IT BEARS REPEATING

First iteration, 25 May 2017

Talk show host and owner of the world’s most punchable face Bill Maher has been continuously denigrating Bernie-or-Busters, Jill Stein voters and everyone else who refused to fall in line with the Democratic establishment in the November elections. Citing no evidence apart from his own authoritative tone of voice, Maher has been asserting over and over and over again that Trump’s term thus far makes it undeniable that Hillary Clinton would have made a much better president, and that lefties who failed to vote for her ought to be feeling pretty bad about themselves right now. He insults and degrades woke progressives everywhere for calling Clinton the “lesser of two evils”, asserting that calling her an evil at all was ridiculous. (Editor's Note: We were not fans of "Bernie or Busters" since we saw them as misguidely following a demagogic charlatan, but at least they rose above the sheer complacent obtuneseness of the centrist rank-and-file that populates the Democratic party. As for jill Stein, her vote recount jig at the end of the 2016 election cycle, which seemed like a de facto alliance with Hillary Clinton, took away much of our faith in her candidacy as a genuine alternative.—PG)

I would like to take a moment to say that this lefty never once accused Hillary Clinton of being the lesser of two evils, and I agree with Bill Maher that such a characterization is indeed absurd. She is very plainly far more evil than Trump, and we would have been bat shit insane to elect her.

To this day I have yet to encounter a single establishment liberal who can use facts and logic to refute my long-held position that Hillary Clinton’s proposed no-fly zone in Syria made her intrinsically unelectable. I have met countless Democratic party loyalists who will scoff at this position and dismiss it as nonsense because it’s not something they’ve ever heard addressed on MSNBC or NPR, but I’ve yet to meet one who will sit down and argue fact-by-fact why Clinton’s no-fly zone was not vastly more horrifying than any of the rotten things Trump has done thus far. If Democrats would have addressed this extremely valid and pressing concern prior to the election, Hillary Clinton could have won, but they did not. Clinton kept calling for the no-fly zone with greater and greater fervor, despite top generals testifying at the time that a no-fly zone could require a full-scale war with both Syria and Russia, and no Democrat ever stepped forward to satisfactorily field this concern. Campaigning on the “Let’s start World War 3” platform is bound to lose a few voters.

 

Not only did this maniacal plot make Hillary Clinton the greater evil by a very, very wide margin, but it’s hard to imagine how a candidate could possibly be more evil. What could be more evil than tempting human extinction via nuclear holocaust? This woman has an extensive history of pushing for spectacular military blunders seemingly at every opportunity, and yet there she was campaigning on the position that America should invade a nation with a large Russian military presence and begin destroying airbases and shooting down anything that flies in a region where Russian military planes are conducting operations. This in a nation that America’s unelected power establishment has been lying about profusely in order to manufacture consent for regime change in the strategically valuable Syria. Despite being diametrically opposed to nearly all of Trump’s policy positions, as a mother I was immensely relieved when Clinton managed to lose the most winnable election in living memory.

Woke progressives need to stop letting these obnoxious, condescending establishment shills walk all over us. While we’re politely trying to reason with these assholes, they’re steamrolling us into silence with relentless, well-funded, fact-free “I’m right and you’re wrong” diatribes. We should be the ones speaking like we know we’re right, because we do.

I would like to wrap up by asking the reader to please hear my following response to Bill Maher in Maher’s own self-assured, authoritative voice:

Actually Bill, ya smug little fuckstick, Hillary Clinton was a disaster and she deserved to lose. You don’t get to campaign on a promise to start World War 3 and then whine when people don’t vote for you. You’re not going to bully us into supporting the next bloodthirsty neocon the Dems try to run either, and if you’ve got a problem with that you can go fuck yourself with a GMO cucumber.

See? We can do it too. Tell these pricks off and let’s take control of this world before they get us all killed.

Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed this, please consider helping me out by sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following me on Twitter, or even tossing me some money on Patreon so I can keep this gig up.

“Advocacy for a no-fly zone is not the same as advocacy of war.”

Per definition it literally is. Taking out the air capabilities of a sovereign nation and controlling their airspace is intrinsically an act of war. What would you call it if China installed a no-fly zone over Washington? Read this 2013 articlefrom the New York Times about the debate of a no-fly zone; this was back before the Russian air force was added to the equation, and already it would have required 70,000 troops to invade Syria and cripple Assad’s air capabilities. But no, that’s not advocacy of war, right? Perfectly normal diplomatic business as long as it’s the US doing it, right? That’s American privilege at its most pernicious.

“Clinton’s stance was further explained with emphasis on negotiation, planning, and the avoidance of war.”

Just like she did in Libya, right? Oh no that’s right, she plunged the nation into chaos, created a collapsed state where terrorism and slavery now reign, then laughed at Gaddafi’s mutilation. She both loves war, and sucks at it. You don’t get to be president when you’re that kind of person.

---

 

There is no basis for claiming we could have trusted such a person to negotiate a no-fly zone in a region where the air force of a nuclear superpower is conducting operations.

“Also, the current administration is looking into no-fly zones with a receptive Russia.”

Collaborating with Russia to create safe zones from jihadist factions is not even a tiny bit remotely the same as the no-fly zone the US government has been debating. Russia and Syria have been allies for generations and they’re working closely together; Putin isn’t talking about taking out Assad’s air force and shooting down his planes.