The 2016 election has been the most pro-war election that I have witnessed in my many years (that’s right I am an old fart)…….regardless who wins this stupid thing the US is poised for a generation more of war and wars…..
If we cannot vote for a person to be president that could end all this lame ass interventionism then how can we fight against the war hawks and their handlers, the M-IC?
If Hillary Clinton hangs on to win the presidency, liberal Democrats have vowed to block her appointment of Wall Street-friendly officials to key Cabinet and sub-Cabinet jobs. But there has been little organized resistance to her choosing hawkish foreign policy advisers.
Indeed, Washington’s foreign policy establishment has purged almost anyone who isn’t part of the neoconservative/liberal-interventionist “group think.” That’s why pretty much everyone who “matters” agrees about the need to push around Russia, China, Syria, Iran, etc.
Reflecting that attitude, Sunday’s lead editorial in the neocon Washington Post hailed the broad consensus within the Establishment for more warlike actions once President Obama is gone, taking with him what the Post calls Obama’s “self-defeating passivity.”
One idea is to defeat the neocons at home….sweep this sort of interventionism from the halls of Congress……
The American Conservative has taken this question to task……
Back in June, I identified five incumbent senators with very hawkish foreign policy records that faced difficult re-election bids or had announced an intention to retire. Of the five I named, four are trailing their challengers or in very competitive races: Mark Kirk of Illinois, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, and Marco Rubio of Florida. The four Republicans were elected to the Senate in the 2010 wave year, and they were all elected in purple or blue states. Even if Trump weren’t the nominee, they would still have been facing a larger electorate in a presidential year in states that are more likely than not to vote for the Democratic nominee for president. Rubio has the best chance of those four to win, and that follows his decision to renege on his earlier pledge not to seek re-election. The fifth senator I mentioned was John McCain, who seemed to be struggling earlier in the year but has since opened up a substantial lead over his challenger. Unlike the other four, McCain isn’t seeking re-election for the first time, and `he is running a traditionally much more Republican state. While Kirk and Johnson appear to be heading to defeat next week, McCain seems to be safe. The other two are close enough that it’s hard to say what will happen.
It is time for the American voter to remove their heads from whatever candidate’s ass…..and start considering the money and man power that is being wasted on conflicts that have NO value to the population of this country.
Time to vote anyone with the war hawk mentality out of government and look for people that will put the country first and the M-IC second.