SOTN Editor’s Note:
There has been something VERY wrong with the Bernie Sanders Campaign right from the get-go.
He has been the victim of one electoral subterfuge after another, one political machination after another, and yet he just goes with the flow. He has let Hillary Clinton get away with so many unjust assaults on his campaign that they can no longer be ignored. Nor can the never-ending deceptions and deceits spun by Clinton & Company. There capacity for prevarication is now as mind-boggling as it is the stuff of legend.
Oh, yeah, he puts up a little stink here and there, but is basically AWOL when the real battles ought to have been fought. And he was on the winning side of every battle. No, there’s something very NOT right here.
If a candidate won’t even stand up for himself, how will he ever stand up for the American people?! Answer: He won’t.
Truly, something is rotten in the state of Denmark where it concerns the whole Sanders campaign strategy. It’s as though he ran just for the show of it. To present the appearance of posing a countervailing candidacy to Clinton’s … and then he completely falls down on the job, time and time again.
Of course, there are very good reasons why this is the case. He’s really NO different from the rabidly neocon Hillary. Although she ought to be tried by the ICC at the Hague for war crimes and crimes against humanity for the Libya and Syria unprovoked wars of aggression, he just went along with these odious imperial wars.
The bottom line here is that Bernie Sanders routinely presents himself as a much different candidate than the ‘others’, and he really is not. Which is why he could never mount a distinguishing opposition to his old friend Clinton. They’re really two peas in a pod and therefore how could he go after his twin pea. He couldn’t, unless he was willing to sacrifice his political career for the rest of this lifetime.
Bernie Sanders is just like all the other fake Democrats and Independents who feign an anti-war platform, but will carry water for the Military-Industrial Complex all day long. These incorrigibly fraudulent career politicians have made it a life’s mission to deceive their states, their constituencies, and their nation. They are in reality all warmongers. And, they are intractable in their war-making initiatives and bellicose endeavors the world over.
Sanders has certainly lived up to his name and berned US all — BIG time!
State of the Nation
March 16, 2016
BERNIE’S FINISHED: HE SHOULD HAVE ATTACKED CLINTON ON FOREIGN POLICY
Sanders did not take issue with Clinton because he is also a neoliberal interventionist
IMAGE CREDITS: GAGE SKIDMORE.
Converted Democrat Bernie Sanders lost big to Hillary Clinton on Tuesday. The former Secretary of State won primary battles in Florida, North Carolina and Ohio. Clinton now has 791 delegates and needs one-third of the remaining delegates in 28 contests to secure the nomination. She only needs to win 60 percent of the vote in California, New York, Maryland, New Jersey and Arizona to pick up another 900.
While it is nearly impossible for an outsider to beat the rigged superdelegate system that controls the Democrat party nomination process, Sanders may have made more headway if he had gone after Clinton on foreign policy.
Clinton’s War Party Insiders
Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy advisers are national security state insiders and neocons. Senior members of the team include former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, former National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, Center for a New American Security CEO Michèle Flournoy, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and others.
Tom Donilon is a former member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group, a “Distinguished Fellow” at the Council on Foreign Relations, a member of the Rockefeller Brothers and Ford Foundation funded Aspen Group, and a member of the globalist Trilateral Commission. Donilon acted as a key player in the bombing and dismantlement of the former Yugoslavia and the takeover of Bosnia by the US and EU under the 1995 Dayton Accords.
Michèle Flournoy, described as a “liberal hawk, is a former undersecretary of defense for policy in the Obama administration and the CEO of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), a national security and military analysis think tank. CNAS hired arch neocon Eliot Cohen, a leading proponent of the Bush invasion and destruction of Iraq. She worked with the neocon think tank the Project for the New American Century and hobnobs with the CFR.
Madeleine Albright, a former Secretary of State in the Clinton administration, enthusiastically defended the brutal sanctions imposed on Iraq which resulted in the death of as many as 576,000 children. In 1996 she defended the murderous sanctions during 60 Minutes interview when she declared “we think the price is worth it.” Albright is a director emerita of the CFR and a co-investor with Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild and George Soros, in a $350 million investment in Africa.
Hillary Clinton’s role in the destruction of Libya is well-known, and yet Sanders did not criticize the US-NATO invasion.
Instead of putting the illegal invasion responsible for the murder of thousands of Libyans in its proper context (as a crime against humanity), Sanders pontificated on regime changeand the national security state’s war on terror.
“She was proud to have been involved in regime change in Libya, with [Muammar] Gaddafi, without worrying, I think, about what happened the day after and the kind of instability and the rise of Isis that we have seen in Libya,” he said in December.
Sanders did not put Libya in its proper context because, like Clinton, he is a neoliberal interventionist.
“Sanders is not a pacifist,” reports The Washington Post. “He supported U.S. use of force in the Balkans under Bill Clinton, and the original Afghanistan intervention to get Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda after Sept. 11, 2001.”
“Is there a moral limit to the military violence you are willing to participate in or support? Where does that limit lie? And when that limit has been reached, what action will you take?” asked former Sanders staffer Jeremy Brecher prior to his resignation.
Bernie Sanders: Neoliberal Interventionist
“The attack on Kosovo is hardly the extent of Sanders’ hawkishness,” notesMichael Arria. “While it’s true he voted against the Iraq War, he also voted in favor of authorizing funds for that war and the one in Afghanistan. More recently, he voted in favor of a $1 billion aid package for the coup government Ukraine and supported Israel’s assault on Gaza. At a town hall meeting he admitted that Israel may have ‘overreacted,’ but blamed Hamas for the entire conflict. After a woman asked why he refused to condemn Israel’s actions, he told critics: ‘Excuse me! Shut up! You don’t have the microphone.’”
A principled stand on non-intervention may have separated Sanders from Clinton and the foreign policy of the national security state—and would have drawn the support of a marginalized anti-war faction of the Democrat party—but it would not have made much of a difference.
The political process, particularly on the Democrat side, is rigged to make certain the same vetted roster of insiders are selected and elected. The goal is to make certain, no matter who sits in the Oval Office, interventionist policies are followed.
Bernie Sanders would dutifully follow the dictates of the war party had he made it to the White House.
The problem is, despite his support for the war party, his overly socialist ideas are too radical for establishment Democrats and their corporate and banker patrons. Clinton claims she will address the financial policies of the elite that are gnawing away at the middle class, but this is merely insincere rhetoric designed to fool gullible Democrat voters. She is, after all, the candidate backed by Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Citibank and transitional corporations.