Fake news, and Sanders’ Electoral College War of the Votes

Two pieces of news need follow-up in the next weeks: fake news and the Electoral College ‘revolution’ against the TWO former presidential candidates, Clinton and Trump, i.e.

Topic of this post: That Sanders and the Democrats are preparing to give the last back stabbing to ‘we the people’ by forcing the Electoral College voters to refuse to vote for the people’s choice, Hillary Clinton, and to vote instead for a REPUBLICAN, Kasich; and to not vote for Trump either. These were the only two candidates the people were deciding on, but now, Sanders and his ‘political revolutionaries’ want to upset the elections to their benefit. How is it that a so-called socialist is betraying the people’s choice and is working to install a Republican in the presidency, that I leave for you to explain to yourselves.

Finally, the MSM will revive the emails fake news to facilitate the final shot at Clinton in that ‘room’ called the Electoral College.

I propose that Trump will ‘review’, with the help of the media, his decision to not prosecute Hillary as justification to bring the emails back. The Electoral College will not vote against Trump, he is already too entrenched in diplomatic mess for the benefit of the US arm dealers and Wall Street; they will defeat Sanders’ silly effort. But it doesn’t hurt to have the Electoral College give the picture that Hillary was defeated by Trump by ‘majority of votes’.

I will discuss first how MSM fake news determined the elections’  outcome.

Fake news

By now must of us are familiar with that term. Our dishonest media (you can continue calling them that given that over half US voters agreed with Trump on that) is drilling the message in the public’s mind that it was Putin who saturated our means of communications with negative fake news about Hillary and positive ones about Trump.

Of course, the dandy job  performed by the MSM of disinformation by fake news and character assassination during the elections is now forgotten; there’s no need now to look at them and demand accountability for their own fake news. Hey, look, it was Putin all along.

Our own MSM showed the public during these elections cycle its power to influence political outcomes; whether that public was paying attention or not, and why, is another topic of discussion.

The fact remains that Hillary Clinton lost the elections on account of the MSM’s 24/7 coverage of the ‘emails scandal‘. The purpose of that persistent coverage for over 14 months was to create a mass emotional feeling of antipathy and repulsion against her. They presented a picture of her as corrupt and dishonest by choice, as part of her personality.

The name of that picture is character assassination, an effective tool of propaganda to immobilize the ‘enemy’ because there’s no way a person can defend him or herself from claims that they are intentionally immoral.

The job was so sublimely executed that the word ’email’ in itself became synonym with ‘Hillary corruption’. They gave Assange the public space to dump incomplete emails, admitting them as ‘conclusive’ without a professional analysis of the material. The FBI provided the last salvo a couple of days before the elections with its dump of emails that had absolutely nothing to incriminate Clinton, but the mere flashing of the word ’emails’ was enough to topple Hillary: email fatigue had set in. By November 8, a significant number of people didn’t want to know about emails nor about Hillary. Some didn’t vote, some voted for Trump or Jill Stein. The rest is history.

When the media or businesses use the psychology of advertisement to move segments or sectors of the population into acting in a particular way, actively by performing the desired behavior, or passively when the desired behavior is not to act, that, my friends, is propaganda. You can act by going and staying in line for a day to buy the new iPhone, or act passively by staying at home and not voting, or actively by changing your vote for the one person you sworn you wouldn’t vote for.

As for Trump, the media gave a picture of him as a lewd clown, but more trustworthy than Hillary. The NYT and the WaPo paid companies  to ‘poll’ voters beliefs. All those polls came with the ‘result’ that Hillary was less trusted, but the conclusions were drawn by the owners of those papers: that the voters must be correct if so many of them had the same opinion. Never was there a questioning of the results, never was there in the polls questions about ‘why do you think so’, or ‘do you think the media influences your feelings?’

That is manipulation of public opinion in action.

There are university courses teaching business and political ‘advertisement’ for professionals; it’s not conspiracy theory. We know the CIA uses these techniques in other nations. But our citizens trust their politicians and corporate elites don’t use these tools at home.

I understand that ‘propaganda’ is here to stay, but we can demand it be less dishonest. Propaganda, for buying products or for political purposes, is based on natural human needs: hunger, fear, need for love and acceptance, for security and safety, for protection against the elements…These needs make propaganda a perennial effective tool to work the masses into submission by manipulating their emotional and physical needs.

The problem with fake news is that its purpose is dishonest, that it works stealthily and the Murdoch’s of our media deny they are using these techniques  themselves for the benefit of a few.

And because propaganda is here to stay, so are our MSM’s fake news. Let’s link that with the Electoral College.

Electoral College War of the Votes

So the media manipulated the voters, Hillary lost, everybody is up in arms against Trump. The only hope to right this wrong is in the Electoral College. Don’t count on that either.

The Democrats, with ‘independent’ Sander at the helm, want to give ‘we the people’ another backstabbing, as if the first was not enough to kill them.

They now pretend to force the Electoral College voters to vote for a REPUBLICAN, Kasich. Sanders’ hatred of Clinton is oozing through the Electoral College. Instead of demanding that the will of the people expressed with over 2 million votes for Clinton, be respected, they want Democrats to vote for a Republican instead of just electing the people’s candidate.

Back to propaganda: expect the MSM to revive the emails scandal in the coming days. Trump will want to revive it, and will claim, with the dishonest media’s nod, that he promised to his deplorables he would prosecute her if he wins. The NYT has hammered on him to do it.

Now is the time to do it. Take her out of the picture, free the Electoral College of their responsibility to uphold the people’s choice. Sanders, a traitor of the ‘working class’, will join Trump openly this time.

The next few days will show how far from the target I am relating to these two topics.

The Woman Card: Fascism and Misogyny in the New Millennium (updated)

[Grammar police, STAY OUT]

Introduction:

Fascism is the ideology of discontent, at least according the description we get of its origins from books analyzing its history.

Question: Did misogyny disappear with the defeat of fascism at the end of WWII?
[Warning: This post contains irreverent opinions and one mild profanity to make sure the irreverency is not missed.]

If you say ‘no’, it didn’t, then you are admitting that it is alive and that our economic and ideological model, capitalism, is misogynistic.  So let’s look into it. Fascism and capitalism were and are misogynistic in nature. It can’t come as a surprise, then, that feminism was in the ballot this last presidential elections with the first woman running for it, and that there was a successful effort to defeat it.

Enter Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton ran openly as a feminist this past presidential elections; thus, feminism itself was in the ballot. And that’s how it came to be that the ‘threat’ of a feminist becoming president and ruling over our modern masculine fascists and their world had them very discontented. Even if she didn’t run as a feminist, these men still would have had a problem with a woman in the highest office, and misogyny would have still be used against her.

Hillary Clinton openly stated in a Rachel Maddow town-hall interview that she was running as a feminist; and her words at that international feminist gathering in Beijing on 1995 are well-known. There can be no doubt that she brought the feminist perspective to the elections, even if she had tried to hide it (which she didn’t).  So feminism had to be defeated. Did you expect the media and anti-feminist men (right and left) to say openly that they were against feminism? So, did you??? Even if she didn’t run as a feminist, these men still would have had a problem with a woman in the highest office in the nation, and misogyny would have still be used against her.

But that threat was averted on November 8 in the only way feminism can be averted, here or in any other place on this magnificent planet: With a concerted campaign of transparent misogyny. Feminism, not only Hillary Clinton, was defeated on that date, and we don’t know if she will recover from it.

Destroying feminism entailed destroying Hillary Clinton: the two were tied together, whether you agree or disagree with her ‘brand’ of feminism. So killing the threat of feminism was done with the powerful media tool of public character assassination, that of Clinton’s. Oh, it was her, not feminism, whom fascists and pseudo-Marxists hated; at least that was their excuse for the virulent misogynistic attacks on her.

The gun of misogyny is there, not in your hand but at the tip of your own tongue, an automatic weapon to be used any time you feel aggrieved or irked by any woman. It was a tool stealthily  and successfully used this presidential election cycle, but it has been in use since humans began to form into social groups. Don’t worry, I won’t go that far back. But I will discuss how fascism’s anti-feminism is a real danger for women in the Trumpist presidency, and how feminism was the issue at the top of this election cycle.

The Woman Card: Fascism and Misogyny in the New Millennium

Some people argue that fascism disappeared at the end of WW2, but no one can convincingly argue that misogyny disappeared with it. Why? Because misogyny didn’t originate with fascism; it is much older than it.

Misogyny was and is an integral part of fascism, but it didn’t originate with it nor did it end with it; it is a problem pestering humanity since, well, let’s say since God decided to side with Adam over that incident in His garden. From Eve losing her case in front of God  came the adage: S/he who is her own lawyer, has a fool for a client.

Anyway, misogyny is fine, thank you for not asking.

This presidential election cycle was defined by two important elements: Feminism an identity politics. The defining happened at the subconscious level, by innuendo; never discussed in the open. These two are the same elements discussed about fascism (as I discuss below); they are there because the human condition has not changed much; advance in technologically, yes, but not humanistically speaking. We are still living under the capitalist ideology (its advanced phase), and women continue to be the oppressed half of the world population based on her sex.Who benefits from saying that we should not discuss identity politics, like racism? White supremacists do. Who from avoiding discussing the oppression of women (sex slavery, lack of health services…)? Sexist men and the capitalists who benefit from avoiding discussing it.

Beginnings: League for the Prevention of Women’s Emancipation

Since its inception, back in the late 1800s, with capitalism in its baby-phase causing havoc on the old economic/social/political order, fascism has been the refuge of men who literally hate everyone who is not them and whom they can’t dominate and exploit. Fascism is actually a creature of capitalism, a reaction against it by the old dominant military and landed classes threatened by the new kid on the blog. It’s worth mentioning that early capitalism was a revolutionary and progressive force, despite its intrinsic contradiction, the oppression of the same working class without which it can’t exist.

Consider the following as a reminder of how proud the first wave of fascists were of their misogyny and their intent to keep women in the kitchen. There was, in 1912-1920, a German  League for the Prevention of Women’s Emancipation. Today, Bannon and Trump call it the GOP.

Capitalism not only brought the old order on its head, it also brought (not of its own choosing, OK?) the Age of the Masses. It makes sense that it did because capitalism thrives on exploiting people en mass.

The point is, capitalism and its era of imperialism came with its own disease: Oppression of humanity as a group; so humanity organized itself against it in terms of groups, identity groups, i.e.: socialists, communists, labor groups, ethnic groups, national minorities…name an identity, it had a group. And then there was that other group that represents half of humanity: women’s groups – Feminists and Feminism.

By the late 1800s and early 1900s, the European landowner class and its military subclass found itself in that soup of humanity organizing and fighting against early capitalism and its nascent imperialism. They were just another annoying group making life difficult to the new capitalist class. But it was from that particular group of humans that fascism came into existence.

Historically shared interests of fascists and communists: Because shit happens

Thus, among the many characteristics of old and new fascism you find: hatred of capitalists (today in the form of ‘hatred of globalism’), of socialists, of communists, of ethnic groups, of labor… and of feminists. These groups, according to ol’ fascists, put their own impure interests above that of the nation and of private property. Hello. Funny thing is, capitalists, then as today, joined with fascists against the masses of the oppressed, with the same arguments today as yesterdays. Let me explain, but not ‘mansplaning’.

Capitalists then, as today, can’t tolerate any better than fascism did a humanity standing against them, against their globalism, against the rape of the environment…they too can’t tolerate women organizing against patriarchy, that living ancient institution. So today they join fascism, and pretend to not be one of them. Not much have changed, people. The worse attack is the one you don’t see coming. You don’t see capitalists/globalists/Silicon Valley’s software kings pointing their misogynistic guns at you. You only see the GOP and Trump doing it, right? Wrong.

Let’s see how they succeeded in the elections to defeat feminism.

Firstly, the MSM (main stream media) gave the public one image of Hillary Clinton, one from that women’s conference, to sear it in their minds as the image of Hillary ‘the evil feminist’. It was the MSM’s view of Hillary’s feminism that the public absorbed, not hers. 

Image result for hillary clinton beijing speech media bashing

“Women’s rights are human rights and human rights are women’s rights once and for all.” The slogan that scared the bejesus out of anti-feminists. She can’t lead the free world with that attitude, can she?

Secondly, as I said before, misogyny is live and well. We see it in violence against women, policies purposely created to keep them in economic disadvantage, sexual harassment at work…And these problems are mild in the USA; worldwide they are truly picante. In any case, our capitalist industrialists, war armament builders and sellers, financial, and Silicon Valley tech giants are mostly men, and men at the highest echelon of power are (like fascism) by nature misogynists. This may come across as a generalization, but it is one based on reality, and requires another post to discuss it.

Thirdly, feminism has never gotten the approval of politicians nor the public in general. Just as fascists accused its enemy of putting their own dirty interests above those of the nation and private property, feminist women continue to be attacked for the same crimes. Bernie Sanders and the zombie Leftists (my term) have blamed Hillary Clinton’s feminism for her loss to Trump. How dare she raise women’s issues ‘above’ the interests of the white blue-collar men of the Midwest. For the anti-feminists in the right and left wings, economic issues trump women’ struggle for political power, even though the oppression of women is as much an economic problem as a political/cultural issue. The oppression of women existed since men learned to use their thumb to carry that big stick with which they hit women over the head to own them. Well, that’s the old cartoon; it exists for something.

Related image

Misogyny has been the favorite weapon against Hillary Clinton since she was First Lady (FL). The media vilified her for not acting like a ‘typical’ FL, for having desires for power of her own. And as I showed with ample examples on this blog, the American Left attacked her as a woman, not only her politics. They portrayed her as a witch, a prostitute, a bitch, man-eater…there was no stereotype of a woman they didn’t use.

Both the zombie Leftists and the MSM denied during the campaigns that they were attacking her as a woman and for her feminism, but after she lost, they blamed her feminism for it, as discussed in this blog.

There’s nothing I can add to the description of Trump as a misogynist, you all know it, except that the zombie Leftists defended him, calling the criticisms against him for those attacks as “unfair” and “unnecessary”. In their sweet anachronistic Marxism, they stated that identity issues, feminism above all, are not important.

“In my opinion, it turns bolshevism on its head by using race or ethnic identity instead of class identity as the supreme, mobilizing force in national life.” Peter Lee Trump: We Wish the Problem Was Fascism at Counter Punch

Another interesting fact to note is that, while the MSM was attacking Trump as lewd  (they never used against him the term misogynist proper), they denied they were using misogyny to attack Clinton. I guess that’s why they are known as “the dishonest media”. They ridiculed her for her tone of voice, for her laughter, how she looked…They portrayed her as more ‘evil’ than Trump because…she dared to want the presidency. Trump was presented as a buffoon, innocent and wanting ‘to stop globalism’.

No man who hates women want one in the White House, least of all if she is a feminist card carrier. It would be naive to believe that anti-feminism and misogyny were not at the top of these elections cycle. In the modern world,  capitalism depends on the myth of democracy and freedom for everybody, it can’t admit it is soaked in misogyny.

But hatred of women is not an economic issue, it is also a cultural issue, an identity issue: Men who identify themselves as too macho to let women ‘control’ them, vs the women whose place in society is decided by them. It has been with us since before humans organized in economic and national groups. It is truly a battle of the sexes. As long as men have the political and economic power, they control the rest of the culture of a society. With the help of certain religions, the MSM, public/private education…the myth that there is no organized hatred of women continues to blind us, despite the daily reports of attacks on women by governments. In the US, ant-abortion is the most blatant form of misogyny, and it comes in covert and overt policies, like reducing access to it for poor women.

So when the MSM made Hillary Clinton so disgusting in the eyes of the public with their innuendos about her being a dishonest “woman”, it was with that in mind that the zombie Leftists and the politically green millennial voted against her. Feminism lost, fascism won. Sanders followers rather vote for a fascist white man than for a feminist, all under cover of her ‘political crimes’. It was not only the emails, it was the 20 years+ of misogynistic attacks on Hillary that succeeded in pushing away the support for her.

On November 8, cowardly and emotionally insecure men of all colors, ethnic background and wallet size (and women afraid of men’s violence against women who fight back) breathe a sigh of relief knowing that no feminist woman was going to be their boss and at the top of the world. They feel now secure and protected in the hands of that virile and bullying white billionaire. They see his acts of corruption the way he does: A sign of  masculine power; as they wish to be.

There is a sense of social angst coming from Trump seizing the presidency, a kind of social premonition that he will unleash fascism in its modern form here and worldwide.

Because misogyny is its most enduring quality, hidden under cultural stereotypes, expect women’s right to take a dive in the next four years, or 12.

Women, you can’t count on the zombie Leftist. They are with Trump.

I suggest you bring to your fold the many men who are emotionally mature as to not be afraid of you seeking the same social benefits they have.

Until then, nasty women, don’t give up.

Democrats and Sanders’ Revolt Against Democratic Voters And Move To The GOP

Note: This is an extract from the post title above, and comes from my new blog. Check the RSS to “take you there“, as Madonna used to sing. I hope you visit and ‘follow’ my inartfully expressed but interesting political observations. Hey, in the new Age of the Egomaniac President, we can now shamelessly praise ourselves. So there. Now go and check that wonderful new blog.

Thank you for visiting.

Sanders and Democrats To Oppose Hillary Clinton at the Electoral College

Yesterday, Politico published this article about the “Democratic presidential electors revolt against Trump”, but it is a revolt against the voters in their own party.

At least a half-dozen Democratic electors have signed onto an attempt to block Donald Trump from winning an Electoral College majority, an effort designed not only to deny Trump the presidency but also to undermine the legitimacy of the institution.

That quote, unqualified, seems a noble and brave effort from these ‘democratic electors’ to uphold democracy by trying to honor the wishes of the people of their own party who voted in historical numbers for their party candidate, Hillary Clinton.

What they are actually trying to do is unthinkable. To avoid the appearance that I’m misinterpreting the facts, I quote directly from the article.

The presidential electors, mostly former Bernie Sanders supporters who hail from Washington state and Colorado, are now lobbying their Republican counterparts in other states to reject their oaths — and in some cases, state law — to vote against Trump when the Electoral College meets on Dec. 19.

…But the Democratic electors are convinced that even in defeat, their efforts would erode confidence in the Electoral College and fuel efforts to eliminate it, ending the body’s 228-year run as the only official constitutional process for electing the president. With that goal in mind, the group is also contemplating encouraging Democratic electors to oppose Hillary Clinton and partner with Republicans in support of a consensus pick like Mitt Romney or John Kasich.

Looks like Sanders and his supporters are not going to be happy until they see Hillary Clinton (HC) dead or in prison. Who could be “encouraging” Democrats to vote against fellow Democrat and winner of the popular vote, HC, but Sanders and his supporters?

First, what is the logic here? How is it that, knowing that the Republicans are not going to ‘unelect‘ Trump, the only way they see to “erode the confidence in the Electoral College is by opposing the person who suffered the unfairness of that political body, i.e., the candidate who despite getting the most votes was denied the presidency?

 

Bernies and The Left At A Crossroad: Support Trump’s ‘Brand’ of Peace or Attack His Racism?

Donald Trump looks and talks like the ugly, racist, bullying American — and he is exactly that, but he hasn’t killed anybody yet, and his public statements have been of a far more peaceful nature than the woman he beat at the polls. Black Agenda Report “War Less Imminent After Clinton Defeat “

Mine is no idle attack on the Left.

That quote up there has been the mantra of the American Left all along: The First Lewd President is pro-peace because he likes Putin. Notice also  the hatred of Clinton, “the woman he beat”. Can’t even call her by her name; they have reduced her to the lowest level of humanity: a ‘woman’. Sounds very Islamist, doesn’t it? Oh, but the Left is not misogynist.

When you set your mind to believe something, you won’t see anything else. True, that applies to everybody, but we are talking about politics and lives here.

The Left wants to see Trump as a pacifist, so they do. They want to see Hillary as beaten in the elections, which she wasn’t because she won the popular vote by over a million votes now, but they continue to perpetuate the lie that Trump defeated her. He didn’t; even he was surprised at the outcome. I believe he was genuinely surprised.

As I have been saying all along on this blog (and now they prove I was right all along), the Left has endorsed and, worse, extolled Trump as a pacifist. These ‘Marxists’ can’t get more deluded than that, can they? They can’t see in the people he is assigning for his cabinet that Trump is fascist; or maybe they can see it but prefer to look to the other side.

These people are going to support Trump’s foreign policies; they have given him a blank check to work with Putin in exchange of ignoring his racists policies at home.

It’s Not Idle Attacks On The Left

Some of the few readers of this blog may think that I’m focusing too much on the American Left, but you should keep an eye on them too.

They have means of persuasion, their online ‘think-tanks’ that propagated among Bernies, ‘progressives’ and unsuspecting rank and file Leftists, the elitist media message that Hillary Clinton (HC) is ‘corrupt’ and ‘dishonest’. The Bernies followed some of these people, they followed the Bernies.

That message of Hillary-hating was effective, they kept removing votes from her; she could have won by a decisive amount of votes from the beginning of the counting process, making it more difficult for the traitors at the electoral colleges to steal the presidency from her.

And they have crossed the ideological barrier to side with Trump; so expect them to go the mile for him. Theirs is no lazy support; they are actively working for him.

Trump’s Call for the Left to Join Him Was Answered

Trump used the Bernies and the Left to keep the race tight. He used Sanders’ tactics of misogyny and character assassination, he used the Bernies and thanked them for helping him on attacking HC. He even INVITED them to join him. Many of them did, voted for him, and the Left will continue supporting him. It’s not idle antipathy for them, they are dangerous to non-white Americans.

“It’s class, stupid, not race” [Counter Punch Mag]

Identity Politics (IP) is being used in the way Hitler did, to protect the interests of white male working class. This time IP is denied, but the result is the same: a focus on the economic problems of white America.

They and Sanders are destroying the democratic party ‘as the party of Wall Street’. That leaves you with, what? With a party that believes that you are ‘stupid’ if you think that the interests of non-whites and non-males are important.

id

The result of fascist brand of Identity Politics. “It’s class, stupid, not race” As with ‘climate change’, deny Identity Politics at your own risk.

By the time the progressives wake up from their masculine dream, it will be too late for them to see that they were supporting a mirage. The male fear of women in power is gone, they are safe in their male world with ultra-alpha man Trump protecting their masculinity.

The only real progressives and Leftists in America today are those who supported Hillary Clinton. We need to stay together and keep an eye on those who betrayed us in the name of male and white supremacy.

 

X-Rays Show: It’s a Malignant Media

As everybody else, I’m raking my mind trying to put the pieces together that would give me a more complete picture of WTF Happened Here?

I know all the usual suspects:

  • ‘I see white people’.
  • Those white bitches
  • Is the economy, stupid.
  • Hillary Clinton (HC) “was a shitty candidate”, explained yesterday Bernie Sanders with all the power of his compassionate heart for women.
  • The Immigrants! Quick! Round them up.

But looking at the recent stats coming out from every fancy research expert’s butt, there are TWO slithering effective crooks who stole your mental sanity and escaped untouched, unharmed, unnoticed, and ever so supremely victorious: THE MEDIA and its wife MISOGYNY.

Hillary Clinton “underperformed” on every category except on one: Black women. A whopping 95% of them voted for HC. Where did Black men go, or everybody else for that matter?

We can confidently assert that Black women is the ONLY segment in our nation that was NOT influenced by the media, be it mainstream (MSM) or Leftist. These women were not affected, they didn’t fall to pieces, like the rest of the nation apparently did, by the last-minute dump of emails that caused so much depression that even HC’ supporters fled in shame from her side.

Of Suicidal Lemmings And That One-Statistical Point

If, as the stats show, HC and the Dem Party lost at least one point in every category (except Black women), then where did that one point go and why?

Let’s be clear, people are not lemmings that commit suicide by leaping en mass to the ocean.

Image result for the rodents that jump the cliff

 

Actually, lemmings don’t do that either. The truth about jumping lemmings is very similar to that of humans.

Lemmings were being chased down and thrown to the cliff by a Walt Disney crew filming “True Life Adventure” series in 1958. They edited the film, you could not see them behind the lemmings doing their inhumane deeds for ‘educational purposes’.

And so with that one-statistical point. They were being chased down the cliff to the ocean of fascism in this presidential election by the media who was hiding behind the “professional journalism” camera, edited to hide their dandy art of pushing public opinion to commit suicide en mass.

Who Exactly Did The Media Attack?

There is agreement across our political spectrum in that the MSM did a horrific, but efficient, job of misinformation and manipulation of public opinion. Unfortunately, there is no agreement on who benefits from what was done, nor on how  that misinformation took shape.

Some people believe that Sanders was ignored by the media, while other believe that he was used to contrast his ‘honesty’ against Hillary’s perpetual dishonest personality; that Trump was unfairly attacked all the time, and some believe that Hillary was NOT attacked by the media, while other believe she was.

There are at least three reasons that explain the lack of agreement in that area.

One,  lack of understanding by regular folks about the art of misinformation and opinion-shaping (because it is an art taught in colleges). Second, because of the belief that freedom of press must be total in a democracy. In my opinion, total freedom of press is like saying that, if I can circumvent your home security system, you don’t need to fix it, just deal with me. And third, because the public ideological position is that the media, even though it belongs to a financial elite, doesn’t bring the owners’ class interests into their job. In other words, capitalist media owners are honest, they just want your ‘clicks’ for money.

This refusal to believe that Murdock or Bezos (WaPo) use the power of the media to advance their class interests is the gem of the elite class. This refusal to believe that there is a class interest behind their journalistic reports must be corroborated and protected at all cost.

Killary Clinton: Because She Is A Babies Killer

Hillary Clinton has been dodged by public lashing in the media since she was First Lady. Character assassination has been the tool used against her all along.

Character assassination is a deliberate and sustained process that aims to destroy the credibility and reputation of a person, institution, social group, or nation.

In May this year, comedian Jon Stewart implied that HC is a sociopath, even suggesting that she is not a human being:

Maybe a real person doesn’t exist underneath there.

That is the picture the media, from right to left, has given us this year. I discussed the history of this attack on her on this blog. Please, check it out.

Misogyny: Because We All Enjoy Attacking Women as Bitches

To be continued tomorrow.

https://wordpress.com/stats/day/crazyusaelections.wordpress.com?startDate=2016-11-11

https://crazyusaelections.wordpress.com/2016/04/16/berniebots-splitting-and-brainwashed/?iframe=true&theme_preview=true

https://crazyusaelections.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/the-great-american-brainwash-half-a-billion-dollars-to-turn-the-public-against-hillary/?iframe=true&theme_preview=true

On the Eve of the Elections: Fascism or Democracy?

Will Americans vote for fascism or for Democracy?

This was not a question I had in mind in any previous election since I moved to the ‘metropolis’ from Puerto Rico in 1982. But now, with the high support for Trump, including from  the ‘intellectual’ American Left, who, contrary to the GOP, is explaining to millennials and to the ‘deplorables’ why Trump is NO FASCIST, that there is no need to be afraid of him,  now I fear that these confused voters might elect Donald Trump tomorrow. The ‘progressive millennials’ are so confused that, in their tender eyes that have not yet seen much of life, Gary Johnson and Trump are ‘revolutionary bros’ and Hillary Clinton is the fascist enemy to be defeated.

This is the scary part of this close-encounter with fascism: This presidential election cycle is like a movie we have already seen, the Fascist German period movie, but people seem to have forgotten it. All the elements for a turn to fascism are already in place here, as I will inartfully discuss in this post; including the Left supporting a fascist candidate for president.

For all the rants about Ronald Reagan’s and the GOP’s ‘fascism’ up to the year 2000, it was understood that their brand of fascism was pretty much hidden behind the curtains of government and behind the knowing media. Our political liberties were still there. I participated freely in Leftists activities, I was arrested, and the courts PROTECTED my right to dissent.

Sure, not always works that way; we still have political prisoners here, a surveillance state, and the fights against the oil pipelines and WS are brutal. But this is yet NO OPENLY FASCIST nation. We can still fight and go home and watch a movie. Most of us are not afraid of being surreptitiously scooped off from the streets by the SA.

No matter how bad things are here, the Constitution is still alive. But the nightmare is setting in, maybe not this year, but sooner than we can imagine. The signs are showing.

Cast of characters

We have the masses of people – working and middle and poor classes, the ‘ethnic’ groups, etc., railing about the economy. Yes, our economy is sinking. That proverbial falling feeling you have when you see your paycheck? Is not in your mind, it is happening to you. The middle class is disappearing, falling down with the poor.

As discussed in this blog, even the globalists admit that their philosophy of global economy has worked mostly for the top 1% of the world-wide elite. Even they are looking for ways to slow down (in uber globalist Larry Summers’ words) the destruction that their progress is inflicting in the rest of humanity and the planet.

Two famous ‘logical inferences’ come to mind: One, where there is smoke, there is fire. The other one is Where there is the smoke of economic crisis and profound and sustained inequality, there is the fire of social and political turmoil. Economic turmoil led in Germany to political crisis.

Donald Trump as Hitler

I venture to say that the millennials are too young to recognize the psychological  features of a totalitarian despot. Trump’s followers, some dismissed as ‘deplorables’, are as ignorant of these features themselves. But the zombie Left has no excuse for not recognizing these features.

To learn about these ‘psychological features’, the millennials only have to watch those documentaries about Hitler (reading is not appealing these days, and the zombie Left is more confused about Trump than the millennials) to see him using the same words as Trump. ‘Corporations are taking away our jobs’? Hitler and Trump. “I’m your voice”? “Immigrants are destroying this nation”? Check and check.

The millennials should see Trump’s unabashed expressed hatred of women, minorities and immigrants as the most explicit sign of how this man is a ‘mini-me Hitler’. He is morally unfit to be our president. The fact that they don’t see it is terrifying because of what it means: they are ideologically and historically uninformed and confused. They are the food from which the media, the fascists and the zombie Left feed (you know what a “zombie” is, don’t you?). It leads to the next cast of characters.

The Glorious  Intellectual Left

The German Left was as guilty of the rise of Hitler as was the people’s inability to see the danger lurking behind his promise of ‘order and economical progress’.

Today, the American Left exhibits the same faults and character flaws, and then some, of the 1900-1930 German left.

The most offensive of these faults is their inability to create a coalition against the right wingers because they can’t overcome their petty ‘ideological differences’. They can’t work not even a TEMPORARY coalition with the Dem party and Hillary Clinton because each group feels only they have THE TRUE Marxist interpretation of class struggle, each group thinks they should be the ONE party of the working class; everybody else is wrong and not worthy of their attention.

The German Left was instrumental in defeating  the empire in 1918, but it was unprepared to hold on to that victory. Their continued divisions opened up the political space for a coalition between former right wing enemies, i.e., the military elite, the nascent big corporations and Hitler to unite against the working class. Divide and conquer, it never fails. The battle for the ‘correct’ Interpretation of Karl Marx analysis of capitalism kept the left divided. Same today. The fascists took the candies while the left was bickering among themselves about what Karl Marx meant.

Today, as I have discussed in this blog, the American Left is basically a zombie Left. They have become an unnatural creature  that functions as Trump Apologists. They explain, because they are the ‘intellectual left’ that must ‘teach’ the working class how to do the ‘revolution’, in their online ‘think tanks’ why the working class must IGNORE the attacks on Trump as ‘fascist’ and racist and misogynist, and vote for him. In their miserable existence (literally), they see Hillary Clinton, a CENTRIST at worse, as the enemy.This is their explanation (apology) of why we should not castigate Trump as fascist and racist:

“In my opinion, it turns bolshevism on its head by using race or ethnic identity instead of class identity as the supreme, mobilizing force in national life.” Peter LeeTrump: We Wish the Problem Was Fascismat Counter Punch

Don’t you love it when the zombie Left uses the adjective(?) “supreme”, like in the 1900s: “supreme comrade”, “supreme zombie Left”… The problem with Trump is not fascism, according to the supreme Left. Actually, there is NO PROBLEM with him, according to them, because Trump is talking about ‘class identity’. How is Trump talking about that is beyond my comprehension, but the zombie Left hears from their graves Trump calling them: ‘When I say ‘grab them by the pussy’ I mean grab the working class woman by the pussy.’ That’s good enough for them. Then there is…

The Media

The presidential election process in the US consists of three elements: the people, the TWO parties, and the media. Of the three elements, the media is by far the most important during the campaign cycle: Through it you control what is publicly discussed, you shape opinions with real and/or fake facts. It is from these facts that must people make up their minds about candidates, mainly because the people don’t have the time to ‘research’ the candidates.

The media forced us to talk about Trump with its 24/7 coverage of anything that could be linked to Trump. It is the media’s fault that Trump is this close to the White House. They gave him billions worth of free coverage and legitimized him and his campaign.

In the US the media enjoys an unearned and pernicious trust from the public, which is the same as saying that the American people are easily manipulated by them. When the people complains about the media, as Trump has shown himself, is not about it been ‘dishonest’. The complaint is ‘don’t attack my side’, be dishonest with the other side’.

We have this news snippet to prove this point. Last Wednesday Murdock’s Fox News allowed Bret Baier  to falsely report  that Hillary Clinton “will be indicted by the FBI”. The purpose was clearly to try to influence the outcome of the elections. Trump’s campaign manager, Miss Personality, Kellyanne Conway later stated, and the media agreed with her, that it doesn’t matter that the public was misinformed because “The damage is done to Hillary Clinton”.  In her eyes,  the misinformation by the ‘professional media’ is a good thing if it unfairly damages your opponent: “No matter how it’s being termed, the voters are hearing it for what it is — a culture of corruption,” Conway explained.”

This is the essence of Machiavellianism, but it is Hillary Clinton the one dragged through the media with the label of ‘dishonest’.

I discussed in this blog how the media covered the ‘protesters’ on both campaigns.

The End

Well, tomorrow is the day. If Trump wins, blame the media for propping him up, and start packing your suitcases, if you are non-white, or white who despises fascism.

If Hillary wins, start buying those marching shoes, ’cause there will be a lot of protests to do. I expect Hillary’s administration to be exemplary at home, but a bit less so in foreign policies issues. We will have to both stand by her at home to protect the administration from the fascist coalition of GOP, confused millennials and zombie Left, and nudge her to the progressive center in foreign affairs.

That’s what democracy looks like.

Hillary is NOT the enemy, ignorance is. Hillary will be our finest president ever, if the fascist triumvirate of GOP, deplorables and millennials/zombie Left doesn’t unite to  impeach her. It will be painful to watch the zombie Left working to install, again, fascism against the working class.

For the zombie Left, either get out of the way or start building a viable third party. Or get ready to rumble with the anti-fascist realists.

Madam President, congratulations. I’m here to serve you.

Vox: It’s time to admit Hillary Clinton is an extraordinarily talented politician

This is an article from Vox

Updated by on June 7, 2016, 10:31 p.m. ET

This is the paradox of Hillary Clinton: She has achieved something no one else in the history of American politics has even come close to doing, yet she is widely considered an inept, flawed candidate.

These two things are not unrelated.

Twice now we have thought that it should have been easy for Clinton to do what no one has ever done before. Twice now we have dismissed her as a weak candidate and a flawed leader for struggling to break a barrier that no one else has ever come near breaking.

America has hosted 56 presidential elections — 33 of them before women received the right to vote. Exactly zero of those elections featured a female nominee from one of the two major political parties.

Until Hillary Clinton.

There is something about Clinton that makes it hard to appreciate the magnitude of her achievement. Or perhaps there is something about us that makes it hard to appreciate the magnitude of her achievement.

Perhaps, in ways we still do not fully appreciate, the reason no one has ever broken the glass ceiling in American politics is because it’s really fucking hard to break. Before Clinton, no one even came close.

Whether you like Clinton or hate her — and plenty of Americans hate her — it’s time to admit that the reason Clinton was the one to break it is because Clinton is actually really good at politics.

She’s just good at politics in a way we haven’t learned to appreciate.

How presidential campaigns favor male traits

Hillary Clinton has her flaws, of course. The email server. The speeches to Goldman Sachs. And just look at her unfavorable numbers! But what really defines coverage of Clinton is confusion over how she’s gotten so far without the animal charisma typical of politicians at her level.

There is something Rebecca Traister wrote in her terrific profile of Clinton that I have been thinking about for weeks. She began by admitting what everyone admits. Clinton is not a great campaigner. She does not give great speeches. She does not inspire. And she knows it. “I am not a natural politician, in case you haven’t noticed, like my husband or President Obama,” Clinton has said.

Hillary Clinton Attends Get Out The Vote Rally In Los Angeles Photo by David McNew/Getty Images

The “in case you haven’t noticed” flashes through that sentence, a quick glimpse into the bitterness and hurt underlying Clinton’s self-deprecating admission. But there was once an excuse, Traister writes. Obama is “a masterful orator. Bill Clinton, too. Even George W. Bush was charismatic in his way.” Perhaps Clinton’s charisma simply suffered in comparison.

But Donald Trump? Are we really going to say that Clinton lacks the likability, the decency, and the eloquence of Donald J. Trump? Traister continues:

If, as in this election, a man who spews hate and vulgarity, with no comprehension of how government works, can become presidentially plausible because he is magnetic while a capable, workaholic woman who knows policy inside and out struggles because she is not magnetic, perhaps we should reevaluate magnetism’s importance. It’s worth asking to what degree charisma, as we have defined it, is a masculine trait. Can a woman appeal to the country in the same way we are used to men doing it?

Though those on both the right and the left moan about “woman cards,” it would be impossible, and dishonest, to not recognize gender as a central, defining, complicated, and often invisible force in this election. It is one of the factors that shaped Hillary Clinton, and it is one of the factors that shapes how we respond to her. Whatever your feelings about Clinton herself, this election raises important questions about how we define leadership in this country, how we feel about women who try to claim it, flawed though they may be.

It is not that no women possess a public magnetism; Sarah Palin could rock a room, and Elizabeth Warren can work a crowd. But the quality we adore in presidential candidates — the ability to stand up and speak loudly, confidently, and fluently on topics you may know nothing about — is gendered.

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are both excellent yellers, and we love them for it. Nobody likes it when Hillary Clinton yells. As my colleague Emily Crockett has written, research shows people don’t like it when women yell in general:

Even though women are interrupted more often and talk less than men, people still think women talk more. People get annoyed by verbal tics like “vocal fry” and “upspeak” when women use them, but often don’t even notice it when men do. The same mental amplification process makes people see an assertive woman as “aggressive,” which gets in the way of women’s personal and professional advancement. Women are much more likely to be perceived as “abrasive” and get negative performance reviews as a result — which puts them in a double bind when they try to “lean in” and assertively negotiate salaries.

It may not be impossible for a woman to win the presidency the way we are used to men doing it, but it is unlikely. The way a woman is likeliest to win will defy our expectations.

Perhaps that’s why we don’t appreciate Clinton’s strengths as a candidate. She’s winning a process that evolved to showcase stereotypically male traits using a stereotypically female strategy.

And it’s working.

A campaign of relationships, not speeches

There is a narrative that has emerged in the Democratic primary, and it goes something like this: Hillary Clinton locked up the Democratic establishment long before the primary began in earnest. She’s the wife of an ex-president. She was endorsed by virtually every elected official in the party and pretty much every major interest group. Her dominance of the inside game was unprecedented for a non-incumbent candidate. And she used this elite firewall to choke off Sanders’s revolution.

When Sanders’s supporters argue that the election was rigged against their candidate, this is what they are talking about. Sanders, they feel, did what you normally have to do to win an election: He generated more enthusiasm, brought in more voters, raised more money, gave better speeches, and polled higher in head-to-head matchups against the Republican candidate. It was only Clinton’s pact with the Democratic establishment that stopped his rise.

In this telling, the way Clinton won the primary is the reason her victory feels hollow: It was nearly preordained, and the seriousness of the challenge Sanders posed just shows what a flawed candidate she really is.

Hillary Clinton And Bernie Sanders Spar At Democratic Debate In Brooklyn Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

But another way to look at the primary is that Clinton employed a less masculine strategy to win. She won the Democratic primary by spending years slowly, assiduously, building relationships with the entire Democratic Party. She relied on a more traditionally female approach to leadership: creating coalitions, finding common ground, and winning over allies. Today, 208 members of Congress have endorsed Clinton; only eight have endorsed Sanders.

This work is a grind — it’s not big speeches, it doesn’t come with wide applause, and it requires an emotional toughness most human beings can’t summon.

But Clinton is arguably better at that than anyone in American politics today. In 2000, she won a Senate seat that meant serving amidst Republicans who had destroyed her health care bill and sought to impeach her husband. And she kept her head down, found common ground, and won them over.

“We have become, actually, good friends,” said Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who served as one of the Republican prosecutors during impeachment. “And that was a surprise to both of us.” (It is perhaps not coincidental that Graham is one of the few elected Republicans now calling on his fellow Republicans to retract their endorsements of Donald Trump.)

And Clinton isn’t just better — she’s relentless. After losing to Barack Obama, she rebuilt those relationships, campaigning hard for him in the general, serving as his secretary of state, reaching out to longtime allies who had crushed her campaign by endorsing him over her. (This, by the way, is why I don’t think you can dismiss Clinton’s victory as reflections of her husband’s success: She’s won her own elections and secured a major appointment in a subsequent administration.)

Now Obama says that Clinton “had a tougher job throughout that primary than I did. She had to do everything that I had to do, except, like Ginger Rogers, backwards in heels.” It’s been clear since early in the primary that he is firmly in her corner, and his endorsement is believed to be imminent.

President Obama Speaks On The Death Of US Ambassador In Libya Christopher Stevens Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

In this telling, in order to do something as hard as becoming the first female presidential nominee of a major political party, she had to do something extraordinarily difficult: She had to build a coalition, supported by a web of relationships, that dwarfed in both breadth and depth anything a non-incumbent had created before. It was a plan that played to her strengths, as opposed to her (entirely male) challengers’ strengths. And she did it.

Hillary Clinton is a generationally talented politician — albeit across a different set of dimensions than men tend to be talented politicians.

When she lost in 2008, Clinton said that after her campaign, it would no longer be remarkable to see women win presidential primaries and nearly win their party’s nomination. But no women did it in 2012, and she was the only woman to do it in 2016. It is still not easy, and it is still not unremarkable, for a woman to succeed in presidential politics. Clinton’s victory is a remarkable achievement, and it shouldn’t be dismissed.

Correction: This post initially misstated the number of congressional endorsements Clinton and Sanders have received.