RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Bronner writes: "With the implosion of the Donald Trump's presidential campaign, extended arguments are unnecessary regarding the choice between Hillary Clinton and her proto-fascist adversary. She is a ruthless neo-liberal politician with great polish and sophistication, whereas Trump is a bully, a liar, and a threat to American democratic traditions."

Hillary Clinton listens to questions at the Rochester Opera House campaign town hall meeting in Rochester, N.H., on Jan. 22, 2016. (photo: Faith Ninivaggi/Reuters)
Hillary Clinton listens to questions at the Rochester Opera House campaign town hall meeting in Rochester, N.H., on Jan. 22, 2016. (photo: Faith Ninivaggi/Reuters)


Our Hillary

By Stephen Eric Bronner, Reader Supported News

23 October 16

 

ith the implosion of the Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, extended arguments are unnecessary regarding the choice between Hillary Clinton and her proto-fascist adversary. She is a ruthless neo-liberal politician with great polish and sophistication, whereas Trump is a bully, a liar, and a threat to American democratic traditions. Hillary is erudite and always prepared, while Trump is erratic and shoots from the hip. Hillary served her country as a first lady, a senator, and a secretary of state, while Trump is a huckster businessman born with a silver spoon in his mouth who declared bankruptcy six times, cheated small investors, supports unrestricted gun rights and deregulation, and betrayed Atlantic City. Hillary’s judicial appointments will surely support equal pay for equal work, a woman’s right to choose, civil liberties, and an attack on Citizens United. Hillary’s administration will fund Planned Parenthood, restrict gun sales, and inject a degree of civility into a polarized environment. There is also symbolic importance in electing a woman to the highest office, especially when a blatant sexist is intent on representing the worst elements of the American polity in the aftermath of the election. Such differences alone provide enough reason for any rational person to vote for Hillary.

No doubt the primary fight between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders was rigged. Former chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the Democratic National Committee played favorites. Hillary was also aided by established liberal media outlets like CNN and MSNBC and progressive commentators who, now full of righteous indignation, fawned over Wasserman Schultz in her seemingly incessant guest appearances. Along with the disparity in financial contributions by elite donors and the more than 400 delegates pledged to Hillary before the primaries even began, it was as if Bernie had to win a baseball game in which he was losing 6-0 before the first pitch was even thrown. Indeed, from the first, Hillary benefited from anti-democratic organizational tactics and structural imbalances of influence and power that favored the mainstream in the Democratic Party.

Most progressives understand that elections are always about choosing the “lesser of two evils.” But there remain enough angry Bernie supporters, depressed by his defeat, who seem unwilling to sully their radical principles in theory even though their refusal to vote can only up whatever legitimacy Trump and his “alternative right” retain. What will Hillary do if she wins? She represents the right wing of the Obama administration, which has supported international free trade pacts like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Perhaps she will switch gears, perhaps not. In any event, from a neo-liberal standpoint, gaining a competitive advantage in the international free market means lowering labor costs and welfare programs. Hillary has made concessions to Bernie’s people on a number of issues and she drew up the party platform with him. But suspicion is warranted. After all, while president, Bill Clinton proclaimed that he would “end welfare as we know it.”

Hillary is legitimately characterized as a “liberal hawk.” Obsessions with her emails while secretary of state, and the outrageous attacks on her role in the Benghazi fiasco, deflect attention from what is far more important. Hillary is uncritical when it comes to NATO and she seems to have learned little from the Iraqi War or her “mistake” in supporting it. Hillary’s commitment to “regime change” in Libya produced the disintegration of a sovereign state, ongoing conflicts among warring tribes, extremists spilling over the borders, and the heightening of regional instability. She has called for increased bombing in support of a fractious and ineffective Syrian opposition, strengthening the American military presence in Iraq, and an unworkable (and potentially explosive) “no fly zone.” Her stance on Israel has also been far less critical than that of President Obama. Admittedly, she has championed human rights. But this should fool no one: human rights mostly serve liberal hawks as a cover for the pursuit of interventionist strategies. Hillary enthusiasts, especially, should inform themselves about the dark side of her politics rather than dogmatically protect her from criticism.

President Obama hit the mark in his convention speech targeting Trump with the phrase: “Don’t boo! Vote!” But we should know what we are getting into – and our position will need to change the day after the election. Those who are not DNC style enthusiasts will undoubtedly find themselves on the outside. They will recognize the need for protest and going into the streets soon enough. No less than her husband, Hillary tends to employ a “triangulation” strategy that targets what liberals have called “the vital center.” The strategy works like this: Trump is against raising the minimum wage; Bernie Sanders endorses raising it to $15 per hour; and then there is Hillary calling for $12 per hour. The Republicans have little to say about student debt; Bernie raises the prospect for free education at public universities; and Hillary comes in with “debt-free” education. Hillary has turned compromise into a principle and, conceptually, she surrenders strategy to tactics. Down the road, Hillary’s willingness to endorse radical proposals will depend far less on whether she is a nice person or a feminist than upon the degree to which social movements and non-governmental actors exert pressure, and (regarding reforms) make her do it.

American movements come to life when Democrats are in office. They flourish more under liberal than explicitly right-wing administrations. That has been the case under President Obama as well. Marches in support of immigrants had a pronounced political impact. So did Occupy Wall Street as well as the Living Wage campaign and Black Lives Matter. Insofar as she represents the right wing of the Obama administration and is less indebted to those on her left, however, Hillary will probably be more difficult to influence than he was. All the more reason to support Bernie’s insurgents in trying to create their own organizational structure: “Our Revolution.” Maybe it can function like the Poor People’s Movement of the late 1960s with one foot inside and the other outside the Democratic Party. Perhaps it will go in another direction entirely.

Time will tell whether “Our Revolution” can sustain itself. Bernie has remained relatively quiet during the presidential campaign and he has stuck to familiar themes. There is even a sense in which his movement is on hold. But it has brought hundreds of thousands of people into the political process and it has provided the Democratic Party with the most radical platform in its history. Who would have thought that “Feel the Bern” was possible? For decades, we were told that using the socialist label and talking about class was politically suicidal. As usual, the “pragmatists” were not only wrong but out of touch. Thirteen million people were inspired by a different and radical message. When the presidential primaries began, free tuition at public universities, breaking up the banks, single payer health insurance (or even the public option), $15 minimum wage, and a transformed tax code were blasted by mainstream media as “unworkable,” “unaffordable,” and “utopian.” Not anymore. Concessions to the rebels have already been made by the liberal establishment and, after Hillary’s victory, radicals will need to keep up the pressure. Of course, something dramatic can always happen that might change their focus (not least the unlikely triumph of Trump). The Republicans will be in shambles, but it is foolish to believe that the alternative right will go away. Only one political posture makes sense for progressives with regard to the Democratic Party: critical solidarity.



Stephen Eric Bronner is Board of Governors Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University. His most recent book, The Bigot: Why Prejudice Persists, will appear in paperback next month with Yale University Press.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are going to return to our original fully-moderated format in the comments section.

The abusive complaints in the comment sections are just too far out of control at this point and have become a significant burden on our staff. As a result, our moderators will review all comments prior to publication. Comments will no longer go live immediately. Please be patient and check back.

To improve your chances of seeing your comment published, avoid confrontational or antagonistic methods of communication. Really that is the problem we are confronting.

We encourage all views. We discourage ad hominem disparagement.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
-1 # babaregi 2016-10-23 10:46
When Hillary is installed as POTUS, then Trump can get back to running a "Get Rich Quick University Program" that bilks enrollees.

Here is his first free installment that reveals the secrets of one of the great masters of the 'get rich quick' genre.

Especially for the paid Hillary posters (AKA: Correct The Record) here, enjoy!:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa7NxUs-euc
 
 
+21 # Inspired Citizen 2016-10-23 15:07
Hillary Clinton is the more dangerous of the two major party candidates. Trump does not want to start a war with Russia over Syria; Clinton does.

https://youtu.be/8rpiqyGmQXQ
 
 
-14 # Robbee 2016-10-23 19:54
[quote name="Inspired Citizen"]Trump does not want to start a war with Russia over Syria; Clinton does./quote]
- citizen - before you came out for rump - you pledged to elect ANY GOP-nominee prez
 
 
-11 # Robbee 2016-10-23 19:03
Quoting babaregi:
Especially for the paid Hillary posters

- what do you mean by that? do you suppose posters who advocate voting for hill are paid? - how does baba tell which ones?

bernie posts here? right? how can you tell bernie has been paid? - when warren or reich post here? is there any difference in how much each gets paid? - how much?

how much would jillie or rump have to pay? to get bernie or warren to switch to endorse them instead? what makes baba think jillie or rump pay less than hill?

in full disclosure nobody pays me - what does baba charge for her accusations here? for hill-directed venom?

rsn is full of sloppy thinkers prone to groundless accuse those with whom they disagree - you too baba? - or are you just lapsing into what goes around? - developing our phony consensus?
 
 
+5 # babaregi 2016-10-23 22:45
Quoting Robbee:
Quoting babaregi:
Especially for the paid Hillary posters

- what do you mean by that? do you suppose posters who advocate voting for hill are paid? - how does baba tell which ones?


rsn is full of sloppy thinkers prone to groundless accuse those with whom they disagree - you too baba? - or are you just lapsing into what goes around? - developing our phony consensus?


LOL...Groundless?
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/correct-the-record-online-trolls/484847/

Billy Bob was complaining about this months ago and got some posters kicked off this platform.

But you've got a point, I can't (for sure) tell the difference between those defending Hillary out of admiration or some kind of misguided loyalty (perhaps yourself and if so, relax) and the ones being paid to troll.

Stay tuned for more Wikileaks and Project Veritas revelations about Democrats causing violence at Trump rallies, election fraud and other goodies:

https://d1sb17b1leotpq.cloudfront.net/rigging-election-video-i-clinton-campaign-and-dnc-incite-violence-trump-rallies.html

Plausible deniability is the key. The sloppy thinking is being done by the DNC operatives that think they won't get caught.

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/bob-creamer-scott-foval-james-okeefe/2016/10/21/id/754768/
 
 
+3 # Felix Julian 2016-10-24 08:16
how much would jillie or rump have to pay? to get bernie or warren to switch to endorse them instead? what makes baba think jillie or rump pay less than hill?


Your non-use of caps and your over-use of silly terminology nd 'nicknames' reveals you as a not-too-sharp poster. Maybe not paid, but certainly played.
We'll remember you after the Coronation just to remind you of how much time you spent online attacking anyone who derided 'your Hillary'.
 
 
-7 # Robbee 2016-10-24 09:42
Quoting Felix Julian:
how much would jillie or rump have to pay? to get bernie or warren to switch to endorse them instead? what makes baba think jillie or rump pay less than hill?


Your non-use of caps and your over-use of silly terminology nd 'nicknames' reveals you as a not-too-sharp poster. Maybe not paid, but certainly played.
We'll remember you after the Coronation just to remind you of how much time you spent online attacking anyone who derided 'your Hillary'.

- our site is rife with sloppy think

guy gives us bush2cheney was no legitimate prez means hill would be no legitimate prez - sloppy think

common misunderstandin g stems from disbelieving bernie AFTER he accepted the result of the primaries and endorsed hill

bernie is the same great progressive he was before the endorsement

some pretend he did not then, and does not now, everyday, explain why hill would make a good prez - same as he did BEFORE his endorsement of her - throughout his campaign - "infinitely better" - explains daily why we need to surround america with progressive officeholders - because some won't listen - IT'S NOT BERNIE - it's some of us suddenly repulsed by what bernie has always said - sloppy think
 
 
-1 # Caliban 2016-10-24 10:28
"Sloppy think"? How about "sloppy write"?

There may be some worthy ideas here, but how is anyone to know if a poster won't use such basic tools as complete sentences?
 
 
+52 # kyzipster 2016-10-23 11:10
"But there remain enough angry Bernie supporters, depressed by his defeat, who seem unwilling to sully their radical principles"

Until there's an acknowledgment that there was nothing radical about Sanders' agenda, this sort of approach will fall on deaf ears. We lost the center a long time ago. It shouldn't be defined by the two main parties which are both far to the right of center, it should be defined by public opinion on individual issues like a fair wage and health care and doing something about the corruption of Wall St.

The media is the biggest problem in this country.

I will vote for Clinton, I wish someone would pay me for that but no such luck.
 
 
+42 # GoGreen! 2016-10-23 13:30
Even if someone would pay me, I would not vote for Clinton. Yes, we lost the center a long time ago. Both major parties are far to the right of center---which is why I am voting for Jill Stein and Ajama Baraka and asking you to consider doing so too. Please go to Jill2016.org and read and watch her explain her ideas on how to end the plutocracy and create real democracy in our nation.
 
 
+40 # jdd 2016-10-23 14:50
The idea that HRC is a "polished" or "intelligent" candidate is baffling. She bungled her way through the nomination process, winning only because she had massive support from day one, which she squandered in both 2008 and 2016. She maintains a lead in the presidential race because her opponent is a disaster yet she speaks to controlled and/or small audiences and dodges difficult questions. The woman is an idiot who would not have been given a second look were she never married to a popular and genuinely intelligent president. Most indicative of her lack of brains is that she continues to call for a "no-fly zone" in Syria despite the fact that she has been warned by the Joint Chiefs that it would certainly bring war with Russia, which entered the picture over a year ago. So she's lobbying for WWIII. How polished and smart is that?
 
 
+23 # Anonymot 2016-10-23 15:32
As Secretary she not only destroyed the Middle East, the Ukraine and Europe on the richochet. She openly threatens war with Russia, Iran, and China and she also destroyed the State Department itself. That's what Bronner calls brilliant?! And he teaches political science?

Hard to believe.
 
 
+3 # CTPatriot 2016-10-24 03:26
You forgot to include Honduras.

I hope RSN is getting financing from HRC's wealthy donors cause I'm certainly not paying for this continuous stream of lesser evil garbage coming from RSN
 
 
-1 # Cassandra2012 2016-10-24 19:37
She did this all by her widdle self, Did she?
 
 
+2 # Patriot 2016-10-24 12:15
Here are Hillary's years of policy positions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI

Progressive? Supportive of women and LGBTs? Uh...?
 
 
-7 # Robbee 2016-10-23 19:56
Quoting GoGreen!:
Even if someone would pay me, I would not vote for Clinton. Yes, we lost the center a long time ago. Both major parties are far to the right of center---which is why I am voting for Jill Stein and Ajama Baraka and asking you to consider doing so too. Please go to Jill2016.org and read and watch her explain her ideas on how to end the plutocracy and create real democracy in our nation.

- why do some keep flogging dead horse jill?

if jillie had wanted to test her positions against those of other progressives, she would have run in the dem primaries against o'malley, bernie and hill - then voters would have gotten to know her name and her positions

jillie is the "stealth candidate" - the fact that jillie remains almost unknown is directly due to one, and only one, person - jillie

if rump wins, those who vote "jillie" will deny they had anything to do with it - that's who jilliebots are

maybe in 2020 greens will find a progressive candidate brave as bernie? - to fight it out - on the issues - with other progressives?

it's 2016 - it's too late for jillie to see the wizard - to get her heart - her courage - that was so 2015?

if you spot the way the wind is blowing among jilliebots here on rsn - they are all growing eager to kiss rump - lie down with jillie and you wake up with rump
 
 
+6 # CTPatriot 2016-10-24 03:28
Can't wait to see the corrupt Democratic Party and it's superfans like yourself consigned to the dustbin of history. I'm voting Green in hopes of hastening that.
 
 
+3 # kyzipster 2016-10-24 09:06
I will not vote for Stein because it's simply a fact that she won't win even one state and there are enough real differences between Democrats and Republicans on domestic issues to convince me that Clinton is a far better choice than Trump.

I'm convinced that Trump would get the tax cuts he's campaigning on because he would more than likely have a willing Congress if elected. It could set us back as much as the Bush years, requiring even more tax increases in the future for Sanders' agenda to see the light of day. A protest vote for Stein would leave a very small mark imo, revolution is much broader than getting behind one candidate every 4 years.

I respect your choice and I won't ask you to vote for Clinton. Seems to me that most people at RSN are on the same side, we just have differences of opinion on our voting choices.
 
 
-7 # Robbee 2016-10-24 10:06
Quoting GoGreen!:
Both major parties are far to the right of center

- don't bother trying to support your outrageous accusation
 
 
-1 # Cassandra2012 2016-10-24 19:35
Jill is not adequately experienced or clear- spoken. She also didnot have sufficient grassroots support.
 
 
+26 # Billsy 2016-10-23 14:08
It would have been helpful for Bonning to include acknowledgment that Sander's campaign was not radical (he's a classic new-deal democrat), but he accurately applies the adjective to those who refuse to vote at all. That is indeed a radical and non-constructiv e choice.
 
 
+4 # Ted 2016-10-23 17:10
Below is a link to a short but very important piece of information that should be seriously considered by those of us who are still considering a WRITE-IN vote for Sanders (OPDENY270 is not a good idea);

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CYwEOmMTwSw&feature=youtu.be
 
 
+9 # CTPatriot 2016-10-24 03:30
In most states unless Bernie is officially registered as a write-in option, you're throwing your vote away. I'm voting Green Party in hopes of getting it the 5% support needed for federal recognition and funding in 2020.
 
 
-10 # NAVYVET 2016-10-23 17:18
He is correct in calling throw-away voters "radical" since they are in effect supporting and voting for the most dangerous anarchist in US history, Donald Trump.
 
 
+4 # Patriot 2016-10-24 11:50
How many times must you be told that voting for someone other than HRC is NOT, repeat NOT voting for Trump?

One-track minds....
 
 
+9 # CTPatriot 2016-10-24 03:23
Unfortunately, establishment liberals like this author truly don't understand those of us on the actual left. He fancies himself an activist but writes like a sheep herder for the center-left establishment party. It's unfortunate that he doesn't recognize the value in voting for Jill Stein, like gaining enough support to make the Green Party viable in 2020.

That's four years from now when this author will no doubt be touting the infinitesimal gains we make under Hillary as a reason not to primary her or support a third party in 2020 either.
 
 
-1 # Juanbaltimore 2016-10-24 06:46
The Green Party isn't even on the ballot in all 50 states. Jill Stein has ZERO chance of winning. Who other than a us has even heard of her? What has she accomplished? I hate Hillary. She's a corporatist warmonger. But the reality is that either she or Trump will be President on Jan 20, 2017. You can't make believe that someone other than one of the two of them will be President. You can wish, as I do, with all the fiber in my being that it wan't the case. It is. We've got to vote for Hillary and immediately begin to pressure her on war and peace, universal health care, minimum wage, etc.

The possibility of a fascist, mysoginist, xenophobe in power is beyond the pale.
 
 
+5 # Felix Julian 2016-10-24 08:29
[quote name="Juanbalti more"]The Green Party isn't even on the ballot in all 50 states. Jill Stein has ZERO chance of winning.

Congratulations ! You just bought yourself the anti-Green Party not-quite-accur ate package. Stein 'isn't even on the ballot in all 50 states' is correct. But she IS on the ballot in 47 states with 3 write-in positions. Close enough. Who other than you has heard of her? Millions of us, that's who. What has she accomplished? Merely making SENSE out of the issues that concern us all (you might wish to tune into any of dozens of videos of the Green Party candidate explaining her platform).
So, go ahead. You said it Juanbaltimore.. ."She's a corporatist warmonger." But you will still vote for her because of her trashy Republican opponent. But all out war is OKAY!
I'm sticking my neck out for the FUTURE and casting my vote for the Stein/Baraka ticket. Can't wait! My conscience will be clear.
As Dr. Stein has said "you can't be a warmonger and call yourself a feminist."
Hillary Clinton is patriarchy in a pantsuit.
 
 
-1 # Robbee 2016-10-24 12:33
Quoting Felix Julian:
patriarchy in a pantsuit.

- what a tangled web we weave
 
 
+4 # Wally Jasper 2016-10-24 10:24
True, Dr. Stein does not have much of a chance of winning. But there are really good reasons for protest votes when it is increasingly apparent that Trump will not win regardless of how most of us (in non-swing states) vote. If the Green Party gets 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for equal coverage and a place at the debates. The reason why not many mainstream Americans never heard of her is that she was totally shut out by MSM. Her message is almost identical to Bernie's, but with the addition of a peace agenda on the global stage.

Bottom line: it will pay off big time to support Dr. Stein, especially if you live in a state other than PA, OH, FL, CO, NV, and a few others. The Repugnicrat Party needs to see that voters want a real choice and real change.
 
 
+3 # Patriot 2016-10-24 12:00
The only reason Stein won't win is because voters are afraid to vote for what they really want--even though their other choices are three candidates who will do absolutely nothing for 99% of the people in this country, and one is salivating over what she sees as a golden opportunity to launch what has a high probability to develop into WW III--a nuclear war!

If all the people who want a truly progressive government would vote for Stein, who's been fighting and working for progressive policies at least as long as HRC has been equivocating and vasilating and panderingjjust to APPEAR progresives--wh en she actually is quite REGRESSIVE and very dangerous--we just might ACHIEVE the government we so desperately want and need.

Vote for Stein and each Green or Progressive candidate on your ballot. Vote to stop spending the money needed to pay for progressive government on destroying one country after another so trade in fossil fuels wil be conducted in DOLLARS vice any other currency, and so the fossil fuel industry can take over resources that belong to the peole of OTHER countries. Vote for peace, sane government, and, most of all, FOR the protection of our environment and climate, while there's still something left to try to protect!

Anyone who believes that HRC will betray the people who have funded her every move and word for the last 20 years is willfully delusional.
 
 
-3 # Robbee 2016-10-24 10:03
Quoting kyzipster:
Until there's an acknowledgment that there was nothing radical about Sanders' agenda

- there was this one thing "radical"

- there was this "political revolution" that proposes to amend our constitution and to reverse 240 years of plutocracy - the best government money can buy - by public funding, only, elections - never been done anywhere before? - yeah! that "radical"!

if hill is elected she has promised - within 30 days after inauguration - to propose a constitutional amendment that reverses citizens united and reforms campaign finance - if hill proposes something less than public funding, only, of all elections federal, state and local - bernie must step up and offer a better amendment - or else he will fail to lead us to the one human one vote democracy he champions
 
 
+59 # PeacefulGarden 2016-10-23 11:21
"Those who are not DNC style enthusiasts will undoubtedly find themselves on the outside."

I have felt on the outside in this country ever since I was a young man of 21; an outcast. I have never agreed with either party and the moronic power plays they perform against the United States citizens. Both parties have no clue of what a working class or poor person goes through every day.

Those of us who do not have money get no policy support. Our legal system favors the rich. The little money you gather is quickly swallowed by for-profit lending banks or local, state, and federal taxes.

Our elections are a duopoly scam, run by a neocon system.

Vote for Jill Stein.
 
 
-7 # Robbee 2016-10-23 20:10
Quoting PeacefulGarden:
a duopoly scam

progressives cannot justify enabling conservatives to win - that represents the opposite of progress - regress - that enables bad government - that harms the vast majority of citizens

progressives who run against other progressives - other than in primaries - help conservatives win

those who claim that hill - not rump - would war on russia - or that hill - not rump - would cut taxes on the rich - play a terrible game with women - blacks - latinos - working poor - middle class - non-christins - and environment

during the past year+ - 3 progressives ran against each other in dem primaries - o'malley, bernie and hill - had jillie run too - then voters would have gotten to know her name and her politics

today jillie is the "stealth candidate" - the vast majority of voters will read her name on a ballot and wonder - who's she? - the fact that jillie remains practically unknown is directly due to one, and only one, person - jillie

it is too late for jillie to see the wizard - to find heart and courage -

automatically jillie gets another 3 years to find the heart that went missing in 2015

if you spot the way the wind is blowing today among jilliebots here on rsn - they are all growing eager to kiss rump - lie down with jillie and you wake up with rump

progressives should unite to vote in progressives - not just hill - and call lame-duck session congress - urging them to oppose tpp - go bernie! and go dem!
 
 
+8 # Ted 2016-10-23 21:01
Look, robbee, we realize that your schztick is to play dumb and pretend that you don't understand that candidates from different parties can't run in other party's primaries but it's getting old.
 
 
-3 # Robbee 2016-10-24 12:39
Quoting Ted:
Look, robbee, we realize that your schztick is to play dumb and pretend that you don't understand that candidates from different parties can't run in other party's primaries but it's getting old.

- bernie was not a dem before he ran in the dem primary - which brings us full circle to jillie - only one person keeps jillie from running in the dem primary - jillie
 
 
+8 # CTPatriot 2016-10-24 03:32
Then you should have no problem with Jill running in the general election because there is NO OTHER PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATE IN THE RACE.
 
 
-3 # Robbee 2016-10-24 12:44
Quoting CTPatriot:
Then you should have no problem with Jill running in the general election because there is NO OTHER PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATE IN THE RACE.

- you are less progressive than some - but so full of yourself
 
 
+41 # ReconFire 2016-10-23 11:54
Exactly PeacefulGarden. This writer is in la la land. " Hillary's judicial appointments will surely support...." HOGWASH. They will support the standard right of center ideology that I have come to hate.
It's almost as if a different writer wrote each paragraph, the way he goes back and forth.
Please someone tell me what concessions Hillary has made to progressives. Hillary has laughed at free college, universal healthcare, and $15 min. wage.
Please vote for Jill Stein
 
 
-8 # Robbee 2016-10-23 20:15
Quoting ReconFire:
Hillary has laughed at free college, universal healthcare, and $15 min. wage.

- source!
 
 
+12 # jimallyn 2016-10-23 23:16
Quoting Robbee:
Quoting ReconFire:
Hillary has laughed at free college, universal healthcare, and $15 min. wage.

- source!

Here's video of Hillary saying universal healthcare will "never, ever come to pass":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BG7w3Oey3xs

And here's an article quoting her:

http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/34935-hillary-clinton-gets-13-million-from-health-industry-now-says-single-payer-will-qnever-ever-come-to-passq
_____________________________________

Here's an article quoting Clinton as saying ‘I favor a $12 an hour minimum wage.'

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-i-favor-12-hour-minimum-wage

And here's a post on hillaryclinton. com dated May 13, 2016 saying Clinton wants to raise the minimum wage to 12 dollars an hour:

https://www.hillaryclinton. com/feed/middle-class-needs-raise-heres-how-hillary-clinton-plans-do-it/
_______________________________________

Robbee, there's two out of three for you, but I'm not going to do all your research for you. Go look it up yourself.
 
 
+13 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 06:41
I think in some of the Wikileaks emails she says, in regard to college tuition, that no one should get "free stuff", oblivious to her own demands for free stuff all the time, and she demeans Sanders' supporters as living in "their parents' basements".

She's a real sweetheart, so full of love and concern for women and children .. and everyone, really.

Remarkable that her supporters can read the things she says about them and still be unfazed. The inbred oligarchs must be thrilled. I wonder what they are cooking up for 2020.

Oh, SOMEBODY has GOT to use the motto "A clear vision for 2020" or I will be sorely disappointed. (If we're still here and if (the illusion of) elections are still allowed.)
 
 
-4 # Cassandra2012 2016-10-24 19:57
jill Stein is an inarticulate anti-Vaxxer whose choice for VP called Obama an 'uncle Tom'!

She is inexperienced and has no grassroots support or party structure behind her. She cannot at this juncture, win.... So all you do is help neo-fascist Drumpf, the know-nothing walking Narcissistic Personality Disorder filled with misogyny, hate & bigotry!
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-10-26 15:39
The anti-vaxx canard has long since been debunked; tossing it out makes YOU look bad--not Dr. Stein.

Any BLACK person who wants to label Obama an Uncle Tom won't get an argument from me! He's done zip point nothing for Blacks--includi ng not releasing all those in Blacks in PRISON on relatively minor drug charges, as he promised to do.

Dr. Stein has plenty of experience; unlike Clinton's, hers has taught her sound judgment, a healthy amount of humility, & not to be afraid or ashamed to reconsider a position & amend it when FACTS change (unlike Clinton, who amends hers when she thinks doing so will be advantageous to herself). Stein has quite a bit of grassroots support, although nobody wants to admit that: For instance, haven't you noticed how many RSN commenters support her? The Green Party isn't exactly insignificant; it has many sitting officehoulders & many candidates will be on the ballot this year in 45 states; Dr. Stein will be on the ballot in 3 more as a CERTIFIED write-in candidate. See gp.org & Jill2016.com to inprove your knowledge.

You've just shown us how inexperienced & uninformed YOU are. Repeating yet again that Stein's supporters are helping Trump is drivel. We choose sane, sensible government, instead of the right-wing, for-the-rich government we now have that Cinton most assuredly will sustain expand--along with starting WWIII.

Worry about how off-beam, uninformed, & bamboozled YOU are by YOUR choice. WE're all comfortable with OURS.
 
 
+42 # guomashi 2016-10-23 11:56
Finally an acknowledgment of the very serious problems associated with a Clinton presidency.

Still, unfortunately, the delusions that somehow she will somehow be swayed by public opinion.

Bill Clinton said it best when he commented on her ability to "bring everyone together". She has no desire to serve an agenda (other than war). She wants to cut down the middle, which has by now fallen off the right edge of the universe.

We are screwed. Maybe an impeachment or a coup can improve things. Certainly elections no longer can make things any better for US citizens.
 
 
+40 # harleysch 2016-10-23 15:19
We should have impeached Bush, Jr., and Obama, for engaging in war crimes, and launching wars which should never have been fought. Bush Sr. wrote in his autobiography that the threat by Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez that he would bring up a Bill of Impeachment if Bush sent troops into Baghdad caused him to pull back.

Why is it that not one Congressman had the guts to draft such a bill against Bush for the Iraq war, or Obama for Libya and Syria?
 
 
+5 # NAVYVET 2016-10-23 17:30
I fought hard for impeaching Bush and Cheney until the Tea Party (paid for by the Koch Brothers) swarmed into Congress. How did they do it? Because holier-than-tho u "progressives" refused to vote. Sound familiar?

As for impeaching Obama for the same kind of crimes against humanity, I would have joined a cause that never emerged. Sorry it didn't--led by disgusted and disillusioned people of color, of whom there are many I personally know--because even if it never got anywhere it might have scared him into more sensible policies.

Probably Hillary, too, would be scared and affected by threats of impeachment, since she as a history of compromise like Obama, and has changed her stance on numerous issues over the years.

But NEVER would impeachment threats, or even the real thing, move the rigid mentalities of "Decider" Dubya or the even more narcissist Drumpf. They are immune to change for any reason, no matter how rational, believing that trumpeting "no compromise" shows off the "manhood" they never were able to develop.
 
 
+6 # Anonymot 2016-10-23 15:39
Well, not quite. There are two areas in which she is expert and she'll probably bring improvements: women who want abortions and the LGBT community. It's just that she puts the entire rest of the world at risk for those twoareas close to her heart.
 
 
+8 # lorenbliss 2016-10-23 17:16
@Anonymot: This is a commonplace notion but it is incorrect.

Hillary's feminism is entirely bogus, a Big Lie to win the votes of identity-politi cs zealots and (tragically misinformed) women.

The truth is that Hillary clandestinely collaborates with Sam Brownback and others of his JesuNazi ilk for "tunneling beneath...the wall between church and state" (Jeff Sharlet, "The Family: the Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power" [Harper: 2008], page 275).

In other words -- again the difference between her public and private positions -- Hillary is a closet theocrat, a secret fanatic intent on imposing the Christian version of Sharia on the United States, complete with zero-tolerance prohibitions of abortion, extra-marital sex, homosexuality, trans-sexuality and gay marriage (which let us not forget she publicly opposed until she changed her public position in 2013).

As to her private position, since she still regularly attends prayer meetings with the Family, we can assume it is at least as hostile to women and sexual minorities as it was prior to 2013.

Relevant links:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-ehrenreich/hillarys-nasty-pastorate_b_92361.html

http://www.alternet.org/story/87665/worse_than_fascists%3A_christian_political_group_'the_family'_openly_reveres_hitler

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/25/obama-the-family-and-uganda-s-anti-gay-christian-mafia.html
 
 
+21 # Merlin 2016-10-23 19:09
lorenbliss 2016-10-23 17:16
Agreed. Even those things that appear good are an illusion.

It may be harsh, but I can find virtually nothing good about HRC as a politician. As soon as I look into what appears good, that good disappears.

It astounds me how many people live in the illusions created by the Clintons and the controlled media. Living in, and by, fear is a terrible thing.

Vote Jill and Go Green!

Do not write Bernie's name in! Your whole ballot will be disregarded!
https://youtu.be/CYwEOmMTwSw
 
 
-15 # Robbee 2016-10-23 20:22
Quoting guomashi:
Finally an acknowledgment of the very serious problems associated with a Clinton presidency.

Still, unfortunately, the delusions that somehow she will somehow be swayed by public opinion.

- hill has become remarkably more progressive and always thanks bernie and his supporters - sorry to disillusion you!
 
 
+8 # Patriot 2016-10-23 21:26
Dream on!
 
 
+13 # jimallyn 2016-10-23 23:19
Quoting Robbee:
hill has become remarkably more progressive

That's if you believe her after the flip-flops she made to try to keep up with Bernie Sanders. I don't, and you shouldn't either.
 
 
+9 # RLF 2016-10-24 06:31
Hill hasn't changed since being all out for Goldwater! She sure knows how to talk shit though!
 
 
+7 # Felix Julian 2016-10-24 08:37
Quoting Robbee:
Quoting guomashi:
Finally an acknowledgment of the very serious problems associated with a Clinton presidency.

Still, unfortunately, the delusions that somehow she will somehow be swayed by public opinion.

- hill has become remarkably more progressive and always thanks bernie and his supporters - sorry to disillusion you!


That's a corker!
"Hill has become remarkably nore progressive..." just in time for the election and to convince former Sanders supporters that she is. She is anything BUT progressive! The only true progressives running for the highest office are Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka!
Vote for the FUTURE!
 
 
+6 # grandlakeguy 2016-10-24 14:53
Hillary Clinton is no Progressive.
She is a Regressive!
 
 
+16 # Capn Canard 2016-10-23 12:11
Our Hillary, aka Kali the merciless, the Angel of Death.
 
 
+14 # markovchhaney 2016-10-23 15:26
Shiva, the Destroyer.
 
 
+57 # librarian1984 2016-10-23 12:17
"Hillary's judicial appointments will surely .. support a woman's right to choose" Like Tim Kaine?

"Hillary's administration will .. inject a degree of civility." Okay, this is the first place I choked. The first paragraph concludes with the interesting assumption that "any rational person" would vote for Clinton. WHAT ABOUT WAR? You talk about it, and thanks for that, but what about it? What do we do? How do we stop her?

You're like the people who said we didn't need to worry about nuclear waste -- we'd have it all figured out in due course. Have we, figured it out? NB firing depleting uranium in tank shells doesn't count.

Then you admit the election was rigged ... but then suggest we vote for the cheater? I am incredulous. I appreciate the honesty but how did you come to that conclusion? What happens in your head between "She stole the election" and "Vote for her"?

LOTE blah blah OMG she supports TPP, fracking and free trade .. but "perhaps she'll switch gears"? Really? THAT's the strategy? We all wish REALLY HARD that she "switches gears"? Are you going to be the one to tell that to America's kids living in poverty, or the Arab children picking up US bomb pieces while they look for their family in rubble?

"American movements come to life when Democrats are in office" Yeah, and then the Dems squash it.

And regarding the "symbolic importance " of electing a woman. I agree. That's why I'm voting for Jill Stein.

Go Green.
 
 
+17 # EternalTruth 2016-10-23 18:44
Exactly right.

I would only add that this article fails to mention the most important issue in our country and the world right now; climate change. It's not a matter of rights or standard of living, it's a matter of our survival as a species (not to mention all the other species we've killed or are killing). A vote for Hill is a vote for the death of our planet.
 
 
+11 # futhark 2016-10-23 20:27
"Hillary's administration will .. inject a degree of civility." Using and/or threatening people or nations with lethal violence can never be accurately called civility. In fact, it is just the opposite. Only one presidential candidate in the field is running on a platform pledging to work for reconciliation of differences through peaceful means, Dr. Jill Stein.
 
 
+10 # economagic 2016-10-23 20:40
Yeah -- how did this guy even earn a BS degree in political science, much less an endowed chair at a major university? Perhaps because political science, while more scientific than economics, is still BS.
 
 
+11 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 06:48
PS Why isn't firing depleted uranium a war crime?
 
 
+2 # EternalTruth 2016-10-25 10:36
Are you certain that it isn't a war crime? I say it's a war crime. Of course, what is or isn't a war crime is irrelevant if there's no one with the power to prosecute those crimes. If the US did it, it's not a crime. If one of our enemies did it, the us would be screaming about human rights abuses and sanctions etc.
 
 
+27 # John Puma 2016-10-23 13:03
I suspect HRC will be as vigilant to thwart any hint of "critical solidarity" shown by her party members as she appears to be against "interests" of other countries not coincident with hers.
 
 
+33 # guomashi 2016-10-23 13:09
I absolutely agree with you
.
Her management of the DNC Convention was chilling.
I don't remember anything that propagandistic and heartless since Hitler's shows of the 30's.
We are not in for a good time the next 4 years, and fears of Trump's fascist tendencies will be seen to have been largely projections of Hillary's own dreams.
 
 
-10 # Robbee 2016-10-23 20:32
Quoting guomashi:
I absolutely agree with you.
Her management of the DNC Convention was chilling.
I don't remember anything that propagandistic and heartless since Hitler's shows of the 30's.

- if you never saw anything infinitely less heartless - you NEVER saw a rnc convention or a repug debate

they come around every 4 years - you should watch on rv sometime - repugs will really open your eyes!
 
 
-6 # Robbee 2016-10-23 20:34
Quoting Robbee:
Quoting guomashi:
I absolutely agree with you.
Her management of the DNC Convention was chilling.
I don't remember anything that propagandistic and heartless since Hitler's shows of the 30's.

- if you never saw anything infinitely less heartless - you NEVER saw a rnc convention or a repug debate

they come around every 4 years - you should watch on rv sometime - repugs will really open your eyes!

- "less heartless"? - robbee! watch the double negatives!
 
 
+9 # economagic 2016-10-23 20:49
It still seems like magical thinking to suggest that T-Rump was a paid stalking horse for Clinton. But suppose you were a Clinton, determined to get yourself or your sometime spouse elected, and had a sleazeball sometime friend with a lot of assets but more liabilities, and you were sitting on a pile of formerly filthy lucre, and were not too scrupulous yourself:

What would you do?

That proves nothing of course. But there are always true propositions that cannot be proved -- in math it's Goedel, in criminal affairs a truism.
 
 
+12 # IAMMe 2016-10-23 13:26
If you want hope, see Michael Moore's new film, "Trumpland". It's uplifting.

We on the Left must come together. We are so divided and bitter. This must end for us to get anywhere.
 
 
+24 # skylinefirepest 2016-10-23 13:58
Ok, so you want to get together to vote for a liar and criminal? A woman who cannot be trusted to do what is right for the country...only what is right for her bank balance? A woman who put the very security of this country at risk for her "convenience" and then lied under oath? If that's what you want the Democratic party to get behind then you can solidly count me out. Trump is a slob but hillary is a criminal!
 
 
+15 # Paris10 2016-10-23 15:20
I would be less angry if she put the very security of this country at risk for her "convenience" and then lied under oath? Sadly she did it to hide Clinton' Pay for Play & money laundering enterprise foundation, among other crimes to hide.
 
 
+24 # Ted 2016-10-23 14:36
"We on the Left must come together. We are so divided and bitter. This must end for us to get anywhere." -IAMMe

I fully agree.

Anyone else who feels this way should read the Ten Key Values of the Green Party and consider if this is something we can rally around;

http://www.gp.org/ten_key_values_2016
 
 
+8 # futhark 2016-10-23 20:32
Thanks, Ted. These are the "Ten Commandments" for a rational world of peace, justice, and sustainable and equitable prosperity. Propping up the economy through ever upward spiraling military spending, to which all the non-Green candidates seem to be committed, is both wasteful and dangerous.
 
 
+12 # Merlin 2016-10-23 17:46
IAMMe 2016-10-23 13:26
"If you want hope, see Michael Moore's new film, "Trumpland". It's uplifting.
We on the Left must come together. We are so divided and bitter. This must end for us to get anywhere."


Hope?… I don’t live on, or by, hope. Life is what it is. I accept it and deal with it. Those who live on “hope” are avoiding depression.

Uplifting?… I am my own “uplifter.” I don’t need someone else’s words to “cheer me up.”Real happiness can only be self created, and this includes during the worst of times. Looking to others to feel better is a fools errand.

Divided?… Only those who vote “as the wind blows and the newspapers direct” (from Emerson,) find confusion. Those who vote their conscience are not divided. They know who they are and live accordingly. They lead instead of following. They don’t seek the approval of others when forming their views.

Bitter?… The people who are bitter are those who did not get what they wanted. It is the reaction of a spoiled child. An emotional response lacking in any reason or logic. Bitter? Please speak for yourself and refrain from using the term “we.” I am not bitter and don’t need your judgement.

Vote Jill Stein and Go Green.
 
 
+3 # economagic 2016-10-23 20:51
I like the quote from Emerson -- prescient.
 
 
+3 # Wally Jasper 2016-10-24 11:16
Yes, well said, Merlin. This is exactly the attitude that our time is calling for.
 
 
+21 # irvingwood 2016-10-23 13:27
I cannot believe l am reading this stuff. This is the obverse of what HRC stands for. You have lost your objectivity, and therefore your usefulness to me. When you changed from impartial,obser ver to shill for probably the most corrupt, deceitful, bellicose, Cold, bullying woman in Washington you lost me. And to think l just made a donation. I will not contribute to more wars, and even a nuclear war,. I don't know why you took this step. Your role should be objective. I can get this stuff at the HRC web site. This election has really served to show who really is a journalist and who a mere hack. Unsubscribe me.
 
 
+4 # markovchhaney 2016-10-23 15:30
I suspect (hope?) that the title is an oblique reference to the movie "Our Hitler."
 
 
+32 # Ted 2016-10-23 13:38
-"OUR Hillary"???

No, not in MY name.

-"Most progressives understand that elections are always about choosing the “lesser of two evils.”

Wrong again, this is a Democracy.


GREEN Now,
GREEN after Nov. 8,
and GREEN until sanity prevails.

http://www.gp.org/ten_key_values_2016
 
 
+33 # Ted 2016-10-23 13:47
The TEN KEY VALUES of the GREEN Party

1. Grassroots Democracy

All human beings must be allowed a say in decisions that affect their lives; no one should be subject to the will of another. We work to improve public participation in every aspect of government and seek to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We also work to create new types of political organizations that expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in decision-making.


2. Social Justice And Equal Opportunity

As a matter of right, all persons must have the opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, any discrimination by race, class, gender, sexual orientation, age, nationality, religion, or physical or mental ability that denies fair treatment and equal justice under the law.
 
 
+26 # Ted 2016-10-23 13:48
3. Ecological Wisdom

Human societies must function with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society that utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture that replenishes the soil, move to an energy-efficien t economy, and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.


4. Non-Violence

It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society's current patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in danger. We promote non-violent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.
 
 
+26 # Ted 2016-10-23 13:49
5. Decentralization

Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. We seek a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system controlled by and mostly benefiting the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all.


6. Community-Based Economics

We support redesigning our work structures to encourage employee ownership and workplace democracy. We support developing new economic activities and institutions that allow us to use technology in ways that are humane, freeing, ecological, and responsive and accountable to communities. We support establishing a form of basic economic security open to all. We call for moving beyond the narrow 'job ethic' to new definitions of 'work,' 'jobs' and 'income' in a cooperative and democratic economy. We support restructuring our patterns of income distribution to reflect the wealth created by those outside the formal monetary economy – those who take responsibility for parenting, housekeeping, home gardens, community volunteer work, and the like. We support restricting the size and concentrated power of corporations without discouraging superior efficiency or technological innovation.
 
 
+27 # Ted 2016-10-23 13:50
7. Feminism And Gender Equity

We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control with cooperative ways of interacting that respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as gender equity, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We recognize that the processes for determining our decisions and actions are just as important as achieving the outcomes we want.


8. Respect For Diversity

We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across the human spectrum. We believe that the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We encourage respect for all life forms, and increased attention to the preservation of biodiversity.
 
 
+25 # Ted 2016-10-23 13:51
9. Personal And Global Responsibility

We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal wellbeing and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet.


10. Future Focus And Sustainability

Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or 'unmaking' all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions. We must make the quality of all lives, rather than open-ended economic growth, the focus of future thinking and policy.
 
 
+9 # Billsy 2016-10-23 13:54
This is the first op/ed piece I've seen in weeks that is worth sharing. While I bristle at any suggestion that die-hard Sanders fans are "radical" in their beliefs (he's a classic new-deal democrat) the main point is well taken, and Bonner was referring particularly to Sanders supporters who refuse to vote (indeed, a radical choice). Clinton is likely to become our next President and we therefore need to loudly voice support for Sander's most populist progressive policies: elimination of private wealth from politics and support for policies that directly help PEOPLE not corporations. A reduction in bloated defense spending is necessary along with aggressive policies to mitigate energy policies harmful to the environment. Support the progressive movement at all levels. Keep Clinton's administration seated on the hottest coals.
 
 
+16 # Paris10 2016-10-23 15:37
Hillary's foot to the fire? Are you kidding? With establishments & entire MSM except for Fox News, shielding her criminal behavior that is absolutely impossible. If do not believe me, Please google this well researched documentary called:"Clinton Chronicles": by Jeremiah and watch to see how every single crimes by Bill & Hillary were artfully and purposefully hidden from public eyes by our MSM, I was one of the fools who voted twice for Bill.
 
 
-8 # Robbee 2016-10-23 20:49
Quoting Paris10:
I was one of the fools who voted twice for Bill.

- do you still pine for bush 1?
 
 
+16 # lorenbliss 2016-10-23 17:43
@Billsy: "Keep Clinton's administration seated on the hottest coals."

A fine ideal, Billsy, until the secret police come extinguish not only the fire but any of us who dared light it.

Have you forgotten what was done to Occupy?

Have you forgotten what is being done to African-America ns, Hispanics and First Nations peoples by the federalized, militarized local police who will soon be at the Empress' command?

Are you unaware of her theocracy-cult' s fawning admiration of Hitler? Its role in granting U.S. sanctuary to Nazi war criminals? (See "The Family," ibid., pages 152-180)

These are Hillary's ideological inputs, her (morally imbecilic) "moral" tutelege
 
 
+8 # futhark 2016-10-23 20:40
The best means we currently have for thermally stimulating Ms. Clinton posterior appendages is to cast our votes for Dr. Stein. If Ms. Clinton possesses half her alleged intelligence, she should have no problem concluding that a significant portion of the electorate desires the policies advocated by the Green Party and would logically respond accordingly. However, I'm not betting on the second part, even if there is a big turnout for Dr. Stein. Ms. Clinton is already deeply committed to the Deep State agenda, as it has provided the impetus that has carried her to the point of winning the presidency.
 
 
+5 # Patriot 2016-10-23 21:39
futhark, not to mention the money and the cheating...the Deep State's minions have provided....
 
 
+3 # John Puma 2016-10-24 00:30
To Billsy:

Get familiar with Chomsky's definition of "radical" and you can relax, de-bristle and throw it back into the faces of those whose use it as an insult: "a person who does not take orders."
 
 
+39 # kath 2016-10-23 13:56
Why do people think they can "hold Hillary's feet to the fire" once they have elected her? What leverage will they have, having ceded their vote? Do you think she cares if you disapprove? Voting for her just reinforces the idea that liberals have "nowhere else to go" and gives a pass to more bad behavior.
Never Hillary.
 
 
+10 # Merlin 2016-10-23 19:22
kath 2016-10-23 13:56

Spot on kath!

The only difference with your statement I have, is that they don't "think." They FEEL. The bots would be emotionally devastated if they lost their illusions and saw the reality of HRC.

It is because their conclusions are emotionally formed that there is no arguing/discuss ing anything with them. You can discuss issues with those who use logic and reason when forming conclusions, but not when emotions are involved.
 
 
-9 # Robbee 2016-10-23 20:51
Quoting kath:
Why do people think they can "hold Hillary's feet to the fire" once they have elected her? What leverage will they have, having ceded their vote? Do you think she cares if you disapprove? Voting for her just reinforces the idea that liberals have "nowhere else to go" and gives a pass to more bad behavior.
Never Hillary.

- go kiss rump! - if hill wins, bernie and warren become more powerful than ever!
 
 
-7 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:20
Quoting Robbee:
[quote name="kath"]Why do people think they can "hold Hillary's feet to the fire" once they have elected her? What leverage will they have, having ceded their vote? Do you think she cares if you disapprove? Voting for her just reinforces the idea that liberals have "nowhere else to go" and gives a pass to more bad behavior.
Never Hillary.

- go kiss rump! - if hill wins, automatically bernie and warren become more powerful than ever! - much moreso if they flip the senate!

- ya recall what bernie says when he wants progress? he says he will point to folks marching outside the windows of the capitol building!

ultimately any progress depends on us - either we march or we don't

recall what fdr challenged folks - make me work for you

hill will take us as far as we make her and congress take us! - there's nothing wrong with that! - go bernie! and go dem!
 
 
+37 # jimmyjames 2016-10-23 14:08
As George Carlin once famously said, "it's a big club and you ain't in it"

Feet to the fire, my ass!
 
 
-8 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:22
Quoting jimmyjames:
As George Carlin once famously said, "it's a big club and you ain't in it"

Feet to the fire, my ass!

- so right! - your ass!
 
 
+20 # tr4302@gmail.com 2016-10-23 14:12
Never Hillary! Right on kath! Amen.
 
 
-8 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:24
Quoting tr4302@gmail.com:
Never Hillary! Right on kath! Amen.

- so right! - your ass!
 
 
+5 # Indie 2016-10-23 14:39
If we are going to have a people's revolution, we first have to elect a candidate who will keep the country out of the hands of an unstable demagogue. Then we have to keep pressure not only on the president but on congress and on state legislatures.
 
 
-14 # Henry 2016-10-23 15:52
Quoting Indie:
If we are going to have a people's revolution, we first have to elect a candidate who will keep the country out of the hands of an unstable demagogue. Then we have to keep pressure not only on the president but on congress and on state legislatures.


Agreed. Voting Green this time isn't going to do anything but possibly feed the lunatic Trump.
 
 
+15 # Ted 2016-10-23 17:48
Nonsense.

I would argue that we are safer with an "unstable demagogue lunatic" who would be strongly reigned in by congress and senate than with a well-heeled, polished, deeply entrenched, and heavily indebted career politician who is bent on her neo-liberal legacy.
 
 
+7 # economagic 2016-10-23 20:56
Oh, bullshit. T-Rump does not have enough money or know enough people to steal the election at this point. But someone else does should it be necessary.
 
 
+30 # Lucretius 2016-10-23 14:43
Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party have unleashed one of the most vicious antiRussian, AntiPutin campaigns in US history and the press not seen in this country since after the Russian Revolution. Far worse many say since 1962.

To claim Hillary is a "liberal hawk" when she as SEc. of State inaugurated the myth of Russian Agression in the Ukraine as an excuse for a new Cold War which now includes placement of missile defense system in two Eastern European countries on Russia's borders is the height of sophistry.

There are good reasons to vote against this dangerous Cold War Hawk and the Democrats and for a peace vote instead. It's a matter of subjective opinion about who actually constitutes the "lessor evil" in this election.
 
 
-8 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:33
Quoting Lucretius:
Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party have unleashed one of the most vicious antiRussian, AntiPutin campaigns in US history and the press not seen in this country since after the Russian Revolution. Far worse many say (than) 1962.

- only those who were not around in 1962 - or 72 or 82 or - well? know what i mean?

but many know no better! or history! that's for sure!

by the way? guess what he says that makes putin so popular in russia these days? - and it's not about rump!
 
 
+23 # djnova50 2016-10-23 15:09
"Our Hillary"? I'm not voting for her so she's not my Hillary. What she says and what she does will be two different things. Holding Obama's feet to the fire did not get us anywhere. He has prosecuted more whistleblowers than any preceding President. He has invaded more countries and killed more innocents than any previous President, thanks in large part to his drone program. His TPP is like Clinton's NAFTA, only on steroids.

Clinton has promised to continue Obama's policies. If you consider yourself progressive at all, you should consider voting for Jill Stein.

As President, you can be sure that Jill Stein would be the only President to not lead us into yet another war, regime change, drone attacks, etc. Human rights over war profiteering. I will take that any day.
 
 
-7 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:39
as far as it goes - i agree -
Quoting djnova50:
As President, you can be sure that Jill Stein would be the only President to not lead us into yet another war, regime change, drone attacks, etc. Human rights over war profiteering.

- jillie will not lead us as prez at all

# djnova50 2016-10-04 13:41
Green is the new Blue. How long will it take others to realize it. The Dems have been shifting rightwards for a very long time.

and who cares about bernie? or lately? - now is the time to win the '80's THIS TIME AROUND - “In a sense, a vote for a third-party candidate is a vote for Trump, the Republican presidential nominee." - bernie

dj has ssold out to rump

hitler never won more than 37% of the german vote - it's too bad germany had more than 2 parties
 
 
+16 # sus453 2016-10-23 15:34
This election cycle we do not have to vote for the lesser of two evils (as if we ever did). A win by Jill Stein is quite unlikely (though you never know), but by voting for her, we can begin to wean ourselves from a Democratic Party that has always betrayed us (unions - remember them?, single payer health care, social security,social justice, peace) whenever it got the chance.

Let's help build a movement. Vote for Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka! Vote for the Green Party!
 
 
+17 # Ted 2016-10-23 17:36
Also, if the Green Party gets a mere 5 percent of the 2016 presidential vote, the Green Party will automatically be included on every state ballot in 2020 (without having to spend $100s of thousands to petition for ballot placement) AND will automatically recieve $10 million dollars in a public campaign financing grant for the 2020 campaign cycle.

Vote GREEN in 2016
 
 
-5 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:43
Quoting Ted:
Also, if the Green Party gets a mere 5 percent of the 2016 presidential vote, the Green Party will automatically be included on every state ballot in 2020 (without having to spend $100s of thousands to petition for ballot placement) AND will automatically recieve $10 million dollars in a public campaign financing grant for the 2020 campaign cycle.

Vote GREEN in 2016

- source!
 
 
-5 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:53
Quoting Robbee:
Quoting Ted:
Also, if the Green Party gets a mere 5 percent of the 2016 presidential vote, the Green Party will automatically be included on every state ballot in 2020 (without having to spend $100s of thousands to petition for ballot placement) AND will automatically recieve $10 million dollars in a public campaign financing grant for the 2020 campaign cycle.

Vote GREEN in 2016

- source!

- and another thing! in 2020 greens don't have to spend $100s of thousands to petition for ballot placement - repugs will gladly petition to get them on the ballot in every contested state for free! - any port in a storm!
 
 
-2 # ericlipps 2016-10-25 04:52
Quoting Ted:
Also, if the Green Party gets a mere 5 percent of the 2016 presidential vote, the Green Party will automatically be included on every state ballot in 2020 (without having to spend $100s of thousands to petition for ballot placement) AND will automatically recieve $10 million dollars in a public campaign financing grant for the 2020 campaign cycle.

Vote GREEN in 2016

And toss your vote away. Well, it's your choice.
 
 
-1 # Patriot 2016-10-26 15:43
Yes, Eric. It's our choice. We've been over and over this, ad nauseum. So drop it, okay?

Just for the record, we don't think much of YOUR choice, either, nor of you for making it.
 
 
+16 # trusted commenter 2016-10-23 15:42
To avoid disrupting the aura of civility bestowed by Clinton, I'll skip the stronger adjectives and just say this post is insane. And I'll criticize only the post and not its author, even if he's an idiot.

If we're going to do critical solidarity, why don't we start by not voting for her? That would be the most effective first step. And no, she's not the lesser evil.
 
 
+14 # Ted 2016-10-23 17:28
Critical Solidarity equals Green Party Membership.

GP.ORG
 
 
-8 # Robbee 2016-10-23 21:57
Quoting Ted:
Critical Solidarity equals Green Party Membership.

GP.ORG

- there's nothing wrong with GPM - it's running one progressive against another in anything but one primary - that's the enemy of solidarity! - the enemy of progress!
 
 
+24 # RLS 2016-10-23 16:17
The rigging involved more than collusion by the DNC and the media. The laws of statistics say that Sanders WON the primary. Discrepancies between the exit polls and recorded vote favored Clinton in 24 of 26 primaries. The odds are 1 in 190,000 according to Richard Charnin, mathematician and author of three books on election fraud. The odds that 11 of the primaries had large discrepancies are 1 in 77 billion.

Charnin's blog posts going back to the Super Tuesday states:
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/

The State Department uses exit polls to verify elections in other countries. A discrepancy above 2% raises a red flag and an investigation and recount follow. Also, voter suppression occurred in state after state: registrations were changed, millions of provisional ballots were given out, voters were purged (126,000 just in Brooklyn) and much more.

Election Justice USA's 96-page report found that "Sanders lost 184 pledged delegates due to voter suppression and manipulation of the voting machines. As a result, Sanders would have a 9-delegate lead." It called for "decertificatio n of the 2016 Democratic primary results in every state in which we have established a reasonable doubt as to the accuracy of the vote tally."

Democracy Lost: A Report on the Fatally Flawed 2016 Democratic Primaries http://www.election-justice-usa.org/Democracy_Lost_Update1_EJUSA.pdf

No other democracy allows private companies to count the votes in secret on proprietary software.
 
 
+17 # lfeuille 2016-10-23 16:47
Not my Hillary. You say Trump is a bully and a liar. Well she is a sneaky manipulator and an equally big liar. And she is just as much a threat to democratic traditions. You said it yourself. The primaries were rigged. How is that democratic? And don't count on any return to civility. Trump supporters are not going to go away and they are not suddenly going to start loving her. But her main weakness, as you said is in foreign policy. How could any sane rational person knowingly vote for war with Russia?? And not radicalism that prevents us from voting for her, it is sanity. Neither candidate meets the minimum standard of acceptability for the Presidency so I won't vote for either. I voted for Gore and Obama, but I won't vote for her.

This article is worse that the fawning puff pieces on Hillary we have been getting daily. The author isn't ignorant of her faults, just dismisses them as insignificant. World War III is not insignificant.
 
 
+17 # theodolyst 2016-10-23 17:56
We must all take the responsibility of NOT voting for either one of these damaged individuals for president. I will vote for Jill Stein and mostly democratic down ballot. Only god can determine who is the lesser evil of these two.
 
 
+7 # rural oregon progressive 2016-10-23 17:59
After many contacts with the Secretary of State Office here in Oregon, I have been informed that the "sore-loser" law will not be invoked for Bernie because he did not lose the Oregon Primary, but rather won in a landslide. So, I and many of my friends plan on writing in Bernie Sanders on our ballots.
 
 
+9 # Ted 2016-10-23 18:43
Please be careful.

Here is a rough, but informative short video about the dangers of a Bernie write-in campaign from one of the founders of BernieOrBust.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CYwEOmMTwSw&feature=youtu.be
 
 
+8 # Patriot 2016-10-23 21:53
rural, please vote Green! Stein will be on your ballot; her platform is even more progressive than Sanders'. Go to gp.org and Jill2016.com, and read for yourself.

In most states, write-in candidates must have registered as write-in candidates for votes for them to be counted. Sanders has not registered as a write-in candidate in any states. Thus, in most states, write-in votes for him will not be counted. Makes me sick to say that, because, if everyone who wants him as our president could vote for him, he'd undoubtedly win. Rural, you have my empathy!

Please, do check out Stein and the Green Party platform. I think you'll like what you see. Stein will be on the ballot in 45 states, and is a CERTIFIED write-in candidate in three others. If everyone who wanted the platform Sanders' proposed would vote for Stein, she could very well win--if our votes are counted as we cast them!

Please, others, if you're thinking about sitting out the election, DON'T! There will be many other offices on the ballot, and you ought to express your preferences of local, state, and Congressional candidates, even if there's no one you want to vote for for president. If that's your position, just leave that box blank. If nothing else, you'll have indicated that you don't support ANY of the presidential candidates! Go for it! But, please, please, do go to the polls and cast your ballot!
 
 
+7 # Felix Julian 2016-10-24 08:49
Quoting rural oregon progressive:
After many contacts with the Secretary of State Office here in Oregon, I have been informed that the "sore-loser" law will not be invoked for Bernie because he did not lose the Oregon Primary, but rather won in a landslide. So, I and many of my friends plan on writing in Bernie Sanders on our ballots.


I feel your pain. Unfortunately, there are laws specific to write-ins and you should be very, very clear and make sure your friends know, what the laws are in Oregon. You may very well have your whole ballot tossed out. Don't waste your vote- invest it! #VoteGreen42016
 
 
+2 # rural oregon progressive 2016-10-24 15:11
Thanks for the input, but as I said previously, I have checked. I posed the question very carefully to ensure that such a write-in would, in fact, be tallied ... I had a series of back and forth contact with the Oregon SOS office, and finally got a definitive answer from the department last week. It was confusing and convoluted, but after the series of emails, they gave me a definitive answer. Write ins will be tallied, and then counted if the "category" of "write in" exceeds the number of individual votes of people on the ballot. Also, we researched precedent in Oregon and found that write in votes were indeed tallied for John Anderson (failed Republican candidate in 1980) in Oregon. I am comfortable with my choice. I was originally planning on voting for Jill after Hill stole the primary, but it is Bernie whom I support, and will continue to do so. If Bernie can win any electoral votes, and if Hill and Donald fail to win sufficient electoral votes, then Congress will have to do the selection... And if they are doing the selecting, Bernie has the most experience and most popular support of any of the candidates... I know it is a long shot, but I will vote my conscience.
 
 
-13 # Rain17 2016-10-23 18:43
What are you all going to do when Stein gets less than 1%of the vote?
 
 
+18 # Ted 2016-10-23 18:44
Keep building our strength.

SOMEONE has to care about our future.

But with over 16 million Bernie supporters who were so strongly moved by the same issues and priorities that Stein is also fighting for, I'm confident it will be much, much, more than merely 1 percent.
 
 
+13 # lorenbliss 2016-10-23 19:33
Trouble is, once Hillary has her finger on the thermonuclar trigger, we may not have a future.
 
 
+8 # Merlin 2016-10-23 19:27
Rain17 2016-10-23 18:43

Another cut and paste job. You may be in the running for the top slot of the most inane posters posting here.

You are not even a joke with your inanity.
 
 
+5 # librarian1984 2016-10-24 06:51
Puddles! Back with your one joke.

How pathetically predictable!
 
 
+13 # A_Har 2016-10-23 21:14
OUR Hillary...??(co ugh, cough) WFT! Give me a break: I DON'T claim her.

Klinton is a complete mess. Wikileaks showed so much fraud and crap: she is swimming in a sewer. Rotten to the CORE.
 
 
-8 # Robbee 2016-10-24 09:04
Quoting A_Har:
OUR Hillary...??(cough, cough) WFT! Give me a break: I DON'T claim her.

Klinton is a complete mess. Wikileaks showed so much fraud and crap: she is swimming in a sewer. Rotten to the CORE.

- we have had plenty of wikileaks released - for max effect - two days before each of 3 debates - still no smoking gun - no sign that hill lead or encouraged or appreciated anything that went on at the dnc - oh well! - maybe 2 days before the election we'll finally get our smoking gun?
 
 
-1 # joejoe 2016-10-23 22:19
This website censors you - despite what it says above. I noted that Marc (person who operates the blog) tends to post pro Hillary material and almost never discusses Jill Stein. The slant is definitely biased. On occasion I would post something like "Never Hillary and Never Trump." with a explanation as to why. I would also ask that people not donate to Marc as he is biased and probably gets donations from the DNC in any case. I think the worst word I used was "crap." I did not insult anyone. All my posts were removed. I never got into any heated exchange with anyone on this site. My handle was jomo1. I call this censorship. I did not post often, no trolling at all. I though you should know. I suspect this will be pulled shortly as well.

p.s. I am now noticing that it seems like other anti-Clinton commentary has been removed as well. Shame on you Marc.
 
 
-1 # LionMousePudding 2016-10-24 00:42
Troll footprints, troll smell... Oh it's Joejoe the troll! I wonder how many dozen articles he posted his self-satisfied rant. I guess I'll be at this a while!

How dare you tell people not to fund this site! If these articles are worth nothing to you then get the heck out and never read them again. Certainly don't comment.

You have a sense of entitlement which says you may use a service for free and then cause it damage because there are some articles you don't like and others you don't see. It is disgusting.

Marc Ash owes you NOTHING. He does not owe you the articles you want. He puts out this incredible news site that I guarantee you are happily reading about other topics but hey, you deserve those for free because the rest of the articles aren't exactly what you want.

You disgust me. Telling people not to donate to something so important.

Who SHOULD pay? Or is your actual goal to make RSN disappear because it wasn't perfect?

You don't deserve this. I hope I never see your name again.
 
 
-4 # Robbee 2016-10-24 08:56
Quoting joejoe:
Marc probably gets donations from the DNC ... I did not insult anyone.

- rump never insults anyone either - he just states the facts - ask him
 
 
-4 # Caliban 2016-10-24 10:47
Surely this # joejoe is a Republican Trumpie Robot, right?
 
 
+1 # joejoe 2016-10-24 13:30
Nope - Jill Stein all the way.

Never SHill and Never Rump!
 
 
-1 # Anonymot 2016-10-24 03:04
Well, not quite, guomoshi. There are two areas in which she is expert and she'll probably bring improvements: women who want abortions and the LGBT community. It's just that she puts the entire rest of the world at risk for those two areas close to her heart.
 
 
+1 # Felix Julian 2016-10-24 08:52
Quoting Anonymot:
Well, not quite, guomoshi. There are two areas in which she is expert and she'll probably bring improvements: women who want abortions and the LGBT community. It's just that she puts the entire rest of the world at risk for those two areas close to her heart.

Your prejudices are showing.
 
 
+1 # AshamedAmerican 2016-10-24 19:16
I respect your thinking in general, Anonymot. But if HRC has a heart, it surely is not big enough to include those two large demographics. Though these will be the likely areas of her crumb droppings.
 
 
-1 # ericlipps 2016-10-25 04:50
Groan. "Hillary the mad killer" seems to be a dominant meme around here.

Dare I suggest that this sort of hysterical hate-mongering is one reason RSN is having trouble with fundraising? Rational people just get fed up after awhile.
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-10-26 15:49
Eric, we're discussing Clinton's record and her own statements. We're not hysterical and we don't hate her, but we sure as Hell don't whant her in the White House.

However...YOU're not exactly gaining in popularity....

Since you're convinced Stein won't garner even 2% of the vote, what do you care if we vote for her? Even you can't possibly believe that your repetious snipes will actually persuade anyone who doesn't now support Her Magesty to suddenly decide to do so--or can you?
 
 
+5 # DLJ 2016-10-24 07:29
Dems prostrate themselves before the Mecca of power,
Being paid to meekly lay down and suffer defeat.
The population demographics of America favor Dems.
But what do they do for 2016-- float a Damsel,
A Lay-Down Kitten for the financial and corporate interests,
To deal with the distress of being zombyfied.
For the Generals and war lovers Killary Clintlock is a George Bush in drag.
In the early 1960s many young women from the wealthy suburbs
Danced with Flowers in their hair,
This Damsel was a Goldwater enthusiast.
Rising to Senator she went on board in 2003 with Bush´s War.
As Secretary of State she guided the War Machine,
Tried to outdo Henry Kissingun.
Bombed Libya, threatened Syria and sent Islamist terrorists there, sanctioned Iran,
Fired the flames of perpetual war.
For 2016, Warriors and Wall Street too are sure
She is no “Populist”.
Hillary, Killary, Pillory Sock,
The Servant goes to the Dock,
The clock strikes High Noon,
The servant goes down,
Hillary, Killary, Pillory Sock.
Oh give us some “populism,”
No more counterfeit progressives.
 
 
-5 # Jaax88 2016-10-24 12:02
Kath:
What do you think the American political landscape will look like if many or most progressives took your position and Trump is elected? How would progressives be able to oppose and defeat most of Trump and the GOP's legislative proposal and deal with potentially a generation or so of more newly appointed conservative S.C. justices, that ill amount to a packed conservative court? Once the S.C is set illiberal, non-progressive bend there is little to no progressive pressure that can effectively be asserted in the short term. Only problematic efforts for a constitutional amendment or essentially a clean sweep by progressives for the presidency and Congress would be able to change the trajectory national politics then. No I do not like Hillary's attachment to big money and big business and her potential to approve trade agreements that are designed to favor big business, that give up some sovereignty to unknown, uncontrollable potential foreign arbitrators that could penalize American taxpayers for laws and rules that are designed to protect the rights and interests of the American public, such as the environment. I would much rather have a president with whom there is potential to persuade than a person who is a fool and from a progressive point of view has shown himself not to be in touch with progressive values.
 
 
+3 # Patriot 2016-10-24 12:21
From "Who is this?" (in the masthead above):

"Reader Supported News (RSN) will carry forward the core concept that the reader is best served by financial control of the news service they depend on. No outside investment capital was used in the startup of RSN. No advertising money will be accepted by RSN. No grants will be sought by RSN. We like having the reader as our boss."

So much for our requests for equal coverage of ALL presidential candidates....
 
 
+1 # Caliban 2016-10-25 11:58
Sorry, Patriot, but I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at.

How exactly does "We like having the reader as our boss" translate into "So much for our requests for equal coverage of ALL presidential candidates....".

I'm not challenging your statement, but I'm not getting the implied connection, and it is possible others might also be puzzled.

Would you clarify, please?
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-10-26 15:55
Caliban, many readers have asked for more balanced coverage of all FOUR parties' candidates, and acknoledgment of both the sabotage of Sanders' campaign and the very obvious fraud that took lace in the primaries--yet all we get is garbage like the article above, repetitiously touting how we absolutely must vote for Clinton and must under no circumstances vote for Trump--exactly the junk we can find at any newsstand and all over our TVs.

Not exactly being treated like "our boss", are we?
 
 
-7 # ericlipps 2016-10-25 04:46
No doubt the primary fight between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders was rigged.]/quote]
You sound like Trump. If your guy lost, the contest just HAD to be rigged, because otherwise Bernie would have just run away with it.

Drivel. Bernie Sanders is an elderly New York Jew who never missed a chance to bray, "I'm a socialist!"

How well was that SUPPOSED to play in, say, the South?

Then there was his failure to connect with nonwhite voters. Just about everywhere Bernie won, the population was overwhelmingly white. THAT wasn't going to play well in large states like California and, yes, even New York.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN