Home | About | Donate

If Elected, Trump Would be Only Global Leader to Let World Burn


If Elected, Trump Would be Only Global Leader to Let World Burn

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

If Donald Trump were elected president, he would be the only world leader who does not believe in climate change—or even in calling for action on global warming.

That's what the Sierra Club found in a comprehensive analysis of verifiable quotes, statements, and actions from global heads of state, released Tuesday, which also warns that the presumptive Republican nominee's steadfast denial of climate science could threaten relationships between the U.S. and its allies.


Although I hope this pompous, arrogant, limited in intelligence, narcissist is not thrust upon the world... if he indeed were to take the Oval Office and turn his back on the urgent need for climate-change action, he will watch Manhattan and the Jersey Shore go under the waves and lose his personal fortune.

If that were a mere cautionary tale with limited impacts on other DECENT human beings, it would be one thing. Unfortunately, this individual's moral retardation, spiritual ignorance, and general self-centered worldview would constitute a DEATH SENTENCE to most sentient life.


"Trump is sticking his head in the sand while the seas are rising"
Depending on his being elected and who his choice is for VP; if he is sticking his head in the sand, we could be OK...if it is beach sand.


I think that David Icke is brilliant in his depiction of global elites and a power structure that has its roots extended WAY into the past. But he also mocks global warming.

I've watched Alex Jones make important statements about the growing trespasses of the Surveillance/Big Brother State. But he, too, decries global warming as an Al-Gore inspired hoax.

I've listened to Gerald Celente whose "Trends" Magazine and fiscal forecasts often are accurate. He also mocks global warming.

And then there are the legions of Republican Governor clowns who do likewise.

What do they hold in common?

Well, for one thing they are all white men and white men conditioned by Patriarchy. Their worldview exalts business and the individual's (man's) right to make his way as if NO other force exists or should exist.

They see any government regulatory laws as encumbrances to their lust for profit.

But beyond all this, they truly do not FEEL or understand the LIVING FORCES that make up the natural world.

This is taken from Vandana Shiva's recent piece since it helps to describe the mindset:

"The paradigm of Genetic Engineering is based on Genetic Determinism and Genetic Reductionism. It is based on a denial of the self organized, evolutionary potential of living organisms. It treats living organisms as a lego set. But life is not lego, meccano, or stratego. It is life—complex, self organized, dynamic evolution—auto poetic."

When men who cannot FEEL and cannot recognize the wisdom, inherent intelligence, and sacredness of the Natural World are positioned to make wide-reaching decisions, their personal distortions will impact this planet and all life forms in deadly ways.

Granted, those who identify with Trump minimize all this. It is true that any continuation of the War State Business as Usual is also lethal... but there is NO indication that Trump wouldn't play shape-shifter and go along with any "With Us or Against Us" policies as put forth by the Army Chiefs of Staff, the CIA, or any war profiteering set of power-brokers.

He is UNFIT. So is Hillary.

Our nation is being held hostage by hostile forces to life, liberty, and the longevity of this planet's already stressed ecosystems.


Seeing Germany leading the industrial world in greening, Merkel's comments have a leg to stand on. With Trudeau championing tar sands extraction, CETA, TPP and TTIP he is nothing more than a closeted Trump and has zero cred on this issue. Ditto Obama.


So, the Chinese leaders aren't letting the world burn?

Also, too, the subtext here seems to be that we need to vote for Secretary Clinton because she wouldn't let the world burn as much!

The lesser of two evils is still evil.


Clinton would whisper sweet nothings in our ears while her corporate paymasters keep the heat a rising.


Sanders has indeed endorsed Clinton and those who supported Bernie will now make their choices as Sanders has made his.
I will not waste my energy by casting stones on speculation of what Sanders is or thinks, that is all fools errand and dissipates our strength and unity, as those who will find faults and cast stones perhaps intend.
I will join, hopefully, a significant number of people that will never vote Trump or the Red Queen regardless the supposed consequences - I will vote Green for Jill Stein and her running mate to support issues that are important to me - more important even than fear or party "unity" or any other political con and charade.

No Justice, NO Peace! Occupy Politics.......



SURELY you can do better than this!

Here is the edited copy:

"Defining what Sanders is or thinks represents a fool's errand and dissipates our strength and utility... "

FOUR spelling errors in one sentence is too much for me to NOT correct.


Yes SR, mea culpa - I was typing fast and not thinking clearly with the news - it happens sometimes and I usually catch myself but not this time. As always, thanks!


Nadia you are seeing with one eye. The other eye would show you the democratic party leader turning his back on BP horror in the gulf and after taking his kids to the beach opening the gulf to fracking. The war in the ME loved by the demos and voted on by Killery caused one of the great pollution events in the Iraq war FOR OIL.

If you were in a boat your one sided nature would capsize the boat.


I don't think Sanders expected or intended this outcome. He's also trapped in the same box.

The Clinton Crime Family goes way back and they managed to slip out of every allegation. That has led many to think the allegations were falsely made to brand the "oh, so Liberal" Clintons through devious machinations taken by their right wing, pro-business enemies.

Suppose that was also part of the canard?

Some time ago I put forth the proposition (and had a lot of "likes" in support) that Deep State operators strongly suggested that the Clintons redefine the Democratic Party by essentially infiltrating it.

In the same way the FBI infiltrated Green Groups, Civil Rights Groups, and Feminists Groups to find out what was going on, and where possible influence the agenda; or in the same way criminals in expensive suits can become banks rather than rob them... the Clintons destroyed the Democratic Party and so tainted it (by doing what had formerly been done exclusively by Republicans, catering to the moneyed interests) that it's lost most of its credibility.

Meanwhile, the system forecloses on any challenge to its duopoly status.

So what's a good guy like Sanders to do?

How did the outcomes of Nader's attempt and prior to that, Ross Perot's attempt shape Sander's understanding of the Politically Possible?

The power structure is heavily entrenched and like a Medieval Castle, also heavily fortified with armed troops.

Sanders could not strip off his Clark Kent business suit and fly about like Superman to overcome it all.

I do not fault the man for the systemic problems that impede genuine Progress.

Too many here have fallen upon him like bloodthirsty vultures. With prior allies like that, who needs enemies or assassins?


Give me a break! $27 a month didn't drain anyone's pockets.

You're setting up a case for resentment.

What other screen names have you used, now that you, "Carol" and "Caroline" have set up a novel new tag team of your own... apparently in place to Damn Sanders. How quaint... and timely.


Endgame, you sound very angry. If you think Trump would make a better leader than Clinton you need a serious reality check. I am not a Clinton fan either, but Trump as a world leader, sounds like political suicide! By the way, I was for Bernie Sanders, the only one who said his truth straight up and did not change his tune under pressure.


Not a Hillary fan either but the alternative is unbearable! Political Suicide is what Trump is..


Are you not part of that same civilian population you condemn as "sheeple"?

And if not, what defines you as separate or superior?

I will continue to pull out the most excellent closing statement by the late Human Right's Attorney Michael Radner:

"You either side with the oppressed, or you side with the executioner."

Since those who ENFORCE a box that limits true voting numbers and options are obviously the oppressors, by terming those stuck in the box (i.e. the oppressed) as "sheeple," you identify with the dominators.

How different is that from the soldier calling the Iraqi a Rag head?

How different from the rapist calling his victim, a bitch?

How different from the cop calling the kid he's targeted a "N----r"?

NAMES that demean, devalue, and denigrate human beings are the first line of ATTACK in any police or war-oriented state.

When you use the VERBIAGE of the dominators to demean those being dominated, you show an identification with the Power Structure, a/k/a the establishment's pro-war, pro-class war, anti-nature/life, status quo.

Is that how you wish to be defined?

If not, then consider why I challenge you and any others who traffic in this most anti-Solidarity shaping Frame (of speech).


My position exactly.


I pledged $15 a month. That's what most guys spend on beer in a weekend, and what others spend on less than a week of cell phone usage.

According to my income tax, I border on the established Poverty Line. I own my own property, but profits are minimal.

Also, turning YOUR condemnation of Sanders--in a sort of "Buyers' Remorse" stance--into me purportedly having more money than you is another tangential argument intended to make me look bad.

I think you've been around a LONG time.

It's a very common thing for people to remain in these threads and use anywhere from 3 to MANY screen names.

Either that, or you have a number of clones. And speaking of clones, you used the phrase "More money than WE do."

Who is represented by the WE in your sentence? After all, if you are a new poster you certainly would be in no position to determine the incomes of other posters... lest, as mentioned, they're part of your Tag Team.


Not to grieve Carol, we did get something from our small contributions - we got millions of others to believe they could make a difference and that our issues are the most important - Sanders himself repeated that often. Our issues and who will champion them now become our focus. Jill Stein has the issues firmly in her grasp and I will support her even more ferociously now. This "political revolution" was never going to be easy - the struggle continues and hopefully it will grow, in part because of Bernie Sanders and his influence on people of conscience......



I see the constant barrage of scary articles about Trump as a way to make us cower and vote for Hillary. Same ole' same ole'. When Hillary passes the TPP it won't matter anyway, all our environmental laws will be gone. So really, what's the difference?
All this push pull with Democrats is a waste too as they refuse to change the DNC platform to ban it. If it is passed we still have to fight for everything we need. Personally, after watching the theft of the election, I want Hillary to lose. If for no other reason than to let them know, we know who they are and won't have it anymore.
Never Hillary