OMG A Vagina! The Banality of Democrats

By Joe Giambrone, Political Film Blog.

Hannah Arendt coined the phrase “banality of evil” when she studied one Adolf Eichmann, a mid-level Nazi bureaucrat who made the trains run on time and carried out his logistics duties according to orders. Eichmann “had consoled himself with the thoughts that he no longer ‘was master of his own deeds,’ that he was unable ‘to change anything'” (Eichmann in Jerusalem, p.136).

Arendt’s wider critique of society relates directly to Democrats today. Eichmann “internalized the cliches” of the day and therefore abdicated his own personal responsibility to stand up and to oppose a murderous system. So many in the US—for a long, long time—have also “internalized the cliches” of the two-party system and remain joyfully ignorant of any and all third-party alternatives. That is the key fact to bridge the analogy between Eichmann’s banality and that we have witnessed on stage at the DNC this past week.

According to comedian Sarah Silverman expecting to be represented and having the people’s votes actually count for something is “being ridiculous.” Maybe so, but ridicule travels in any number of directions, Sarah. Watch out.

What you don’t do is as important, in the larger scheme, as what you do. Economists even have a formal definition of this phenomenon: opportunity cost. By spending energy, money, effort, work, etc. in supporting a corrupt Democrat, you are denying all those tangible benefits to a non-corrupt alternative candidate and party. By legitimizing one, you de-legitimize the other. You. Your actions, Sarah Silverman et al. I suppose it’s a subtle point to some but more valid than anything Silverman or the Hollywood glitterati on stage at the DNC mustered up this past week.

With the coronation of Queen Hillary in Philadelphia in a deluge of scandals, the main narrative had to become that of the “first woman” nominated to run for President of the United States. History was made! Headlines said so.

That is where my personal involvement enters the story. I’m not having it. Hillary Clinton is, of course, not the first woman to run for President of the United States. When I point to these inconvenient facts, the celebratory slogans quickly morph into, “the first female candidate of a MAJOR PARTY!”

A corrupt party controlled by big money interests is what that translates to in the real world.

That’s where I live.

I personally voted for Cynthia McKinney in 2008 (Green) and Jill Stein in 2012 (Green). My choice had zero to do with the presence or absence of a vagina, however. I find that concern beyond trivial, although I do accept the view that putting a woman in the White House holds some potential symbolic meaning. It is of several magnitudes less importance than what a corrupt warmonger will do to the world once she seizes the Superpower.

The Democrats exploit these symbolic bait-and-switch strategies, as with Barack Hussein Obama. Now we’ve had a black man in office. Worse than Nixon was the expert assessment. Obama’s numerous crimes, indistinguishable from those of the previous administration—including protecting the previous administration from prosecution—don’t seem to be understood by most run-of-the-mill Democrats. They simply, and always, remain blind to the crimes of their own party, believing their own spin as if it held the entire story. Anything negative must be a Republican plot of course, or perhaps the Russians; it must be anyone’s fault but their own.

My go-to rebuttal to camp Hillary is to simply play back her own statements vouching for George W. Bush’s fabricated “WMDs” in Iraq. HRC’s special touch was to add the word “undisputed.”

Average Democrats, guilty of wholesale hypocrisy as a fact of life, simply don’t care that Hillary Clinton’s hands are already soaked with the blood of Syrians, Libyans, Yemenis, Haitians and Hondurans. That she was directly involved with the rise of ISIS and associated radical Islamist proxy armies. That she approved arms to Gulf dicators after receiving millions in “donations” to her foundation. They don’t care that she’s an imperialist mentored by the likes of Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski. The Democratic National Convention even applauded the war criminal Madeleine Allbright, one of the most despicable politicians ever to come out of the United States, who brushed aside the murder of half a million Iraqi children as if she was combing lint off of her gown.

War crimes then become “mistakes,” the kind only the elites can make and get away with. It’s a tired story with an outrageous body count.

And so we get symbols instead of accountability. That is Hillary Clinton’s only remaining card to play: the female card. She clearly stole the nomination from Sanders, clearly lies to get what she wants, and clearly commits crimes with impunity (that is unless Wikileaks nails her to the Cross as Julian Assange has hinted).

My unshakeable and bitter disgust lies then with common Democrats, those who believe today that the vagina trumps all (no pun intended), facts be damned.

If female empowerment is suddenly so important to you in 2016, then why wasn’t it in 2012, nor in 2008? These people have already abdicated responsibility and bought into the grand deception. They have already mindlessly supported a criminal party that had never before offered them a female candidate, while ignoring the party that clearly did. That should be a mark of shame, not some marketing victory to garner more votes.

Willfully they cast a ballot not for the female who was uncorrupted by corporate money, but for Obama, who raised a cool $1Bn his last time out of the gate—more than Mitt Romney—and has continued the neocon dream of perpetual war and an expanding, brutal military empire.

Speaking of that expanding military empire, we had all best understand the recent warnings of President Putin, who issued dire pleas to western journalists regarding NATO expansion up to Russia’s borders. This provocation risks nuclear war, as the Russians can no longer tolerate the encroachment and placement of nuclear-capable missiles mere minutes from Moscow. These are the policies Hillary Clinton has pursued. She represents the neocon wing that seeks to humiliate and contain Russia, all risks to life on earth be damned. Hillary and Obama have turned Russia from a helpful ally into a defensive, nuclear-armed and desperate enemy.

The Green Party of the United States could easily be a “major party” today if the millions who suddenly now care about a woman in office had simply supported it instead of a corporatist party of belligerence and empire. Democrats have rejected and even vilified honest alternative political candidates in favor of corrupt corporatists. Much blame lies with the common “little Eichmanns,” perhaps those living next door to you. Perhaps some to be seen below in the comments section.

This is no trivial matter. The Democratic Party just imploded on live TV, split into an ungovernable mess, when a sea of disgruntled Sanders supporters stormed out of the arena. Sanders has now left the party and will return to the Senate in the fall as an Independent. Hillary Clinton was not only exposed as a cheat and a fraud, but she upped the ante two-fold. First she picked Kaine, no friend to progressive voters, and then she hired the disgraced fixer of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz! With judgment and arrogance that unsound is it any wonder that Donald Trump surged ahead by as many as 6 points?

Hillary Clinton is a corrupt fearmonger opportunist. Donald Trump is a corrupt fearmonger opportunist.

Jill Stein represents common people. Of course she is disrespected in the media and especially by Democrats. It couldn’t be any other way in today’s America.

This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Lynn Walker

    This author almost shook himself into semi-consciousness before slipping back into his delusional dream-state. He momentarily had it there, when he talked about opportunity cost and the potential lost when you spend your time, energy and money supporting a corrupt democrat. He simply needed to apply this concept to the greater venue of politics in general. When you spend your time, energy, money and mental focus on supporting a political solution you’ve lost the opportunity to actually do something meaningful. Fools are those who repeat their mistakes believing things will be different this time. This time, this politician will finally be a good one.

    The key point missed by fools like this is that the American political system is completely dominated by a tiny but powerful group of people, some of them not even Americans. Studies have shown that your input has absolutely no impact on policy. Can somebody please explain to me why any intelligent person would put any of their energy or hopes into a futile endeavor instead of seeking an alternative? When I say this, people almost always ask “what do you suggest we do?” I could give you the answer, but you’d probably disagree. The better choice is to start thinking of alternatives yourself, but first you have to stop being ridiculous and putting your faith into a system where you are powerless.

    • Mildredmcraft4

      <<o. ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!fn580m:….,….

    • Brockland A.T.

      True enough. Even when they get it, they don’t. Apparently its easier to wring ones hands than put them to useful work promoting something that does.

      The legislative process would be much better under proportional representation. At the very least more voices have outlets to be heard and the money to buy them all has to be spread out more.

      The otherwise binary executive process would be much better under ranked choice voting.

      That said, the system is all you’ve got till its changes. No-one could show up at the polls in November but Hilary voting for herself, but that would not annul the election, would make her President and her signature would be just as legally binding on official orders and documents.

      Everyone will still have to live under the government whether they voted for it or not, reaping what it sows.

      Trump 2016 = Never Hilary.

      The strategic choice is clear. In a morally relativist system, the lesser evil is the greater good and the greatest good, unattainable.

      In this case the greatest good is Jill Stein (Green Party) btw.

    • Jason Walker

      trolls abound.

  • Brockland A.T.

    Liberal feminists are certainly grating when they rail at the immoral patriarchy then suddenly immoral patriarchy becomes OK if its a woman shilling for it. Hilary’s big promise was to guarantee half her cabinet posts will be women. Likely all these women would be indistinguishable from male warmongers and assorted male incompetents, but its OK because now women warmongers and incompetents get a government job too.

    Trump is right; she really is playing the woman card.

    A neocon Hilary cabinet will most certainly not be representative of women who historically and up to today have been leading peace activists alongside men – in an earned and voluntary association. Patriarchal governments, on the other hand, apparently had no trouble recruiting women to appoint in support of ‘the patriarchy’. Even going back to WWI, male governments used women to sell what they could not.

    Apparently Hilary’s war criminal record is what American women want more of.

    Trump 2016, the Strategic Choice. Trump hasn’t got blood on his hands and isn’t exactly the warmonger’s choice.

    Or Jill Stein (Green Party), the moral choice.

    NOT Libertarian. OMG TPP Johnson is no Constitution-First Ron Paul.

    Just remember – no-one can stop Hilary but as many Trump votes as possible might stop her.

    Opportunity cost; the lesser evil IS the greater good in a morally relativist system and Trump is by far the lesser evil and thus greater good. God may be the greatest good, but He is NOT on the ballot.

  • wehaveseenthisb4

    Agreed Hillary will accomplish nothing for 90% of the population, but it appears she made most of the delegates at the DNC feel good. Feeling good seems to be high on their list of priorities and the lame stream agrees. Having the courage to recognize the party’s lawlessness and change it are tasks far too difficult and frightening to contemplate … everyone back to your cell phones.

    Hillary like Obama confirmed she’ll accomplish nothing by saying she’ll, “…work across the aisle with her colleagues …” You’d need a president with the wiles and mean temper of LBJ to to get anything meaningful past and through the Congressional Repubs, the corporate, Blue Dog and neo-liberal Dems. Hell, if she’s elected the Repubs in the House will begin impeachment proceedings the day after she’s inaugurated.

    Like O, she will have volunteered for a job that required a massive amount of heavy lifting and a mammoth amount of lawlessness to set right (admittedly left by the idiot son and his crew of criminals), but O assiduously avoided heavy lifting and basically set nothing right. Hillary will do the same. Pathetically, O’s soaring rhetoric seldom, if ever left the paper his speeches were written on and made it down to the street. Only in Hillary’s case it won’t be soaring rhetoric but same old robotic, stilted, clichéd neo-liberal meme … that will keep everyone happy.

  • clarioncaller

    This author totally forgot about Rep. Shirley Chisum, who ran for President in the 70’s. She is a much better example of empowerment than HillBillary ever will be. I will continue to find solace in viewing George Carlin videos while most people will waste their ‘opportunity cost’ by voting for tweedle dee or tweedle dumb.

    • Yes. There’s a documentary about her on Netflix, if it hasn’t gone out of rotation. Chisholm (sp) is an amazing figure.

  • Tom Paine

    As a Ron Paul libertarian what sex a politico is is absolutely irrelevant. But we agree about the absolute corruption of the Republicrats. We don’t need a third party let’s get at least a second opposition party to start with.