Creating a better world through words and images

Artwork/Political Cartoons
Artwork/Political Cartoons
Artwork/Political Cartoons
Artwork/Political Cartoons

[Thank you, Niko House, for drawing my attention to this very interesting exchange, “a very entertaining back-and-forth,” indeed.]

Colbert: “Why do you think that THE PEOPLE — why do you think he (Bernie) has got, while not the majority of the support in the Democratic Party, right now, he’s got the plurality, to use that twenty-cent word…?”

Christie: “Because he’s one of the only people up there who’s actually talking about ideas.”

Colbert: “Elizabeth Warren talks about ideas.”

Christie: “No, she doesn’t.”

Colbert: “Yes, she does!”

Christie: “No!”

Colbert: “She talks about all the same ideas that Bernie talks about!”

Christie: “No! No, she used to talk about all the same ideas, then she backed off of it. And now everybody doesn’t like her. Because the people who are the real progressives don’t think she’s genuine, anymore. And the people who are the moderates don’t trust her. So, she’s in No Man’s Land.”

Precisely right…

As a “progressive,” Sen. Warren has greatly damaged her brand and given many of her former supporters grave doubts about her character, allegiances, and priorities.

In terms of policy proposals, Sen. Warren remains one of the top three candidates in this race, along with Sen. Sanders and Rep. Gabbard.

But in political terms (former New Jersey governor and emblem of corruption) Chris Christie is 100% correct: Warren is toast.

She’s dealt herself one too many critical blows already this year, thanks to her Obama/Clinton consultants. There’s no path forward for her in 2020, except damaging the progressive frontrunner on behalf of Mike Bloomberg and the establishment.

(Her less charitable critics, including myself, have suggested that that’s what she’s been after, all along.)

“Mike Bloomberg has been publishing videos attacking Bernie Sanders and Bernie supporters for being ‘toxic’—and then Bloomberg fabricated grotesque fake quotes” [“praising despotism”] “and attributed them to Bernie.” – from an article published by

This is what the establishment does: It projects.

For the second consecutive primary season, an obscenely rich right-winger with an appallingly Trump-like history is smearing the most gentle, compassionate, moderate/centrist candidate with the most popular policy proposals and the least aggressive, least white supporters.

In 2016, David Brock (who called Prof. Anita Hill “a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty”) tarred us with the invented “Bernie Bro” smear — created by the Clinton campaign, as reported by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, Glenn Greenwald. (This was the same political machine that had dubbed Obama’s 2008 supporters “Obama Boys,” accusing then-Sen. Obama’s supporters of being unusually aggressive and “sexist.”)

Was it true? Were Bernie’s 2015-16 on-line supporters unusually aggressive or hostile? Not that I saw, and I was hopping everywhere from DailyKos, The Huffington Post,,, The New York Times, Facebook, TruthDig, and beyond.

More significantly, Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting’s former managing editor, Julie Hollar (today, FAIR’s senior election analyst), recently reported the March 2016 study that found Sec. Clinton’s on-line supporters nearly twice as “threatening” as Sanders’s supporters (30% to 16%).

I can attest to that.

Where was the MSM’s reporting about all of the “Hillary Harridans” (most of whom were bullying white men)? Why didn’t the MSM go with a sexist framing of her “toxic” trolls, many of whom were literally on the payroll of David Brock, the Clintons’ answer to Karl Rove?

(They could have called out the “Brock Bros,” at least, and acquainted their audiences with Brock’s shameful history in the service of no-holds-barred, right-wing politics.)

Now, in 2020, a serially racist and misogynist modern plutocrat — Mayor “Stop & Frisk” himself, who has paid the better part of a billion dollars to the DNC and bought himself a candidacy, thanks to changed debate rules and paid staffers on the DNC’s “Rules Committee” — is trying to paint Bernie Sanders, the candidate of the working class and people of color, as a proponent of DESPOTISM.

(Positively despicable.)

Once again, the pot is calling the kettle black.

Colloquially put, haters gonna’ hate…

That these haters represent the elite — and the people they’re hating on represent the most vulnerable and marginalized — well, that’s something they’d rather not talk about.

(It makes the Identity Politics “Woke” sticker on their sleeves look like a tasteless joke.)

A disingenuous attack on the only candidate not funded by corporations and billionaires (Bernie) has ended in yet another painfully hypocritical reversal… and a brand-new super PAC (Sen. Warren’s).

Apparently, it’s time for Warren to resume her former practice of “sucking up to billionaires!”

Last September, The New York Times reported that the vast majority of funds raised for Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s “100% grassroots funded” presidential campaign came from corporations and billionaire megadonors hosting one swanky fundraiser after another for the Massachusetts senator (far more than she needed for her Senate race).

And yet, not long ago, Sen. Warren was on the debate stage in New Hampshire condemning all of her male rivals for “sucking up to billionaires.”

(She’d already tagged Pete Buttigieg for his “wine-cave” fundraisers — and Mayor Pete had already hit back, noting that Warren, herself, has attended plenty of exclusive, billionaire-hosted fundraisers: “This is the problem with issuing purity tests you cannot yourself pass.” Democratic Party grandee and former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell chimed in: “Can you spell hypocrite? …She didn’t have any trouble taking our money the year before… All of a sudden, we were bad guys and power brokers and influence-peddlers. In 2018, we were wonderful.”)

Forbes reported in November that although Buttigieg and Biden are the billionaires’ favorite candidates, the campaigns of Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar have been funded by 27 billionaires (between the two of them).

Yet on the debate stage in New Hampshire, Sen. Warren sought to tar Bernie Sanders with the same brush as Buttigieg and Biden, the two most billionaire-dependent candidates in the race. She hung her lie on a technicality, because Bernie Sanders actually does have one super PAC backing him (one that she’d previously celebrated): “Our Revolution.”


Our Revolution is composed of nine 100% grassroots-funded progressive organizations: The Sunrise Movement, Indivisible, Movement Voter Project, Make the Road Action, Center for Popular Democracy Action, Dream Defenders, People’s Action, Our Revolution, and National Nurses United (environmental groups, progressives, nurses, immigrants’ rights groups, voter rights groups — representing the opposite end of the spectrum dominated by the billionaires and corporate lobbies that have historically backed Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and the rest).

Mike Figueredo of The Humanist Report asks a perfectly legitimate question of Sen. Warren: “Do you honestly believe that Dream Defenders and Our Revolution and the Sunrise Movement are comparable to the Wall Street-funded super PACs that back people like Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden?”

We’re waiting for your answer, Senator. With baited breath, we await your next Bernie-smearing contortion of the truth, you sexist, ratfucking, culture-appropriating, white privilege-reeking, Trump-applauding, right-wing-talking-point-spouting HYPOCRITE.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren in her New Hampshire speech after finishing a distant fourth: “We can unite our party. We can unite people… we can unite people…”

(Unity… at least until it’s time to stoke division and smear Bernie Sanders and his supporters, then “unity” goes out the window!)

Warren (in that same speech): “The question for us Democrats is whether it will be a long, bitter rehash of the same old divides in our party, or whether we can find another way…”

(Surely, Senator, the way we “unite” our party is by reviving the old “Bernie Bro” smear invented by the Clinton campaign — brilliant!)

Warren: “…the fight between factions in our party has taken a sharp turn in recent weeks, with ads mocking other candidates and with supporters of some candidates shouting curses at other Democratic candidates.”

(Boo, says the audience…)

(Only the truth is that Sen. Sanders has refused to attack his rivals and expressly forbidden his supporters from going negative. In fact, he’s the only candidate in this race unilaterally disarming in the name of unity — just as he did in 2016. “I don’t care about your damn emails!” he told Sec. Clinton, refusing to go negative. Then and now, Bernie just wants to talk about POLICY and defeating Trump in November.)

Warren: “These harsh tactics might work, if you are willing to burn down the rest of the party in order to be the last man standing.”

(And there’s the irony: Apparently, Warren is completely willing to “burn down the rest of the party” in order to be the last woman standing. She’s willing to revive a totally unfounded David Brock smear and open up all of those bitter old wounds from 2016. In January, on the eve of the 2020 Iowa Caucus, Elizabeth Warren tried to take down the left’s best hope against Trump by bringing up a year-old conversation and characterizing it in a way she’d never characterized it before — suddenly turning on her “friend” from Vermont, implying that he is a SEXIST.)


(“Bernie’s winning? Burn it all down!” In the name of “unity,” burn those bridges, Senator! Alienate Sanders’ army of supporters by following the Hillary Clinton ratfucking playbook — surely that’s the way to “unite” the party and defeat Donald Trump!)

Warren: “They might work… if you think only you have all the answers, and only you are the solution to all our problems…”

(Now, that is rich. Warren and her campaign have spent the previous year saying: “I have a plan!” “She’s the one with the plans!” “Her plans are the best, so Bernie should drop out (anyone still supporting Bernie over Warren is “sexist,” because her plans are the best)! “Elizabeth Warren has all the answers!” “She is the solution to all our problems!”)

(Way to weaponize identity and trivialize sexism, Senator! You’ve certainly got the solution to cure “unity” — divisiveness and vicious personal attacks that no one believes!)

The Democratic establishment to Elizabeth Warren: “We need a solution to all of our problems, and ‘all of our problems’ are named BERNIE SANDERS.”

Warren in response: “I have a plan for that!”

(And then she proceeded to turn herself into a kamikaze warrior for the establishment, willing to blow up her political career in the hopes of ending Bernie’s. How’s that working out for you, Senator? Terribly, but you keep doubling down, covering yourself with shame. It’s what Hillary would want. That, and a second term for her old pal, Trump — as long as it stops that horrible, horrible Bernie “No one likes him” Sanders and his majority-nonwhite, majority-female, working class army of LGBTQ-friendly “bros,” aka, the people who comported themselves most civilly in 2016, per a study cited by Julie Hollar of Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting.)


(Unnamed person on unspecified website) writes “We’ve seen crazy things happen (Trump getting elected), but Bernie is the Democrats version of Ross Perot. He WILL NOT win the middle. The middle decides. You read it here first.”

I respond:

That’s the conventional wisdom, but it’s as wrong now as it was in 2016. The “middle” are independents (45% of registered voters, with the GOP and Democrats tied at 27%) — and Bernie is beating Trump by 18% among independents. That’s the best of any of the current Democratic crop.

(Unnamed person on unspecified website) writes “all the polls, like the one you posted about independents, were in favor of Clinton in 2016.”

While that’s true, most of those polls showed Clinton winning by 2-4%, within the margin of error — it was very tight (and those same polls showed Bernie beating Trump by double digits, a much safer bet, contrary to the conventional wisdom).

It was the chattering class of pundits who gave people the impression that Clinton couldn’t possibly lose to Trump… even when she was clearly the most vulnerable.

Conversely, it was the analysts and researchers, like myself, who reviewed the data and predicted Clinton’s loss.

(Unnamed person on unspecified website) writes “…there are more democrats who won’t vote for him than republicans wouldn’t for Trump.”

You may have a point. Many mainstream Democrats will be reluctant to vote for Bernie. They have been conditioned to hate Bernie the way they hated Obama in 2008. (Sec. Clinton’s campaign had demeaned then-Sen. Obama’s supporters as misogynist “Obama boys” and her campaign had even questioned his “American-ness,” his religion, and his country of origin, feeding into some Birtherism, along with some other ugly racist tactics. As a result of that divisive primary, 25% of Clinton’s supporters became PUMAs — an acronym for “Party Unity My Ass!” — and “Democrats for McCain.” In the general election, some 3 million Clinton supporters voted for McCain-Palin against Obama. Contrast that to the number of 2016 Bernie voters who ended up voting for Trump: 12%, less than half as many crossovers as the Clinton folks in 2008.)

But my feeling is that the Democrats who dislike Bernie are among the most consistent voters in presidential elections. They will come out and vote for Bernie — not because they want to, but because they’re reliable “Blue No Matter Who” voters, and they hate Trump even more than they hate Bernie. It’s probably a close call after the years of smears against Sanders, including the Clinton-invented “Bernie Bro” smear — but I think they hate Trump a tiny bit more than they hate Bernie, the most popular politician in the country with the broadest, most diverse, majority-female, working class coalition, including teachers, Starbucks workers, Wal-Mart “associates,” and Amazon slaves… plus the military, where Bernie tops even Trump in individual donations.

(Unnamed person on unspecified website) writes “…the US isn’t ready to pay for what Bernie has in store for us. Scary to think about for me. Buttigieg has a better shot to win the masses IMO. He’s somewhat moderate…”

I respond (mentally, “scarier than second-term TRUMP or first-term Buttigieg?!”) but in actuality, I respond):

I think that the conventional wisdom has again misled you. When it comes to policy, Bernie Sanders is a centrist. He’s the most popular politician in the country for several years running, with great appeal to rural, conservative-leaning folks, as well as the Democratic base.

Most of his proposals poll at 60-80% with the American people: tax the wealthy, confront climate change, provide healthcare and a livable minimum wage, etc.

Sure, Buttigieg is being presented by the war-loving corporate media as a moderate, but he’s far from moderate on most issues. When it comes to foreign policy, he’s either with Trump or to his right.

Furthermore, Buttigieg is deeply unpopular in South Bend and has 0% support from the African-American community. He’s been caught faking support from black Indianans and editing video to make it appear that his comment at a CNN Town Hall received a round of applause… when it had received none. (He also paid over $40,000 to “Shadow, Inc,” the company behind the app that miscounted the vote in Iowa. #MayorCheat is trending for a reason, and it’s no conspiracy theory.)

Buttigieg’s political positions have truly been all over the place, and he’s the #1 recipient of billionaire donations. He’s been evasive about his work for the corporate sector and U.S. intelligence community. And his debate performances have been poor, garnering much criticism (he’s no Amy Klobuchar).

In fact, the more people get to know Pete, the less they like or trust him. IMO, he’s a sure loser in a general election against Trump, and the polls confirm that, too.

Meanwhile, Bernie’s been polling best against Trump for two consecutive election cycles. And he’s been winning in 2020 with over 40% of the votes of people of color, far more than any of his rivals. His most favorable demographics are from people of color. He’s the only candidate with more nonwhite support than white support and more women supporters than men. Plus, he’s bringing millions of new people into the process, who are registering and participating in large numbers. He has a grassroots volunteer army of 1.2 million supporters, well organized in one state after another. And he’s breaking record after record for crowds and fundraising — with no PACs or big donors, just small, individual donations.

If all that doesn’t make Sanders our best candidate against Donald Trump — a real populist vs. a fake one — then I can’t imagine who would be better… Ron Paul? Tom Hanks? Captain America?

(It’s certainly not Buttigieg, Biden, Warren, Klobuchar, or Mike “Billionaire” Bloomberg!)

In any case, I appreciate your willingness to jump in and engage. Have a great day!

After the stolen Iowa Caucus, Norm Solomon says that progressives need to take heart, because the DNC can’t rig everything, and anyone who says otherwise is just plain giving up.

But it’s not about “fatalism” or “defeatism,” Norm, it’s about strategy.

It’s about recognizing that the leader of our movement is wearing kid gloves as he’s fighting for all of our lives — and pulling his punches, at that.

Bernie’s campaign is now referring to the rigged 2020 Iowa Caucus as a “focus group” and saying “Let’s move on.”

Forgive me, Senator, but that’s just foolish. Just as firing Matt Orfalea when he was slandered was foolish. Just as chastising Zephyr Teachout for calling Joe Biden “corrupt” – when Joe Biden is manifestly corrupt — was foolish. Just as distancing yourself from Cenk Uygur over a bunch of college-boy nonsense was foolish…

It’s bad strategy, Bernie.

(I’m with Jimmy Dore on this one).

Refusing to call out the DNC’s theft of the Iowa Caucus — not even criticizing Buttigieg’s Guiado-esque power-grab (or CNN for legitimizing it) — is like signaling surrender to the establishment at the very onset of the rigging of the 2020 primary.

It does not augur well.

It’s like Obama allowing a Citigroup executive to name his first cabinet — then “looking forward” and shielding Wall Street executives (along with war criminals) from anything resembling justice.

When the left refuses to fight, our neo-fascist establishment comprehends that none of its high crimes and treachery will be challenged. They can butcher millions of Muslims (literally, under Trump’s three immediate predecessors alone). They can torture the hell out of thousands of totally innocent civilians. They can illegally spy on everyone and TOTALLY GET AWAY WITH IT.

They can rig as many primaries as they want, as blatantly as they want, with no repercussions.

The famous quote from Frederick Douglass comes to mind:

“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or both.”

There’s a reason I call these usurers, slavers, election-riggers, and mass-murderers of Muslims “neo-fascists” — in so many ways, all they offer the world is duplicity, genocide, tyranny, and wholesale ecological collapse.

It is no exaggeration to say that they are humanity’s and democracy’s worst enemies…

…and Bernie’s playing fucking “footsie” with them!

In his own way, Bernie is far too like Sen. Warren, who has been debasing herself on behalf of the establishment ever since 2016, when the Dems first began dangling VP slots before her.

For as long as Sen. Warren has been involved in national politics, “Harvard’s First Woman of Color” has always signaled total acquiescence to the powers that be. She openly promises to work within the allowed parameters of the system — meaning that, like Obama, the only “incremental” progress she genuinely offers will be for the neocon agenda and Wall Street: drone attacks will continue; the Iran regime-change project, advanced by our last several presidents, will continue; GITMO; spying on citizens; militarized police; school privatization; fossil-fuel exploitation; austerity; the Prison Industrial Complex; and Military Industrial Complex will flourish.

Wall Street insolvency, “trade” pacts that elevate corporations over sovereign states, and the deregulation of our banking (and other) laws will continue… until the U.S. economy and our infrastructure — along with the oceans — simultaneously collapse. (That’s karma for you!)

Like his “friend,” Elizabeth Warren (the Senator from the Cherokee Nation — only not), America’s most popular politician, Bernie, signals that he’ll never truly hold the neo-fascists’ feet to the fire.

He always plays nice.

He never delivers the knock-out blow.

He doesn’t care about Sec. Clinton’s “damn e-mails” (over 30,000 privatized e-mails on an insecure server in the Clintons’ closet… a server that was supposed to be secure and also the property of the people of the United States, subject to review under normal FOIA rules — that’s the Freedom of Information Act, which Sec. Clinton violated in order to run the U.S. State Department as her own private piggy bank for influence-peddling and self-enriching… Ask the Saudis and the Russians if they didn’t “Pay to Play.” Uranium One isn’t some “Republican conspiracy theory,” it’s evidence of the corruption of our government… like when Clinton’s State Department faked its environmental review of the Keystone KL pipeline in order to get the project moving, as was reported in The Guardian).

Like Sen. Warren, Bernie often refuses to challenge the establishment’s bogus narratives, like virtually all of Russiagate. And he refuses to refute war-fostering lies about Venezuela, Syria, Russia, and Iran.

In 2016 and now, in 2020, Bernie’s genteel restraint, going along to get along, has only emboldened these criminals.

And that in my opinion is a YUUUGE strategic miscalculation — one that promises to hobble our movement, once again.

The DNC and Clinton/Obama cabal, representing the oligarchy, has made it abundantly clear that they will not allow Bernie Sanders to be nominated, no matter how brazenly they need to rig this process.

They are throwing everything at him — and not just “shade.”

With their billions of dollars (counting Bloomberg alone) and corporate media backing them every step of the way, they will most likely succeed: once again, our movement will be knee-capped.

The establishment has signaled, “WE WILL RIG THIS PRIMARY EVERY BIT AS MUCH AS WE HAVE TO!”

In response, Bernie is signaling:

“I’ll only hit back occasionally and never hard.

“I won’t demand audits of obviously rigged primaries.

“I won’t insist that international election monitors, including the Carter Center, oversee the rest of the primary.

“I won’t point out when exit polls are way off in multiple southern states using Diebold machines — so far off that they far exceed the international standard for election fraud.

“I won’t beef when scores of precincts are closed on election day in state after state, or when hundreds of thousands of voters are removed from the rolls, or when millions of votes go uncounted, as they did in California, alone, in 2016, thanks to the efforts of CA Secretary of State Alex Padilla, who inexplicably remains in that job (because progressives don’t have half the fight in us that the Tea Party did).

“And at the Convention in July, I’ll just roll over and support whatever neoliberal, neoconservative scumbag the DNC selects as our nominee, even if they’re arguably as bad as Trump or worse…

“I furthermore promise that, even after you cheat to ‘win’ this primary, I will not join the Green Party or Democratic Socialists of America or Nick Brana’s People’s Party.

“Instead I will do record numbers of stump speeches for the corrupt loser that Trump will very likely annihilate in November, dragging a Republican super-majority behind him.

“My name is Bernie Sanders, and I am a genuine mensch and lover of humanity.


That, dear Bernie, is why you will “lose” in 2020 the same way you “lost” in 2016: because you refuse to fight for yourself, but more importantly, you refuse to fight for our votes.

(That’s why you’ve only got my writing, this time around, and nothing more — not my dollars, nor my activism, which I’m saving for local causes, including defending teachers. In 2016 you let me down in a big way, then did 40 rallies for the only candidate running to Trump’s right — an amoral authoritarian arguably posing a greater threat to America and humanity than any presidential candidate since George W. Bush. After you folded to Sec. Clinton like a cheap tent, I literally had a nervous breakdown. YOU LET US ALL DOWN.)

Bernie, “Tio Bernie,” even though you often shun progressives and disappoint us, I love you like an uncle!

You’re truly, positively the best politician we’ve seen in generations.

I sincerely believe in your movement, and I’m immensely grateful that you’ve done so much to birth it.

I think you’re easily the most electable candidate against Trump (and I believe that you’re the only genuine lefty in this race, save for Rep. Tulsi Gabbard).

I think you have been brilliant in articulating a cohesive strategy for mobilizing our movement — a movement that is greater than any individual person and promises to wring progress out of our corrupt political system.

But grow the fuck up:

Our movement can be crushed and dispersed with ease. Barack Obama proved that when he crushed and dispersed Occupy Wall Street (to the deafening silence of establishment “liberals”).

Bernie, you are so fantastic that you are capable of creating an American version of the “Yellow Vests! But you know full-well that any such movement will be crushed with brutality worthy of most dictatorships. Obama took OWS, a totally peaceful movement that had mobilized scores of thousands, and demolished it with jackbooted violence: mace in the face, tear gas fired at point-blank range, our libraries burned, our activists entrapped and false-arrested by the hundreds, including several journalists.

Bernie, for an American politician you are amazingly unique, and I mean that in the best possible way. You’ve consistently supported the civil rights of women, people of color, and the LGBTQ community — ever since you were a young man (before it became fashionable).

You were arrested in 1963 for protesting housing discrimination against African-Americans — and later marched for freedom with Martin Luther King.

You’ve fought most every horrible degradation of our society that I can think of, from the Vietnam war to the wars on Iraq to the wars on Libya, Yemen, and Syria to NAFTA to CAFTA to the TPP to “Grand Bargain” entitlement-slashing to The New Jim Crow to the privatization of schools/prisons to Wall Street-deregulation and more… all the way down to the media-ownership deregulation that’s left us with merely the burlesque of a “free press” (the corporatized media that’s spent the last several years trying to smear and disappear you).

In 2016, you challenged Sec. Clinton — a Cheney clone on foreign and domestic policy, Trumpian in her politics (full of race-baiting, demagoguery, and ratfucking lies) — and you “lost” due to corruption and cheating, involving the systematic disenfranchisement of millions of Americans.

(Millions of Americans whose votes you refused to fight for.)

And then you campaigned for Sec. Hillary Clinton, Trump-family friend and the embodiment of corruption, an unambiguous threat to world peace, the biosphere, democracy, and the rule of law.


(And fire your establishmentarian consultants — especially the ones behind your “nice guy/doormat” political strategy, which is bound to fail.)