Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion

I think I already know the answer to this, but who believes there's any chance whatsoever that the US President voted into office in the 2016 election will represent the common people ahead of their corporate interests and/or their other non-disclosed affiliations?

I think we can discount Hillary Rodham Clinton and Jeb Bush, should they run as predicted, as being remotely "for the people". Likewise if Joe Biden makes a bid to be president.

So who else is out there??
Jesse Ventura, Bernie Sanders and Ralph Nader might all make independent bids I've heard.

I wonder if eventually (like maybe the 2020 election or 2024) the American people will get so angry with all the corruption they'll finally turn their back on Democrats and Republicans?
Remember, other nations have more than two strong parties to vote for.

James, given that Australia is supposed to be traditionally 10yrs behind other advanced countries, America will probably turn that corner of liberated insight while Australia starts going down the path the USA started some 10yrs ago.

Can't we beat America and jump ahead of the queue just once and miss that entire era of financial deprivation America suffered?

Laureen wrote: "James, given that Australia is supposed to be traditionally 10yrs behind other advanced countries, America will probably turn that corner of liberated insight while Australia starts going down the ..."

You make good points about Australia following America and that it's heading down the same path as a nation.
However, in many ways I think we're already on the exact same path as I tend to believe we are now essentially beyond the concept of clearly defined countries these days. It's more about global corporatocracy instead of democracies separated by international borders and therefore US politics (more than any other) is in a way world politics. That's why some have nicknamed Australia "The United States of Australia". Probably an exaggeration, but not without some truth I suspect.

But anyway, getting back to what this thread is about...the next US political election...I'm interested to learn others opinions (especially American members). I mean, Obama promised change and his catchy slogan "Yes we can" won over the country and yet I can't see any important changes after his now 7 years in office. Seems like he mostly just carried on similar policies to Bush and Clinton - Obama strikes me as just as much pro-war and pro-Big Business as his predecessors.

So is there anyone on the horizon capable of implementing real changes for the common people and capable of winning the presidency?

What do others think?

Sorry James, but I think the Presidency is a faux position. Find someone who can sell themselves and their party to the people and the real power-brokers swing from the presidency coat tails. President Obama is a likable character who was set up to win over the American people.

However, it doesn't seem to matter which side of politics is voted in because it would have to be a real bull-headed, determined, strong, intelligent leader to overcome the lobbyists and self-interested conglomerates wielding power. I image he/she would not be a likable character like the current President. So what us it the people want?

Laureen wrote: "Sorry James, but I think the Presidency is a faux position...."

Exactly my point, Laureen.

James Morcan wrote: "Laureen wrote: "Sorry James, but I think the Presidency is a faux position...."

Exactly my point, Laureen."

Yes, I know. I guess I just wanted to show my approval, somewhat.

The 'all the presidents are related' fact/theory aside, if Hilary Clinton wins (as she will), that means out of 30 years only two families have been in office (oh, sorry, am forgetting the brief spell of Obama). Still, it's good to see democracy exists...

Harry wrote: "The 'all the presidents are related' fact/theory aside, if Hilary Clinton wins (as she will), that means out of 30 years only two families have been in office (oh, sorry, am forgetting the brief sp..."

good point.
Hillary's a warmonger like the rest in my view.

I think it's more about having a good heart than it is about race or gender.
Obama was the first non-White President - made no difference at all as he's an elitist.
If Hillary wins she'll be first female President - and it'll make no diff either as she's an elitist also.

You're right, Obama probably did beat Bush in the war dept. But remember, who was Secretary of State during much of Obama's presidency? Hillary! She was the one selling the perpetual war machine and "war on terror"...

PatEye wrote: "I was merely addressing a few of my perhaps incorrect impressions of many Americans' wrongful or politically correct attitudes. It should be noted that the last time Americans voted for a president..."

I can agree with PatEye, although I don't closely follow American politics and am probably out of my depth in even attempting to talk about them. What does everybody think about JFK. He was very much loved but said to be a warmonger if I remember?

JFK was on the record for not wanting to go to war in Vietnam as he deemed it an unnecessary war. Some, including Vietnam veteran Oliver Stone, believe that's why JFK was killed.

His brother, RFK was going to end the Vietnam War had he lived and gotten to be President by the predicted landslide most political analysts believe he would have won.

By contrast, Hillary and Obama and the Bush clans, have never opposed any major war proposal...

Here's an article from the Boston Review magazine on the complete withdrawal and peace strategy JFK ordered just before being assassinated: http://bostonreview.net/us/galbraith-...

To my knowledge no President since JFK has vetoed any major war plans of the Military Industrial Complex...

Perhaps tellingly, the very first meeting JFK's successor President Johnson had was over Vietnam for which he immediately signed documents to authorise full-scale war....

PatEye wrote: "Somewhat off this sub-topic, when Johnson was a senator he was said to be the biggest critic of the "war," but upon attainment of the White House changed his mind. ..."

Sounds identical to Obama.

You're right about pre-war activities (following on from the French etc) in Vietnam growing, including during part of JFK's tenure. But the bottom line is he was definitely pulling out and made that decision against massive pressure coming from the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, his entire war cabinet and the Military Industrial Complex in general, who all wanted fullscale war in Vietnam.

There's a document JFK signed, I think I recall it's called something like NamSat 743 or something like that, which many Vietnam war vets remember the name of and often quote. That document, signed about 30 days before JFK was assassinated, gave full authorization to completely end the Vietnam War.

Thanks guys for educating me somewhat. Now, just one more question. I was very young when JFK was assassinated hence my lack of recall. Politics didn't interest me so much then, but I do recall the tears when JFK was killed as everybody seemed to love him in Australia.

Now, to the question. Later, when I grew up a bit, it seemed that JFK was somehow involved or responsible for the altercations with Cuba. But my brother, three years older than me, says that JFK saved the world by stopping Russian war ships from reaching Cuba (or something like that). Now go tell me to do my own research to which I would say you were justified in telling me to do so. However, you all know my time is highly restricted and I know that you guys are way up on these things.

Bernie Sanders has declared officially and seems to be the only one with a real concern and feel for the average person. Which, of course, means he has no chance of winning. But hopefully he brings those important issues to common discussion.

PatEye wrote: "Laureen wrote: "Thanks guys for educating me somewhat. Now, just one more question. I was very young when JFK was assassinated hence my lack of recall. Politics didn't interest me so much then, ..."

OK then - it comes back to me now. That is how my brother explained it. Thanks PatEye.

Ila wrote: "Laureen wrote: "Thanks guys for educating me somewhat. Now, just one more question. I was very young when JFK was assassinated hence my lack of recall. Politics didn't interest me so much then, ..."

Thank you very much Ila. That is an interesting article for me and nice and brief. I don't know about getting a program called Drop Box for my PC. I am computer illiterate as I keep saying. I have an IPad at home mainly for Goodreads and a computer at work. I don't know if we are on the Cloud. We haven't been but we had an upgraded system installed yesterday.

I barely know how to use this IPad and all it's mysterious functions and although I spend hours at work using a computer, I don't understand nor wish to, the inner workings or all that it is capable of. I hate reading boring subjects like computer technology and rely on people to show me when I have to learn something new.

But I love to know about history and how people think and why certain things happened in our past. I work too much to have the time for personal research. It is 3.30am here so I best get back to bed but a thank you for the offer Ila.

PatEye wrote: "I've hear a number of "analysts" postulate that Hillary's last loss to Obama was not entirely a function of his oft repeated "new ideas" inarticulations, but that it had more to do with her fashion..."

You have a lascivious mind PatEye, you old dog!

PatEye wrote: "BREAKING NEWS!!!!! The most obscure of internet blogs has reported that Cathy O'Brien may be releasing another book imminently. After her preliminary extortion attempt failed; she has reportedly au..."

What is LGB@T ?

HaHa. I thought I might have been showing how dumb I am, but, no, I don't think I could have been expected to know that.

Why not Nicki Minaj ? She would make a wonderful president !

Matt wrote: "Why not Nicki Minaj ? She would make a wonderful president !"

Yes! Go Nicki!

Hey, Now I'm getting educated. Learning about the antics of people I've never heard of! I knew there was a reason I stayed away from women's mags.

Ila wrote: "PatEye wrote: "While I hope that I'm wrong, it seems to me that what you wrote can be interpreted as some sort of justification or psychological plea for the understanding of this man"

..."

PatEy..."

It's alright Ila. I took your comments correctly and I thank you for the information. Anyway, I never take for granted one point of view being correct. I have to hear an alternative viewpoint before I accept anything as "gospel". Your post seemed to be presenting facts as you saw them rather than opinion. Besides all that, it is always mere speculation about what happens behind the scenes in politics - we can only attempt to understand if there was purity of motivation in any decision making.

LBJ did seem like a strange character but I only ever saw him on TV. He seemed self-important and overly sure of himself but that, of course, could be entirely wrong -little me from across the seas.

Ila wrote: "Hillary Clinton's sexual preference being mentioned in my opinion, I don't think it would be much of a surprise to many people if a female announced (and with proof) that they were or are Hillary's..."

All this about Hillary doesn't interest up me in the least. Gossip is a far worse thing often than what is gossiped about. You are right to say that it could in no way affect how competent she is to do her job except if she lets blackmail or some other nasty thing to affect her judgement. But that applies to all humans including politicians.

Ila wrote: "I do think that Hillary is doing the smart thing by not engaging her opponents and the press with all the negative stuff they're throwing her way. After all, it takes 2 to have an argument and if she continues not to engage, they can't argue with her. In her situation I'd do the same thing.

I wonder who she'll pick as her VP? Any thoughts on that? ..."

What about Henry Kissinger for Hillary's VP????
Seems he and Hillary would get along very well...you know, birds of a feather, and all that ;)
And even though Henry has been a Republican for decades, he actually started out as a Democrat and switched sides when Nixon won the Presidency if memory serves me right.
He's clever like that and goes whevever the power switches to like a leaf blowing in the wind...
So this could be old Henry's big comeback and maybe together he and Hillary can start some new wars and create some "debt relief" packages to bail out more privately owned banks...

But seriously, I do think Hillary has all the brains to become a great President (she's certainly more intelligent than any recent President I would assume). Unfortunately, however, she doesn't remotely have the compassion to care about the masses in my opinion. Her political ambition far outweighs her compassion and she lacks heart - that's why she happily collaborates and works for global elitists and warmongers - in fact she's one of them!

Let me reiterate one of my favorite quotes in recent years by Mark Ruffalo: "It’s not going to happen from above. We are the change that we’re waiting for. Anything worth a damn that’s ever happened on behalf of the people has always come up from the people and forced itself onto the power above. And that’s the way it always is and that’s the way it’s always going to be."

I just hope people don't fall for Hillary's perceived charms (just because she's a female or whatever) like they fell for Obama's charms (just because he's from a minority community or whatever) - otherwise those who get their hopes up for "President Hillary" delivering the goods are in for 4-8 years of bitter disappointment ala Obama.

Compassion has no skin color or gender or religion or even any family/community background, in my opinion.
When an honest and caring politician FINALLY gets voted into office (hopefully this century!) he could be an 85 year old white male multibillionaire for all we know. What's lacking is not intelligence, but people who genuinely care about those less fortunate in society.

Personally tho, I think it'd be kinda cool if there is a Native American female President one day. That'd seem just in a way. And also, they could have Pow-wows on the White House lawn :)

James Morcan wrote: "Ila wrote: "I do think that Hillary is doing the smart thing by not engaging her opponents and the press with all the negative stuff they're throwing her way. After all, it takes 2 to have an argum..."

I am not so sure you are right about Hillary although you seem yo know more about her than I do. What I feel is based on history. The sort of strong people we need to make worthwhile decisions are the type that don't give up easily. Hillary has hung in there for the long term and I admire that. She doesn't seem to respond to negative press or public ridicule which I also admire. It shows me that she truly believes in her opinions of what is good for America.

I wonder if the opposition doesn't come from those who fear she might succeed. She strikes me as someone with balls and as such can deal quite comfortably in a man's world but, I agree, no one should be voted in because they have a thing about glass ceilings or skin color. The best human being for the job is what I believe.

PatEye wrote: "Hahaha. Is that buzzard still alive? If not how about Cheyney or Rumsfeld? ..."

I think Henry is still alive...even if he's in the rest home he can just text Hillary every so often. She's so capable she can do all the rest...and by all the rest I mean managing all those black budgets...

Imagine if Hillary Rodham Clinton wins in 2016, or Jeb Bush wins. Or one wins in 2016 and then the other in 2020.

That'll mean the US/world has been ruled by two families for decades...

James Morcan wrote: "Imagine if Hillary Rodham Clinton wins in 2016, or Jeb Bush wins. Or one wins in 2016 and then the other in 2020.

That'll mean the US/world has been ruled by two fa..."

Oi! I pointed that out first!

Sorry. I missed that.
Anyway, all we need is Chelsea Clinton to enter politics and maybe a George Bush grandson to enter the fray and it'll be a Bush/Clinton whitewash until the end of the world...

Which should be pretty soon if that happens.

Ugh, I loathe politics...Although, I am impartial to Donald Trump for POTUS out of the other running candidates because of his, frequently, politically incorrect "filter" regarding various issues that seem to have some merit. I do not always agree with everything he says/stands for, but maybe this country needs a bit of a "hard a**" President to help kick the U.S. back into some form of normalcy and fairness. Obviously, there are many broken and unfair/not well thought out regulations/legislations/other within the country, a plethora of appalling worldwide treaties and such, and wars that may not be necessary, of which all of the above, possibly, only benefit the elite and/or secret societies.

James Morcan wrote: "I think it's more about having a good heart than it is about race or gender.
Obama was the first non-White President - made no difference at all as he's an elitist.
If Hillary wins she'll be firs..."

*cough cough, Obama's the first biracial president.* Haha, sorry, you said "first non-White president" which is incorrect since he is part white. Just thought I'd say that.......

Jim wrote: "Which should be pretty soon if that happens."

Ha!
You may be right there.

A group poll is currently running. It asks: Who would you like to see win the 2016 United States presidential election?
https://www.goodreads.com/poll/show/1...

Declared candidates and possible candidates, include (in no particular order!):

Donald Trump, John Kasich, Al Gore, Mike Huckabee, Jon Rappoport, Ben Carson, Lawrence Lessig, Martin O'Malley, Ralph Nader, Condoleezza Rice, Michael Bloomberg, Jeb Bush, Bernie Sanders, Carly Fiorina, Jesse Ventura, Marco Rubio, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Joe Biden, Rick Perry, Jim Gilmore, Roseanne Barr, Lincoln Chafee, George Pataki, Sarah Palin, Michelle Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Bobby Jindal, Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Jim Webb, Zoltan Istvan, Ted Cruz

Hillary Clinton once said: “Every moment wasted looking back, keeps us from moving forward.”

I would counter that by saying: Every moment wasted by REFUSING to look back and learn from colossal mistakes of the past, keeps us from moving forward :)

Donald Trump can't seriously have called for banning Muslims to the U.S... can he?

“Donald J Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on,” his campaign said in a statement released on Monday.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/...

Harry wrote: "Donald Trump can't seriously have called for banning Muslims to the U.S... can he?

“Donald J Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our coun..."

If he wins, maybe Trump should begin with "My fellow Americans, I am your latest shit for brains President..."

Ah, the land of the free!

Harry wrote: "Ah, the land of the free!"

British Prime Minister David Cameron might get along well with Trump me thinks ;)

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democr... I wonder why he is so worried about Muslims or terrorists coming to US...seems to me Americans are doing a much better job killing each other off with constant mass shootings.

Lisa wrote: "I wonder why he is so worried about Muslims or terrorists coming to US...seems to me Americans are doing a much better job killing each other off with constant mass shootings. ..."

Hmmmm...Not too sure about that analogy ;)

But isn't Trump a Mormon?
So he's probably just coming from a Christian Fundamentalist perspective also knowing strategically that such xenophobic comments, especially concerning foreigners/immigrants of non-Christian religions, always win quite a few votes in the Bible Belt...

With Belgium and the UK being bases for the terrorists of the Paris attacks, we'll soon be bombing our own countries.

It would probably be cheaper if we just all bombed our own. I might suggest it to the MoD...

I do think he should worry about gun control rather than ban immigration. ..he's a bigot and a media whore. He'll say anything to get attention. That was my sensored version.

Lisa wrote: "I do think he should worry about gun control rather than ban immigration. ..he's a bigot and a media whore. He'll say anything to get attention. That was my sensored version."

Would love to hear the uncensored version. :)

James would block me ;)

Harry wrote: "Would love to hear the uncensored version. :) ..."

Ditto.
Go for it Lisa...Let the swear words flow like that actress in the Exorcist!

never saw the exorcist either. ..but is that where "exercise your demons" came from?

I don't think it would be wise of me to expose my true expressions of topics and people I passionately dislike.