Democrats, you can’t vote for Hillary: The case for writing in Bernie Sanders If Hillary Clinton is the nominee
We need structural change: Clinton as president would merge GOPers and Dems into one party on war & foreign policy
The same neoconservatives who view the Iraq War as the right decision are now gravitating towards Hillary Clinton.
Only Bernie Sanders says “I’ll be damned” to quagmires. Trump is actually less hawkish than Clinton, which says a lot about Hillary Clinton, and lot about her supporters.
If Bernie Sanders doesn’t win the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton might be “better” than Trump in many ways, but certainly not from the vantage point of structural change. The word “better” doesn’t explain the global ramifications of allowing George W. Bush’s neoconservative advisers, and Henry Kissinger, into a Democratic White House.
Hillary Clinton as president would seamlessly merge Republicans and Democrats into one party on war and foreign policy, led by the same people who advised Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, and even Richard Milhous Nixon.
I explain my philosophy in detail during this YouTube segment.
The merger of both American political parties on war is actually the foundation for fascism. When a Democrat appeals to neoconservatives, and legitimizes Henry Kissinger’s foreign policy, then we’ve altered our democracy forever.
As for risking a Trump future, I explain why none of Trump’s plans would pass Congress during my recent appearance on CNN International with John Vause.
One million Americans have been injured and close to 7,000 have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Again, one million Americans have suffered in ways you can never imagine; forever scarred by the global quagmires we hold less threatening than Donald Trump’s rallies.
President Obama just sent Americans to Syria, sent American soldiers back to Iraq, and prolonged our stay in Afghanistan. This has taken place, despite the fact that PBS states “Out of 2 million troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 800,000 have had multiple deployments, many five or more.”
With Clinton, Obama will be viewed as a pacifist.
The Middle East is engulfed in flames because of Bush’s decision to invade Iraq (aided by Democrats like Clinton) and unintended consequences, or blowback, like ISIS. As for the devastating toll on Iraq, over 174,000 civilian deaths have been documented, and this could be a conservative estimate. One study states that around 500,000 human beings have died, but that report was published in 2013. Still, there are far higher estimates of carnage.
I’m not saying writing-in Bernie, if Clinton is the nominee, will be perfect. However, as I’ve heard throughout this election, “don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good.”
If you blame Ralph Nader for 2000, then remember Iraq was the biggest tragedy of the Bush years. Not only did Clinton vote for Iraq, she’s learned from her “mistake” by appealing to neoconservatives on foreign policy.
Take a second away from completely ignoring Clinton’s prison lobbyist donations and role in the Honduras coup to think about the consequences of a President Hilary Clinton utilizing the AUMF and implementing a Democratic version of Bush’s foreign policy.
We’ve seen President Obama utilize the AUMF to send troops to Iraq, Syria, and prolong their stay in Afghanistan, with hardly any Congressional approval.
Again, this is the foundation of fascism, when both parties unite on war and liberals defend neoconservative principles.
But Trump will eat your children and destroy the world!
In another appearance on CNN International with John Vause, I explain that a Hillary Clinton indictment could easily lead to a Trump presidency, and that you’d better vote for Bernie Sanders if you fear Donald Trump.
We’re finished as a democracy if the only two choices we have for leadership are a reality show buffoon, and a person who could possibly get indicted after Election Day; both of whom who happen to be friends. I still find it bizarre that Bill Clinton spoke to Trump on the phone before his presidential run.
Therefore, why write in Bernie’s name if Clinton is the nominee, even with the possibility of Trump?
Four years of Trump, and we get eight years of a Democrat. Four years of Clinton scandals and inability to type an email, and we likely get eight years of Cruz or Kasich.
But think of the poor, you privileged white male, and what Trump will do to people mired in poverty!
First, I highlight why Hillary Clinton has benefited greatly from white privilege during an appearance on CNN New Day with Victory Blackwell.
Second, ask a poor person how Obama’s presidency has put money into his or her pocket, or how Bill Clinton’s welfare reform bill impacted his or her life.
Also, the notion that Trump could unilaterally build walls or deport millions is ludicrous. According to BallotPedia, “A total of 469 seats in the U.S. Congress (34 Senate seats and all 435 House seats) are up for election on November 8, 2016.” Forget about fearing Trump, make sure America gets a Democratic Congress. Then make certain Bernie Sanders becomes nominee, because the FBI isn’t giving Hillary Clinton a parking ticket.
Rest assured, if Clinton’s FBI investigation runs through November, say hello to an even greater Republican majority in Congress.
In this YouTube segment, I state the case for writing in Bernie Sanders if Clinton is the nominee.
Below is a summary of the four major reasons I’ve highlighted in my YouTube segment.
1. Hillary Clinton will merge Democrats and Republicans into one party when it comes to foreign policy and war.
America’s president can unilaterally wage war and I don’t trust any president, Democrat or Republican, advised by both Henry Kissinger and the same neoconservatives who advised Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. Neocons actually hate Trump, which says a lot about Clinton.
When the U.S. eventually has only one choice on war (and liberals are now hawks), we’ll become a fascist nation. I explained on MSNBC last year that Republicans have always wanted another major ground war, and now they might get their wish with Hillary Clinton.
2. The FBI is investigating Clinton and I’m sending a message to the DNC.
Call me old fashioned, but I don’t want my president linked to an FBI investigation. The FBI isn’t part of the GOP.
I also want the DNC to know that Clinton is far too conservative, on the major issues correlating directly to unilateral presidential power, to run as a Democrat in 2016.
3. Structural change is needed, now more than ever.
To settle for anything other than Bernie’s calls to break up banks, or other structural solutions to our dilemmas, is to pave the way for another collapse, or endless military quagmire. Neither Clinton or Trump will address structural change on major issues.
Structural change is needed to solve Wall Street collapses, endless counterinsurgency wars, a racist criminal justice system, and other endemic issues we face as a nation.
4. I don’t want the lesser of two evils, I want an honest politician, and Bernie is infinitely more honest than Clinton or Trump.
I can hear the logical fallacies already, so yes, all humans lie. Some humans lie a great deal less than others, and very rarely, a politician like Bernie Sanders exemplifies integrity in American politics. Choosing between Clinton or Trump, in terms of honesty, is like deciding between whether to put a cobra, or a rattlesnake, in your sleeping bag. One has less poison, but you won’t sleep well either way.
Finally, Christopher Hitchens made a compelling case that Henry Kissinger is indeed a war criminal, and I urge everyone voting for Clinton, out of the fear of Trump, to read the argument made by Hitchens.
As for Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s FBI email investigation makes him the true front-runner, and either by winning the remaining primary states, or by potential Clinton indictments, I still believe Sanders is poised to become our next president.
(This article first appeared On The Huffington Post)