Skip to content

The Problem with Hillary Clinton

2015 December 21
by Ian Welsh
Hilary Clinton Secretary of State Portrait

Hilary Clinton Secretary of State Portrait

A lot of people don’t like Hillary. Some on the left even hate her.

For a few, it may be because she is a woman. For most it has much more to do with policy.

Pretending that people are unreasonable when they hate a politician who voted for a war which was a war crime is good spin, but it’s not honest.

Hillary Clinton voted for war with Iraq. She defended that vote for years, though she now says it was a mistake.

Hillary Clinton defended the “Welfare Reform” put in place by her husband.

Hillary Clinton was for the Patriot Act.

Hillary Clinton voted for TARP.

There are real reasons to dislike, and even hate, Clinton.

Let us be clear, I do not hate Clinton. In 2008, I supported John Edwards, but when he dropped out, I supported Hillary. I did so, because after reading her platform and Obama’s, I decided she was slightly to his left. I also believed she would be far more likely to remove Bush apparatchniks from government posts, something Obama eventually did not do. I believed that Clinton was slightly to Obama’s right on foreign affairs, but not enough to matter.

The fact that Obama made Clinton his Secretary of State indicates I was correct on that last point.

Indeed, when Clinton said she was staying in the primary race because you never know what might happen, and the left-o-sphere exploded with accusations that she was calling for him to be assassinated, I defended her, and I believe I was the only person who did so on Huffington Post’s front page.

None of this is to say that Clinton was, then, a good candidate, simply that I considered her better than Obama.

So, I don’t hate Clinton. I don’t even dislike her. I am only one step from her, I know a LOT of people who know her, some of whom are her friends. By all accounts, she is a very likable person.

But, based on her policy decisions, she is either monstrous, or has terrible judgment. She is, at best, a “Lesser Evil” candidate. It is not deranged for people to dislike her or even hate her–she has supported policies which have impoverished  and killed millions. If that isn’t reason enough to hate someone, I don’t know what is.

Of course there are those who do hate her for being an uppity woman, or for various conspiracy reasons (Vince Foster!), but it’s perfectly possible to hate her based simply on her public policy positions over the years.

I don’t like Sanders that much. He’s far better than Clinton on domestic issues, and he’s been on the right side of some important foreign policy issues, but he’s quite problematic on foreign affairs overall. Still, he’s clearly been better than Clinton on enough big items that matter, which is to say that, yes, if you’re a Democratic Primary voter, I think you should vote for Sanders.

Hillary also appears to have become worse on Foreign Affairs over the years. Her hatred of Putin and Russia, in particular, worries me. It feels to me that Clinton still views Russia as the USSR, and that she personally dislikes Putin (not surprising, given he has personally denigrated her for being a woman).

I don’t see Russia as that significant of a threat, and I think treating it as if it is one is more likely to make it one. I also don’t like saber-rattling against a nation which has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world multiple times over.

Hillary is a conservative politician with bad judgment. Bernie is a left-center candidate whose policy suggestions would be mainstream in most European countries (for instance, real universal health care).

Hillary is good on women’s rights and she is a woman herself. There is an argument that having a woman president is important. It is, from a left-wing perspective, the only strong argument I can think of for choosing Hillary over Sanders.

But, to me, at least, it doesn’t trump voting for the Iraq war. That’s a lot of dead people to write off.

Your mileage may vary.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

43 Responses
  1. dongo permalink
    December 21, 2015

    Hillary

  2. Ian Welsh permalink
    December 21, 2015

    Sigh. Well, at least I was consistent. Fixed.

  3. S Brennan permalink
    December 21, 2015

    I deeply hope that Hillary who urged Obama to make a $1.5-2 trillion mess of Libya & Syria with her wars of aggression is shown the door at the first chance. Two wars that have left those once prosperous countries shattered, with over 350,000 dead…all to please Hillary’s political contributors.

    Hillary is a war criminal, no better than Hans Frank, or Wilhelm Frick, additionally, she is a sociopath of the first order, her cackle, yes, cackle at the news of Gaddafi dying after being anally raped with a bayonet should put the matter to rest. I’m all for a woman president…but not one who finds rape & murder humorous material.

    Comparing Hillary to a Nazi isn’t fair…she’s far closer to a Green River Murderer. I don’t want somebody who is unwilling to hide her cruelty, something most sociopaths can manage, anywhere near the nuclear button.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/06/19/flashback_2011_hillary_clinton_laughs_about_killing_moammar_gaddafi_we_came_we_saw_he_died.html

  4. JRA permalink
    December 21, 2015

    Don’t forgot Honduras! It’s cute that she wants to send children back to that hellscape she created.

  5. Onihikage permalink
    December 21, 2015

    Her name is still misspelled in the image caption, tags, 9th paragraph, and third-last paragraph (counting a “paragraph” as everything between line breaks). Did you forget about Ctrl-F?

    The biggest problem I see with Hillary is that she doesn’t have the ability to shake off influence from corporate donors. I recall a video in which Elizabeth Warren recounted a story where she basically educated Hillary on why a certain bill going through congress was bad for the American people. Warren said of Hillary, “I never had a smarter student,” and Hillary turned around the entire administration to prevent it from passing.

    However, when Hillary became Senator, the exact same bill came up again, and she voted in favor of it. In Warren’s words, “As Senator Clinton, the pressures are very different from when she was First Lady.” To me, corporate influence threatens to destroy all traces of American democracy, so a candidate who can’t fight that influence is unacceptable.

    I get the impression that Hillary is rather vindictive – if you get in her way, she will make your life miserable. When she wants something, people fall in line. It’s the kind of politics I really hate, and it explains why she’s gotten so many endorsements so early on in the campaign (granted, it could be as simple as telling people what they want to hear, which Hillary seems to be good at).

    I agree also that she’s “a conservative politician with bad judgment,” and she seems to surround herself with other poor-judgment people like Debbie Wasserman Schultz – formerly the co-chair of Hillary’s 2008 campaign, now the despotic chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee. The fact that she did not recuse herself from her position of authority when Hillary ran was suspect from the beginning; the debacle between the DNC and the Sanders campaign has only added to my suspicion. Something is afoul.

  6. Steve permalink
    December 21, 2015

    Beautiful souls don’t get elected president. It would probably take a “sociopath” (I don’t believe that Hillary is at all a sociopath) to get the radical policy changes desired by so many on this board.

    I wish voters would take some ownership over the actions of their politicians. Americans want a strong economy. How do you keep the wheels of the economy turning? Most politicians are too weak to do anything other than beat the poor to do so.

    “If only we could get the good people elected” is a vacuous, populist dream. But then getting voters to acknowledge their own narrow-minded shitiness is the world’s worst campaign strategy. It’s hard to convince people that many of their preferences are actually well-represented in Congress, and that the people in power are deeply constrained.

    I would love for Sanders to get elected, but I don’t think he would be able to effect any kind of fundamental ideological change. He might, though, at least look like he is trying to win the Democratic primary. I am not impressed by his inability to throw punches.

  7. Bill Hicks permalink
    December 21, 2015

    S Brennan entirely stole my post.

    Seriously, I would actually prefer that Trump be elected for three reasons:

    1). He doesn’t pretend to not be a vicious, evil scumbag.

    2). He and Putin’s ongoing love fest means he’s less likely to start WW3 over Syria.

    3). If he is elected at least the mainstream left can stop pretending they have an ally in the Whit House.

  8. Steve permalink
    December 21, 2015

    Trump will remember tomorrow that he hates Putin and Russia, and the day after he will forget again. Do you think Trump will decline to saber rattle with NATO? Really?

    Putin and Trump are both manly men who’s tendencies are to double-down, not de-escalate.

  9. V. Arnold permalink
    December 21, 2015

    The problem with Hillary? Gods be good; where to start. How about her rabid hawkishness; being a serial liar; and a tool of Wallstreet.
    The link below is a good assessment of Hillary;

    https://thisishell.com/interviews/878-doug-henwood

    I would sooner see Trump as president than another Clinton. But then, I quit voting after 2000 because it was clear it no longer matters…

  10. S Brennan permalink
    December 21, 2015

    Shorter Steve;

    Now that the “lessor two evils” isn’t moving the soap, it’s time to try, “Evil…it’s what works”.

    Good luck with than line Steve…I feel pretty confident you’ll be back with something else soon.

  11. Bill Hicks permalink
    December 22, 2015

    So Steve, I take it you are at least in agreement with points #1 & 3 of my post?

  12. Dan Lynch permalink
    December 22, 2015

    I’m in the “hate Hillary” camp.

    That said, personality-wise and not policy-wise, I believe a President Hillary would accomplish more than Obama. Obama has no aptitude for governing. He is a bullshit artist and he likes to make speeches, but shows little interest in the nuts and bolts of policy and politics. Nor did he accomplish much as a private citizen.

    Hillary wants to make her mark and is willing to fight and take chances to get what she wants. I don’t agree with much of what she wants, but nonetheless I think she would “do stuff,” and wheel and deal to pass legislation. Many of those things would be bad things, but she would not sit on her thumbs.

    I don’t take Bernie seriously. He’s about 100 years old so even if he did win he would probably not live another 8 years. A vote for Bernie is essentially a vote for his running mate, so pay close attention to his running mate if Bernie survives the primary. Most likely Bernie would select a Southern conserva-Dem running mate to balance the ticket. So at best Bernie is running a vanity campaign if not a sheepdog campaign.

    In any event I believe 2016 is the Republican’s to lose. I expect the economy will be in a recession and there is an unpopular Democrat in the White House. A record number of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction and nobody likes Hillary. All that favors the Republicans, not that the Republicans have the answers, but that’s the way the 2-party system works — throw the bums out, let the other bums in. Lather, rinse, repeat.

  13. V. Arnold permalink
    December 22, 2015

    Dan Lynch
    December 22, 2015
    Hillary wants to make her mark and is willing to fight and take chances to get what she wants. I don’t agree with much of what she wants, but nonetheless I think she would “do stuff,” and wheel and deal to pass legislation. Many of those things would be bad things, but she would not sit on her thumbs.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Your gleaming generalities are a meaningless word salad. You specify nothing but vague statements about this, that, and other. Unbelievable aquiescence to illegitimate authority by you boggles the (my) mind.
    Hillary (as already said) is a serial liar, corrupt to the core, a hawk beyond redemption, and a proven, self confessed tool of Wallstreet. And that’s okay because “she’ll do stuff”?
    Fuck all; you exemplify all that is wrong with the “voting public’s ignorance” of being able to define the candidates and their policies.
    Well, one way or the other, you’ll likely get your candidate and you’ll have to live with a no change government of intrusive spying, torture, extra-judicial killings of US citizens, suspension of Habeas corpus, rendition, and YOUR ass on the line if you don’t tow the line.
    I’ll not live in a world like that. And I don’t!
    Good luck, you’ll need all you can get.

  14. Spinoza permalink
    December 22, 2015

    The name Clinton is a four letter word where I come from.

  15. Bernard permalink
    December 22, 2015

    i might actually vote for Trump, after reading where Clinton made “nice” and sucked up to Richard Scaife Mellon a few months ago, who financed the whole “Hate against the Clintons/Whitewater et al” campaign, that lasted for 8 years during Bill Clinton’s reign as President. After seeing this charade, it’s easy to see how Clinton will do anything to become President. also i stopped watching TV listening to the Corporate Media. lol, funny how that worked!! i think Hillary will be elected. the Republicans need a “cover” to do their dirty work, as Bill did the Republicans dirty work for the entire 8 years of his move to the far right. Obama and Bill Clinton have always done what the Republicans wanted and couldn’t do.

    Sucking up to the Republicans is worse than being a Republican, if that is possible. lol. at least Republican have “integrity?.” lol. they stab you directly where they told you they were going to. the Democrats, like Obama and the Clintons did as President, and both Senate and House D’s have done, these D’s stab us in the back, in accordance to the Republican’s desire. Vichy French/Quislings helping the Nazis is an analogy that works for these traitors. Some deeds require more finesse than Republicans beliefs allow.

    Obama has been the “Plantation Overseer,”particularly when it came to Budget Bills, letting the Bush tax cuts become law, raising taxes on middle income/Fica taxes, and never ever demanding anything in “bargaining with Republicans during Budget talks, lol. such a good model for those willing to sell out the hoi polloi. Bill Clinton, too, has always done Republican desires, like gutting Welfare, moving American jobs offshore/the Glass Steagall Act Repeal, which gave us the 2008 Economic Crash/NAFTA, for example. these “Lesser Evils” do more evil than any Republican in office could. Keeping the public divided is what has worked since time immemorial. and the Democrats who are in office are just one side/”the lesser evil”/ side of the duopoly party.

    Clinton’s son in law is a Goldman Sachs Wall Street man. as if Clinton, Bill or Hillary were anything but part of the Elites. the Elites initially just didn’t like the Clintons. the public had to sit through 8 years of Media attacks, which should have made Americans lap up the Clintons for being “attacked” and pilloried endlessly, day after day after day for 8 years. after all it/the Elites” are a club, and Rednecks like Bill had to force their way into Membership. Whitewater, Vince Foster and Monica Lewinsky were the entrance fees the Clintons paid to be a member. we have seen how the Clintons sold out for money.

    watching Clinton sell Democrats out, like Obama did, will hasten the election of a Republican. when the time is right, after the “lesser evils” have prepared/dumbed down/trashed whatever difference there was between the Demo/Republican Party, a Republican will be “safe” enough to be appointed/elected President. and make the transition into an “officially declared corporatocracy” or”inverted totalitarianism,” from Chris Hedges vocabulary, easier, than it would be today.

    Obama was the first “black” president, Hillary will be the first woman. it will still be run by the Money Elites, like those that Hillary bowed down to in her obeisance to Richard Scaife Mellon. Money talks in America, as well as runs the whole Banana Republic.

    the Middle East and the rest of the World will pay dearly with Hillary as President. Pushing that “red” button at 3 am in the morning, as Hillary has said, before in questions about bombing Iraq, is not an issue for her. never question a power crazed American. Americans are Exceptional, that is the American Dream. Hillary is just another Politically empowered Warmonger who enjoys killing. just like Obama, Bush, Reagan, Bill and the rest. the little people had better scurry away for any safe refuge once Hillary is elected.

    and Hillary will be elected. Trump is too much of an independent idiot to be that much of a tool to be allowed to be elected. Trump boasts like a rich fool always does. Hillary is premeditated, prepared and extremely dangerous. Just the right type the Elites need to keep things the way they are. of course, we could vote Trump in to “help” jump start the decline Hillary is part of.

  16. BDBlue permalink
    December 22, 2015

    “I get the impression that Hillary is rather vindictive – if you get in her way, she will make your life miserable.”

    That is one of her better qualities, IMO. Part of the problem with the current “left” is a desire to make nice instead of punishing the assholes who got us here. The issue, of course, is who will she been vindictive towards? If I thought she’d remember that Wall Street essentially funded Obama in 2008 and, along with the Dem establishment, made his win over her possible and be vindictive accordingly, I’d feel much better about her. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be the lessons she learned from 2008 and she is a much worse candidate for it, IMO (not that she was all that in 2008).

  17. markfromireland permalink
    December 22, 2015

    Part of the problem with the current “left” is a desire to make nice instead of punishing the assholes who got us here.

    That would be yourselves.

    However what it soon being Christmas and in the interests of good cheer. I’ll help you get started. I’ll arrange some people from Opus Dei to visit you in your homes to make sure you’re self-flagellating properly. I’m sure that in the spirit of Christmas they’ll even donate the whips and hairshirts.

    mfi

  18. Ian Welsh permalink
    December 22, 2015

    I am told Clinton is likeable. I have never met her and neither like nor dislike her. At one time I hated her, I do not any longer, as I find it neither useful nor desirable to hate. I have better ways to spend my attention. The world is full of people whom it is entirely reasonable to hate. Brim full.

    Those who think this makes me a nice person or unable to make hard decisions if my responsibilities require them would be very sadly mistaken on both counts.

  19. S Brennan permalink
    December 22, 2015

    Directed at Ian’s last comment;

    What researchers discovered was surprising: Those who are described as “agreeable, conscientious personalities” are more likely to follow orders and deliver electric shocks that they believe can harm innocent people, while “more contrarian, less agreeable personalities” are more likely to refuse to hurt others…during the experiment, a distinct pattern emerged: People who were normally friendly followed orders because they didn’t want to upset others, while those who were described as unfriendly stuck up for themselves.

    “The irony is that a personality disposition normally seen as antisocial — disagreeableness — may actually be linked to ‘pro-social’ behavior…This connection seems to arise from a willingness to sacrifice one’s popularity a bit to act in a moral and just way toward other people, animals or the environment at large. Popularity, in the end, may be more a sign of social graces and perhaps a desire to fit in than any kind of moral superiority.”

    …One particular group held steady and refused destructive orders: “women who had previously participated in rebellious political activism such as strikes or occupying a factory…it turns out nice people just want to appease authorities, while rebels stick to their guns.

    http://mic.com/articles/92479/psychologists-have-uncovered-a-troubling-feature-of-people-who-seem-nice-all-the-time#.MI4OrUxfs

  20. TWAndrews permalink
    December 23, 2015

    In a vacuum, I like Sanders better than Clinton, but I think that HRC in the White House with Sanders and Warren leading a growing progressive movement to expand the Overton window, and pull her to the left will do the most to move policy in a progressive direction.

    I think if Sanders were elected he’d be totally ineffective at enacting his agenda, and it would discredit it to some degree.

  21. alyosha permalink
    December 23, 2015

    For me, it’s all about stopping Trump, who I believe will be the Republican nominee, and who has a good shot at being President, particularly if he gets a little help from ISIS.

    Love Bernie, but he can’t get much traction beyond a narrow demographic, and as others have said, he’s too old, and pay close attention to his Veep. The right has spent thirty years demonizing socialism, and so his policies will likely go nowhere.

    Trump channels Mussolini, and will “Make America Great Again” by getting us to set aside the Constitution (what’s left of it) for “awhile”, so he can become the dictator he embodies in the business world. ISIS or a collapse of the dollar are possible crises that could be the catalyst for this setting aside of what’s left of the rule of law. Our system is so gridlocked and the public is so clamoring for change, and for a strong man like Trump to blow it all up. Once he’s in, that’s it for the Republic.

    Just as Hitler created “the German Miracle” in the middle of the Depression, and Mussolini was wildly popular, so will the Donald be, if he can bust through the logjam and make some needed changes in America, such as single payer, universal health care. It wouldn’t surprise me if he pulled this out of his hat in the final stretch of his campaign.

    Trump may be a know nothing, but he will run rings around a calculating, past-her-shelf-life politician like Hillary in any debate, in terms of scoring points with the audience.

    I met Hillary briefly, back in ’92 when she, Bill, and the Gores were doing a bus tour thru the northeast. She doesn’t strike me as particularly evil, just not terribly gifted. “A conservative politician with bad judgment” is apt. Unlike her husband, she has a tin ear for politics, who’s made me cringe from time to time with her decisions. And I swear that electrifying look in her eyes makes me wonder what kind of drugs she’s on. Medicate for Success?

    Just as Obama was an eight year respite from neocon madness, I look at Mrs Clinton as the only thing preventing a President Trump. I need time to pack my bags.

  22. Bill Hicks permalink
    December 23, 2015

    Anyone who thinks President Hillary would be better than President (Your Favorite Republican Here) needs to ask themselves how most “free” trade agreements that have been destroying the working and middle classes have been passed under Democratic presidents–especially Bill Clinton.

    That said, I think race is Hillary’s to lose–and assuming she wins she’ll be obliterated in 2020 when the crappy, neoliberal global economic order that her family has been so key in helping to come to pass finally collapses. Frankly, it would delight me to see her get tarred with the blame and go down in history as one of America’s most vilified presidents along with GW Bush.

    Full disclosure: I cast my last primary vote in 2008 to keep her from getting the nomination, and my last general election vote the same year holding my nose with Obama. I don’t ever plan to vote for any of these warmongering, sociopathic scumbags ever again.

  23. markfromireland permalink
    December 23, 2015

    @ alyosha December 23, 2015

    Obama was an eight year respite from neocon madness

    He was? Regime change in Libya (orchestrated by his administration). The appalling Ukraine imbroglio (orchestrated and fomented directly by his administration). The leading role his government has played and continues to play in the Syrian rebellion. The on-going American military disaster in Afghanistan.

    Then there’s his administration’s determined efforts to ram through such disastrous “free trade” agreements as TTIP and TPP. When it comes to domestic policy he and his administration have gone out of their way to continue his predecessor’s ruthless stripping of the assets and opportunities of everyone except the very wealthiest segments of American society. While his administration’s ruthless determination to hound whistleblowers and to seek the maximum possible penalties against them epitomise the continuing efforts to prostitute your country’s legal system to the desires of the security apparat.

    Obama is worse than Bush much worse because his administration is both more competent and more effective at slipping through policies that are, quite frankly, evil.

    Hilary would be more of the same but worse as, unlike Trump, she has support in both houses of your legislature.

    Have you forgotten how much of the current decay of your country can be attributed directly to the policies implemented during her husband’s administration with her enthusiastic support?

    As somebody who wants to see your country drastically and permanently weakened I hope she becomes your president.

    mfi

  24. Gtdread permalink
    December 23, 2015

    Republicans are unlikely to win another Presidential election in the next 12 to 16 years. The electoral college and demographics (closely related), and a number of other issues have pretty much sealed the deal at the national level. Vote suppression and fraud are their only routes to Presidential success. They only control congress through state level gerrymandering.

    Mr. Sanders can win, albeit with great difficulty, and his election will be of great significance, if only to shut up all the folks who say it can’t be done. More importantly, the big banks and media will have been shown to have lost a considerable amount of power, since there is no scenario under which they actually want him to become Prez. If it happens, it will be because they lost, clearly a good thing in and of itself.

    In any event, prognosticating on the future is not that important. it is important to engage as many people as possible in supporting him. That’s a whole lot of disappointment with any alternatives, should he lose. That disappointment can serve some solid purposes.

  25. alyosha permalink
    December 23, 2015

    @markfromireland – you certainly make some good points. Obama likes to kill people, particularly via drones, he’s a lot more efficient about it than his predecessor.

    Given the choice between the completely delusional right wing in this country – with its fantasies about how America would be/should be received overseas, it’s childish incomprehension of its own shadow and evil, its denial about science and reality in general, its open destruction of democracy in this country – versus a competent technocrat like Obama who at least is grounded in reality and recognizes limits – I’ll take the latter evil. I know that my blood pressure and my quality of sleep improved after Bush /Cheney left.

    It’s an argument we’ve had a lot on these pages: which evil is worse, the kind that is openly evil or the kind that is less obviously so, and masquerades as good, occasionally doing good.

  26. S Brennan permalink
    December 23, 2015

    Much as it will pain him, I agree with Mark…if anything, his short list of particulars cuts Obama quite a bit of undeserved slack.

    Obama/Hillary together are responsible for AT LEAST 350,000 civilian deaths.

    Anybody who offers Obama/Hillary praise, however faint, share in the guilt of their mass murders. Hillary, at the very least, should be tried before an international war crimes tribunal, not anointed President.

  27. sdfs permalink
    December 23, 2015

    Trump is simply taking the piss. Scary ideologues very seldom start out as upper-class fops like Trump.

    They also usually are fairly consistent in their fanaticism, while Trump never displayed these Andrew Dice Clay proclivities in his 2000 Presidential bid or indeed at any time until the last few months.

    He’s filling the scarecrow role in this election that Palin had in 2008.

  28. S Brennan permalink
    December 23, 2015

    Apologies for double posting, but this news bit is on topic.

    ======================================

    What this poll* says is; If you want Sanders as President, stop bashing Trump. But Sanders supporters, with the exception of one of my friends are not smart enough to see that a Sanders vs Trump match-up, OF AND BY ITSELF, is the best thing that could happen to this country. I say, bring it.

    But don’t let me stop your mind-numbing “Trump is Hitler” comparisons fed you by Hillary’s camp. Here’s a quiz, to my memory, Hillary, in all her banality, has labeled six men as being “just like Hitler”, can you name them?

    *see link below

    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/264023-in-blockbuster-poll-sanders-destroys-trump-by-13

  29. Ivory Bill Woodpecker permalink
    December 23, 2015

    “As somebody who wants to see your country drastically and permanently weakened I hope she becomes your president.”–MFI

    I’m curious, Mark–what do you think would replace the USA if it were drastically and permanently weakened, which I agree is at least possible?

    “Be careful what you ask for…” and all that.

  30. markfromireland permalink
    December 23, 2015

    What do I think would replace the USA if it were drastically and permanently weakened? Probably something akin to what your ancestors fought a civil war to prevent. Although I suspect that it wouldn’t stop at just a North-South division.

    mfi

  31. Ivory Bill Woodpecker permalink
    December 23, 2015

    @MFI: I should have been more specific–what do you think would replace the USA in world affairs if the USA took a nose dive?

    After all, the British Empire was an exploitive and often brutal thing, but its permanent decline after WW1 left room for Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, and the Soviet Union to emerge.

    The global capitalist apparatus which uses my country’s government as its murder weapon (Capital is Palpatine; Uncle Sam is merely Darth Vader) is a gang of loathsome criminals, but are you sure that gang would be replaced by something better, or are you just so sick of the current gang of criminals that you’re willing to gamble?

  32. ersatz permalink
    December 23, 2015

    @ Ivory Woodpecker

    The Brits killed more people in their colonial conquests than the Nazis did during the Holocaust- it’s not even close. Your eurocentric worldview is obvious. The Brits were not just often brutal, they were worse than the Nazis. By some recent estimates, they killed 10 million Indians in 10 years. I think they would have been happy to wipe out the Indians if there weren’t so many of them.
    ____________________________________________

    Bill Clinton killed 1 million Iraqis through sanctions. That’s something no pussy shit Democrat will talk about. If that’s not beyond sociopathic, I don’t know what is. That’s who you fucking lesser of two evilist cowards elect. Literal mass murderers. Have fun with the decline bitches.

  33. Hugh permalink
    December 23, 2015

    It’s real simple. A vote for any Democrat or any Republican is a vote for more of the same.

    Democrats and Republicans are not greater and lesser evils. They are complementary ones. They work together, and they very much do not work for you. If a candidate can not give you positive and substantive reasons for voting for him/her, then they don’t want your vote, and you should not give it to them. And by the way, not being the other guy is neither a positive nor a substantive reason for anything.

    Hillary Clinton is a neoliberal on economic matters and a neoconservative on foreign affairs. A more toxic combination is not imaginable. In foreign affairs, she lines up neatly with both Nixon and Reagan. On the economy, I would say she is to the right of Nixon and in line with Reagan. I find it interesting that the one word which typifies the Clinton approach to politics, triangulation, is never used around her. But it is how she could vote for the Iraq war and support it for 12 years. It wasn’t because it was based on a mountain of lies or, as a preventive war (quaintly renamed wars of choice), it was a war crime. No, it wasn’t any of that. It was her assertion that she could have done it better. So she wasn’t technically with the Bush Administration on the war. Nor was she with the war’s opponents. That was the triangle. And when Obama finally left Iraq (on Bush’s timetable and only after last minute efforts to stay fell through) and support, any support, for the war, became political poison, then and only then and with another White House run in the works did Hillary come out against the war. And that too was typically Clintonesque: brief with no admittance of bad judgment on her part, and once done never to be brought up or discussed again.

    You can see much the same process going on with her positioning on the TPP. She was for it (“It’s the gold standard”) and then she was against it –as is. In other words, she is not against the idea of the TPP, only this one, and that only because she thinks she could do it better. Δ

    You don’t get to be Senator for New York without first being the Senator for Wall Street. You don’t get to rake in a hundred million dollars in “speaking fees” and multiples of that more through a “foundation” without being owned by the rich. So how can you triangulate that? You balance it by putting forward some very moderate tax the rich proposals which you know will be killed in Congress. And this is what Clinton has done.

    But back to my original point. If someone offers you the choice between two shit sandwiches, are you really going to consider, or care, which is the less shitty? And if you do, what the hell is the matter with you?

  34. Ken Hoop permalink
    December 23, 2015

    Re Iraq, Clinton would not have cared no WMDs were found if the war had been quick with no insurgencies to amount to anything and a pro-American, pro-Israel puppet installed.

    Sanders like Hillary is anti-Assad and favors Saudi doing more American bidding in the Mideast, believe it or not.

    He is NOT the American Jeremy Corbyn, a real leftist.

    You could argue that a Trump victory might do some good on the issues wherein he is right and also bring the Left into the streets, where it will be passively accepting of Hillary’s warmongering.
    And as we realize street protest will ultimately be required to change things in any substantial way.

  35. V. Arnold permalink
    December 23, 2015

    @ Hugh
    December 23, 2015

    Touche’
    Ef the lot of them.

  36. Ivory Bill Woodpecker permalink
    December 23, 2015

    @Ersatz: And Meri Kurisamasu to you as well. 😆

    @Hugh: “Democrats and Republicans are not greater and lesser evils. They are complementary ones. “

    Or as Upton Sinclair put it, they are two wings of the same bird of prey.

  37. alyosha permalink
    December 24, 2015

    Shorter Ivory Bill: Two horses, same owner.

  38. markfromireland permalink
    December 24, 2015

    One vampire two fangs.

    mfi

  39. Ivory Bill Woodpecker permalink
    December 24, 2015

    Meri Kurisamasu!

    Feel free to ignore any ads above or below; it’s what I get for using a free hosting site. 😛

  40. different clue permalink
    December 24, 2015

    I could be wrong but . . . I think I B Woodpecker’s question about “what would replace” America upon America’s fall from world power wasn’t concerned with what would fill up the middle third of the Great Turtle Island. I think it was meant to be about . . . who or what would be the Next Great Hegemon. If I am wrong about that, perhaps I B Woodpecker can correct me on my mistaken understanding.

  41. different clue permalink
    December 24, 2015

    (By the way, and separately . . . “Meri Kurisamasu” reminds me of a trip to San Francisco once and a visit to the Golden Gate Bridge . . . near the SF-side entrance of which was a little store oriented to Japanese tourists called “Gifuto Shoppu”. If I would have had the time, I would have gone in there just to see.
    http://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/golden-gate-bridge-gift-center-san-francisco?select=cTxtzNGa_YF1X1dvKag_Sg

  42. Ivory Bill Woodpecker permalink
    December 24, 2015

    @Diff Clue: You took my meaning correctly.

    I reckon at least some of the enemies of Hohenzollern Germany and Romanov Russia thought nothing could be worse than those two empires… 😮

    Meanwhile, for all my reservations about Hillary, she would lock my vote down if she actually said THIS.

    WARNING: LINK IS VERY NSFW–he’s not called “The Rude Pundit” for nothing. 😈

  43. Ivory Bill Woodpecker permalink
    December 24, 2015

    Now to shift gears completely from my last post– :mrgreen:

    The Story of the Other Wise Man, by Henry Van Dyke. A Christmas classic from 1895.

Comments are closed.