Why I Can't Trust Either Hillary Or The Republicans With The Presidency

I'll make this one as brief as I can on the biggest reasons why I'm not able to trust either Hillary Clinton or the GOP with the Presidency. The reasons are actually fairly simple for both.One is foreign policy (aka the nuclear football). Hillary, as many know too well, is a militarist and is actually too dangerous in my eyes to leave in charge of the football. In this respect she's the same as the Republicans, basically doubling down on the policies that got us into Iraq. Example: the no-fly zone in Syria. That's guaranteed to start a war with Russia (the nation with the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons), which happens to be one of Syria's major allies (the other being Iran). How smart is it to place a no-fly zone, when there's literally a Russian naval station in Tartus?

Secondly, Hillary and the Republicans would most likely work together to get rid of the rest of the social safety net. This runs contrary to what most people want here at home. In fact, there have been several instances where some loud voices have called for their expansion. For example, we have enough money in the Social Security Trust Fund to keep it solvent until about 2037, which is when we'll run into trouble. We can make it totally solvent if we just scrap the cap on how much income is taxed for it (currently the cap is $118,500). As for making people survive on less while prices climb ever higher is asking to put people out on the street again.

On another note, both Hillary and the Republicans would work tirelessly to retain the neoliberal status quo at all costs, which goes against what people are calling for.They're tired of neoliberalism, and how it's absolutely corrupted our politics and economy. We need a new direction for America, one that takes on the corporate excess. Not one that continues these pay-to-play politics, and where corporate board-rooms decide public policy. That's all neoliberalism has given us. Corruption to the worst degree since the 1920s.

Additionally, think about the fact that Hillary and the Republicans will make sure that we don't have a livable minimum wage. The federal minimum wage at the moment is $7.25/hr, which is a starvation wage. What's to say that Hillary won't just accept scrapping the minimum wage altogether? That's the point, with Hillary, you just don't know. She has a habit of saying one thing and then doing the exact opposite.

Now for me personally, along with the reasons listed above, it's about making sure I have something to work with, not to fight against. For example, because I'm Autistic, I need to go through behavioral training and changes. I don't know if my insurance will even cover it next year (or next month), given some of the changes implemented under the Affordable Care Act (which needs a lot of tweeking to work properly). Anyone who votes to uphold or to repeal it, better have a good idea in place for how to make it work or have a better replacement. I'm not getting either of those from either Hillary or the Republicans. Because of that I don't feel that I can trust them. Additionally, if there's a draft, who's to know if my friends or members of my family get called in for military service, or worse, get killed in action? I can't support anyone who's even thinking of going to war as the first resort. That's all I hear from Hillary and the Republicans, the glorification of war.

This is why I often unsurprised to hear musings of comparing America to Nazi Germany at times, especially by Russia's Vladimir Putin. This isn't to say that Putin's entirely right or wrong, but it shows the ill effects our country's militarism has and how corrosive it can be. Even China's getting worried about it, just like Russia. Even our own allies, like Great Britain and France, will end up worrying about us, too. We need a new look at how to connect to the rest of the world, one that emphasizes soft, rather than hard power.

I can say very clearly that our approach to Russia is not working. Hillary and the Republicans may think that reseting relations with Russia means that the Russians will become submissive to our dominance and fall in line. That won't happen, since they're only going to cooperate with us if we treat them as an equal. I think it's time to move past all the bluster that both Hillary and the Republicans have been serving us, the Russians, and the rest of the world, and create a new environment that includes, not excludes, everyone's voices.

Verizon Just Got Berned

It's a sign that we're heading into a new era of reining in corporate excess, and an era where labor is taking a more assertive stance. That's what we can see when the Communications Workers of America and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers called the strike. Verizon is starting to get heat from the growing support for the strikers, especially when many of the workers are not paid very well, or when they're in agreement with the unions over expanding their Verizon fios broadband service. The fact is that the expansion has never happened and that's partly contributing to why both unions went on strike.

What's really interesting is the recent war of words between Bernie Sanders and Lowell McAdam, Verizon's CEO. Apparently McAdam hated the fact that Bernie called out Verizon's stashing profits off-shore to avoid (really to evade) paying US taxes. Just to be clear Verizon's pre-tax profits between 2008 and 2012 were $19.3 billion, and they got a rebate back of $535 million. This comes at a time when Verizon pays many of its employees starvation wages and provides them with very poor benefits. This comes out of a report by Americans for Tax Fairness published in 2013. Going back to the war of words, Bernie made the case fairly clear that Verizon's not adhering to its responsibilities as a corporate citizen by not paying any form of federal taxes and to make the point of saying that Verizon is only 1 of many bad actors executing loopholes in our Federal Tax Code. The icing on the cake is that Bernie channeled FDR when he said on Twitter that he welcomed the contempt of McAdam, and other CEOs of large corporations. Here's the Tweet in its entirety. Enjoy!

I don’t want the support of McAdam, Immelt and their friends in the billionaire class. I welcome their contempt. https://t.co/OIiykGeHQT

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) April 13, 2016

Jgsf1987

Why The Dynamic Of 1972 Is The Wrong One For 2016 And Why 1968 Is The Right One

As I mentioned previously on here that 1968 is the real dynamic that this year's election mirrors, I realize that I forgot to add in how 1972's dynamic is absolutely wrong. There are a a couple of factors as to how that's the case and I'll describe them here.

First off, we need to understand that Bernie Sanders' campaign today does not mirror George McGovern's campaign in 1972, it mirrors Eugene McCarthy's in 1968. When McCarthy ran well to Lyndon Johnson's left on the issue of the Vietnam War, it gave him the propulsion necessary to bring him within striking distance of capturing The Democrats' nomination that year. What happened? The Democratic establishment in a swift, though reactive, move placed the incumbent Vice President at the time, Hubert Humphrey, on the top of the ticket which really infuriated and demoralized the Democratic base (Humphrey, as an important side-note, never campaigned for the nomination). Many felt that their vote had been robbed from them, and as such, either sat out the election, or voted for third parties. The Democrats would manage to pick up on their mistake 4 years later, but by the time they did, it was too late.

Which leads to the next point: how was it that George McGovern was so badly blown out in 1972? That's actually very simple, the Democrats caught the message of 1968 and campaigned on it 4 years after the fact, when it was no longer in people's minds. McGovern's platform was unable to gain any traction from the message no longer having any real relevance. The electorate was tired of liberal activism that year, and they saw Richard Nixon as having finally restored some sense of order following the chaos of the late 1960s. The prevailing wisdom at that time was that "Democrats can't govern," and that only the GOP could be entrusted to do so. That wisdom had a lot of traction up until about 2006 or so, when the electorate finally understood that Republicans don't govern. That came on full display again in 2015-6.

That leads to the final point of saying that nominating Hillary Clinton is guaranteeing a lost opportunity. I know, that on paper, Hillary has an impressive resume that's worth considering, but that's not a good enough reason to give her the nomination. Hillary's judgment on several past decisions were off target (Iraq War, Libya, Syria no-fly zone, etc.), and resulted in people getting hurt or killed. Now, the problem with nominating Hillary, in my eyes, is that it will depress voter turnout in the general election, or worse, give us united government under the Republicans. If you think I'm off target, I'd suggest looking at polls on 270ToWin's website. In just about every election between 1968 and 2012 (with some notable exceptions like 1992 and 2008) we've a seen a continual drop in voter-turn out. With more and more people failing to turn out, it makes our democracy that much more susceptible to corrosive corruption by big-moneyed interests and hijacking by extreme voices. None of this is good for us, not at a pivotal moment such as this.

Keeping these points in mind, now you can see how comparing today's political dynamic to 1972 if we nominate Bernie is wrong, and how 1968 is actually the right comparison.

How Bernie Is Another Step Closer To Potentially Overtaking Hillary

Bernie Sanders just got a big win in Wisconsin (there were 96 delegates up for grabs), and this has increased his campaign's momentum onto the nomination. How this is significant is that he's won 7 of the last 8 primary/caucus contests, and that may change the way the race goes. So far Hillary Clinton has been on the defensive, along with The Democrats' establishment, looking for ways to woo Bernie's voters and falling all over themselves.

Face it, people are tired of establishment politics, especially several segments of the Democratic base. We're ready to go big and bold, even if it challenges conventional wisdom. There's too much at stake with corporate fat-cats controlling both party establishments. 

The Need To Repeal The Anti-BDS Law ASAP

Barack Obama has done us no favors by signing the anti-BDS bill into law. This law does not delegitimize Israel, as Benjamin Netanyahu's government would like us to believe. This is a direct violation of the 1st Amendment and also the 9th, 10th and 14th Amendments. I certainly hope that when Bernie Sanders becomes President that he will repeal this odious law immediately.

What Israel is doing to the Palestinians does not reflect the values as ascribed by the Talmud. Nowhere in the Jewish faith is there any means to condone this type of suffering. This is racism and moreover ethnic hatred at its core. Demonizing the Palestinians, many of whom are suffering from the worst human rights abuses. Think about this, this is an example of our tax dollars being wasted. We should not be subsidizing the Israeli War Machine. Here's a look at how much we've wasted courtesy of Haaretz.

This law does not reflect who we are as Americans. We don't root against the underdog. As an American Jew I may get a lot of heat for saying this, as someone who has no sympathy for the people who suffered the worst of the Holocaust, but it needs to be said. We should not be emulating the worst of our historic oppressors, the Nazis. We're behaving just like them. I can cite numerous examples of this, such as this video for starters:

In this video, we get a glimpse of how hatred of Arabs and Palestinians starts in Israeli education (much like how the madrassas operate in Saudi Arabia and other places under the control of the Wahabist sect of Sunni Islam). Think about how this may be coming from our tax dollars. Why should we be funding this? It makes little sense to me.

That's the whole point behind BDS, it says that allowing this type of separation and repression should end now. If Israel wants to be treated as a respected member of the community of nations, then it better adhere to its responsibilities and the basic rules of the road. What is it going to take to get that into the Israeli Government's head? The kind of pressure BDS brings.

What Pisses Me Off About Hillary Clinton

I know that I've written extensively on here about how I have severe misgivings about Hillary Clinton being elected President, but what's pissing me off even more is how dirty she's getting and how desparate she comes across as. I can't vote for someone who's only paying me lip service. How stupid does she think I am? I can see right through her, and I know damn well that she doesn't have my best interest at heart, only what lines her pockets. She's pulling the same stunts that she did with Barack Obama back in 2008, and look at what happened. That's not even the least of my gripes. What has me even more floored is the fact that she, along with The Democrats (Democratic National Committee) are basically engaging in election fraud wherever they can during the primaries just so that she can be nominated, even when the base is largely rejecting her. I never signed up for this!

I'm pissed as hell that if she's nominated I'll either vote in Bernie Sanders as a write-in, or if John Kasich get's the GOP's nomination, I'll end up voting for him. Hillary is untrustworthy, and nominating her is a big mistake in my eyes! If she thinks that telling Millennials, such as myself, that we can't have anything to help us out, because we have to subsidize big business, then she deserves to lose to the Republicans in November. Let the Republicans run us into the ground, we'll boot them out after 2 years (Congress and across the states) and 4 years (Presidency) anyway. This is how fed up people are with all the excuses and the lies. We know how tough it is to govern 320 million of us, but that's no excuse to ignore us when we're calling for help and/or some relief. No way are we going to let Corporate America (specifically big business and the very wealthy) call the shots. No way in hell! 

What Older Generations Don't Get About Us Millennials

There's nothing more obnoxious than hearing false stories about the choice we face in November. I say this as a young American, the one group who the media trumpets as the least invested in our country's future. I'd beg to differ, as we're just as invested, but we're tired of being ignored until just before election. Not to mention we really detest being overly criticized about everything, or being projected on as to how we should feel, think, etc. Honestly, the way things are currently are not working for us. For what reason is it right for us to be working between 1 or more jobs to pay down massive debts from getting our education? And they have the right to be lecturing us on the necessity of having an investment portfolio or a mortgage? AS IF! How throwing us a bone here as we're drowning in debt?

And they think identity or dog-whistle politics is what drives us to vote? They've got to be smoking some bad weed. Identity politics, like dog-whistle politics, is the easiest way to make us tune older generations out. We know about the struggles previous generations made to get rid of racism, and we're thankful for that, but let us have our go at it. What's so absurd about all the projections that the Silent and Baby Boom generations make onto Millennials is that we don't have any respect for tradition, or for that matter traditional hierarcy, or that we don't protest against it enough. Let me say this to both generations, that's because the Millennial generation has the same type of mindset as the G.I. Generation (the generation that fought in WWII and then made this country a superpower). This means that we're turned off by both forms of politics. We're a more collaborative generation where labels really don't hold a lot of water, and that means working from all angles.

We've come to realize that all this overly hyperbolic politicking is tearing this country to pieces, and that it's our place to rein in those who lead us. Our realization of how our institutions have failed us comes from the fact that we haven't had our voices heard. Are we surprised by this? Hardly. What more can we expect when older generations are not willing to listen to us? It's no secret we're frustrated, but we're willing to channel that frustration in a way that will force a response. Is the reason that most Milennials are not willing to entertain the notion of Hillary Clinton because they're sexist? Of course it's not, we'd love to see a woman as President, but not Hillary. Our reason: identity politics primarily, but also because she has no real plan to help us. Add in 1 other factor, foreign policy. How can we be sure that Hillary won't start another war and call upon us to fight it? We're tired of war! I know I'm tired of it as well.

More News From North Korea

It seems as if America and its partners have thrown down the gauntlet on North Korea, hitting with the heaviest sanctions to date passed by the Security Council. Apparently North Korea's continued threats of pre-eminent nuclear war has worn thin both Russia and China's patience. To have Russia warn the North that an invasion by the Americans and the South may be jusitifiable is really telling of how close the Korean peninsula is to having war break out. Originally I heard the story from Alex Jones, who has a history with the truth at times, and apparently he was spot on about the Russian response. The Guardian was the first to break this story, and there's no question that if there's a war that starts in that part of Asia, it'll be sanctioned by the Security Council.

It's also telling about how thin China's patience has worn, especially when they really don't want more American military hardware so close to their border. Now whether they'll back international military action is a whole different question, but I'm fairly sure they'll do so if the North Korean nuclear threats don't abate. Like the Russians, the Chinese also are warning the North that if these threats continue then there will be a real justification for invasion. 

New Supreme Court Pick

Having heard that Barack Obama's nominated a new Supreme Court justice, Merrick Garland, to succeed Antonin Scalia, I'm not at all surprised to hear the Senate GOP's squawking about how they won't do their job as described by the Constitution.

Now I can think of one major reason why they won't do it: their base. The base wants to make sure an ultra-conservative succeeds Scalia.  To put it in another way, they want someone on the court who will rule in favor of their beliefs and views. These include a return to Jim Crow and overt racism, denying non-Whites their constitutional rights, belief that Whites are superior to all and that only White lives matter, etc. The bottom line is that these are strongly held convictions in many parts of the country, and many of the people who hold these views want them enacted into law.

After feeding their base racism, and the need to enact it into law, the GOP's now answering for whipping up that same racial prejudice in the forms of Donald Trump & Ted Cruz . What did they think would happen, that someone wouldn't break through and grab the ability to enact such views? Now they have to look to the Democrats to stop Trump, if he is their nominee, which will be unlikely if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee. The last person who should be the one to pick a successor for Scalia is Trump. Guaranteed he'll pick someone who's a strong opponent of racial justice.

That's why there's the campaign telling Senate Republicans to Do Your Job. We need to hold their feet to the fire, by telling them that their scorched-earth obstructionism will cost them the Senate and the Presidency in November.

How 2016 Is A Mirror Image Of 1968

If anyone remembers the break-down of the New Deal Coalition back in 1968, then get ready for a rebooted version this year. Think of Donald Trump as the fill-in for George Wallace, Ted Cruz as Richard "Tricky Dick" Nixon, Bernie Sanders as Eugene McCarthy and Hillary Clinton as Hubert Humphrey.

Now suppose that Cruz were the GOP's nominee, just like Hillary would be for the Democrats, and Trump ran, via as an independent or 3rd-party. Think of the outcome, we'd have Ted in the White House succeeding Barack Obama. The reason I'm saying that Cruz could end up being our President is that Trump would only be successful in potentially syphoning off would be votes for Hillary or Cruz all across the country.

In this analogy, we can see why Donald Trump will not cease to use overt bigotry as a campaign strategy as it's absolutely working for him. Trump's tapped into a very deep White rage that's been simmering under the surface since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, especially in many parts of the South, Great Plains and both the Mountain & Pacific West. This White rage is much worse than the Black rage we've seen over the past couple of years. These folks want to be free enough to shout out their bigotry at the top of their lungs and feel vindicated that they don't have to hide their true beliefs.

It's also easy to see why Ted Cruz's holding his cards close to him. He knows that he can pose as the savior of the state from all the violence and lawlessness caused by both Trump and the Democrats (the same as the Law and Order platform Richard Nixon ran on 1968). But remember, Cruz would like nothing more than to implement Law and Order, via racial conservatism.

In Bernie Sanders' case, it's real easy to see how he's a reincarnation of Eugene McCarthy. Bernie's been crusading against the sheer inequality of opportunity for everyone regardless of background (be it race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, etc.), and also excoriating the recklessness of both the political and economic establishment. Like McCarthy, Bernie's calling for a dramatic overhawl of many governmental policies and also blasting the establishment's disregard for the real costs of war.

As for Hillary Clinton, she's the re-embodiment of Hubert Humphrey, who has the support of the establishment, but no support from the base. Many of the same voters who would likely turnout for the Democrats would end up staying home. That's exactly what happened in 1968, and what's about to happen if Hillary's nominated now in 2016.

There's one thing we need to bear in mind, unless we want a new version of Kissinger-esque offensive realism, we're better off not repeating the same mistake we made 48 years go.