Submitted by Glen Ford on
by BAR executive editor Glen Ford
Bernie Sanders has endorsed President Obama’s troop escalation in Syria, once again showing that “he is no more ‘progressive’ than Obama on foreign policy, and just as dishonest – a true Democrat. Sanders will ultimately bow to Hillary Clinton, while still claiming that the Democratic Party can be transformed from the inside. However, millions will have witnessed that the campaign proves exactly the opposite – and will seek alternatives.
Sanders Prepares to Bow Down to Hillary, But Many of His Supporters Won’t
by BAR executive editor Glen Ford
“His underlings are telling the troops that this whole electoral exercise will be worthwhile if they succeed in pushing through a progressive party platform, in Philadelphia.”
The 2016 presidential season will only be of historical significance if it leads to a fracturing of the duopoly electoral system in the United States, a “trap within a trap” in which the rich control both parties – one of which is always the overt party of white supremacy. Donald Trump has already succeeded in creating a “market” for a second right-wing party by stripping the GOP’s’ appeal to its raw, racist, white nationalist essentials – a political nightmare for every corporate public relations department in the nation. Corporate logos will be hidden in brown paper bags at the Republican convention, in Cleveland.
It is difficult to imagine how the Trump rank and file and the party’s corporate “establishment” will paper over their irreconcilable differences, rooted in the party’s failure to preserve skin privilege and good jobs in a White Man’s Country. Just as brazenly, Trump, the rabble rousing billionaire, has violated the most sacred ruling class taboos by rejecting the national security rationale for the hyper-aggressive, ever-expanding, global U.S. military presence. If Trump fails to convincingly recant such heresies, the rulers will deal with him with extreme prejudice.
“Trump has violated the most sacred ruling class taboos by rejecting the national security rationale for the hyper-aggressive, ever-expanding, global U.S. military presence.”
Bernie Sanders presents no such threat to Empire. He supports President Obama’s illegal drone wars and the 15-year occupation of Afghanistan. Should he somehow be elected president, Sanders would follow Obama’s practice of reserving Tuesday’s for choosing targets from his “Kill List.” To circumvent U.S. and international prohibitions against assassination, Sanders offers the same “self-defense” justification as the Israelis do, when they slaughter Palestinians by the thousands. "There are people out there who want to kill Americans, who want to attack this country, and I think we have a right to defend ourselves," Sanders told Chris Hayes, of MSNBC.
The nominally socialist senator from Vermont claims that he differs from Hillary Clinton on foreign policy because she “is too much into regime change and a little bit too aggressive without knowing what the unintended consequences might be.” During the New Hampshire debate, Sanders said the ouster of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein “destabilized the entire region” and the overthrow and death of Muammar Gaddafi “created a vacuum for ISIS” in Libya. “Yes, we could get rid of Assad tomorrow,” Sanders told the crowd, back in February, “but that would create another political vacuum that would benefit ISIS.”
“It doesn’t bother Sanders a bit that the U.S. presence on sovereign Syrian soil is illegal, an act of war.”
His leftish boosters clung to these utterances as proof that Sanders was, deep down, a peaceable kind of guy, in sharp contrast to “Queen of Chaos” Clinton. Tuesday, however, as he was losing four of five primaries, Sanders showed that he is no less a warlord than Barack Obama – who, like Sanders, based his “peace candidate” appeal on his 2002 opposition to the Iraq invasion. Obama announced he was sending 250 more U.S. Special Forces troops into Syria, supposedly to fight ISIS and to arm and train more of those elusive, damn-near-extinct “moderate” rebels. It doesn’t bother Sanders a bit that the U.S. presence on sovereign Syrian soil is illegal, an act of war, as is U.S. funding and training of fighters attempting “regime change.”
"Here's the bottom line," said Sanders. "ISIS has got to be destroyed, and the way that ISIS must be destroyed is not through American troops fighting on the ground." U.S. Special Forces have already been engaged in combat operations in Syria, as Sanders should know. Nevertheless, he plowed on:
"I think what the president is talking about is having American troops training Muslim troops, helping to supply the military equipment they need, and I do support that effort. We need a broad coalition of Muslim troops on the ground. We have had some success in the last year or so putting ISIS on the defensive, we've got to continue that effort."
What Sanders is saying is that he would continue Obama’s policy of regime change, despite the “unintended consequences” and its clear illegality. He is no more “progressive” than Obama on foreign policy, and just as dishonest – a true Democrat.
“Sanders opposes ‘regime change’ except when it is perpetrated by a Democratic administration.”
The same day, Sanders sidestepped Joe Scarborough’s attempts to get him to agree that Hillary Clinton is a “hawk” on foreign policy. “I don’t want to characterize her, but I think our views on foreign policy are different,” Sanders told the MSNBC host. “I think my views are a lot closer to President Obama’s than they are to Hillary Clinton’s.... I believe it must be Muslim troops on the ground who do the fighting with the support of the United States. I will do everything that I can to prevent our troops from getting involved in perpetual warfare in the Middle East.”
A distinction without a difference, as they say. Sanders opposes “regime change” except when it is perpetrated by a Democratic administration. He really doesn’t mind U.S. “boots on the ground” in other people’s countries, as long as they are arming and training people of native religions and races to kill others of their kind, and U.S. casualties are kept to a minimum.
Sanders is an imperialist pig. Although his self-image is that of a Scandinavian social democrat, Sanders is more like a French “socialist” who supports the maintenance of a safety net for his own people, but reserves the right to routinely commit mass murder in the former colonies in order to preserve the French “way of life” and “values.”
With the mathematics of the presidential primary race now undeniable, Sanders is preparing his supporters to scale back their dreams of social transformation – which, for some of them, includes a genuine retreat from Empire as well as a new domestic deal. His underlings are telling the troops that this whole electoral exercise will be worthwhile if they succeed in pushing through a progressive party platform, in Philadelphia. Then it will be time to unite with Hillary, the plutocrats’ candidate, in the battle against the dreaded Trumpster.
“Sanders is preparing his supporters to scale back their dreams of social transformation.”
Bernie Sanders is peddling the sucker’s line, that the Democratic Party can be transformed from the inside. However, the actual experience of the campaign, as witnessed by millions of young, newly energized citizens, is proving exactly the opposite; that this corporate-crafted Democratic mechanism and its interlocking Republican counterpart are tools of the oligarchy, designed to manufacture consent to corporate rule and corral and crush dissent.
When Sanders consummates his “sheep dog” assignment, he will deflate to his original state: a small-town Democratic Party operative. Most of his supporters will acquiesce to Hillary’s nomination – just as most people everywhere acquiesce to everything most of the time. But, a significant proportion, numbering in the millions, and including the half of young African Americans that have rejected the Black Misleadership Class’s slavish allegiance to the Democratic Party hierarchy, will not. And, although Hillary Clinton will surely win victory in November with her “big tent” Democratic Party – flush with white suburbanites who, only yesterday, were Republicans – it will be a Party that is even more hostile to Blacks and progressives than before Donald Trump plunged the duopoly into crisis.
Millions of people, especially young folks, will be looking for an alternative to the Democrats and the Republicans – or to electoral politics, entirely. It’s up to the Left to give it to them.

Forward
Print HTML
Reddit
Viadeo
























8 Comments
BERNIE WANTS TO GO TO LEBANON WITH HILLARY
Submitted by LL on
Feminists destroyed Donna Edwards, because she wasn't their kind of woman.
CORRECTION: BERNIE WANTS THE TURKS TO GO TO LEBANON
Submitted by LL on
Feminists want an "orderly transition" in Lebanon too.
Khaim Saban the Dims' AIPACer-Likudnik Billionaire Sugar-Daddy-
Submitted by Nixakliel on
Put-Up $100,000 for the Dims establishment 'liberal' [Chris Van-Hollen] vs Donna Edwards- cause Sis was NOT enough of a Bibi-AIPACer lap-dog. After Saban's 'generosity' MD's Dim party insiders, including most Black MD Dim-Party big-wigs- backed the white dude Chris Van Hollen over Sis Edwards [the Black Mis-Leadership class in action -again- So much for Racial 'solidarity']. As such Sis Edwards 'only' got 2/3s of MDs Black vote while Van-Hollen got 1/3 of MD's Black vote along w 3/4s of MD's Dim white vote.- causing Sis Edwards to come-up short.
As Bernie's reaching Bern-Out 2 top 'Progressive' Talking Heads-
Submitted by Nixakliel on
[one's a 'Socialist-Alternative' in Wash St] Recently wrote articles Calling for Bernie to run as a 3rd Party Independent candidate for POTUS. Uhmm NOT Gonna Happen!! Bernie's made it clear he's backing Billary when she wins the Dims' POTUS nomination!! If Bernie was gonna run as a 3rd Party Independent, He's done so from the get-go!!!
IMO except for the so-called 'Democratic-Socialist' & 'Political-Revolution' hype- Bernie's run always reminded me of Obama's in 2008 [w less success of-course]- all the way down-to Bernie's Motto 'A Future You Can Believe In' [vs Obama's in 2008: 'Change You Can Believe In']!! Aling w the 'contrast' of Bernie's anti-Iraq War vote to Obama's 2002 anti- Bush-Cheney 'Dumb [Iraq] War' speech. Just as this got OBomber phony creds as being the 'anti-War' candidate- likewise for Bernie. Bernie's NOT anti-war, he too is anti so-called 'DUMB War'!!!
Both OBomber & Bernie failed to say the real reason ISIS is NOW on the run in Syria, is cause of the Russian's recent actions there via its air-force, in combo w Assad's forces along w Iranian & Hezbollah's key support. The US had bombed [mainly open desert] in Syria for over a YR to 1.5 Yrs, resulting in ISIS actually grabbing & controlling even MORE territory in Syria [& Iraq too]- before Putin got fed-up w that BS 'charade' & went to work- w full approval of Syria's Legit Govt [= Assad's]- & got ISIS & AL-CIAeda on the run w their backs up against the wall in Syria, in less than 6 months!!!
- Yet Bernie wants the Saudis [of all people] to spearhead the anti-ISIS efforts in Syria- showing either he don't know what the HELL he's talking about re Syria, ISIS & the Saudis- Or if he actually does, then he's nearly as 'slick' & sinister as Killary is in this regard!!!
PS: IMO the most impressive thing Bernie's done during his POTUS run, is his refusal to go before the AIPACer Likudniks & just do the 'Stepin-Fetchit' like all the others: KIllary & Trump, Cruz & Kasich Did!!
I Listened to TRNN's Coverage of the MD Dim Election
Submitted by Nixakliel on
Most of Paul Jay's guests were Black Bernie supporters [he / they did NOT focus much on the local mayoral & senate races - See @ http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&I... ]. Yet when Jay asked point blank, given that this past Tues Bernie got whipped in 3 states [MD & Penn St being his biggest losses] & even narrowly lost Conn too [Bernie did win RI]- when it comes down to it would / will they vote for Billary, most of them [reluctantly] said YES!!! With FEAR of the Trumpocalypse being their main reason! At-least one [or more] of those Black Sandernistas went on about how [potentially] dangerous [for people of color] Trump in the Oval Office would be- TRUE BUT... IMO Billary in the Oval Office is likely nearly as dangerous maybe even more so!! Cause she & Slick Willy are much shrewder & more well connected poly-tricians than is Trump & her being a woman {neo}'Liberal' Dim who most Blacks & Hispanics are backing, she'll be able to get away w more unopposed than Trump would- ala Slick Willy's tenure in the 'Big {white} House'!!
People in the lame-stream & even alt media go on & on about all the outrageously bigoted & misogynistic stuff Trump's said, but IMO little that Trumps said is much more outrageously racist than KIllary's 'super-predator' & 'I Came I Saw, He Died. Ha, ha, ha!!!' screeds [& I think she took some 'cheap-shots' at poor {mainly Black} moms while hyping Slick Willy's 'Welfare DeForm' prog too]. And IMO Killary's likely an even bigger WAR-Monger than Trump is!!
- Plus Trump & the Billary Clintons [especially Slick Willy] were until quite recently, hang-out buddies; such that until the current POTUS race Trump & Slick Willy hung out together as 'Thick as Thieves'!!!
PS: The only way Trump has any real shot at beating Billary in a head to head- is that the Repug insiders manage to cut a deal w Trump to keep the Repug party from splitting; while on the other hand Sandernistas break ranks w the Dims in mass, cause they simply reject the idea of backing Billary- which IMO is unlikely [especially after he endorses her & urges his Sandernistas to do so too] & could be checked by putting Bernie on the ticket w her.
DONNA EDWARDS DEFEAT in MARYLAND TELLS ALL!
Submitted by akechlo on
The Deomcratic establishment and their moneyed supporters, including Congressional Black Caucus, went against Donna Edwars despite the fact that she had pledged her loyalty to Hillary! It is her voting record with respect to the desires of other outside forces that cut her down! You see, African American elites are selected and elected to cast their votes on issues outside the issues affecting the communities they represent. This is how they earn their living. This is how the Democratic establishment treat minority representatives. Without toeing this very line, they will have to jobs! The CBC could not dare give her any support.
Jeremy Scahill Takes a BIG Whack at Bernie re Foreign Policy-
Submitted by Nixakliel on
On DN!'s Tues Mar 3rd show [@ www.democracynow.org/2016/5/3/jeremy_scahill_clinton_is_legendary_hawk ]: } JEREMY SCAHILL: Well,... Hillary Clinton is one of the legendary Democratic hawks in modern U.S. history. She’s what I call a 'cruise-missile' liberal, who they believe in launching missiles to solve problems & show they’re tough across the globe. Hillary Clinton as Sec of State, really oversaw a paramilitarization of some of the State Dept’s divisions, & was the main employer of the private contractors [aka Mercs] that were working on behalf of the U.S. govt, & was one of the key people in creating the horrid destruction we’re now seeing in Libya, because of her embrace of regime change. Yet Hillary Clinton on these issues is an easy target, because she's so open about her militaristic tendencies.
But Bernie Sanders has been given a sort of pass on these issues. Recently at a Democratic town hall meeting, Bernie Sanders was asked directly about whether or not he supports the kill list- where the actual term "the kill list" was used... He said the way Obama is currently implementing it, he supports. Bernie Sanders goes after Hillary Clinton all the time for being a regime change candidate—and he’s right—and blasting her for her alliance with people like Henry Kissinger. But let’s be clear: Bernie Sanders in the 1990s was a supporter & signed onto legislation that was authored by Donald Rumsfeld, William Kristol & these notorious [mainly Repug] neocons, who created the disaster of the Iraq invasion with Democratic support. Bernie Sanders signed onto the key document that—the legislation was created as a result of the PNAC demanding that Bill Clinton make regime change in Iraq the law of the land. Bernie Sanders then voted for that bill, largely authored by Donald Rumsfeld & the neocons. Bernie Sanders then supported the most brutal regime of economic sanctions in world history, that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. He supported the bombings in Iraq under Pres Clinton, under the guise of the so-called no-fly zones, the longest sustained bombing campaign since Vietnam. Bernie Sanders was about regime change. Bernie Sanders signed onto neocon-led legislation that made the Iraq invasion possible by codifying into U.S. law that Saddam Hussein’s regime must be overthrown. So, when Bernie Sanders wants to hammer away at Hillary Clinton on this, go ahead. You're 100% right. She’s definitely for the politics of empire... But Bernie Sanders needs to be asked about his embrace of regime change, because the policies that he supported in the 1990s were the precursor to the disastrous war in Iraq that he hammers on all the time without ever acknowledging his own role in supporting the legislation that laid the groundwork for it... {
PS_So Jeremy Scahill Really Takes Bernie to Task RE His F.P. =
Submitted by Nixakliel on
Foreign Policy positions Bernie's taken both in the past & even the present. Jeremy says that Bernie been getting a 'pass' as if he's a foreign policy 'dovish peacenik', only because Killary's such a damnably blatant 'R2P' 'Cruise-Missile' {neo}'Liberal' WAR-Hawk!!!
Pages