RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "Whatever happens with the nomination, we respectfully request that Bernie soon organize a broad series of grassroots gatherings where those who have worked so hard for him will get the best possible training and inspiration toward becoming lifelong activists who'll make a tangible difference in the day-to-day business of saving this planet."

Hillary Clinton. (photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty)
Hillary Clinton. (photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty)


Is Hillary Stealing the Nomination? Will Bernie Birth a Long-Term Movement?

By Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman, Reader Supported News

27 April 16

 

t this delicate moment in the primary season, we all need to take a deep breath and evaluate what comes next.

Bernie Sanders has a mathematical chance to win. But Hillary seems the likely Democratic nominee.

Donald Trump has an army of delegates. But if he doesn’t win on the first ballot, Paul Ryan could be the Republican nominee.

Oy!

For a wide variety of reasons, we believe Hillary and Bernie could beat Trump. But we’re not sure about Ryan, who we find absolutely terrifying.

Key is the stripping of our voter rolls. Millions of Democrats have already been disenfranchised. In a close race, that could make the difference.

Also key is the flipping of the electronic vote count, which few on the left seem to be willing to face in all its depressing finality.

Both are explored in our new Strip & Flip Selection of 2016: Five Jim Crows & Electronic Election Theft (introduced by Mimi Kennedy and Greg Palast) at www.freepress.org and www.solartopia.org

As Greens, we believe this election’s most critical imperative is that Bernie convert the HUGE upwelling of mostly young grassroots discontent he has ignited into a long-term multi-issue movement. His success won’t be measured by whether he wins the nomination or presidency. Miles Mogulescu has written nicely about this at The Huffington Post

It matters most that those he’s energized emerge after November full of commitment and heart. We’ve seen too many electoral campaigns feed into a general “disillusionment” when they don’t win the vote count. We’ve seen too many youthful uprisings too quickly dissipate.

As geezer vets of the civil rights, anti-war, No Nukes, social justice, election protection and other campaigns, we desperately want all these brilliant folks of all ages to take on the issues nearest to their hearts with renewed ferocity in the coming months, years, decades.

Having awakened this glorious beast, we need Professor Sanders to teach this class of ‘16 the ultimate lessons in staying power (of which he is such a sterling example).

So whatever happens with the nomination, we respectfully request that Bernie soon organize a broad series of grassroots gatherings where those who have worked so hard for him will get the best possible training and inspiration toward becoming lifelong activists who’ll make a tangible difference in the day-to-day business of saving this planet.

We all know that some meaningful changes can be made by putting better people in office. But in in the long run it’s the nitty-gritty grind of facing down the corporations issue by issue, place by place, nuke by nuke, that will save us.

Along the way there’s the collapse of our electoral system. From Jimmy Carter to Harvard to the UN and so many others who’ve studied it, it’s patently obvious the mechanisms by which we conduct elections in this country are ridiculously decrepit and corrupt.

As a partial solution, we’ve concocted the “Ohio Plan,” which demands: universal automatic voter registration at age 18; a four-day national holiday for voting; voter ID based on a signature that matches the registration form with stiff felony penalties for cheating; universal hand-counted paper ballots.

We also want money out of politics, public-funded campaigns, an end to gerrymandering, and abolition of the Electoral College.

In 2016, the first thing to face is the massive disenfranchisement of millions of voters, mostly citizens of color and youth. We are heartened to see Bernie and Hillary joined together in an Arizona lawsuit.

But the long lines and urban registration stripping that we saw in Phoenix, Madison, and elsewhere this spring will spell doom for the Democrats if they cannot guarantee their constituencies’ the right to vote in November.

At this point, we’re not optimistic. The efforts at re-enfranchisement are little and late. Among those doing superb work on this stripping of our voter rolls are the great Greg Palast (www.gregpalast.com), Ari Berman ofThe Nation, and others.

But the electronic flipping of the alleged vote count remains a demon black box. The 2000 election was turned from Gore to Bush by electronic manipulations in Volusia County, Florida. The 2004 election was turned from Kerry to Bush in a Chattanooga basement which transformed a 4.2% Democratic lead into a 2.5% GOP victory in 90 dark minutes.

All that could happen again in 2016.

Over the years we’ve respected the work of The Nation’s Josh Holland, who’s expressed concern about our reporting on indications of irregularities that seem to favor Hillary over Bernie. 

But our stated conclusions on them remain far from conclusive. If we thought we had definitive evidence that the Clinton campaign was stealing the nomination from the Sanders campaign, we’d say so in direct, explicit and unmistakable phrases.

Simply put: we do NOT at this point believe they rise to the level of provable theft, as we are certain was the case in 2000 and 2004.

We understand concerns and welcome the dialogue. But we’d like to avoid the usual circular firing squad.

Writing in The Nation, Josh has deemed it important to mention disagreements with our former collaborator Steve Rosenfeld, and our good friend Mark Hertsgaard. 

Mark’s writing on global warming has been legend. In 2004 he criticized some of our reporting on the Ohio vote count. We disagreed with him then and still do. Nothing in the past 12 years of our research and writing while based in central Ohio has surfaced that would make us change our reporting on how the 2004 election was stolen. Quite the opposite.

But other comments on the nature of electronic election theft throw up a HUGE red flag. And here we worry about a dangerous gap in the work from The Nation and the left as a whole.

If international election standards were applied to the 2016 primaries, eight states – Georgia, Massachusetts, Alabama, Texas, Mississippi, Ohio, New York, Tennessee – would be investigated for suspected fraudulent election results, because the actual vote deviates so greatly from the exit polls. Also, the exit polls indicated that Sanders won in Illinois, Massachusetts and Missouri. 

The bottom line is this: there is no viable method for monitoring or verifying the electronic vote count in 2016. In a close race, which we expect this fall, the outcome could be flipped in key swing states where GOP governors and secretaries of state are running the elections. This includes most notably Ohio, Michigan, Iowa and Arizona, plus North Carolina and Florida (where the situations are slightly different).

Steve has called this “a stretch.” He and Josh seem to dismiss the assertion that an election can be electronically stolen as “conspiracy theory,” apparently based on the idea that such thefts would become obvious fodder for an infuriated media and public outrage.

This we find this overly trusting and dangerous. Under our current system there is no way to counter-indicate a stolen electronic vote count except by exit polling, for which Josh has expressed contempt. Exit polls in other countries (especially Germany) are highly reliable; here the raw data is too, but can be hard to get. And it’s now standard procedure to have the public numbers “adjusted” to fit official vote counts, fraudulent or otherwise.

And even raw data exit polls have no legal standing. Nor, apparently, does the court system itself.  

After the 2004 election, we won a ruling in the King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell federal lawsuit. Bob was lead attorney, Harvey a plaintiff. Judge Algernon Marbley ordered Ohio’s 88 county election boards to compile their records and bring them to Columbus for an official recount. But 56 of those 88 counties failed to produce the requested records. Some boards of elections “accidentally” destroyed all of the requested ballots. No one was prosecuted. There was never a recount.

Admitted into evidence in the lawsuit was the Ohio secretary of state’s architectural map of the computer network used to count Ohio’s votes. It is included here so everyone can take a look.

The votes were counted by private contractors in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The three main companies involved were all heavily linked to the Right to Life movement in Ohio. The Free Press also uncovered the contract where these companies arranged with the Secretary of State’s office a year prior to the 2004 election to move the Ohio vote count to Tennessee should Ohio’s supercomputers fail on Election Day, which would happen for the first time in known history. Cyber-security expert Stephen Spoonamore told the Free Pressthat the computer configuration was set up to allow a “man in the middle attack” to alter Ohio’s votes.

The late night shift in the 2004 electronic vote count in 10 decisive swing states was by all accounts a “virtual statistical impossibility,” with the odds against that happening in the millions. But now we are being told the idea that this could indicate a stolen election is “conspiracy theory.”

PLEASE!!! If someone – anyone! – can demonstrate EXACTLY how the electronic vote count will be monitored, verified and made clear to the media in 2016, and then guarantee that the public and the courts will react with enforceable fury, we will be eternally grateful.

We hope in the meantime The Nationwill add to Ari Berman’s fine reporting on the stripping of voter eligibilities an in-depth investigation into the “other shoe” of election theft – the flipping of the electronic vote count.

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) raised the “Diebold question” at a Congressional Black Caucus hearing on April 21, 2016. Johnson noted how easy it would be to hack the old voting machines, many that are over 20 years old, and vowed to introduce legislation that would make voting secure.

Finally, we are often asked how, if the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen, Obama won in 2008 and 2012. We did, after all, write in 2004 that the 2008 election was being rigged.

The answer is simple: it was. But Obama won by far too many votes to have that election credibly stolen. And his campaign was not in denial.  

We are happy to hear from Steve that our reporting on Ohio 2004 might have enhanced Obama’s scrutiny on the 2008 vote count.

But it should be made clear that Obama’s victory could easily have been flipped had the vote count been closer and had fewer states been so definitively won. We believe he actually won by more than 10 million votes in both 2008 and 2012, but was officially credited with far less.

Where, exactly, is the line beyond which an election can’t be stolen? Do the Democrats need to win by 5%… 10%… to get an official victory? And what then happens to the down-ballot races?

We prefer not to see those limits tested again.  

And we need to have people prepared to take tangible action. In 2012 Bob Fitrakis filed a successful Election Day lawsuit preventing illegal computer patches being rigged into Ohio’s electronic machines. In a closer race, those patches might have made the difference. We believe the expectation that they would work did cause Karl Rove to do his legendary flipped-out double-take on Fox News as he was told Mitt Romney had lost Ohio.

We also reported (as did The Nation) that voting machines in key Cincinnati precincts were financially linked to the Romney family. We each wrote separate articles about that and were each blacklisted by Daily Kos for doing so, even though the vast bulk of Harvey’s 150+ previous blogs on that site were about nuclear power and renewable energy.

Some publications that aren’t progressive understand the problem. Twenty-three minutes into the 2012 Election Day, Forbes took the Free Pressreporting seriously, and warned voters of the dangers of private, for-profit companies owning and maintaining voting machines.

Over the years we’ve been repeatedly told that we should stop reporting on electronic election theft because it might discourage voter turnout. And that the key to a Democratic victory in 2016 will be another massive vote count victory that will be “too big to steal.”

Frankly, we don’t see that happening this year.

And we find such talk deeply disturbing. We have no doubt that innumerable US House and Senate races have been stolen over the years, along with governorships, control of state legislatures, referenda and more, all of it producing a deep reinforcement of the corporate control of our government. 

We’re also reasonably certain that neither Hillary nor Bernie is likely to amass in November a margin of victory over either Ryan or Trump that would be big enough to negate the possibility of massive disenfranchisement and electronic vote flipping in key states like Ohio, Michigan, Iowa or Arizona. 

And anyway … why the hell are we even thinking about leaving such a problem unsolved? 

This disease needs a definitive cure. 

We look forward to further reasoned and reasonable dialogue. We invite Josh and Ari to join us on our panel at the upcoming Left Forum in New York in May. We welcome a public discussion with Steve and Mark in California.

Above all, we hope to see those millions of Bernie supporters joining us at the reactor sites, the banks, the women’s health centers, the shelters, the schools and so many other critical hot spots in our corporate-plagued society, no matter who wins (or how) in November.



Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman are co-authors of six books on election integrity, including the new Strip & Flip Selection of 2016: Five Jim Crows and Electronic Election Theft(www.freepress.org and www.solartopia.org). Bob’s Fitrakis Files are at www.freepress.org. Harvey’s Organic Spiral of US History is coming soon at www.solartopia.org.

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   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+86 # grandlakeguy 2016-04-27 14:49
Dear Bob and Harvey, I have closely followed your wonderful work all these years and applaud you for not giving up in disgust! I cancelled my subscription to The Nation more than a decade ago due to their insistence that this problem was a "conspiracy theory".
You have proven so many times over that our elections are absolutely being manipulated at every level and yet both political parties pretend that there is no validity to the obvious truth and ignore the subject.
I love your "Ohio Plan" for voting guidelines and fell that it should be a national standard.
I sincerely hope that the Sanders campaign looks into this and seizes this problem as a major campaign issue and starts speaking to the fraud that is the American "election theater" at every public appearance.
Our fraudulent elections are a national disgrace and I hope that someday the treasonous criminals that have been involved in this outrage are brought to justice and spend the rest of their lives in prison if convicted.
What they have stolen from every citizen is beyond imagination.
 
 
+37 # Crumbling Empire 2016-04-27 15:48
Quoting grandlakeguy:
I love your "Ohio Plan" for voting guidelines and fell that it should be a national standard....

What they have stolen from every citizen is beyond imagination.

MORE THAN OHIO PLAN. The Ohio Plan is a good one, I agree GRANDLAKE, but the mentions above of getting money out of politics (reversing BUCKLEY V. VALEO which held that Money is Speech), having PUBLICLY-FUNDED ONLY CAMPAIGNS and the elimination of the Electoral College system are even more critical.

I also champion MANDATORY VOTING, which Australia has, and which results in something like 90% voter turnouts.

BEYOND IMAGINATION. What the Plutocracy has stolen from US citizens is not "beyond imagination"; Marx accurately predicted corporate/bourg eois domination of government, which we call Fascism, as an inevitability in capitalistic society.

“The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.”
― Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto
 
 
+59 # librarian1984 2016-04-27 22:14
I think what is beyond imagination, and perhaps what grandlake meant, is that it is difficult to imagine all we've lost, what our country would look like if the people who actually won the races were in office. How different our nation would be if districts had never been gerrymandered. For that matter, an alternate America where JFK and RFK and King and Malcolm had not been assassinated.

Through violence and election fraud, and a thousand other ways, this country has been hijacked by corporate interests and power whores. It's beyond imagination because the corruption is so vast and the effects so far-reaching as to be incalculable.

People are dead because of greed and corruption. People lose their jobs. Kids go hungry. While the elite pick out a new yacht, the schools rot. Multitudes fester in jail. Others commit suicide.

Maybe, without the corruption and greed, corporations would feel more connected to their workers and their communities. Maybe we'd have innovated in battery and renewable energy technology instead of war ordnance. Maybe we'd have a great national childcare system or light rail and bike lanes and high speed coast-to-coast train service, or the best public schools in the world.

Instead we have the worst election integrity among industrialized nations, and a country to match.
 
 
+23 # lorenbliss 2016-04-27 23:46
The USian nation is, in this sense, the world's deadliest banana republic.

More broadly, our situation today is that of proletarians in the old Russian Empire under Nicholas II or the sans culottes of Imperial France in the final years of the Old Regime.

In this context, a more rational solution -- rather than making demands we know will be rejected -- is the quiet formation of a national network of local socialist study groups.

The need for such a network is implicit in "Socialize the Banks," part of this same evening's RSN download.

It is made explicit by my own contribution to the "Socialize" comment thread, here: http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/36563-socialize-the-banks

Meanwhile, contemplate this irony: USia has become the 21st Century equivalent of that unspeakably oppressive kingdom which -- for its own imperial purposes -- midwifed our separation from Great Britain.

Yes, we have become the modern counterpart of pre-revolutiona ry France...to the extent many of us are so impoverished, we cannot even afford to replace our worn-out pants.
 
 
+4 # Crumbling Empire 2016-04-28 11:11
Quoting librarian1984:
I think what is beyond imagination, and perhaps what grandlake meant, is that it is difficult to imagine all we've lost, what our country would look like if the people who actually won the races were in office.

LIBRARIAN: We're just talking semantics here, but once again, Marx PREDICTED this end to any capitalistic system.

INEVITABLE. Our losses not only are easy to imagine, to me at least, they were inevitable.

CRUMBLING LIFE. I see conditions only getting worse: $10 Starbucks coffees, wage reductions, toxins into the environment, increased government surveillance to the point of suffocation of rights, unaffordable health care, increased military spending and the like.

Which is why I use the moniker CRUMBLING EMPIRE.

PAST EMPIRE TRAJECTORIES. What empire in the past has reformed itself and transformed into a healthy, vibrant, sustainable nation? Maybe the British Empire, but that was by the accident named Adolf Hitler, similar to Isaac Asimov's unforeseen mutant Mule, and the great fortune of having the US protectorate nursing it back to health, plus the British Empire contracted by 90% or so in terms of power and reach and totally was bankrupt in 1945.
 
 
+4 # CelticNavigator 2016-04-30 08:51
If I'm not mistaken, Crumbling, Aussies are not forced to actually vote, but they do have to show up at polling places as part of their civic duty. This explains why they have 90% voter turnout, rather than nearly 100%. Aussies are more independent than most folks, and clearly the ones who don't vote after signing that they have reached the polls are refusing to vote for either Tweedle Dee OR Tweedle Dum in a given election year.

Mere nit-picking, I realize; and don't WE wish every Merkin had to show up at polls and use paper ballots only, eh? I saw a C-Span program featuring an assistant U.S. Attorney General who stated that computer hacking will soon result in $2 trillion in thefts per year... and we are supposed to believe votes can't be hacked/flipped?
 
 
+13 # MsAnnaNOLA 2016-04-28 08:26
If the Democratic party or nor its candidates won't come out against the vote manipulation then they are probably in on it. They probably have an agreement to share power every 8 years by electing president from the other party. This way they always win. The status quo wins every single time. They get to choose the candidates and the winner every time. Very predictable.

How else do you reconcile Kerry Edwards not contesting the election in Ohio? It was known right then that there were problems. If the parties wanted free and fair elections we would have them.

They are a duopoly two sides of the same coin. Each party gives mere scraps to its constituents meanwhile they for the most part continue the main themes of the day. More war, more rights taken away, more bailouts for the banks,no real investigation or information of government crimes, no criminal prosecutions of anyone in power of either party despite them announcing their crimes on national television broadcasts (see Bush/Cheney on torture).
 
 
-17 # rocback 2016-04-28 10:57
Is this where they pass the tin foil hats out?
 
 
+5 # Anarchist 23 2016-04-28 18:26
Tin foil hats actually conduct more; those in the know, like the entire CIA/NSA complexes are sheathed in copper to prevent the capture or penetration of electronics. As for conspiracy theory in general, Jules Caesar found out they exist as did Jesus, among others. Fascinating subject but hardly unfounded.
 
 
0 # CL38 2016-04-29 04:10
See you're already wearing one.
 
 
+5 # lfeuille 2016-04-28 15:28
Kerry's personal vanity. He didn't want to be seen as a "spoil sport". Too many candidates in that position forget that it is not about them, it is about their supporters. And the legal system encourages that view. There is no way for a voter or group of voters to contest the results, it is left to the candidate, who usually won't fight. What we really need is to give voters the right to contest the election and that probably can't be done without a constitutional amendment guaranteeing all citizens the right to vote.
 
 
+3 # Anarchist 23 2016-04-28 18:34
Around our way, it was known as the Skull & Bones election as both candidates were members of that secret society and were 'brothers under the skin'...Kerry folded like a cheap lawn chair on that one, although later I often wondered if Edwards, the popular running mate who vowed to fight was not found out to be quite crooked and maybe was used as blackmail.Howev er, ever after, appalled, I called John F. Kerry 'JFK -the Farce' because his initials were JFK and at that crucial moment in our national history, the first JFK was assassinated... the second one just gave in..and as the quote goes 'History repeats, the first time as tragedy, the second as farce.' The tragedy of this country is probably woven in its creation but it is a shame because of the suffering of those who are innocent of creating and maintaining the on-going horror, the institutionaliz ed evils. And with this election, another cross-roads and then....?
 
 
+9 # Radscal 2016-04-28 16:49
I completely concur that the only explanation for the DNC passively allowing Republicans to steal elections is that they (or their owners) benefit, too.

I noted here earlier that, on 4/20/16, Rachel Maddow noted vote flipping in Republican Primary in New York.
With 82% of precincts reporting, Ben Carson had 2,056 votes in one county.
But, with 100% reported, Ben Carson had 162.

Somehow, Carson lost 1,894 votes!

But of course, Maddow just rolled her eyes and laughed about those zany Republicans.

Now we have proof of vote flipping in the PA Democratic Primary.

Bernie Sanders LOST 2,655 votes in Sussex County PA.

With 16% of precincts reporting, he had 6,247 votes.
When 40% of precincts reported, his total had dropped to 3,592.

Sanders did better in Broome County. There, he only “Lost” 989 votes.

https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/2016/04/26/election-live-results-observers-catch-sanders-votes-going-down-screen-shot/

Of course, Ms. Maddow hasn’t noted how those “zany” Democrats are flipping votes, too.
 
 
+13 # newell 2016-04-27 16:08
So if we are worried about Cruz or Ryan--why in the hell are we dumping on Trump? We should have him on our bumpers. He is the liberal god's gift to us--but we are helping the conservatives keep him from the nomination. He can't beat Hillary or Bernie. I'm beginning to think we liberals are more stupid than the conservatives-- (ignoring who's correct of course).
 
 
+42 # grandlakeguy 2016-04-27 17:15
newell: Trump WILL beat Hillary. So many Bernie supporters are passionate about their candidate for two reasons:
First, he is honest and has espoused the same wonderful concepts to transform our nation and improve the lives of it's inhabitants for decades.

Second: Bernie supporters, to a very large extent, have done their home work and know all about Hillary's record as a neo con hawk, her subservience to Wall Street and other corporate influences and her constant changes of position on vital issues for the convenience of gaining support. Hence they strongly support Bernie as the far better candidate and infinitely better potential President.

A large percentage of Bernie supporters (myself included) will NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton!

Most Hillary supporters when asked will make statements like "it's her turn" or "it is time for a woman president". When a vicious campaign as such that will be surely waged against her by the Trump forces progresses many of her supporters will not much like what they learn about her and her support will diminish.

Trump will so damage Hillary, with the actual recounting of her terrible judgement and blood soaked record, that he will most likely defeat her.
 
 
-22 # rocback 2016-04-27 18:19
Latest USA Today poll shows Hillary crushing Trump 50 to 39.
 
 
+26 # RMDC 2016-04-27 19:17
rockback -- just curious, are you indeed a paid Hillary troll? It is ok if you are. You need a job, too. But it would be nice to know just to help read the posts you write.

Polls right now on Hillary vs Trump are meaningless. Sanders beats Trump by a bigger margin. But things will all be different once the conventions are over.

It may be that the Clintons engineer something that will give Hillree a boost. It won't work for me, however.
 
 
+28 # Billy Bob 2016-04-27 20:49
It may also be that the FBI is filled with conservatives with a grudge, waiting for the right time (after the convention) to spring the request for indictment and arrest for espionage.

PLEASE NOTE, however that, since this IS the FBI, it is NOT another "whitewater". This is a serious criminal investigation, and they don't seem to be in the mood to do any exonerating in the near future. I'm wondering if Clinton's past may catch up to her and she may actually be held accountable for, yet another instance of her megalomania.
 
 
+13 # Anonymot 2016-04-27 21:53
I think you're in wishful thinking. That would simply be too good to be true. The FBI is part of Deep State and were they to indict her after the convention, such chaos would ensue that... Wait a minute, Guess who would take over the government. The Germans did it in 1932...
 
 
+5 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 00:12
This would be a conclusion to the history of the United States in keeping with Shakespearean or Classical Greek tragedy: candidate Hillary jailed as an espion; der Trumper president by default; der Trumper's SS (Bikers for Trump, i.e., the Hells Angels, Pagans, Gypsy Jokers etc.) sworn in as federal auxiliaries; all of their targets -- at least all of us who are young and/or physically able -- fleeing the country or hiding in the mountains and forests...

Yep, very much like Germany in 1932, with one unspeakably ominous exception: where is the Red Orchestra now that we so desperately need it?
 
 
+10 # Anonymot 2016-04-28 00:55
The Red Orchestra will come from the ranks of the Sanders movement. There are brave folks here and there like Ellsberg, Kiriakou and Snowden, etc. They spring up when needed although at the moment it is pretty depressing. Lip service seems to be hiding the beast's true nature.

Our resemblance to the German early Thirties is bone chilling. I've said for some time now that the 20% of our white population is of German descent and that 2000 years ago Tacitus (one of Hitler's heroes) described them as warlike and terrifying. I am a student of behavioral genetics and believe the Teutonic traditions have been replicated for thousands of years. If in doubt, ask Drumf or Kissinger or Rumsfeld etc.

Of course a lot of Germans were anti-Nazi and fled or resisted, but most were what we'd call "sheeple" today.
 
 
+7 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 02:52
Bone-chilling indeed, a nation of what the Nazis called "Good Germans" (the Ku Klux equivalent of which is "Good Christians"). Though our government -- particularly in how it has turned against the entire 99 Percent -- is more a latter-day incarnation of Nicholas II's regime than that of der Fuehrer.

What scares me most as a Leftist is our absolutely hopeless lack of organizing skill -- an absence infinitely reinforced by the lethal taint of a so-called "anarchy" that in reality is nothing more than rhetorically disguised Ayn Rand hatefulness.

As I witnessed firsthand as an early activist in Occupy Tacoma, this is what destroyed Occupy from within even as it was being smashed from without. (For how this internal self-destructio n works, see https://womenborntranssexual.com/2011/09/23/trashing-the-dark-side-of-radical-movements-of-the-left/ )

Thus I must ask: absent trained and disciplined inputs from elsewhere, who could possibly assemble, rehearse and direct such an Orchestra?

Again I am thankful I am old (76) and not in the best of health. I will probably be dead before the USian Empire fulfills the dreams of all those Nazi war criminals it welcomed after 1945 and officially declares itself to be what the rest of the world is already beginning to recognize it as: the Fourth Reich.
 
 
+6 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 03:09
Adendum for Anonymot: 53 years ago as an undergraduate I wrote a combined history and English paper that argued Hitler and Nazism were historically, sociologically and psychologically logical, even predictable outgrowths of German society.

My primary source was of course Shirer, but Tacitus' "Germania" was most assuredly part of the bibliography, as was "Mein Kampf." (The paper earned an A from each department.)

Hence I tend to agree with your genetic hypothesis: note for example the instant embrace of resurrected Nazism by the ethnic Germans in the Ukraine.

Also, though people of Germanic dissent make up only 20 percent of the USian population, they and their English cousins (themselves descended from Germanic peoples), make up the overwhelming majority of the USian One Percent and its Ruling Class vassals.

(Disclaimer: despite my English surname, genetic work by a niece indicates we Blisses are about 98 percent Celt, mostly Highland Scot of the haplogroup that indicates our earliest known ancestors were Scythians or other Peoples of the Steppe. Maybe that's why I like my late father lean so far to the Left.)
 
 
+3 # Saberoff 2016-04-28 10:51
Hey Lornen, I am and have been a proud, bleeding heart liberal my whole adult life; and a German. Should I be offended?
 
 
+2 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 13:27
Please don't be offended by my generalization (especially since I know that, when one includes the First Nations genocide, there is no empire in history with more blood on its hands than the U.S.)

Also I should have pointed out that German skill at arms was often on the side of the good guys, as for example in the German socialist revolution of 1918 (suppressed by the Friekorps), or in the fact the Thaelmann Battalion (for which Google) was the first and probably best unit of the International Brigade in the Spanish Civil War. (Too bad the prediction in "Los Quatros Generales" did not come true.)
 
 
+3 # Anarchist 23 2016-04-28 18:48
I am of the principle that good and Evil are Equal Opportunity employers and as quoted in Chris Hedges' book American Fascists, that American Fascism would use symbols familiar and comforting to the people, like the flag, the cross, the bible.
 
 
+12 # MsAnnaNOLA 2016-04-28 08:48
Do we really have lack of organizing skill or are we organizing around a party that has absolutely nothing to do with the left at all? The debate is framed in the terms the party sets. We need to change that.

The duopoly must end.
 
 
+3 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 15:23
Based on what I've witnessed over the years, it is a steadily worsening lack, not just of organizing skill, but of the vital capacity for empathy.

It is an absence directly proportionate to the decreasing quality of USian public education and the increasing influence of the Ayn Rand ethos therein.

Undoubtedly it is deliberately conditioned, particularly since the ability to empathize is the direct opposite of the moral imbecility that is the prerequisite of "success" as defined by capitalism.

The resultant ideology, self-defined as "anarchy," is in truth merely an obsessive, run-amok form of egotism and selfishness.

This was as much a factor in the destruction of Occupy as was its brutal suppression by the federally commanded, federally militarized local police.

Perhaps significantly, the inability to empathize seems to be an increasingly definitive quality of USian whites.

People of color -- perhaps because under capitalism their educations are deliberately marginalized -- seem to have generally retained the ability to empathize.

Hence for example the enduring nature of Black Lives Matter versus the flash-in-the-pa n nature of Occupy.

Explanatory disclosure: "what I have witnessed over the years" includes participation in the Organized Labor, Civil Rights, Anti-Vietnam War, Alternative Press, Back-to-the-Lan d and Occupy movements. I am an alumnus of the Knox County Jail (June 1963) and remain a member of the National Writers Union (AFL/CIO).
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-04-28 17:09
Loren,

I recommend practicing your generally exemplary critical thinking skills when confronted with any claims of biological determinism.

The same ideology that brought us racism, sexism, classism, ageism, etc. is now floating the very same claims under the guise of "evolutionary psychology" and "behavioral genetics."

There has been not a single case of any gene or suite of genes proven to be responsible for any complex human behavior. Every single claim presented (the "gay gene," the "risk gene," the "substance abuse gene" have been proven to be wrong.

Since those "isms" have always served the will of the 0.01%, when some scientist claims to have "found" such a genetic link, it makes front-page news in the popular science press.

But when researchers prove the claim fraudulent, those findings only appear in the scientific journals.

What has been proven time and time again is that cultural factors have enormous effects on behavior, and that often cultural "memes" reproduce for many generations, or even thousands of years if they prove beneficial to the population.

The great folklorist, Alan Dundes wrote a fascinating and funny book on Germanic cultural traits, titled "Life is Like A Chicken coop Ladder." I bet you'll find it a very worthwhile (and short) read.
 
 
+1 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 23:40
Thank you for the legitimate reprimand.

Though I know better, I sometimes let my anger -- in this instance at what the Germans did in Eastern Europe -- overcome my intellect.

And the German atrocities are perhaps a bit more real to me than they are to many USians.

My very first employer was a Lithuanian Jew, a schoolteacher who became a partizan and later a Red Army officer; another of my employers, also one of my lovers, was a Polish Jew who survived the Holocaust; another lover, a Russian Jew, lost nearly her entire family to the Germans.

Hence I cannot but empathize -- quite strongly in fact -- with bmiluski's "tell that to my uncle" statement below.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-04-29 00:40
Thanks for reconsidering, Loren.

As one who truly appreciates irony (the glue that binds the universe together, preventing yin and yang from ripping it apart), I can't help but note that the very same Nazi claims of uniquely heritable traits they used to excuse their inhumane treatment of "others," was being used to ascribe heritable traits for their uncivilized behavior.
 
 
+2 # RMDC 2016-04-28 08:17
Anon - "I am a student of behavioral genetics and believe the Teutonic traditions have been replicated for thousands of years. If in doubt, ask Drumf or Kissinger or Rumsfeld etc."

Tnis is all mythology. Genetics is pseudo science. Look at history. The British have been the most vicious nationality on earth for several hundred years. The Bushes are descended from the British royalty. The British destroyed the Germans in two wars of the 20th century. They enlisted the help of their cousins in America. Germany did not have a chance against these savages.

Actually, Germans are quite civilized when compared to the British and their far flung off-spring.
 
 
-8 # rocback 2016-04-28 10:41
This sounds like Fox "News" with all the misinformation about the e-mails. The FBI has already said they are not investigating Hillary.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/14/jeb-bush/heres-whats-wrong-jeb-bush-saying-hillary-clinton-/

Actually, Clinton is not under FBI investigation. The inquiry to which Bush refers revolves around the private email server Clinton used while serving as secretary of state. And it is not a criminal investigation.

Here are the facts.

In July 2015, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community sent what is called a security referral to members of the executive branch. A security referral is essentially a notification that classified information might exist in a location outside of the government’s possession. In this case, the location was Clinton’s private email server.

Soon after, the New York Times incorrectly reported that the inspectors general requested a criminal investigation into Clinton’s email use — as opposed to a security referral. But the newspaper later issued two corrections. The referral was in connection with Clinton’s account, not whether Clinton herself mishandled information, and did not allege criminal activity.

Officials told reporters at the time that the FBI was not targeting Clinton herself
 
 
-4 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 11:48
I'm trying to figure out why Colin Powell's and Conderisa Rice use of private servers are not being investigated. Oh wait, they're both repugs.
 
 
+5 # dbrize 2016-04-28 18:36
Quoting bmiluski:
I'm trying to figure out why Colin Powell's and Conderisa Rice use of private servers are not being investigated. Oh wait, they're both repugs.


Well bmiluski since you are trying so hard to figure it out allow me to help you.

It's because your friends Obama, Pelosi and Reid took impeachment and things like this off the table when many were in favor of more than a few investigations.
 
 
-9 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 11:45
"Actually, Germans are quite civilized when compared to the British and their far flung off-spring."
----------------------
Do you want to tell that to my uncle who was carried out of Buchenwald on a stretcher.

Actually ALL men are just vicious no matter the race, nationality, or creed.
And please, RMDC...pick up a history book and actually read it.
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2016-04-28 17:19
Tell it to my ancestors who were tortured, enslaved and starved to death by the Brits.

Or the ancestors of the Native Americans, or the Armenians, or, or, or...

It's not inherited genetic predispositions , or "human nature" that manipulate people into doing horrible things.

One need look no further than the Torah to see many examples of horrible mass murder and genocide excused by an elite to drive normal humans into committing horrible crimes against humanity.

Until we realize that all human babies have the ability to grow into profoundly good or profoundly evil adults, we will remain easily manipulated fools.
 
 
+3 # dbrize 2016-04-28 19:34
Quoting bmiluski:
"Actually, Germans are quite civilized when compared to the British and their far flung off-spring."
----------------------
Do you want to tell that to my uncle who was carried out of Buchenwald on a stretcher.

Actually ALL men are just vicious no matter the race, nationality, or creed.
And please, RMDC...pick up a history book and actually read it.


bmiluski:

I'm aghast! Shocked! You of all people...a, a, I can hardly get this out...a sexist!

In the faint hope that I, a mere mortal man, can somehow soften your blanket condemnation of myself and all ancestral beings, may I gently proffer the thought that when taking respites from "vicious" activities men have also done the following:

Written and produced some truly beautiful, inspiring music, poetry and architecture.

Found cures for a variety of diseases, many of which were deadly to women and men alike.

Produced the Salk vaccine among others.

If this brief plea does not bring a bit of mercy, I finish with this thought. Were not for a man we would not be so fortunate as to have your welcome presence on these boards.
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-04-28 17:12
Thank you, RMDC.

"Genetics is pseudo science."

Well, genetics as a biological science can result in profound knowledge. But genetics applied to complex human behavior is pseudo science. It's just the latest version of "biological determination" that has been used to excuse the worst of human social behaviors.
 
 
+4 # Anarchist 23 2016-04-28 18:52
Good and Evil are Equal Opportunity Employers..I hope this meme helps ;-)
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-04-28 21:02
Wish I could be so concise sometimes.
 
 
+1 # Caliban 2016-04-30 11:40
Genetics is NOT a "pseudo science", but positing a relationship between national aggression and genetics IS bogus -- i.e not a biological science at all.

Militarism and authoritarianis m are real, however, but the cure for excesses in both areas must come from the Political sciences and proven democratic principles of government, not genetic fantasias.
 
 
+3 # Anarchist 23 2016-04-28 18:40
Mein Drumpf, enough to give one vertigo...I do understand that is the actual family name....I think the Oligarchs will go with HRC however...but if it is Drumpf sworn in on Jan 20,...
 
 
+19 # MsAnnaNOLA 2016-04-28 08:45
Again Dems nominate her at their peril. We need someone above reproach. We need Bernie.
 
 
+2 # lfeuille 2016-04-28 15:35
The FBI might want an indictment, but the Attorney General will not. She is their boss. No bankers went to jail. I do not believe Hillary will be indicted.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-04-28 16:53
The FBI Director that Obama appointed, James Comey is a Bush Administration alum who previously worked for HSBC Bank to help them get around their convictions for laundering money for drug dealers and terrorists.

So, yeah. He's pretty conservative.
 
 
-8 # Charles3000 2016-04-28 07:42
I am not a backer of HRC but the following is a fact. As Secretary of State she had final authority to classify or declassify documents. If she said it was declassified then it was. Period. Only POTUS could overrule her. The entire email thing's a sham. They do not have a case against her. No one else in government, excepting POTUS, could classify a State Department document without her approval.
 
 
+10 # MsAnnaNOLA 2016-04-28 08:59
I think you are wrong Charles. No one has ever claimed the Secretary of State can declassify at will. It was claimed that POTUS could do it during the Scooter Libby Trial, but that particular question was left unanswered by the legal procedure and all of the left leaning legal scholars of the day questioned it. They questioned it because of the way it was done. It has no basis in statute.

Like Bush and Plame's identity. You are claiming she alone can just change the classification of documents and distribute them to whomever she sees fit. This did not get Scooter Libby off the hook for disclosing classified information so I don't see how it can get Clinton off.


A major critique of the Bush Admin as well as Obama admin has been the way the selectively leak whatever classified info they want to make themselves look good. They never tell us the whole truth and lie with impunity when it makes them look bad to declassify in public would tell the whole truth and make them look bad.

The problem with your argument is they have the emails where she ordered them to strip the classification markings and just send insecure. No procedure, no formal declassificatio n. I believe that is where the problem lies. Much like Scooter Libby she can claim the SCOTUS declassified it, but where is the proof? It looks like she did it unilaterally.

Another potential problem is who was she sending it to? Espionage charges? We don't know but it is a possibility and one I won't risk.
 
 
-5 # rocback 2016-04-28 11:04
Point is there has not been a single e mail sent out that was classified at the time. And the ones that were considered that after the fact is in dispute by the various agencies anyway.

Both Condeleeza Rice assistants and Colin Powell also had private e mail accounts they used. But nice try. Maybe you should be getting your info from other tan the right wing echo chamber.
 
 
+2 # Charles3000 2016-04-28 12:04
"... she ordered them to strip the classification markings...."
That is precisely how it is done! And I have seen it done that way. Scooter Libby worked for POTUS via the VP office. He did not have final authority to classify/declas sify info. The bottom line is documents/infor mation do not classify themselves; people do and it follows the management hierarchy.
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-04-28 17:28
I think the "email scandal" is exactly like the "BENGHAZI! scandal." Both are misdirection.

The real scandal about Benghazi was that the US had backed monstrous jihadis to destroy the most prosperous country on the continent, and then to ship weapons and jihadis from Libya to the next "regime change" in Syria.

And the real email scandal is not the security of her server or when emails were classified. It is what is said in those emails.

Knowing the coup in Hondurans was an illegal and unconstitutiona l military coup.

Knowing there was no "humanitarian crisis" in Libya, but rather greed for the gold and oil.

Deliberately fomenting a "peaceful pro-democracy protest" in Syria by funding, arming and training foreign invaders who began sniping police from the start.

On and on and on.

HRC's concern is not that Republicans will hate her more than they already do. She's worried that if Democrats and Independents learn the truth, they will not be willing to "hold their noses" and vote for her.
 
 
+3 # dbrize 2016-04-28 17:54
Bingo!
 
 
+6 # MsAnnaNOLA 2016-04-28 08:44
Many many people do not pay any attention to the candidates until the convention or after when the two candidates are chosen. See 46 percent are independent. So they are not party affiliated and don't pay attention until later. I know a lot of these people.

They will start hearing Trump and they will say oh why are they calling him racist. He does not sound racist. Oh he is self funding the campaign, that is kind of cool. Oh he is against disastrous trade deals, that is kind of cool. He was against the Iraq war, that is kind of cool.

Contrast that with Hillary going back and forth on her positions on these important issues.
 
 
+2 # Charles3000 2016-04-28 12:07
You are correct here, MsAnnaNOLA! Trump will pulverize HRC from the left!
 
 
-5 # Barbara K 2016-04-28 11:04
RMDC: Yes, I saw those same polling figures as rocback. There is no way some piece of trash like Trump will win this election. Just because some people don't back Bernie, doesn't make them a troll. Get over it, EVERYONE is not a Bernie fan. We do exist out here without him. Hillary is doing just fine. I know you and your friends hate that. Also the FBI have already cleared Hillary of any wrong-doing, BB. They say they are not investigating her. They are investigating the faked investigation in Congress, where the freak there altered the emails. Good thing the FBI still had copies of them, so they easily identified the alterations. They even showed some on TV. We all have a right to back whomever we want for President, whether you like it or not. Stop calling us trolls. It just makes you look stupid.

..
 
 
-4 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 11:57
Careful Barbara...the progressive Taliban will come after you.
 
 
+12 # dbrize 2016-04-28 14:15
Quoting Barbara K:
RMDC: Yes, I saw those same polling figures as rocback. There is no way some piece of trash like Trump will win this election. Just because some people don't back Bernie, doesn't make them a troll. Get over it, EVERYONE is not a Bernie fan. We do exist out here without him. Hillary is doing just fine. I know you and your friends hate that. Also the FBI have already cleared Hillary of any wrong-doing, BB. They say they are not investigating her. They are investigating the faked investigation in Congress, where the freak there altered the emails. Good thing the FBI still had copies of them, so they easily identified the alterations. They even showed some on TV. We all have a right to back whomever we want for President, whether you like it or not. Stop calling us trolls. It just makes you look stupid.

..


Barbara K,

Would appreciate learning more about your positions on a few significant issues:

Do you support the Global War on Terror?

Do you believe our current state of affairs require a temporary suspension of certain constitutional rights?

Do you believe trade agreements such as TPP and NAFTA are "free market" agreements?

Do you believe the CIA/MIC are genuinely under civilian control?
 
 
-9 # Caliban 2016-04-28 01:26
I'm amazed at the negatives for # rocback's post above. It's hard to believe how many GOP/Trump-lover s there are on this site.

Sad.
 
 
+14 # Charles3000 2016-04-28 07:47
Trump will be running far to the left of HRC on foreign policy and maybe banks too. Everyone from TPs to progressives will like that! But he cannot get left of Bernie...
 
 
+10 # RMDC 2016-04-28 08:20
Charles is correct. Although we can't know what Trump really will do since he has no track record, we do know what Hillree will do and it is all bad. So even though I'm definitely NOT a Trump-lover, I'd take him over Hillree. It is a risk, but a good calculated one. I think most people understand that.

The really sad thing is to see people who will vote democrat no matter what just to keep a republican out of the white house. They start whining about the supreme court and other appointments. Well, Hillree is a known evil. Trump is something we don't know.
 
 
-12 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 11:59
OMG....this is a repug site disguised as a far left site.
 
 
+8 # Charles3000 2016-04-28 12:33
That is precisely where I am; we all know what HRC will and will not do and it is all BAD! Trump will be a watch and see. He is smart and hopefully, if he gets there, he will attempt to do a good job. And I am a 100% Bernie supporter for single payer insurance, free K-16, restore Glass-Steagall, break up the big banks, tax Wall Street trading,get out of the mid east...etc.I know HRC will do none of those so I will cross my fingers and hope ...can't vote for HRC.
 
 
+8 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 15:51
Alas we are (again) coping with a politics of fear.

My biggest fear is that Hillary, by her continuation of the USian/Nazi assault on Russia in the Ukraine, will start World War III. (It is one thing to fight a proxy war with Russia, as in Afghanistan or Southeast Asia; it is quite another -- the height of suicidal stupidity in fact -- to attack the Mother Bear in her own den.)

I also fear Hillary's intention to slash or abolish Social Security, Medicare and the other social services upon which I as a physically disabled low-income senior depend for survival.

My biggest fear of Cruz is that he and his JesuNazi supporters will complete the ongoing transformation of the U.S. into a zero-tolerance Christian theocracy.

I have experienced, and as a journalist reported on, the theocratic viciousness of Christians in the South, the northern Middle West, the Northeast and the Pacific Northwest.

Hence I understand (A)--the malevolence that is the one truly defining quality of Christianity and (B)-- that I as an agnostic (with outspokenly Gaian tendencies) would undoubtedly face persecution.

From Cruz I also fear the loss of the stipends and services that sustain my life.

I fear the other One Percent-anointe d Republican candidates for the same reasons.

Trump is an unknown quantity, but his Nazi-like campaign is itself fearsome.

In this well-informed and therefore utterly wretched context, Sanders is not merely my choice. He is literally my only hope.
 
 
+3 # Anarchist 23 2016-04-28 19:00
I agree with you although perhaps the Oligarchs will restrain HRC from starting WWIII. Still, it is a grim landscape compared to the Rooseveltian stance offered by Bernie
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-04-29 00:52
I am part of the "surplus" population. No longer productive enough.

But really, aren't all of us in the "developed West" excess labor? Productivity has skyrocketed in the past century, and especially after WW II. We in the West have bought the homes and cars and other "hard goods" to the point that we're a diminishing market.

But the "undeveloped" countries hunger, not just for food, but for material produce. Yet, the planet cannot bear producing enough so that all 7 billion of us have "two cars in every garage."

So, a psychopathic 0.01% could easily welcome our eradication, paving the way for the "undeveloped" world to consume as we have since WW II.

Largely, it would be the Southern Hemisphere they would see as the real "growth market."

I do not think it a coincidence that the Bush family has bought something like a million acres in Paraguay.
 
 
-3 # Caliban 2016-04-30 13:22
You might try to get on top of some of these fears, #lorenbliss. If these things were going to happen at all, they would have happened during the Reagan years.

Personally, I have seen no indications in either Clintons' political histories that either lusts for a 3rd World War, for instance. If you have, I'd like to hear about it, but I don't count verbal support for Ukrainian protesters remotely close to being a WWIII provocation.

The same for Clinton's supposed intention to "slash or abolish Social Security, Medicare and the other social services". Where are you getting this stuff? These have been staples of the Democratic political philosophy for nearly a century, and Clinton has supported them for her whole adult political life.

I, personally, have already voted for Sanders in my state's Democratic primary, but I also believe that the penchant among some Sanders backers on RSN to demonize Clinton is misinformed, misguided and works against the health and welfare of those very programs you claim to need and support.
 
 
0 # Salus Populi 2016-04-28 10:17
Unfortunately, judging only from his "foreign policy" speech the other day, I am no longer hopeful that he would be a non-interventio nist. He seems to be changing his tune to accommodate the fears of the Rabid Reicht that he won't be a reliable steward of the Imperium.
 
 
+3 # kalpal 2016-04-28 09:11
Can't run to the left of anyone when you don't have a clue about foreign policy.
 
 
-7 # rocback 2016-04-28 10:46
Caliban, a lot of them are Trump trojan horses. No honest progressive would even consider Trump over Clinton.

I read an article that told of a group hired by Trump dirty trickster who tell them to do the following steps:

1. first go into the progressive sites and praise Sanders gaining the admiration and camaraderie of the group
2. Next trash Hillary unmercifully.
3. Finally, drop all pretenses and just bash Hillary and promote Trump.

Not saying they all are but you can pretty much tell which ones are.
 
 
-9 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 12:00
Wow rocback....that describes this site to a tee.
 
 
+9 # dbrize 2016-04-28 15:34
Quoting rocback:
Caliban, a lot of them are Trump trojan horses. No honest progressive would even consider Trump over Clinton.

I read an article that told of a group hired by Trump dirty trickster who tell them to do the following steps:

1. first go into the progressive sites and praise Sanders gaining the admiration and camaraderie of the group
2. Next trash Hillary unmercifully.
3. Finally, drop all pretenses and just bash Hillary and promote Trump.

Not saying they all are but you can pretty much tell which ones are.


Now this is really funny, I read an article that said the DNC and some "friends" with lots of money, hired a "group" to go onto progressive sites and:

1. Praise Bernie while setting up Hillary as a viable "progressive alternative". This by refusing to debate her record or lying about it.

2. Next, when feeling safe about the outcome, shift gears to empahsis on fear tactics to keep weak kneed progressives on for "Hill".

3. Finally if it looks like the above isn't working, accuse all Hillary criticism as a takeover of a progressive site by Trumpster "trojan horses".

What the hell, if the checks don't bounce, go for it, everyone's got to make a living.

As the saying goes..."if you can't sell the steak...sell the sizzle".
 
 
-1 # Caliban 2016-04-30 18:13
Thanks, rocback, I hadn't thought of that twist. Nor of the further zap from dbrize. The real lesson, I guess, is constant vigilance.
 
 
+2 # lfeuille 2016-04-28 15:32
George Washington University just released a poll showing Trump within 3 points of Hillary. I'm not sure it is valid because I learned about it in a email from one of the many Democratic Fundraising groups begging for money, so it quite could possibly have been commissioned to be biased in favor of fundraising scare tactics, but it doesn't seem to me to be beyond the realm of possibility.

If it is true, it adds urgency to the thrust of the article we are discussing. But I don't see a solution that can be implemented in time for the election. I believe the Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate Federal Elections, but this Congress is Republican. It isn't going to shut down the party's ability to cheat.
 
 
+10 # MsAnnaNOLA 2016-04-28 08:35
I agree. I think we will find him much more reasonable in the general. The msm will have a hard time demonizing him when he is the candidate and people actually see him speaking as opposed to reading about what the msm is saying about him.

He will say he bought Hillary. He will take her to the woodshed and the Dems will wish they had not nominated her. She is not likable. Her record is disastrous. Her war-mongering is scary. All the baggage will not do well for her.

We do not need a hot-war with Russia in the Middle East. That is where a Hillary presidency obviously leads. We will lose a hot-war. Do your homework people. Russian weapons are superior. They do not have multiple billion dollar weapons systems that don't work and continue to be funded. We have the most expensive shitty arsenal money can buy. Corrupt politicians and military industrial complex have got us in a bad spot. The new surface to air missiles are an example.

http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/new-russian-air-to-air-missiles-will-field-almost-perfect-accuracy/

Oh and we can never cut military spending no matter how high the debt goes or no matter what other priorities there are in this nation. Why?
 
 
+5 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 16:18
"We have the most expensively shitty arsenal money can buy."

Thank you, MsAnnaNOLA; truer words about the present-day USian military have never been said.

Compare, for example, our obscenely expensive yet infinitely unreliable service rifle, the notorious M16 and its M4 clone, with its rival the famously reliable AK-47.

The disgrace of the M16 is all the more notable given that prior USian service rifles, the 1903 Springfield, the M1 (on which I trained) and its direct descendant the M14, were each -- especially the M1 -- reckoned the best such rifles of their times.

But then LBJ had to pay off his political creditors, and to do so he took the design and manufacture of USian military arms away from the government. He privatized it, giving it to Armalite, thence to Colt Industries. At the same time he shut down Springfield Armory and permanently dismissed its Ordnance Board, the agency that, since our nation's earliest years, had passed final judgement over our military's weapons.

Indeed, the story of the M16 -- and particularly how USian troops were stuck with such an unreliable weapon -- is one of the greatest untold national scandals of all time.

It is also why seasoned soldiers, once in the field (and despite the threat of courts-martial) , often "lose" their M16s and M4s and replace them with AKs: Avtomat Kalashnikova, the ultimate name in battlefield reliability.
 
 
+2 # Anarchist 23 2016-04-28 19:03
Glad to have this verified by one who knows..
 
 
+6 # Radscal 2016-04-29 01:13
I was surprised to read in Oliver Stone's "Untold History of the US" that Congress seriously debated nationalizing all war production between WW I and WW II.

The public had become outraged when they learned about the enormous profits made by weapons and machinery manufacture in WW I, so hearing were held about removing the profit from war waging.

Obviously, that didn't happen.

Imagine the world today if profit had been removed prior to WW II.

LBJ and Lady Bird made fortunes off of military contracts, especially after he escalated Vietnam into a full-on war. They had connections to Brown-Root (Halliburton) and Bell Helicopter amongst others, and bought much stock in them before invading Vietnam.

Strange side note: Michael Paine, whose wife, Ruth was Marina Oswald's landlady/friend /translator, and found Lee Harvey his job at the Texas School Book Depository worked for Bell Helicopter.

ps. One reason that US troops in Vietnam switched to AKs was their much greater power. M-16s fire the 5.56 round, while AKs fire the 7.65 (basically the same as your M1 Garand, while the 5.56 is essentially a .22 caliber - though with much more powder). I understand that M-16s reliability and durability have been greatly improved over the years, but that power difference still exists.
 
 
+3 # lorenbliss 2016-04-29 05:29
Small technical correction:

The AK-47, like its predecessor the SKS, fires the 7.62x39mm Soviet round, which launches a 123-grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2300 feet per second for a muzzle energy of 1445 foot pounds. At 100 yards the energy is 1125 foot pounds.

The U.S. Rifle caliber .30 M1 (aka the "M1 Garand") fires the .30-'06 round (officially "caliber .30 Government Model of 1906"). In its M2 Ball configuration, the round most commonly issued for military purposes, it launches a 150 grain bullet at 2700 feet per second with a muzzle energy of 2440 foot pounds. At 100 yards the energy is 2090 foot pounds.

These are all approximate figures because every rifle -- AK-47, M1, M16 -- is essentially and within reasonable limits a rule unto itself.

The European designation for the .30-'06 is 7.62x63mm. In other words, the .30-'06 cartridge is nearly twice the length of the 7.62x39mm, though both are, as you say, .30 caliber.

The 5.56mm (.223 Remington) round fired by the M16 launches a 55 grain bullet at 3240 feet per second with a muzzle energy of 1282 foot pounds. At 100 yards this energy has dropped to 921 foot pounds.

You are absolutely correct to say the 5.56mm is "essentially a .22"...and like even the highest velocity .22s, it takes a very long time (or many, many hits) to drop anything much bigger than a henhouse-raidin g feral cat.

The 7.62x39 however is comparable to the .30-30 Winchester, which reliably takes deer and black bear.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-04-29 13:29
Thanks again, Loren.

Yeah, my typo on 7.62 v. 7.65. I'm not a rifle guy, though I know many who are, and have experience with all those cartridges.

To complete your comparison, I looked it up and see the 7.62 bullet ranges 123 to 125 grains, exits the muzzle at ca 2400 fpc with ca. 1650 foot pounds of energy. So, while far more powerful than the 5.56, it's less so than the .30-06.

But my main point was the fact that Congress actually debated taking the profit out of the war machine. I can't stop imagining what a better world it would be if private manufacture of war machinery had ended in the 1920s.
 
 
# Guest 2016-04-27 18:02
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
# Guest 2016-04-27 18:03
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
+5 # nice2bgreat 2016-04-27 18:40
.
The likely nominee for President of a brokered Republican convention is John Kasich.
.
 
 
+7 # Billy Bob 2016-04-27 20:54
And Kasich would be very difficult for Clinton to beat. The two are too much alike, although he does seem a little less sleazy and a little more trustworthy than Slippery Hillary.
 
 
0 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 12:03
Actually, Billy Bob....since Kasich has NOT been put under the magnifying glass, and is being compared to Cruz and Trump, he only SEEMS "normal". After listening to some of his town halls, I, as a woman, am scared to death of him.
 
 
+3 # dbrize 2016-04-28 14:12
Quoting bmiluski:
Actually, Billy Bob....since Kasich has NOT been put under the magnifying glass, and is being compared to Cruz and Trump, he only SEEMS "normal". After listening to some of his town halls, I, as a woman, am scared to death of him.


bmiluski,

As a woman, what are your feelings about the following:

Do you support the Global War on Terror?

Do you believe our current state of affairs require a temporary suspension of certain constitutional rights?

Do you believe trade agreements such as TPP and NAFTA are "free market" agreements?

Do you believe the CIA/MIC are genuinely under civilian control?
 
 
+1 # Billy Bob 2016-04-29 05:53
Babs believes that, as a woman, human rights are none of her concern. That's why she supports a woman for president, who happens to be the biggest warmonger and threat to human rights, of any candidate from either party.

As a woman, she has the right to say, and do, anything, "as a woman", and that's supposed to excuse a total lack of concern for all of humanity.

"As a woman", whenever Hillary Clinton decides to bomb thousands of women and children to pieces in 3rd world countries, that will be a "YOU GO GIRL!" moment. Why? Because IT WAS A WOMAN ordering their murder!

YAY!
 
 
+2 # lfeuille 2016-04-28 15:46
Well, he is so inflexibly anti-abortion, I think it might give her the edge, provided she makes sure everyone hears about his record.
 
 
+1 # Crumbling Empire 2016-04-28 11:21
Quoting nice2bgreat:
.
The likely nominee for President of a brokered Republican convention is John Kasich.
.

The only two potential GOP candidates that defeat Trump on an ELECTORAL COLLEGE BASIS (which is how we actually vote), according to 270 to win, are Kasich and Paul Ryan.

If Trump falls well enough short of 1,237, I still believe Ryan is a significant possibility, and threat.

Lastly, I agree with many above that Trump will run an incredibly damaging campaign against Hillary, and that the polls will change considerably after July.

The Donald will receive some Bernie supporter votes, and his vacuous platitudes will stimulate and activate hoards of Republican voters and convince many Independents to hop on board his Fascist, Populist, Beautiful Jet. The counter issues that may destroy him are women and Latinos.
 
 
-12 # Shades of gray matter 2016-04-27 22:21
Some pipsqueak responses to this lengthy, in depth, thoughtful essay. It's time for Marc to reveal the tsunami contribution total$ from Revolting Commenters, Movement Mobilizers on RSN.
 
 
+26 # Farafalla 2016-04-27 22:21
"So whatever happens with the nomination, we respectfully request that Bernie soon organize a broad series of grassroots gatherings where those who have worked so hard for him will get the best possible training and inspiration toward becoming lifelong activists who’ll make a tangible difference in the day-to-day business of saving this planet."

Ultimately that is the strongest point in this piece. I totally agree.
 
 
+24 # eduardoben 2016-04-27 22:57
Part One:

It seems that he most dangerous candidates right now are, in descending order, Slithery Hillary Clinton, Fascist Ted Cruz and Ego-maniacal racist Donald Trump.

Bernie is the only choice so lets stop talking like he's gonna be out of the race. The Clinton campaign, and the Clintons, are so dirty that a criminal indictment or other crippling scandal could land on Hillary at any time, hopefully sooner rather than later.

Hell, she turned the State Department into a Clinton family business. Want some weapons approved? Drop a million in the Clinton Foundation, give Bill a hundred thousand dollar speaker fee and application approved. Need a rush approval? Drop two million in the foundation and give Bill two hundred thousand. Plus first class and five star expenses paid of course. In most places that's called bribery and kickbacks.

And Clinton crony John Podesta is so dirty its beyond description. He coordinated a campaign by Clinton-Gore to block Nelson Mandela and the South African government from making cheap and legal copies of patented HIV drugs for the THREE MILLION South Africans infected with the AIDS virus in 98-99.

He did that on behalf of the big patent holding pharmaceutical companies who had been his clients when he was a corporate lobbyist with his brother in what is now known as The Podesta Group just before he became Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff.
 
 
+17 # eduardoben 2016-04-27 23:10
Part Two:

Podesta returned to work as a lobbyist after that stint (though he never actually stopped working for the Group's clients) and he’s now Hillary’s Campaign Director. And none of the news networks are saying a word or asking any questions about Podesta.

It's now up to Bernie to stop being Mr. Nice Guy and expose Clinton for the Corporate Compromised, ethically and morally bankrupt war monger-hustler that she really is.

Bernie should know that if she gets her hands on the keys to the Pentagon's war machine, thousands of people will die needlessly, like the people in Libya, Ukraine, Syria and Honduras are dying because of what she did or started while Secretary of State. I can't think of any non-incumbent presidential candidate who’s been responsible for or complicit in so much death, destruction and human misery before even becoming president.

If the news media refuse to inform the public about Hillary's record, then Bernie is the only one with the access to do that and he must. Lives depend on it.

If he doesn't get the nomination he should run as a third party candidate because the conditions have never been more favorable for an alternative party candidate to win.

He shouldn't endorse Clinton. She’s too dangerous to too many people. I’d bet my life that she'd have us involved in another war within her first six to twelve months – probably in Syria or Iran.

Bernie, campaign like thousands of lives depend on it. We're with you to the end.
 
 
+1 # Saberoff 2016-04-28 11:02
Greens!
 
 
+13 # Hooligan 2016-04-28 00:20
Don't forget Bill has 5 separate shell companies offshore in case the piles of money add up too fast.(Reported by Stephen Braun, Assoc. Press 5/26/15).
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-04-28 17:49
And we just learned that Drumpf and Hillary both own shell companies AT THE SAME ADDRESS in Delaware!
 
 
0 # Billy Bob 2016-04-29 18:24
My hunch is that (as best friends going way back), Hillary is paying Trump for his act.
 
 
+15 # Majikman 2016-04-27 23:51
The next logical step from the creation of Occupy, is to a formal political party...out of the reaches of the head busting, tear gassing cops doing the bidding of Wall St. The DNC doesn't know it yet, but the neo-liberal dems are dead (RIP Wasserman Shultz) along with the GOP. Don't know how long it will take for them to implode but not long. I see Bernie as the godfather, the honored elder statesman guiding and helping a new generation to earn their political chops. Maybe wishful thinking.
 
 
+12 # backwards_cinderella 2016-04-28 04:49
They say Buffalo went for Hillary? Everyone & I mean EVERYONE I know voted for Bernie. My entire neighborhood is plastered with Bernie signs. & where you don't see Bernie signs, you see Trump signs. The only people I know who voted for Hillary are the establishment Democrats I used to work for.
 
 
+1 # Charles3000 2016-04-28 07:51
The After Party is real!
 
 
-7 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 12:04
Sorry to burst your bubble Cinderella but, NY is larger than your neighborhood.
 
 
-4 # Candie 2016-04-28 07:47
Damn! I guess I have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary. I could never vote for a republican so Hillary it is UGH!
 
 
+6 # Anonymot 2016-04-28 08:37
No, there's Jill Stein at the Green Party, writing in Bernie Sanders, or abstention if you can't vote for Trump.
 
 
-10 # bmiluski 2016-04-28 12:05
That IS voting for trump!!
 
 
+1 # Billy Bob 2016-04-29 05:54
You mean HIllary's best friend?

6 vs. (1/2 x 12)
 
 
+10 # eduardoben 2016-04-28 12:49
A vote for Hillary is a vote for war. That should be clear to anyone who studies her record as Secretary of State. I'm a Vietnam vet so I take these matters very seriously. As an independent radio journalist I also visited war zones in Central America and the Middle East. All those wars were created by the United States too.

Hillary Clinton pushed and coordinated the destruction of an entire nation known as Libya and sold that war with lies about massacres of thousands of civilians by the Libyan Army which were just as false as Bush's lies about WMDs in Iraq.

I think Cruz is scary about the use of military power also. So, don't give up on Bernie. We have to support his candidacy to the end.

But if it does come down to Hillary vs Trump, and since you'll be holding your nose anyway, vote for Trump. He's a racist who says nasty things about Muslims but Hilary has been responsible for KILLING Muslims -- by the thousands -- which requires a racist disregard for the lives of Muslim men women and children in Syria and Libya. And she's demonstrated a racist disregard for the value of Palestinian lives as well.

I don't like Trump. He is a racist. But he seems more likely to sit down and negotiate with adversaries than resort to military violence as the first course of action as Hillary does.

And if that's true, it could save the lives of thousands of men, women and children in the Middle East and around the world. We KNOW what Hillary will do.
 
 
+1 # CarolYost 2016-04-28 08:24
When are the people who stole the elections for Bush going to jail, with a real assessment ofvell the lives lost because of Bush and his warmongering for oil and US supremacy?

Also, any claim that a group of people can be genetically wired toward certain attitudes(as is claimed about the Germans in certain comments above) is Nazi and racist and should not be considered.
 
 
0 # Anonymot 2016-04-28 08:46
Do you still believe in Phrenology or what? Creationism? Take a week or two off and read Sociobiology by Edward O Wilson.Certain aspects of behavior are most certainly inherited over long periods of time just as certain physiological traits are.

Calling what one fails to understand negative, like Nazi and racists is, fortunately, just PC and passing, not an inbred trait.
 
 
0 # lfeuille 2016-04-28 16:00
It is more complicated than that. Inherited traits are not always directly expressed. They can be modified by genetic modified that are often dependent on environment, both in the womb and the external environment. E.o. Wilson has been criticized by other leading biologists s too deterministic.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-04-28 17:57
E O. Wilson: the man who put the ANT into Anthropology.

There is a branch of science which is devoted SOLELY to the study of all things human. Human evolution. Human biology and genetics. Human behavior. Human variation (what was once called "Racial Anthropology" until it was proven there's no such thing as biological "races.").

And yet, to find excuses for Biological Determination, one has to turn to bug men and bird men. Almost NO Anthropologists buy into that "evolutionary psychology" BS (that's the term they developed after "sociobiology" was proven to be so shot full of holes that the mere mention of it would get one laughed out of a scientific forum.

Among the few Anthropologists who does sell Biological Determination is Napoleon Chagnon, who was found to have not only created the behaviors he sought to prove (by giving machetes to chosen individuals) and even then FALSIFYING his own records.
 
 
+3 # Majikman 2016-04-28 09:39
Carol, I think you're conflating genetic tendencies with destiny on a very primitive basis. It's a hugely complex subject including Nature vs. Nurture. On a less inflammatory basis, think of dog breeds. There's a genetic reason (brains & temperament)tha t most K9 police dogs are German Shepherds rather than labs, retrievers, pit bulls or even Dobermans. People, being mongrels, are not as easily categorized of course, but one doesn't expect an Einstein to drop from the Jukes family tree.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-04-28 18:03
So here's a fascinating thing.

During WW I, the US Army gave IQ tests to all draftees.

They found that black, urban people were significantly more "intelligent" than rural white people.

So, did the smart black people all move to the cites (where they have since evolved into more "stupid" people) and the "dumb" white people all move to the country, or were the IQ tests not testing what was claimed?
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2016-04-29 09:11
IQ tests, especially the Stanford-Binet, are notorious for their flaws. They are culturally biased, measure only certain aspects of intelligence, and so forth. The best book I know of on the history of intelligence tests and "measures" is still Steven Jay Gould's "The Mismeasure of Man."

Also very much worth reading, for a more expansive and modern view of the workings of the brain, is Howard Gardner's "Frames of Mind," which explores his theory of multiple intelligences.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-04-29 13:34
Exactly, Salus.

I haven't read Gardner, so I just added it to my reading list. Thanks.
 
 
+4 # Mainiac 2016-04-28 08:42
The best and most productive way to organize Bernie supporters now, especially our younger members, is to expose how this nomination is being stolen by HRC and the Dem establishment. Fitrakis and Wasserman rather blithely dismiss this as a possibility. Rather they jump ahead to the training of supporters for the long haul. But the nomination is not yet lost. If the superdelegates, for instance, understand that the Party is going down big time with HRC as the nominee, not just by losing the election, they may rethink their position.
 
 
+2 # lorenbliss 2016-04-28 16:27
Unless of course the One Percent have ordered Hillary's candidacy precisely to ensure a Republican victory, thereby to hasten the transformation of the USian homeland to overt fascism.
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-04-28 21:10
Yep. Whether HRC or a Republican is coronated President, the 0.01% win.
 
 
-4 # Robbee 2016-04-28 08:53
i'm not buying it that, in a hill versus rump contest, as projects - # grandlakeguy 2016-04-27 17:15
"... Trump will so damage Hillary, with the actual recounting of her terrible judgement and blood soaked record, that he will most likely defeat her."

- hill was secretary of state for four years - in every foreign policy debate she will run circles around rump - but, frankly, on policy she will kick anybody's ass - on policy there is no fair fight against hill!

rump plans to "rebuild our military" - rump's foreign policy is a "clear vision" of attacking isis with a plan so "great" that he can't reveal it for fear isis learns of it

so far rump has only tipped isis off on one aspect of his great plan - "i will bomb the shit out of isis! - on my first day in office, i will tear up the (no-nuclear-bom b-making) treaty with iran! ... a bad deal! the worst ever!”

by contrast hill has perfectly positioned her candidacy, on use of the military, as win-win - she talks blood-thirsty war hawk, which endears her to jewish voters and militarist crazy-ass murica! - yet she alone says "war is never a first option" - so, by contrast with gop warheads! she would be our only "peace candidate"

hill's craftiness reminds me of how deftly (slick?) bill handled military funding - every single year the pentagon told him all it wanted - every single year bill passed billions more than such inflated requests! - in what world is hill a "peace candidate"? only in crazy-ass murica!
 
 
+4 # kalpal 2016-04-28 09:17
Any candidate for peace in the USA will never be a candidate for president. The USA's power structure is adamantly opposed to peace anywhere on this planet except in North America. When IKE pointed out the direction this nation was going no one with with any power paid attention. Too much money in being warlike.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-04-28 18:09
I agree that TPTB do not want any peace candidates elected.

And while it's true that Eisenhower gave that great "Military/Indus trial Complex" speech on his way out the back door of the White House, while he was President, he oversaw the greatest peacetime increase in the military in US history (to that point).

One example: when he was elected, we had a couple hundred nuclear weapons. When he left, we had 8,000. He filled his Cabinet and Administration with those Military/Indust rial and Wall Street sociopaths that he later warned us about.

The speech was important, and all USians should know it. But when he had the authority to do something about it, he simply built it up.
 
 
-7 # rocback 2016-04-28 10:55
Hillary has been relentlessly attacked for the last 30 years by Hate radio, Fox "News", Roger Ailes, the entire Republican Party and now the Bernie bridge burners, and is still standing.

She has been "investigated" by 9 GOP committees including being grilled for 11 hours by that guy who looks like someone from Deliverance and wiped the floor with them.

She takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin. Neither Trump or Bernie could have handled that and would have folded like a cheap suit.
 
 
+2 # laurele 2016-04-28 11:01
"Blood-thirsty war hawk" will endear Hillary to Jewish voters? Where do you come up with this? Jewish voters are overwhelmingly progressive, and many have actively opposed the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya for more than a decade.
 
 
+3 # Anonymot 2016-04-28 14:07
I thinks he confounds the difference between the religion & the Israeli government. Unfortunately, it's true that Netanyahu has stirred up a lot of real confuscaters.
 
 
+1 # lfeuille 2016-04-28 16:03
"Strong defender of Israel at all costs" will endear her to some Jews, especially older ones who are so invested in Israel that they cannot be rational about it.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-04-28 18:05
"Hill's" record as Secretary of State is PRECISELY what will cost her the votes of morally consistent progressives and liberals.
 
 
-6 # Robbee 2016-04-28 09:52
whistling in the dark! says - # Anonymot 2016-04-28 08:37 No, there's Jill Stein ...

milk producers of america are gonna hate mot!

- stein is a 3rd-party candidate for national office, like nader in 2000 - the only thing a green candidate can accomplish in federal elections is to siphon progressive votes from the dem candidate!

didn't stein run in 2012? how did that work out for greens? greens are like a guy who goes to the frig, takes out the milk, opens the top, smells it's yeck! spoilt! puts it back, and every four years takes it out again, just to see if it got fresh again!

the irony is that stein is a competent candidate, but lazy - like bernie, she should run for office as mayor, do a good job, run for office as senator or governor, as bernie proved a 3rd party candidate can win, and only then run for prez as a dem!

the greens' mission is to ruin dem candidacies because they maintain that there is ABSOLUTELY NO difference between dems and zomblicans, which only shows inability to judge, lack of critical thought - when you believe in things that you don't understand, you're gonna suffer! - stevie wonder

greens haven't pulled a nader yet, losing dems an election! - but they won't quit trying!

mot is our "here's how to" champion of progressives throwing away their votes! our champion of spoilt milk!

mot's is false-flag support for stein! - down with GOP! - in the general election, go dem!
 
 
-2 # Robbee 2016-04-28 09:59
mot's other "big ideas" - "writing in ... or abstention"

# Promoting Peace 2016-02-20 00:28
To not vote, or to vote green, or throw away your vote in some other manner sends a major message that one doesn't truly support Bernie. Bernie knows extremely well what's at stake here, and I support and believe in him exquisitely.

He wants, at all cost, to keep the GOP from taking the White House, especially if we don't regain control of the Senate or the House. I feel this is why he's biting his tongue at times, and not openly trying to destroy Hillary.

He truly knows what he's doing, and I feel he has incredible wisdom and courage, and the ability to put his personal emotions aside for the sake of this precious country of ours.

One can only imagine who the GOP will appoint to the Supreme Court, possibly 3 or more upcome openings in the next 8 years, if they have the ability do do so.

If they have no constraints, I feel they will appoint truly horrific members who will set our country back for literally generations.

I feel we have no right to do this to our children and their children. We have no right to throw up our hands and say, if we can't have Bernie, then the hell with it, and let the GOP have it all.

I'd rather only have my foot burnt, than to have my whole body destroyed. Getting art of what I desire is far better than getting nothing, or even worse, having so much taken away from us, especially after the extremely hard fought progress we've made.
 
 
+7 # laurele 2016-04-28 11:05
For many of us, Hillary is not "part" of what we desire; she is NONE of what we desire. Personally, I cannot support a cheating Wall Street shill under any circumstances. I genuinely believe she is the worst of all possible choices, and that is why I will either write Bernie in or vote for Jill Stein. All the fear mongering by Hillary's supporters is only reinforcing that decision.
 
 
-4 # OLDGUY 2016-04-28 13:22
The Bernie followers on this site are not Bernie followers if they do not listen to what he belives which is DEFEAT TRUMP AT ALL COSTS.
 
 
+6 # Anonymot 2016-04-28 14:12
I think, therefore I vote. I've supported Bernie in every way since he started. But if I can think on my own to follow Sanders, I can think on my own to do what is needed in my opinion. I'm nobody's hack.

If Bernie isn't nominated I'd hope he founds a 3rd party. THAT, I'd vote for.
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2016-04-29 05:56
What should Bernie's followers do if Clinton is arrested after the convention? Hold our noses and vote for her anyway?
 
 
-6 # Robbee 2016-04-28 12:40
says - # laurele 2016-04-28 11:05
"... I will either write Bernie in or vote for Jill Stein ..."

- ya know ralph and his cwazy lugnuts have had 16 years to comprehend the nausea of bush 2 cheney polluting the white house - an episode that was 8 years of solid atrocity too hideous to stand recounting - to apologize, and to promise never to foul up our nation, ever again!
 
 
-3 # rocback 2016-04-28 16:42
Bettysdad is a level headed intelligent and handsome man.

:-)
 
 
+1 # dbrize 2016-04-28 18:00
Quoting Robbee:
says - # laurele 2016-04-28 11:05
"... I will either write Bernie in or vote for Jill Stein ..."

- ya know ralph and his cwazy lugnuts have had 16 years to comprehend the nausea of bush 2 cheney polluting the white house - an episode that was 8 years of solid atrocity too hideous to stand recounting - to apologize, and to promise never to foul up our nation, ever again!


Only a troll would make fun of people with speech impediments. Not to mention people who actually vote their conscience.
 
 
-3 # rocback 2016-04-28 19:44
dbrize, aren't you the one defending Trump above. Isn't Trump the one who made fun of the disabled reporter?
 
 
+4 # dbrize 2016-04-28 20:20
Quoting rocback:
dbrize, aren't you the one defending Trump above. Isn't Trump the one who made fun of the disabled reporter?


1. Show me where I "defended" Trump?
2. Does Trump's bad taste excuse Robbee's?
3. Bring it on counselor.
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-04-28 21:13
Ralph Nader is sponsoring a huge conference in D.C. to help kick-start a local-level to Federal-level "political revolution." Uniting "left" and "right" as he's been promoting, the plan is to turn the US into an actual democratic republic.

https://www.breakingthroughpower.org
 
 
+9 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-04-28 13:46
I haven't looked through the comments as yet, but I'll just say that anything from rocbak should be ignored,
 
 
+2 # Promoting Peace 2016-04-28 22:03
What amazes me is that some people can "say" they support Bernie, but when it comes down to it, they have no trust or respect for him what-so-ever.

Bernie is in the midst of this intense fight for our country, and is giving everything he has for this cause.

I love, respect, and trust Bernie as deeply as I could possibly trust anyone. With that in mind, if Bernie eventually says we need to do everything and anything we can to keep the GOP from taking the Presidency, then that is what I will absolutely do.

And, if this includes voting for Hillary, based on Bernie's wisdom, and decades of insight into what's truly going on here, then I will hold my nose and vote for Hillary.

To do otherwise, for me, is to say Bernie doesn't know what the hell he's talking about, and I am so arrogant I will think I know more than Bernie does, when I'm just on the sidelines whereas he's in the very center of this horrific mess we call Democracy here in the US.

If you don't trust Bernie's wisdom, then read up more on Bernie and learn about his history, and please gain a little more trust in this incredible person. I truly believe he knows what he's talking about, and is dead serious about doing the very best he/we can for this beautiful country of ours.
 
 
+1 # Salus Populi 2016-04-29 09:49
I, too, believe Sanders is "giving everything he has" and is very serious about turning this country around.

But that does not mean I believe that everything he does is wise or "right." He is a politician who makes compromises, an example's being his voting along with the other 99 Senators to support Israel's crimes against humanity in Gaza a while back. (Compare this to Rep. Barbara Lee's lone vote in either chamber against giving Bush XLIII Illegitimus unlimited powers to wage war a month or so after 9/11.)

It is true that Sanders normally is not a "go along to get along" player, and the Amendments King in the Senate, but that does not make his judgment infallible.

Nor do I believe in idolizing other human beings, whether it's FDR, JFK, Bob Dylan, Barbara Lee, Bernie Sanders, Noam Chomsky, or Mahatma Gandhi. What I do believe in is independent research, weighing the ethics and morals of any important decision I make, and acting accordingly, rather in accordance with Douglas Hofstadter's "super-rational ity" principle.

That I support Sanders does not imply that I support his alternative, whom I seriously believe to be a war criminal, and a stealer of elections -- someone without a moral compass, unless you believe the will to power is one.

I don't tell others how to vote, and resent it when anyone tells me how I should vote. Every citizen has the same responsibility: to do right by humanity by their own lights. Anything else is mummery.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-04-29 13:38
Perfectly expressed!
 
 
+2 # Promoting Peace 2016-04-30 17:14
If you have any facts to support that Trump will be better for our country, & that he will choose Supreme Court Justices better than what Hillary would choose, or that he will protect our environment better than Hillary & won't give the super-rich, & big business a blank check to destroy the environment what they want, & that he will fight harder for the poor & middle class than Hillary, etc., please share your facts or reasoning with the rest of us.

I too make up my own mind, & from all the research I've done, & in spite of Hillary's many faults, she will still be incredibly better for the common people, for women, for the environment, for foreigh policy, etc., than Trump ever could be.

Trump is an egotistical maniac filled with self serving greed & a massive need to feed his ego above all else. He blatantly expresses he has no intention of working with any other world leaders, & will demand that everything goes his way, at all costs.

I don't like Hillary, but she's no where near as scary as Trump is, and Cruz is even worse.

I certainly don'w worship Bernie, or follwo him blindly as I spend many, many, hours doing whatever research I can. Even so, I know I only get a small part of what Bernie is getting, and all I'm saying is I truly trust him & know for a fact I don't want a country lead by Trump, Cruz, or any of the GOP clowns.

Everyone needs to make up their own minds, & if they choose not to vote, or to throw away a vote, or vote for Trump, so be it.
 
 
+2 # Barbara Glassman 2016-04-29 00:01
As a longtime fan of your work, I fear that framing the nomination as being stolen by Hillary gives your critics an undeserved advantage. As you know, the problem of electronic vote theft is longstanding and much broader and deeper than her campaign.
 
 
-1 # Robbee 2016-04-29 08:59
say what you mean! - # Billy Bob 2016-04-29 05:56
What should Bernie's followers do if Clinton is arrested after the convention? Hold our noses and vote for her anyway?

bill, you're not really worried that hill will be arrested - you're really worried that she will not be - you have good reason to worry!
 
 
0 # Robbee 2016-04-29 09:26
repeating himself spams - # Anonymot 2016-04-28 14:12
"... I can think on my own to follow Sanders ..."

- yeah! but mot, you're out way ahead of bernie on this one! in what way do you follow bernie on this one? bernie is not gonna follow you on this one! your way doesn't work for bernie, on what he's trying to accomplish! altho bernie leads, it was NEVER about him - it was ALWAYS about us! your path leads nowhere! - saying pointless gestures, you would call it voting "conscience", for hopeless causes
makes you feel better is not good enough for bernie! or the rest of us!

are we all islands? - do we owe our fellow progressives nothing??? not even slowing our descent into neocon hell? by voting dem?

last year merlin and i argued this very point - then he stopped posting for months - now that he's back i wonder if we are still islands? - with no duty to one another? - his posts are not quite the same as before hiatus

but mot, as you still maintain we are islands in no stream? please help us try to understand why you say you follow bernie, okay?
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-04-29 13:47
"slowing our descent into neocon hell"

HRC voted FOR NeoCons:

Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State
Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense

HRC voted for the crucial NeoCon Agenda:
2001 AUMF
2001 USA PATRIOT Act, and later expanded it
Establishing the Department of Homeland Security

Fiscal 2004 Defense Authorization-P assage, which 
Ended the ban on new nuclear weapon development plus

As Secretary of State, HRC hired NeoCon Victoria Nuland whose husband is a founder of the seminal NeoCon organization, Project for a New American Century, and who has switched parties to endorse HRC for President.

She also pushed the NeoCon agenda in selling the escalation of war in Afghanistan, the illegal "regime change" in Libya, the creation and funding and arming of the mercenaries responsible for 1/2 million deaths in Syria.

In short, voting FOR a NeoCon does not "slow" their agenda. It formally mandates it.
 
 
-4 # Robbee 2016-04-29 10:01
! - dbrize 2016-04-28 15:34
Quoting rocback:
... a lot of them are Trump trojan horses ...
whistling in the dark, responds d- "Now this is really funny ..."

now, ta da! here's exhbit a!

according to posts generally in reverse chronologic -

nonsensically sums big rump fan! - who conveniently overlooks the fact that hill opposes TPP! - # Inspired Citizen 2016-03-29 17:25
"... When it comes to corporate fascism, Trump is a preferable candidate to #CorporateClinton."

threatens GOP troll!- Inspired Citizen 2016-03-20 13:13
"... either Unite Behind Bernie or else (RAP promises) Trump as the next President.”

hill worse than rump! snarls GOP troll - # Inspired Citizen 2016-03-17 15:51 "... Clinton more dangerous than Trump.”

citizen, note that your pledge amounts to GOP catfishing for progressive votes! - # Inspired Citizen 2016-02-23 14:27 "... Bernie or lose the general election ... is a pledge."

outing false-flag ops! - our local hill-haters have been self-identifyin g here as GOP trolls for months and months!

- citizen, at long last! thanks! outs RAP! - Republicans Against Progress - says - # Inspired Citizen 2015-12-10 18:10 "It's going to be #BerrnieOrElse the GOP. That's RAP's promise!"

says self-fulfilling prophet of doom! - # Inspired Citizen 2016-03-17 21:44 "Without a miracle, (bernie’s) campaign is doomed. (RAP) has been arguing this since last July ..."

- down with rump trojans! - go bernie!
 
 
-1 # dbrize 2016-04-29 16:05
In the words of the inimitable Monty Python:

Spam! Spam! Spam! Spam!
Lovely spam! Wonderful spam!
Spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam spa-a-a-a-a-am spam.
Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam!
Spam spam spam spam!
 
 
+2 # Benjamin David Steele 2016-04-29 12:55
"Simply put: we do NOT at this point believe they rise to the level of provable theft, as we are certain was the case in 2000 and 2004."

We have clear proof that the Clintons don't care about democracy. What more do we need to know? If elections aren't about democracy, then what is the point?
 
 
+1 # Robbee 2016-04-30 09:45
great post! you have thoughtfully laid out the best case for hill being a neocon! - says # Radscal 2016-04-29 13:47
"... In short, voting FOR a NeoCon does not "slow" their agenda. It formally mandates it."

- congrats! - you are one-half of one-half of the way there!

negative on test # 2! - a neocon is more than a warhead! - on non-military issues hill is no conservative - she is more or less progressive as bernie on everything that benefits us 99%, sorry!

negative on test # 3! - never saw a war she didn't want to fight? - a) hill supports obama's no-nuke-bomb-ma king treaty with iran - that rump promises to tear-up on his first day in office; b) she supports obama's no-ground-force s policy in syraq; - in clear contrast to crud and rump, she declares "war is never a first option"

only in crazy-ass murica, but, after bernie, whose credentials are not pristine either, hill is actually our "peace candidate"! sorry!
 
 
+1 # dubinsky 2016-04-30 14:34
an extremely silly lede for a small pile of griping blather.

Clinton isn't stealing a dam thing.

the sad truth is that Clinton has received 3,000,000 more votes than Bernie.
 
 
+1 # Promoting Peace 2016-05-01 19:07
As much as I disliked Bush and all the horrible damage he did to our country, if there was an election and the only way I could prevent a second Hitler from winning the election was to vote for Bush, I damn sure would vote for Bush as I love this country too much not to do whatever I possibly could to prevent the worst damage to it from happening.
 

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