Home
Paul Craig Roberts
Institute for Political Economy
If Trump Were Sexually Interested In Men, It Would Be Politically Incorrect To Say Anything About It
If Trump Were Sexually Interested In Men, It Would Be Politically Incorrect To Say Anything About It
The presstitute media are doing everything that propagandists can do to anoint Hillary to the Oval Office.
The main issue facing the electorate is whether the next administration will lead us into military conflict with Russia and by implication with China, not Trump’s sexual interest in women. The conflict would be thermo-nuclear. Trump is in the oligarchs’ crosshairs, because Trump disavows conflict with Russia.
A subsidiary issue is that Trump, unlike Hillary, is not owned by the oligarchs. If Trump were able to form a government that reflects this difference, there would be hope for peace and for Washington to turn its attention from service to the One Percent to service to the 99 Percent.
Guest Columns by Stephen Lendman
One-Party Rule in America
by Stephen Lendman
Democracy in America was farcical from the republic’s inception. Money-controlled duopoly rule runs things today.
Things are headed toward eliminating one of its two right wings in the presidential race if pro-Hillary supporters, backed by media scoundrels, get their way.
They’re calling for Trump to step aside, abandon his campaign, effectively letting Hillary be anointed Obama’s successor, making November voting a greater charade than already.
Sunday media scoundrel headlines, claiming Trump losing support from GOP leaders, read like a campaign obituary. Hillary is the establishment favorite. He’s the outlier, whatever he says or does – dark forces running America sabotaging his run for the White House.
Is November’s outcome predetermined? Shall we ahead of the curve proclaim president-elect Hillary? Should the remaining two presidential debates (sic) be cancelled? Why bother if Hillary already triumphed.
Was the entire campaign from its onset meaningless theater? Hillary was chosen DNC nominee before it began, Sanders going along for an extended 15-minutes of notoriety, little more than a shameless Hillary puppet after endorsing her for whatever special favors gotten in return, showing he’s as corrupt as America’s entire political establishment.
Even Ralph Nader turned on Trump, calling him a “betrayer in chief,” shamelessly supporting Hillary, the most ruthlessly dangerous presidential aspirant in US history.
He disgracefully ignored the menace she represents, failed to explain America’s deplorable political process too debauched to fix, voters having no say on how they’re governed or by whom.
Governance exclusively serving wealth, power and privilege is what politics in America is all about – no matter who holds top positions. They’re all cut from the same dirty cloth – Republicans like Democrats on all issues mattering most.
Nader understands. So why didn’t he explain, focusing his ire only on Trump, giving Hillary a pass, despite her deplorable public record since the 1990s.
Isn’t that enough to disqualify her from holding any public office? Letting her become head of state with her finger on the nuclear trigger, eager to squeeze it, is unthinkable.
Sunday editions of The New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal online, and pro-Hillary broadsheets nationwide are on the warpath, practically demanding Trump bow out – unheard of in US presidential politics, reaching for despicable new depths.
The latest uproar is over his lewd comments, released on videotape. Sleaze isn’t usually a political issue. Making it one might force half the Congress to step down – and correct the record on numerous past presidents guilty of amorous indiscretions.
Interviewed by the Wall Street Journal on Saturday, Trump said there’s “zero chance (he’ll) quit. I never, ever give up,” stressing Hillary is “a horribly flawed candidate.”
She’s guilty of war crimes, racketeering and perjury. She supports monied interests exclusively over popular ones. She’s disdainful of middle class values, uncaring about America’s most disadvantaged.
Most disturbing is the threat, maybe likelihood, of nuclear war with her, as president, able to launch it extrajudicially.
What matters more – Trump sleaze and everything else disreputable about him or saving humanity from possible annihilation? An easy choice in November.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Security Council Wars
by Stephen Lendman
America, Britain, France and their go-along Security Council partners in high crimes want war, not peace in Syria. Russia and China alone among world powers support responsible conflict resolution.
On October 8, dueling resolutions were proposed – both with no chance for passage. One drafted by Russia called for US-supported al-Nusra terrorists to be granted safe passage from eastern Aleppo to achieve cessation of hostilities in the war-torn city – vetoed by America, Britain and France.
The other proposed by France was a thinly veiled scheme for escalated war – wanting al-Nusra and other terrorists in and around Aleppo given no-fly zone protection, aided by US-led “coalition” warplanes, Russian and Syrian ones alone banned from overflying territory they hold.
A Russian Foreign Ministry statement minced no words, calling France’s (deplorable) draft resolution “a blatant attempt (to ban Syrian and Russian) flights over Aleppo, to provide…cover…for Jabhat al-Nusra terrorists and militants merged with them, in spite of the UN member-states’ obligations to combat the terrorist threat with the use of all available means.”
The resolution supported by Washington “immediately after (it along with Britain and France) refused to implement the Russian-US agreements on the Syria settlement, has grossly distorted the actual state of affairs and was of a politicized, unbalanced and one-sided nature.”
“The whole blame for escalation of tensions in the Syrian Arab Republic was shouldered in an indiscriminate way on the country’s authorities.”
“Regretting profoundly the damage inflicted on the efforts to resolve the Syrian crisis by supporters of the confrontation, Russia confirms its adamant adherence to a search for long-lasting political solution to the Syrian conflict.”
“We are ready for constructive joint work in the interests of responsible implementation of already reached agreements and coordination of extra steps which will allow Syrians to determine the future of their country through talks of all political, ethnic and religious groups without any external interference.”
Tireless Russian good faith efforts failed because Washington and its rogue allies want war, not peace, Syrian sovereign independence destroyed, not preserved, US-led Western puppet governance replacing democratic rule.
Syrian UN envoy Bashar al-Jaafari bluntly explained blocking Russia’s responsible resolution “confirms for the hundredth time that those who stood against it have no political will to fight against terrorism…to achieve inter-Syrian settlement.”
Russian UN envoy Vitaly Churkin, current Security Council president, called Saturday’s session “one of the most bizarre…in (SC) history” – two dueling resolutions proposed, knowing neither would be adopted.
America, Britain and France used Saturday’s proceedings to politicize their imperial interests – opposing vital Syrian/Russian vital efforts to free Aleppo from the scourge of US-backed terrorists, wanting them protected, free to continue mass slaughter and destruction, supported by Pentagon-led “coalition” warplanes.
Things seem headed inevitably toward East/West confrontation, Obama laying the groundwork for Hillary next year, looking increasingly more likely. War between the world’s two dominant nuclear powers may follow.
America’s rage for dominance threatens everyone everywhere. Hugely dangerous flashpoint conditions in Syria may spark explosive nuclear war putting humanity’s fate up for grabs.
Imperial madness may kill us all – yet public ignorance and dismissiveness remain mindless of the greatest of all possible threats.