Oliver Stone backs Sanders; attacks pro-war Clinton

Written By: - Date published: 9:19 pm, April 1st, 2016 - 84 comments
Categories: capitalism, class war, democracy under attack, political alternatives, us politics - Tags:

Oliver Stone is the co-creator of the outstanding Untold History of the United States documentary series. No one understands the true history of the Imperial United States better than he.

Zero Hedge relays Oliver Stone’s support of Bernie Sanders:

We’re going to war — either hybrid in nature to break the Russian state back to its 1990s subordination, or a hot war (which will destroy our country). Our citizens should know this, but they don’t because our media is dumbed down in its “Pravda”-like support for our “respectable,” highly aggressive government. We are being led, as C. Wright Mills said in the 1950s, by a government full of “crackpot realists: in the name of realism they’ve constructed a paranoid reality all their own.” Our media has credited Hillary Clinton with wonderful foreign policy experience, unlike Trump, without really noting the results of her power-mongering. She’s comparable to Bill Clinton’s choice of Cold War crackpot Madeleine Albright as one of the worst Secretary of States we’ve had since … Condi Rice? Albright boasted, “If we have to use force it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future.”

Hillary’s record includes supporting the barbaric “contras” against the Nicaraguan people in the 1980s, supporting the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia, supporting the ongoing Bush-Iraq War, the ongoing Afghan mess, and as Secretary of State the destruction of the secular state of Libya, the military coup in Honduras, and the present attempt at “regime change” in Syria. Every one of these situations has resulted in more extremism, more chaos in the world, and more danger to our country. Next will be the borders of Russia, China, and Iran. Look at the viciousness of her recent AIPAC speech (don’t say you haven’t been warned). Can we really bear to watch as Clinton “takes our alliance [with Israel] to the next level”? Where is our sense of proportion? Cannot the media, at the least, call her out on this extremism? The problem, I think, is this political miasma of “correctness” that dominates American thinking (i.e. Trump is extreme, therefore Hillary is not).

This is why I’m praying still for Bernie Sanders, because he’s the only one willing, at least in the name of fiscal sanity, to cut back on our foreign interventions, bring the troops home, and with these trillions of dollars no longer wasted on malice, try to protect the “homeland” by actually rebuilding it and putting money into its people, schools, and infrastructure…

I believe Fascism is still our greatest enemy and its face is everywhere in our so-called “democracies.” It was always about the moneyed interests that had the power. That is what Fascism is and that is the danger we are in now. Sanders talks about money, listen to him. He talks cogently about money and its power to distort. He’s the only one who has raised his voice against the corruption in our politics. Clinton has embraced this corruption.

Oliver Stone’s full piece is here at the Huffington Post. Under Clinton, he says that the world will be marching to war: either multifaceted “hybrid war” or full on hot wars. Or I suppose, both.

And he quotes from a Buddhist Monk exhorting those who perceive the truth to stand forth:

When fear becomes collective, when anger becomes collective, it’s extremely dangerous. It is overwhelming… The mass media and the military-industrial complex create a prison for us, so we continue to think, see, and act in the same way… We need the courage to express ourselves even when the majority is going in the opposite direction… because a change of direction can happen only when there is a collective awakening… Therefore, it is very important to say, ‘I am here!’ to those who share the same kind of insight.

— Thich Nhat Hanh, Buddhist Monk, The Art of Power

 

84 comments on “Oliver Stone backs Sanders; attacks pro-war Clinton ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Chooky 1
    1 April 2016 at 9:33 pm

    +100 CV…excellent Post

    …but doesnt Andrew Little and the New Zealand Labour Party back Hillary Clinton?….scary!

    • Colonial Viper 1.1
      1 April 2016 at 9:37 pm

      Just like they backed Anyone But Corbyn for the UK Labour Leadership.

      • the pigman 1.1.1
        1 April 2016 at 11:37 pm

        How ridiculous of both of you. Link to Andrew Little or the Labour Party endorsing Clinton, please Chooky.

        I know CV does it out of spite, but really Chooky..

        1 or 2 MPs (and if I remember, it was only Mumblefuck) made some barbed comments about Corbyn on facebook, I think after the British LP had already made their choice. It’s possible that Nash might made some similar anti-Corbyn barbs here while on the piss.

        • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1
          1 April 2016 at 11:41 pm

          As far as I know, Little never released a public statement congratulating Jeremy Corbyn for winning the Labour leadership in the UK. Which was a deliebrate snub, in my view.

          • Kiwiri 1.1.1.1.1
            2 April 2016 at 12:43 am

            On the NZ Labour Party website, there was no press release congratulating Corbyn that I have been able to find.

            • miravox 1.1.1.1.1.1
              2 April 2016 at 6:09 am

              Didn’t have to look too far….

              Labour leader Andrew Little is welcoming the news that Jeremy Corbyn is his new British counterpart, after a stunning win in the UK Labour leadership race.
              The veteran backbencher started out as a 200-to-one outsider, but scored a convincing outright majority in the first round of voting.
              Mr Little says Mr Corbyn spoke directly about issues that mattered to voters, and Labour members responded to that refreshing style.
              “His challenge now is to convert that into a campaign that’s going to enlist the support of the majority of British voters,” says Mr Little. “He’s got five years to do that. He’s set himself up well.”

              Monday 14 Sep 2015 5:00 a.m http://www.newshub.co.nz/nznews/andrew-little-corbyn-brings-refreshing-style-2015091320#ixzz44azBAdhW

              • Kiwiri …
                2 April 2016 at 8:22 am

                “On the NZ Labour Party website” – my statement still stands

                • miravox …
                  2 April 2016 at 8:30 am

                  Lucky for me then that I didn’t say it didn’t stand.

                  I just showed where you and cv could find a version of it. Especially seeing the press releases on the Labour Party website seem to deal with domestic rather than international issues.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    2 April 2016 at 8:49 am

                    OK, you found a quote in a piece. Cool. Regardless. Little ain’t no Corbyn; the current NZ Labour hierarchy are the same third way UK Labour establishment which fought against Corbyn tooth and nail.

                    • miravox …
                      2 April 2016 at 8:54 am

                      Derailing your own post.

                      That chip is showing again – imo.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      2 April 2016 at 8:57 am

                      Chip? Never denied it wasn’t personal Miravox. Regardless I back my analysis: NZ Labour is run by the same globalist third way establishment that fought tooth and nail against the left wing Corbyn insurgency.

                      And that relates directly to the exercise of Anglo empire.

                    • miravox …
                      2 April 2016 at 9:00 am

                      Someone on this thread made an incorrect statement. I corrected it. End of.

                      Oliver Stone, backs Sanders. So do I.

                      It could have been a good comments thread. Instead its degenerating into a Labour hate-fest.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      2 April 2016 at 9:01 am

                      Who was it who said that all politics is local? So it is.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      2 April 2016 at 9:05 am

                      Labour hate-fest?

                      It’s just another symptom of people throughout the western world who are clearly over voting for the lesser of two evils.

                      And over those who keep telling them that they should.

                  • the pigman …
                    4 April 2016 at 10:23 pm

                    Thank you for seeking that out Miravox. I loved the reaction you got too…

                    “But… but… the congratulations from Little has to be in a press release on the NZLP website to be official!”

                    Goodness me.

                    • weka …
                      4 April 2016 at 11:43 pm

                      +1 Thanks Miravox.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      5 April 2016 at 12:35 am

                      Don’t get smartass. Little and Robertson don’t support Corbyn, and don’t support a Corbyn-like change in the NZLP.

                      They represent the NZ faction of the middle class approval seeking third way Labour establishment who fought against Corbyn tooth and nail, who positioned Corbyn as an unelectable hard lefty.

              • Leftie …
                2 April 2016 at 7:41 pm

                Touche’ Miravox !! +100 on your posts.

        • Chooky 1.1.1.2
          2 April 2016 at 10:28 am

          @ pigman…re Andrew Little backing Clinton

          ‘Trump or Clinton – who would be better for New Zealand?’

          http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/298063/who-would-be-better-for-nz

          Andrew Little: “Hillary Clinton offers a safe, steady pair of hands in the presidency which is why I think she would be attractive to a lot more Americans.”

          • Chooky 1.1.1.2.1
            2 April 2016 at 10:33 am

            Personally I would prefer Trump over Clinton any day

            …but Bernie Sanders would be best of all

            …the NZ Labour Party should be endorsing Bernie Sanders!

            …why is Andrew Little behind Hillary Clinton and not Bernie Sanders?

            …why does Andrew Little think Hillary Clinton is a “safe, steady pair of hands”? ( is he stupid?)

            https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/336868-clinton-trump-foreign-policy/

            • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.2.1.1
              2 April 2016 at 11:36 am

              That’s my ranking. 1) Sanders 2) Trump 3) (by a long way) Clinton.

            • happynz 1.1.1.2.1.2
              2 April 2016 at 7:17 pm

              Trump? Really? Trump recently stated that women should receive punishment for having an abortion. You cool with that?

              • Leftie …
                2 April 2016 at 7:38 pm

                Obviously Chooky and CV are cool with that, and the rest of Trumps offensive views Happynz. Shocking really.

              • Phil …
                4 April 2016 at 2:18 pm

                I’m assuming CV is also, comparatively speaking, cool with Trump’s:

                direct advocation of war crimes to kill the families of terrorists;
                persecution of individuals for their religious beliefs;
                mexican wall;
                denigration of the handicapped and women, and;
                incitement of violence to shut down political discourse.

                It appears to be the case that as long as one’s against the TPP, then nothing else matters to CV…

            • Leftie 1.1.1.2.1.3
              2 April 2016 at 7:35 pm

              @Chooky. “Labour leader Andrew Little says New Zealand will have no choice but to work with whoever is elected by the American people, but he would lean towards Mrs Clinton.”

              The article from RNZ was a skewered question to start with… “Trump or Clinton – who would be better for New Zealand?”
              Bernie Sanders wasn’t mentioned once, neither was any other candidate.

              No doubt Andrew Little was thinking, like most people do, if in the event it came down to just Trump and Clinton, better Clinton than Trump, and responded accordingly to the question he was asked.

            • the pigman 1.1.1.2.1.4
              4 April 2016 at 10:26 pm

              Double thanks to Leftie and Miravox for unpacking Chooky’s fallacious argument.

              It’s like asking Andrew Little if he prefers Tui or Speights, and when he says Speights you say “ANDREW LITTLE’S FAVOURITE DRINK IS SPEIGHTS AND HE PREFERS SPEIGHTS OVER WINE (AND IF HE LIKED WINE, WHY DIDN’T HE PUT A PRESS RELEASE ON THE NZLP WEBSITE SAYING SO??!11?)”.

              Sorry, but that doesn’t cut it.

          • miravox 1.1.1.2.2
            2 April 2016 at 6:07 pm

            You seem to be misrepresenting what you’re reading here Chooky.

            In that interview he’s backing Clinton ahead of Trump. There is nothing at all about whether he backs Clinton ahead of Sanders.

            As a centre-left person, it’s no surprise at all that Little would back Clinton ahead of Trump.

            As a person who thinks through political issues, it’s no surprise at all that Little would back Clinton ahead of Trump.

          • Leftie 1.1.1.2.3
            2 April 2016 at 7:33 pm

            To correct Chooky’s cherry picking…. You missed out the part that said prior to your quote “Labour leader Andrew Little says New Zealand will have no choice but to work with whoever is elected by the American people, but he would lean towards Mrs Clinton.”

            The article from RNZ was a skewered question to start with… “Trump or Clinton – who would be better for New Zealand?” Bernie Sanders wasn’t mentioned once, neither was any other candidate.

            No doubt Andrew Little was thinking, like most people do, if in the event it came down to just Trump and Clinton, better Clinton than Trump, and responded accordingly to the question he was asked.

  2. AmaKiwi 2
    1 April 2016 at 9:40 pm

    + 1

    A wise woman I knew, who left Nazi Germany in 1938 and lived in the USA from 1945 to 1975, said, “Someday America will be like Nazi Germany.” She was correct.

  3. adam 3
    1 April 2016 at 9:40 pm

    I never thought I’d say this… I think Hillary Clinton is starting to scare me as much as Donald Trump.

    A friend sent me this, It is a well researched piece that ever social democrat should read.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes/

  4. RedLogix 4
    1 April 2016 at 9:51 pm

    And once that collective fear and anger takes hold it takes great courage and sacrifice to stand against it.

    I’ve often wondered how that day will go.

    • Lara 4.1
      2 April 2016 at 4:36 pm

      Standing against it often sees the dissenters thrown in prison.

      I think, given the lessons of history, that’s how that day will go.

  6. One Two 6
    1 April 2016 at 9:58 pm

    Trump is running interference for Clinton

    Clinton is a diabolical human being with the track record to prove it

    The ties which bind these people together, are what need to be broken

  7. Macro 7
    1 April 2016 at 10:07 pm

    I would hate to have to live in the USA. It is the most powerful and most fearful country on Earth. The good people of the US are fed fear from the moment they wake by a scaremongering media that lives on fear. Their movies are full of it, there is no escape. For the MSM if there is nothing to fear they manufacture it, and having a story they tell it relentlessly. No wonder the people there want to carry guns with them. This of course just adds to the fear.
    Saunders is the only sane candidate. He alone sees through the scaremongering, and the sabre rattling, to see that if they could just break this cycle of being afraid they could begin to concentrate on the real issues that hold back the people.
    We have the same sabre rattling going on here in NZ people. Beware, we are about to commit $10 Billion to a defence buy of astronomical madness when our Health and Education systems are beginning to fall apart. There is little threat in the Pacific from submarines now, there wasn’t much before (was the USSR really going to make a pre-emptive strike in the 1980’s? when it was struggling to keep itself together?) Is China really going to blockade our shipping? Whatever for?
    But it seems we must spend all this money on something we will never need.
    And for the USA, because they are so afraid they must spend more and more on guns, and the more they spend, the more reason they will have to be afraid.

  8. Bill 8
    1 April 2016 at 10:20 pm

    I believe Fascism is still our greatest enemy and its face is everywhere in our so-called “democracies.”

    Well, of course its face is everywhere.

    Our so-called democracies positioned themselves between what was claimed to be two implacable theoretical opposites. Thing is, in the real world, both those opposites were more or less the same thing. On one end of the supposed spectrum sat the Bolsheviks. On the other, Mussolini et al. The only difference the Bolsheviks made was to concentrate the ideas and institutions of fascism and fold it all (church, state and market) into one entity – the party.

    The early socialists, communists and anarchists pointed all of this out and were suppressed and persecuted by the social democrats of ‘our democracies’; by the Bolsheviks and their fellow travelers in the statist regimes; and in those fascist states commonly, popularly and acceptably identified as fascist.

    In short, our democracies have meandered the ground between two expressions of fascism. One (rarely acknowledged) is embodied in statism. The other is the political companion of a market economy ‘set free’.

    Our illusion of freedom and the only space we are allowed movement or expression, is that point where both market and state collide. In that narrow strip of contested ground, of state versus market, we get – not freedom – merely ‘choice’….vote ‘left’, vote ‘right’.

    God help you (us) if you (we) reject that ‘choice’ and make a serious bid for freedom instead.

    • adam 8.1
      1 April 2016 at 10:51 pm

      But we have no choice but to make a bid for freedom Bill. Because freedom is more than ideology, it is essential for us to breath.

      Otherwise in full agreement, the suppression of the communist sailors at Kronstadt was the death kneel of the Russian revolution. Like the Cultural Revolution was for the Chinese. The only communist revolution which came close to being good was in Vietnam, they are now being destroyed by the “party”, who has fully embraced free markets.

      Having friends who grew up in Franco’s Spain and others who lived through the nightmare in Chile – those countries were no better. Actually listening to stories over beers from a mix of people – they both tell similar stories of societies where freedom is a word never spoken aloud.

    • Stuart Munro 8.2
      2 April 2016 at 10:02 am

      I have often thought that more evolved political systems contain all previous models. For example the fascism of the Right in NZ is not a philosophical movement (however debased) but rather a feudalism, an attachment to perceived alpha leaders in the hope of protection and reward.

      Freedom died with the legal fiction that corporations are entitled to the same rights as people – this grants political rights to a pile of money and results in a corporate oligarchy.

      • Phil 8.2.1
        4 April 2016 at 2:32 pm

        the legal fiction that corporations are entitled to the same rights as people

        That is not what legal personhood entails at all.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood

        • Stuart Munro 8.2.1.1
          4 April 2016 at 2:43 pm

          The issue is not whether the rights are identical, but whether they are excessive or inappropriate for corporate entities. Given the ease which which corporate structures insulate shareholders from consequences, corporations need to be restricted more than individuals – the general rule is that they are less regulated.

          • Phil 8.2.1.1.1
            5 April 2016 at 12:36 pm

            … corporations need to be restricted more than individuals – the general rule is that they are less regulated.

            If i have read your comment correctly, you’re saying corporations have less regulation/law with which they must comply? That is a hilariously large pile of bullshit.

            I note the wikipedia page summarises the issue better than I can:
            Misconceptions
            In debates on this topic it is sometimes asserted that the notion of corporate personhood implies that corporations are entitled to all of the rights and privileges that apply to natural persons (i.e., human beings). However, the definition of corporate personhood includes some, but not all of said rights and privileges. Whether a corporation is a “person” possessing any one of those rights or privileges is properly decided by applying basic logic, common sense, and relevant and valid law to an examination of generally accepted reasons why the state grants existence to the legal fiction of the corporate form, so that on the one hand courts may hold that corporations must have the right to own property or enter into contracts, or to be subject to municipal zoning laws that apply to “persons” without necessarily having the same speech rights enjoyed by natural persons and without having the right to vote and without counting as a second “person” for the purpose of driving in a carpool lane.

            • Colonial Viper 8.2.1.1.1.1
              5 April 2016 at 12:40 pm

              Seems like corporations will be given more rights, powers and influence under the TPP than ordinary NZ citizens have.

              I can’t get a dinner date with Andrew Little or John Key, but apparently big pharma executives can.

              • Phil …
                5 April 2016 at 3:31 pm

                … and that was different BEFORE the TPPA?
                No, no it wasn’t.

                Alternative hypothesis: Maybe it’s just that people don’t like having dinner with you?
                😛

  9. gnomic 9
    2 April 2016 at 2:39 am

    “We came, we saw, he died.”

    Hillary is unfit for power. Not to mention her close relationship to Slick Willie, another example of the species. And what is up with the hair? Does she think that anybody cares about the sculptured beehive thang? How does she find the time for the styling? Fire those advisors and quit with the dye.

    As for Trump, i could not possibly advise euthanasia but the removal from the gene pool of anyone who could vote for the hairpiece is tempting. Aside from the failed clown aspect. Has this nincompoop ever heard of the Great Wall of China? Although it worked for several hundred years in the main.

    Anyone else left as a real candidate in the free world’s greatest democracy? Cruz? One glance says not now, not ever. The Bern can hardly get enough votes from the bemused admass.

    Perhaps the only good news is that there will be no more Bush, at least for now.

    • Colonial Viper 9.1
      2 April 2016 at 8:18 am

      330M people to choose from and this is all the US elite can come up with. Bill is right. We’re going underwater.

      • tc 9.1.1
        2 April 2016 at 8:55 am

        No this is all the us elite want the people to choose from, a batshit crazy billionaire and a ‘radical’ socialist type who wants to scale back war who will lose to a proven warmonger.

        This satisfies the elite as it keeps the war machine fed and fear will continue to reign over the US people. Job done.

    • locus 9.2
      2 April 2016 at 9:26 am

      are you really writing off a politician because of their hairstyle?

      do you oppose hillary’s views on education, gun control, healthcare, immigration, abortion……?

      http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/hillary-clinton-believe-candidate-stands-10-issues/

      • gnomic 9.2.1
        2 April 2016 at 8:15 pm

        Trump’s hair bespeaks falsity and conceit. It says he is a buffoon. Perhaps fit to run a coconut shy at a fair.

        Hillary’s coiffure says shallow, style over substance. Compare with a leader like Merkel for example. Same old pudding bowl cut year in and year out as far as I recall. Not that I am a huge Merkel fan as she is a rightist, but she clearly has staying power and some degree of wisdom.

        That’s my reading of the hair.

        Thanks for the link about Ms Clinton’s platform. Alas it is probably true she is the best of a bad lot who might actually be elected. But if she wins she is probably going to face the same problem as Obama, an obtuse Republican majority in Senate and Congress making it near impossible to get anything done. And she seems to have an itchy trigger finger.

        Moreover I feel her motivation is suspect. It seems to be more about having power (insofar as the US president actually has any) than for the betterment of mankind. Er, personkind, or humanity, the people of the world. Perhaps I am wrong.

        • Colonial Viper 9.2.1.1
          2 April 2016 at 11:24 pm

          Alas it is probably true she is the best of a bad lot who might actually be elected. But if she wins she is probably going to face the same problem as Obama, an obtuse Republican majority in Senate and Congress making it near impossible to get anything done.

          Get serious, both sides of the House receive huge donations from Big Pharma, the Military Industrial Surveillance complex and Goldman Sachs.

          And they got plenty done, massive bailouts for Wall Street, hundreds of billions in funding for the F-35, increased powers for the NSA, and more.

          Who says Congress can’t get anything done.

          As for Clinton being the best of a bad bunch, I think that Oliver Stone clearly stated how seriously shite Clinton is.

          • locus 9.2.1.1.1
            3 April 2016 at 8:50 am

            rational or irrational hatred of hillary notwithstanding CV, let’s hear why you think trump is way ahead of her as a choice for US president……

            what do you think of his abhorent and aberrant utterances on moslems, mexicans, blacks, women,…..?

            • Colonial Viper 9.2.1.1.1.1
              5 April 2016 at 12:48 pm

              Who the fuck cares about Trump soundbites about Muslims (sic) or Mexicans while he his on the primary campaign trail to try and win votes from Republican cray crays?

              Apart from dreamy headed privileged social liberals that is.

              Instead. Let’s talk about reality and real world actions for a second here.

              Bill Clinton passed trade deals which impoverished millions of Mexican farmers and farm workers causing a massive flood of illegal immigrants into the southern USA, undermining the negotiating power of US workers in those states.

              While both Clintons were directly involved in economic, sanctions and war on terror policies which were fundamental to killing 2M or more Muslims in the Middle East and Central Asia over the last 2 decades.

              So while Clinton can say all the nice things she wants about Mexicans and Muslims, you and I know her real life historical track record actually is.

              • locus …
                6 April 2016 at 6:40 am

                Who the fuck cares about Trump soundbites………..Apart from dreamy headed privileged social liberals that is.

                well CV, yes i am a privileged social liberal….. but definitely not ‘dreamy headed’

                Despite your criticism of hillary (and bill, although we weren’t talking about him) you still haven’t said why you think Trump would be better, and it’s not good enough to ignore what Trump says and pass off his views as soundbites

  10. saveNZ 10
    2 April 2016 at 8:39 am

    Great post. +100
    The world needs Bernie Sanders to bring sense to the USA and therefore more sanity to the entire world!

  11. locus 11
    2 April 2016 at 9:14 am

    Hillary Clinton is the first prominent Democratic presidential candidate to openly run on a gun-control platform since Al Gore’s losing campaign in 2000. She supports holding gun manufacturers liable for deaths caused by their products, expanding background checks and prohibiting those on no-fly list from purchasing firearms. She has also supported reinstating the ban on semi-automatic “assault” rifles.

    Also, a few left-right comparisons of Hillary and Bernie:
    http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35666347

  12. vto 12
    2 April 2016 at 9:17 am

    There is a huge amount of seemingly justified anti-US sentiment on here…. yet we never hear the contrary view from any Americans…

    Is it possible some of our commenters, who seem to be ex-US people (like Joe-90??), could provide whatever the alternative view is? What is the alternative view? That, you know, America really is great, that everybody should carry guns and bombs in their hip holsters, that America is really the most moral, that America must lead the world, etc etc…

    Nobody expounds that view.
    This alternative view canvas is barren
    Where are its supporters? They are not here, they are not in the paper, they are not on the streets …. I guess they are at Trump Rallies … I would like to hear a cogent view from them ….

    FFS, Putin steps in for his country and speaks and answers questions, literally for hours, on the wheres and whyfores in support of Russia. Not so the US.

    The lack of that alternative view is a telling gap so large that we can’t seem to see it .,…

    • locus 12.1
      2 April 2016 at 9:38 am

      I’m not a US watcher, but I can’t help thinking that there are some truths in this article: http://thedailybanter.com/2016/01/hillary-gop-smears/

      Hillary Clinton’s reputation is largely the result of a quarter century of visceral GOP hatred. With the exception of maybe Barack Obama, whom they’ve irrationally loathed with the fire of a thousands suns, it’s tough to name anyone conservatives have more vigorously derided throughout the years than Hillary Clinton

    • left for dead 12.2
      2 April 2016 at 10:47 am

      vto Did you hear Mr Moore been interviewed on Nat Rad this morning.

    • Andre 12.3
      2 April 2016 at 10:47 am

      vto, I’m US/NZ dual national. Born in the US, moved to NZ when I was 10, spent most of the 90s in the US (Philadelphia, Madison WI, San Diego), returned to NZ in 99 and been living here since then. On balance, I would actually prefer to go back to the US (to one of the islands of relative sanity west of the Rockies) but family reasons are keeping me here.

      Sure we hear about all the crazy stuff, and there’s plenty of it, because it makes for great-selling media. But we hear a lot less about the things that they are doing well at. Many of the things they’ve fucked up really badly at in the past, they’re actually moving in the right direction on. Much of the angry nutjobbery that gets a lot of press (guns, Trump, Republican obstruction…) looks to me like last-stand militancy from people feeling the pressure as “their way” is dying out. In much the same way as smokers got really militant in the 80s and early 90s.

      Whereas in New Zealand, we seem to be in a headlong rush to move our society into copying some of the worst bits of the US, while failing to protect the things that make New Zealand special.

      • Colonial Viper 12.3.1
        2 April 2016 at 10:56 am

        looks to me like last-stand militancy from people feeling the pressure as “their way” is dying out. In much the same way as smokers got really militant in the 80s and early 90s.

        But is it really just a matter of cultural wars and redneck-ism?

        As far as I can tell the US working class was demolished in the 1980s and 1990s and for the last ten years it has been the (former) middle class that is being increasingly impoverished and insecure.

        And people are trying to find answers – or scapegoats – to what is going on.

        • Andre 12.3.1.1
          2 April 2016 at 11:22 am

          The format here on The Standard means things always get way over-simplified. So yes, it’s not just culture wars etc. My time in the US was all in pretty “liberal” areas, so I’m not going to pretend to a broad view of everything going on.

          That middle-class hollowing-out and insecurity is at least a 35 year thing, not just 10. But it’s really reaching bursting pressure now. Part of it appears in culture wars and redneckery. Part of it appears as genuine interest in trying something different to the 30 year political status quo.

          The good news is the push-back against the hollowing-out is starting to become a lot more visible and seems to be gaining traction. That we see people like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, less public players like Nick Hanauer, really starting to get air-time is really encouraging. That kind of movement just wasn’t there in the 90s in the US, and I really don’t feel it here in New Zealand now (apart from here on The Standard).

          • Colonial Viper 12.3.1.1.1
            2 April 2016 at 11:34 am

            Much of NZ still seems to live close by that famous river in Egypt.

          • RedLogix 12.3.1.1.2
            2 April 2016 at 5:50 pm

            Welcome your perspective Andre.

            One thing would suggest to CV, is not to make the mistake of generalising too much about the USA. It’s the most diverse nation in probably all of history; every value, every cultural outlook, every extreme of human grace and disgrace to be found inside it’s borders.

    • happynz 12.4
      2 April 2016 at 8:35 pm

      You want someone to confirm your bias?

    • Ad 12.5
      3 April 2016 at 6:22 am

      Putin has also won the Syrian war. Without anyone’s help.

  13. Wayne 13
    2 April 2016 at 3:42 pm

    When I know that Stone and Saradon are backing Sanders, it confirms that my choice should be Clinton.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 13.1
      2 April 2016 at 6:17 pm

      Stick to your knitting Dr. Mapp: your endorsement of Clinton simply indicates that you’d make a crap Lefty.

      • Ad 13.1.1
        3 April 2016 at 6:24 am

        Being a crap lefty is a badge our entire Opposition shares, so I’m sure he’d wear it with pride.

      • Wayne 13.1.2
        3 April 2016 at 9:41 am

        It is not an endorsement, rather it is simply an expression of who I think is best for to be the US president.

        In any event it is well known that the New Zealand political spectrum is different to that of the US. The liberal part of the National Party maps quite well with the centre right of the Democrats. So I suspect a very large number of Nats would quite easily support the Clintons.

        Not surprisingly the activists in Labour will be more comfortable with Sanders.

  14. whatisis 14
    2 April 2016 at 11:26 pm

    “”… The mass media and the military-industrial complex create a prison for us,
    Therefore, it is very important to say, ‘I am here!’ to those who share the same kind of insight.

    — Thich Nhat Hanh, Buddhist Monk, The Art of Power

    I think military-INTELLIGENCE complex more aptly now.
    All those willing to say “I am here” how much of the “intelligence” tracking is taking note of us and how much detriment could/will it cause? It’s beyond me…. but they own..
    The medias interpretation of the world as it is is also detestable. Saturated with americanistic fervor.

    So, bernie4pres.. otherwise it better be drumpf trump and implode so a rebuild might create a better system.. hellory hillary is exactly what is wrong. Better than a bush but only by a smidgeon…

    Good on ya oliver

  15. Ad 15
    3 April 2016 at 5:41 am

    Pretty delicious democratic comedy that the two candidates with highest spectacular polling negatives will face off against each other, and the US will be run by one of them.

    Stone and Sarandon should step out of their own America World Police parody and do a film on the election right now.