Which is the lesser of two evils? Nothing is as it seems in the “election” of 2016.

From: Robert C. Casad, Jr.

I live primarily as an expatriate, having relocated to Denmark in 2005, just after the Bush II “re-election” following the judicial putsch of 2000.  I very actively supported Bernie with donations from abroad, and consider his efforts at “political revolution” to be the single most positive development in American politics in my lifetime.

Here I write to urge fellow progressives in the US to take great caution when they interpret the information they are seeing about the 2016 election as it unfolds.

At first blush this seems like a no-brainer: Trump is so bad that we have to plug our noses and vote for Hillary.  Yet if you take a deeper look, you may re-think who, exactly, is the lesser of two evils in this regrettable situation – this nightmare scenario which exists because of Hillary Clinton’s ambition and her successful suppression of Bernie’s “political revolution.”  Trump wouldn’t have stood a chance against Bernie.  

You should think long and hard about what is really going on in an election in which the Koch brothers and the Bush Crime Family support Hillary.  

I used to say that if you wanted to fight for preservation of local culture in middle America, you should call your oganisation “The Committee for the Annihilation of Local Culture.”  This would be the most effective way to formally establish yourselves as the opponent of fox-in-the-chicken-coop “proponents” of local culture such as WallMart, Time-Warner and the like.

Something analogous applies to the 2016 election.  Night is day.  War is peace.  Hate is love.  Nothing is as it seems.  I just watched a scene from the Democratic Convention in which broadways stars sang a touching rendition of “What the World needs now is love sweet love,” with thousands of delegates holding hands, swaying and singing along. Seems like a very positive contrast with the Republicans’ message of fear.  But you should not be taken in by the simplistic logic that Hillary is the candidate of love/defending local culture while Trump is the candidate of hate/annihilating local culture.

The official democratic message is that everything is alright, things are looking great, all of this fear from the Republicans is just a lot of Trumpery.   

But in fact there really is a lot to fear – from Hillary.  Here is a link to an interview where she plainly states:  “I want the Iranians to know that if I am the President, we will attack Iran.”  

She supported the Iraq war which followed quickly after the Bush putsch in 2000.  Her super-agressive regime change program in Libya (allegedly motivated by “love” for the poor Libyans whom Kaddafi would have slaughtered) ultimately became a field day for Isis.  Her failed regime change program in Syria (again allegedly motivated by “love” for the Syrian people mistreated by the monster Assad) has unleashed a cataclysm – now millions of people are homeless refugees, straining European “freedom of movement” to the breaking point and leading to a rising tide of urban terrorism. It is an ongoing theme of her candidacy that “Russian agression” is the biggest foreign policy threat facing the US, hence the need to totally surround Russia with NATO installations.   

Trump, the hate candidate, in contrast plainly says “wouldn’t it be nice if we got along with Russia?”  Trump proposes to work with Russia to defeat Isis and is not keen on encircling Russia with NATO bases.   

I have just seen today major headlines from supposedly reputable news organizations which suggests that Vladimir Putin was behind the hacking of the Democratic National Committee emails.  For example, see NBC News, (“DNC Email hack: Why Vladimir Putin hates Hillary Clinton” ) and see New York Times (“Russia, suspected in hacking, has uneasy history with Hillary Clinton” with picture of Hillary Clinton in a meeting with Putin”).

This is a classic example of a phenomenon that has become very common in news coverage in the US:  Things are stated very matter-of-factly about Putin that are not actually substantiated at all. The actual evidence which points to a Russian connection in the DNC hack was that (1) it was from a Russian VPN server, and (2) there were some cyrillic characters in some “clues” which were carelessly left behind in the hack.  Only in the US is it possible for this evidence to be immediately extrapolated as proof that “Putin did it.”  Russia is a big country.  A lot of people live there who do not like the United States, especially after the US-imposed economic sanctions.  People who believe that Putin is a dictator who controls everything that happens in Russia are simply living in la la land.  

But until now, until Trump brought this question into the center of the presidential campaign, the anti-Russian propaganda machinery in the US has been totally effective.  Even my own family in the US, all well educated, resonable people, simply refuse to discuss the question of “Russian aggression.”  I am wrong.  It is settled.  There is simply nothing more to be said about it.  Russia is a global menace run by a thug dictator.  They might invade Poland any day now.  Full stop.  Please let us not discuss this subject.

To me it is a profound and disturbing shock that the CONTENT of the hacked emails is somehow less important in the media coverage than the totally unsubstantiated claim that “Putin did it” in order to help his “buddy” Trump.  The CONTENT shows that, what was formerly poo-pooed by the mainstream press as a “conspiracy theory” of Bernie supporters, was indeed a fact – the democratic party establishment willfully suppressed Bernie’s “political revolution.”

At the end of the day, Hillary is a war-mongering globalist.  No matter how disgusting Trump may be, he is neither of those things.  What Trump promises is to hit the re-set button on establishment, globalist Pepsi-Coke two-party politics.  In my view, that is much more likely to provide a fertile ongoing context for the “political revolution” than if Hillary is allowed to complete her program.  As for the “nuclear codes,” I would trust just about anybody with them before I would give them to Hillary.

About the Author

Bernie Blog
Administrator and Editor for BernieBlog.org BernieBlog.org On Facebook

8 Comments on "Which is the lesser of two evils? Nothing is as it seems in the “election” of 2016."

  1. Brian Copeland | July 31, 2016 at 4:30 am | Reply

    I have no illusions as to the devious ways of the former Senator from New York and the many ways she did or could have suppressed the “revolution”. I understand that….as I understand that this is what I’m told is called “politics” in the good ‘ol US of A. I also understand that now with the internet ….I’m not beholden to getting my news or information at 5pm from the three news sources so when you speak of Hillary’s clear penchant for stacking the deck in her favor tell me again how she kept all those Sanders voters from going to the polls and casting their votes.

  2. Robert Casad | July 31, 2016 at 4:31 am | Reply

    The most egregious abuse happened in California. Here is a link to a documentary on this subject “UNCOUNTED: The true story of the California primary.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5ugmNoanx8 It is difficult to find all the facts, because the mainstream press does not report this story. But certainly Hillary needed to win California – by hook or crook! There are widespread accounts of administrative efforts to suppress Bernie votes on election day. Something like 900,000 (?) “new voter” registrations were disqualified. Further, literally millions of voters who were not registered democrats at the last election came to the polls but were given only “provisional ballots.” The official count of these “provisional ballots” remains unknown TO THIS DAY. Why not simply report the count? Because the unpleasant detail that Hillary’s margin in California was nothing like the “landslide” that was reported would have cluttered up the context of the democratic party convention. Imagine how things might have turned out if Sanders actually won California (which in theory he might very well have done, if you re-qualified the disqualified new voters and if he would have carried them by the same margins that he carried the under 30 vote). Imagine what would have happened if Bernie, having won California, had actually contested the convention on the argument that he was in a better position to defeat Trump than Hillary. Note how plausible that argument had become by the time of the convention. That would have been the Political Revolution FOR REAL. And THAT is what Hillary and the party establishment suppressed.

  3. Brian Copeland | July 31, 2016 at 4:36 am | Reply

    To my good friend Robert, and to all the other supporters of the honorable Senator Sanders…… are you willing to risk four years with, if we can take him at his word, President Trump’s total denial of global climate change? Are you willing to risk the appointment of 3 or more Supreme Court Justices that will shape legal doctrine for the next 40 to 50 years? Risking it all just for the sake of giving Hillary a electoral slap in her face by voting for Trump or Johnson or the Green party? I urge the supporters of Bernie to vote their conscience. The problem I see is there can be nothing……NOTHING…..that is good if Hillary doesn’t win. Is she a “global war monger”? Let’s cross that bridge when we come to it. First, and most importantly, let’s join together to see that Donald Trump will never be called President.

    • Robert Casad | July 31, 2016 at 4:41 am | Reply

      The choice for Sanders supporters to vote their conscience is not a matter of delivering a mere “electoral slap in the face” to Hillary.

      We are still struggling for a government that will finally correct the effects of the “Reagan Revolution.” The Clintons simply aquiesced and reformed the democratic party establishment doctrine into a kind of Reagan-lite. Obama perhaps tried but ultimately failed to turn the country in a different direction. Now at last in this election there is a possibility of a new direction. This is ironically offered NOT by Hillary, but by the effects of Trump hitting the “re-set” button on the status quo and providing the counter-point against which the ongoing Political Revolution can evolve.
      Instead of giving in to blackmail and voting for Hillary out of fear about the Supreme Court or Global warming or abortion rights or whatever, I suggest instead a proud vote of conscience – go ahead, make our day. The ongoing Political Revolution will be real and vital under President Trump. It will most likely be co-opted and turned into a marketing slogan under Hillary.

      I call for an outright conclusion that it is Trump, the Mexican-abusing evil hate candidate, who is the lesser of two evils. That is a terrible state of affairs – no doubt about it. But that is what I am saying.

      Of course in evaluating which of the evils is lesser, one has to make choices about a variety of different factors and how these should be “weighted.”

      A first question in the accounting of evils is “how much weight should you give to foreign policy concerns?” The foreign policy questions are deadly serious. On the one hand you have Hillary’s globalist agenda, her plans to “finish the job” of encircling Russia with NATO bases and missiles 5 minutes flight from Moscow (and to rail against “Russian aggression” for Putin’s having dared to oppose this), and her total lack of repentance for her terrifying program of regime change and promoting Sunni-Shiite war in the middle east which set the stage for Isis. In contrast, you have the obnoxious Trump, who intends to turn the tables on the globalist agenda, stop the NATO encirclement of Russia, and restore good relations with the Russians. Brian very naively suggests about Hillary’s globalist war mongering that we can “cross that bridge when we come to it.” But in fact, that bridge “over the Rubicon” so-to-speak will have been crossed the moment Hillary took office. This is a program that is already in motion. It can only be stopped if Hillary is stopped. And indeed this could very well be our last chance to get off this train.

      A second question in the accounting of evils is “how much weight should you give to domestic policy concerns?” Note that while foreign policy problems are irreversible, domestic policy problems can eventually be corrected by a subsequent government. I suggest that all domestic policy concerns should be evaluated with an expectation that the Political Revolution is ongoing.

      Concerning the “Supreme Court problem:” This will be considerably less significant if the democrats recapture the Senate this year. I think that could have been easily accomplished had Sanders been the nominee. Republicans are defending seven seats this year in states that Obama carried in 2012. A big turnout of Sanders “voters of conscience” in these states could provide a “safety net” – not to elect Hillary but for the democratic party to re-capture control of the Senate. In this case, the threat of dangerous judicial activists getting on the Supreme Court will be greatly reduced.

      But let us take the worst case scenario where President Trump indeed packs the Court with right wing activists: In that case, this issue will form the first clear objective of the Political Revolution. The number of “justices” on the Supreme Court is not set by the Constitution, but simply by the Judiciary Act of 1869. This can be amended at any time that one party, or coalition of parties with concurring will, controls both houses of Congress and the White House. In my view, the Supreme Court has long since lost any claim to legitimacy (after Bush v Gore, Citizens United and so on). We would do well to reduce the stature of individual “justices” by adding a lot more to the total – say from 9 to 27. And this is totally possible to do.

    • I agree Brian, first things, first ‘Dump Trump’ in his pusch against global safety (& sanity) then move on to history, one stage at a time & accept we can’t have it all in one go & that there will be the opportunity to reset things if things don’t go too well with Hillary.
      At least there is a chance to continue for progressive change ihn 2020 as who knows what Trump may have done in the mean time in so many areas, it is a risk the ‘world’ can’t take- we have to smack down the Trump clown or the circus will continue, this especially so as Bernie himself has given Hillary his blessing, we all have to move ahead & not cry over spilt milk, there are only 2 real choice on offer, one of which will surely send us all to hell (btw- Trump has often been a beneficiary of economic liberalism & now says its a bad thing as if he has nothing to do with it).
      Remember 1932 in Germany enabling acts can happen if left to one individual, make sure you can atleast ‘have a hand’ or say in future events.

  4. One month after a Bernie Sanders supporter served the Democratic National Committee and its then-chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, with a civil complaint alleging fraud on behalf of Hillary Clinton, he was found dead in his Florida home. In a video recorded by independent filmmaker Ricardo O. Villalba, the deceased, Shawn Lucas, appeared to be excited to serve papers on the DNC on July 3 — the day before Independence Day. . . Rich’s killer reportedly took nothing of value from the 27-year-old — with the exception of his life. His wallet, watch and cell phone were still on his person.

  5. To all at Bernies blog,
    If it didn’t need saying previousely the time to dump ‘the pretender to no end’ is now stop this dictator-in-waiting with his brown shirts in waiting aka the KKK who don’t want to duck the fact that they support Donald.
    Stop the tyrany before it gets any sort of a foothold, dump Trump now!
    Send a message against this wanna-be monarch, support chance & continue to support a better deal for all; but first things first Hillary needs to be the one who wins on election day for history,sanity,security & a better way ahead.
    Vote out Trump circus, you will be doing everyone a great service not only your nation but also everyone from every nation.
    Hillary may not be without fault be she is by far the best option in which the situation becomes increasingly serious- do the world a favour even if you have to grit your teeth in process, not everything in life in fair but we need to start somewhere for better things to happen down the track.

  6. Imagine casino operator calling anyone else crooked, Trump wont set any reset button but he might press one button & it wont be pretty.
    Hillary may haved moved to the right in some areas but the ‘Sanders effect’ has made the DMC much more progressive & the only real hope therein, it is a much better bargain the other side (dark side) on offer.
    The ledger can be squared.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*