The Greatest Danger to Bernie’s Revolution

Quite right Ian. Just as it was the GOPe which posed the greatest threat to Trump’s campaign and have continued to threaten his Presidency.

I don’t agree with a single thing Sanders stands for but I love the idea that the Democratic Establishment – who stand for nothing – is getting its ass handed to it.

Sanders needs to appoint a Running Mate ASAP. I say Rashida Tlaib, I would rather Ilhan Omar, but she is not a Natural Born US Citizen, and AOC is a moron and best left on the sidelines.

Next Sanders must monitor his health and take the fight via social media. Large Rallies with Coronavirus on the loose is a good way for him to contract it and die. He also needs to take this and whack Trump over the head as Trump cut CDC funding. But more importantly, its going to wreck this nation, no stopping it, we’re past that point. I go back on the rig tomorrow and my family is locking down. We aren’t waiting anymore as we got several deaths across the state now from flu like symptoms but tested negative for flu. None are confirmed as CDC won’t allow tests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU2gSrm-ng0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuBB3GNGQIk

This election’s Sword of Damocles is Coronavirus. Sanders and Trump are both highly vulnerable due to their ages and if enough of the candidates contract it, it will be utter chaos.

Bernie’s so badass that his running mate could be a vial of coronavirus. He’d bring it to the debate against Trump and watch him try to health care that. One weakness Trumps kind has is a fear of dirt and disease. Personally, I’d chase him around the stage with my vial of VP pick so everybody could watch Mr. Alpha Winner cower like an infant.

It’s interesting that the old establishment tricks aren’t working so well anymore. I’m curious about what the reactions to any potential super-delegate-mandering could be. If there wasn’t outright revolution, it would only add fuel to a future revolutions fire, since oligarchic enablers are aging and dying off, while the youth are more afraid of unrestricted capitalism than they restricted socialism.

Sanders needs to appoint a Running Mate ASAP. I say Rashida Tlaib, I would rather Ilhan Omar, but she is not a Natural Born US Citizen, and AOC is a moron and best left on the sidelines.

These are Putin’s picks too. Imagine that.

The establishment and the billionaire donors love Trump because he’s been very good to them (and of course, not so good for everyone else).

Exactly. Trump would have been Six Feet Under a long time ago if it was otherwise. They’ve tolerated his odious, obnoxious, crude & crass behavior because he’s increased their net worth tremendously thus far.

Hard to tell if this is a darkness before the dawn or before the end of all light.

Decades ago I watched with horror as the paradigm for governing shifted from New Deal to neoliberal with the election of Reagan.

Now I’ve lived long enough to see it swing back. The particulars of how it plays out can be hard to predict, but the governing paradigm is shifting back to New Deal thinking and away from neoliberal nonsense.

Right now it sounds like the movement is incubating and building support, winning state or local races and starting changes where they already can. New voices keep showing up. Thinking and practice are getting refined.

The kids are smarter than we are and we won’t be able to stop them. They are going to bring some kind of New Deal 2.0 eventually, and Trump’s second term will be when they build it.
I hope I live long enough to see it happen.

Please. There will be no “debates” with Trump. There is no debating with that thing. The best you can do is overwhelm and overcome him. Neither our institutions nor any of the Dems on stage are capable of doing that.

The Dems in disarray narrative is a standard trope that’s been around as long as the internet. It’s being recycled in the current Dem Big Wig “panic” over Bernie narrative. Is the Dem Party apparatus really in panic over the Bernie Sanders semi-juggernaut? Some of the television personalities are running around screaming, Tweety being the prime ridiculous example. And we hear the donor class is rather cross that the Party has allowed things to get to this point.

But remember neo-lib adage: every crisis is an opportunity.

Sometimes crises have to be manufactured. And they are.

I seriously doubt Bernie will be the nominee, though anything is possible. I think I explained my reservations about him, but there are lots of other reasons why he’s unlikely to be chosen as the nominee, movement or no. Someone else, a ‘unity candidate’ who can/will defeat Trump will emerge and Bernie will endorse. So will all the others. And grumbling, the movement will largely go along. Bloomberg is not that candidate.

This doesn’t happen in an atmosphere of panic, but “crisis” — manufactured or not — helps. So I expect the ‘crisis’ over Bernie’s rise to last through the primaries.

And then? We’ll see.

A lot of people still want Warren as VP. I think she is best left in the Senate or in a cabinet position. Gabbard or Yang would be interesting, but I think most of their supporters have gone to Bernie anyway. I don’t think AOC, Tlaib, or Omar would help Sanders bring in the voters he needs to ensure he beats Trump. They would all work well in his administration, but not as VP. It’s a tough choice, but I’m sure Bernie already has an idea who he wants, and I trust his judgment. I am excited to see who he will choose.

Ro Khanna, per that link above to the CNN interview with Wolfie the Wolfman Blitzkrieg. expressed Bernie’s stance and policy as it relates to Putin’s Russia. Ro Khanna is Bernie’s national co-chair so he speaks for Bernie in this interview. He and Bernie are one. This is not Ro Khanna and Bernie playing the political game. This is what they know. This is what they think. This is not playing games. If you don’t agree with it, you’re not a REAL Bernie supporter but instead a pretend supporter.

Putin wants to create the maximum level of confusion and division. Look, Russia is a has-been power. Their economy is in the dumps. They see the rise of China and they are basically realizing that their only method of competing in the world is sowing discord in other democracies. That’s not going to work and we need to stand up to Putin and say this is unacceptable and you;re not going to endear yourself either to the United States or Europe if you continue down this path. ~ Ro Khanna — Nation Co-Chair of Bernie’s 2020 Campaign

Ché,

Thanks once again for sharing your faith in cynicism.

Z

If the field breaks down and candidates start dropping out, all but Warren’s following will lean towards Bernie. He’s the most likable candidate and the leader in the race.

Even Young Republican Pete, if he drops out, though he’s a conservative, he’s also gay and probably has a lot of gay support who is behind him for identity reasons more so than political ones. Besides gay professionals and the “I’m not prejudiced against gay people” mind-f*cked voter, who is his base? If he drops out, Bernie should get a fair amount of that gay Pete vote and his liberated “I’m not prejudiced against gay people, I was going to vote for one” following. Bernie is the candidate most supportive of gay rights, much more so than YR Pete, by the way. YR Pete’s gayness is mostly valued by him for its brand recognition to him.

How about Biden’s following? African-Americans, older people, and the folks who foolishly believed that he was the most electable candidate. Bernie will pull heavily from Biden’s voters.

Amy K from Minnesota. Minnesota Scandinavian heritage. They’re not going to be scared away by a socialist. Wisconsin the same way. Amy K does not draw much from the professionally successful women voter. Warren holds that.

Bloomberg is just an electability play in the democratic primary. If he was in the republican primary it would be different. There are no die-hard democratic party Bloomberg voters out there. You won’t drive down any lonely state highways in Kansas next February and see a fading Bloomberg 2020 sign in some farmer’s field rattling defiantly in the face of northern winter winds.

Warren is probably the candidate whose backers won’t go over to Bernie much because she has been so aggressive towards him, so if you stick with her to this point you almost have to hate Bernie or you would have gone over to him after all the shit Warren has pulled. YR Pete and Bloomberg are also trying to scorch earth Bernie – get their voters not to turn to Bernie. But Mikey $B has a base of zero and so has no sway over anyone, no one is emotionally invested in Mikey $B’s candidacy, he only appeals to the bribed voter and mercenary political operatives who go to the highest bidder, no questions asked. The “money talks, campaign promises are cheap” contingent. YR Pete has a base of probably about 10% tops. His results in Iowa and NH were higher than he’ll get in any of the remaining states, I’d bet, probably even his own. He is good for the short run, but he wears on you the more you see of him. YR Pete’s always presenting, never representing. He has no fervent base and he has as much emotional investment into his support as Mikey $B’s support has in Mikey $B.

Some candidates are going to get exhausted and just say to hell with it. Biden soon for sure. He’s running out of gas. Warren will probably stay around to the end carving herself out as a victim of misogyny, hero to successful professional women, a priestess to practicality, an academic-minded theorist of principles when her true aim has been solely focused on attacking Bernie’s campaign for the past two months by constantly shooting veiled arrows at him and readying the misogynist accusations the moment he says a word back. She’ll probably stick around for the vanity of it, to show how tough she is. The Hillary type of feminist, victim-hero for the upper class professional women who have the luxury of indulging in identity politics.

Z

Ché, of course there are no “debates” with Trump. That’s my point. Bernie needs to beat Trump at his own game in the “debates” without permanently staining himself in the process. I believe some cutting satire with props would be the perfect strategy for Bernie. I further suggest Bernie bring a couple of peaches to the debate so he can throw them at Trump at some point. Impeach him, in otherwords. Again. Bernie should drive home the impeachment angle ad nauseum and the Putin is a KGB commie who owns Trump angle ad nauseum. The goal is to so unnerve Trump so he either explodes in a nervous breakdown or he walks off stage. Decorum is long gone and shouldn’t even be a consideration when forced to play on Trump’s turf.

Anon,

I’ve had those same fears, I imagine many of us do.

I believe at this point though that it is too late to simply thwart the movement by removing him and if something does happen to him, Bernie will be seen as a hero, a martyr, and a rallying point and there will be a hell of a lot of anger against our ruling class, our enemies, because most of the public, particularly the youth, will think the one percent was behind it and that will light a fire under Bernie’s base and that will spread and they’ll just jump right behind another candidate who will fight for the same causes and that candidate will become president in 2020.

Our rulers have lost control of the narrative, their media has lost credibility with the public, and enough of the public realizes it now. The proof that they have lost control of the narrative is the success of Bernie’s campaign despite all they’ve done to harm it.

Z

Here’s how the candidates stand on a fracking ban. Bernie, Warren, Tulsi and Steyer are for an outright ban of fracking whereas Bloomberg, Biden, Buttigieg and Klobuchar are for increased regulation but not a ban. As we know, regulation doesn’t work with the fossil fuel industry. Considering that, banning fracking is the only resolute proposal. Regulating it is feckless lip service and it will be business as usual when no one’s looking or paying attention.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/climate-change/fracking-ban/

There is a great cleavage between the American 80% and the 9.9% that is revealed when the 0.1% start showing up as Trump and now Bloomberg have.

Trump’s emergence was a much bigger threat to Democratic Party elites and their game of selling the Democratic electorate out to donors than to Republican elites. And, the Dem elite reacted with a desperation and indirection that is underestimated and misconstrued on the left.

I think Bernie’s campaign will struggle with the legacy of the three years of polarizing indirection and may well never overcome it. The intelligence agencies warning of Russian election interference is just a beginning. They will try to make Bernie appear hostile to the white, male working class by insisting on the tropes of demographic triumph the Party has trotted out and the identitarian rhetoric of class scorn.

It is worrying to me that no one on the left ever thought to question the whole Trump impeachment either as strategy or on the merits. This speaks to a certain blindness to how others see them that I think may extend from Clintonite liberals to Bernie leftists. The triumphalism and scorn for the possibility Bernie has a low ceiling on his support from the electoral mainstream worries me.

Biden’s support in NV is mostly due to Harry Reid’s political machine and NV’s large cast of older voters.

Z

It has been a long time since either Party has done anything for the working class, so people often look for other indications, and social-cultural polarization is used by elite propagandists to exploit this searching for alternatives. If Bernie can get in and actually deliver concrete, material benefits, the politics of effective political appeals will change. But, in the meantime, people will look at markers of cultural (dis)respect and forms of lunatic delusion in people on the “other” side. That is the problem a polarizing politics has left us with.

On Trump’s side, he has real problems with evangelicals as well as suburban Republican women of a certain age. Real union workers will desert Trump given half a reason, but I think the discontented evangelicals and conservative suburbanites will be harder.

I think Bernie’s policies on student debt and M4all are great, but in their 30-second sound-bite form they can sound like impractical giveaways to many people who are engaging just now.

There is a big job of political education to do, with late engagers as well as people who like Trump because the right sort on the “other” side hate him so much.

Establishment Democrats (elites especially) do not hate Trump for the same reasons as normal people. The former may not want to admit even to themselves their true motivations.

Sanders captured 54% of Nevada’s Latino vote.

Try again zippy …

One of the common things I hear from liberals these days is the lament that the Republicans are ‘no longer a normal political party’. Putting aside the fact that I struggle to identify when, by their reasoning, the GOP was ever a normal party (this is just more West Wing nonsense about the mythical noble and reasonable Republican who can be negotiated with), they have things exactly backwards.

The Republicans are a normal political party. Their primary goal is to achieve and then exercise power. They have a vision. It’s an ugly, almost entirely horrific vision, but it is a vision.

The Democrats meanwhile believe in nothing. Because they aren’t a functioning political party. They don’t seriously try to achieve power, and basically do nothing with it when they do manage to achieve it. The purpose of the Democratic Party is provide employment for idiot consultants, and the children of those consultants. It’s one big grift, forever ‘fighting for (but never winning)’ progressive values. #resistance is just the latest form of this. It’s been this way since the Clintons ‘New Democrats’ smothered what was left of the party of FDR, almost a generation ago.

Sanders scares them so much because he’s threatening to make a whole lot of parasites unemployed. And since most of these people are genuinely idiots, with useless skillsets for things that they mostly aren’t actually good at anyway, the future looks mighty grim for them if he wins.

The purpose of the Democratic Party has long been to clean up the titanic messes left after periods of Republican rule. The pattern was set by FDR. We go through the same thing over and over and over. Republicans run the country badly for their own benefit alone, Dems are assigned the job of fixing it. They are the much maligned professional managerial class who have morphed over the decades into somewhat kinder-gentler Rs — because in effect the two major parties are a partnership, the Rs being the dominant and radical partner, the Dems being the practical, subservient and moderate-conservative partner.

Bernie’s no fool. He knows this intimately. He’s part of it. (This is part of why I’m leery of sending another senator to the White House.)

But let’s say Bernie wins in November and there’s a Dem majority in the House and Senate. Would we be looking at 2009 all over again? Would suddenly enough of the Dems act to thwart Bernie’s populist progressive policies? Of course they would. Why? Because enough of them were Republicans not that long ago, and the money to fund campaigns would still be dependent on the good will of the ruling class, whose motto is “this much and no more.”

Some things might happen. Minimum wage increase for example. Compromise at $12. Some student loan forgiveness, possibly, but only with strings. A modest infrastructure program. Some tweakage to ACA which could lead to M4A in another decade if we keep pushing. Less war but not an end to it. A restoration of Obama era tax rates on the rich. Minor reductions in military spending. Minor increases in social spending.

All these things and more are already in the legislative pipeline, thwarted by Mitch and his minions in the Senate.

And this is about as much as the ruling class will allow in any given period of “leftist” rule.

Green New Deal? No. The idea is terrifying. M4A at once? No. Too complicated. Greater levels of democracy for the people, accountability for the oligarchy? Difficult under our system. Maybe impossible without a major, indeed catastrophic, shock. Unfortunately — or maybe not — the climate emergency is slow enough to adapt to. There’s much gleeful anticipation of the next economic-financial free-fall, but there’s also a lot of preparation for it. What about the Outbreak? Could that do it?

What it can do is enable much greater levels of authoritarianism. That seems to be a widely shared governmental goal these days, isn’t it? So I’d keep my eye on that.

@ bruce wilder,

I don’t know if Tulsi Gabbard is considered to be on ” the left” or not. But she did question the impeachment ploy at the time and has since written an article about why.

https://fortune.com/2020/02/21/tulsi-gabbard-democrats-trump-impeachment/

If Sanders wins nomination on the first ballot, he will offer the VP place to whomever he offers it to. The DemParty will try extorting him into picking one of its own mainstream figures , a Tom Eagleton type designed to sabotage the Sanders campaign. One hopes Sanders will reject such DemParty extortion efforts.

I would most of all prefer a VP running mate Gabbard. Picking Gabbard signals a willingness and intention to declintaminate and disobamafy the DemParty. Gabbard would carry the battle to the heart of the Clinton. Every gladio clintonite left-behinder would be purged and burned from out of the party, and those pink pussy hat Clinton nostalgiasts who choose to reveal themselves as irreconcilable cancer-loving Bernie-haters can just go vote for Trump.

I found this essay to have some contradictions. Sanders will win the nomination because “he’ll have the most delegates” works only if Bloomberg plans to write off his ¼ billion dollar Primary investment. I seriously doubt if he is that kind of person.

If Sanders is three or thirty delegates short of 50% plus 1, it’s my prediction he loses. That Sander’s supporters will mostly go berserk won’t bother any of the Big Brass Dems. Still an opinion, but all the small fry are continuing in the race on the chance they’ll pick up a few delegates. Anything to keep Sanders from that magical 50% +1 mark. The DNC would probably loudly claim it wan’t THEIR doing, but rather the work of the evil super-rich Bloomberg.

Bloomberg will go for the brass ring if he has any chance at the nomination. The man played the role of dart board in his first debate, so any practice and coaching he receives will make him look very good starting with that as a baseline. If he can’t snag the nomination, he’ll hand-pick the final candidates. What about a Klobuchar/Warren combo? Even some of Sander’s people might hold their noses and vote for this ticket. And if Trump wins anyhow, who among the top 1% will really care?

The Russiagate racket is going to accuse Bernie of being a Russian plant, without giving any proof, and then the DNC will use it as an excuse to disqualify Bernie from the primary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8io9WfiGQzY

Zachary Smith wrote: “…all the small fry are continuing in the race on the chance they’ll pick up a few delegates. Anything to keep Sanders from that magical 50% +1 mark.”

In this regard, it’s worth noting that in the states with caucus-style primaries Sanders seems to have done significantly better than Biden and Buttegieg in terms of gaining vote share in the 2nd alignment. Thus, it may be that the plethora of Dem primary candidates still running (besides the already-mentioned, Warren, Klubuchar, Steyer, Bloomberg, and whomever I’m forgetting who’s still theoretically in the klown kar) does _not_ represent a failure of the “moderates” to pick one of themselves to consolidate the “not-Sanders” lane of the Dem primary, but remains the _optimal_ actually-existing strategy for the Dem establishment.

As candidates drop out, it turns out that a disproportionate share of those who would have voted for them are migrating to voting for Sanders. So the indications are that Bernie may do better in a less crowded field, in terms of percentage of votes cast.

Thus, the Democratic establishment confront a “pick your poison” scenario. On the one hand, if they do manage to consolidate their primary field, they risk enlarging Sander’s share of votes cast. On the other hand, if they do not consolidate it, they may guarantee Sander a disproportionate share of pledged delegates.

Zachary S. wrote: “If Sanders is three or thirty delegates short of 50% plus 1, it’s my prediction he loses. That Sander’s supporters will mostly go berserk won’t bother any of the Big Brass Dems.’

Sure. I don’t disagree. They’re fully stupid enough to do that. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, however, for more than a decade following the assassinations of the Kennedys and MLK, the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago, and then the election of Nixon, terrorist bombings became daily occurrences in the U.S., with in one eighteen month period in 1971-72, for instance, 2,500-odd different bombings happening.

This was a time, too, when the U.S. was at its economic zenith and could competently carry out projects like Apollo and go to the Moon, and the economy — unless you were African-American — enabled an ordinary person to support a family and buy a house by working as a cashier or in a factory. In 2020, conversely, in a U.S. where something like 900, 000 are homeless and the bottom half of the population are so strapped that they couldn’t put together $400 for an emergency, the explosive potential among the population at large is far higher than elites have any clue about.

So, yeah, the Dem establishment are stupid enough to stiff Sanders. But then they’re probably already screwed whatever they do, though most of them aren’t smart or honest enough to realize it yet.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of people.

It seems that the much maligned DNC and its media handmaidens are getting the message that their fierce nonstop anti-Bernie shit is backfiring. That doesn’t mean they aren’t still anti-Bernie — of course they are — just that for the time being they’ll mitigate their opposition with a bit of “fairness.” Just watch.

Now the opposition focus is on Bernie’s genuine leftist past, praising Castro’s Cuba and such like, in the hopes that the Red baiting hoo-hah will knock him down a peg or two. This is one of the problems with his rather advanced age. He’s old enough to have seen and experienced and commented upon actual Communist states and governments whereas most of his critics are not, or if they are, they are steeped in ignorance and propaganda. Most people alive today have no idea what this Cold War re-fight is all about anyway.

@Buzzard,

Are there enough dissatisfied people in the mid and lower ranks of the active-personnel Democratic Party structures that if they all feel the Sanders group was cheated ( as against honestly defeated) . . . that they would leave the Democratic Party in their thousands or millions? Would they try forming a different party to be called something like the Real Democrat Party or some such? Would they try to exclude anyone with any discoverable past, link or tie to Clinton, Obama, the DLC, the Third Way, the Hamilton Project, etc. from infiltrating and penetrating the Real Democrat Party in order to destroy it from within?

Different Clue,

I can speak for my local county. There’s a generational divide in that respect. The older ones are all about Team Blue and more interested in the (D) label than in policy, which helps explain their semi-interest in Bloomberg. (They’re also skeptical of Bernie in part because he’s really not a D, which tells you all you need to know about where they’re coming from.) The younger ones ran for the committee and came onboard to use the existing D infrastructure to push the party to the left, and support Bernie (or Warren). I don’t think they’ll LEAVE if Bernie gets screwed out of the nomination; we’re all just essentially waiting for the older generation to age off.

We sometimes have vacancies in the Committee, due to people moving or quitting mid-term. When that happens, we advertise the vacancy and take applicants, and usually get a half-dozen or so. We then interview each of them. The first question they get is “Why are you a Democrat?” It’s a simple question, but extremely effective when it comes to screening out Third Way-types. Which we do (largely upon the insistence of me and a couple of others).

In another county in my state, the Central Committee had pretty much degenerated into a front group for a local conservaDem (who, surprise, lost his race anyway). Local progressive activists, fed up, actually got organized, ran, and WON…. but within a couple of years the movement collapsed because (a) the holdovers did everything they could to freeze out the activists, and (b) the activists themselves started infighting. My county’s committee is more stable and productive than that, and we have some good progressive talent, but we don’t have the institutional power yet.

It will take awhile for these younger, more progressive people to percolate into the power structures, unfortunately, and I’ve already seen the co-option process occur with one of our once-promising younger members. I remain in the party because there IS value in getting Dems elected to local offices, but I don’t have great hopes for the national party, at least in the short term. I just hope the Trump crowd doesn’t demolish our institutions beyond repair before we can recover.

@Buzzard,

This sounds like a viable approach, worth taking to see if it can lead to victory in the long run.
Exclusion of young corruptocrats from even getting in is a very worthwhile political infection-prevention innovation. One hopes that other local and hyper-local DemParty groups take the same approach.

Are the older DemMembers in your county old enough to have come of age when the Dem Party still meant something in particular . . . if only legacy memory of the New Deal? If so, and accounting for decreasing cerebro-neuroplasticity with age, it is to be expected that they won’t easily update their perceptions to fit the current situation.

I hope you-all can hang tough enough long enough to prevent a whole new generation of Junior Gladio-Clintonites from taking over when the older guard has died out and away.

If Sanders wins the presidency everything you cynics “know” about the political landscape doesn’t apply any more.

The savvy cynics act like Sanders getting elected will be an isolated event that has no other repercussions. And assumes that all that young, enthused political support that got him elected, that’s feeling its power and has a sense of urgency will just dissipate. That nothing else will happen. Shoot, you could easily see almost a complete turnover in Congress within the next Congressional election cycle because Sanders is going to call them out, make them at least make a stand on things rather than deflecting through the collusion of political process. And Sanders is going to have an army of young, energetic volunteers who believe they are fighting for their lifespans who will be listening to him and at the ready.

Things change. Times change. If Bernie Sanders becomes president I think things are going to change much quicker than the first-order thinking political cynics believe.

Z

Thanks, StewartM. I’ve always considered you someone who is ethical and moral and who’s heart and mind is in the right place unlike some around here who are wolves in sheep’s clothing. The Cuban revolution is a litmus test that politically separates the wheat from the chaff. Your response to me validates you are the wheat and not the chaff.

The Cuban revolution was not Fidel Castro’s vanity project or a power grab by thugs as Donald Trump and his ilk would have us believe. It was in fact a turning of the tables. It was giving the violent thugs a taste of their own medicine. It was an incredible effort by the entire population of Cuba to make a more just and egalitarian society against all odds when you consider America and all its partners lined up against Cuba when Castro refused to let Western corporations dictate the policy of Cuba.

What Fabiola fails to realize is, feckless muddling government leads to revolution. History has proven this. The Dem establishment is feckless muddling government and it led to the ascension of Trump. The ONLY way to remedy this is with STRONG PROGRESSIVE GOVERNANCE. Otherwise, it’s full-throated fascism and the likes of Fabiola will not protect us when that time comes. They’ll move back to Cuba.

AIPAC’s meddling and interfering in America’s electoral process. It’s not just Putin’s Russia — it’s Israel too

Israel goes beyond “meddling.” It’s a tail wagging the dog scenario. Read Grant Smith over at IRMEP. Read Alison Weir at If Americans Knew. Read The Israel Lobby by Walt and Mearsheimer, which started as a magazine article that couldn’t even find a publisher in the U.S. despite being a rather tame account of how Israel and its partisans dominate US Middle East policy. Check out The Council For the National Interest.

To get a true understanding if what’s going on, the best book on the subject, a book every human being should read, is Israel Shahak’s “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years.”

Why did Truman go against the wishes of his entire State Dept in recognizing Israel? A suitcase full of money? Might there be some truth to the old canards?

I suggest finding out for yourself.

On AIPAC — a documentary in four parts called “The Lobby” is up on YouTube. Here’s a link to the first part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lSjXhMUVKE.