Home | About | Donate

Watch: Bernie Sanders Response to Trump State of the Union

Search conspiracy theory origin on yahoo… The JFK one. You get the impetus for the last few decades of this term’s use. Who is likely to use it and why. It took me ten tries to get the link to load at all. :slight_smile:

What congressional investigations are you talking about? WTH, what a cop out.
I’m not gonna let you point to Congress and say go ask them. I not your errand boy, understand.
I get my info from Breitbart, Naked Capitalism, Zero Hedge, C99%, Strategic Culture, Al Jazeera, and CD.
Funny thing, they all agree the Russia crap is all a fraud. Imagine that, from the far left to the far right, from the middle east to the south pacific, they are all on the same page.
What planet are you on?


Why are we blaming Putin? It works for a number of issues.


Thank you for bringing some semblance of reality to the Russia debate. Some that haunt these boards can’t do the obvious and FOLLOW THE MONEY. That is what Mueller is doing and that is why Trump is nervous. He should be.

At this point, given available evidence, I don’t see any real evidence of a sophisticated social media campaign. What Facebook, Twitter and Google produced was remarkable weak, to the point of non existent. However, Trump acting to money launder Russian Money has been exceedingly easy to document and the connection is remarkably clear. Is it illegal given preexisting sanctions and international law? In today’s day and age, probably not if it is structured properly. The truth is Russia oligarchs save Trump’s bacon when he was yet again bankrupt in 2008. American banks wouldn’t lend him a nickel and Trump tower was close to worthless given the absence of buyers. So the Russians swooped in, bought 60% of the condos and Russia is now your BFF. Money spawns the friendship.

This transfer of wealth probably wasn’t illegal (almost nothing is in finance) but it creates the bond to be exploited. What is illegal is direct financing of presidential campaigns and that seems to have happened via the NRA. It was reported by the McClatcy (?) newspapers that the NRA funneled somewhere between 50-70 million dollars to the Trump campaign that originated from man who is deputy director of the Russian Central Bank. The NRA has not denied the story and that is an issue. It needs to be properly discussed and it is serious if true. This isn’t a technicality and frankly more than a few people on this board need to give their head a shake. God help us if the left thinks this is about a few tweets and dark Facebook accounts.


Sanders joins the Russia hysteria:

Bernie Keeps Promoting The New Cold War, And Yes, We Need To Talk About It

Which is a Neoconservative generated psyop:

Threads Of Establishment Russia Narrative Trace Back To Neocon Think Tanks

Meet The Cabal That Are Framing Domestic American Activism As “Russian Influence” and “Fake News” - (Disobedient Media)

Remember PropOrNot? We now know that was a propaganda op run by Neocons and tied into anit-Russian Ukranian groups:

The Anonymous Blacklist Promoted by the Washington Post Has Apparent Ties to Ukrainian Fascism and CIA Spying - (Alternet)

Somone got on the local network of PropOrNot’s web server:

Unpacking the Shadowy Outfit Behind 2017’s Biggest Fake News Story - (Consortium News)

And what is all this phony Russia hysteria about? It’s about the threat of the China-Russia economic alliance:

Russiagate Isn’t About Trump, And It Isn’t Even Ultimately About Russia


Democratic Party has unified it’s foreign policy wing with the neocons:

With New D.C. Policy Group, Dems Continue to Rehabilitate and Unify With Bush-Era Neocons - (The Intercept)


Thank you for the links, new sources for me.
War is the worst evil in the world. Number one.
Re China,
I moved to China ten years ago.
Maybe they have worse pollution.
Maybe they have minority issues.
Maybe they have less press freedom (maybe not).
Maybe they are poorer.
Maybe i really don’t like Chinese food everyday.
Maybe they are way too crowded.
Maybe they do more surveillance (Maybe not).
BUT they don’t make wars.
I believe that war in the world (100+ conflicts for the USA now?) is the major cause for pollution, minority issues, curtailment of freedoms, and poverty all over the world.


Well. How about Tibet? I’m not all that sanguine about the Chinese, honestly.

I won’t go there. And I won’t go to churches in China. I have met people who go to these places to cause trouble or smuggle things.

He’s certainly been supportive of Obama’s wars. He’s in support of the Kill Matrix. Now he’s fanning the neoconservative russian hysteria psyop (see my post, in answer to @MCH).

On the other hand, I don’t think it’s all he is. He supports “workers”, in the sense that he wants better wages and working conditions. But in that vein, supporting the development of a weapons industry in vermont has counted for him as “supporting workers”. So to him, demonstrating against that industry is being “anti-worker”. This is exactly what happened in relation to protests against GE in Burlington when they were making helicopter gattling guns for the Contra war.

1 Like

Without confronting the MIC? While supporting the Kill Matrix?

And, … “matriarchial,” like Madelaine Albright, Condoleezza Rice, Samantha Powers … ?

1 Like

Sure, it makes you chuckle. You’re a good liberal, laughing at a left that at minimum wants an anti-war candidate.

Let me tell you, buddy. If we don’t get someone who’s going to confront the MIC, we’re not going to get anything but nice words.


I completely agree. I don’t want us to minimize how much work this is going to be, though. There really is no Left in this country; and all the powerful institutions are against us. We’ve got the internet - if we can keep it.


We’ve always been here, but then the Obamabots turned into Berniebots and hounded us into silence. Some of us actually want rational discussion about the bind we’re stuck in.

I don’t think it’s a matter of learning. If anything, given his short period of real radical politics, his “learning” is what brought him to where he is. He’s made his compromises, and I don’t think there’s any going back now.

I’ll just link my earlier response here, on Gabbard.

1 Like

“successfully changed Britain with BREXIT” - I think that was Cambridge Analytica. Look it up.

“changed France” - the French themselves denied any hacking by Russia. You’re obviously not keeping up.

“Changed American Politics” - Every new breathless report turns into a big nothing, yet many of us still seem to be consuming the cow pies.

The story is not Russia. The story is a populist revolt against a corrupt liberal class that is destroying the foundations of a livable society for most of its members. While I’m not surprised, I do wish they could have picked better.


In my understanding of the terms, though associated with male and female (for good reason), patriarchal power and matriarchal power are not ultimately defined by gender, but by their defining characteristics. Patriarchy is hierarchical, with a clear order of power with the person at the top with absolute power over those under him (or her).

Matriarchy is power associated with the feminine, creation, regeneration, fertility, imagination, the arts, community, nature, love, intuition.

In Christianity, the god of the Old Testament wielded patriarchal power. The idea of the god in the sky that will wipe your ass out unless you obey seemingly arbitrary rules. The god of the New Testament is a matriarchal god, emphasizing love and community, turn the other cheek. Early Christianity was matriarchal but when the Roman empire adopted it as its official religion, it was subsumed into a patriarchal hierarchical tradition with priests with doctrines like original sin that associate sex with evil. Augustine said every time a man and woman have sex they once again commit the original sin.

What patriarchal power has created is a world where people feel free to destroy nature–that with humans at the top, other forms of life are not as important as we are. When power is hierarchical it gives license to kill those with less or no power–war on ‘lesser’ humans, destruction of nature.

Females can be subsumed into a patriarchal power structure as perhaps those three women you mentioned were, as males can also be subsumed into matriarchal power.

It is unfortunate that patriarchy and matriarchy are so strongly associated with male and female because if you go into it deep enough, they have nothing to do with gender.

Anyway, this is what I think. Feel free to disagree.

1 Like

C99%, hellz yeah.

1 Like

I can’t find a definition of M and P online that matches yours, although I do not doubt that the words may be used in that way by some writers.

I’ve heard the words used for home systems of power, with some countries using a more pattriarchal family command, especially in South Asia, and others, maybe Thai and some parts of China, where the women have more power at home.