Home | About | Donate

WATCH LIVE: Bernie Sanders Hosts 'Fighting for Justice in Michigan' Town Hall With Rashida Tlaib

There’s a simple explanation for not going to war with Iran.

It’s the one nation in the region that could shut down the oil spigot, spread the conflict across the Middle East including into Israel, and produce the mother of all quagmires.

Yet, as if to underscore just how stupid and knee-jerk bellicose the US/Israel/KSA alliance is, you still can’t rule a war with Iran out.


I have literally listened to Progressives nominally under the Democratic umbrella say this with feeling and verve every 2-4 years for nearly half a century. Unfortunately, this is the last US election where there was an opportunity for a Progressive movement to actually offer us an opportunity to save our nation, global civilization, and quite possibly our species, by 2024, even with an overwhelming majority throughout the legislature, and all three branches of government and an overwhelming majority of our nation’s population supporting dramatic climate action, it will be unlikely to save our nation, global civilization, or species.

“A day late and a dollar short toward earning our salvation,” will be the epitaph on humanity’s cosmic gravestone emphasizing the arrogant irony of our self-selected species name of the “wise, wise-men.” Unfortunately, we deserve no better, our death comes by our own hands.

1 Like

I’m sure you’re right, but it still confuses me. It suggests a degree of restraint and foresight which I thought was beyond the reach of our current leaders.

Our standard operating procedure is go in with our guns blazing, regardless of what might happen. The worse the outcome, the better: more profits for someone for a greater duration.

We’re on a bad losing streak in wars right now.

So bad, that presidential candidates are running (on the rhetoric) of ending forever wars.

So bad, that the real figures behind the levers of power (think PNAC) are actually wary of that happening. It’s why they are backing Biden over Trump. Trump, a bumbling, erratic moron with no talent outside of self-promotion and grifting, is on the verge of extracting us from our longest war. And Biden, a noted and consistent hawk, knows which side his bread is buttered on (think MIC).

Obama had eight years to get us out. Nope.
And in this thread, otherwise reasonable people give Trump zero credit for it.


I agree. And that’s why I’ve given up on Democrats, despite having been one of them for over 40 years.

Democrats hate Trump more than they want peace. Heaven forbid he should end the Korean War, improve relations with Russia, get us out of Afghanistan, bring some troops home, … It’s no longer clear that Democrats want peace. All Democrats seem to want is Biden, the very antithesis of peace. We’re about to add the flames of war to the flames of environmental catastrophe.

I can’t understand why anyone – especially one who calls her- or him- self Progressive – would identify with the Democratic Party any longer. (Bernie comes immediately to mind.)


Just read it. It’s terrific – thank you! Some excerpts to motivate others here to look at it:

That they have thrown their support behind the candidacy of Joe Biden is an ominous development, particularly for those who believe that U.S. foreign policy should be guided by the principles of realism and military restraint, rather than perpetual wars of choice.

As the historian David Sessions recently tweeted: “Basically nobody in liberal circles is taking seriously the consequences of the fact that the exiled cadre of the Republican Party are building a massive power base in the Democratic Party.”

With the notable (and noble) exceptions of a few anti-war Democrats like Reps. Barbara Lee, Tulsi Gabbard, Ro Khanna, and Sen. Jeff Merkley, the opposition party has spent much of the Trump era turning themselves into the party of war.


I completely agree. Humans, it turned out (Who knew?), were slow learners. Or rather, frightened, lazy, shallow thinkers (see Daniel Kahnemann’s Thinking, Fast and Slow

1 Like

Thanks for the reading offer, unfortunately, I’ve accepted the fate of our nation and global civilization, and am working with all the meager resources at my disposal to fight for the survival of our species, but it is a grim and melancholy daily battle even now, I can’t imagine what it will be like after the death of our nation and global civilization, but that is what we prepare for now.

Missed your post - public school teacher, busy, re-starting work, assigned a subject out of my field.

“progressives have failed to make demands and back them up. But…progressives are not…a d-party constituency except by default.”

If I follow - not sure I do - my reply is that, imo, the greater threat of Sanders was not simply that he might win, but that his movement was insurrectional in character - threatening to form a near-half of normally LOTE Democratic voters in a more independent bloc prepared to make demands.

Instead - as stated somewhere in another post by me you read - that shifting bloc post-Sanders split into mostly LOTEs and a smaller # of more militant progressives.

“Progressives could…should make demands – but they’ll be ignored as always.”

Quite possibly - I do not presume to know. But - to repeat myself yet again - a) it has never actually been tried, b) a public, anti-democratic refusal to share power would have its own political value in getting voters to ‘go third party’, and c) as stated in my last post, when it seemed to many - including establishment Dem’s - Sanders likely would be the nominee, they began to negotiate - 'so how ‘bout, if you’re the nominee, we have a say too, you know, to bring the wings of the party together?’ Note that the point I take from this last is that D action is influenced by shifting judgement of how much power it has.

“I think we should own their blame and rub it in their faces.”

Agreed - demanding power cannot be a game of chicken where progressives back down and go LOTE. They must demand ‘serious power sharing or both sides lose,’ and be prepared not to accept blame, but to blame the Democratic Party for an anti-democratic failure to represent. Although this can technically work with a small, Green vote in swing states, to have real power, it must be a much larger, insurrectionist share of LOTE voters. And unfortunately, the LOTE’s are nowhere there.

“Super Tuesday Massacre.”

Hah. Super Tuesday Hari Kiri for emperor, imo. Yes, I left out those who fell on their sword in 24 hrs. Don’t know how to judge how much that vs Clyburn played. Both factors…to repeat self - Sanders was apparently surpassing Biden w/blacks (plus many others). A last time - not clear Dem. party was sure its gambits would work.

Last, idea that “black firewall didn’t believe B. could beat Trump.”

Yes…that may be one idea…especially w/older southern black voters…but I think it’s important that this is also a much wider mainstream media idea of voters - ‘Sanders is just too left for America’ - that D’s and their right liberal media have used to scare voters away from Sanders: the unsupported assertion that ‘he just couldn’t win.’ And ‘you wouldn’t want to hurt black people, now would you?’

Will be awhile before I can post again.

1 Like