"A Fraud...Upon the American People"

I remember well the days when the League of Women Voters, a totally nonpartisan group, was in charge of moderating Presidential Debates in this country.  That was in the 1970's and 1980's.  At the end of the League's stint, the Repubs & Dems rejected about 80 proposed questioners for the debate...as well as numerous tough questions.  Later, the Republicrats came up with a nontransparent contract sanitizing the debate, saying who should be in the audience, and determining the exact questions that would be allowed.  The League resigned with this statement:  "A fraud is being perpetrated upon the American People.".

That's how we wound up with a private corporation run by the Dems & Repubs, the Commission on Presidential Debates, being in charge of the debates.  The word "Commission" makes it sound as though it's some sort of public, representative, all-encompassing entity.  It isn't...not by a long shot.  This private company determines who is allowed to debate, who will moderate the event, what questions will be allowed, and who is allowed in the audience.  This is rigging to the Nth degree.

At least the top three "Third Parties" should be allowed to participate in the upcoming debates...regardless of any percentage in polls.  Why not?  Isn't that democracy in action?  If the Republicrats claim that there isn't enough time for that amount of participation, that's pure hogwash.  Look at how many candidates were in the Primary Debates.  Four, five, or even six candidates wouldn't hinder anything in the major Presidential Debates.  Quite the opposite:  such a scenario would enhance the choices for the electorate.  The fact is:  without being in those debates, a candidate has little to no chance to garner votes.  That's how the monopoly eliminates its competition.

[See the first featured segment on today's broadcast of Democracy Now, Thursday, August 18, 2016.  Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, and others have something important to say.]

A private corporation should not be allowed to have complete control over those debates.  That's not democracy...that's Soft Fascism.

Okay, you're all excited about politics.  In this Rigged System I can't imagine why, but good for you.  Now, why not insist that Oligarchical control be relinquished, and instead, genuine participatory democracy be instituted?  Why not?  Habit?  Break out of the box.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

The Extreme Ignorance of the Don... and the Rigged Game

Let me state again at the outset:  I don't support Clinton, either.  In fact, there isn't a single candidate running this year that I would even consider supporting... not necessarily because of the individual, but rather because the entire System is rigged.  In the present Crony Capitalist atmosphere, it doesn't really matter at all in any significant way who gets into high office.  For that to matter, first the corruption must be changed by peaceful pressure from outside the Rigged Game.  People have been trying to change it from the inside for at least about 100 years...no luck.

Donald Trump can't be a serious candidate...not with the statements he has made for months now.  I'm beginning to suspect that his only function is to guarantee the coronation of Clinton.  Following are just a few of (supposedly) the Don's beliefs... which are extremely ill-informed.

1.  He stated today or yesterday that Iran is the biggest supporter/promoter of State-sponsored terrorism in the entire world.  One only can assume that by "terrorism" he means that of ISIS and Al Qaida... you know, the ones who are Sunnis... the ones who are the sworn enemies of Iran... that same Iran that is in the Shia sect of Islam.  Apparently (& we certainly don't know this for a fact) Trump is unaware that there's a Sunni-Shia civil (or religious) war going on throughout the Muslim portion of the Middle East.  I find it quite incredible that a major candidate for national office here would be unaware of such a thing.

2.  Not long ago, he stated that Obama was the "Founder of ISIS".  He didn't explain why, but I'm fairly sure where that reasoning lies.  [By the way, I'm certainly no fan of Obama's...I think he's a Corporatist and a Perpetual War Hawk, as well as a gross violator of the Constitution.]  It is true that when Obama took office in January, 2009, he was in a big hurry to exit Iraq.  After we left that country, the U.S.-installed Shia gov't there began to oppress the Sunni residents even more...and the Muslim civil war continued, thus giving rise to ISIS (disaffected Sunnis).  Trump's reasoning, however, ignores the Americans who were 99% responsible for generating ISIS:  Dick Cheney, Dubya Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Paul Bremer, and a whole slew of behind-the-scenes NeoCon theorists.  By the time Obama first got in office, the whole thing already was a complete shambles.

3.  His statements regarding "extreme vetting" and Cold War style identification & handling of those "hostile to our values" essentially is a call to return to the McCarthyism of the 1950's.  Any major candidate calling for such a thing nowadays would have to be a total ignoramus.  That rhetoric appeals to perhaps 10-15% of the electorate...and turns off everyone else.  No serious candidate would ever make such a proposal... because instituting that policy would be completely un-American.  [Instead of "Hoo-ah", the Don's call to action is "H.U.A.C.".]  Anyone who can't see why that would be an extremely dangerous, slippery slope simply is not thinking on all cylinders.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well