Ya just gotta love ‘The CIA Democrats’ from the wsws
Ordinarily, I’m most sincerely disinterested in electoral politics, but this is just too great to pass up. It’s an epic example of libruls who’ve learned to love the CIA and other ‘intelligence’ agencies since the advent of the Mueller investigations. That there was no appreciable anti-war movement under the D Drone Killer in Chief, and there likely wouldn’t have been had the Red Queen been in the White House now is self-evident, but this evidence that the DCCC libruls have learned to love da bomb, high up military figures, as well as Special Ops and Seal assassins may have been predictable for some, but campaigning on those ‘credentials’ is breathtaking hubris in plain sight. But on with the show!
In Part One of his three part series at wsws.org, PART ONE | PART TWO | PART THREE, Martin writes that they discovered that:
“An extraordinary number of former intelligence and military operatives from the CIA, Pentagon, National Security Council and State Department are seeking nomination as Democratic candidates for Congress in the 2018 midterm elections. The potential influx of military-intelligence personnel into the legislature has no precedent in US political history.
“The Democratic leaders are promoting CIA agents and Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. At the same time, such people are choosing the Democratic Party as their preferred political vehicle. There are far more former spies and soldiers seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party than of the Republican Party. There are so many that there is a subset of Democratic primary campaigns that, with a nod to Mad magazine, one might call “spy vs. spy.”
Explaining how this series was prepared, Martin notes that currently, the House is controlled by a majority of 238 Republicans compared to 193 Democrats, and that to reach a majority, the Dems would need to gain of 24 seats.
He writes that according to the DCCC, 102 seats are seen as either priorities or at least completive, including 22 where five D and 17 R incumbents aren’t running again, and another 80 Rs who could be beaten if predictions of a swing to Dems prove accurate.
The World Socialist Website reviewed all of the FEC reports of these 102, most of whom had already raised $100,000 to make them competitive in primaries as starter war chests.
“The total of such candidates for the Democratic nomination in the 102 districts is 221. Each has a website that gives biographical details, which we have collected and reviewed for this report. It is notable that those candidates with a record in the military-intelligence apparatus, as well as civilian work for the State Department, Pentagon or National Security Council, do not hide their involvement, particularly in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They clearly regard working as a CIA agent in Baghdad, an Army special ops assassin in Afghanistan, or a planner for drone missile warfare in the White House or Pentagon as a star on their résumé, rather than something to conceal.
One quarter of all the Democratic challengers in competitive House districts have military-intelligence, State Department or NSC backgrounds. This is by far the largest subcategory of Democratic candidates. National security operatives (57) outnumber state and local government officials (45), lawyers (35), corporate executives, businessmen and wealthy individuals (30) and other professionals (19) among the candidates for Democratic congressional nominations.
Of the 102 primary elections to choose the Democratic nominees in these competitive districts, 44 involve candidates with a military-intelligence or State Department background, with 11 districts having two such candidates, and one district having three. In the majority of contests, the military-intelligence candidates seem likely to win the Democratic nomination, and, if the Democrats win in the general election, would enter Congress as new members of the House of Representatives.”
From Part II:
“Aside from their sheer number, and the fact that more than 40 percent, 24 of the 57, are women, there are other aspects worth considering.
Agents, but no longer secret
First: The number of candidates who openly proclaim their role in the CIA or military intelligence. In years past, such activities would be considered confidential, if not scandalous for a figure seeking public office. Not only would the candidates want to disguise their connections to the spy apparatus, the CIA itself would insist on it, particularly for those who worked in operations rather than analysis, since exposure, even long after leaving the agency, could be portrayed as compromising “sources and methods.”
This is no longer the case. The 2018 candidates drawn from this shadow world of espionage, drone murders and other forms of assassination positively glory in their records. And the CIA and Pentagon have clearly placed no obstacles in the way.
He writes that in Part One they’ve covered the cases of Elissa Slotkin, running in Michigan’s 8th District, who served three tours with the CIA in Baghdad, and Gina Ortiz Jones, an Air Force intelligence officer in Iraq, running for the Democratic nomination in the 23rd District of Texas.
“Aside from their sheer number, and the fact that more than 40 percent, 24 of the 57, are women, there are other aspects worth considering.
Agents, but no longer secret
First: The number of candidates who openly proclaim their role in the CIA or military intelligence. In years past, such activities would be considered confidential, if not scandalous for a figure seeking public office. Not only would the candidates want to disguise their connections to the spy apparatus, the CIA itself would insist on it, particularly for those who worked in operations rather than analysis, since exposure, even long after leaving the agency, could be portrayed as compromising “sources and methods.”
This is no longer the case. The 2018 candidates drawn from this shadow world of espionage, drone murders and other forms of assassination positively glory in their records. And the CIA and Pentagon have clearly placed no obstacles in the way.”
Let me see if I can shorten the bios of some of them, then you can read more of the details.
“Abigail Spanberger, seeking the Democratic nomination in a district in the suburbs of Richmond, Virginia, has the following declaration at the top of her campaign website: “After nearly a decade serving in the CIA, I’m running for Congress in Virginia’s 7th District to fight for opportunity, equality and security for all Americans. My previous service as a law enforcement officer, a CIA officer, and a community volunteer has taught me the value of listening.” Indeed!”
“Jesse Colvin, running in the 1st District of Maryland, spent six years in Army intelligence, including four combat deployments to Afghanistan and a year near the Demilitarized Zone between North Korea and South Korea. (quoting Colvin’s campaign material)
““As a Ranger, my four combat deployments in Afghanistan took place within a Joint Special Operations Task Force. I led intelligence teams whose work facilitated capture/kill missions of Taliban, al-Qaeda and other terrorist leaders. I managed a lethal drone program. I ran human intelligence sources. Every day, my team and I made dozens of decisions whose outcomes carried life and death consequences for my fellow Rangers, our Afghan partners, and Afghan civilians.”
“Jonathan Ebel, running in the 13th District of Illinois, served four years as a naval intelligence officer, including on the staff of the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany during the invasion of Iraq in 2003. He now teaches religion at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Then there is Shelly Chauncey, seeking the Democratic nomination in the 5th District of Pennsylvania, in the Philadelphia suburbs. Her website strikes a feminist note:
“Shelly served her nation for more than a decade with the Central Intelligence Agency. She began her career as a secretary and worked her way up to become a counter-intelligence officer. Shelly served as an undercover officer with the CIA in Latin America, East Asia and throughout the United States, providing logistical and counter-intelligence support to operatives abroad.”
Another campaign website touches on the domestic operations of the US spy machine. Omar Siddiqui, running in California’s 48th District, describes his background as follows: “On the front lines of national defense, Mr. Siddiqui serves as a private advisor and consultant to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on issues of national security and counter-terrorism and was formerly an advisor and community partner with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Mr. Siddiqui is presently director of special projects of the FBI National Citizens Academy Alumni Association…”
Dan McReady, a Marine Corps veteran turned “clean energy” multi-millionaire, backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for the Democratic nomination in the 9th District of North Carolina, even claims to have “found Jesus” in Iraq, where he was baptized in the waters of the Euphrates River.
Some of the career military candidates in the next list either joined the Obama administration, worked counter-terrorism, as Navy Seals, Special Ops, etc.:
Daniel Helmer, VA 10th, Alison Friedman (Also VA 10th w/ a $million war chest, Richard Ojeda VA 3rd, Josh Butner, CA 50th, Dan Feehan, MN 1st, Andy Kim NJ 3rd, Maura Sullivan NH 2nd, Jason Crow CO 6th, Matthew Morgan, MI 1st
From Part Three:
“From the State Department to Capitol Hill
The final category of military-intelligence candidates consists of veterans of the US State Department during the Obama years, most of them former aides to Hillary Clinton. These are among the best financed and most publicized of the likely Democratic nominees. In the event of a Democratic “wave” in November, most would find themselves with seats in Congress.”
Seventeen names are listed, but you can look at them at your leisure.
The next section is:
‘A stealth candidate—and some celebrities, including several candidates with over a million bucks in their war chests already.
Martin’s ‘Some political conclusions’ is long and worthy, but here are a few excerpts:
“The campaign takes place in the wake of more than a year of unrelenting focus by the Democrats on the anti-Russian campaign, a narrative claiming that Trump’s victory in the presidential election was the result of Russian interference and that Trump is, for all practical purposes, a Russian stooge in the White House.”
“Clinton ran in 2016 as the favored candidate of the military-intelligence apparatus, amassing hundreds of endorsements by retired generals, admirals and spymasters, and criticizing Trump as unqualified to be the commander-in-chief.
This political orientation has developed and deepened in 2018. The Democratic Party is running in the congressional elections not only as the party that takes a tougher line on Russia, but as the party that enlists as its candidates and representatives those who have been directly responsible for waging war, both overt and covert, on behalf of American imperialism. It is seeking to be not only the party for the Pentagon and CIA, but the party of the Pentagon and CIA.”
“The upper-middle-class layer that provides the “mass” base of the Democratic Party has moved drastically to the right over the past four decades, enriched by the stock market boom, consciously hostile to the working class, and enthusiastically supportive of the military-intelligence apparatus which, in the final analysis, guarantees its own social position against potential threats, both foreign and domestic. It is this social evolution that now finds expression on the surface of capitalist politics, in the rise of the military-intelligence “faction” to the leadership of the Democratic Party.”
A ‘part of a set’ Bonus: ‘Google admits collaboration with illegal US drone murder program’, Andre Damon, wsws.org, 8 March 2018
“In another milestone in the growing integration between the military-intelligence complex and Silicon Valley, Google’s parent company Alphabet has confirmed that it has provided software to identify targets used in the illegal US government drone murder program.” and toward the end:
“This [the third-offset against ‘the pacing’ threat from China] strategy revolves around the recruitment of the US private technology sector, which remains the most developed in the world. As the Economist put it, the United States “continues to dominate commercial AI funding and has more firms working in the field than any other country.”
Speaking at a conference last year, Marine Corps Col. Drew Cukor, the head of the so-called “Project Maven” in which Google is a key collaborator, declared the US in the midst of an “AI arms race,” adding, “Many of you will have noted that Eric Schmidt is calling Google an AI company now, not a data company.”
After reTweeting the wsws CIA Dems coverage, and likely having seen their Google helps drones coverage, this: @wikileaks march 8: ‘The beginning of the end of humanity: Google has put artificial intelligence (AI) into the Pentagon’s drone program Background: ‘Google Is Not What It Seems’, by Julian Assange, an excerpt from his book, in answer to: ‘Project Maven brings AI to the fight against ISIS’, 21 December 2017, the bulletin.org
“Maven is designed to be that pilot project, that pathfinder, that spark that kindles the flame front of artificial intelligence across the rest of the [Defense] Department.”
Air Force Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan
Ain’t it a beautiful world we’ll likely be handing over to future generations?
(cross-posted from Cafe Babylon
Comments
But like let's reform the Democratic Party y'know.
In the meantime, get those votes out for those "lesser-evil" candidates!
“Those who make Bernie Sanders impossible will make Luigi Mangione inevitable." - Dan Berger
lol.
"Be the reform you want to see!"
~ abigail spanbergerger
(“Abigail Spanberger, seeking the Democratic nomination in a district in the suburbs of Richmond, Virginia, has the following declaration at the top of her campaign website: “After nearly a decade serving in the CIA, I’m running for Congress in Virginia’s 7th District to fight for opportunity, equality and security for all Americans. My previous service as a law enforcement officer, a CIA officer, and a community volunteer has taught me the value of listening.”)
Abigail's curriculum vitae reads like she was
an operative with Operation CHAOS.
BTW, are there any ex COINTELPRO operatives on the ballots to give some balance?
Operation CHAOS
"Umm, 99, isn't the force opposing CHAOS called CONTROL?" -- M. Smart, Agent 86
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Max, I asked you not to tell me that.
lol.
imitating mel brooks and buck henry: quelle homage! as i'd tagged this: 'not satire'. but almost, of course...
Perfect anology!
But wasn't that officially KAOS?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
missed it by -that- much!
typo fixed
"Missed it by that much!"
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
"All of the above"
as Kyle Kulinski put it (in the above Jimmy Dore video). 3rd party, no party, Dem party, from within, from outside... doesn't matter. Use all of the above to get more progressives elected.
Couldn't agree more.
One way that likely won't work is "build a new party from the ground up," but, hell, throw that in the mix too. There is no real Dem party anymore, so "all of the above" ways to get more progressives elected works for me.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I see that a lot of women
From the intelligence community are "empowering" themselves in power grabs that are usually relegated to men.
As a fellow female, I can't tell you how "proud" I am that women also represent the fetid stench coming from capitalism on steroids, where the captains of industry co-opt the U.S. Military as their global goons to advance their bottom line. As they say in business, if you're not moving forward, you're dead. (Or was that Woody Allen, in Annie Hall?)
Great essay, and thanks for the links to WSWS. I don't usually go over there, but this essay reminded me I should.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
i do be so proud as well,
and ya hit the nail exactly on the head!
(“A case in point is Elissa Slotkin, a former CIA operative with three tours in Iraq, who worked as Iraq director for the National Security Council in the Obama White House and as a top aide to John Negroponte, the first director of national intelligence. After her deep involvement in US war crimes in Iraq, Slotkin moved to the Pentagon, where, as a principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, her areas of responsibility included drone warfare, “homeland defense” and cyber warfare.”
She's been groomed well
For the bullshit talk.
I'm sure the woman she's embracing in that picture would be interested to hear how dead children who ended up as collateral damage in the countries our intelligence agencies targeted is "helping" women.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
whooosh; ya got that right.
you've reminded me of angelina jolie with head of NATO jens stoltenberg joining the #meToo movement, cuz: war is hardest on women. or something.
should go to WSWS
We all should, even if we don't subscribe to their philosophies or have "business" there, just to defy the attempts made by Google and others to suppress them!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
they get a lotta shit right, imo.
second stop for me in the mornings after RT for the more subversive news the scribes to the Imperial project reckon 'isn't fit to print'. but yeah, there are a lotta different varieties of socialists. i check in with my favorite tankie on twitter at least once a day.
Same as the women who prove that they are just as
bloodthirsty as men are. Thatcher, the Rices, Albright, Herself and countless other women who think they too need to wear their big boy pants.
I didn't get it when people cheered for gays and lesbians to be able to join the military so they too could kill brown people. I was appalled that they wanted to. And yeah, now transsexuals can join too? Yippee ..
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
Agree. Riddle me this...
why on Gawd's green earth would a gay or trans wish to join the military? All the sex? Hell, I carried a gun on duty, but it was the last thing I wanted to see once the gun was secured and I went home for the day. Goes for the tanks and other hardware too. Get me into my jeans and sneakers and a hit off the hash pipe, tyvm. Eight hours a day was enough "playing Army" for me. And most I served with.
So, I can't imagine the gay and trans community wishing to experience that which seems 180˚ from their core self. But maybe that's just my bias showing. Trans in the military? Voluntarily? Get out! I don't get it. That's like asking a '60s hippie if he'd like to join the local American Legion club. but, hey, what do I know...
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@snoopydawg
Actually, I think they must have been born psychopaths themselves; imitations couldn't possibly project that degree of brain-deficient cluelessness regarding basic humanity in their exhibited pathology. Psychopathy isn't just limited to men, ya' know.
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.
As Hillary, Thatcher, Evita all demonstrated
Unfortunately gender is not a mis-deed defender.
We are a hereditary oligarchy.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEiODVUdUVU]
But it also doesn't surprise me that the CIA has its hands up the Ass of the Ass.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd4t8Kys0tU]
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
could you give me the cliffs note on the first video, please?
second is far shorter & hilarious. reminded me a bit of anthony freda.
Mostly just ranting about a Tim Kaine-esque candidate
that Nancy Pelosi supports named Dan Lipinski, a jackass who inherited his congressional seat from his father. Fuck 'em.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
thanks for explaining,
do i take it then that cuz the bern endorsed newman with what HE says she believes (i watched the first 2 minutes), will fight for, etc. that Ds should vote for her? or are you just pinging on the family nepotism?
me, i don't take campaign promises as anything but playing to the base you reckon will one day be yours. but then, i have a doctorate in political cynicism, so....there's that (smile).
No doubt. Cynicism is also a specialty of mine.
Political campaigns look like this to me anyway..
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7XBiabD_vM]
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
ha! a good friend of the café often brings the simpsons
to illustrate a point. i'd never seen them, to say the truth. but as an aside, may i say two things? one: set yer clocks forward an hour tonight, goddammit, and two: if no one else does, i might just put up an open thread here and over yonder on:
trump to have discussions w/ jong un.
my wondering is which party will screech the loudest, save for the lindsey graham types who crave virtue signal looking prescient if it blows up in spades. me, i'm down w/ it, myownself, and yes, i've heard many of the 'cautionary tales' afoot.
bless your heart, aspie corner, and all hearts here, good night.
Whether she knows it or not, Nancy just gave Lipinski
the kiss of death. If Republicans make ups substantial minority of the district, they will be out in droves to vote against him, assuming he wins the primary. (Note: about nomenclature, loyal establishment Dims come out in herds--baa!)
And how many of those are part of the so called
progressive insurgency? I checked a few and they were all labeled progressives although not sure if they're connected to Justice Democrats or DSA.
Regardless how it happened, there's just no getting around the fact that both major political parties are fully invested in U.S. imperialism. It's plainly stated in their party platforms. In an essay I wrote recently I challenged anyone to show me how any of the new progressive dem party challengers promoted by Justice Dems and DSA (the Sanders wing) opposed imperialism. I've looked at some of their campaign websites and it's all the same mealy mouth dem party weasel talk like "reduce military spending" and "stop waging unnecessary wars" while "keeping America safe" without even moderate opposition to imperialism and the quest for global hegemony.
The WSWS author is right, the dem party's "mass" base in the upper middle class, the professional Ivy league infested class that has also taken over most alternative political sites and progressive media. It serves to prevent radical ideas from taking hold to protect the dem party and to keep their own privileged places in society.
superdelegate system
This is also the reason for the superdelegate system, deliberately designed to "prevent radical ideas from taking hold to protect the dem party and to keep their own privileged places in society". Superdelegates are members of the privileged class by definition. (Pay no heed to the Dems' excuses that these are "long-term Democratic Party activists" and any other such noise; the superdelegate system is a clear and obvious method of keeping those who demand real change of any sort away from the levers of power.)
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
patrick martin noted in his political conclusions:
"Parenthetically, it should be noted that there would be no comparable influx of Bernie Sanders supporters or other “left”-talking candidates in the event of a Democratic landslide. Only five of the 221 candidates reviewed in this study had links to Sanders or billed themselves as “progressive.” None is likely to win the primary, let alone the general election."
and yes, the 'our revolution' FP tab is...so mealy-mouthed it reads like the DSA's. reform capitalism, much like naomi klein's 'this changes
nothing'.The Establishment Dems
Apparently did a good job weeding out the neophyte progressive upstarts who had delusions of democracy.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Really? Just five?
We've got five right here in central NY.
I suspect that number is a tad low, unless of course the five noted here are the only ones in the country running.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
'We've got five right here in central NY.'
five what? progressives? bernistas? but as martin had noted: 'of the 221 whose bios they'd perused' (or close), which iirc were mainly the candidates with a minimum of a hundred grand in their war chests already.
"Progressive" is getting to be an Orwellian term.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
There is no yellow brick
road to a majority congress. There is no magic way to get there. In the end, 20 years from now, there are going to be the same two parties there's ever been, always been. Twenty years won't change that.
What hopefully changes is the makeup of the Dem party, hopefully flip more red states blue. And, as Kyle Kulinski says (in the Jimmy Dore video), the "way" to get there is "all of the above." 3rd party, no party, from within, from outside... there is no magic way, we need to embrace them all. otherwise it simply is the same ol' lame ol' "nice try, but we came up a little short."
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
all of these war/intel candidates are courtesy of the dccc's
'turn red to blue'. i find fault with your statement that in twenty years there will only be red and blue parties afoot, though. thought experiment: if all of the people who voted for obomba the second time around, even loathing his policies, both foreign wars and domestic sell-outs of the people...had voted say, green en masse, would that have demonstrated the power of potential third parties?
if obomba had been denied a second term, might the many disaffected Ds have not voted for orange julius as in: 'you can keep the hope, i'll take the change' or whatever? from my cheap seats in the bleachers, his rule to trumps was a natural evolution/devolution. and herr hair has just doubled down, tripled down on so many of the worst rubbish that came via obomba rule.
lesser evil voting sucks; it's gotten us here. well, save for voting lesser evil in 2008 for O, i expect, but mccain/palin, OMG.
I don't see the duopoly
changing any time soon.
The Greens have been at it for 20 years and have mustered a whopping 4%, 5% of the vote. No other 3rd party comes close to those numbers. So, where is this 3rd party coming from? The progressives can't get their $h!t together, splintered in a million directions... there is no 3rd party, will be no 3rd party any time soon. There just aren't enough voters that give a flying fuck, and that's not changing any time soon neither. If I want to find the "activism" or "activists" in my neck of the woods I better look in the mirror. And, sadly, I suspect that's the case in congressional districts from sea to shining sea.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
the libertarians actualLY garner a higher percentage, but ok.
but you never responded to my thought experiment. and the greens have been far more radical than progressives, or at least the 'our revolution' sort. just look at their FP page; it's just a wee bit less warlike in its formulation of 'enemies', *whose lives were lost*, and a bunch of other 'lesser war' silliness.
did you hold your nose and vote for obomba in 2012, or vote for him gladly, as 'able to win', which is what the many LOTE-voters suggest, even the demi-god...noam chomsky. or if that's too personal to answer, i'll understand. yes, the debate commission should lower the bar for their candidate participation, but srsly: now many at least kinda-woke citizens will refuse to vote in 2018 or by 2020?
I gladly voted for
O'bummer in 2012.
What, vote for a Green instead?
Granted I hung on to O'bummer too long, expecting his eleven dimensional chess to kick in at any moment, bringing us hope and change. I didn't dump any hope of him amounting to something until Jan. 2015, a couple months after the midterm, when it became abundantly clear his presidency was going to amount to jack.
And, yeah, the millenials might generate something with the Independent party the Greens never could. I guess if there's ever going to be a 3rd party it will start in 2018 with the Independents. Or not at all. Hey, if that's where the progs flock... is fine with me, party labels becoming a thing of the past. As I said, I agree with Kyle in the Jimmy Dore video, "all of the above."
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Big Al
They're also a relatively small portion of the American voting population, aren't they?
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.
At least this will remove the middle man in American foreign
policy. It will also come in handy for upcoming wars against Russia and China - more efficient chain of command without interference from the proles.
Interesting evolution going on in the world. The US goes on a war footing while it's two long time traditional enemies institute programs of social uplift for their citizens.
Somehow the following seems fitting:
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPOzQzk9Qo]
yeppers, no matter how many seats these cia-miltary folks
end up winning, it's a win-win for Imperial foreign misadventures and full spectrum dominance (signs of a dying empire, many say), isn't it?
thanks so much for the eric idle, it cheers me to no end.
i'll add a couple. a commenter from berlin at the café said 'there's also this' (also devo)[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVGINIsLnqU]
they got so much right all those decades ago. jerry casale was fully radicalized after the kent state killings, and he later became jihad jerry and the evildoers:
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUpVAwiJ18E]
Cruelly hilarious
But, yeah. That's where are foreign policy is.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Peters and Stabenow are mine.
Both voted with the GOP to weaken Dodd Frank. Stabenow is up for reelection. I can't wait to run right out and vote for her.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
and dodd-frank was such a piece of shittt to begin with.
no 'reinstate glass-steagal, unwind bubba clinton's fooking 'Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000', on which whistle blowing ruined the good brooksley born for her trouble/
'any other attempts were trashed by obomba's white house. dang, i can still see the tall lanky grey-haired man on the steps saying that nothing meaningful is allowed to happen after the phoney baloney 3-day 'angelides commission' (O's answer to the televised weeks of the pecora commission). he left congress shortly thereafter. a good public servant, wish i could remember his name.
Curious if the R's are doing the same thing?
I hope WSWS will do that research as well.
if you use disqus,
you could suggest it. but i reckon it would be rather pro forma for Rs to stand as former military, etc., but my guess is that none would be so bold as to campaign as 'cia, other intelligence', etc.
on edit: it would be an interesting thought experiment to see if the Intelligence services would allow R candidates to trumpet their past positions in 'intelligence' (oh, what an oxymoron). but srsly, you could read part 2 and see if what wsws saw of the 'vulnerable' R candidates noted the same.
The schpys are likely
running as Dems to further
weaken the party. Right out of the Karl Rove /KochBros playbook.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I like how these persons on the panel talk.
May be you can talk clearly like them as well?
Daniel Ellsberg's Advice for How to Stop Current and Future Wars.
Here is their presentation worth listening to, imho.
Video: Press Conference Marking 15th Anniversary Of Leak by GCHQ Translator Katharine Gun Revealing U.S. “Dirty Tricks” at UN for Iraq War
https://www.euronews.com/live
it's not clear to me who you're addressing
with 'May be you can talk clearly like them as well?' with all due respect, while i reckon i might like the video, norman solomon is one of the key promoters of the 'we can reform the dems', both at TRNN and consortium news now that robert parry has crossed over. i suspect he never would have allowed such drivel as his now-editor son does. but again, that's just me.
but let me know where i might be misreading you, if you would.
Sorry, it's nothing, I just can't make reasonable comments
without having read the essay several times including all the links. Your article is very long and as you don't use blockquotes it's a bit hard on the eyes and I kinda gave up. And then I did post the video with those CIA folks as comparison, because they talked in a way I find easier for me to understand.
I specifically like this site for the EB and the Weekly Watch, because it helps me finding articles fast, which I always found to be relevant after having read them. I try to make some small comments to show my respect for the work of the people, who write the articles here. It is meant to show my appreciation. But frankly I can't make a meaningful comment to the content of your article within the time frame people here read and react to an essay. That is a crux for me with blogs. I am sorry that sometimes it frustrates me so much that it shows in my reactions.
You make smart funny remarks and get a good laugh at each others comments. I wanna laugh too. Robert Parry wrote very clearly. Mr. Solomon I have no clue about. And I don't know his son either.
I would have to read hours and hours every day, watch more hours of videos before I could make up my mind about the ideological outfit the editor of a site or an author wears. It is often too much for me, especially when I have to read articles 'on time', which are hours during the night here in Germany that kill my biological sleep rhythm. I simply can't think fast at 3 am in the morning.
No offense. I like to have peace with people here and hope for clarity. If you could use blockquotes it would help. Your article points to a lot of information, which I like to work through slowly. It takes time. When I am finished, you and the article's other commentators are already gone and it doesn't make sense to the still make a comment to it. That's the crux with blog conversations, at least for me.
Again my apologies for the way I talk and for being on the slow side. I wanna be your friend despite my lack of fast reading comprehension.
https://www.euronews.com/live
thanks for explaining,
as for my not using block quotes, i don’t even use them at the café (a word press blog), cuz i dislike them so. i can’t even remember how they format there, but maybe major indents, or something. so i colorize them as above, then use easy copy to cross post here. but i do understand your comments about time, too much to read, etc. i have a similar problem w/ watching videos: too much time too often, so i usually hunt for transcripts before i post long uns, like at TRNN.
and i hear you about how quickly folks skitter away here; i’m usually awake by 3 or 4, and by night time...whooosh, are my eyes and brain afire, and i just turn off my laptop, figuring i’ll respond in the morning...but everyone’s gone!! (smile) oh, and i don’t care for emotions, either.
but no, i don’t take offense, so no apologies are needed. i just wanted to know what you’d meant. and yes, consortium news did post that same solomon piece. i’d wondered what his twitter account might reflect, and on the way to finding it came across this odd bodkins piece from dissidentvoice, FWIW: ‘Progressive Norman Solomon Joins with Neocon Robert Kagan’, by John V. Walsh, July 15th, 2016
“Driving south to Mountain View in my new home state of California, I tuned into KPFA, the Pacifica outlet in the Bay Area. Norman Solomon, longtime prominent figure in Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) and co-founder of “Roots Action” was being interviewed on a program called “Talkies.” Just a few hours earlier Bernie Sanders had endorsed Hillary Clinton, betraying the millions who voted for him (and voted against her) and losing the respect of many millions more.
On air Solomon was commenting on the termination of Bernie Sanders’s milquetoast campaign against Hillary Clinton. And he was contrasting Hillary unfavorably with Bernie in a very detailed way with lots of references to Hillary’s policies. No personality analysis, no psychobabble. He mentioned that perhaps the most prominent neocon these days, Robert Kagan, was supporting Hillary Clinton for President. Yes, the same Kagan who calls for ever more US wars in the Middle East and for confrontation with the second mightiest nuclear power, Russia. Solomon pointed out quite correctly that Kagan had even said that Hillary shared his beliefs, but she would call them something other than neoconservatism.”
Then in almost the next breath Solomon called on Bernie’s followers to support Hillary for President. No, not Jill Stein, but Hillary.”
(the author admits he might being a tad hard on poor norman...) but i consider you my friend, and ma soeur. peace when you can manage it, mimi.
Thanks for the details and your understanding,
I am just going a bit nuts. Look for example at this article at the wsws:
German Chancellor promotes rearmament and war in speech to parliament and then at these:
Germany's lack of military readiness 'dramatic,' says Bundeswehr commissioner
The German parliament's military commissioner has published a report sharply critical of Germany's combat-readiness. The problem comes amid the country's increasing involvement in military missions abroad.
Ok, I have no understanding why Germany has to be involved in military missions abroad. IMO, because they have no guts to fight against the expectations the US has for their Allies to do their part. Nothing has changed from the Rumsfeld times.
Merkel doesn't cross over as promoting war to me. So, whatever exaggerated wording, ie propaganda is thrown out, it's from both sides.
https://www.euronews.com/live
i can't speak intelligently on either article,
but i have seen reports on other media that the german coalition government a) was increasing its contribution to nato, and b) increasing its own military capabilities. but i reckon you're correct that most journalists have their biases. i will volunteer that café commenter/author von davidly (amerikan expat in berlin for a long time now) has disagreed with johannes stern now and again, fwiw. side note: wsws has journalists around the world, so i'll assume stern lives in germany.
b at MoA is a former german colonel or such, but focuses mainly on the ME. his site has a huuuuge commentariat for his analyses.
oh, I never can comment intelligently, thanks,
I didn't mean to say that the author is biased. I can't understand why Germany is playing with their soldiers in the ME or Afghanistan and am against that and am upset about it. I just found the wording a little too black and white at the wsws article's headline.
Will read over at MoA. Thanks for that tip.
https://www.euronews.com/live
may be this would make my views a little clearer
This 'Master plan' for refugee removal gets cautious nods in Germany
Ingo Bierschwale and Christian Andresen Mar 11, 2018 has not grown on Angela Merkel's original pile of
shitcompost.yes, yes, that is so:
Germany's new interior minister lays down law-and-order credentials
and clearly it must be rejected with full force:
Reject German coalition pact! Make public all secret agreements! - Statement of the Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei
10 February 2018
Basically Merkel had to cave in to new law and order right-wing conservatives, like CSU Seehofer, who became more right-wing to still be left of the extreme right-wing AfD, and folks blame Merkel for being the culprit for the right-wing shift.
Right, it's Merkel's fault. It's not the Social Democratic Party's fault, who were too elitist and chicken to be an opposition voice for the German workers, and not the CSU (Christian Social Union) Seehofer's fault, who blamed Merkel on and on to be too 'liberal'.
Well, I think people will regret to have criticized Merkel for her open refugee policies. If you think a new law and order minister of the interior is the better choice, that's your choice.
We have a Mr. Bannon hugging le Pen in France, everywhere the right-wing extremist poor have a come-back, but the pamphlet of the Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei is completely 'right' from the left pov. It's all Merkel's fault. And of course it's "
HannibalHitler ante portas". Beware of the bad Germans! Darn it, they never change, don't they?Wake up and smell the
coffeepropaganda.https://www.euronews.com/live
thanks for the cliffs notes,
and i hope you feel better as to what's afoot, what's not, or at least why.
Most people "got" Bernie's
"endorsement" of Hillary.
As for his "campaigning for Her,"
they "got" that too. Bernie simply used his own campaign stump speech while snidely inserting, "we Know Hillary supports $15 an hour, we Know Hillary supports (one of Bernie's policies)." Of course Her didn't, and we all knew that.
Many took that as Bernie stabbing his supporters in the back. I took it as Bernie "playing politics" to remain relevant. Mission accomplished. Her Highness done, Bernie still standing, still relevant. And, granted, his walking the fence politics over the past year has been disappointing at best. At best. And I don't expect that to change. Bernie apparently likes to walk the fence. His loss. Becuz, really, all he needed to do after Her election defeat was pick up the flag he dropped in Philly a few months earlier and get on with it. Simple as that. Get back on the stump. But, nope. His loss, our loss. The party was there for the taking, but Bernie wouldn't pick up the flag. And it So sucks.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
i see that you may have heard his stump speeches for the
'anointed one' differently than many, then. i guess i should say that i'm sorry for your loss, but i haven't liked him since he started campaigning. one café friend bernista, think it was on this, admonishing me that he'd never thunk bernie'd 'be attacked by the left' iirc.
oh, yes, his new bill thousand days late against the saudi (did he mention israeli munitions?) scorched earth bombing and diaspora in yemen, but to me...this is the bern writ large, much like the 'or revolution' FP page i'd put up...somewhere. and was it you who'd said there were more than five either progressive or our revolution sponsored congressional candidates in central new york? apologies for my early onset CRS disease.
'Bernie Hearts Drone Assassinations, but with One Proviso', sept. 2015 but as they acronym: ymmv, smile
Shaun King says...
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Wink
Lol, yeah, except the way that Bernie always put it when 'campaigning for Her' was that "Hillary knows the importance of this; Hillary knows how much whatever is needed" never that she "supported" any of it, knowing damn well that people would immediately mentally finish the unspoken sentence that Her never would because Her's a pathologically - and pathetically - venal, cheating, criminal psychopath. And the look on Her face when Bernie did that was so delightful... He did manage to turn things around on Her quite nicely, until, I suspect, they evidently started writing specific phrasing...
Can't be easy trying to outmaneuver a whole nest of psychopathic criminal types... it's apparent that nobody else has successfully tried. Luckily, Bernie's been pretty good so far at managing what's thought impossible where the public good's concerned. Got to know when to hold 'em, when to fold em, and the precise moment and manner in which to win a greater good.
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.
Agree. And you just
know all those "Hillary Knows... "
had to frost Her bunns.
Was his same m.o. at the Philly convention.
He damned Her with faint praise, Her seething with every "knows... "
Say what you want about the Bern, he stopped Her cold from moving right.
Nobody else did that.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
For me, #Russiagate was a bridge too far
Like you I was OK with Bernie trying to stay relevant and that's how I interpreted his actions. That's fine if what we're doing is whining about real things or even various bits of political dirt. "Staying relevant", however, is not sufficient reason for #Russiagate. If someone wants to start WW3 and end life on earth as we know it then I'm afraid they're going to need a much better reason than that.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
Great essay. Why would they run as democrats?
I can see the DCCC recuriting the ex-security/miiitary state actors, but why did these CIA-candidates pick the democratic party? Isn't the common stereotype of democrats as being goof ball anti-military types still around? Or is that stereotype only still living in right wing fringe? Maybe better career possiblities? I wonder if the candidates reject the gop for their white nationalism with the democratis offering a better home in that regard, while keeping and endorsing the MIC state: "I can be an accepted woman, yet still get to bomb terrrorists disguised as innocent civilians?" (Hillary's feminism.)
i'm not sure quite what you're asking,
but if i get your drift, i'd have to answer that under obama's right wing military and domestic rule, the democrats were ratcheded again to the right, as w/ bubba clinton earlier. this explanation was published prolly two decades ago, but more true now than then.
patrick martin again:
"When the dust clears after November 6, 2018, there will almost certainly be more former CIA agents in the Democratic caucus in the House of Representatives than former Sanders activists. It is the military-intelligence operatives who constitute the spine of the Democratic Party, not the Sanders “Our Revolution” group. This is a devastating verdict on the claims of the Vermont senator, backed by various pseudo-left groups, that it is possible to reform the Democratic Party and push it to the left.
The preponderance of national security operatives in the Democratic primaries sheds additional light on the nature of the Obama administration. Far from representing a resurgence of liberal reformism, as apologists for the Democrats like the International Socialist Organization claimed at the time of his election, Obama’s eight years in office marked the further ascendancy of the military-intelligence apparatus within the Democratic Party.
This is demonstrated by the subsequent role of his top personnel. Among the former Obama civilian officials who are running in the Democratic primaries for seats in the House of Representatives, 16 served in the State Department, Pentagon, Department of Homeland Security or National Security Council, while only five served in domestic agencies. One of those, Haley Stevens, was chief of staff for the Obama auto industry task force, which imposed 50 percent wage cuts on newly hired auto workers. Among the five, only Stevens is considered a likely winner in the primary."
let me know if we're talking past one another, okay?
@MrWebster
Maybe the Dems are actively (still and always) competing for Israel (and any) billionaire donors again and Bibi/Saban, Adelson and others want to see Military/Intelligence come into the open as forming a good (well, bad) chunk of direct and public US policy-making?
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.
I recognize this operation and its strategic patterns.
Don't you?
This is the Council on Foreign Relations.
The Council on Foreign Relations [CFR] was formally established in Paris in 1919 along with its British Counterpart the Royal Institute of International Affairs [RIIA]. They were founded by a group of American and British imperialists and racists intent on ruling the world. Many of the American members were American intelligence officers that belonged to the first American Intelligence Agency -- THE INQUIRY. Many of the British members were British Intelligence Agents.
The Council on Foreign Relations, and the Royal Institute of International Affairs are adept at using the media to create massive psycho-political operations used to manipulate public opinion. The psycho-political operations are often designed to create tensions between different groups of people. The object is to keep the world in a state of perpetual tension and warfare to maximize profits from CFR/RIIA munition, medicine, media, energy, and food businesses — and empower themselves.
The CFR has only 3000 members yet they control over three-quarters of the nations wealth.
The CFR runs the State Department and the CIA. The CFR has placed 100 CFR members in every Presidential Administration since Woodrow Wilson. They work together to misinform and disinform the President to act in the best interest of the CFR not the best interest of the American People. At least five Presidents (Eisenhower, Ford, Carter, Bush, and Clinton) have been members of the CFR. The CFR has packed every Supreme court with CFR insiders.
In February 1941 the CFR officially became part of the State Department.
So, the CFR is all about the military. They would find it enormously convenient if most of Congress was deeply immersed in obedience and discipline. I'm surprised to see how quickly this type of social engineering has taken shape.
::
Vote or don't vote. Join a Party or don't.
It makes no difference.
Thanks for a wonderfully engaging essay.
We actually know all 3000 of them in one way or another.
The membership is by recommendation only. The CFR is where future US presidents are selected and where they are groomed for the job. This is the think tank from which the President will select most of his appointees, including the Supreme Court. At the CFR level of government, there's only one political ideology. They are all Neocons. There are leadership groups inside the CFR that have authority over the nation's global decisions. This can create the appearance of a deep state. The CFR has no interest in governing American society beyond the design of the propaganda being employed. That's something Congress might or might not take care of. They won't vote on articles of war because that is above their pay grade.
I have yet to see someone outside of the CFR adequately describe it. They almost always veer off here and there into their own projections and biases about motivation and purpose. Few can grasp the full panorama of the CFR because their imaginations are limited by their reality. This author made a pretty good attempt:
The fact is, the CFR is quite transparent about what they do in their own publications. One just has to look for them.
@Pluto's Republic
So if we lure that lot into their luxury bunkers and seal them in with their supplies, a good portion of the problem is eliminated?
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.
I sometimes was wondering who of you work
for the Council of Foreign Relations, because I never understood who and what they were and stood for.
https://www.euronews.com/live
The Masters of the Universe
The following shows who owns and controls the voice of the American Empire. These people control what you see and read on the media, what you watch on your TV, what you eat, what you dress like and even what 80% of the proles think or talk about during the day. This is the club that you are not a part of that George Carlin spoke about.
Great chart
But what's missing is the business empires that make up the 3 organizations at the top.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Here you go.
Names and corporations that run and control America.
[Right click to View Image]
Here's a link to Huffington Post before it too, joined the club we are not in:
@CB
Nationalize the suckers and seize their wealth for non-payment of taxes. That'd be plenty to start fixing some of the damage they've done.
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.
The Money Quote
.
Considering that only a quarter percent of the population still votes, doesn't look to me like the democracy product the corporatocracy is peddling is actually selling, eh?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
nice catch, amigo.
i'd covered some of the CFR members on south sudan some time ago (looks like sept. 2016), including cheadle and clooney, lol. as well as warren beatty, i forget which other hollywood stars, all have lifetime memberships.
i look forward to reading your links; thanks so much. oh, and when a few months ago ian welsh had touted oprah or clooney for prez, i'd mentioned that clooney is...er...CFR. bless your heart, pluto's republic.
We can forget because they are not in Washington DC.
Out of sight, out of mind.
Their headquarters is in New York. Midtown. It is from there that they govern the foreign policy of the nation. That's why what really goes on at the UN is not covered by US media. That's where Nikki Haley gets her horrific talking points. That's where Hillary was groomed. That's where RussiaGate was cooked up. That's where the national brainwashing takes place. Mussolini would feel right at home there.
Thanks for yet another inspiring essay, Wendy. I am grateful for your contributions here.
That'll make a nice change
That'll make a nice change from Dems and Repubs. People will get to vote for either the bloodthirsty military/spy party or the bloodthirsty corporate party! No more silly pretense about the people being being represented - how refreshing!
Edit: at least the Dems have apparently finally found that message for the public: these, your selected overlords, are capable of killing you themselves if you contest their faked (s)election, criticize the Party/government or demand action against injustice; how Clintonesque!
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.
I fear for Bernie Sanders' life.
I'm not kidding. What would absolutely crush the growing movement in this country? The elimination of the central figure. And if we think that has not happened before, we are kidding ourselves. I read Family of Secrets by Russ Baker years ago. Now I'm reading The Devil's Chessboard. I don't think my fears are fringe at all.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
is there a growing sanders-esque movement in this nation
to crush?
Like him or hate him
Bernie still is the most liked politician on the planet.
There simply is no one to his "Left." Nobody.
And, yes, the Bernie movement still continues. Hell, we have 3 or 4 Bernie FB groups in my neck of the woods alone. Yes, it has fallen off some since Hillary's election smackdown but believers keep the flame lit. The Bernie movement ain't going anywhere, is here for the long haul. Where did you think all those "Justice Democrats" spin off groups came from? Exactly! Without Bernie there would be no such groups. Any and all progressive groups point back to Bernie. Many may have given up on Bernie the politician, but they can't deny he was the spark.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
i'd had to bingle for 'justice democrats',
so thanks for the heads up directions, mainly cenk uygur and 'former leadership from the 2016 Bernie Sanders presidential campaign'. so you're correct, although 'no one to the left' gets into squidgy territory, unless you mean 'already elected' politicians. but i do remember seeing polling that the bern has high approval ratings, and many still claim that he could have beaten trump. but i need to be finished with this bernie thread now, and i'll just leave the 'our revolution' page on their 29 candidates running in 2018, from school board, county commissioner on up the ladder. but they're claiming kucinich? to me he's always been far to the 'left' of bernie, but...i've loved dennis from his cleveland muny power days (smile) and that he'd campaigned on having a cabinet level department of peace. how subversive!
Well, that's the "problem."
There are so many Bernie groups that, taken individually, don't amount to crap. Add 'em up collectively and you've got a whole 'nuther ballgame, got something going.
Or would have, except everyone's busy in their own separate fiefdoms.
And that's the problem - why progressives can't get anything done, can't win elections.
The Left has so many little fiefdoms - we're more pure than you! - that nothing gets done. I don't belong to Any of the 3 or 4 or 5 major spinoff groups from Bernie's campaign becuz they all sounded like bull$h!t to me. And maybe they are. I work with 3 or 4 Local Bernie groups, unaffiliated with the top groups. We help local Berniecrats with their local campaigns.
So, while it may Look like the "Bernie Movement" is dead, it's far from it, 29 lonely "Justice" candidates to the contrary. The "movement" is at least alive in my NY-21 and most other upstate NY congressional districts. We still Feel the Bern even if we're not particular fans of the presidential candidate. Bernie's movement carries on, with or without him.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
And, by the way, speaking
of NY-21, where is Dylan Ratigan?
Nowhere to be found, that's where.
He hasn't made so much as a peep since he announced.
Maybe he's keeping his powder dry?
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I can't tell anymore.
But the headlines about his rallies and meetings and interviews, added to the poll numbers on his popularity certainly put out the perception that there is an organized and potentially powerful movement that will affect the next Presidential election. And since the DCCC is packing the field of democrats with ex CIA types, there is even more cause for concern.
I don't really believe that the Russians are the only group that has or uses various nerve agents and poisons to their own ends.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
nope, they're not. n/t
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I doubt if it would even be mentioned
or at least till they've analyzed whether that itself would offer a point of unification. Perhaps that's why he's still alive.
First time I heard arguments against Tulsi Gabbard's bill
HR5417 Securing America's Elections Act of 2018 she introduced that I could follow. What do you think? Has the Sane Progressive a point?
[video:https://youtu.be/T1cri6Y72aA]
I wished there would be a text summarizing the main points The Sane Progressive makes.
[video:https://youtu.be/oOV4QWz7BIw]
So, should the Sane Progressive debate Jimmy Dore?
https://www.euronews.com/live
Sane Progressive is a trustworthy researcher and reporter.
Sane enough so that she was not allowed to continue to post via YouTube shortly after the election, about the time when many sites similar to this one found that public access to them was being buried behind several pages of non-pertinent info. Not sure when I learned about her -- it may have been via CSTM or Ellen North.
That was a long watch but enormously important to understand. The dark side of electronic communication is becoming darker.
Thank you mimi for being here and posting it.
Edited to add: Sorry to hear Dore did not look at the fine print.