7d2e-6727-ea11-a601-2818784d6d68&emdi=bc9e7d2e-6727-ea11-a601-2818784d6d68&ceid=117332

kalboking , 1 hour ago link

TULSI GABBARD IS true patriot Dont y'all remember when she called trump as Israel's bitch?

[Dec 31, 2019] Another despicable attack on Tulsi

It is reasonably cheap to buy a journalist and turn him into the attack dog on particular, inconvenient or dangerious for the financial oligarchy candidate.
Dec 31, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kali , Dec 29 2019 19:01 utc | 13

New article about Tulsi Gabbard being viciously attacked over religion during Christmas.

Angry Bernie Sanders supporters whom I guess forgot to take their meds over the holidaze are viciously attacking Tulsi because of Jesus? LOL. This new article is specifically about Mike Figueroa from The Humanist Report, a semi-popular vlogger, and also a fanatic atheist type.

He used to be a Tulsi supporter, but since he is connected to the TYT network which is funded by Hollywood Billionaire and major DNC Clinton funder Katzenberg, he must have recently been told to toe the party line on smearing Tulsi if he wanted to reap the funding benefits of TYT who are hardcore Tulsi haters, following the DNC line.

I guess Tulsi showing the Christmas spirit gave him a reason to look hardcore to his fellow fanatics and appease TYT money folks. Anyways, here is the new article Like, In The Year 2024

[Dec 29, 2019] Tulsi is a very strategic thinker

Dec 29, 2019 | caucus99percent.com

gulfgal98 on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 1:38pm

Tulsi is a very strategc thinker

@earthling1 I honestly do believe that she thinks long term and, for whatever reason, her decision not to run for her own congressional seat is a part of her long term plans. Despite her being smeared over and over by the media, Tulsi has the unique ability to effectively expand the electorate by appealing to rational people, regardless of party affiliation.

The establishment is terrified of her message. Otherwise, why would they be attacking her so viciously despite her reported low polling numbers?

While Tulsi is a practicing Hindu, she was raised in a multi faith family with her father being a still practicing Catholic. And she mentioned that they had attended a Baptist church in South Carolina on Christmas Eve. I noticed that her parents were in attendance at the dinner that her brother in law and his mother prepared.

is detonating.
Someone is gonna have to clean up the debri and make some kind of use of what is left over. Recycle the trash. Make it green. Bernie is past his best by date.
This is what I have suspected all along. To save the Party, we must completely destroy it.
Even if it means four more years of Trump. By then, climate change will be obvious to even the dullest among us.
Tulsi is angling to be there to clean up the mess.
IMHO

Alligator Ed on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 2:11pm
Tulsi gains by not running for Congress in 2020

@gulfgal98 She will not be campaigning as a Dem this cycle, unless perhaps Bernie gets the nomination. The severance from Congress means de facto severance from the Democrat Party. The stink of said party becomes more and more apparent daily as Shiftless, No-Nads, Nervous Nancy et. al. continue their demeaning and angering stupidity. More Dems are getting turned off by the House sham impeachment daily.

#2 I honestly do believe that she thinks long term and, for whatever reason, her decision not to run for her own congressional seat is a part of her long term plans. Despite her being smeared over and over by the media, Tulsi has the unique ability to effectively expand the electorate by appealing to rational people, regardless of party affiliation.

The establishment is terrified of her message. Otherwise, why would they be attacking her so viciously despite her reported low polling numbers?

While Tulsi is a practicing Hindu, she was raised in a multi faith family with her father being a still practicing Catholic. And she mentioned that they had attended a Baptist church in South Carolina on Christmas Eve. I noticed that her parents were in attendance at the dinner that her brother in law and his mother prepared.

Cassiodorus on Fri, 12/27/2019 - 6:42am
Do you have other signs --

@earthling1 that suggest that the Democratic Party is "detonating"?

It looks to me that the Democrats are settling in for a long period of existence as America's Vichy party. The Democrats are that party that exists so that those Americans who are afraid of Republican policymakers can vote for them so that, when elected, they can find clever ways of giving away power to the Republicans.

As for destroying the Democratic Party, we are on the same page.

is detonating.
Someone is gonna have to clean up the debri and make some kind of use of what is left over. Recycle the trash. Make it green. Bernie is past his best by date.
This is what I have suspected all along. To save the Party, we must completely destroy it.
Even if it means four more years of Trump. By then, climate change will be obvious to even the dullest among us.
Tulsi is angling to be there to clean up the mess.
IMHO

earthling1 on Fri, 12/27/2019 - 12:30pm
I still see

@Cassiodorus
friends and family demexiting even today. Many of my union buddies are still pissed that the union bosses supported Her in 2016.
The teacher strikes last year and before showed the leadership out of step with the rack and file.
Now, in France the union leadership is being ignored entirely by the membership and see them as sell-outs to the labor movment.
Ditto in Chile, Peru, Ecuador, and numerous other countries around the globe.
It's the same all over the world. Working people are seeing their representation being deminished by union leaders.
IMHO

#2 that suggest that the Democratic Party is "detonating"?

It looks to me that the Democrats are settling in for a long period of existence as America's Vichy party. The Democrats are that party that exists so that those Americans who are afraid of Republican policymakers can vote for them so that, when elected, they can find clever ways of giving away power to the Republicans.

As for destroying the Democratic Party, we are on the same page.

Cassiodorus on Fri, 12/27/2019 - 1:41pm
yeah --

@earthling1 Those French union bosses, btw, really like that lockstep marching. One of the primary reasons for the current general strike is that the union bosses in France finally gave their okay to the whole thing. Or at least this is what my source, who hails from Montpellier, tells me.

As for your friends and family, Demexiting has one really big advantage -- they will no longer be persecuted for not voting for Democrats. Can they still vote for Bernie Sanders?

#2.5
friends and family demexiting even today. Many of my union buddies are still pissed that the union bosses supported Her in 2016.
The teacher strikes last year and before showed the leadership out of step with the rack and file.
Now, in France the union leadership is being ignored entirely by the membership and see them as sell-outs to the labor movment.
Ditto in Chile, Peru, Ecuador, and numerous other countries around the globe.
It's the same all over the world. Working people are seeing their representation being deminished by union leaders.
IMHO

doh1304 on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 12:22am
Needless to say (but I'll say it anyway)

her chances will be much better in 2024 if Bernie wins in 2020. She will have a base to lead in place rather than in the wilderness. In short, there will still be an America.

davidgmillsatty on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 11:57am
Benie thinks he is immortal

@doh1304 So maybe not should he win and hangs on for all four. (Two big hypotheticals). And unless he picks her for VP, she will still be in the wilderness in 2024.

her chances will be much better in 2024 if Bernie wins in 2020. She will have a base to lead in place rather than in the wilderness. In short, there will still be an America.

Situational Lefty on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 12:59am
TULSI 2020!

If she pisses off those people, she must be doing something right!

[Dec 29, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard Quo Vadis: If the Dem Party is going to be kaput

Dec 29, 2019 | caucus99percent.com

Tulsi Gabbard: Quo Vadis?


Alligator Ed on Wed, 12/25/2019 - 11:02pm After bravely contesting a nomination she knows she cannot win, Tulsi Gabbard has and continues to exhibit a tenacious adherence to achievement of purpose. What is that purpose? I believe it is evident if you only let your eyes see and your ears hear. Listen to what she says. Looks at what she does.

//www.youtube.com/embed/F1bVz4nNNnA?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

Humble surroundings. Real people. Good food.

What this does is obvious. However, please forgive me if I proceed to explain the meaning. People see what apparently is her home milieu. I've been to Filipino homes for dinner as many of my nurse friends were Filipino. Tulsi is so human. Despite Hindu belief, she is respectful to the presence and perhaps the essence of Jesus, and does not sound pandering or hypocritical.

Getting to know Tulsi at the beginning of her hoped-for (by me) political ascendancy. Get in on almost the ground floor of what will become an extremely powerful force in future American life.

Why? What's the hurry?

The more support and the earlier Tulsi receives it propel the campaign. That's what momentum means: a self-generating growing strength.

One doesn't have to be a Tulsi supporter to hopefully receive some ideas which may not have occurred to you. This essay does not concern any specific Gabbard policy. What I write here is what I perceive of her character and thus her selected path. Mind-reading, perhaps. Arm-chair speculation, possibly.

Tulsi has completed phase 2A in her career. The little that I know of her early life, especially politically (such as how she voted in HI state legislature) limits a deep understanding which such knowledge would provide. As the tree is bent, etc.

We are in Phase 2B. Tulsi, as I wrote in another essay, is letting the tainted shroud of Democrat corruption fall off her shoulders without any effort of her own. The Democrat party is eating itself alive. It is all things to all people at once. That is a philosophy incapable of satisfaction.

Omni Democraticorundum in tres partes est (pardon the reference to the opening of Caesar's Gallic Wars, with liberal substitution by me).

The Dems trifurcate and the division will be neither pleasant nor reconcilable. Tribalism will be reborn after Trump crushes whomever in 2020.

Tribe one: urban/techno/überkinden.

Tribe two: leftward bound to a place where no politician has ever ventured. Not socialism. Not Communism. We could call it Fantasy Land, although I fear Disney owns that name.

Tribe three: progressive realists. By using such positive wording, you will correctly suspect my bias as to which Tribe I belong to.

Once again, policy will not be discussed. Only strategy and reality. Can't have good strategy without a good grasp of reality. This is why Establidems are bereft of thematic variability. For the past 3.3 years, they have been singing from a hymn book containing but one song. You know the title. Orange Man Bad. Yeah, that's it. If they don't like that title, we establidems have another song for ya. It's called Orange Man Bad. Like that one, huh? Wazzat, ya didn't like the song the first time. Hey, we thought the song would grown on you.

Them Dems, noses up, can't see the sidewalk. Oops. Stepped in something there, huh? Oh, yeah like the Impeachment.

But I digress: The latter part of Phase 2B is not clear. Tulsi will continue to accept small donor contributions, even after not obtaining the nomination next year. Public appearances will be important but should be low key with little press attention. Press attention is something however that won't be available when most desirable. What else Tulsi will do may be to form a nucleus of like-minded activists, thinkers, and other supporters to promote an agenda for a more liberal, tolerant society.

If the Dem Party is going to be kaput . . .

@Alligator Ed

. . . ah, never mind.

Don't be surprised if even Warren will fail to gather the 15% of votes needed in each early primary state to get awarded any delegates.

It's gonna Biden vs Bernie.

Bernie or Dust. Or she who shall not be named in which case even worse (and I don't mean Tulsi).

edit/add: Well, lookee here, hot off the presses as it were:
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/26/can-bernie-sanders-win-2020-ele...

Alligator Ed on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 2:05pm
from your citation: If Sanders' candidacy ....

@Wally @Wally

If Sanders' candidacy continues to be taken seriously, he will eventually be subjected to the scrutiny that Warren and Biden have faced for prolonged stretches. That includes an examination of his electability. "That conversation has never worked well for anyone," Pfeiffer said.

What a bunch of hypocritical horseshit. Bernie not getting scrutiny? In 2016, when not being derided for this, that or the other, Bernie was always scrutinized. There are only two things voters have learned since the DNC 2016 convention:

1. Bernie had a heart attack
2. Bernie supported H. Rodent Clinton in the general election.

Wally on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 3:08pm
The reference was to 2020

@Alligator Ed

. . . and to the much noted "Bernie blackout" up until now this time around.

It's gotten to the point given the polls and the first primary in being held in about a month where TPTB in conjunction with the MSM can no longer afford to turn a blind eye towards Bernie. It's gonna get really nasty.

The most recent tropes on the twitters, probably in response to Brock talking point memos, have been pushing Bernie as an anti-Semite and him purportedly triggering rape survivors. Of course it's horsehit but it's the propagandistic method of the Big Lie.

I'm genuinely curious. How will you react if Tulsi endorses the Dem nominee and it ain't Bernie? Bernie's endorsement of she-who-shall-not-be-named in 2016 seems to have pretty much completely soured him to you. Endorsing Biden better? Or at least acceptable? Not for me. Bernie doing so in 2016 I could understand and forgive. But this is my last go round absent a Bernie miracle.

#2.1.1 #2.1.1

If Sanders' candidacy continues to be taken seriously, he will eventually be subjected to the scrutiny that Warren and Biden have faced for prolonged stretches. That includes an examination of his electability. "That conversation has never worked well for anyone," Pfeiffer said.

What a bunch of hypocritical horseshit. Bernie not getting scrutiny? In 2016, when not being derided for this, that or the other, Bernie was always scrutinized. There are only two things voters have learned since the DNC 2016 convention:

1. Bernie had a heart attack
2. Bernie supported H. Rodent Clinton in the general election.

Alligator Ed on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 3:55pm
Tulsi's support if Bernie's not nominated

@Wally She might back Yang--who won't get nominated. But I hope she doesn't do anything more than a neutral statement, somewhat to the effect that "We must defeat Donald Trump", then not campaign otherwise.

#2.1.1.1

. . . and to the much noted "Bernie blackout" up until now this time around.

It's gotten to the point given the polls and the first primary in being held in about a month where TPTB in conjunction with the MSM can no longer afford to turn a blind eye towards Bernie. It's gonna get really nasty.

The most recent tropes on the twitters, probably in response to Brock talking point memos, have been pushing Bernie as an anti-Semite and him purportedly triggering rape survivors. Of course it's horsehit but it's the propagandistic method of the Big Lie.

I'm genuinely curious. How will you react if Tulsi endorses the Dem nominee and it ain't Bernie? Bernie's endorsement of she-who-shall-not-be-named in 2016 seems to have pretty much completely soured him to you. Endorsing Biden better? Or at least acceptable? Not for me. Bernie doing so in 2016 I could understand and forgive. But this is my last go round absent a Bernie miracle.

Wally on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 5:17pm
I don't think anyone other than Bernie or Yang would want Tulsi

@Alligator Ed

. . . to campaign in support of their candidacies.

Maybe Biden will accept her support. I've still never been able to figure why she never and probably still won't take any shots at his warmongering and otherwise cruddy record regarding domestic affairs.

#2.1.1.1.1 She might back Yang--who won't get nominated. But I hope she doesn't do anything more than a neutral statement, somewhat to the effect that "We must defeat Donald Trump", then not campaign otherwise.

by Alligator Ed on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 6:28pm
She was working her way up the food chain

@Wally That's what intelligent predators do.

#2.1.1.1.1.1

. . . to campaign in support of their candidacies.

Maybe Biden will accept her support. I've still never been able to figure why she never and probably still won't take any shots at his warmongering and otherwise cruddy record regarding domestic affairs.

wokkamile on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 5:29pm
Well, she wouldn't

@Alligator Ed @Alligator Ed be unfamiliar with the neutral position. Though I wonder if she would feel comfortable dipping into that well again given how much grief she got the last time.

Of course, if she again puts it in Neutral, and doesn't support the D nominee (anyone but Bloomberg), she will be finished as a Dem pol. She might as well go off and start a Neutral Party.

#2.1.1.1.1 She might back Yang--who won't get nominated. But I hope she doesn't do anything more than a neutral statement, somewhat to the effect that "We must defeat Donald Trump", then not campaign otherwise.

by Alligator Ed on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 6:30pm
She IS finished as a Dem

@wokkamile Her dismissal papers will be submitted to her after she is barred entry into the DNC convention, regardless of how many delegates she may have won.

#2.1.1.1.1.1 #2.1.1.1.1.1 be unfamiliar with the neutral position. Though I wonder if she would feel comfortable dipping into that well again given how much grief she got the last time.

Of course, if she again puts it in Neutral, and doesn't support the D nominee (anyone but Bloomberg), she will be finished as a Dem pol. She might as well go off and start a Neutral Party.

Wally on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 8:38pm
Will Tulsi win any delegates?

@Alligator Ed

Don't forget that 15% state threshold for eligibility to be awarded delegates.

#2.1.1.1.1.1.2 Her dismissal papers will be submitted to her after she is barred entry into the DNC convention, regardless of how many delegates she may have won.

Alligator Ed on Thu, 12/26/2019 - 9:40pm
My crystal ball has developed cataracts

@Wally Thus my powers of predicting the future have dimmed accordingly. But two things haven't dimmed:

1. It is readily apparent that the DNC won't let Bernie win. They'll rob him of votes in CA (100% probability) and NY (95% probability), etc.

2. The Demonrats will get destroyed in 2020 up and down ballot except in the fiefdoms of Californicate and Ny-no-nah-nah.

What, pray good Sir, do you predict or is that an impossibility at this time?

#2.1.1.1.1.1.2.1

Don't forget that 15% state threshold for eligibility to be awarded delegates.

Wally on Fri, 12/27/2019 - 6:54am
I certainly won't be surprised if Bernie gets cheated or worse

@Alligator Ed

I will be surprised if Tulsi gets so much as one delegate.

More than a few knowledgeable people think he has a very good shot of winning California. I am less optimistic about NYS but I think he will do well enough to get a good number of delegates especially if he does well in the earlier primaries (NYS comes April 28).

I don't feel solidly about making any kind of predictions at this point but given the nature of the Democratic Party, I don't see it as falling into oblivion anytime soon or in our lifetimes.

As far as Bernie goes, I am not optimistic but I still have some hope. I still fervantly believe that his candidacy is the best chance we will have in our lifetimes of bringing about any substantial change -- and if he and his critical mass of supporters can't pull it off this time around, we're all phluckled big time, even alligators, in terms of combating climate change and putting a kabosh on endless wars. I wish you good future luck with Tulsi though. I just don't see it. But I've been wrong on more than one occasion in my life.

[Dec 24, 2019] Only Tulsi had the sense to see impeachment for what it is, a farce that only helps Trump

Dec 24, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

ggm , December 24, 2019 at 2:06 am

[Dec 21, 2019] There have been numerous smears of Tulsi Gabbard that have been repeated over and over the last few years after she went to Syria. She started to give the foreign policy blob a lot of grief for their support of the overthrow of Syria to install a theocratic jihadi government controlled by the usual suspects.

Dec 21, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kali , Dec 21 2019 22:03 utc | 22

There have been numerous smears of Tulsi Gabbard that have been repeated over and over the last few years after she went to Syria. She started to give the foreign policy blob a lot of grief for their support of the overthrow of Syria to install a theocratic jihadi government controlled by the usual suspects.

One smear they like to use is to call Tulsi an Islamophobe. That began years ago when she criticized Our Savior Obama (pbaj) for claiming ISIS was not a religious extremist organization, that it was a criminal group and the US needed to give Iraqi men more to do and then they wouldn't join those criminal gangs like...ISIS.

Anyways, this article goes into a deeper state (yup, deeper than usual) conspiracy by various actors to smear Tulsi for a variety of reasons subservient to foreign interests, with a surprise intro to another often unspoken of interest with a lot of hidden power in Washington.

Anatomy of A Smear: How Liberals Have Become Willing Dupes of Foreign Political Psy-Ops

[Dec 20, 2019] Here is why Tulsi voted as she did

Dec 20, 2019 | caucus99percent.com

Tulsi voted present and here is why she did that.

"I could not in good conscience vote against impeachment because I believe President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing," she said. "I also could not in good conscience vote for impeachment because removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our country."

A censure would "send a strong message to this president and future presidents that their abuses of power will not go unchecked, while leaving the question of removing Trump from office to the voters to decide," Gabbard said.

[Dec 19, 2019] Tulsi probably is purposely distnce herself from the DNC. That will alow her to run as an independent

But Tulsi running as an independent means reelection of Trump.
Dec 19, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
psychohistorian , Dec 19 2019 6:20 utc | 82
@ Posted by: jalp | Dec 19 2019 6:00 utc | 80 with the Green Party status....Thanks

If Tulsi is totally left out of the Democratic race, is it possible that she could be a Green candidate? When is the "drop dead" date for that to occur? How is the VP pick handled?

TIA

Bryan Hemming , Dec 19 2019 9:10 utc | 88

I see Tulsi Gabbard managed to distance herself from the affair and rise above it by voting "present" instead of "yes" or "no". I sense she is purposely putting a lot of space between herself and the DNC, and may even be positioning herself to run as an independent come spring, despite saying that was not her objective only a couple of months ago. Given the lack of wisdom and loss of sense of direction being shown by the Democrat leadership it would be a very wise move.

powerandpeople , Dec 19 2019 8:43 utc | 87
The Tuls is unlikely to be the Dem candidate.

Her options are open.

Pres. Trump wants to go down in history for something other than the impeachment charade.

He thinks outside the box, is afraid of nothing, can turn on a dime, and may be the only person who can kick open a door that seems jammed, thereby healing half the nation.

[Dec 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard did the smart thing and abstained in the vote from the circus

Notable quotes:
"... But as we know it has become politically incorrect on the left to do anything but to put on your clown makeup and join the circus. ..."
"... But Tulsi Gabbard as usual doesn't play their game. And because of that, like Trump she is also a target of the deep state and not just the deep state of America--it is the deep state of the entire 5-Eyes security apparatus who together work overtime to overthrow Trump and any and all who resist their attempt to rule the world. ..."
"... Today's Deep State most resembles the colonial administrations during the heyday of European imperialism. These too worked to run their own secret foreign policy, and to bring their power to bear on domestic policy as well. ..."
Dec 19, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kali , Dec 18 2019 21:59 utc | 18

Tulsi Gabbard did the smart thing and abstained in the vote from the circus. But as we know it has become politically incorrect on the left to do anything but to put on your clown makeup and join the circus.

But Tulsi Gabbard as usual doesn't play their game. And because of that, like Trump she is also a target of the deep state and not just the deep state of America--it is the deep state of the entire 5-Eyes security apparatus who together work overtime to overthrow Trump and any and all who resist their attempt to rule the world.

This is a new article on Tulsi and her battle with the deep state: Tulsi Gabbard: Enemy of Their State

Russ , Dec 18 2019 22:00 utc | 19

Historically the ability of unelected, unaccountable, secretive bureaucracies (aka the "Deep State") to exercise their own policy without regard for the public or elected officials, often in defiance of these, has always been the hallmark of the destruction of democracy and incipient tyranny.

Today's Deep State most resembles the colonial administrations during the heyday of European imperialism. These too worked to run their own secret foreign policy, and to bring their power to bear on domestic policy as well.

Although both halves of the One-Party really want the effective tyranny of state and corporate bureaucracies, it's not surprising that it's the Democrats (along with the MSM) taking the lead in openly defending the tyrannical proposition that the CIA should be running its own foreign (and implicitly domestic) policy, and that the president should be just a figurehead which follows orders. That goes with the Democrats' more avowedly technocratic style, and it goes with the ratchet effect whereby it's usually Democrats which push the policy envelope toward ever greater inequality, ecocide and tyranny.

Now is a time of rising irredentism and the decline of all the ideas of globalization and technocracy, though the reality is likely to hang on for awhile. The whole Deep State-Zionist-Russia-Deranged-Trump-Deranged-MSM-social media censorship campaign is globalization trying to maintain its monopoly of ideas by force, since it knows it can never win in a free clash of ideas.

Impeachment, and the pro-bureaucracy anti-democracy campaign related to it, besides its more petty purposes (distraction from real social problems; forestalling Sanders), is the culmination of technocracy's attempted coup against a president who, even though he agrees with this cabal on all policy matters, is considered too unreliable, too undisciplined, too damn honest about the evil of the US empire. If they can take him down, they think they can restore the full business-as-usual status quo including the compliance of the rest of the world.

Since impeachment's going to fail, we can expect the system to try other ways.

Australian lady , Dec 19 2019 3:26 utc | 71

Thank you b, another great post.

But also may I compliment Kali@18 and Russ@19 for their terrific comments. I have just finished reading the link provided by Kali, which is an outstanding essay by Pam Ho- a paradigm shifter if ever there was one! I have been making a determined effort to liberate my thinking from ideological partisanship and reading this essay was like pressing a refresh button in my brain.

Despite the ra ra b. s.,Trump's letter will become an historical document, as it does encapsulate all the manufactured tribulations that have been foisted on his presidency, though I would have liked b to include all those words which were CAPITALIZED. He's quite a personality, your president The best summation of the man is, curiosly enough, provided by Syria's president Assad. There is an honesty about him even when he's uttering a bald-faced lie!

Tulsi has been newsworthy for a number of years now and right from the getgo I said to myself "she's my kind of gal"

Here is a woman of courage and presence. She's young and principled, even if she's a member of a very corrupted party.

May she go far.

psychohistorian , Dec 19 2019 3:53 utc | 73

@ Posted by: Australian lady | Dec 19 2019 3:26 utc | 71 who ended her comment expressing support for Tulsi Gabbard

When the impeachment vote was taken today, there were two Dems that voted against and Tulsi voted Present

She will be ostracized for her non vote but I give her credit for distancing herself from the impeachment circus. Given that she has stated that she won't run again for Congress, I speculate that she may jump to the Green Party if given the chance to run ahead of or with Jill Stein.....any barflies know how the Greens are shaping up for this coming election?

I read in a couple of places today that the strategy of the Dems is to not forward the impeachment to the Senate for an indeterminate amount of time......let the stew, the Senate and Trump simmer a bit.....more kabuki for the masses while the public continues to be screwed economically.

[Dec 13, 2019] Gabbard Takes No Prisoners In DNC Warfare Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... Authored by Sarah Cowgill via LibertyNation.com, ..."
"... not quite reaching ..."
Dec 13, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Gabbard Takes No Prisoners In DNC Warfare by Tyler Durden Thu, 12/12/2019 - 18:45 0 SHARES

Authored by Sarah Cowgill via LibertyNation.com,

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), the outspoken, independent thinker from Hawaii running for the loftiest perch in the land, has just said "no" to taking the next Democratic presidential primary debate stage. This signals either a surrender or a strategic end-run around the field. Yes, we've been down this road before. It is the same sentiment she expressed prior to the last debate; although she threatened to boycott the circus, she did qualify, show up, and rebuke the other candidates and the Democratic Party.

Gabbard has been Public Enemy #1 in those circles since. Instead of playing into the cemented narrative, Tulsi, who has not so far reached the conditions imposed for participation in the next round, is not wasting her time.

The Most Repetitive Show On Earth

As the sixth platform for national domination looms, Gabbard tweeted a different plan, saying:

"For a number of reasons, I have decided not to attend the December 19th 'debate' -- regardless of whether or not there are qualifying polls. I instead choose to spend that precious time directly meeting with and hearing from the people of New Hampshire and South Carolina."

Whether her bold decision is based on not quite reaching the necessary baseline requirements, or because she has had enough of the game playing, Tulsi seems indifferent to striving for inclusion . And we all know Gabbard is not one to tread water in the shallow end of the pool when a good, strong crawl will cover more territory.

Tulsi Gabbard

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has upped the ante for primetime pandering by requiring candidates to have a minimum of 4% support in selected national polls and 6% in two state polls of the early primary states Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, or Nevada.

The deadline for polling qualification is Dec. 12 at the witching hour of 11:59 p.m. in the Eastern time zone. How dramatic for what is likely to be a boring rehash of Trump-bashing, held a scant week later.

Although Tulsi has the sheer donor numbers needed – the support of at least 200,000 unique donors – her national polling numbers haven't yet reached the threshold. Those on the survey leaderboard are Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), former Vice President Joe Biden, Mayor Pete Buttigieg, billionaire Tom Steyer, and businessman Andrew Yang.

A Diverse Or One-Note Race?

Tulsi has been tilting at the DNC and its primary prerequisites since the get-go, claiming the surveyors they used weren't "accurate" enough, or that the venues were biased. Gabbard's campaign released a statement in August, which said:

"Many of the uncertified polls, including those conducted by highly reputable organizations such as The Economist and the Boston Globe, are ranked by Real Clear Politics and FiveThirtyEight as more accurate than some DNC 'certified' polls."

The DNC was insistent that its criteria for inclusion have been fair and balanced. Just ask the committee's spokeswoman Xochitl Hinojosa, who responded:

"This has been the most inclusive debate process with more women and candidates of color participating in more debates than billionaires. We are proud of this historic and diverse field with 20 candidates participating in the first two debates and at least 10 candidates in each debate after that."

What's ironic is that no people of color – because of the strident stipulations imposed – will be at the Dec. 19 debate hosted by PBS NewsHour and Politico at the Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. PBS is set to broadcast the debate, and most likely, fewer people will watch the event than Gabbard can reach by holding town halls or meet and greets. Perhaps she's on to something, after all.

[Dec 09, 2019] "There are no patriots in Washington " -- So tragically true. Only profiteers.

Dec 09, 2019 | www.unz.com

annamaria , says: December 7, 2019 at 9:54 pm GMT

@Erebus

"There are no patriots in Washington " -- So tragically true. Only profiteers.

anon [113] Disclaimer , says: December 7, 2019 at 11:01 pm GMT
@Erebus TULSI2020

"There are no patriots in Washington "

Don't be so sure. Note that Trump congratulated Tulsi on Kamala's demise. If she isn't the nominee, her mere presence in the campaign is a boon to Trump because she exposes the rot in the DNC and the Empire.

Dem Establishment can't control me and that scares the hell out of them

https://www.youtube.com/embed/IC98dmTAKbM?feature=oembed

[Dec 07, 2019] Enough is enough. Viva Tulsi. Down with neocons. List of wars involving the United States

Dec 07, 2019 | economistsview.typepad.com

RC (Ron) Weakley said in reply to ilsm... , December 01, 2019 at 08:16 AM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States

List of wars involving the United States

[Only the listed war names and dates copied without all the references and details.]

  1. American Revolutionary War - (1775–1783)
  2. Cherokee–American wars - (1776–1795)
  3. Northwest Indian War - (1785–1793)
  4. Shays' Rebellion - (1786–1787)
  5. Whiskey Rebellion - (1791–1794)
  6. Quasi-War - (1798–1800)
  7. Fries Rebellion - (1799–1800)
  8. First Barbary War - (1801–1805)
  9. 1811 German Coast Uprising - (1811)
  10. Tecumseh's War - (1811)
  11. War of 1812 - (1812–1815)
  12. Creek War - (1813–1814)
  13. Second Barbary War - (1815)
  14. First Seminole War - (1817–1818)
  15. Texas–Indian Wars - (1820–1875)
  16. Arikara War - (1823)
  17. Aegean Sea Anti-Piracy Operations of the United States - (1825–1828)
  18. Winnebago War - (1827)
  19. First Sumatran expedition - (1832)
  20. Black Hawk War - (1832)
  21. Texas Revolution - (1835–1836)
  22. Second Seminole War - (1835–1842)
  23. Second Sumatran expedition - (1838)
  24. Aroostook War - (1838)
  25. Ivory Coast expedition - (1842)
  26. Mexican–American War - (1846–1848)
  27. Cayuse War - (1847–1855)
  28. Apache Wars - (1851–1900)
  29. Bleeding Kansas - (1854–1861)
  30. Puget Sound War - (1855–1856)
  31. First Fiji expedition - (1855)
  32. Rogue River Wars - (1855–1856)
  33. Third Seminole War - (1855–1858)
  34. Yakima War - (1855–1858)
  35. Second Opium War - (1856–1859)
  36. Utah War - (1857–1858)
  37. Navajo Wars - (1858–1866)
  38. Second Fiji expedition - (1859)
  39. John Brown's Raid on Harpers Ferry - (1859)
  40. First and Second Cortina War - (1859–1861)
  41. Paiute War - (1860)
  42. American Civil War - (1861–1865)
  43. Yavapai War - (1861–1875)
  44. Dakota War of 1862 - (1862)
  45. Colorado War - (1863–1865)
  46. Shimonoseki War - (1863–1864)
  47. Snake War - (1864–1868)
  48. Powder River War - (1865)
  49. Red Cloud's War - (1866–1868)
  50. Formosa expedition - (1867)
  51. Comanche Campaign - (1867–1875)
  52. Korea expedition - (1871)
  53. Modoc War - (1872–1873)
  54. Red River War - (1874–1875)
  55. Las Cuevas War - (1875)
  56. Great Sioux War of 1876 - (1876–1877)
  57. Buffalo Hunters' War - (1876–1877)
  58. Nez Perce War - (1877)
  59. Bannock War - (1878)
  60. Cheyenne War - (1878–1879)
  61. Sheepeater Indian War - (1879)
  62. White River War - (1879–1880)
  63. Pine Ridge Campaign - (1890–1891)
  64. Garza Revolution - (1891–1893)
  65. Yaqui Wars - (1896–1918)
  66. Second Samoan Civil War - (1898–1899)
  67. Spanish–American War - (1898)
  68. Philippine–American War - (1899–1902)
  69. Moro Rebellion - (1899–1913)
  70. Boxer Rebellion - (1899–1901)
  71. Crazy Snake Rebellion - (1909)
  72. Border War - (1910–1919)
  73. Negro Rebellion - (1912)
  74. Occupation of Nicaragua - (1912–1933)
  75. Bluff War - (1914–1915)
  76. Occupation of Veracruz - (1914)
  77. Occupation of Haiti - (1915–1934)
  78. Occupation of the Dominican Republic - (1916–1924)
  79. World War I - (1914–1918)
  80. Russian Civil War - (1918–1920)
  81. Last Indian Uprising - (1923)
  82. World War II - (1939–1945)
  83. Korean War - (1950–1953)
  84. Laotian Civil War - (1953–1975)
  85. Lebanon Crisis - (1958)
  86. Bay of Pigs Invasion - (1961)
  87. Simba rebellion, Operation Dragon Rouge - (1964)
  88. Vietnam War - (1955–1964[a], 1965–1973[b], 1974–1975[c])
  89. Communist insurgency in Thailand - (1965–1983)
  90. Korean DMZ Conflict - (1966–1969)
  91. Dominican Civil War - (1965–1966)
  92. Insurgency in Bolivia - (1966–1967)
  93. Cambodian Civil War - (1967–1975)
  94. War in South Zaire - (1978)
  95. Gulf of Sidra encounter - (1981)
  96. Multinational Intervention in Lebanon - (1982–1984)
  97. Invasion of Grenada - (1983)
  98. Action in the Gulf of Sidra - (1986)
  99. Bombing of Libya - (1986)
  100. Tanker War - (1987–1988)
  101. Tobruk encounter - (1989)
  102. Invasion of Panama - (1989–1990)
  103. Gulf War - (1990–1991)
  104. Iraqi No-Fly Zone Enforcement Operations - (1991–2003)
  105. First U.S. Intervention in the Somali Civil War - (1992–1995)
  106. Bosnian War - (1992–1995)
  107. Intervention in Haiti - (1994–1995)
  108. Kosovo War - (1998–1999)
  109. Operation Infinite Reach - (1998)
  110. War in Afghanistan - (2001–present)
  111. 2003 invasion of Iraq - (2003)
  112. Iraq War - (2003–2011)
  113. War in North-West Pakistan - (2004–present)
  114. Second U.S. Intervention in the Somali Civil War - (2007–present)
  115. Operation Ocean Shield - (2009–2016)
  116. International intervention in Libya - (2011)
  117. Operation Observant Compass - (2011–2017)
  118. American-led intervention in Iraq - (2014–present)
  119. American-led intervention in Syria - (2014–present)
  120. Yemeni Civil War - (2015–present)
  121. American intervention in Libya - (2015–present)

{ finis }

RC (Ron) Weakley said in reply to RC (Ron) Weakley... , December 01, 2019 at 08:25 AM
This list tells quite a story. It deserves a name such as "US History Written in Blood," but more ironically and yet sufficient would be "An Inconvenient List." In any case, mass murder for fun and profit has defined war throughout the entire history of humankind. That in the modern era of late that the US has pioneered rentier capitalism as a means of extracting profits from the industrial war machine is a matter of the natural evolution of state sanctioned murder, far better at returning profits to investors than the mere slaughter of stone age natives to steal their land.
RC (Ron) Weakley said in reply to RC (Ron) Weakley... , December 01, 2019 at 08:45 AM
Neoconservatives in this context are traditionalists rather than some aberration of modern political thought.
RC (Ron) Weakley said in reply to RC (Ron) Weakley... , December 01, 2019 at 08:50 AM
OTOH, pacifism is indeed an aberration of political thought, not necessarily an unwarranted aberration, yet one that should be subject to close inspection for its bona fides. My Cherokee ancestors inform me to always be suspect of the good intentions of white men claiming that they despise war.
ilsm -> RC (Ron) Weakley... , December 03, 2019 at 05:14 AM
Rome martyred Christians bc up to Constantine they were all "draft dodgers".
ilsm -> RC (Ron) Weakley... , December 03, 2019 at 05:20 AM
Pacifism for me is individual. I was a cold warrior (pacifist not!) from '72 to '85 when I went from supporting operating weapons to the "dark side" in weapons development, which a lot was also nuclear related.
JohnH -> RC (Ron) Weakley... , December 02, 2019 at 07:59 AM
One of the first things that happened after Trump announced his withdrawal [not!] from Syria is that Pelosi hopped on a plane to Jordan:

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a group of American lawmakers on a surprise visit to Jordan to discuss "the deepening crisis" in Syria amid a shaky U.S.-brokered cease-fire."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/20/nancy-pelosi-goes-to-jordan-for-vital-discussions-about-syria-crisis.html

I mean, what's with that?

It's pretty obvious that Team Pelosi is more concerned with the affairs of the Empire, even though she has no constitutional responsibility. than for the welfare of the American people. The focus of the impeachment hearing on American policy in Ukraine is further evidence.

Meanwhile, I have gotten no answer to my basic question: what are the top 5 pieces of progressive legislation that Pelosi has passed--legislation that representations can brag about to their constituents when running in 2020? It's pretty obvious that their have been almost none.

Team Pelosi has gone rogue as has Trump.

RC (Ron) Weakley said in reply to JohnH... , December 02, 2019 at 12:30 PM
Yet, I have been assured by others here at EV that our two party representative political system is not merely engaging in so much Kabuki theatre in order to appear relevant. Who knew?
kurt -> RC (Ron) Weakley... , December 02, 2019 at 05:02 PM
Outside of the fact that this fellow is a liar of monumental proportion - for instance, this post alone contains 3 different lies - it is fundamentally untrue that BOTH parties are just engaged in theater. One actually passes legislation to help people and to reduce the influence of $$$. The other - as former Republican party member Norm Orenstein has pointed out - is anti-democracy, pro-despotism and a insurgent danger with a propaganda arm.
ilsm -> kurt... , December 03, 2019 at 05:12 AM
Huh... all team Pelosi/Schumer of is rant against the US constitution, demean the congress, disdain the office of the President and make up things about the Donald.

See the continuing resolution good through 20 Dec because Pelosi who owns the House won't face the responsibility to try and run the US government's purse.

ilsm -> JohnH... , December 03, 2019 at 05:08 AM
Team Pelosi like the faux liberals are sponsored by the same owners of the swamp!

Never attribute to Trump derangement what can be explained by a criminal conspiracy.

JohnH -> EMichael... , December 05, 2019 at 05:13 PM
More selective outrage from EMichael, the partisan hack.

Sure, it's horrendous that Trump pardoned a war criminal. But let's not forget that Obama never even prosecuted torturers ... or closed Guantanamo as promised.

As usual for EMichael and his ilk, what's a horror when their party does something, it's perfectly acceptable when his party does it.

kurt -> EMichael... , December 06, 2019 at 11:18 AM
All these years of being a almost pacifist and now I am seeing the error in my ways. Sometimes - hopefully increasingly less often - good people must rise up and stomp out evil. The pardons were not just condoning war crimes - it was telling the nazi ahs in the ranks that they can do the same domestically. The right has an army within the US. Most of the officers are okay - but that said, they are tolerating nazis, white supremacists, oathkeepers and dominionists in their ranks. These exceptions are to let the other nazis know they can mass murder if the want.

[Dec 02, 2019] The Smearing of Tulsi Gabbard by W.J. Astore

Notable quotes:
"... Aha! There you have it. Back in February 2016, Gabbard resigned her position as vice-chair of the DNC to endorse Sanders, and the DNC, controlled by establishment centrists like the Clintons as well as Barack Obama, have never forgiven her. Recently, Hillary Clinton smeared her (as well as Jill Stein, Green Party candidate from 2016) as a Russian asset, and various mainstream networks and news shows, such as "The View" and NBC, have suggested (with no evidence) she's the favored candidate of Russia and Vladimir Putin. ..."
"... Just what we don't need: two bought-and-paid-for political parties in the service of the wealthiest and the corporations. But at least the Republicans are (mostly) honest about their priorities ..."
Dec 02, 2019 | bracingviews.com

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is a compelling choice for president in 2020. She's principled, she's against America's disastrous regimen of regime-change wars, and she's got the guts to criticize her own party for being too closely aligned with rich and powerful interests. She's also a military veteran who enlisted in the Army National Guard in Hawaii after the 9/11 attacks (she currently serves as a major and deployed overseas to Iraq during that war).

What's not to like about a female veteran who oozes intelligence and independence, a woman who represents diversity (she's a practicing Hindu and a Samoan-American), an early supporter of Bernie Sanders who called out the DNC for its favoritism toward Hillary Clinton

Aha! There you have it. Back in February 2016, Gabbard resigned her position as vice-chair of the DNC to endorse Sanders, and the DNC, controlled by establishment centrists like the Clintons as well as Barack Obama, have never forgiven her. Recently, Hillary Clinton smeared her (as well as Jill Stein, Green Party candidate from 2016) as a Russian asset, and various mainstream networks and news shows, such as "The View" and NBC, have suggested (with no evidence) she's the favored candidate of Russia and Vladimir Putin.

Think about that. Hillary Clinton and much of the mainstream media are accusing a serving major in the U.S. military of being an asset to a foreign power. It's an accusation bordering on a charge of treason -- a charge that is libelous and recklessly irresponsible.

A reminder: Tulsi Gabbard enlisted in the military to serve her country in the aftermath of 9/11. What did Hillary Clinton do? Can you imagine Hillary going through basic training as a private, or serving in the military in a war zone? (Hillary did falsely claim that she came under sniper fire in Bosnia , but that's a story for another day.)

Tulsi Gabbard is her own person. She's willing to buck the system and has shown compassion and commitment on the campaign trail. She may be a long shot, but she deserves a long look for the presidency, especially when you consider the (low) quality of the enemies she's made. Reply


wjastore November 26, 2019 at 1:10 PM

Whenever I post anything remotely positive about Tulsi Gabbard on Facebook, the same few people come out to denounce her. My response is below, though I know you can't reason with haters:

That Tulsi has been on Fox News is an argument in her favor, i.e. her crossover appeal and her willingness to engage with the "other side." That Tulsi met with Assad is, in my view, reasonable; true leaders are always willing to meet with "bad" people, even ruthless dictators, in the cause of averting war. My main point is how she's being smeared as some kind of traitor, or at least a useful idiot. She's neither. Also, I've read the piece on Tulsi in Jacobin, and I've heard about alleged cults. Is this really the best the media can do? Guilt by association?

Some of our readers may have concerns about Tulsi, e.g. alleged Islamophobia, alleged cults, etc. The main point is this: Does she deserve to be smeared as a Putin puppet? What does this say about our media? And why are they doing this? I can tell you why. Trillions of dollars are spent on wars and weapons, and Tulsi is calling for an end to regime-change wars and a return to diplomacy. She also, like Bernie, is willing to call out the DNC as being against the interests of ordinary Americans -- and she's right about this. She has a lot in her favor. I'm a Bernie fan myself, but I'll take Tulsi over all those phony "centrists" like Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Harris, and Biden.

rs November 26, 2019 at 1:52 PM
This was published when she was accused of being a Russian asset! https://www.thenation.com/article/tulsi-russia-clinton/

On the other hand, her connection to extreme right RSS and BJP ( of India ) though diaspora are troubling .. https://www.alternet.org/2019/10/russia-accusations-a-distraction-from-tulsi-gabbards-actual-troubling-ties/

wjastore November 26, 2019 at 2:09 PM
I can't speak to the RSS/BJP connection; I've read about it, but I admit to ignorance on the matter. Of course, every candidate has multiple connections, positions, donors, etc. All politicians carry baggage. So far, from what I've read, Tulsi is more principled and more courageous than most of her peers.

I'm still a Bernie fan -- his long record of helping the poor and vulnerable speaks for itself. Of course, he once went to Moscow oh no! Run away! 🙂

Joseph Mirzoeff November 26, 2019 at 3:24 PM
Tulsi has now done four courageous, unusual, and very positive things while merely a candidate:
1) Tulsi effectively took down a leading contender and DNC favorite, by demonstrating that Senator Harris had been a corrupt prosecutor.
2) Tulsi defended democracy as she sued Google for at least $50 million, for playing favorites in search-routing of candidates.
3) Tulsi called out Hillary Clinton for the monster she is.
4) Tulsi supported a process toward 911 truth by supporting 911-victims' families' right to see FBI documents that have been denied to them.

Tulsi is the anti-war candidate. Tulsi Gabbard should be Commander-in-Chief. Yang should be VP and in charge of the economy. Read his book. UBI is the way to go. Tulsi needs someone she can trust as VP.

Michael Murry November 26, 2019 at 4:46 PM
To your list of courageous Tulsi Gabbard positions, I would add the following, Joseph:

Tulsi Gabbard Says She Would Drop Julian Assange Charges and Pardon Edward Snowden , by Jason Murdock, Newsweek (5/15/19 at 5:22 AM EDT).

I consider the vicious persecution of Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning -- both languishing in prison for having committed no crime whatsoever -- along with the exile of Edward Snowden, among the greatest travesties of justice ever committed by the U.S. and U.K. (dishonorable mention goes to Sweden and the latest Ecuadorian government, as well). I had hoped for this subject to come up in the "debates," giving Tulsi yet another opportunity to shine relative to her competitors, most of whom would soil their undergarments in panic at the thought of "crossing" the absurdly named "intelligence community" and its entirely co-opted corporate media outlets.

If Tulsi Gabbard had done no other principled thing than this, I would have considered her heads and shoulders above anyone else campaigning for a position in the U.S. government today.

Michael Murry November 26, 2019 at 4:59 PM
I ought to dedicate this one to Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard for her principled defense of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden (and no-doubt Chelsea Manning, as well):

Star Chamber, Incorporated

Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning
Jailed as twin examples for the proles:
"Look what happens if you publish secrets:
More totalitarian controls."

In Chinese: "Kill the Chicken scare the Monkey."
Rat-out your colleagues. Do not Power tempt.
Or otherwise the judges and grand juries
Will hold you in what lawyers call "contempt."

A strange word-choice, indeed, by Power's minions
Who spend careers perfecting rank abuse.
For them I'd have to feel respect much greater
Before that is the word that I would use.

I've nothing good to say for prosecutors.
Some say I wish to "damn them with faint praise."
But I reply: "You praise with faint damnation.
So which of us has coined the the better phrase?"

Despicable, the treatment of these heroes.
The US and UK have sunk so low.
Still, Julian and Chelsea have together
More balls than these two governments can grow.

No matter, they have passed into the ages.
Already they have earned a fair renown.
Each day they live defiant, undefeated,
They rise as jailers try to put them down.

As JFK once said of his elite class:
"The ship of state leaks mainly from the top."
But if some lowly, powerless, poor person
Tries that, they'll feel the lash. No truth. Now stop!

To scare a monkey, kill another monkey.
If not, the monkeys learn impunity.
While eating KFC they ask, obtusely:
"What has a chicken got to do with me?"

And so the Corporation-State must silence
Reports of its incompetence and crime.
If citizens knew what it did they'd order
Its dissolution. Now. And just in time.

Historically, they called it the Star Chamber
A secret court designed to thwart the king.
But power then perverted it to serve him.
Grand juries in the US, same damn thing.

They now indict ham sandwiches routinely
With no protection for the innocents.
Presumed as guilty, evidence not needed.
Conviction guaranteed. No court repents.

A judge may do whatever he determines
He can. So levy fines. Coerce. Demand
On penalty of prison, testimony
Against oneself, alone upon the stand.

"Democracy" is just a euphemism
If citizens allow this to proceed.
Orwellian: first Hate then Fear of Goldstein.
Two Minutes, daily. Really, all you need.

Michael Murry, "The Misfortune Teller," Copyright © 2019

Joseph Mirzoeff November 26, 2019 at 4:20 PM
Please don't fall for Bernie. He is neither Presidential nor trustworthy. Consider this: https://www.sentinelsource.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/what-did-bernie-know-about-these-conspiracies-by-joseph-mirzoeff/article_f7b43e69-6639-526a-823d-c4ca3778b5a1.html
Felix_47 November 27, 2019 at 12:21 PM
This is a good commentary. military experience is a good thing especially when we are dealing with the fact that over half of the national budget is devoted to the military.
wjastore November 27, 2019 at 5:19 PM
A good short clip on Tulsi Gabbard and smears against herL https://www.youtube.com/embed/OcCOtOCZ_qY?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
rs November 29, 2019 at 9:34 AM
Tulsi Gabbard KNOWS it i. e. Cost of Wars!
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-is-tulsi-the-only-democrat-who-cares-about-our-wars/
Monotonous Languor November 29, 2019 at 10:03 AM
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar has a thoughtful article on playing it safe, running out the clock, prevent defense, etc., on your opponent as it would apply to politics.

Jabbar writes: Almost every poll showed her with a respectable lead over Trump just days before the election. So, the Clinton campaign tried to run out the clock by not campaigning much in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, and South Dakota, all of which turned much redder than in the previous presidential election.

The tactic of trying to pick a "safe" candidate who can beat Trump by appealing to their ideas about Middle America sends the wrong message to all of America. No team devise a game strategy based on fear: they emphasize their strengths and exploit their opponents' weaknesses. The Democratic candidate shouldn't be the least objectionable, but the one who boldly forges ahead with clear and detailed plans for Making America America Again.

Democrats can't pander to voters by denigrating Trump but then promising them Trump-lite with a wink. Promote progressive policies and plans worthy of a party that wants to lead this country without fear of being called "socialists" or "the radical left" or whatever else your opposing team chants.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/oct/15/how-sports-tactics-can-help-the-democrats-beat-donald-trump-in-2020
===================================
Jabbar is correct. The Corporate Democrats among them Biden, Buttigieg and Bloomberg are fighting desperately to preserve a perceived lead aided and abetted by the McMega-Media.

Chicago Alderman, Paddy Bauler (1890-1977) said in 1955 on the election of Daley the Elder, "Chicago ain't ready for reform yet", or "Chicago ain't ready for a reform mayor".

Today, the pundits employed by Corporate America, along with various Democratic Party stooges for Wall Street tell us America ain't ready for Reform.

bmcks November 29, 2019 at 4:21 PM
Yes, ML, so goes American 'Exceptionalism', after WW2 Victory. Today, so goes a Great American City in violence, all so shortsighted. I'm still confused with our never-ending wars overseas, as our cities rot in crime & violence, my main concern. I didn't grow up – or party! -later on in today's disaster areas of Baltimore or Philadelphia, etc.It was GREAT!

But somethings going on I don't know about, when the WORST cities have black Congresspeople (Maxime Waters?) living in 6.5$Mil mansions as their "districts" die.
I have NO PROBLEM with black people! Such a smear an insult. But it's worth investigating why these characters who have ruined their cities are supporters of Dems, & Billary! Oh! They spend & vote lavishly on more money for our wars, but nothing for their own cities!

Finally starting to figure it out: They're traitors to their own race, for their personal benefit. They make Dems "look proud", vs "REP's!" Yes, they too re dreadful maybe that's why I feel: TULCI GO! She's neither dreadful party!

wjastore November 29, 2019 at 5:32 PM
A long but interesting podcast with Tulsi Gabbard on the Joe Rogan show

https://www.youtube.com/embed/PdYud9re7-Q?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Eddie S November 29, 2019 at 7:05 PM
ML: Good citation of KA-J -- - although I've seen the same-sort of criticism of the Dems elsewhere, Kareem's sports analogy is very helpful in understanding the concept.

(I have to say that I got sick of the Dems milquetoast approach to politics. Maybe it was an understandable response to a frustrating right-wing zeitgeist, but DAMN, did they have to be SO passive against the Reps?? Even when they briefly held majorities in Congress under Obama, the wouldn't introduce/push bills that weren't 'filibuster-proof'!?!? I for one might still be voting Dem POTUS IF they had pushed those progressive bills., then let the Reps filibuster for weeks or months, meantime the Dems & Obama could've gone in front of the public daily and said something like "We're trying to help you by passing Bill X, but the Reps are filibustering and stopping Congress from getting any work done!" Let the government shut-down for a few weeks because of it and keep hammering away at the Reps for being the BLOCKERS, etc. Call their bluff, and use it against them during elections. Instead they tried to be overly accommodating & conciliatory BEFORE debate had even begun!)

Michael Murry November 29, 2019 at 7:46 PM
Yes. Eddie. The Democratic Party not only gets its ass kicked for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, but it seems to have developed something of a masochistic taste for the Republican abuse. Hence two of my verse compositions essentially agreeing with your observations:

(1) From eight years ago. From "Hope" and "Change" to despair and the status quo. And with a Nobel Peace Prize for Endless War, too.

Congenital Stockholm Syndrome

He started by giving up quickly,
Surrendering early his case.
He offered to kiss their asses.
Replying, they pissed in his face.

Their urine, he thought, tasted strangely;
Yet not at all bad to his taste.
He'd gotten so used to it, plainly.
Why let such a drink go to waste?

The people who voted in favor
Of him and his promise of "change"
Now see in his many betrayals
A poodle afflicted with mange.

Each time that the surly and crazy
Republicans out for his skin
Condemn him for living and breathing,
He graciously helps them to win.

He'll turn on his base in an instant
With threats and disdain and neglect
While bombing some Muslims so Cheney
Might thrill to the lives that he's wrecked.

A black man in love with apartheid
He offers his stalwart support
To Zionists and their extortion
With "More, please!" his only retort.

A masochist begging for beatings
Obama takes joy in abuse
Receiving just what he has asked for
Which makes him of no earthly use

The little brown men that he's murdered
In homes far away from our land
Bring profits obscene to his backers
Who give him the back of their hand.

Obama seeks praise from the vicious
Republicans, no matter what.
He suffers, apparently, nothing
So much as his need to kiss butt.

Michael Murry, "The Misfortune Teller," Copyright 2011

(2) From twelve years ago and on the Congressional side of the Surrender Monkey Syndrome:

Nancy the Negotiator

Nancy the Negotiator
Gives up first; surrenders later;
Takes her cards from off the table,
Then recites her loser fable:

"We don't have the votes we need,"
Nancy says, in tones that bleed:
"Mean Republicans will whine
If we do not toe their line."

Nancy bows to George and Dick
While her skinny ass they kick;
Writes them checks both blank and rubber,
Then proceeds to lamely blubber:

"We don't like what Dubya's doing.
Still, we quite enjoy the screwing.
Masochism's what we offer,
Helping crooks to loot the coffer"

"Sure, the squandered blood and treasure
Goes to those we will not measure.
Still, we promise you'll adore us
If you mark your ballot for us."

"Choices you don't have assail you,
Leaving only us who fail you.
Nonetheless, we've gotten fatter.
Why, then, should we think you matter?"

Michael Murry, "The Misfortune Teller," Copyright © 2007

After six years in Uncle Sam's Canoe Club (the last eighteen months of that in the now-defunct Republic of South Vietnam) it didn't take me long to realize that the Republicans get paid a lavish salary to do what the fabulously wealthy demand, while the Democrats get a comparatively meager allowance to do what the Republicans tell them to do, also on behalf of the fabulously wealthy: namely, betray their own working-class anti-war base so that the Republicans will not have anything even remotely "leftist" to worry about. In truth, the Democratic party crawled up its own ass and died so many years ago that I think I've lost count.

Like Like

wjastore November 30, 2019 at 9:06 AM
Just what we don't need: two bought-and-paid-for political parties in the service of the wealthiest and the corporations. But at least the Republicans are (mostly) honest about their priorities

[Dec 01, 2019] Joe Rogan finally got around to interviewing Tulsi, along with another vet named Jocko Willink.

Dec 01, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

fdr-fan , November 29, 2019 at 2:11 pm

Attn Lambert:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdYud9re7-Q

Joe Rogan finally got around to interviewing Tulsi, along with another vet named Jocko Willink.

Tulsi does splendidly but unsurprisingly, finally allowed to complete a sentence without fighting stupid questions.

Around the middle of the clip, Willink has a passionate description of the rebirth of manufacturing in Maine, which is surprising!

Conrad , November 29, 2019 at 3:50 pm

#25 on trending when I clicked through just now. Not bad for a two and a half hour long interview.

And how on earth did an ex comedian and MMA commentator become one of the better political interviewers around?

WheresOurTeddy , November 29, 2019 at 4:19 pm

"And how on earth did an ex comedian and MMA commentator become one of the better political interviewers around?"

Dereliction of duty by the gatekeeper oligarch press, and discontent by the ever-more-discerning consumer to be served cold lies? Baby Boomers and Silent Generation dying off more by the day? People under 40 who have never experienced an economy that doesn't suck for the non-rich?

polecat , November 29, 2019 at 5:07 pm

He got over his fear factor ..

XXYY , November 30, 2019 at 10:44 am

I've started listening to Rogan interviews since Sanders's blockbuster interview a few months ago.

The guy is actually a surprisingly good interviewer, for reasons that are hard to understand. For one thing, he is invariably friendly and respectful, which I think draws the subject out. His format also allows almost unlimited and uninterrupted time, (2-3 hours is typical), which removes time pressure and allows extended and nuanced conversation. He also has no particular agenda, and allows the conversation to go where it will, jumping in with "questions" only when a particular topic seems to be exhausted.

The interesting thing is that anyone, either inside the media or outside it, could be doing a similar program; it's not technically hard. But no one is.

dcrane , November 30, 2019 at 12:58 am

Rogan first interviewed her in May. This was the second time. And another good one. She is ready to be president.

Perpetual war , November 30, 2019 at 4:55 am

If I didn't miss anything, then it is not 100% clear that USA will stop invading and bombing other countries with Gabbard. She is slippery enough to continue the bombings. She still mentions war as a last option. It is highly subjective to judge whether you have used up all diplomatic channels to achieve your goal or not.

The wars and invasions has been about stealing natural resources, oil mainly but now lithium too, feed the MIC-swamp creatures in general and selling out state resources to American interests. In no way does she tackle the causes of the wars, only the symptoms.

When have you tried all diplomatic channels to steal Iraq's, Venezuela's, Syria's and Libya's oil fields? What do the diplomatic tools look like? Economic strangulation? IMF on steroids?

She needs to talk about a society getting off of oil for a starter

Hepativore , November 29, 2019 at 2:46 pm

It is amazing on how so many arguments against progressive policies coming from the Democratic Party all seem to boil down to "Shut up and get back to work, peasants!"

Incrementalists do not even slowly improve things most of the time, as the neoliberal Democratic Party "incrementally" follows the Republicans rightward with every broad shift to the right on the GOP side. Today's deregulators and supply-side economic proponents are just as likely to be Democrats as Republicans and many Democrats are probably cheering on Kavanaugh's attacks on environmental standards as we speak.

Our aristocracy do not even pretend to adhere to any sort of sense of noblisse oblige, unlike the feudal lords of old.

[Nov 30, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard: Wake Up and Smell Our $6.4 Trillion Wars

Nov 30, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

he Democratic establishment is increasingly irritated. Representative Tulsi Gabbard, long-shot candidate for president, is attacking her own party for promoting the "deeply destructive" policy of "regime change wars." Gabbard has even called Hillary Clinton "the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party."

Senator Chris Murphy complained: "It's a little hard to figure out what itch she's trying to scratch in the Democratic Party right now." Some conservatives seem equally confused. The Washington Examiner 's Eddie Scarry asked: "where is Tulsi distinguishing herself when it really matters?"

The answer is that foreign policy "really matters." Gabbard recognizes that George W. Bush is not the only simpleton warmonger who's plunged the nation into conflict, causing enormous harm. In the last Democratic presidential debate, she explained that the issue was "personal to me" since she'd "served in a medical unit where every single day, I saw the terribly high, human costs of war." Compare her perspective to that of the ivory tower warriors of Right and Left, ever ready to send others off to fight not so grand crusades.

The best estimate of the costs of the post-9/11 wars comes from the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University. The Institute says that $6.4 trillion will be spent through 2020. They estimate that our wars have killed 801,000 directly and resulted in a multiple of that number dead indirectly. More than 335,000 civilians have died -- and that's an extremely conservative guess. Some 21 million people have been forced from their homes. Yet the terrorism risk has only grown, with the U.S. military involved in counter-terrorism in 80 nations.

Obviously, without American involvement there would still be conflicts. Some counter-terrorism activities would be necessary even if the U.S. was not constantly swatting geopolitical wasps' nests. Nevertheless, it was Washington that started or joined these unnecessary wars (e.g., Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen) and expanded necessary wars well beyond their legitimate purposes (Afghanistan). As a result, American policymakers bear responsibility for much of the carnage.

The Department of Defense is responsible for close to half of the estimated expenditures. About $1.4 trillion goes to care for veterans. Homeland security and interest on security expenditures take roughly $1 trillion each. And $131 million goes to the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, which have overspent on projects that have delivered little.

More than 7,000 American military personnel and nearly 8,000 American contractors have died. About 1,500 Western allied troops and 11,000 Syrians fighting ISIS have been killed. The Watson Institute figures that as many as 336,000 civilians have died, but that uses the very conservative numbers provided by the Iraq Body Count. The IBC counts 207,000 documented civilian deaths but admits that doubling the estimate would probably yield a more accurate figure. Two other respected surveys put the number of deaths in Iraq alone at nearly 700,000 and more than a million, though those figures have been contested.

More than a thousand aid workers and journalists have died, as well as up to 260,000 opposition fighters. Iraq is the costliest conflict overall, with as many as 308,000 dead (or 515,000 from doubling the IBC count). Syria cost 180,000 lives, Afghanistan 157,000, Yemen 90,000, and Pakistan 66,000.

Roughly 32,000 American military personnel have been wounded; some 300,000 suffer from PTSD or significant depression and even more have endured traumatic brain injuries. There are other human costs -- 4.5 million Iraqi refugees and millions more in other nations, as well as the destruction of Iraq's indigenous Christian community and persecution of other religious minorities. There has been widespread rape and other sexual violence. Civilians, including children, suffer from PTSD.

Even stopping the wars won't end the costs. Explained Nita Crawford of Boston University and co-director of Brown's Cost of War Project: "the total budgetary burden of the post-9/11 wars will continue to rise as the U.S. pays the on-going costs of veterans' care and for interest no borrowing to pay for the wars."

People would continue to die. Unexploded shells and bombs still turn up in Europe from World Wars I and II. In Afghanistan, virtually the entire country is a battlefield, filled with landmines, shells, bombs, and improvised explosive devices. Between 2001 and 2018, 5,442 Afghans were killed and 14,693 were wounded from unexploded ordnance. Some of these explosives predate American involvement, but the U.S. has contributed plenty over the last 18 years.

Moreover, the number of indirect deaths often exceeds battle-related casualties. Journalist and activist David Swanson noted an "estimate that to 480,000 direct deaths in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, one must add at least one million deaths in those countries indirectly caused by the recent and ongoing wars. This is because the wars have caused illnesses, injuries, malnutrition, homelessness, poverty, lack of social support, lack of healthcare, trauma, depression, suicide, refugee crises, disease epidemics, the poisoning of the environment, and the spread of small-scale violence." Consider Yemen, ravaged by famine and cholera. Most civilian casualties have resulted not from Saudi and Emirati bombing, but from the consequences of the bombing.

Only a naif would imagine that these wars will disappear absent a dramatic change in national leadership. Wrote Crawford: "The mission of the post-9/11 wars, as originally defined, was to defend the United States against future terrorist threats from al-Qaeda and affiliated organizations. Since 2001, the wars have expanded from the fighting in Afghanistan, to wars and smaller operations elsewhere, in more than 80 countries -- becoming a truly 'global war on terror'."

Yet every expansion of conflict makes the American homeland more, not less, vulnerable. Contrary to the nonsensical claim that if we don't occupy Afghanistan forever and overthrow Syria's Bashar al-Assad, al-Qaeda and ISIS will turn Chicago and Omaha into terrorist abattoirs, intervening in more conflicts and killing more foreigners creates additional terrorists at home and abroad. In this regard, drone campaigns are little better than invasions and occupations.

For instance, when questioned by the presiding judge in his trial, the failed 2010 Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, a U.S. citizen, cited the drone campaign in Pakistan. His colloquy with the judge was striking: "I'm going to plead guilty 100 times forward because until the hour the U.S. pulls its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan and stops the drone strikes in Somalia and Yemen and in Pakistan and stops the occupation of Muslim lands and stops Somalia and Yemen and in Pakistan, and stops the occupation of Muslim lands, and stops killing the Muslims."

Ajani Marwat, with the New York City Police Department's intelligence division, outlined Shahzad's perspective to The Guardian : "'It's American policies in his country.' 'We don't have to do anything to attract them,' a terrorist organizer in Lahore told me. 'The Americans and the Pakistani government do our work for us. With the drone attacks targeting the innocents who live in Waziristan and the media broadcasting this news all the time, the sympathies of most of the nation are always with us. Then it's simply a case of converting these sentiments into action'."

Washington does make an effort to avoid civilian casualties, but war will never be pristine. Combatting insurgencies inevitably harms innocents. Air and drone strikes rely on often unreliable informants. The U.S. employs "signature" strikes based on supposedly suspicious behavior. And America's allies, most notably the Saudis and Emiratis -- supplied, armed, guided, and until recently refueled by Washington -- make little if any effort to avoid killing noncombatants and destroying civilian infrastructure.

Thus will the cycle of terrorism and war continue. Yet which leading Democrats have expressed concern? Most complain that President Donald Trump is negotiating with North Korea, leaving Syria, and reducing force levels in Afghanistan. Congressional Democrats care about Yemen only because it has become Trump's war; there were few complaints under President Barack Obama.

What has Washington achieved after years of combat? Even the capitals of its client states are unsafe. The State Department warns travelers to Iraq that kidnapping is a risk and urges businessmen to hire private security. In Kabul, embassy officials now travel to the airport via helicopter rather than car.

Tulsi Gabbard is talking about what really matters. The bipartisan War Party has done its best to wreck America and plenty of other nations too. Gabbard is courageously challenging the Democrats in this coalition, who have become complicit in Washington's criminal wars.

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan. He is the author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire.


Alex (the one that likes Ike) 17 hours ago • edited

And, by the way, it's important to stress that Tulsi ain't picking at Her Majesty all of a sudden. It was the said majesty who has recently started picking at Tulsi first out of no reason, extrapolating that joke of Trump's "Russia's candidate" status on her as well.

Also, this:

People would continue to die. Unexploded shells and bombs still turn up in Europe from World Wars I and II. In Afghanistan, virtually the entire country is a battlefield, filled with
landmines, shells, bombs, and improvised explosive devices.


At least in Europe it is indeed shells and bombs, which are kind of big schmucks thus easily noticed when approached and then disarmed by engineers. While all over the Middle East it is first and foremost IEDs that can look like, virtually, anything starting from a hand grenade's size.

polistra24 Alex (the one that likes Ike) 5 hours ago
Good point that I hadn't thought about. Hillary is not only the war-starter abroad, she's the fight-starter here.
Kierkegaardian 16 hours ago
Because every dollar counts, I think that sums should always be written with all digits, like this
$6400000000000
Alex (the one that likes Ike) Kierkegaardian 5 hours ago
On one hand, you're right. On the other hand, the average neocon/neolib commenter who will come to enlighten us as to Russian agents behind the authorship of the article will be utmostly unable to read the damn thing. For such a feller it ain't gonna be much different from 5D21DBA0000.
Disqus10021 16 hours ago
You can read a summary of the Brown University study here: watson.brown.edu/costsofwar...

You can read a summary of a similar study published at Harvard University in 2013 here: www.hks.harvard.edu/publica...

Unfortunately, a lot of Americans in recent years were more concerned about gays getting married and poor women terminating their pregnancies.

At Thanksgiving dinner today, the conversation eventually turned to politics and more specifically, Ukraine. I asked the other diners if they knew who Victoria Nuland was and got blank stares. Most didn't know that Crimea had been part of the Russian Empire going back to 1783, which happens to be the year that the US was formally recognized as a separate country under the Treaty of Paris.

How big is $6.4 trillion? Enough to cover outstanding student loans about 4 times. Or enough to stabilize Social Security and Medicare for decades to come.

Clay Williams 16 hours ago
Wait...you think it's the DEMOCRATS who "appear abysmally unconcerned about the human and financial toll?" Wow.
Alex (the one that likes Ike) Clay Williams 5 hours ago
Yes, them. Exactly like their Republican twins.
Mark 9 hours ago
Mostly a very good article - but - what possible legitimate purpose was there invading Afghanistan ? This was the biggest war crime of the lot and you're still there. Afghanistan had nothing whatsoever to do with the New York plane attacks. It was a failed state and had the misfortune to have bin Laden and co supposedly holed up in the mountains there and unable to do much about it. Dealing with that required a specific police style action. Instead you carpet bombed Kabul to start and unleashed a frenzy of killing across the country. Unfortunately pretty much as a lot of us predicted around the middle of Sept 2001.

And where did you find Osama in the end ? Oh yeah, hiding in luxury in a Pakistan army town.

In response to the plane attacks you murdered countless thousands in an immiserated land and after another brain fart thought Iraq was a good idea because they had nothing to do with it either.

The only civilian plane to fly out of the US on Sept 11 2001 was carrying the Saudi Royal family back home. Almost all the plane terrorists were Saudi and Pakistan conspired against you continually. But you didn't have the guts or brains to take either of them on and instead picked in the weakest of the lot, Afghanistan followed by a nice flat country you'd already half destroyed and without nukes.

Apart from that, good article.

Daniel (not Larrison) Mark 4 hours ago
I'm not sure if it was a "failed state" at that point. True, we did not like the brutal Taliban to be in charge, but I don't think it had no effective central government. It did.
Frank Valente Mark 4 hours ago
It is hard not believe that 9/11 was the work of our own deep state and the Saudi Government....Patriot Act anyone????
appleDwight 7 hours ago
How clueless do you have to be to express antipathy towards Gabbard's stance and question "what really matters"? What do these idiots think is more important than policies that send our children to war?
Rappahannock IV 6 hours ago
"Senator Chris Murphy complained: "It's a little hard to figure out what itch she's trying to scratch in the Democratic Party right now.""

Couldn't agree more, Senator Chris. Most Democrats really like these pointless, endless, trillion dollar wars. They want to keep them going strong as long as possible, because there's nothing Democrats like better than staggeringly expensive government programs, and when it comes down to a choice
between being more frugal and getting Americans out of the Middle East on the one hand, or a big, juicy budget-busting festival of spending, refugee floods, and death on the other, there's no question where Chris Murphy and the Democratic Party stand.

As for Tulsi Gabbard, who does she think she's kidding? An anti-war Democrat? A fiscal restraint Democrat? A "focus on America not foreign wars" Democrat? Whoever heard of such a thing? She needs a new party, one that isn't run by billionaire elites serving corporate or foreign interests. Call it "the American Party", to distinguish it from the corrupt garbage offered by the globalist elites and foreign interests who run the Democrats and GOP.

Fran Macadam Rappahannock IV 5 hours ago
One military industrial lobbyist with a million bucks has a million times the influence of a million ordinary voters with one buck each.
Frank Valente Rappahannock IV 4 hours ago
I appreciate your silly tirade against the Democrats, hate to rain on your biased parade BUT it is BOTH corrupt political parties that perpetuate this senseless crusade! Both of these parties should be dismantled and banned!
Sid Finster 5 hours ago
The United States merely pays lip service to avoiding civilian casualties. Witness Mosul and Fallujah, to name but two recent examples.
Frank Valente 4 hours ago
Tulsi would make the best of all presidents but I am afraid the CIA working for the owner Oligarchs of the evil Military Industrial War Crime Complex would do the same thing they did to Kennedy so they could put a stooge in office to do their bidding.
kouroi 4 hours ago
All these wars weren't against terrorists and such. For a good strategist, that was the best opportunity to get in the Central Asia and plant your bases there under the belly of Iran, Russia, and China and start making mischief and prepare for the next phases. At that point, with the new man at helm in Moscow and China getting lift-off, it was clear that the planned take over of the entire world economy was not happening, so action needed to be taken.

As for the 6.4 trillion dollars and such, what should be clear to any with two brain cells between their ears is that the US has no intention to ever repay those loans, or any, at least not to foreigners. And is the duty of the American cogs to shed their blood for their betters' ever expanding profits.

Go Tulsi Go!

staircaseghost 3 hours ago
I could remind readers that Hillary Clinton is not now running for president and is not ever going to be president, but I know the TAC target demographic uses snarls about Hillary the way the rest of us use punctuation marks, so I guess I can let the gratuitous first-paragraph sneer slide.

Your representation of the Sen. Murphy quote is upside down, inside out, and completely obviates the rest of the article. He is not bemused that someone is trying to sell steaks to vegetarians. He is asking why she is trying to sell refrigerators to eskimos.

Meanwhile, her fellow Democrats appear abysmally unconcerned about the human and financial toll.

You... couldn't be bothered to spend even 15 seconds typing in a name of one of the Democratic frontrunners and the words "foreign policy" or "endless wars" into google?

I mean, no one was hiding something like this from you :

"From endless wars that strain military families to trade policies that crush our middle class, Washington's foreign policy today serves the wealthy and well-connected at the expense of everyone else... A strong military should act as a deterrent so that most of the time, we won't have to use it. We must continue to be vigilant about the threat of terrorism, but it's time to bring our troops home... That means cutting our bloated defense budget and ending the stranglehold of defense contractors on our military policy."

Mccormick47 3 hours ago
I'm well to the left of center, and I donated to Tulsi early in her campaign. So many conservatives have praised her that she's become suspect for people on the left. She's allowed herself to become a one issue candidate, and that's unworkable in a presidential campaign.

Her anti gay activities in the past are problematic, and although she identifies as a Hindu, there are claims she's or was member of a cult like group. It's very clear to me that the Evangelicals would attack her for her religion in any event. Tulsi will never be president, but I hope she continues her battle to end the forever war.

peter mcloughlin 3 hours ago
There is blindness across the political spectrum about the perilous state of the world. They do not see the similarities with 1914 and 1939. The situations are not identical, no two situations are. But the pattern is clear.
https://www.ghostsofhistory...

[Nov 28, 2019] Tulsi is capable of being a good president the first in decades in my opinion

Notable quotes:
"... Starting to remind me more and more of JFK. She's a natural at public speaking; I don't think I've ever seen her lost for words, and while she must have prepared herself for many of these questions. she launches immediately into her response and does not use recovery pauses like "Ummm " that break up the flow of her speech. She responds instantly and seemingly spontaneously, and delivers the whole message as a seamless package. ..."
Nov 25, 2019 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star November 25, 2019 at 11:52 am

https://www.youtube.com/embed/5ktOunMSzzw?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

Like Like

Patient Observer November 25, 2019 at 3:47 pm
Did she say she would not vote for impeachment? Up to recently, I thought that, while she was the best of a bunch of fakers, clowns and idiots, her lack of experience and toughness were fatal flaws..

However, her ongoing performances suggests to me that she is capable of being a good president – the first in decades in my opinion.

Like Like

Mark Chapman November 25, 2019 at 5:18 pm
Starting to remind me more and more of JFK. She's a natural at public speaking; I don't think I've ever seen her lost for words, and while she must have prepared herself for many of these questions. she launches immediately into her response and does not use recovery pauses like "Ummm " that break up the flow of her speech. She responds instantly and seemingly spontaneously, and delivers the whole message as a seamless package.

Hillary did her a huge favour by taking her on.

[Nov 28, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard Takes On Kamala On The Debate Stage

Nov 28, 2019 | www.youtube.com

Victor , 6 days ago

2:42 I find it funny that Kamala said that because if there is any candidate on that stage that "can speak to all people" it's definitely Tulsi. Conservatives actually appreciate and respect Tulsi Gabbard, even tho we disagree with her with just about everything, she actually does a good job speaking to both sides. She's the only candidate that shows respect to conservatives and isn't afraid to go on Fox News. Unlike Kamala. Conservatives do not like her and we know she doesn't care about us.

[Nov 27, 2019] Progressive journalist MSNBC doesn't try to hide 'contempt' towards Gabbard TheHill

Nov 27, 2019 | thehill.com

Progressive journalist Michael Tracey claimed Tuesday that MSNBC is has dropped all pretenses for their "contempt" towards Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii).

The political news contributor said the left-leaning network has treated her fellow 2020 Democratic candidates, including businessman Andrew Yang , and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) unfairly, but he argued that with Gabbard it, "crosses a certain threshold."

"Fundamentally they're beholden to whatever the market incentives are and right now it's within their market interests to depict Tulsi as an infiltrator, as a Trojan horse in the Democratic Party and not deal on the substance with what she's saying which is why over and over again they tar her as a Russian plant essentially," Tracey told Hill.TV.

"There's nobody who can really offer any kind countervailing view because it's just not economically advantageous for them at this point," he added.

MSNBC didn't immediately return Hill.TV's request for comment.

Tracey pointed to a fiery exchange between Gabbard and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) during last week's 2020 primary debate as a prime example.

During the debate, Harris accused Gabbard of being a conservative media darling and consistently going on Fox News to bash President Obama during his tenure.

"I think that it's unfortunate that we have someone on this stage who is attempting to be the Democratic nominee for president of the United States, who, during the Obama administration, spent four years full-time on Fox News criticizing President Obama," Harris said.

Gabbard dismissed the criticism, calling it "ridiculous."

The California senator also hit Gabbard over her meeting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who U.S. officials have accused of being a war criminal. Harris concluded her attack by saying that Democrats need a candidate who can take on President Trump as well as "bring the party and the nation together."

The back-and-forth came after Gabbard criticized the Democratic Party of fashioning outdated foreign policies "represented "by Hillary Clinton and others' foreign policy."

"Our Democratic Party unfortunately is not the party that is of, by and for the people. It is a party that has been and continues to be influenced by the foreign policy establishment in Washington, represented by Hillary Clinton and others' foreign policy, by the military industrial complex and other greedy, corporate interests," she said.

Leading up to the fifth Democratic debate, Gabbard engaged in a weeks-long feud with Clinton after the former Democratic presidential nominee said the Hawaii lawmaker was "the favorite of the Russians."

-- Tess Bonn

[Nov 27, 2019] If Sanders had some character he would run as an independent with Tulsi

Nov 27, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

james , Nov 26 2019 22:58 utc | 20

'thanks b.. looking at the theatre, it seems dems have backed themselves into a corner... meanwhile obama wants to ca-bosh sanders... You know if Sanders had some character he would run as an independent with Tulsi.. but you all know that stands a snowball chance in hell.. the problem with conformists, is they spend too much time conforming and that doesn't end up serving anyone.. and it is the reason trump got elected - he is not a conformist.. self centered narcissist, yes, but conformist - no.. too bad about american leadership being persona non grata...

what i don't understand is why bernie doesn't run as an independent? if he is so great and would be great for the usa, why can't he figure this basic picture out? this is why i give merit to jackrabbit sometimes - it is all political theatre and they are all in it together raping the common people..

[Nov 26, 2019] Tulsi, warrior princess by Alligator Ed

Notable quotes:
"... She's tough, smart, and amazingly strong psychologically. That's exactly the kind of person you want on point. ..."
"... TLA "have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you" -- Schumer ..."
"... Not out of line to presume the JFK way is one of those six . . . https://duckduckgo.com/?q=schumer+trump+six+ways+sunday ..."
Nov 22, 2019 | caucus99percent.com

This message is brought to you thanks to the efforts of the combined staffs of the History and Sociology Departments of Alligator University.

This year of our Lord, the holy Flying Spaghetti Monster 2019, we have discovered a legend--a living, fire-breathing legend at that. Not since the days of Boudica , a warrior Queen, has the earth seen such a warrior. Not surpassed by Jean d Árc nor Katherine the Great. This warrior of the wireless age has not only exhibited compassion on the battlefield, as befits a person of high honor, but has the uncanny ability to perform as the best of Generals (not just Majors) throughout recorded history have done. Know wherein lies the enemy. Know your own strengths. Know your own weaknesses. When engaging the enemy, do not hold back. Fight to win! Win as big as you can, while sparing needless damage.

Tulsi, our subject (and [bias apparent here] champion), has arisen, almost from the sea. Far to the West across the Great Water, from islands spewed from the mouths of living volcanoes, emerged, almost as an eruption, our Warrior Princess Tulsi. She fought to defend her tribe by joining a council of the advisers, then abandoning such sedentary life and chosing battle instead. Fighting with distinction, Tulsi saved the lives of many fellow soldiers. Her counsel proved both wise and humane. Troops and others recognized Tulsi's emerging greatness, coupled with compassion.

To the delight of her cadre, Tulsi sallied forth to the land known today as The Great Swamp. Chauvinistically however, I believe my south Florida estuary is the true Great Swamp. But we shall leave that debate to a later time.

She joined a regiment called the DNC. At first it seemed to Tulsi this to be a desirable posting, surrounded by fields and rivers with pleasing structures in which to live. Continuing her steady progress up the ranks, our Warrior Princess, as yet untested by actual combat, joined others to high councils of War and of Foreign trysts.

But only a few years had yet to pass during her service, Tulsi sensed some problems in the command chain. Plans seemed to favor neither Nation nor Military, but instead the commanders themselves. Upon thus learning, Tulsi resigned her position, abandoning the ill-disposed regiment, seeking mission achievement over promotion.

A loosely knit Brigade, called the Democratic Party, united by the power of money and of power itself, was to become the default posting of TWP. Unfortunately the chain of command was rent asunder by internal factions, an unholy tug of war resulting. This war is still actively contested--we are in a state of war.

[Injection of unpaid political endorsement, not approved by TWP] Folks, we need this brave general to lead.

Contesting amongst others for the ultimate Brigade command was Tulsi and 21 22 (23?) others. The concept grew either too tiresome or expensive for many contestants, who either became sick or perished from fatigue and/or loneliness. The field of battle was becoming clarified, gaining Tulsi progressively improving evaluation and appropriate planning for future campaigns.

The First Slain Enemy, Olaf the Oaf

From the gentle hills and scattered forests of Ohionia came Olaf. Initially he was known as Olaf the Ogre; until he was slain by sword blows from Warrior Tulsi. Description of her foe is warranted. Her foe was a giant, tall and strong. But Olaf was neither quick of wit nor of foot. Large he was, as said. The ground would rumble beneath his foot steps. Trees were bent aside as he strode unstoppably through the woods. Local dwellers both feared and respected Olaf, the mighty.

The battle: the setting is on a level plain under illumination of many cell phones torches soon after sunset. Other contestants on the field have agreed that only two contestants combat each other. Female referees would enforce rules of combat.

Tulsi and Olaf faced each other. In his ponderous way, Olaf declared his desire to engage. With that, Warrior Tulsi swiftly smote his pate with a mighty broadsword blow. Owing to the thickness of Olaf's cranium, the sound of the resultant impact was heard for miles. Yea, more than a thousand miles some say. Rending Olaf's pulsating brain irreversibly damaged, the Oaf staggered from battleground, only to succumbing to his wounds months later.

Not being particularly fond of Olaf, I did not check the source of the following: it is estimated that 30 people attended his internment, including undertakers.

Yet the Campaign had only just begun. More foes to conquer.

Second Casualty: Klammer the Camel

Venturing forth from the Kingdom of Kalifornication comes (but not for very long) the former Lord High Executioner, Klammer the Camel. Since Klammer is of mixed parentage, it is unsure whether Klammer is a Dromedary (one hump camel) or a two hump Bactrian camel. It is recorded that an expert on Klammer's humping is retired statesman Willie Brown.

It is said said that Klammer's exhalations could kill enemies at 10 paces. Yet Klammer's best weapon was heaving heavy Criminal Code books at her victims. Strangely, Klammer looked reasonably fit in her drab clothing. Foes who faced her in battle have noted how white Klammer's teeth are as she gnashes at them. She had a strange reaction to cannabis. When others utilized the substance, she raged and destroyed them, if she could reach them. Yet when she herself inhaled the aroma of such burning vegetation, she became as if in a trance.

The battlefield: very much like the field upon which brave Tulsi slew the Oaf, at night with many candles burning held by acolytes of various contestants. Once again, only two were allowed combat at a time. Supremely self-confident of victory, flush with self-satisfaction after inflicting a minor wound on former vice-king JoJo the Far Gone. Klammer first engaged other contestants, smirking from her presumed victories. Now brimming with confidence bordering on hubris, Klammer stood her ground. Then, in a well-planned straight ahead frontal attack, delivered with swiftness and ferocity, Tulsi struck her foe. And struck her. While Klammer lay quivering on the ground, TWP demanded an apology of her for her past sins. When none was evinced, Tulsi stuck the tip of her blade into Klammer's seeming impenetrable armor. This wound, though not immediately fatal, nevertheless is proving fatal to the now debilitated Klammer. Klammer attempted a counter-attack at another field before falling slack-jawed after a mere glare from Tulsi. Not yet dead, but soon.

Third Casualty: Boots the Jiggler

Wandering from a land not far from the home of Olaf, proceeds the Stolid Boots. He sets his sights on new lands to conquer. The city he leaves is burning and being plundered by wandering Mnuchkins from the neighboring fiefdom of Illinois. Unconcerned with the plight of the subjects of the Boots' prior management, Boots bravely strides forth, still not battle-tested. He gathers with him followers, some of whom are loyal, while others need financial encouragement to participate in his campaign.

Boots has been gifted with the ability to speak so eloquently and at such length that those auditioners of his monologues are both amazed and yet unable to understand the essence of Boots' message.

The battlefield: interestingly quite similar to those upon which Tulsi administered the blows dispatching the Oaf and crippling the Camel. Once again, remaining combatants aligned to watch two of their number engage upon combat.

Boots, buoyed by the support of his entourage, summoned forth 400 of his Southern Army to aid in his battle. There Boots turned upon Tulsi, promising to not only to vanquish her by his superior generalship but send troops across the Southern border. But, becoming anxious of TWP, he turned to assay his retinue of 400. But lo, none remained, most not having left the barracks.

In face-to-face combat Boots met Tulsi. Mutually acknowledging their military experience, Tulsi struck blows into the Jiggler. This assault froze Boots into place, unable to respond. The above picture of Boots was made immediately after a biting blow from Tulsi's broadsword. He was heard to mumble something like "Et tu, Tulsi?".

. . . . .

Campaigns against larger enemies are soon to come. One looming conflict may be likened to a civil war against Brooklyn Bernie which hopefully be short. A battle against the Hokey Okie is inevitable.

Our AU colleagues assure me that the Feared Medusa will enter the fray after more rivals have fallen. The Snake-head leads a mighty army, most of whom are oddly cyborg-like. Bots I think they call them. Hilbots actually.

A musical coda is appropriate here. A good choice is a warning, an admonition to those contemplating with the Warrior Princess.

www.youtube.com/embed/lK3Oc6HD4xU?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

Centaurea on Sat, 11/23/2019 - 12:41am

Warrior Tulsi

has massive cojones .

She's tough, smart, and amazingly strong psychologically. That's exactly the kind of person you want on point.

lotlizard on Sat, 11/23/2019 - 9:39pm
TLA "have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you" -- Schumer

@The Voice In the Wilderness

TLA = "Three Letter Agencies" = shorthand for the so-called "intelligence community"

Schumer = Senator Charles "Chuck" Schumer (D–NY), Senate Minority Leader

Not out of line to presume the JFK way is one of those six . . . https://duckduckgo.com/?q=schumer+trump+six+ways+sunday

[Nov 25, 2019] Tulsi, warrior princess caucus99percent

Nov 25, 2019 | caucus99percent.com

Tulsi, warrior princess

Alligator Ed on Fri, 11/22/2019 - 8:53pm This message is brought to you thanks to the efforts of the combined staffs of the History and Sociology Departments of Alligator University.

This year of our Lord, the holy Flying Spaghetti Monster 2019, we have discovered a legend--a living, fire-breathing legend at that. Not since the days of Boudica , a warrior Queen, has the earth seen such a warrior. Not surpassed by Jean d Árc nor Katherine the Great. This warrior of the wireless age has not only exhibited compassion on the battlefield, as befits a person of high honor, but has the uncanny ability to perform as the best of Generals (not just Majors) throughout recorded history have done. Know wherein lies the enemy. Know your own strengths. Know your own weaknesses. When engaging the enemy, do not hold back. Fight to win! Win as big as you can, while sparing needless damage.

Tulsi, our subject (and [bias apparent here] champion), has arisen, almost from the sea. Far to the West across the Great Water, from islands spewed from the mouths of living volcanoes, emerged, almost as an eruption, our Warrior Princess Tulsi. She fought to defend her tribe by joining a council of the advisers, then abandoning such sedentary life and chosing battle instead. Fighting with distinction, Tulsi saved the lives of many fellow soldiers. Her counsel proved both wise and humane. Troops and others recognized Tulsi's emerging greatness, coupled with compassion.

To the delight of her cadre, Tulsi sallied forth to the land known today as The Great Swamp. Chauvinistically however, I believe my south Florida estuary is the true Great Swamp. But we shall leave that debate to a later time.

She joined a regiment called the DNC. At first it seemed to Tulsi this to be a desirable posting, surrounded by fields and rivers with pleasing structures in which to live. Continuing her steady progress up the ranks, our Warrior Princess, as yet untested by actual combat, joined others to high councils of War and of Foreign trysts.

But only a few years had yet to pass during her service, Tulsi sensed some problems in the command chain. Plans seemed to favor neither Nation nor Military, but instead the commanders themselves. Upon thus learning, Tulsi resigned her position, abandoning the ill-disposed regiment, seeking mission achievement over promotion.

A loosely knit Brigade, called the Democratic Party, united by the power of money and of power itself, was to become the default posting of TWP. Unfortunately the chain of command was rent asunder by internal factions, an unholy tug of war resulting. This war is still actively contested--we are in a state of war.

[Injection of unpaid political endorsement, not approved by TWP] Folks, we need this brave general to lead.

Contesting amongst others for the ultimate Brigade command was Tulsi and 21 22 (23?) others. The concept grew either too tiresome or expensive for many contestants, who either became sick or perished from fatigue and/or loneliness. The field of battle was becoming clarified, gaining Tulsi progressively improving evaluation and appropriate planning for future campaigns.

The First Slain Enemy, Olaf the Oaf

From the gentle hills and scattered forests of Ohionia came Olaf. Initially he was known as Olaf the Ogre; until he was slain by sword blows from Warrior Tulsi. Description of her foe is warranted. Her foe was a giant, tall and strong. But Olaf was neither quick of wit nor of foot. Large he was, as said. The ground would rumble beneath his foot steps. Trees were bent aside as he strode unstoppably through the woods. Local dwellers both feared and respected Olaf, the mighty.

The battle: the setting is on a level plain under illumination of many cell phones torches soon after sunset. Other contestants on the field have agreed that only two contestants combat each other. Female referees would enforce rules of combat.

Tulsi and Olaf faced each other. In his ponderous way, Olaf declared his desire to engage. With that, Warrior Tulsi swiftly smote his pate with a mighty broadsword blow. Owing to the thickness of Olaf's cranium, the sound of the resultant impact was heard for miles. Yea, more than a thousand miles some say. Rending Olaf's pulsating brain irreversibly damaged, the Oaf staggered from battleground, only to succumbing to his wounds months later.

Not being particularly fond of Olaf, I did not check the source of the following: it is estimated that 30 people attended his internment, including undertakers.

Yet the Campaign had only just begun. More foes to conquer.

Second Casualty: Klammer the Camel

Venturing forth from the Kingdom of Kalifornication comes (but not for very long) the former Lord High Executioner, Klammer the Camel. Since Klammer is of mixed parentage, it is unsure whether Klammer is a Dromedary (one hump camel) or a two hump Bactrian camel. It is recorded that an expert on Klammer's humping is retired statesman Willie Brown.

It is said said that Klammer's exhalations could kill enemies at 10 paces. Yet Klammer's best weapon was heaving heavy Criminal Code books at her victims. Strangely, Klammer looked reasonably fit in her drab clothing. Foes who faced her in battle have noted how white Klammer's teeth are as she gnashes at them. She had a strange reaction to cannabis. When others utilized the substance, she raged and destroyed them, if she could reach them. Yet when she herself inhaled the aroma of such burning vegetation, she became as if in a trance.

The battlefield: very much like the field upon which brave Tulsi slew the Oaf, at night with many candles burning held by acolytes of various contestants. Once again, only two were allowed combat at a time. Supremely self-confident of victory, flush with self-satisfaction after inflicting a minor wound on former vice-king JoJo the Far Gone. Klammer first engaged other contestants, smirking from her presumed victories. Now brimming with confidence bordering on hubris, Klammer stood her ground. Then, in a well-planned straight ahead frontal attack, delivered with swiftness and ferocity, Tulsi struck her foe. And struck her. While Klammer lay quivering on the ground, TWP demanded an apology of her for her past sins. When none was evinced, Tulsi stuck the tip of her blade into Klammer's seeming impenetrable armor. This wound, though not immediately fatal, nevertheless is proving fatal to the now debilitated Klammer. Klammer attempted a counter-attack at another field before falling slack-jawed after a mere glare from Tulsi. Not yet dead, but soon.

Third Casualty: Boots the Jiggler

Wandering from a land not far from the home of Olaf, proceeds the Stolid Boots. He sets his sights on new lands to conquer. The city he leaves is burning and being plundered by wandering Mnuchkins from the neighboring fiefdom of Illinois. Unconcerned with the plight of the subjects of the Boots' prior management, Boots bravely strides forth, still not battle-tested. He gathers with him followers, some of whom are loyal, while others need financial encouragement to participate in his campaign.

Boots has been gifted with the ability to speak so eloquently and at such length that those auditioners of his monologues are both amazed and yet unable to understand the essence of Boots' message.

The battlefield: interestingly quite similar to those upon which Tulsi administered the blows dispatching the Oaf and crippling the Camel. Once again, remaining combatants aligned to watch two of their number engage upon combat.

Boots, buoyed by the support of his entourage, summoned forth 400 of his Southern Army to aid in his battle. There Boots turned upon Tulsi, promising to not only to vanquish her by his superior generalship but send troops across the Southern border. But, becoming anxious of TWP, he turned to assay his retinue of 400. But lo, none remained, most not having left the barracks.

In face-to-face combat Boots met Tulsi. Mutually acknowledging their military experience, Tulsi struck blows into the Jiggler. This assault froze Boots into place, unable to respond. The above picture of Boots was made immediately after a biting blow from Tulsi's broadsword. He was heard to mumble something like "Et tu, Tulsi?".

. . . . .

Campaigns against larger enemies are soon to come. One looming conflict may be likened to a civil war against Brooklyn Bernie which hopefully be short. A battle against the Hokey Okie is inevitable.

Our AU colleagues assure me that the Feared Medusa will enter the fray after more rivals have fallen. The Snake-head leads a mighty army, most of whom are oddly cyborg-like. Bots I think they call them. Hilbots actually.

A musical coda is appropriate here. A good choice is a warning, an admonition to those contemplating with the Warrior Princess.

//www.youtube.com/embed/lK3Oc6HD4xU?modestbranding=0&html5=1&rel=0&autoplay=0&wmode=opaque&loop=0&controls=1&autohide=0&showinfo=0&theme=dark&color=red&enablejsapi=0

Centaurea on Sat, 11/23/2019 - 12:41am
Warrior Tulsi

has massive cojones .

She's tough, smart, and amazingly strong psychologically. That's exactly the kind of person you want on point.

[Nov 25, 2019] Chris Matthews Asks Gabbard Why Are So Many Democrats War Hawks

Notable quotes:
"... Why were they hawks? ..."
"... "Yeah," Tulsi answers. "I point to two things. One is you have the foreign policy establishment and the military-industrial complex in Washington that carries such a huge amount of influence over both parties." ..."
"... She continues, "There are campaign contributions, the influence that these contractors have in this pay-to-play culture , this corrupt culture in Washington, but you also just have people who don't understand foreign policy and who lack the experience to make these critical decisions that impact our lives and the safety and security of the American people. This is so serious about what's at stake here." ..."
"... Democratic presidential primary debate, Wednesday, Nov. 20, 2019, in Atlanta, via the AP. ..."
Nov 24, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

In a rare moment with MSNBC's Chris Matthews, Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard explained why the leading figures in her party are war hawks. Far from days of the Democrats feigning to have any semblance of an 'anti-war' platform (only convenient for Liberal activism during the Bush years, but fizzling out under Obama), today's party attempts to out-hawk Republicans at every turn.

"I'm looking at the Democratic establishment figures," Matthews introduced, "people I normally like. John Kerry, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton. You go down the list. They all supported the war in Iraq. Why were they hawks? " (Though we might ask, what do you mean, " were ?"). "Why so many Democrats with a party that's not hawkish, why are so many of their leaders hawks?" Matthews reiterated.

In the segment, Matthews heaps rare praise on Tulsi for being "out there all alone tonight fighting against the neocons."

me title=

"Yeah," Tulsi answers. "I point to two things. One is you have the foreign policy establishment and the military-industrial complex in Washington that carries such a huge amount of influence over both parties."

She continues, "There are campaign contributions, the influence that these contractors have in this pay-to-play culture , this corrupt culture in Washington, but you also just have people who don't understand foreign policy and who lack the experience to make these critical decisions that impact our lives and the safety and security of the American people. This is so serious about what's at stake here."

Democratic presidential primary debate, Wednesday, Nov. 20, 2019, in Atlanta, via the AP. NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Please enter a valid email Thank you for subscribing! Something went wrong. Please refresh and try again.

The interview happened immediately after this week's fifth Democratic debate Wednesday night in Atlanta, and after pundits have continued to complain that Gabbard is a 'single issue candidate'.

However, is there any candidate in her party or in the GOP saying these things?

We find ourselves in a rare moment of agreement with MSNBC's Matthews: she is "out there all alone tonight fighting against the neocons." Tags Politics

[Nov 24, 2019] Elizabeth Warren Soft-Pedals Far-Right Bolivia Coup

Nov 24, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

Drew Hunkins , November 21, 2019 at 15:32

Hopefully Kamala Harris never sniffs the White House, we'd all die in a nuclear war. Her pathetic and stupid swipes at the courageous and brilliant Tulsi Gabbard last night in the debates were something to cringe at.

[Nov 24, 2019] It Was A Coup. Period -- Tulsi Gabbard Slams US Interference In Bolivia

Nov 22, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

"It Was A Coup. Period": Tulsi Gabbard Slams US 'Interference' In Bolivia

Democratic Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard has come out swinging on Bolivia, following an initial period of being silent and reflection on the issue after leftist President Evo Morales was forced to step down on November 10 over growing anger at election irregularities, whereupon he was given political asylum in Mexico.

"What happened in Bolivia is a coup. Period," Gabbard wrote on Twitter in the early hours of Friday while warning against any US interference.

"The United States and other countries should not be interfering in the Bolivian people's pursuit of self-determination and right to choose their own government, " she argued.

Washington had been quick to endorse and recognize opposition senator Jeanine Anez as 'interim president' after she controversially declared herself such without a senatorial quorum or public vote, and as Morales' Movement for Socialism was said to be barred from the senate building when it happened.

Gabbard's statement, which again sets her far apart from a large field of establishment and centrist candidates on foreign policy issues , comes a few days after Bernie Sanders was the first to condemn the events which led to Evo's ouster as a military coup.

"When the military intervened and asked President Evo Morales to leave, in my view, that's called a coup," Sanders tweeted Monday, while linking to a video showing Bolivian security forces dispersing an indigenous pro-Morales protest using a volley of tear gas canisters.

Meanwhile, in a new interview with Russian media this week, Evo Morales said the right-leaning Organization of American States (OAS), which had initially cited "clear manipulations" in the voting surrounding his controversial re-election to a fourth term, played a prime role in deposing him, and that ultimately Bolivia's huge reserves of lithium were being eyed by the United States and its right-wing Latin American allies .

"The OAS made a decision and its report is not based on a technical report, but on a political decision," Evo told RT in the interview from Mexico.

Addressing his country's most valued natural resource, he said, "In Bolivia we could define the price of lithium for the world...Now I have realized that some industrialized countries do not want competition" -- while implying Washington had helped engineer his downfall.

Most estimates put the impoverished country's Lithium supply at about 60% of the world's known reserves .

The White House in the days after Evo's ouster had called it a "significant moment for democracy in the Western Hemisphere"; however, the now exiled former president described it as "the sneakiest, most nefarious coup in history."

* * *

Watch key moments of the translated RT interview below:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZY1fIwFkSvQ

[Nov 23, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard, is being viciously slandered in article after article in neoliberal MSM

Nov 23, 2019 | www.unz.com

Durruti , says: November 22, 2019 at 5:57 pm GMT

Taken together, those twin hasbara refrains evoke a notion of divine punishment. JFK and RFK were punished for the sins of their Jew-hating, Nazi-loving father. Mind you, it was Yahweh who took vengeance, not Israel!

Brilliant article by Guyenot. Thoroughly well written & informative.

I note in passing:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/democratic-establishment-reaches-boiling-point-with-tulsi-gabbard/ar-BBX8P8S?li=BBnb7Kz

A Congresswoman, Tulsi Gabbard, is being viciously slandered in article after article in the Mainstream (Zionist) Media. Read the diatribe carefully, and learn some of how the People are misdirected-brainwashed.

Ms. Gabbard is, apparently, leading in the Polls, and the Zionist controller Power Elite are Panicky. They will do to Ms. Gabbard what they did to Ron Paul, and his campaign.

It is a sense of frustration that We-I are not able to Revenge the murder of our last Constitutional President, John F. Kennedy, the Destruction of our Republic, the millions of murders from November 22, 1963, to the present, or to effectively defend & protect this noble lady (Ms. Gabbard).

If we protect her, we protect ourselves and our Country. Freedom is not free. We must Pay for i t!

God Bless America!

Durruti

[Nov 23, 2019] NYTimes Pans Cult Leader Gabbard's White Pant Suit After Praising Hillary For Same Outfit

Notable quotes:
"... Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News, ..."
"... My favorite paragraph from the NYT article depicting Tulsi as a fringe, divisive cult leader because she wears white pants suits - by the same author and paper who heaped praise on how Hillary's white pants suit shows she's ready to carry the nuclear codes. ..."
Nov 23, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

Green Greenwald

My favorite paragraph from the NYT article depicting Tulsi as a fringe, divisive cult leader because she wears white pants suits - by the same author and paper who heaped praise on how Hillary's white pants suit shows she's ready to carry the nuclear codes.

Her white suits are not the white suits of Ms. Clinton, nor even the white of Ms. Williamson, whose early appearances in the shadeoften seemed tied to her wellness gospel and ideas of renewal and rebirth. Rather, they are the white of avenging angels and flaming swords, of somewhat combative righteousness (also cult leaders').

And that kind of association, though it can be weirdly compelling, is also not really community building. It sets someone apart, rather than joining others together. It has connotations of the fringe, rather than the center.

A New York Times writer who praised Hillary Clinton for wearing a white pantsuit called Tulsi Gabbard a "cult leader" for wearing exactly the same thing.

[Nov 15, 2019] Tulsi at 6, Kamala at 1. Glorious!

Nov 12, 2019 | www.youtube.com

Krystal Ball describes the boost Tulsi Gabbard's campaign has gained from Clinton's attack on her.


poofendorf , 3 days ago

HRC is a BRILLIANT strategist...first for Trump and now for Tulsi.

XA , 3 days ago

she's right about hillary being a war mongerer

Rob Brown , 2 days ago

I would NOT want to find myself inside of Tulsi's crosshairs. She is dynamic!

Ron Ryan , 3 days ago

Tulsi's the only Dem that's worth a damn.

Dilip Patel , 3 days ago

Behar and her gaggle got owned hard by Tulsi! It was so joyful to watch!

[Nov 15, 2019] Tulsi is in for the next debate

Nov 15, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

"DNC Announces 10 Candidates in Atlanta Democratic Debate" [ Bloomberg ]. Joe Biden, Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Tulsi Gabbard, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, Tom Steyer, Elizabeth Warren and Andrew Yang. And not Julian Castro, sadly. "The forum will be co-hosted by the Washington Post and MSNBC. Candidates will be questioned by four female moderators: Rachel Maddow, Andrea Mitchell and Kristen Welker from the network, and Ashley Parker from the Post. The two-hour event had a higher bar to qualify than previous debates. Candidates must have contributions from 165,000 donors, up from 135,000. And the donors must be geographically dispersed, with a minimum of 600 per state in at least 20 states. In addition, participants must either show 3% support in four qualifying national or single-state polls, or have at least 5% support in two qualifying single-state polls released between Sept. 13 and Nov. 13 in the early nominating states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina or Nevada."

[Nov 12, 2019] The best argument for voting for young beautiful women as POTUS

Nov 12, 2019 | www.unz.com

Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque , says: November 12, 2019 at 4:39 pm GMT

@The Alarmist

The emperor is naked

That is the best argument for voting for young beautiful women as POTUS.

[Nov 11, 2019] The truth is that for the Clintonite-Bushite elite almost all Americans are 'deplorable'.

Notable quotes:
"... The truth is that for the Clintonite-Bushite elite almost all Americans are 'deplorable'. What is fun for them is to play geopolitics – the elite version of corporate travel perks – just look at how shocked they are that Trump is not playing along. ..."
Nov 11, 2019 | www.unz.com

Beckow , says: November 9, 2019 at 12:47 pm GMT

Recent class history of US is quite simple: the elite class first tried to shift the burden of supporting the lower classes on the middle class with taxation. But as the lower class became demographically distinct, partially via mass immigration, the elites decided to ally with the ' underpriviledged ' via identity posturing and squeeze no longer needed middle class out of existence.

What's left are government employees, a few corporate sinecures, NGO parasitic sector, and old people. The rest will be melded into a few mutually antagonistic tribal groups providing ever cheaper service labor. With an occasional lottery winner to showcase mobility. Actually very similar to what happened in Latin America in the past few centuries.

The truth is that for the Clintonite-Bushite elite almost all Americans are 'deplorable'. What is fun for them is to play geopolitics – the elite version of corporate travel perks – just look at how shocked they are that Trump is not playing along.

alexander , says: November 9, 2019 at 11:38 am GMT
BUILDING OUT vs. BLOWING UP

China 2000-2020 vs. USA 2000-2020

Unlike the USA (under Neocon stewardship) China has not squandered twenty trillion dollars of its national solvency bombing countries which never attacked it post 9-11.

China's leaders (unlike our own) never LIED its people into launching obscenely expensive, illegal wars of aggression across the middle east. (WMD's, Mushroom clouds, Yellow Cake, etc.)

China has used its wealth and resources to build up its infrastructure, build out its capital markets, and turbo charge its high tech sectors. As a consequence, it has lifted nearly half a billion people out of poverty. There has been an explosion in the growth of the "middle class" in China. Hundreds of millions of Chinese are now living comfortable "upwardly mobile" lives.

The USA, on the other hand, having been defrauded by its "ruling elites" into launching and fighting endless illegal wars, is now 23 trillion dollars in catastrophic debt.
NOT ONE PENNY of this heinous "overspending" has been dedicated to building up OUR infrastructure, or BUILDING OUT our middle class.

It has all gone into BLOWING UP countries which never (even) attacked us on 9-11.

As a consequence , the USA is fast becoming a failed nation, a nation where all its wealth is being siphoned into the hands of its one percent "war pilfer-teers".

It is so sad to have grown up in such an amazing country , with such immense resources and possibilities, and having to bear witness to it going down the tubes.

To watch all our sovereign wealth being vaporized by our "lie us into endless illegal war" ruling elites is truly heartbreaking.

It is as shameful as it is tragic.

SafeNow , says: November 9, 2019 at 6:01 pm GMT
That's fascinating about the declining "middle class" usage. A "soft synonym" that has gone in the opposite direction, I think, is "the community."
LoutishAngloQuebecker , says: November 9, 2019 at 6:31 pm GMT
The white middle class is the only group that might effectively resist Globohomo's designs on total power.

Blacks? Too dumb. Will be disposed of once Globohomo is finished the job.
Hispanics? Used to corrupt one party systems. Give them cerveza and Netflix and they're good.
East Asians? Perfectly fine with living like bug people.
South Asians? Cowardly; will go with the flow.

The middle class is almost completely unique to white people.

Racial aliens cannot wrap their minds around being middle class. They think I'm crazy for appreciating my 2009 Honda Accord. They literally cannot understand why somebody would want to live a frugal and mundane life. They are desperate to be like Drake but most end up broke. It will be very easy for GloboHomo to control a bucket of poor brown slop.

Svevlad , says: November 9, 2019 at 6:32 pm GMT
Ah yes, apparatchiks. The worst kind of person
Counterinsurgency , says: November 9, 2019 at 7:36 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman

There IS a black middle class, but a big chunk of that works for governments of all shapes and sizes.

Strictly speaking, there is no more "middle class" in the sense of the classical economists: a person with just enough capital to live off the income if he works the capital himself or herself. By this definition professionals (lawyers, dentists, physicians, small store owners, even spinsters [1] and hand loom operators in a sense) were middle class. Upper class had enough property to turn it over to managers, lower class had little or no property and worked for others (servants and farm workers, for example). Paupers didn't earn enough income per year to feed themselves and didn't live all that long, usually.

What we have is "middle income" people, almost all of whom work as an employee of some organization -- people who would be considered "lower class" by the classical economists because they don't have freedom of action and make no independent decisions about how the capital of their organizations is spent. Today they are considered "intelligentsia", educated government workers, or, by analogy, educated corporate workers. IMHO, intelligentsia is a suicide job, and is responsible for the depressed fertility rate, but that's just me.

Back in the AD 1800s and pre-AD 1930 there were many black middle class people. usually concentrating on selling to black clientele. Now there are effectively none outside of criminal activities, usually petty criminal. And so it goes.

Of course, back then there were many white middle class people also, usually concentrating on selling to white clientele. Now there are effectively none, except in some rural areas. And so it goes.

Counterinsurgency

1] Cottagers who made their living spinning wool skeins into wool threads.

Mark G. , says: November 9, 2019 at 8:20 pm GMT
@unit472 A lot of the middle class are Democrats but not particularly liberal. Many of them vote Democrat only when they personally benefit. For example, my parents were suburban public school teachers. They voted for Democrats at the state level because the Democrats supported better pay and benefits for teachers but voted for Republicans like Goldwater and Reagan at the national level because Republicans would keep their federal taxes lower. They had no political philosophy. It was all about what left them financially better off. My parents also got on well with their suburban neighbors. Suburbanites generally like their local school system and its teachers and the suburban school systems are usually careful not to engage in teaching anything controversial. A lot of the government employed white middle class would be like my parents. Except in situations where specific Republicans talk about major cuts to their pay and pensions they are perfectly willing to consider voting Republican. They are generally social moderates, like the status quo, are fairly traditionalist and don't want any radical changes. Since the Democrats seem be trending in a radical direction, this would put off a lot of them. Trump would be more appealing as the status quo candidate. When running the last time, he carefully avoided talking about any major cuts in government spending and he's governed that way too. At the same time, his talk of cutting immigration, his lack of enthusiasm for nonwhite affirmative action, and his more traditional views on social issues is appealing to the white middle class.
anon [201] • Disclaimer , says: November 9, 2019 at 8:33 pm GMT
Wealth held by the top 1% is now close to equal or greater than wealth held by the entire middle class.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-09/one-percenters-close-to-surpassing-wealth-of-u-s-middle-class

Something similar was seen in the 1890's, the "gilded age". This is one reason why Warren's "wealth tax" has traction among likely voters.

WorkingClass , says: November 9, 2019 at 11:55 pm GMT
The term middle class is used in the U.S. to mean middle income. It has nothing to do with class. Why not just say what you mean? Most of the middle class that we say is disappearing is really that rarest of phenomenons. A prosperous working class. The prosperous American working class is no longer prosperous due to the Neoliberal agenda. Free trade, open borders and the financialization of everything.

Americans know nothing of class dynamics. Not even the so called socialists. They don't even see the economy. All they see is people with infinite need and government with infinite wealth. In their world all of Central America can come to the U.S. and the government (if it only wants to) can give them all homes, health care and education.

Lets stop saying class when we mean income. Not using the word class would be better than abusing it.

Anyway. Yes. Middle Class denotes white people. The coalition of the fringes is neither working, middle nor ruling class. They are black or brown. They are perverts or feminists. If the workers among them identified as working class they would find common ground with the Deplorables. We can't have that now can we.

Rosie , says: November 10, 2019 at 2:21 am GMT
@Audacious Epigone

Are we to the point where we've collectively resigned ourselves to the death of the middle class?

In the neoliberal worldview, the middle class is illegitimate, existing only as a consequence of artificial trade and immigration barriers. Anytime Americans are spied out making a good living, there is a "shortage" that must be addressed with more visas. Or else there is an "inefficiency" where other countries could provide said service or produce said product for less because they have a "comparative advantage."

Rosie , says: November 10, 2019 at 2:25 am GMT
@WorkingClass

Anyway. Yes. Middle Class denotes white people. The coalition of the fringes is neither working, middle nor ruling class. They are black or brown. They are perverts or feminists. If the workers among them identified as working class they would find common ground with the Deplorables. We can't have that now can we.

I don't know about that anymore. Increasingly, "middle class" means Asian, with Whiteness being associated with the lower middle class (or perhaps "working class"). Sometimes the media uses the term " noncollege Whites," which I think is actually very apt. They are the ones who identify with Whiteness the most.

[Nov 09, 2019] Are You Calling Me Stupid Gabbard Rips Joy Behar's 'Useful Idiot' Smear On The View

Notable quotes:
"... Journalist Glenn Greenwald summarized the testy exchange as Gabbard "responding with righteous rage but also great dignity to the disgusting smears of Democrats about her patriotism and loyalty." ..."
"... What a woman! Get Trump out and give the POTUS to Tulsi. Wonderful. I will definitely contribute to her campaign. ..."
"... What's funny about the whole thing is that the 'regular viewers' of the view are some of the most programmable 'useless' idiots that this (excuse for a country) has ever seen.... ..."
"... The View -- owned by Disney. Openly misandrist show -- in the shows more than 2 decades, having gone through dozens of hosts, the show has never had a male host. How's that for "inclusivity"? ..."
Nov 08, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Democratic presidential candidate and Hawaii congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard faced the increasingly nasty smears branding her a Russian asset and "traitor" head on during The View on Wednesday, following the recent spat with Hillary Clinton who suggested the Kremlin was "grooming" Gabbard to be a third-party candidate .

"Some of you have accused me of being a traitor to my country, a Russian asset, a Trojan horse, or a useful idiot I think was the term that you used," Gabbard told the panel, after in prior episodes Joy Behar especially had agreed with and aggressively amplified Hillary's baseless claims. The panel had also previously called her a Trojan horse. Gabbard came out swinging in her remarks: "It's offensive to me as a soldier, as an American, as a member of Congress, as a veteran, and frankly as a woman, to be so demeaned in such a way."

"Well, useful," Behar said, referencing her previously labeling the Iraq war veteran Moscow's 'useful idiot'. "But that's a Russian term, they use that," she added. "Are You Calling Me Stupid?" Gabbard at one point angrily shoots back. And demonstrating just how low and idiotic, and without substantive argument the "controversy" around Gabbard has become, Behar at one point even offers as 'evidence' of the presidential candidate's supposed Russian ties that she's appeared on FOX's Tucker Carlson Tonight on multiple occasions.

"I am a strong and intelligent woman of color, who has dedicated almost all of my adult life to protecting the safety, security & liberty of Americans," Gabbard fired back.

She also schooled the panel on her distinguished military career and slammed Behar's likening her to Putin's "useful idiot" -- explaining also that she joined the Army after the 9/11 attacks but that her country lied to her in invading Iraq.

"You are implying that I am too stupid, and too naive, and lack the intelligence to know what I am doing," she further counter-attacked Behar with.

The full segment from Wednesday's The View appearance is below, with the fight over Behar's "useful idiot" remarks beginning at the 1-min mark:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/-Y8ayIpjPvY

One astounding moment came when Gabbard reiterated her position that Hillary Clinton is a "warmonger," at which point Behar actually asked, "What's your evidence of that?"

A perplexed Gabbard immediately shot back, "Are you serious?"

Journalist Glenn Greenwald summarized the testy exchange as Gabbard "responding with righteous rage but also great dignity to the disgusting smears of Democrats about her patriotism and loyalty."


haruspicio , 45 minutes ago link

What a woman! Get Trump out and give the POTUS to Tulsi. Wonderful. I will definitely contribute to her campaign.

BTW who is that ******* harridan to her left, the ugly one cutting her off all the time? What a ******* bitch.

Bubba Rum Das , 2 hours ago link

What's funny about the whole thing is that the 'regular viewers' of the view are some of the most programmable 'useless' idiots that this (excuse for a country) has ever seen....

wakeupscreaming , 2 hours ago link

The View -- owned by Disney. Openly misandrist show -- in the shows more than 2 decades, having gone through dozens of hosts, the show has never had a male host. How's that for "inclusivity"?

Next time you take the kids to the movies or to a themepark, think twice about patronizing Disney.

keep the bastards honest , 1 hour ago link

Stay away, they are perverts, keep your kids away from their media and products.

Petkattash , 4 hours ago link

She was clear and confident in her remarks. Still don't care for many of her policies but she is was better that the rest of the D bunch.

iSage , 7 hours ago link

I am fearful the Republic for which We Stand, is falling, right before our eyes. I guess we disengaged at some point, sad. We are all Americans, what happened to the common ground? It is disappearing...

Bobzilla. Do not piss him off , 7 hours ago link

Joy Behar is a so fugly. She's a loudmouth ******, who is even uglier than the fat negress with the stupid looking blonde dregs. ****, what a hideous show. Anyone who watches that POS show is a ******* low IQ moron .