I have an Adri, your argument is invalid.

Category: Philosophy

What the Objective of Criminal Justice Should Be


Instigative, protective, and preventative. In that order.

Reforms required:

Abolition of plea bargains. Because an investigation is an experiment and you don’t haggle over findings. At best you debate to arrive at consensus.

No parole or probation. Because either a person is sufficiently rehabilitated to reenter society or they are not. If a citizen’s rehabilitation is in question then examine them till it isn’t and act accordingly.

Abolition of prison in it’s current form. The entire prison budget and deployment should be converted into a layered system of job training, education, mental and physical healthcare, and research of every relevant type. A place where prisoners don’t serve a fixed sentence but rather are inducted into a program from which only healthy prepared citizens can “graduate.”

Prisons today serve as torture chambers to terrorize the public into obedience and to satisfy their collective sadistic whims using primarily the poor, the foreign, and the mentally ill as their victims.

Prison should resemble primarily a very comfortable example of a school combined with a mental hospital. Among the thousands of advantages to this approach is respect for the cliche “innocent until proven guilty.”

Indeed to test the veracity of the system innocent volunteers should be paid to enter as criminals to in a double blind fashion measure how accurate rehabilitation procedures are.

All employees of this system should be required to complete the program and the program should be available to any on request. The objective isn’t to separate and punish criminals but you understand and prevent crime, to rehabilitate and improve the lives of everyone involved to whatever degree is possible and to research and understand when and why it is not possible.

People beyond repair should be kept in comfortable humane isolation until they die of natural causes serving society as subjects of study to the end of preventing the formation or perpetuation of people like themselves in future.

Everything about modern prison and criminal justice is wrong or fraudulent. I’d say 90% of the people in charge of it are corrupt in some fashion either fiscally, politically, or ideologically. The CEO of the private prison, the senator that gerrymanders prisoners in his district and like to play “tough on crime”, the sadistic corrections or police officer that just wants people to hurt or control for pleasure… These are the real and common truths of our “justice” system.

See also:

Critical Differences and Why I am Alone

An Open Letter to Bernie Sanders

Here is the response my mom wrote and sent to the Sanders campaign after receiving an invitation to his new “Our Revolution” group. It’s a moving statement and I urge you to read it.


I’m too disappointed to hope anymore.  I’m 62 years old and  lived through the assassinations of JFK, MLK, RFK, and so many others who could have done something to change the course of this country, and you were my last hope.  I will not vote for Trump or Clinton.  I will write your name in, and that will be my last political involvement.  I’m tired of hoping and praying for an America that probably hasn’t existed since the 1800’s.   I’ve marched, donated, and watched my brothers and sisters die in Viet Nam and the streets of the USA for NOTHING.  The only thing that matters to this government is MONEY and how they can get more of it from those who have the least.  I am ashamed to be an American.  We are the laughing stock of the world, and I don’t see an end to that viewpoint.  When my husband and I are gone, I sincerely hope my son and his significant other can sell what little land we own and leave America for a safer place, if there is one left.  I just do not have the will or energy to believe anymore.  My generation tried, at least, to revolt.   There won’t be a revolution.  I wish you well and applaud your effort, but I realize now that if you did happen to actually win the presidency, they would kill you too.  All the best to you and thank you for trying.  But I can’t be involved again.

BLM and a Defense of Riots


In response to a conversation a friend and I had about BLM’s relationship to rioting I am writing this post as a kind of general statement of opinion.

There’s plenty to criticize people for. But blaming BLM for riots isn’t reasonable because It’s not like BLM are the Illuminati. The entire existence of BLM is a response to a lack of power. And without power there can be no responsibility.

So first we must think about what BLM is and isn’t actually capable of.

They don’t have the power to start or stop riots.

So knowing that, questions spring to mind. Should BLM denounce them, encourage them, or stay silent on them? Knowing they can’t prevent or cause them. Are riots justified?

In my view BLM is automatically an ally of any one who feels the police have become an oppressive, regressive, violent mafia. I’m not saying they think that, I’m saying anyone else who thinks that should see BLM as allies.

In terms of political strategy, if BLM were a monolithic organization, which it isn’t, I don’t think they should denounce rioting because if they did, and riots happened anyway, it would expose that weakness and set them against any elements of the community that have (perhaps rightfully) concluded that the time for peaceful response is at an end.

If you start to think of the police as an invading army, rioting becomes a rather merciful option.  I can’t help but think that if the police here acted like the police in those areas towards my community’s children a riot would be the least of their worries.

Essentially I view riots as warning shots preceding open revolt. And open revolt has to be on the table if we expect to effectively negotiate with the state. Which is what all activism is.

This is a huge part of why I think anti-gun progressives are outright foolish. It’s like starting a game of chess by asserting that violence is wrong and banning the use of pawns.

Some describe a riot as a kind of political or economic cannibalism, as burning “their own” city. But how do you define your city as opposed to your prison? It isn’t their city when their lives are ruled by people that don’t even live there. And that’s true of all of us so long as 62 people own half the planet.

If anything a riot is the burning of a company shanty town. And let’s be honest, they aren’t that destructive anyway. A few fires, a smashed car, and some rubble in the street. They aren’t a hurricane.

Mostly they are symbolic, and a great way to force the police and the press to show their true colors, which as Gandhi has shown us can be quite effective political currency.

I could see it being described as burning collaborator businesses that demonstrably don’t care about them. Business in my view rarely helps a community. First of all the vast majority of it is corporate, which means it’s parasitic and corrupting. Corporations clearly own the press and the government, that’s the root of the problem. Rioting to destroy corporate business interests in my community seems on paper like an extremely valid response.

And don’t talk to me like jobs are inherently a good thing. They aren’t.

Let’s not lose sight of the fact that what BLM fights for is 100% justified. Cops keep getting cleared and acquitted for killings that are often on video. If there is no legal recourse, and the economy is completely unresponsive to both activism and political engagement, then a riot is a reasonable next step in my view.

Tell me things aren’t bad enough to justify revolt in the streets and I’ll tell you you’re not paying attention.

Even if BLM denounces rioting, I would not. Rioting is a valid compromise when trying to avoid a revolutionary civil war.

If that war happens, it will be the police who history shows declared it.

See also:


If not now, when?

Dore v Seder #BernieOrBust Debate

TLDR: HRC can’t beat Trump anyway in the general. If you’re terrified of Trump, you better start busting ass right now to get Bernie the nomination.

Ok. So I’m making this because I knew watching it would piss me off and I’ll have a bunch to say about the whole thing so here it all is on one place. And yes it badly pissed me off. But the YouTube comments made me feel better.

Telling the net Sam is full of shit is not new information to them. Yay for being on the right side of history.

It’s interesting though how much time this debate cost me. What Sam cost me. I hope the day I spent writing this is worth a day doing what I do on twitter. I’ll never know which was more helpful.

As you likely already know, I’m wildly pro #BernieOrBust http://underlore.com/bernie-or-bust/

Before the debate even begins I knew what one of the problems was going to be. Narrow focus. Sam is a minutia type guy. He’ll zoom in on tiny little regions, fight in those regions as if they are totally isolated and then move to another tiny region. That will be a recurring theme.

His core argument is SCOTUS appointments. But I shred that argument later. Long story short, SCOTUS isn’t an emperor any more than POTUS is.

So here we go.


Right away Jimmy sets himself up for a bit of a stumble. He talks about what HRC says like it matters. That’s a large and bad concession to make. The entire debate imo should center around actions not words. Mainly because HRC doesn’t mean anything she says.


Again, error. Speaking like influencing HRC’s rhetoric is influencing the party in any actual way is wrong because again nothing she says matters. We know FOR A FACT what choices she’ll make when it comes time to actually make or influence policy. She is functionally a neocon. Period. I don’t care about one word that comes out of her mouth.


See? Right away, Seder jumps into he said she said about Clinton as if her talking points matter, as if what she says matters, and Jimmy can’t refute it yet because he just gave up that ground.


Seder aiming his microscope at minutia. Yeah, Sanders wasn’t focused on process first because he hadn’t seen the cheating yet. (#ExitPollGate/#AZPrimary/#NYPrimary/etc) But what’s it matter to the big picture which happened first? It doesn’t. This is fantasy football meets daily grind for these people. (Cenk/Kyle/Sam) and all the other #UniteBlue (DINO?) cowards.


Lessig is completely irrelevant. He did it for ego and he didn’t do his homework on Bernie and he was trying to pull a Nader. I’m glad they didn’t let him in the debates. He’d have hung on splitting Bernie’s vote. I’ll always be grateful to Martin for dropping out for that reason. That man has my respect.


Sam is playing the hipster here imo. He’s only bringing up Lessig because virtually no one knows who he is in this context and wants to drop the name and show everyone how informed he is. It’s a rhetorical/ego thing, not a logic thing. And as I said the whole topic is irrelevant starting at 4:58.


Jimmy Dore deploys his biggest weapon, the fact that he’s allowed to turn everything into a joke. It’s like a rhetorical tactical nuke. And now everything Sam said between 4:58 and 5:40 becomes moot. Well done 🙂 He didn’t use this tool much further on, but that’s probably because to Jimmy this isn’t a laughing matter.


Bernie doing all the wrong things in terms of crafted presentation signals his authenticity. It screams disregard for appearance. In this context, the wrong thing is the right thing. That’s why everyone loves his hair. We love a guy who does not give a fuck.


Jimmy should not downplay Bernie’s chances and he shouldn’t hedge about “the movement” because that just goes back to rhetorical influence. If they steal the nom from Bernie this shit isn’t going to matter because HRC will just spend the next 8 years quietly making it literally impossible for anyone like Sanders to ever get that close again. This is the last progressive running for POTUS in the USA. If Bernie “loses” to her cheating, all future ones will be all talk and neolibs, or sacrificial lambs for RNC/neolib candidates to feast on.


No. Active HRC supporters lost the ignorance card months ago. No more doubt benefit for them. Now they are simply DINOs and RWNJs. They know exactly what they are voting for. The nullification theory is nice, but it’s not the case. Though it’s possible that argument will spread just because it’s impossible to disprove.


Blaming the DNC for HRC is backwards thinking because she owns the DNC. If anything we should blame the Clintons for our piss poor crop of “democrats” in all other regions of government.


Really Sam? You think HRC has a great resume!? Are you on bath salts? As a senator her biggest accomplishment was naming a post office, and voting and stumping for the Iraq war using Bush’s exact script. As sec state she gave birth to Isis with her monstrosity in libya, and made everything she touched comprehensively worse.

Her resume is “great” for a neocon. We whine about Trump’s racist blather but when it comes to actually exterminating minorities on this planet HRC has at least a high 5 digit kill count. Seven if you include the Iraq war, which she stumped for.


Not clear Sam?? Only because you won’t pull your head out of your ass. She’s a monster. She is a literal war monger and pathological liar. #WhichHillary


Yes. Exactly. All the pro Bernie anti Hillary corruption and election fraud talk means exactly zip if the DNC knows ultimately you’ll do as you’re told. At the end of the day, if they know they can take your vote for granted, they will. Period.

In a way, because of this, I hate non #BernieOrBust #FeelTheBern types even worse than Hillary supporters because at least the HRC crowd isn’t pretending to be something they ultimately won’t be when it matters.


Yes. Neolibs = neocons + abortion. Well said.


Yes. Excellent point. We vote for people because we can’t vote for policy directly. The idea is to vote policy through people. It makes absolutely zero sense to vote in an election against your own interests. Tactical voting is a failure of the system, not a part of it.


Jimmy ends the debate for all rational people right here. Trump will not have the DNC cloak to protect his right wing madness. Plus he’ll have the RNC/white/male cloak to get leftist stuff done. It’ll be the exact opposite of Obama. We might actually slide left under Trump for many of the same reasons we’ve slid right under Obama.

HRC on the other hand will be able to get away with virtually everything, being ignored by the left and financed by the right.

Sam looks confused. How dim is this guy? His whole premise is tactically voting and then doesn’t understand that the votes were cast grudgingly. Just because someone wins an election doesn’t mean they get the support of their voters, especially in our system. What a slave brain. Guy expects extorted grudging votes to be given gleefully and with genuine support because that’s how his mind works. Guy has gone into internal appeasement mode full time.

If Trump is elected he will be opposed by the entire democratic base, half the republican base, two thirds of independents. Virtually all of the women, all of the minorities, and at least two thirds of the young. Everything he does will be news like it is right now and it will be wildly opposed whenever it’s insane.



Sam pretending he doesn’t know neoliberalism exists. Assuming voters equal supporters. Whatever pal.


Out with the microscope again. Oh they lost the senate and not the house. The point is that they were losing for the first time like ever and it terrified them. To understand why: adamcurtisfilms.blogspot.com


Yes yes let’s debate tie color percentages in march of 82. So tired of the microscope.


Drop some more names Sam. Maybe someday you’ll get to the point. Sidenote: That’s why I never watched his videos. Him and HR goodman have this same problem. They make huge rambly noise filled videos. Both are pathologically averse to getting to the point.


Finally, getting to the point. Finally recovered from his involuntary minutia senate v house correction.


Could you say “uh” a few hundred more times? I guess I can’t handle 2 milliseconds of silence and he can’t handle Jimmy having a turn to speak. Win/win. Amirite?


Bernie did not fail to get the AA/latino vote. They were virtually all crammed into the front half of the southern fried primary. And also badly disenfranchised by voter suppression laws while at the same time being hilariously misinformed by the MSM. On top of all the closed primary absurd deadlines party suppression.

You can’t rig an entire system to both suppress the minority vote, and crush insurgent candidates and then blame the candidate when they lose.


Sam’s whole theory that Bernie is tapping into something new is wrong. What changed was that he was the first real reformer to run on the democratic ticket since Carter. End of discussion. That’s the only thing that really changed.

Obama won in 08 expressly because we’ve been waiting for that and that’s what he promised.

Others could have run but they weren’t from the inside or refused to drop their egos (Nader/Greens) long enough to actually have a chance. Or of course they were cheated out of it at some earlier stage.


Are you ever gonna let Jimmy talk? Anyway. No Obama preemptively surrendered on the single payer option. He’s a neocon also. He’s just as Jimmy said, pro abortion DINO. Understand, Obamacare wasn’t an effort to save the healthcare system, it was an effort to save the insurance industry.


Yes! Exactly. Obama was dead weight on healthcare. He’s a democrat In, Name, Only.


Yea break out that microscope. God I hate this guy. He’s so hellbent on gutting his own influence. It’s pathetic. Why even talk about national policy if you want to think so narrow and specifically? Go be on some city council where the microscope is the right tool for the job.

This goes to the whole problem with democracy.


Sam’s head is stuck in his microscope so he apparently doesn’t remember that healthcare was and is a mess because Americans could look at the whole rest of the fucking planet and see a better way and we were tired of literally sacrificing our children on the altar of insurance profits.

Jimmy’s right. It was placate us, or face the pitchforks. Sadly we got swindled. Obama bailed out the insurance industry by throwing the DNC cloak over the Heritage foundation’s plan while simultaneously throwing the public option under the bus.

Sam can’t step back and realize that at the time it didn’t matter what the republicans didn’t want because the majority was awake and screaming for once. The Establishment had two choices, fix it to our satisfaction sufficiently to douse the torches, or face joblessness after the next election because you literally picked your insurance donors over our fucking children.

See also: Hillary Care


Yeah. It’s called tactical voting you sanctimonious shill. If you weren’t such a robot you’d understand that people have this thing where they can do something they hate to avoid something worse, which is funny that you don’t understand because that’s the entire point of you cowards voting for HRC. Or hell, maybe it isn’t. Maybe you’re just a DINO too. Too much fame too much money.


“I’m definitely open…” he says while not shutting up long enough for his guest to answer a question. Also trying to drag Jimmy down into microscope land. “mechanically” “walk me through” etc.


Changing topic before Jimmy gets to answer.


Sam finally shuts up. But Jimmy is flustered because it’s clear that Sam is going to not let him talk if he pauses for even one second. And I’m sick of that tone like it’s absurd to think that people will vote one way and act another in a system and party utterly dependent on tactical voting.

People will vote green, and write in Bernie, or not vote at all, and then do what they do policy by policy, issue by issue.

There are two layers of politics in this country. Electoral politics and activism.

Trump can win and still be opposed by the majority. Why are we even having to explain this when the entire premise of #UniteBlue is tactical voting against your own interests!


It’s ironic. #UniteBlue says vote the candidate you hate to prevent something worse from happening. And the fact is, that’s exactly what #BernieOrBust is doing, only we don’t define “worse” based on party labels. And we can think past the upcoming election.


Hey Sam, if you’re gonna have a guest and ask them a question, how about you let them answer it? If you just wanna monologue, make a video. Oh right, no one would watch it. That’s why you’re having Jimmy here. Basically no one cares what you have to say otherwise.


SCOTUS? Really? Have you seen Obama’s pick? Are you aware that HRC is further right than Obama? Do you still not understand that simply because she’s wearing the DNC cloak whoever she picks will be assumed to be good by the bulk of the democratic base? But ANYONE Trump picks will get instant inspection and radical opposition?

I’m tired of Sam pretending party label has no impact on popular reaction when he defines victory almost exclusively by party label! It’s hair tearingly awful.

Sad fact: If HRC was running as a republican on the exact same platform she’d lose virtually all her supporters, including Sam.


And again, the microscope. SCOTUS picks aren’t emperors either. We can undo any damage they do if we control the executive and congress. That’s how checks and balances work, and we need to take them both anyway. That’s the whole point of the political revolution.


Have you seen this election? Again. #ExitPollGate You think HRC gives a flying eff about the voting rights act? Every time there is election failure and mass disenfranchisement, she wins. She’s not going to pick anyone for SCOTUS that will allow Bernie 2.0.


Yay look at all this neat stuff under my microscope! /facepalm


If you have to scream how huge the issue is, it’s probably not all that huge frankly. Nothing the SCOTUS does can’t be undone with additional legislation. Again, microscope guy thinks that his current field of vision is the entire world. Did you not notice citizen united? Society can react and respond to SCOTUS rulings.

Your buddy Cenk is all the time talking about the power of a constitutional amendment.

Quit acting like a lousy SCOTUS is the end of the world. We’ve been there for like a decade already. Scalia could have lived another 30 years. So what?


Sam’s entire argument is based on an HRC that doesn’t exist. He is calling her a democratic president. But the whole problem is SHE ISN’T A DEMOCRAT! What the eff will it take for you people to understand that?

Bernie or Bust


Yeah let’s aim the microscope at her appointments. Now aim it at Bush’s appointments. Can you even see a difference? No, because there isn’t one. You’re telling me I’m supposed accept a one party system because one half of it is worse than the other half.

No. It’s gone too far already.

No Farther

I am not sacrificing progressivism in America to avoid a republican president. No. Not gonna do it.


The point isn’t HRC’s appointments being better or worse than Trump. The point is killing neoliberalism so we can at some point stop picking between evils! WTF is wrong with you people?


If we can’t rely on democrats they why are you willing to saw your feet off to avoid a republican president? Why do you keep assuming HRC isn’t every bit functionally a republican?



Sam is basically Cenk. Only with a different branch. He thinks SCOTUS is an emperor. He keeps assuming the SCOTUS operates in a vacuum and isn’t subject to the checks and balances system.

If he really believes that, then what’s the point of voting in the first place? I guess in his mind we’re a double republic. We pick the people who pick the people who pick the policy now.



So if Trump appointed Hitler 19 times, eventually we’d just get tired of saying no? That’s a specious assumption. Jimmy is right.

We only have to fight Trump’s picks for 4 years. You honestly think he’ll get a second term? No. Not unless he swings left HARD.

Which ironically is more likely coming from him than HRC and is all the more reason to not fear-vote for HRC as if Trump is Emperor Satan.


The look on Sam’s face when Jimmy said it’s easy to stand up is priceless because right there you see the cowardice that defines that man. Standing up is the last thing he’s capable of. He’s a whipped dog. A blue dog?


Sam completely misreads the direction of demographics in this country. Did he miss Bernie getting like 70% of the youth vote? What happens to young people? They get older. They are the future of this country and 70% of them are democratic socialists now.

Again… HRC can’t beat Trump anyway in the general. If you’re terrified of Trump, you better start working right now to get Bernie the nomination.


Oh god oh god I’m losing, let’s aim my microscope somewhere else. Evade evade!


Sam is confusing can’t with won’t. HRC and neolibs won’t fight for us, but they will fight Trump because they don’t have a choice. End of debate.


Sam is so hung up on partisan identity politics that he misses that it’s not “Obama’s” TPP, it’s their same donor’s TPP. Their money men will pick up the phone and tell them to “compromise” and vote in favor of the TPP and bang, we’re stuck with it. They might even get a cherry on top as a reward from neolibs for suddenly “working with” them.

All the obstructionism blamed on Obama hate is theater. The obstructionism itself is the point. Do you not remember starve the beast? The moment something they want looks like it’s coming, obviously they’ll pass it.


That is exactly the point. Trump will be inept. HRC on the other hand is a pathological liar as well, only she’s good at it, at least relative to Trump, plus she has that all important DNC cloak of invisibility. Pay no attention to the neocon behind the curtain.

If Trump signed the TPP it would 100% chance die in congress.


Yes it did, but also Obama wasn’t running against Bernie Sanders he was running AS Bernie Sanders. (Sam actually denies this later which is mind blowing in its absurdity.)

It doesn’t matter what we got, the point is what we were trying to get. If we on the other hand pick HRC over Sanders, you can say goodbye to ever seeing a real progressive in the white house ever again. Ever. Trump HAS to beat her to discredit neoliberalism so that we can run someone like Bernie in 2020 with a united front and a reformed party cleared of these neoliberal saboteurs.


HRC IS NOT A PROGRESSIVE! If we let HRC masquerade as a progressive we will never get an actual one ever again.


Microscopes AND cowardice this time.

Sam is a RWNJ. I realize this now. Dude is like Cenk.

Plan B is keep fighting like we have spines. Just because surrender always works doesn’t mean it’s a good plan A.


Dude, Bush is not Trump.

Bush is a garden variety idiot right winger. No one was 100% seriously comparing Bush to Hitler. It’s so funny. You’re so terrified of what Trump might be you’ll vote Cheney/Kissinger 2016 to avoid it, and yet pretend blindness to the polarising get out the opposition vote power of a candidate your camp is literally calling Hitler. Well which is it? He’s not so bad, or he’s barbarians at the gate? It can’t be both.


Sam seems blissfully unaware of the implosion the right wing is facing now because of Trump. How nice for him.


Yes, if the choice is between a neoliberal who stole the nomination from a progressive, and a republican, we should pick the republican so that we can get the progressive we should have picked last time.

If we show that we’ll be good little doggies and vote on command when whapped with the newspaper we can say goodbye to ever getting anything other than the newspaper.

This isn’t hard to understand.



Because the leftist base like you won’t fight for anything because they will think they’ve already won. It’s exactly like how Obama gets a pass on all the neocon crap that he does, like solidify the bush tax cuts. Because HRC wears the DNC cloak she can get away quite literally with murder. Just as Obama did.


Dead on. The reason crap is so broken is because no one is willing to endure short term hardship for long term gain. Again and again they have learned that we’ll just keep voting lesser of two evils lesser of two evils lesser of two evils until finally we’ve forgotten what good even looks like.

It’s time to stand up, be willing to take a punch, and say NO MORE!


The hell it does. Trump has single handedly gutted the republican party. Are you high? Did you just call Trump establishment? Really? Apparently the RNC wasn’t informed. They threw like 15 candidates at him. He crushed them, all.


Sam still thinks what she says matters. That’s just insane. We know what she’ll do. Whatever her donors want. End of debate.

Trump doesn’t even have donors in that sense. He’s the only wild card left if it’s down to HRC v Trump.


His party won’t let him? The one that just did everything they could think of to stop him from being the nominee and failed hilariously? His party that has zero financial control over him? The same congress you think would be powerless to stop lousy SCOTUS appointments? XD

Doublethink is an art form in some brains. Guy just don’t have the mental ram to hold the whole picture in memory at the same time do you. That’s why he microscopes. He can’t think of the whole big picture all at once.


This. We’ll never see a progressive as an option if we keep kissing fear’s ring.


Dude wants precedent during the debate of an unprecedented situation. That’s climate change denier level sophistry. “Well can you show me precedent of global warming killing off humanity? I didn’t think so. HOAX!”

This is basic logic. Which would you rather have, an enemy at the gate or a traitor in your midst? A sword on your shield or a dagger in your back?

Do I really have to explain how a turn coat is more lethal than an enemy general? What planet do you live on Sam?


Sam wants a nice safe comfortable well known well researched easy path to pulling the dagger out. Well, at this point, there isn’t one. That bridge is burnt. The DNC burnt it with the cheating. #ExitPollGate and all the rest. We either stand now or get used to kneeling forever. Sam is clearly already there. He no doubt has a boot taste preference at this point.


Voting Cheney/Kissinger 2016 is not “moving the ball forward” it’s by definition voting DINO on the grounds that republicans are worse. Which means that for all future time all they gotta do is stay further right than the DNC and they win either way.

It’s like trying to win tug of war by dropping the rope. As opposed to suddenly giving slack and then yanking hard while they are off balance.

Sam is cool with a one party country just so long as that party doesn’t screw us quite as hard as it could be screwing us. O.o


Let’s roll out the hyperbole. For Cenk it’s “I’ve been to too many holocaust museums” and for Sam it’s 30-40 years of slightly more right wing SCOTUS.


Pedantry to the rescue!

Sam demands a 200 year study and citation and global consensus. Because logic isn’t good enough for a YouTube debate.


Are you high? If they get rid of the filibuster they are screwed forever the next time they are in the minority.


It’s easier for democrats to drum up opposition, among democrats to oppose republicans, than it is for democrats to drum up opposition among democrats, to oppose democrats. Do I really have to explain why that is? Tell me, which is harder, shooting your enemy in the leg or shooting your friend in the leg?

Would you rather be shooting at enemies or friends? Which is harder?


This is SO pathetic. Sam thinks “fighting” HRC is getting her to lie more like a lefty. Sam is convinced that simply calling yourself a democrat MAKES you a democrat.

Besides, that theory is shot already. Obama got elected sounding like Bernie. Turns out he’s as neocon as HRC. How easy was it for us to pull him left? Apparently not very since it didn’t happen. The man literally kills American citizens and endorses child labor to make Nike more money. And the left can’t get him to budge.


It ain’t about pulling Trump to the left either you ring licking sycophant. Quit looking for boots to polish you pathetic little toady. It’s about replacing these people and crushing everything they do until we get the replacement.

Christ you’re allergic to courage aren’t you.


No, Trump is not a neoliberal. He’s a republican. And HRC is a neoliberal. Which is a fancy word for DINO. That’s just Jimmy getting tired of being badgered.


But they will fight against Trump because he evicerated their party. Republican voters have made voting against their interests an artform.


Where’s the evidence!? Did you miss the last 8 years of Goldman Sachs rule? What protects Obama from left wing hatred? What got him reelected? Lesser of two evils, and the cloak of the DNC membership. The evidence is him getting away with TPP, whistleblower crackdowns, drone strikes, not closing gitmo, endless war, banking free pass, and on and on and on. All because spineless people like you think D = better than R no matter what.


Sam’s just completely full of it. I refuse to believe he doesn’t understand the mechanism of neoliberal DNC cover. Does he just not understand what propelled the Clintons to power?



Closet RWNJ. Like the rest of HRCs base.


That’s it? After decades of neoliberalism, that’s your trophy case of achievement? Sounds to me like “it could be worse” lesser of two evils tactical voting simply made things worse at the end of the day. You mean giving up doesn’t work? Shocker. Bottomline question: Are things net positive or net negative under your approach? Net negative, obviously. What you are “doing” (which is to say, not doing) isn’t working.


1. What HRC say means NOTHING. 2. Lesser of two evils voting didn’t influence the color of her lies, Bernie Sanders did. Because her thought controllers realized that we are not bluffing.


You could go “on and on” taking credit for stuff #BernieOrBust has done. Yes, you could. But it wouldn’t mean anything.


Sam can’t let Jimmy speak for more than 20 seconds without interrupting him.


More deeply deeply pathetic trophies. Toys found in cereal boxes on balance. And that’s the basis of your whole strategy?


Obama care was a bailout of the insurance industry. We’d have had single payer now but for Obama’s (neolib) stabbing us in the back.


Sam is rewriting history. He thinks Healthcare reform was a unilateral political thing. Like Obama and company just decided to fight one day for health care. No dude, we got sick of feeding our kids into the for-profit wood chipper of health insurance. And we’re still sick of it, we just got divided by ppl like Sam on whether or not the insurance company bailout was a solution or not just because it briefly slowed the slide to the right.


Sam lives in fantasy football land where what a politician says is all that matters.


That’s the core of the issue. Sam here is either a liar or he’s wildly ignorant. I say liar, because I’m decent at poker, but whatever. We’ll say he’s just an innocent moron.


Yes it would be better if we get a right winger in office because then we’d actually fight unified and effectively instead of DEBATING EACH OTHER ON WHETHER OR NOT A FIGHT IS NEEDED! WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU!?


Yess yess you smarmy git. What do you think “yes we can” and “change” meant??


Yes, that’s indisputable. We voted for FDR and we got Bill Clinton 2.0. Watch his address. Tell me he’s not talking the Sanders talk.

WTF is Sam saying? That we were voting for just a little change? Yes we can… Compromise? No dude. Wake the eff up.


Exactly. He beat HRC the same way Sanders would be beating HRC if not for the southern fried primary and straight up election fraud. #ExtiPollGate


Again, exactly, either you think we need revolution or your don’t. Sam is clearly comfy.


Sam crying loser tears because he can’t put the revolution under his microscope and understand it. Dude is the narrowest thinker I’ve seen in this context. He’s trying to be the Chomsky of YouTube. Let’s just drill down to the most meaningless tiniest detail and live there for a year.

“And welcome folks to our 99 part series on the price of yams in ecuador and how that relates to the the economic theory prevalent in the last quarter of 1992, because I think that’s just SUPER important.”


OMFG I’m tired of Sam taking all the credit for good stuff and blaming all the bad stuff on us.

The whole reason over half the country doesn’t vote is because they recognize that voting neolib v republican is utterly pointless!


The whole reason the right controls what it does is because neoliberalism isn’t working!


Sam denies that having a neoliberal in the mix splits the left but look at what we’re doing. Having a debate between leftists over whether or not our enemy is our enemy. If the election was between Trump and Trump. We wouldn’t be having a discussion. But because it’s Trump and HRC we are, ONLY ONLY because she’s labeled a democrat. End of debate.


That’s what you call letting Jimmy have the last word? Such a petulant child. Yes yes Sammy, it’s YOUR show, you win. /head pats.

Bernie or Bust

Last Updated: 2016-07-26 0715 PM

This will likely be my last update. Everything below this update I leave for the historical record.

Bernie betrayed us. He had no intention of fighting at the convention.


He will not run third party.

Trump or Hillary will be president.

This is not a democracy.


At least I can take pride in the voters even if the election was rigged.



Are you #BernieOrBust?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...





This issue is very closely linked with the issue of Clinton’s electability and many articles touch on both sets of points.

So see also: http://underlore.com/bernie-sanders-electability/

External Links:

2016 Democratic Primary Election Fraud FULL Timeline

And although this isn’t meant to get anyone to switch their support from Hillary to Bernie, I’m hoping that it clears some misconceptions about Bernie supporters and their hesitance with supporting Hillary Clinton if she is the nominee. We can have a conversation after, but the reason we haven’t been able to up to this point is because the election fraud part hasn’t been acknowledged or taken seriously. We’re even told that it didn’t happen.

Bernie Sanders, FDR, and Contested Conventions : Snopes.com

In short, it isn’t precisely clear why Sanders opted to endorse Clinton weeks before the convention without suspending his campaign. Many Sanders supporters maintained that the DNC or Clinton campaign threatened to rescind platform promises had Sanders not endorsed, but the senator made no such claim himself in a 12 July 2016 delegate conference call. During that call, Sanders did urge all delegates to appear in Philadelphia and vote for him on the first ballot.

As for claims that Sanders (like FDR before him) was heading into a contested convention after endorsing a rival, there was scant truth to that claim. FDR headed into the convention with a majority of pledged delegates, prior to the advent of superdelegates. While FDR needed a hard-won two-thirds majority to seize his nomination, he also started with more delegates than his competitors. And the process of formally endorsing a rival didn’t appear to be exceptionally relevant (if at all common) in the 1932 presidential nominating process.

2016-07-18 16_01_07-Bernie Sanders, FDR, and Contested Conventions _ snopes.com

Don’t rule it out: Bernie Sanders (slightly) leaves door open for Green Party run with Jill Stein

Sanders leaving the door open to a Sanders-Stein ticket comes at a time when polls show unprecedented support for a candidate to challenge Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. This week NBC found that 47% of voters would consider a third-party candidate if Clinton and Trump were the major-party nominees. In the last week, two other polls found a large minority will vote for a third party this year. Schoen Consulting found 20% of voters would vote for a third party against Clinton and Trump with 14% undecided; Data Targeting Inc. found 21% would do so with 14% undecided.

Hillary Cannot Win, Bernie Will Win: It’s About Turnout

Extreme? No. A Hillary nomination moves the General into Mondale or Dukakis territory (see Appendix at bottom). Polls consistently show Hillary’s Unfavorable rating exceeding 50% and she is seen as dishonest and untrustworthy by 61% of Americans–that’s greater than Trump, Hillary starts the race from behind, name-recognition her only asset, and with undecideds on her in single-digits, she has no path to victory.

But why the near landslide loss? It’s a perfect storm, led by the nation’s mood. Over two-thirds think we are on the wrong track. People want change. Hillary is The Establishment politics-as-usual candidate in an election cycle where a significant portion of the American electorate is demanding change. Hillary turns off every American wanting change which includes significant portions of the Democratic base. If Hillary is the nominee, there will be record low turnout from traditional Democratic constituencies like students, labor unions, and minorities. She will get little support from Progressives many of whom will, if they vote at all, vote Green. Among independents, Hillary is viewed unfavorably by a large majority (net -27 in the latest poll), and she strongly motivates the Republican base to vote to defeat her–Conservatives hate her even more than they hate Obama. A Hillary nomination guarantees Republican victory.

Petition update · Now more than ever, it’s gotta be #BernieOrBust · Change.org

If you have not already taken the #BernieOrBust pledge, please do so by clicking below. If you have already taken it, now is when we need to build this movement faster than ever. Bernie, down ~300 pledged delegates, really needs a miracle. Please find two of the 30% of Bernie’s supporters, who will not vote for Clinton according to a recent poll, and ask them to take the pledge. You can send them to http://BernieorBust.org to take it. This #leverage is his best hope in our view.

To those of you liberals who don’t understand the Bernie or Bust movement, allow me to explain it in a way that may be clearer and more detailed than what you are used to hearing.

The people of this movement have come to the realization that our current system is broken beyond repair and the time for incremental change is over. This is worth repeating. The system under no circumstances can be fixed with establishment politics; it can only be fixed by a progressive political revolution that sends a message loud and clear that we the people are setting a new standard for our elected representatives.

Bernie Sanders understands the urgency to navigate our way out the whirlpool of injustice and impending disasters that inevitably await us and he has a voting record that proves he has the wisdom required to make the right decisions for the country.

Liberals for Hillary: There is Nothing Stranger

The first order of business in that regard is to make anti-austerity politics succeed. This makes perfect sense – because if anything radically better is to come onto the agenda in the foreseeable future, quashing neoliberalism is an indispensable first step.

Small wonder then that there is enough fervor in the Bernie camp that Clinton’s publicists, and the media hacks that serve them, are now warning that, like the Republicans, the Democrats could splinter apart, thanks to Bernie’s refusal to turn his operation over to the Clinton machine. If only this were true!

The Definitive, Encyclopedic Case For Why Hillary Clinton is the Wrong Choice

[NOTE: This is a long piece! If you want to read or print it out in pdf form, you can find it right here and download it to your computer and read at your convenience.]

But time is short and the stakes are high, and I want to focus on a pattern of her claiming to be a progressive Democrat while taking positions that are too often more closely aligned with the other side of the aisle, and on a record that I worry makes her a real longshot if she’s our nominee.

Please Recognize Your Privilege If You Can Afford Eight Years of Hillary Clinton and the Status Quo — Medium

Some people say Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are approximately the same on the issues. These people likely have a lifestyle and a level of income that is comfortable and that they’re not too worried about losing. For middle class and working class people, many of whom struggle from paycheck to paycheck and carry debt, the policies proposed by the two candidates are nothing alike.

How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties

From these large amounts of money being transferred from state coffers to the Hillary Victory Fund in Washington, the Clinton campaign got the first $2,700, the DNC was to get the next $33,400, and the remainder was to be split among the 33 signatory states. With this scheme, the Hillary Victory Fund raised over $26 million for the Clinton Campaign by the end of 2015.

Susan Sarandon: I Don’t Think I Could Vote For Hillary If Sanders Loses | Video | RealClearPolitics

“It’s dangerous to think we can continue the way we are with the militarized police force, with the death penalty and the low minimum wage and threats to women’s rights and think you can’t do something huge to turn that around. The country is not in good shape if you’re in the middle class. It’s disappearing,” Sarandon said Monday night on MSNBC.

Hear this, Sanders supporters — you don’t need to back Hillary: You have every right to say “Bernie or bust” – Salon.com

Gitmo remains open, American troops are still in Afghanistan, the criminals that engineered the financial crisis are at large, and race relations have deteriorated rather than improved. Now Sanders supporters hear Hillary Clinton promising to continue wherever Barack Obama leaves off, and they wonder what the point of four more years of the same would be in an increasingly desperate country and, indeed, world.

Hillary Clinton Is Better Than the Republican Candidates. But I Still Wouldn’t Vote for Her.

Both Clinton and party leaders are making a mockery of many of the principles the party is supposed to stand for. And pledging to support Clinton in the end – no matter what she and the DNC do – enables this kind of behavior. It’s hard for me to see how we will ever fix our political process and reclaim our democracy by refusing to draw some lines in the sand.

Fear of Bernie or bust movement expressed on progressive outlets | Examiner.com

The Bernie or bust pledge, an idea initiated by Revolt Against Plutocracy last June, commits pledge-takers to either write in Bernie Sanders or vote for the Green Party candidate in the general election if Bernie is not the nominee. After reaching 50,000 pledges in late February, the story was picked up by the Washington Times on March 1st. Fox News and CNN asked for interviews, but only Fox has found the time in the last two weeks to cover the story. MSNBC refuses to mention the movement. So much for their “liberal bias.” CNN already has the reputation as the Clinton News Network. Perhaps its time for progressives to recognize MSNBClinton as well.

Thank Your Favorite God for Bernie’s Michigan Win, Because A Clinton Nomination Would Split the Democratic Party

Sanders’ win is a good thing for Democrats because he is the only candidate who can unite the party in November. There is no way economic progressives and Bernie supporters will accept a Hillary Clinton nomination after everything they’ve seen in this primary.

Before Her Assassination, Berta Cáceres Singled Out Hillary Clinton for Backing Honduran Coup | Democracy Now!

Every other country in the world or in Latin America was demanding the restitution of democracy and the return of Manuel Zelaya. It was Clinton who basically relegated that to a secondary concern and insisted on elections, which had the effect of legitimizing and routinizing the coup regime and creating the nightmare scenario that exists today.

Proof that Ignorance Drives Hillary Clinton’s Voters | Global Research – Centre for Research on… – Linkis.com

But the point is, yet again, that, in the general-election match-ups, Sanders really and authentically IS the more electable of the two Democrats to become the U.S. President. That’s just a fact, though consistently Clinton voters assume the exact opposite of the fact. Their assumption on that is plain false.

Viewpoint: explaining why the United States needs a revolution | Examiner.com

While many, if not virtually all of Bernie Sanders’ supporters want a woman as president someday, the people who believe the U.S. “needs” a female president are those who have the greatest requirement to understand our corrupted, rigged system of government. While many citizens want a female president, the United States needs a political revolution.

What Hillary Clinton wants you to forget: Her disastrous record as a war hawk – Salon.com

If Clinton had done anything other than endorsed the deal, she would have created a major headache for herself. Even so, her speech about the deal highlighted what ought to be–but probably won’t be–a deeply examined part of her ideology: her hyper-hawkishness.

Hillary Clinton, Economic Populist: Are You Fucking Kidding Me? | Opinion | teleSUR English

For the 2016 election, with the electorate in a restive mood, Clinton has gone back to the populist well. Her rhetoric is more left wing than last time. She talks about paid family leave and increasing Social Security and the minimum wage, all welcome developments. Yet there is little substance behind the speechifying.

I Am Absolutely Furious and I Don’t Know What to Do With Myself

When I think of Hillary Clinton offering her eloquent ode yesterday to Nancy Reagan for the late first lady’s supposed “very effective, low key [AIDS] advocacy” — thereby not only ignoring the horrible, evil truth of what happened but actually rewriting history and casting Reagan as some kind of hero, I am absolutely furious and I don’t know what to do with myself.

The case against Hillary Clinton: This is the disaster Democrats must avoid – Salon.com

Were Clinton to take office, would she seriously push for greater economic fairness, more peace and a generally progressive agenda, or would she defend the status quo?To answer this, let’s look first at our context. Strange things are happening. Establishment neoconservatives seem to be gravitating toward Clinton as an anti-Trump

Hillary Clinton 2016: What’s Wrong with Hillary? – POLITICO Magazine

But when you look at the positions she has taken on some of the most significant public policy questions of her time, you cannot escape noticing one key pattern: She has always embraced the politically popular stand—indeed, she has gone out of her way to reinforce that stand—and she has shifted her ground in a way that perfectly correlates with the shifts in public opinion.

Revolt Against Plutocracy – Movement for an American political revolution

Bernie or Bust:  A pledge to write-in Bernie Sanders or vote for the Green Party candidate 57,000+ people have taken so far. Why? Keep reading.

33% of Sanders Supporters Will Not Vote for Clinton If She Wins Nomination

The real takeaway, however, is that 33% of Sanders supporters say that they “Could not see themselves supporting Clinton” in the general election. Additionally, 32% describe themselves as having “a negative view of Clinton.”

Will Quigg, KKK Grand Dragon, Switches Support From Trump to Hillary Clinton

“We want Hillary Clinton to win. She is telling everybody one thing, but she has a hidden agenda,” Quigg, a grand dragon of the KKK’s California chapter who is responsible for recruitment across the Western United States, told the Telegraph.

My thoughts on this link: https://plus.google.com/+BrandonSergent/posts/ixYCfjD1oW4

My Thinking:

Firstly, as I describe in the meme above, the price of Hillary is death for the entire concept of a progressive party in America.

People are assuming Trump would be worst based on habit and hyperbole.

1. Democrat is not automatically better than republican when both Trump and HRC are only wearing the labels for expediency.

2. Trump will not be allowed to be Hitler 2.0. We aren’t electing an Emperor and we are the most heavily armed public of any major nation.

He may want to be Hitler, or even try. He would be quickly stopped one way or another.

After you get past those two facts and start looking at HRC vs Trump, vs what you don’t know about Trump and what you know for a fact about HRC, also once you look at the consequences of rewarding an overt neoliberal with the presidency, Trump vs HRC becomes a no brainer.

It’s not what you think. HRC is WAY more dangerous than that orange buffoon.

But even if it wasn’t that dire, still I would not be voting for Hillary if she steals “wins” the democratic primary.

A knife in the back is worse than a sword on your shield. Period.

Many have argued that Bernie would be a qualitatively establishment president, and that Hillary would be preferable to Trump or Cruz. But we already tested that theory in 2008, and I do not like the outcome.

Calling any president establishment is a baseless assertion unless you expand the definition of establishment to such a broad degree that it’s semantically null.

We haven’t seen a progressive president in the modern era. The last one we had was Carter. The last one like Bernie was FDR.

Also, the covert republican logic applies to the SCOTUS as well. Just look at Obama’s SCOTUS appointment. I’d rather have it publicly understood that we have a corrupt right wing court than the illusion of a progressive one. Because then we could agitate collectively in a useful direction, as opposed to wasting time trying to reason with a covert partisan.

I voted for Obama the second time because of appointment anxiety. But again, I dislike the outcome. We ended up with a right wing SCOTUS anyway. Compare their rulings with the desires of the chamber of commerce. And yet where is the organized left wing protest? Absent because of the assumption that Obama is on our side because he’s black and because he wears the D and because he campaigned like Bernie.

If we truly know on the other hand that the SCOTUS and the administration are both right wing and corrupt then our efforts can be properly focused on taking back the whitehouse and obstructing everything they do in congress and lower courts. As we clearly would Vs Trump.

If we get a right wing all three, then it becomes a matter of taking back both congress and the whitehouse or forcing them to show their hand as a totalitarian state at which point other options need be explored.


In all cases the enemy you can see is preferable to a traitor you cannot. Hillary would get the Obama apologist treatment, as is proven by the HRC camp right now. They are positively eager to make excuses for her blatantly conservative career. And thus were she elected, the country would further drag to the right anyway, but without meaningful resistance.

Bernie on the other hand, is in all senses an activist. Electing him will basically be the first step of a bloodless coup designed to topple an oligarchy. Compromise is no longer acceptable.

Look at what is on the table.

Trump is literally turning into Hitler. I’m not even exaggerating. He would be a lame ineffectual Hitler thank the gods, but that’s what he wants, and there’s always the slim slim chance he’ll get it. And then there’s global warming Hillary will make worse, then there’s the TPP she’ll instantly find an excuse to back, continued mass incarceration which she and her husband invented, and a global bank collapse she’ll profit from, and the 2nd great depression that won’t impact her.

Look at the historical analogs. We’re risking a literal second holocaust, the literal end of the food chain, a literal global environmental collapse, and possibly WW3 if she pisses off Russia bad enough in Syria, etc.

I am not even kidding about any of that. Granted it’s not all likely, but it is very clearly on the table.

Hillary and Trump terrify me. But Hillary an order of magnitude more so. That’s why I’m #BernieOrBust because I’d rather have an earlier shot at changing course than smoother sailing in the mean time.

Electing Hillary might be better for a very short while, but it would be like how Obamacare killed single payer only with the entire concept of progressivism in the United States. I would rather we had suffered another four years of nothing followed by single payer, than 8 years of Obamacare.

I’m playing the long game. And so should you unless you’re 90 years old and childless.

Update 2016-03-20 0404 AM: The Dark Truth About Many Democrats

I’ve come to realize something.

The hate of #BernieOrBust voters shows that something sinister lies behind much of the the lesser of two evils voting. An excuse.

HRC followers I think are not in fact immune to evidence. I think southern voters are not as suppressed as our benefit of the doubt would imply. They are simply closet republicans.

Secretly they love the wars, the shootings, the rape, the executions, the poisoned children, the slaves, the urban decay, the crushing squalor, the torture, the despair, the opulence, the dystopian future, the smog, the toil, the disease, the ascension fantasy, the rigid hierarchy, the shared flattering lies, the mockery, the scorn, the false humility, the condescension, the caste system. And above all, the excuses for them.

I think there is some Stanford prison experiment stuff going on here. Some fight or flight or appease response.

They shake their heads and tut, but inside they are elated. Like the apple tossing peasants of the public execution era and the colosseum.

They just prefer to pretend their hand is forced. They are sadists hiding behind duty. And so they call themselves progressive and pretend they don’t see. They hide behind the lies and “compromise” further and further dark. Because in the words of the TV, they don’t want to end the exploitation, they want to become the exploiters.

They are horrified by the thought of actual progressive political victory. Of the game finally being fair with no brutal punishments for the losers.

So they violently defend a totalitarian warmongering psychopath and pretend this defense is evasion of a pathological lying narcissist that excuses them. But like the man said, being against evil doesn’t make you good. We need to admit there is evil in our camp.

These people don’t have the ethical fortitude for an equitable and humane future. And so they pretend to be bamboozled. They vote against their own interests, and waggle their fingers with one hand and fondle their genitals with the other.

It is not ignorance we battle. It is evil. Evil I define here as the natural inclination to derive joy from the true suffering of others, and this inclination being allowed to define personal policy. A form of a person’s nature that is simply malevolent.

As I said, being against evil doesn’t make you good, so hating and hurting these people is not the solution. But neither is converting them. You can’t talk a fish out of water. The solution is to simply out flank them. To prove that democracy is wisdom by out voting both the overtly and covertly evil. Admit that conversion is impossible. Simply dismiss them. And look elsewhere for those of our kind. The utilitarians. The undiscovered social democrats. To find them and show them the opportunity they have.

The young are the key. We must convince them to actually vote. The time is now.

See also:

A short #BernieOrBust Discussion (with tweet) · Innomen · Storify

Where in we talk about the merits and flaws of a Trump win if Hillary wins the nomination.

Underlore Links:

How I got banned from Dailykos.com in less than 8 hours.

Where in I tell the tale of how I was banned from Daily Kos for being a #BernieOrBust voter before it was a hashtag.


#BernieOrBust Tweets





Softball Questions

TYT, It sounds to me like you are complaining about bishops being interviewed for the job of pope, on the grounds that they are not being harassed about being religious. A town hall isn’t the place for that. You guys are missing the point of a right wing town hall.

The right wing mutilates the crap out of itself on terms it can understand during debates. Why would right wing audiences want to see the same in the town hall? Softball is the only way right wing voters get to see an example of them being given everything they want without direct personal opposition. Which is what they would get as president.

Think about it, no one ever really got in Bush’s face while he was president. Because he was the freaking president. Softball questions are actually a pretty great way to preview what each candidate as president would look like.

Also you guys are talking like it’s the media’s job to basically interrogate the right about why they are right wing generally, and that’s fair out in the world in the context of problem solving, but that’s unfair in the context of a town hall given that in other contexts you accept the existence of the right wing.

You never for example overtly and seriously argue that the right wing should be banned. You never overtly argue for a one party system. Think about what that means. It by definition means that you agree that the existence of the right wing is legitimate, in which case you must also grant it is legitimate for it to explore itself in some contexts unchallenged. This is one of those contexts.

Everyone knows everything there is to know about the right wing. These candidates are virtual clones of each other. There’s no new information to extract from them from either side. Just like everyone knows that those bishops all believe the same things, we know all these regressives believe the same things, wrong or not.

The function of the press as a watchdog is to challenge them on this stuff, true, which they don’t, but a town hall is supposed to be partisan friendly. This is actually like the one place where where softballs kind of are fair play.

Now, you cry but what about the left getting hardballs, how is that fair? Well it’s fair because that’s what the left wants. Progressives have a lot bigger decision to make intrinsically when choosing a direction and a leader.

This is about the fundamental difference between conservation and progress. There’s only one past, but there are many possible futures. Wanting to regress is a unidirectional goal, but wanting to make progress is an infinitely more complicated hypothetical because you can go in any direction except back.

This town hall is exactly what was expected, exactly what it should be, and that’s why I didn’t watch it.

TYT seems to understand this when they comment on the fear of being called liberal media. That’s exactly what the media are afraid of because that’s exactly what it would be if they were to ask hard (IE, how dare you be right wing) questions, in the context of a town hall.

The time to ask them that sort of question is out in the real world when their policies fail. That’s the kind of question you ambush them with while they are getting off a bus or otherwise have them cornered. Like if you catch them drinking some water you ask them how they’d feel if you told them deregulation put lead in it.

Even TYT must realize fairness isn’t it’s actual goal. Yes you are saying ask both hardball questions, but that’s what you want them to do. That’s even but it’s not fair. You’re asking to get your way in both cases, but another form of fair is to not get your way in both cases. Would you rather the left get softball questions too in the context of debates and town halls? Of course not. Because that’s not the function of a town hall for the left wing.

Realize. This is what the right wing wants and expects from partisan contexts that already agree with them. It is not what the left wing wants and expects. The right in these contexts wants easy mode, the left wants to be challenged. Conversely, in a left wing debate everyone in civil, in a right wing debate they tear eachother’s throats out. The media is right wing biased, no question, but this softball town hall is not in my opinion an example of it.

Underlore © 2013