2008 Election

good cop, bad cop

The 2008 "election" is a choice between the Rockefeller Republicans and the neo-cons, between the Council on Foreign Relations (Obama / Biden) and the American Enterprise Institute (McCain), between the old guard of foreign policy and the crazies. We need better choices than that if we are going to be able to use some of the rest of the oil for relocalization, renewable energy and "power down" strategies to mitigate the end of the age of oil.


Pointless party conventions in the U.S.
Damage control is the best the Democrats and the Republicans can aim for in Denver and St. Paul
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
August 23, 2008 at 12:00 AM EDT

this year's conventions will be choreographed with precision. No opportunities for mischief. No margin for error. No unscripted moments. The Beijing Olympics, organized by Communists who believe in centralized planning, have provided more occasions for spontaneity. And at least in Beijing, no one has known in advance who would win.


How to Tell Obama and Clinton Apart

from the Progressive Review, Washington, D.C. www.prorev.com

How Clinton and Obama are alike

How Clinton and Obama are different

Obama also . . .

Clinton also . . .

MSNBC has a fancy webpage with slick graphics and video clips of each candidate on the issues at

January 03, 2008
Vote for Change? Atrocity-Linked U.S. Officials Advising Democratic, GOP Presidential Frontrunners
Independent journalist Allan Nairn and American Conservative correspondent Kelley Beaucar Vlahos discuss a little-addressed facet of the 2008 campaign: many of the top advisers to leading presidential candidates are ex-U.S. officials involved in atrocities around the world.

AMY GOODMAN: Are you saying that there’s no difference between these candidates?
ALLAN NAIRN: Well, fundamentally, there’s no difference on the basic principle of, are you against the killing of civilians and are you willing to enforce the murder laws. If we were willing to enforce the murder laws, the headquarters of each of these candidates could be raided, and various advisers and many candidates could be hauled away by the cops, because they have backed various actions that, under established principles like the Nuremberg Principles, like the principles set up in the Rwanda tribunals, the Bosnia tribunals, things that are unacceptable, like aggressive war, like the killing of civilians for political purposes. So, in a basic sense, there is no choice.
But there is a difference in this sense: the US is so vastly powerful, the US influences and has the potential to end so many millions of lives around the world, that if, let’s say, you have two candidates that are 99% the same--there’s only 1% difference between them--if you’re talking about decisions that affect a million lives--1% of a million is 10,000--that’s 10,000 lives. So, even though it’s a bitter choice, if you choose the one who is going to kill 10,000 fewer people, well, then you’ve saved 10,000 lives. We shouldn’t be limited to that choice. It’s unacceptable. And Americans should start to realize that it’s unacceptable.


2008 presidential charade promises deepening of government criminality and expansion of war
by Larry Chin
Global Research, January 10, 2008
Online Journal

Every election in modern US history has been a criminal manipulation, choreographed and rigged by political elites and performed by hand-picked elite puppets, each backed by their teams of corrupt war criminals, intelligence/security “advisors” and think tank assets. The 2008 affair will be no different.

It is time once again to dispel the mass insanity and unfounded hopes as another fresh election hell ensues. There will be no savior, no end to the continuing world crisis, and absolutely no “change."

The monsters behind each candidate

As the American public once again gets swept up into another beyond, ridiculous carnival over which “presidential personality” is most “likeable," which preselected puppet makes a better speech, etc., there is little or no attention paid to the individuals behind each candidate; the forces that are pulling the strings, and actually setting the geopolitical agenda.

The Washington Post has provided a complete list of each puppet’s respective “masters," which must be studied line by line:

The War Over The Wonks: A list of national security and foreign policy advisors to the leading presidential candidates from both parties

This list holds the key to the central issue: war.

As the names reveal, every major candidate (the favored puppets with any real chance of being selected) fronts for agendas set by current and former neoconservative and neoliberal “security” officers and politicos, members of the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, and apparatuses such as the Heritage Foundation, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Brookings Institution, AIPAC, the Hoover Institution, the American Enterprise Institute, and others.

Some of the most nightmarish individuals who walk the earth today can be found behind the candidates, as follows:

John McCain

Henry Kissinger
Richard Armitage, former deputy secretary of state, covert operative and lifelong Bush ally
Robert “Bud” McFarlane, Reagan/Bush national security adviser, Iran, Contra
William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard (neocon)
Alexander Haig, Reagan/Bush secretary of state
George Shultz, Reagan/Bush secretary of state, Hoover Institution, Bechtel
Brent Scowcroft, Ford, George H.W. Bush national security adviser
James Woolsey, former CIA director
Lawrence Eagleburger, George H.W. Bush secretary of state
William Ball, Reagan administration Navy secretary
Colin Powell

Barack Obama

Zbigniew Brzezinski
Anthony Lake, Clinton administration national security adviser
Sarah Sewall, Clinton administration deputy secretary of defense, counter, insurgency czar
Richard Clarke, Clinton and Bush administration counter, terrorism czar
Susan Rice, Clinton administration Africa specialist and NSC member, Brookings
Bruce Riedel, former CIA officer, NSC Near East and Asian affairs, Brookings

Hillary Clinton

Bill Clinton
Madeline Albright, Clinton administration secretary of state
Sandy Berger, Clinton administration national security adviser
Richard Holbrooke, Clinton administration UN ambassador
Gen. Wesley Clark, Clinton era Kosovo commander
Leslie Gelb, Council on Foreign Relations, former State and Defense Department official
Martin Indyk, Clinton administration Israel ambassador, Brookings
Strobe Talbott, Clinton administration deputy secretary of state, co, creator of Caspian oil “6+2” group, Brookings
Jeffrey Smith, former CIA general counsel

Rudy Giuliani

Kim Holmes, former George W. Bush assistant secretary of state, Heritage Foundation
Louis Freeh, former FBI director
Stephen Yates, former deputy assistant to Dick Cheney
Norman Podhoretz, Hudson Institute (neocon)
Kenneth Weinstein, Hudson Institute
Numerous individuals connected to the neocon Hoover Institution and Heritage Foundation

Mike Huckabee

Huckabee has been secretive about his team. Among the names floated so far:

Ed Rollins, Republican operative
Frank Gaffney, neocon
John Bolton, George W. Bush U.N. ambassador (as of this writing, Bolton’s participation is a strong rumor)

John Edwards

Edwards boasts a large team of career military/intelligence officers, most of whom are “rank and file." Among the more notable names:

Barry Blechman, Jimmy Carter assistant director of US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, founder and chairman of the Henry L. Stimson Center
Irving Blickstein, former assistant deputy chief of Naval operations, RAND Corporation

Mitt Romney

Cofer Black, former CIA and George W. Bush state department counter terrorism officer, vice president of Blackwater USA
Alberto Cardenas, lobbyist and former chairman of Florida Republican party
Roger Noriega, George W. Bush assistant secretary for Western hemisphere affairs
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R, Mich.), ranking member, House Intelligence Committee

2008 Presidential Candidates
  Obama McCain McKinney Nader
impeachment of Bush / Cheney
opposes impeachment, wants to replace Bush with himself, would be able to use Bush's illegal powers if President
opposes impeachment, endorsed by Bush
last act in Congress was to introduce a resolution to impeach Bush, Cheney and Rice, the Democratic Party did not support her effort
supports impeachment
war on Iraq
claims to have been against war from start, but doesn't want to end it quickly, voted for funding the war, supports US bases in Iraq and leaving some troops there
vehement supporter
voted against the War on Iraq and against funding the war
against the war
silent about Bush's complicity in 9/11, claims that the attacks could not have been foreseen, echoing Condi Rice's comments on this topic
wrote a foreword to Popular Mechanics book attacking 9/11 complicity by focusing mostly on false claims
most oustpoken Member of Congress about the problems with the official story of 9/11, sponsored only hearing on Capitol Hill that examined these issues (July 2005), employed expert historian John Judge on her Congressional staff, a close friend of 9/11 investigator Michael Ruppert
when asked about foreknowledge in March 2002, Nader said it sounded like the April Glaspie situation -- the US ambassador who told Saddam Hussein in July 1990 that the US would not get involved with his dispute with Kuwait, thus luring Iraq into the "Desert Storm" conflict
was a supporter of Palestinian rights before being elected to the Senate. Obama's first appearance after his de facto winning of the Democratic nomination was to speak at the AIPAC convention. Strongly tilted toward Israel, does not support a balanced approach.
vehement support for Israeli imperialism and occupation
As a member of Congress, she consistently supported Israeli and Palestinian peace groups, and received countless smears for doing so.
Nader has been a long time supporter of Middle East peace (his family is Lebanese).
In 2007, Sen. Obama suggested the US may need to intervene there, which could make the War on Iraq seem small in comparison.
military budget
supports Bush's military budget
supports Bush's military budget
voted against Bush's military budget
not in Congress, but opposed to it
Patriot Act
voted to reauthorize
voted for the original version, voted to reauthorize
voted against
not in Congress, but opposed to it
Peak Oil
does not say anything about it
does not say anything about it
thinks the oil companies should build more refineries to refine oil that does not exist
oil drilling
supporting Republican talking points instead of discussing Peak Oil
uses "oil drilling" as a Rove style "wedge issue"
does not say anything about it
Climate Change
supports carbon trading type approaches, but not a cut off of polluting technologies
supports carbon trading type approaches, but not a cut off of polluting technologies
advocate for renewable energy for decades
nuclear power in favor of more nuclear reactors, as long as they can be made safe and a suitable waste dump found
in favor of more nuclear reactors, doesn't say we should fix any safety problems
supports clean energy instead
a campaigner for safe energy for nearly four decades
highways campaigned for adding Illinois expressways in the 2005 highway bill
Amtrak has a few words in support of improving train service
opposed to funding Amtrak
strong supporter

Kyoto Treaty

part of an effort as a State Senator to oppose Kyoto      
NAFTA & WTO has "free trader" advisors from the University of Chicago, has rhetoric against NAFTA but many advisors who support it
voted for NAFTA,
strong supporter
strong opponent
a leading campaigner against
genetic frankenfood somewhere between supporter and opponent
wealth millionaire, lives in a mansion next to the University of Chicago (elite neighborhood)
his wife is multi-millionaire, has multiple houses
not wealthy
millionaire but lives humbly, does not own a car