The Debate Theater
I couldn't watch the whole debate. It only took about 10 minutes before I was hurling curses at both candidates, so it was either turn the TV off or break it.
I think I made the right decision.
On one side you had the status quo candidate, smirking, arrogant, and completely oblivious and indifferent to the suffering of the working class.
On the other side you had the entitled rich kid doing his best impression of a greasy, used-car salesman. He's smart enough to actually hear the suffering of the working class, and immoral enough to exploit that information.
We may as well be 15th Century English peasants. The lords of the country are fighting a real, bloody war against one another, but it doesn't matter one wit to us whether the House of Lancaster or the House of York wins. We are f*cked either way.
It's not a secret that we aren't a democracy anymore. That was proven in a 2014 Princeton study.
"A proposed policy change with low support among economically elite Americans (one-out-of-five in favour) is adopted only about 18% of the time," they write, "while a proposed change with high support (four-out-of-five in favour) is adopted about 45% of the time."
...
When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.
The average American has almost no influence on the policies of the country.
Last year former President Carter declared that we live in an oligarchy.
It violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it’s just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or being elected president. And the same thing applies to governors, and U.S. Senators and congress members. So, now we’ve just seen a subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect, and sometimes get, favors for themselves after the election is over.
Yet, in spite of everyone knowing this to be true, we still get caught up in the pageantry of the elections. We pretend that our interests are better represented by the lords at the House of York, or Lancaster.
We make believe that our choice of oligarchs matters.
We pretend that even though the system is rigged, the election process is still sacred, and that we do it better than other countries.
Well, we don't.
Domestic and international experts rate the US elections as the worst among all Western democracies. According to Electoral Integrity Project, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden are at the top of the ranking, while the US scores 62.
The report gathers assessments from over 2,000 experts to evaluate the perceived integrity of all 180 national parliamentary and presidential contests held between July 1, 2012, and Dec. 31, 2015, in 139 countries. The 2014 US congressional elections rank even worse, 65th out of 180 worldwide.
Our elections are so bad that international monitors should be required.
It amazes me that the very same people the current system is so badly exploiting, are the same people demanding fealty before the flag.
The very same people that curse our government and who think the worst of their fellow citizens are the ones most eager to support our wars of empire and the prison-industrial complex in the "name of freedom".
If I was to choose, I would rather the status quo candidate wins, but only because Congress will likely remain Republican and thus will block many of her awful policies.
Either way, a victory of the status quo candidate won't end anything.
With Clinton’s election certainly Trump the candidate can be defeated. But with another Wall Street Democrat in the White House the right-wing demagoguery of Trumpism is only likely to grow more emboldened, more bitter, and more menacing. With Clinton in office essentially nothing will be done to reverse the growing wealth divide in the country. Nothing will be done to create millions of secure, well-paid new jobs, based on a solid manufacturing economy. Nothing will be done to find alternatives to mass incarceration. And nothing will be done to end the permanent war economy that has made the United States the leading global purveyor of war and militarism. However, while economic and social justice will remain elusive, much White House “concern” will be expressed and maybe even a few “task forces” created. And the country will grow angrier.
This is especially true when the recession start in 2017 or 2018.
Comments
Earth to those who control the political economy: While you
are looking out for #1, be very careful that you don't step in #2. (You are being watched.)
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
My take on the "debate"
From the Light House.
I would like to debate you on this point you made
I believe that should HRC (Her Royal Clinton) win, she will give cover to the republicans and pass things like gutting Social Security under the guise it needs fixing. "Democrats" in congress will go along with her too. We will see a return to the 90's where a Clinton adds to the prison population, guts social programs as "Democratic" congresspeople go along with it because it is a "Democrat" in the white house and the republicans will go along with it.
T-Rump on the other hand, no one in congress would want to work with him to the point that this congress looks downright friendly to Obama by comparison.
This is NOT an endorsement of the comb-over troll, this is just a view that the status quo candidate is actually far more dangerous.
When I was a kid, Republicans used to red scare people, now it's the Democrats. I am getting too damn old for this crap!
I am certain that Repubs will fight Hillary
Because they must maintain the kayfabe.
If the peasants catch on that the whole thing is staged there will be Hell to pay.
No, the Republicans will go along with her.
They will help her destroy social security, invade other countries, and surrender our sovereignty to international corporations by means of labor-destroying trade deals, even though they will whine and bitch that these "great ideas" are actually theirs, not the Democrats', and they'll be right. How do I know they'll go along? Look at the first Clinton presidency. NAFTA. Repeal of Glass-Steagall. Welfare "reform." Etc., etc., etc. The Clintons and the Republicans are an unholy concoction if there ever was one. And we the peasants never did catch on in sufficient numbers even to slow them down. Bill is still lionized by "liberals," for God's sake.
Twain Disciple
That's what Rand Paul's faction is for--
but they're not supposed to win.
You can maintain kayfabe without winning. You see, there are some corrupt parts of the Republican party, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't stay a Republican! Help Rand Paul make the Republican Party great again. We just need to support the right kind of Republican and then, as we take more and more seats, we can take over the Republican party and set it straight.
Meanwhile the Bush Republicans like Mitch McConnell will get cozy with people like Chuck Schumer and support Hillary's stupid shit legislation.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Don't ever forget....
It takes a Democrat to screw a Democrat.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
You got that right.
It took a Nixon to go to China. It will take a Clinton to destroy Social Security.
Where's Monica Lewinski, now
Where's Monica Lewinski, now that SS needs her again to protect it? Baby, put your blue dress on and play Superwoman again?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/10/30/how-monica-lewinsky-saved-social-...
If you haven't read this before or recently, I'd suggest doing so in full.
Who else only just found out that even Bill's fracking penis is crooked? What else don't we know that we actually didn't even want to know in the first place, but probably should?
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Republicans will fight on token issues chosen for sacrifice
by Clinton, but her wars, privatizations, neoliberal trade deals, will all sail through with bipartisan support. Then Hillary, like Obama will say 'Sorry, I tried to make health insurance less rigged, but this is all those evil republicans would allow'. Trump may be worse, but he is bound to be isolated and outmaneuvered in congress by Democrats who have reason to appear to oppose his policies, which will probably be over the top and unrealistic and incompetent.
In the end you're right, for us peasants, whether House Lannister (technically Baratheon) or House Targaryen sits the Iron Throne, little changes and Winter is Coming.
I agree with you. If Clinton wins, Social Security as we know
it will be history. Even though it's a contract, and even though it operates on a 1% overhead, Big Finance wants to get their lunch hooks into our retirement money and, at least for now, they get what they want.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
I have the same small quibble
as you, and on that first paragraph I totally agree. But I'm far more skeptical on whether any Congresscritter from either side of the supposed aisle will not work with him. He too can give both sides political cover in his own way - he's an outlier, and while some of his policies may be abhorrent out in public forums, most of them will undoubtedly be worked on quietly, behind those proverbial closed doors.
He's the same on taxes as she is, and most likely the same on privatization of SS and Medicare, and those are the things they all have in common. We know he's good with the wars, all that political blathering about NATO and shared responsibility for "defense" aside. As for deportation, they're already doing it under Obama, all kabuki disagreements with him being so much theater to enflame the masses on BOTH sides. Trade agreements are in the bag with him or HER. They'll maybe try to pretend they're pushing back on some of the more egregious policies, but they'll do the plutocrats' bidding at the end of the day.
But yes, Shillary is the dangerous one, and I do believe she's got this one all nailed down.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
My quibble about your quibble
is simply this: she doesn't have it nailed down yet. If Assange has the email bomb he says he does, or if HRC lies in her JW deposition, of if her brain fails more--then there is a possibility she won't win. In fact PFAW released a poll purportedly from Nate Silver showing the Hairball 9 points ahead of Medusa.
She's wining the e-voting machine vote
120% to none.
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
If I may, I'd just like to
(Edited to include the comment to which I replied, now over the Hills and far away, lol, and this: Both corporate parties serve self-interests - the corporations and billionaires funding them - and the main battle between them seems to be a rather bizarre theatre production alloyed with a wrassling match for the biggest funders/providers of most lucrative employment, many of these now using them to take over the world, at which point, there won't be much need for them or the theatre anymore. I suspect that this is why it seems to be mostly absolute crazy-people taking over in US politics, because the sane would never do this - they'd think better and not.)
Tue, 09/27/2016 - 3:23pm — RejectingThe3rdWay
If I may, I'd just like to point out that either of the corporate candidates - and the TPP-supporting Libertarian - (edit: will be willing; I believe that only Hill is known to be eager) to support the Bush-initiated corporate coup in propaganda-handing over the people's inalienable right of delegating the people's entailed-for-posterity power of legislation to elected officials holding office intended to serve the public interest.
This means that once domestic law effectively (via purportedly 'legalized' threats of extortion in the form of potentially unlimited bankrupting lawsuits against the public from thousands of involved corporations/billionaires) has been claimed to be off-shored from all involved countries so betrayed, the power to legislate has been fraudulently removed from democratic government and from the reach of the people. What purpose remains to government except to promote and enforce corporate profit-enhancing law as decreed by the off-shored participating corporate/billionaire-only 'trade' court?
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
we lasted 15 minutes,
I couldn't watch.
Great. Are you getting one of those 4K TVs? Have you decided how many inches the screen will be?
No way will a Republican Congress block Hill's policies
the Bush side of the party will ally with the Democrats and kick the Rand Paul side of the party in the cojones.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Bingo!
The corporacrats will rule if Hillary is elected. The neo-cons and the neo-liberals are simply two sides of the same coin and they serve the same masters. They will align under Hillary to enact legislation that harms we the people. Trump is an oligarch, but he is a wild card that they are not sure they can control. Either way, the people are screwed, but with Hillary, we are sure to see Social Security as we know it disappear and definitely we will see more wars with Russia being the ultimate target. Dog help us.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
I keep telling people
that "means testing" means that if you have an IRA or 401K, you will have to exhaust it before getting SS. They tell me "Oh no! It's only millionaires that will be cut". There aren't enough millionaires to make their SS amount to anything substantial. 1%? 2%? No, it's the middle that will get screwed. First they turn a program based on everyone getting a pension based on their earnings into a welfare program. Then they do "Welfare reform".
I don't know a single person under 40 who expects to get a Social Security check.
Editted for spelling.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
I could be wrong
but I think the idea that a billionaire, real estate developer is some sort of outsider is laughable.
Sort of like when Bush told us in 2002 that Iraq was a danger to us. It doesn't make any sense.
If Hillary The Insider will sell us out, so will Trump The Outsider.
Ask yourself who wall Street is pimping
and you will know who is most important to stop.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
The dangers of live streaming protests.
We know that the state is always watching but so how we can we document resistance & amplify voices without accidentally incriminating them?
--- In the immediate aftermath of radical resistance demonstrators are often quick to upload incriminating footage of their comrades.
--- If you are documenting protests in solidarity with the movement you have a responsibility to review footage before sharing it online.
--- This can mean not uploading tape until you get home or dropping back or to the side to review it before posting.
--- Spot potentially incriminating video uploaded? Rather than spread it you could ask the poster to remove it & send it to movement lawyers.
--- Photos on social media can be used by cops to incriminate, thats why mine are often filtered, at a distance or behind
--- If you're live streaming a protest in solidarity with those protesting you need to be doubly aware of your surroundings.
--- Video being shared by live streamers can be used by police for intel or to incriminate. That doesn't mean don't stream, it means be smart.
--- If you're live streaming a march & you're asked to not film a person or to momentarily go dark respect that.
--- If youre live streaming use your discretion, that can mean going down, filming yourself explaining the action or muting your audio.
--- Cops will use video/pics to create charges after the fact. They will use their own, the presses & the stuff you posted to social media
--- This year the Chicago Police used photos taken by Chicago Tribune photographers twice to back up or create charges
https://twitter.com/soit_goes/status/780850438203506689?lang=en
From the Light House.
Are you aware of this?
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
clowns
I only made it about one minute, and in 2 30-second doses at that.
My sister made a reference to "the clown" for Der Donald Drumpf. I responded: "Sounds more to me like clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right..... "
[video:https://youtu.be/DohRa9lsx0Q width:480 height:360]
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
One of the very fist statements made me want to puke
That's utter BULLSHIT
It is a BI-partisan commission, if it was NON-partisan Jill Stein and The Johnson would have been invited as well.
When the moderator starts off with a lie before the candidates even speak, you know the whole thing is just bukake theater for the masses.
When I was a kid, Republicans used to red scare people, now it's the Democrats. I am getting too damn old for this crap!
Agreed. Essentially a front organization.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Now is the winter of our discontent...
made glorious summer by this son of York.
Damn, you just don't hear that many good allusions to the War of Roses any more.
A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!
Will A Horse's Ass Do?
If so, hop aboard either candidate.
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
Alas, poor Richard
Will Shakespeare completed the ruin of Richard's reputation, because he wrote such good theater. Never mind that there was hardly any truth in it beyond the names of the characters.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
He had to.
Richard being a terrible person, and a criminal, was necessary to the idea that Elizabeth had, er, the correct standing to be on the throne of England.
It was bad enough that there were doubts about her mother, and her mother & father's marriage, which made many think of her as a bastard/illegitimate--she didn't need doubts raised about the right of the Tudors to the throne too. Which was, in my opinion, basically non-existent, and Elizabeth was the only one of them worth a damn in any way, but there was no way Shakespeare was gonna rock that boat.
I agree with Josephine Tey, but I also think Elizabeth was probably the best thing that could have happened to England at that moment, short of a (positive, non-Cromwellian) revolution. The security state which grew up around her, with which she was not always comfortable, but which she went along with (IMO, way too much) was the bad side; the good side was that she actually gave a shit about England and its people prospering, and wanted the endless sectarian violence to stop. What she did in terms of public political gestures to make it stop was pretty damned good for the time, again IMO.
And although there were some complete bastards exploiting the situation, who had way too much power, I also blame the damned Vatican. If they were going to make a move to re-Catholicize Britain, why the hell that stupid play with Mary, Queen of Scots? What kind of nefarious schemers were these guys, anyway? How half-assed. When all they actually had to do, if they had had two brain cells to rub together, was wait. Elizabeth could not afford to marry, which meant she would have no heir. The next people in line were all Catholic. Would it have killed the Vatican to wait 30 years or so?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It backfired on the Vatican bigtime, too
Mary was deposed by her own people, fled to England for safety (and wound up in "protective custody"), and her son was raised Protestant. He was the next logical heir to the throne of England - and wound up getting it.
Letting sleeping critters lie would have been much better for maintaining what was left of the status quo. But those Popes were incorrigible meddlers.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Dare we hope
... that these disgusting latter-day Plantagenets just get on with murdering each other already, and take the Tudors with them while they're at it? I want to see us skip ahead a couple of centuries and get to the beheadings in my lifetime. At this point a Cromwell doesn't look half bad.
Please help support caucus99percent!
I think that's a bit unfair to Richard.
At the risk of sounding like a monarchist, I'd take Richard III over either of these clowns in an instant.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Hanry VIII
Hell, I'd take fucking Henry VIII over either of them in an instant! And he's usually regarded as the worst monarch Britain ever had. (Yes, I said Britain. He's worse than any independent Monarch the Scots or Welsh have ever produced, too.)
The way the 2016 election has turned out, I'd vote for Tsar Ivan the Terrible over either of the current mainstream "choices"......
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Wow, that's a close call...
Henry was, um, well, he was a piece of work.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
That's the point where I desperately try to find
another history to look to other than English history. Because Cromwell was, um, well, there's a reason people went back to being monarchists after he died. What a piece of shit that guy was.
The weird relationship of the English to revolution is something that's been preoccupying me these days. Up until the last 40 years, we've been the only descendants of that culture to successfully revolt and create something that had any positive aspects at all that lasted.
So, I guess that couldn't be allowed to stand, huh?
Anyway, the English are not very good at revolution. I've never really understood it.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The reason that I am in the USA & not Ireland is Cromwell.
My ancestors escaped the English invasion and came to the only RC colony, Maryland, in 1654. Since then we've remained Irish - inbreeding if there weren't so many other Irishers here - and with varying degrees of anti-English sentiment.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Cromwell was an SOB, but his son was incompetent
which was what allowed the Restoration - Junior couldn't keep the lid on the pot and it boiled over.
Charles II brought a lot of interesting ideas with him from France, including reopening the theaters and even allowing (gasp!) women on stage.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Charles II
I like Carolus Secundus! He managed to restore English culture, recover from the Fire of 1666, and restore normalcy and peace to England for most of his reign. Frankly, I think he should have tried a little harder to get Parliament to legitimize one or more of his bastards; allowing James II/VII onto the Thrones (England and Scotland) was asking for trouble. (Which arrived in due course.)
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
I liked him too, and agreed on legitimizing the bastards
seriously, James was not...well, not one of my favs.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
"Recover from" the Fire of 1666? He was out there helping!
First organizing and directing, and then when things got critical, actually pitching water on the flames (per a contemporary account, unknown whether an actual eyewitness).
Little brother James was in the thick of it too, and won himself some temporary popularity by his efforts.
Coincidentally or not, the plague epidemic which had been raging in London form 1665 ceased, and London was never again visited by plague.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_London
Edit: Charles II's only real fault was that he was such a horndog, and had the misfortune to choose a barren wife.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Amazing if true.
What would it be like to have a leader that actually gave a shit about the object of their rule, I wonder?
I *think* Carter cared; I can dimly remember what that was like.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Actually, Canada (that [pre
Actually, Canada (that [pre-Harper, democratic Socialist-type] country next door to you) never revolted and did pretty well up until NAFTA...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Canada has done very well, up until Harper--
this is not a criticism of cultures that derive from England, it's an observation that England, and the colonial cultures it produces, seem averse to revolution. Much more so than other cultures. I mean, they had, what, two revolutions EVER? And I'm not sure the Glorious one exactly counts--it's more like they somehow offloaded their conflicts onto Ireland and sang Kumbaya together.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Shocking
the wealthy class
Heh!
Much like Louis XVI and his etiquette-bound court, or Nicholas II, hermetically sealed within the Alexander Palace, or, on a big day, parading around the rooms of the vast Winter Palace on some Big Occasion, because the streets of St. Petersburg were too dangerous to negotiate.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Not really shocking. Their actions demonstrate their
beliefs no matter what they may say.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
It was on in another room within Palazzo Bollox (for homework)
But I just put a pair of headphones on, and did other things......... rummaging through photos for EC's animal post, for example.
I could vaguely tell who was speaking by the timbre of the voice, but it all passed me by. So no TV's destroyed here.
And sanity preserved.
Go House of Lancaster!
(Edited)
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
I Refused To Watch
I had to get to work early the next morning and didn't want my sleep disturbed by the memories of their loud and raspy voices spewing demonstrable lies.
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
Jill Stein's live debate participation broadcast
was featured on Facebook, Twitter, and Periscope and maybe some other places I'm not familiar with. I heard a number of total viewers from all sources of 2.8 million people.
Meanwhile, Democracy Now has done a wonderful split-screen-insert-Jill video, in two or three parts, that is currently on youtube. Personally, I think it's neat.
Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.
Read the transcript - Jill SO
Read the transcript - Jill SO won! No wonder they didn't want her anywhere near the place...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Jeremy Scahill on Trump's military supporters
This is scary stuff. Jeremy has done as much as anyone to uncover the contract armies and now that the military is a strong player in the deep state, getting these guys into a Trump administration could make things ever worse in a hurry.
Here is another guy I had not heard about before and he is part of the Trump travelling team. Scahill says he could be Scty of Defense or head of CIA, or .....
The hard-partying surfer turned master assassin who is Trump’s guest at the debate
And people said that Drumpf couldn't attract talent!
While Medusa has her long-established coterie of Neo-cons, H. Killinger, and other "liberal" aspirants to Don Rumsfeld's throne, just slightly lower than Darth Cheney's, Der Drumpf seems quite adept at barrell-digging. True, he's just learning the trade, but if he doesn't rein in his military advisors, we may be at war soon--except it won't be with Putin's Russia. My vote regardless of which disaster invades the White House, will be war with Iran in the first hundred days--ya know they got WMD's--lotsa them.
Can I inject some post-debate conspiracy theory here?
So I have been reading some of the feedback here on the debates. My sense is that Hillary did not win, and Trump did not fail.
1. Trump is gaining in the polls and Hillary is spitting mad at unions for not giving her the coronation.
2. The Pentagon is running its own foreign policy at least in Syria. I believe that the Pentagon air attack on the Syrian soldiers at Deir Erroz was deliberate and was meant to scuttle/destroy the cease fire arranged by Kerry and Lavrov. It worked.
3. If Hillary does not knock out Trump in coming debates and if the poll numbers keep going in Trumps favor, then we can expect the Ash Pentagon to do come up with their own October surprise to push Hillary into the White House.
4. What will the Pentagon October surprise be? Ash and company on their own will order the shooting down of a Russian fighter/bomber in Syria. If Putin reacts by shooting down an American fighter, so much the better.
5. The election will turn on the anti-Russian patriot Hillary Clinton vs. the Russian loving traitor Donald Trump. Hillary
The shooting down of the Russian bomber/fighter will be staged to blame the evil Russians for the provocation, like we had intel that they were going to bomb a hospital with new born kittens and baby unicorns. It worked with Qaddafi, it will work with Putin.
My reactions--and it's not conspiracy theory,
it's valid speculation!
1. yeah
2.probably, though I'm not sure there's a consensus at the Pentagon on Syria--just not sure
3. A *lot* of the military dislikes her. I don't think they'd be the ones creating such a surprise. Maybe some at the CIA might--they seem to be pretty cozy with the Saudis over there--but then again, the covert types tend to really despise her. I'm not certain the military side of the MIC is going to intervene for Hill.
4.I don't think so. More inclined to think there would be an attack on our soil, and don't think it would be the Pentagon doing it, though it might. And anyway, as someone responded to you below, it's way easier to just rig the election, isn't it? As long as she can keep the numbers close, and Trump doesn't pull away into double digits.
5.No, because most people think that's garbage. Nobody buys the Russian thing except Hillary's supporters. It won't fly with the American people, whose main reaction to this talking point so far has been "Really?"
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vxiQ9JCKvE]
It doesn't help that the DNC just had its pants pulled down. When it's clear that you've committed wrongdoing and you're corrupt as hell, pointing and yelling "Russkies! It was the Russkies who pulled my pants down! Bad Russkies!" is not going to win you much credibility with the American people.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Be easier just to steal election in two of OH/PA/MI/OH/FL
[edited] that 2nd OH should be IN (oops).
Or, as your list implies, rig Ohio twice.
Peace and love be with you, reader.
Taking my inspiration from Karl Rove...
I reckon his 08 idiocy on election night was based on them stealing SE OH in 04.
We watched this:
More of us should consider voting Green. If other countries stomp out political opposition it's called tyranny.
The route out of this mess
requires some thinking outside the coffin. Liberal/conservative divides are mainly along social identity lines, just as the Owners like it. There's a Sufi joke that ends 'When danger threatens it threatens all alike" and the wars, the rigged economy, the dearth of hopeful options, and the destruction of the environment (and even climate change deniers hate the pollution that causes climate change)...
For immediate survival we need people who care about these things to work together. Or die. End of story.
Orwell: Where's the omelette?
The rich think there are safe havens.
Looks like the rich are buying up land in places like New Zealand to wait out the apocalypse. I don't think anywhere will eventually be safe from the disasters we are creating. I read speculation that just a nuclear war between India and Pakistan would be enough to spark a world wide nuclear winter.
https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2015/jan/23/nervous-s...
Silly beggars! Even apart
Silly beggars! Even apart from nuclear winter and radiation, other things, such as that to-be-unlimited global industrial pollution, global lack of oxygen from resultant ecological disaster including slowing ocean currents and catastrophic globally unregulated financial industry failures closing even banks for the rich having no surviving poors to pay tax/surrender saleable houses to bail them out, spread everywhere. And the monster storms will certainly be global, along with quite a lot of the flooding, not that far down the road either. Data dots and creating pretend-realities can't bring back what was destroyed for short-term insatiable greed by those who had most of the plenty already and wanted it all...
If all I'm to be left with is schadenfreude, I'll at least enjoy that, especially since I won't see those results, being slated to form a body among those in the first wave to die when social programs are undone under the corporate coup. I figure that makes me one of the lucky ones.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Breaking your television and never watching again would
have been the right decision.
Peace and love be with you, reader.
I didn't watch a
single second of that shit show. Why bother to watch two people competing to see who can lie the most?