With Trump the Likely Nominee, Clinton’s Presidential Electability Without Sanders is Highly QuestionableLeave a comment
May 7, 2016 by Alfred
For decades the American people has become increasingly totally fed up with both, establishment Republican and the establishment Democratic presidential real alternatives.
In the case of the 2008 Obama election, this trend seemed an exception. Obama was indeed a “real” and productive alternative and remains one as such, to this day, shortcomings notwithstanding.
The 2016 election year is now a landmark historic bipartisan turn around moment which can lead us to heaven or hell.
The “outsider” candidates of both parties, namely Trump and Sanders, have clearly become the realization of this alternative to what had become the dysfunctional neoconservative as well as neoliberal establishments.
Unfortunately, particularly after the collapse of the USSR, the Republican party entered a period of triumphalism marked as well by a steady intellectual, ethical, and political decline since it became the party of the top billionaire elites on one extreme, and of the woefully inadequately educated masses on the other extreme, something which also led to their being grossly uninformed and/or misinformed by a self-censoring mainstream corporatized infotainment media, and hence vulnerable to the dishonestly and corruption of its misleaders.
This gradual decadence of the Republican party into what is now a state of its putrefaction, has been reflected in the manifestation of its dishonesty, greed and power – lust by said elite in synergy with the manipulative appeal of the masses of these uneducated or undereducated and misinformed masses, to the point that they became fertile ground for the party’s tactic of using intolerance, and fear, hate incitements in ways which led to the dissemination of falsehoods which would guarantee the party’s hegemonic belligerent agenda abroad and its neoconservative policies at home, something which in conjunction of the rapidly evolving military industrial complex which President Eisenhower warned us against, favored the super wealthy and the cost of the rest of the population.
This phenomenon led to a massive deflection of our tax payer’s funds to belligerent and corrupt hegemonic militaristic adventurism, which coupled to the abysmal neglect of our social programs, our infrastructure maintenance and modernization, and the massive loss of jobs as a result of so-called “free trade agreements” had not only our industries relocate abroad, but additionally had the executives of said industries creatively involved with their finance experts in ways which have resulted in the establishment of massive tax obligations evasions.
The ensuing hemorrhage of treasury and blood going back to Ronald Reagan’s massive military spending and to his invasion and bombing of the island of Grenada 33 years ago, where as a result medical students were literally assassinated, since there was no provocation and threat to the U.S. at all from an island the size of Washington, DC, and forward to this day, has inured us in the myth that perpetual wars for perpetual oil or perpetual hell had some sinister economical or security benefit for us.
At the same time, the Democratic party, while rhetorically being an opposition party to the Republican party, was not immune to the same wave of mind boggling corrupting and literal wicked temptations which did the Republican party in, but on a Republican – Lite approach. The Democratic party’s culture is quite distinct and more refined than that of the Republican party, so it did not fully endorse the madness of war for the sake of war.
So, with this background in mind we now arrive at a crucial decision point which has the potential to either herald a new magnificent era in our nation, an era marked by a renaissance of the American dream, namely the dream of many of us to become a republic modeled more after our Canadian neighbor’s model. A republic which will enable us finally to chart the path to become all we can become and no longer lead by the example of power, but inspire by the power of example.
Contrariwise though, we will most certainly slip backwards and wind up being worse of than before.
The Obama era has had its ups and downs, but contrasted to the horrific failure and destructiveness of the Cheney/Bush-era, this was a literal “belle epoch” for our nation.
Now, the crucial decision point requires extremely careful handling.
Unfortunately of the two “outsiders”, the one who towers way above in all character traits and experience may almost but sadly not necessarily become the nominee, while the other one who is incomparably inferior in experience and character traits is all but nominated.
What makes this problem more vexing is that the independent Senator Bernie Sanders is running against the very establishment-business-as-usual, Democrat Hillary Clinton who, given her tremendously flawed but not well known background, is most possibly and even quite probably, less likely to win the presidential election against the non-establishment Donald Trump.
One of the basis for this assertion is that the mainstream media has hardly done its job to report the very dark side and track record of Hillary Clinton history.
Before proceeding with the purpose of this article which is to illuminate its readers about said very dark and concerning side of the possible nominee of the Democratic party, it is important to note that there are three possibilities which may be considered to avoid an electoral defeat to the “outsider” nominee, who – by the way – while more independent and more outspoken than the other Republican candidates, is no improvement over ALL of said other Republican candidates whose record on honestly, dedication to peaceful conflict resolution in foreign policy, immunity to corruption, dedication to social equalization, and dedication to respecting our constitutionally guaranteed right of separation of church and state, and our constitutional right to equality under the law, is less than mediocre.
Having said this about said “outsider” Trump, it must be noted for whatever it is worth that, rhetorically at least he has stated that (a) he opposed the war on Iraq, and (b) if elected, “we’re getting out of the nation-building business and instead focusing on creating stability in the world”. He also warned that leaders who have sought to bring democracy to countries uninterested in it, have only plunged them into chaos, and (c) he added that “Instead of trying to spread universal values that not everybody shares or wants”, positive reforms should be spread by “strengthening and promoting Western civilization and its accomplishments”.
Whoa, well said ! This of course does not neutralize everything else he has said and done to deem him an acceptable president, but what is most remarkable about this statement is that this “outsider” in this context distinguishes himself positively from all the other Republican mediocre former candidates, and furthermore and most astoundingly Trump here sounds much more acceptable and independent than his possible rival, Hillary Clinton.
So, since the Argentum Post has already addressed in various articles the severe character shortcomings as well damaging policies of Hillary Clinton, based on exposes which are solidly documented, what follows infra is a power point type list of aspects of Hillary Clinton which is drawn from and can be looked into, in an elaborated format, which is provided in the embodiment of an article published – to the credit of – New York Times on April 21, 2016 by author and journalist Mark Landler, which is titled “How Hillary Clinton Became a Hawk” with a byline which reads “Throughout her career she has displayed instincts on foreign policy that are more aggressive than those of President Obama – and most Democrats ”
* It is noteworthy to point out at this juncture that Hillary Clinton was a Republican who embraced the military and militaristic policies, and who is the daughter of a Navy petty officer who was a staunch Republican and an anti socialist , and that she channeled his views, according to Landler.
* Hillary described Obama in 2008 as naive, irresponsible, and hopelessly unprepared to be president.
* Hillary would often side with Secretary of Defense Gates against Obama and is said to have a textbook view of American exceptionalism. [ Foreign Affairs describes in “The Myth of American Exceptionalism” that “The idea that the United States is uniquely virtuous may be comforting to Americans. Too bad it is not true” ]
* It is quite noteworthy to observe that Mark Landler says in his NYTimes article that “For all their bluster about bombing the Islamic State into oblivion, neither Donald J. Trump nor Ted Cruz of Texas has demonstrated anywhere near the appetite for military engagement abroad as Hillary Clinton has”.
* So, Landler further adds the following, which should be a reason for major concern, namely that “Unexpectedly, in the bombastic, testosterone-fueled presidential election of 2016, Hillary Clinton is the last true hawk left in the race”.
Notably the Cheney/Bush junta hawks damaged catastrophically our country’s best interests, not to speak of the hundred thousand Iraqi deaths and 5 thousand American deaths it caused, something which prompted her close friend, Madeleine Albright to reply to the question of a TV journalist as to whether this was worth it, given that thousands of innocent unarmed Iraqis and their children were killed and the water supply of Baghdad was heavily damaged and intoxicated with untreated sewage, that she thought “yes, it was well worth it “…
* During the 2008 campaign Hillary Clinton falsely claimed that when in March of 1996, she visited American troops in Bosnia, as the first lady, she dodged sniper fire after her C-17 military plane landed in an American base. This was denied by Chris Hill, our own diplomat who would serve as our ambassador to Iraq, and who did not remember any snipers at all, and indeed recalled children handing her bouquets of spring flowers.
* Landler reports that Jack Keane, one of the intellectual architects of the Iraq surge is also perhaps the greatest single influence about how Hillary thinks as regards to military issues. He sits on the board of General Dynamics and served as a strategic adviser to Blackwater.
* As Obama was laying the groundwork for his candidacy with a campaign that would emphasize his opposition to the Iraq war, Hillary voted in favor of the war.
* Hillary became a close friend of General David Petraeus and both would be later accused of mishandling classified information.
* When it came to the Afghan troop debate, Hillary sided with wily military generals in a three-month drama of dueling egos and her unstinting support of General McChrystal in his maximalist recommendation to Obama. something which made it harder for him to choose a lesser option. Eventually though, General McChrystal had to be fired by President Obama.
* In the final days of the debates, Hillary found herself at odds with her own ambassador in Kabul, Karl Eikenberry who said that McChrystal’s proposal, which Hillary supported, would “saddle the U.S. with vastly increased costs and an indefinite, large-scale military role in Afghanistan“.
* Landler said that “To thwart the progressive insurgency of Senator Bernie Sanders, Clinton carefully calibrated her message during the Democratic primaries to align herself closely with Obama and his racially diverse coalition.
* Correctly Landler concludes by stating that “Americans are weary of war and remain suspicious of foreign entanglements“.
Correctly this writer of the Argentum Post has complemented the scholarly and brilliant analysis of Hillary Clinton by Mark Landler, by clearly documenting that in addition to Hillary’s obsessive enthrallment with an aggressive and provocatively militarized set of policies which targets irrationally, such countries as the People’s Republic of China, our primary lender, where we are unnecessarily and provocatively undertaking naval maneuvers in the South China Sea, and Russia whose classical Bach concert in celebration of the containment and eviction with Russian support of Daesh from Palmyra was just observed – in Palmyra.
These are postures that are characteristic of persons who are still living in the Cold War era, but Hillary at 68 which is close to the age of Bernie Sanders could have updated herself a bit, unless her outdated stand serves her incitement instincts which are in line with those who support the industrial-military complex which obscenely profits from wars of aggression.
When it came to Cuba and Iran, with which we now are on a path of normalization of relations, thanks to the sophisticated diplomacy of President Obama and our partners, Hillary shamelessly opposed diplomacy with both until she was overruled and forced politically to respect President Obama who along with our respectable partners in Europe as in the Vatican thanks to reformist Pope Francis, succeeded fabulously by his sophisticated policy of constructive engagement with both.
As stated supra, the Argentum Post has also documented Hillary Clinton’s brazen disregard for the most egregious human rights violators in Latin America, as for example, her 2009 support of the crushing of the democratically elected government of President Zelaya in Honduras revealed, a coup which started with the abduction of the Zelaya in the middle of the night from his residence and which continues today with the empowerment of oppressive thugs who persecute worker organizers and carry out assassinations against human rights workers such as Bete Caceres, a coup which Hillary insisted we will not characterize a coup in view of our interest in our military base of Palmerola in Honduras.
Equally documented has been Hillary’s unwavering support of the former dictator of Egypt, calling Hosni Mubarak, a “friend of the family”, Hillary’s unwavering support of our sale of weaponry to the decaying, ruthless violent, Saudi Arabian dictatorship,which has by now killed some 6 thousand mostly unarmed civilians in Yemen, and the same applies to her unconditional support of our military support of the General Al-Sissi egregious human rights violator whose military crushed the only democratically elected president Egypt ever had, namely President Morzi, who now sits in jail awaiting quite possibly and without a proper trial his death sentence.
Most particularly and most egregiously is the record of Hillary’s unstinting support for the obscurantist, genocidal, fundamentalist, supremacist, Apartheid, regime of Netanyahu et al., a man who ordered the Summer of 2014 massacre of some 3,000 mostly unarmed civilians, including some 500 chidden in Gaza, who most likely will be charged by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and crimes against the humanity of the autochthonous Palestinian legitimate owners of their land, Palestine, and a man who had the insolent temerity to enter the Capitol building via an intrusion by collusion with ethically bankrupt Republican senators in order to feeble-mindedly attempt to sabotage the U.S./ P5+1 diplomacy with Iran which was highly successful and productive.
During her present campaign Hillary promised to invite this monstrous delusional man who falsely stated that he “speaks for all Jews”, to the White House as her first act after being inaugurated.
So here we have it. Hillary Clinton is clearly a wily, manipulative, opportunistic, neoliberal, and very hawkish, establishment candidate, someone who is the last kind of Democratic candidate America needs now, as Bernie Sanders ignited and unleashed, at long last, the huge progressive movement of mostly younger voters, but as well sapient well seasoned senior voters which clearly is categorically rejecting going to the future backwards, since the President Obama two terms have been, and continue to be a major step forward in the right direction, and it would be illogical and irrational for voters to elect anyone but one such as Hillary who will continue moving away from the liberally and progressively modernized, humanized, march in the direction of rendering our democracy genuinely participative.
So, to conclude therefore, given who Hillary Clinton really his, something which those who only are exposed to the mainstream media will not be aware off, namely a candidate who owes Wall Street firms, most particularly Goldman and Sachs, who owes the industrial military complex, particularly General Dynamics and Lockheed, and who furthermore owes the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) which is a most sinister lobby of huge and toxic undue influence in the formulation of our disastrously tendentious Middle East policies, and who owes the like of repulsive casino gambling mogul Sheldon Adelson, deference and favors which will severely limit her ability and incentive to serve our nations best interests.
There is no question that these commitments most definitely render Hillary Clinton a candidate which will not be able to easily or at all defeat Donald Trump.
Not only is Hilary Clinton badly flawed character-wise, but given that her “outsider” opponent Bernie Sanders owes no one but the decent and rational American citizens who donated on average $27.00 for his brilliantly run campaign, which initiated an irreversible movement which the Democratic party must recognize, even if Hillary is out of touch, she will not be able to win and rule without the support of “we the people” who have made it clear in the primaries that the “outsider” Sanders is indeed the only one who can defeat easily the “outsider” Trump, for reasons too obvious to enumerate in this article.
Realistically therefore we have the following options.
Since Sanders has a right to contest every single primary, particularly the New York one where 125 thousand people found out that they will not be allowed to vote (?), something which Hillary did 2008, the Democratic “super delegates” may still recognize that it is in the best interest of the Democratic party if it is ready to evolve, and therefore in the interest of the country, to nominate him and not Hillary.
Alternatively, if Hillary manages to get into touch with reality and ends any denial state obstacle, and chooses to work with Bernie Sanders and incorporates into her campaign vital elements of his campaign, and either offers him the VP post or the Secretary of State post, then she may receive the millions of disaffected Democratic and independent votes she will surely lose otherwise, and this loss will render her most vulnerable to a defeat to Trump and this will surely be a defeat for our nation as it is utterly not in the interest of decent and constructive conservatives as well as liberals to have Donald Trump elected to the presidency.
It goes without saying that if Hillary chooses the option to include Bernie Sanders in her administration, this choice will only have validity and therefore provide her with the million of votes which logically otherwise she cannot obtain, if she includes in her platform a foreign policy which is bereft of any strings attached to it by her debt to the industrial-military complex, to AIPAC, to the disgusting Sheldon Adelson gambling casino mogul, to the Wall Street firms which paid her millions of dollars for so-called “speeches” whose content she will not reveal, and to other moneyed firms and institutions which are addicted to having their undue nefarious interests in prevail to the detriment of our nation’s best interests.
This article concludes with, again, the recommendation to its readers of the extraordinarily important and informative article by author and journalist Mark Landler titled “How Hillary Became a Hawk“.
PS According to the New York Times, this article is adapted from ” Alter Egos : Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the Twilight Struggle Over American Power “, published this month by Random House.