Lester Holt: Hello and welcome to the Democratic Party presidential debates, where tonight ten people will pretend to be much further to the left than they actually are so that normal human beings will like them.

Savannah Guthrie: Our first question is for Senator Elizabeth Warren. Senator Warren, you have many plans for America. Many, many plans. Is this correct?

Elizabeth Warren: Yes that is correct. I have many plans to make things better, and Americans must come together and work together as Americans to make America America.

Savannah Guthrie: Thank you. Congressman O’Rourke, how do you feel about taxing the wealthy?

Beto O’Rourke: Me gustaría informar a todos que puedo hablar español.

Savannah Guthrie: Uhh… Okay?

Cory Booker: Hey I can speak Spanish too!

Savannah Guthrie: Yes, yes you both can speak Spanish. This next question is for Senator Warren. Senator, you have many plans for America. Do you think rich people should be allowed to feast on the flesh of poor people?

Elizabeth Warren: No. We should stop allowing rich people to eat poor people because there are laws against this and my plan is to enforce those laws.

Julián Castro: I can actually speak Spanish better than anyone here, so I pretty much win this debate.

Cory Booker: Yeah well I live in a poor neighborhood.

John Delaney: Well I think-

Lester Holt: You shut your whore mouth, Delaney. Senator Warren, we haven’t heard from you in a while. You’ve got lots of plans for America. Do you believe every American should have healthcare?

Elizabeth Warren: Yes, every American should be allowed to have healthcare.

Lester Holt: That’s beautiful. I love you.

Julián Castro: I pronounce Hispanic names correctly, too. Like, perfectly.

Bill de Blasio: May I just interrupt for a moment to say that I am a white guy who would like to be president?

Lester Holt: Yes, you may.

John Delaney: Can I?

Lester Holt: Fuck you, limp dick. Governor Inslee, you’re a white guy who wants to be president. How do you feel about a woman’s right to choose?

Jay Inslee: I basically invented it.

Amy Klobuchar: I would like to collect my identity politics points for him saying that please.

Cory Booker: The neighborhood I live in is rather poor actually.

Tulsi Gabbard: War is bad.

Tim Ryan: I also am in this debate.

Lester Holt: It’s time for a commercial break, but we’ll be back with more Elizabeth Warren after this.


Chuck Todd: Welcome back to the-

Microphones: Wakjbwoiwefnfboqnhunafkh bfkjdfnnikr hfbskjfbbhd giuvnmmhbfuui wnoerifiolsfni

Chuck Todd: Oops never mind, one more commercial break.


Chuck Todd: And we’re back! Senator Warren, you’ve got a lot of plans for America. Do you think it’s good for people to be murdered with guns, or bad?

Elizabeth Warren: It’s bad.

Chuck Todd: Brilliant. Congresswoman Gabbard, you have said that you hate gay people and you want them all to die and go to hell so you can urinate on their graves by the light of a blood moon. How, specifically, do you sleep at night?

Tulsi Gabbard: I do not hate gay people.

Chuck Todd: Right. Congressman O’Rourke, if I asked you a normal question in plain English, would you please give me a straight answer in response?

Beto O’Rourke: You know one of the most powerful pieces of art in the United States capital is the Trumbull painting of George Washington resigning his commission to the Continental Congress, at the height of his power submitting to the rule of law and the will of the people. That has withstood the test of time for the last 243 years, and some people say well does this mean that neoliberalism can’t work? And I always say you know what? We’re AmeriCANs, not AmeriCAN’Ts. I say we CAN come together, as Americans, as white Americans, as black Americans, as gay, trans and Latino Americans, and we can find a neoliberalism that works for all of us.

Chuck Todd: Please stop standing on top of your podium.

Cory Booker: I too can speak with lots of inspiring-sounding words. I speak them really intensely, like I’m trying to rip into your guts with my voice. I live in a poor neighborhood. People get shot. Shot right in the face. You people don’t even know.

Tim Ryan: I would like to use my small amount of time to argue for the indefinite occupation of Afghanistan because the Taliban attacked us on 9/11.

Tulsi Gabbard: They definitely did not.

Tim Ryan: You are the same as Donald Trump.

Rachel Maddow: So, who wants to Russia Russia Russia Russia Russia? Russia! RUSSIA! RUSSIA!!!

John Delaney: I would like to Russia Russia Russia-

Rachel Maddow and Chuck Todd: SHUT THE FUCK UP, DELANEY.

Amy Klobuchar: You know, sometimes giving the rich and powerful people everything they want is the most progressive and revolutionary thing you can do.

Rachel Maddow: Okay we’re running out of time, so everyone quickly give your parting remarks.

Bill de Blasio: I am well-known and I have familiarized myself with the progressive-sounding things to say.

Tulsi Gabbard: I’m like a hundred percent certain I could take Mike Pompeo in a fair fight.

Tim Ryan: This is the weirdest Republican primary debate I’ve ever participated in.

Jay Inslee: I- wait, which one am I again?

Beto O’Rourke: Together, all things are possible in America, where our inspiration to thrive outweighs our differences and overcomes our obstacles, and I don’t know about you, but I believe we can all make positive changes and sail off together into the sunset in a sailboat on a field of wheat.

Julián Castro: Even the names of Central and South American countries. I pronounce them absolutely perfectly.

Amy Klobuchar: Klobuchar 2020! Together, we can make small, incremental changes or leave them the way they are if it’s too politically inconvenient!

Cory Booker: In my very poor neighborhood they call me Crazy Eyes. They say it’s because my eyes are so normal.

Elizabeth Warren: You cannot stop me. I am inevitable.

John Delaney: America-

Chuck Todd: And we’re out of time! Tune in tomorrow for more of the same with Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Iggy Silverstein, Jorp Japson, Merv Meebleton, and many other famous politicians!


The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitterthrowing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandisebuying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone, or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish or use any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!

64 responses to “First Democratic Debate, Summarized:”

  1. Dear Caitlin,

    Please help me with this.

    My journalist son, who should know better by now, is again threatening to succumb to blandishments
    from the Faux Left. He’s a snowflake. It’s probably my fault for being such a declawed Tiger Mother.

    We’re going to start having these vehement, painful discussions now that the US elections are hoving into view.

    I need better arguments. He has this weird tuning fork affinity with the Dems who betrayed us all long ago.

    Will you advise me? How can I talk to him?

    I need more and better goods on Warren.

    I think there are thousands/millions of younger voters who think/feel the way he does.

    I forward many of your posts to him and he does think they’re great.

    As do I! So great.

    I told him I was forwarding this particular pre-quarrel thread to you. Read from bottom up.

    From: AS Hodson
    Subject: Re: [New post] First Democratic Debate, Summarized:
    Date: 1 July 2019 at 14:56:06 IST
    To: Hal

    Not hyperbolic…unfortunately. Stop being afraid of strong language.

    She’s a clever deceiver unlike the ancient Joe Biden who cannot hide his bizarre conduct over many years.
    But voters won’t forgive her cynical racist lies.

    Trump has already broken the party duopoly…he’s a sort of apolitical wrecking ball..certainly not a real Republican tho he is an actual conservative. He is
    constantly at odds with the vile establishment R’s (never forget Bush/Cheney) and has been since day 1 of his presidency.

    There is no one in the field yet who offers any light. Except a glimmer of hope from Gabbard.

    Why do you care? Both sides are corrupt warmongers murdering foreign citizens every day.

    They are just vying for the privilege of being the 1st Operative.

    P.S. I’m sending this thread to Caitlin

    On 1 Jul 2019, at 14:10, Hal Hodson wrote:

    Seems a bit hyperbolic. I’m not claiming the dems are *good*, just that they’re better than Rs who have been hollowed out by Trump. I still think it’s a choice worth making, at least until the party duopoly breaks (like it has in the UK, which is good news)

    On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 21:08, AS Hodson wrote:
    The Dems are the sickest and most corrupt political entity on the planet. Warren is just a less obviously criminal HRC.
    She owes her backers and will pay them in “wars”.

    On 1 Jul 2019, at 14:06, Hal Hodson wrote:

    That doesn’t help anything. Clearly warren is a better leader in every single way than trump. If she’s the candidate I’ll be voting for her. Tbh I’ll be voting for whoever the democrat candidate is. I just pray it isn’t Biden

    On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 21:03, AS Hodson wrote:
    Don’t vote for either of them.

    On 1 Jul 2019, at 14:02, Hal Hodson wrote:

    Well, both the dem and rep candidate in 2020 are going to be known liars no matter what, so that’s not a very helpful heuristic

    On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 21:02, AS Hodson wrote:
    Never vote for a known liar.

    On 1 Jul 2019, at 14:00, Hal Hodson wrote:

    I am interested in Gabbard but she not gonna get the nomination. I’ll take a weird ethnicity fib over Biden or Trump any day

    On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 20:58, AS Hodson wrote:
    Bad. She won’t do at all. Because of this:

    This is the second example that we know of where she claimed to be an American Indian in order to claim preferential consideration.
    The other time was when she applied to Harvard.

    No matter how often she apologises and tries to minimise this lie..she has no DNA link whatsoever with Native Americans…she cannot wash out this “damned spot”.

    What is amazing is that even at the very beginning of her professional career she was falsely and deliberately playing the race card. That is how fake and how dangerous
    “progressivism” is in the US. It’s a whole cynical agenda deliberately designed to mislead and deceive. She signed up years ago.

    The only one that has any vestige of possible integrity is Tulsi Gabbard.

    On 1 Jul 2019, at 07:40, Hal Hodson wrote:

    lol this is pretty great. how do you feel about warren?

  2. Great satire. But this accurate comment “Hello and welcome to the Democratic Party presidential debates, where tonight ten people will pretend to be much further to the left than they actually are so that normal human beings will like them.” reveals something important.

    4 years ago, 8 years ago etc these people would not have pretended “to be much further to the left than they actually are”. This is a huuuge change, just as “socialism” went from a curse or a slur – to a respectable word and respected position – the preference of the majority of major sectors of the population.

    It may be unwelcome news to the legion of doomsayers and pessimists on the “Left”, but this is a major change for the better.

  3. Hubert Reiter Avatar
    Hubert Reiter

    Is this for real???

  4. Michel Bélisle Avatar
    Michel Bélisle

    Since the obvious 9-11 lie, people do not have any excuse if they vote for mainstream political parties.

    Surely, we are in a spiritual battle. You cannot endorse lies over and over again and, to say the truth, put your soul in jeopardy, just because you want to protect a situation here on earth that you consider all right for you, i.e. fortune, social status, properties etc…

    But in our era, which I call the “Bullshit era” because it is the “encore” version of the days of Noah just before the Second Coming of Christ, it seems difficult to wake many people to the spiritual dimension of what is going on.

    I really have seen enough. Fortunately, the end seems to be very near. Keeping my Rosary close.

  5. Peter in Seattle Avatar
    Peter in Seattle

    Back in 1973 or thereabouts, George McGovern’s campaign manager called Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72 the “least factual and most accurate” account of the 1972 presidential race. Caitlin’s summary of this year’s first Democratic “debate” probably qualifies for a similar accolade … except that it’s probably not the least factual.

    Thanks, Caitlin, for giving us some really good (albeit bitter) laughs. I’m looking forward to a second installment!

  6. Michel Bélisle Avatar
    Michel Bélisle

    In the West, the only ones who have an interest to vote are the rich and the upper middle class because elections are there to perpetuate the statu quo and the statu quo is just right for them.

    Please do not encourage established political parties. If you think you have to vote, vote for independent candidates without affiliation.

    I have seen more than enough. I hope Our Lord is coming soon. I pray the Rosary for His Coming.

  7. Tulsi embarrassed Ryan

  8. Shannon LeBlanc Avatar
    Shannon LeBlanc

    Merv Meebleton and Jorp Jepson crack me up! Excellent summary!!!

  9. Joe Van Steenbergen Avatar
    Joe Van Steenbergen

    So now, Caitlin, we understand you can write comedy as well as serious material. You continue to amaze! Thanks.

  10. I’m sick of people, Tulsi included, who go on about how they “served their country”. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria didn’t attack us. Al Qaeda had nothing to do with 911. Unless they snuck into the towers and planted explosives. Then they wouldn’t have needed the planes. So Tulsi is either lying or she’s ignorant. Assad is not a brutal dictator who gassed his own people. I refuse to vote for people that condone the destruction of millions of lives based on lies.

    1. Tulsi didn’t push war with Syria, and in fact isn’t pushing interventionist war in general. She is literally the most anti-war candidate in the race. You’re either ignorant or lying when you paint yourself as anti-war.

      If you’re ignorant, educate yourself. The #1 anti-war choice is Tulsi Gabbard.

      1. Johny Conspiranoid Avatar
        Johny Conspiranoid

        Tulsi Gabbard is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. A corporatist party can only deliver a corporatist candidate.

  11. I’m voting for Merv Meebleton! He’s the only candidate that can fix this rotten system! Don’t agree? Debate me!

    (Great piece and thanks for the laughs Caitlyn)

  12. Yep, an exercise in how to fix a debate by selecting who to ask questions. Tulsi was made invisible.

  13. The interesting thing is that the people are trying to make their own narrative about this. I fled social media a few years ago, but I do hear whispers that Tulsi appears to have played very well with the crowd.
    Remember, the last two people elected President did so by saying they were against war. Obama was the antiwar candidate against Hillary and McCain. Trump beat the Bush scion by saying the Iraq war was a mistake. Unfortunately, they are two different flavors of liars and confidence tricksters. But still, the American people respond to candidates that say they want to end the wars. Maybe the third time’s the charm?

    1. Don’t forget, Bush Jr. ran as an anti-interventionist and “compassionate conservative”.

      From Foreign Policy Mag: Bush promised Americans a foreign policy that would be strong but “humble,” and both he and his advisors chided Clinton and Gore for their misguided efforts at “nation-building.” In short, Americans were told that Bush would focus on great power politics, avoid messy quagmires in countries of marginal strategic importance, and keep our powder dry.

  14. This is excellent being intended as satire but it borders on being so close to the truth I’m sure some people could easily think it was simply an excellent summarized historical accounting of what passes for debate these days.

    Remember the 2016 Republican Primary debate wherein Trump seemed to lose his patience with Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, apparently for being guilty of making good sense while disagreeing with Trump and thus stealing some of his limelight? Trump seemed a bit angry and stated “He didn’t listen very well, did he” speaking of Rand basically aside to the candidate group as opposed to speaking to the audience. I suspect it would be very interesting to know what that was all about, but my impression at the time was that some kind of deal or agreement had been made behind the scenes whereby those other Republican candidates would all basically shut up, fall in line and kiss Trump’s ring (or something akin to that). But I am admittedly horrible paranoid sometimes.

    Take that together with how Trump completely dismantled Hillary Clinton (who’s certainly no slouch in a fight!) in their own debates and I’d have to conclude that unless a major Avatar emerges out of the Democratic hopefuls with a flaming sword to confront him, President Trump (what’s in a name, anyway?) will be around running things for at least another term. This is plenty of time to set up a Trump family dynasty to displace the previously existing Bush/Clinton dynasty for which the new Justice Department is already forging coffin nails – at least to hear what Judicial Watch is reporting. Obama? Mena?

    It seems the Republicans were supposed to select well funded Jeb who, due to “low energy” would then lose by design to well funded Hillary (whose turn it was) in the same manner as Jeb’s ex-CIA chief turned President dad lost to Bill (history repeats itself) which seems pretty much by design in retrospect and thus that particular “royal” dynasty would have remained intact and all this “Deep State” J. Edgar Hoover designed continuity of dirty little secrets government nonsense could have continued with the public continuing to know nothing. It’s government by the People all right, but only a few.

    But seriously, do we think we’ve seen the bottom of this rabbit hole yet? Iran will cave to Trump, N. Korea will cave to Trump, Putin has already caved to Trump, The military is sworn to Trump, the “problem” citizens of the US who actually own and know how to use guns in accordance with the Second Amendment have already caved to Trump, ultimately everyone will cave to Trump, the world economy will flourish and everyone will prosper. There will therefore be no reason to oppose Trump (ever), at least no logical reason.

    Hold my beer and watch this, oh that’s right, Trump doesn’t drink… “Never trust a man who doesn’t drink” – Winston Churchill (also W.C. Fields) I’ll drink to that! Probably a lot.

    1. Funny how we haven’t heard so much from Rand Paul after he gotten beaten up and put into the hospital.

      1. Nice observation, Daniel, but we also haven’t heard much from any of the other candidates either except for that which might pass for controlled opposition. Rand’s “neighbor” must be some kind of real badass or maybe Sen. Rand Paul simply has very brittle bones.

    2. Johny Conspiranoid Avatar
      Johny Conspiranoid

      Tulsi Gabbard is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. A corporatist party can only deliver a corporatist candidate.

  15. I don’t know at what point people believe any of these clowns will be ringmaster of the circus.
    This is just the dog and pony show. The magician has cards up his sleave.
    No one can see the elephant in the room.. because the lions are too blurry..
    The monkeys all speak Spanish.. and everything gets blamed on the bear.

  16. Ah the wonderful bliss of not watching any commercial television. Even though I did not get to see any of it I am certain that none of them are what I want in a ” leader “! Let us install Ms Caitlin Johnstone as ” leader of the world ” and put a stop to all of this eternal madness!

  17. I loved it, but your wrong on one thing and that is that the conversation just isn’t crazy enough. They’re more nutty than that.

  18. P.Brooks McGinnis Avatar
    P.Brooks McGinnis

    No More War

  19. Hilarious in a sad sort of way, but you missed John Delaney’s favorite word: bipartisan.

    P.S. The candidate most googled during the debate: Tulsi Gabbard.

    1. “The candidate most googled during the debate: Tulsi Gabbard.”
      That’s correct:
      The Real Winner Of Last Night’s Democratic Debate

  20. “And we are out of time.”

    The perfect footnote to America. The Doomsday clock is at 2 minutes to midnight. This is set, by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, based on the fact that we are closer to nuclear war since the early 1950’s, and because the world is going to be much hotter and the sea levels much higher because we refuse to reduce out greenhouse gas emissions. And, we are out of time. Cue Bugs Bunny to say “Th-Th-Th-Tha-Tha-That’s All Folks.”

    1. P.Brooks McGinnis Avatar
      P.Brooks McGinnis


      Until now, it’s been an anomaly of the nuclear age that some of the fiercest critics of such weaponry were drawn from among the very people who created it. The emblem of that is the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, a bimonthly journal founded after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by veteran scientists from the Manhattan Project, which created the first nuclear weapons. (Today, that magazine’s sponsors include 14 Nobel Laureates.) Beginning in 1947, the Bulletin’s cover has functioned annually as a kind of nuclear alarm, featuring a so-called Doomsday Clock, its minute hand always approaching “midnight” (defined as the moment of nuclear catastrophe).

      In that first year, the hand was positioned at seven minutes to midnight. In 1949, after the Soviet Union acquired its first atomic bomb, it inched up to three minutes before midnight. Over the years, it has been reset every January to register waxing and waning levels of nuclear jeopardy. In 1991, after the end of the Cold War, it was set back to 17 minutes and then, for a few hope-filled years, the clock disappeared altogether.

      It came back in 2005 at seven minutes to midnight. In 2007, the scientists began factoring climate degradation into the assessment and the hands moved inexorably forward. By 2018, after a year of Donald Trump, it clocked in at two minutes to midnight, a shrill alarm meant to signal a return to the greatest peril ever: the two-minute level reached only once before, 65 years earlier. Last month, within days of the announced manufacture of the first W76-2, theBulletin’scover for 2019 was unveiled, still at that desperate two-minute mark, aka the edge of doom.

      To fully appreciate how precarious our situation is today, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientistsimplicitly invites us to return to that other two-minutes-before-midnight moment. If the manufacture of a new low-yield nuclear weapon marks a decisive pivot back toward jeopardy, consider it an irony that the last such moment involved the manufacture of the extreme opposite sort of nuke: a “super” weapon, as it was then called, or a hydrogen bomb. That was in 1953 and what may have been the most fateful turn in the nuclear story until now had just occurred.

      After the Soviets exploded their first atomic bomb in 1949, the United States embarked on a crash program to build a far more powerful nuclear weapon. Having been decommissioned after World War II, the Pantex plant was reactivated and has been the main source of American nukes ever since.

      The atomic bomb is a fission weapon, meaning the nuclei of atoms are split into parts whose sum total weighs less than the original atoms, the difference having been transformed into energy. A hydrogen bomb uses the intense heat generated by that “fission” (hence thermonuclear) as a trigger for a vastly more powerful “fusion,” or combining, of elements, which results in an even larger loss of mass being transformed into explosive energy of a previously unimagined sort. One H-bomb generates explosive force 100 to 1,000 times the destructive power of the Hiroshima bomb.

      Given a kind of power that humans once only imagined in the hands of the gods, key former Manhattan Project scientists, including Enrico Fermi, James Conant, and J. Robert Oppenheimer, firmly opposed the development of such a new weapon as a potential threat to the human species. The Super Bomb would be, in Conant’s word, “genocidal.” Following the lead of those scientists, members of the Atomic Energy Commission recommended — by a vote of three to two — against developing such a fusion weapon, but President Truman ordered it done anyway.

      In 1952, as the first H-bomb test approached, still-concerned atomic scientists proposed that the test be indefinitely postponed to avert a catastrophic “super” competition with the Soviets. They suggested that an approach be made to Moscow to mutually limit thermonuclear development only to research on, not actual testing of, such weaponry, especially since none of this could truly be done in secret. A fusion bomb’s test explosion would be readily detectable by the other side, which could then proceed with its own testing program. The scientists urged Moscow and Washington to draw just the sort of arms control line that the two nations would indeed agree to many years later.

      At the time, the United States had the initiative. An out-of-control arms race with the potential accumulation of thousands of such weapons on both sides had not yet really begun. In 1952, the United States numbered its atomic arsenal in the low hundreds; the Soviet Union in the dozens. (Even those numbers, of course, already offered a vision of an Armageddon-like global war.) President Truman considered the proposal to indefinitely postpone the test. It was then backed by figures like Vannevar Bush, who headed the Office of Scientific Research and Development, which had overseen the wartime Manhattan Protect. Scientists like him already grasped the lesson that would only slowly dawn on policymakers — that every advance in the atomic capability of one of the superpowers would inexorably lead the other to match it, ad infinitum. The title of the bestselling James Jones novel of that moment caught the feeling perfectly: From Here to Eternity.

      In the last days of his presidency, however, Truman decided against such an indefinite postponement of the test — against, that is, a break in the nuke-accumulation momentum that might well have changed history. On November 1, 1952, the first H-bomb — “Mike” — was detonated on an island in the Pacific. It had 500 times more lethal force than the bomb that obliterated Hiroshima. With a fireball more than three miles wide, not only did it destroy the three-story structure built to house it but also the entire island of Elugelab, as well as parts of several nearby islands.

      In this way, the thermonuclear age began and the assembly line at that same Pantex plant really started to purr. Less than 10 years later, the United States had 20,000 nukes, mostly H-bombs; Moscow, fewer than 2,000. And three months after that first test, theBulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved that hand on its still new clock to two minutes before midnight.


      It may seem counterintuitive to compare the manufacture of what’s called a “mini-nuke” to the creation of the “super” almost six decades ago, but honestly, what meaning can “mini” really have when we’re talking about nuclear war? The point is that, as in 1952, so in 2019 another era-shaping threshold is being crossed at the very same weapons plant in the high plains country of the Texas Panhandle, where so many instruments of mayhem have been created. Ironically, because the H-bomb was eventually understood to be precisely what the dissenting scientists had claimed it was — a genocidal weapon — pressures against its use proved insurmountable during almost four decades of savage East-West hostility. Today, the Trident-mounted W76-2 could well have quite a different effect — its first act of destruction potentially being the obliteration of the long-standing, post-Hiroshima and Nagasaki taboo against nuclear use. In other words, so many years after the island of Elugelab was wiped from the face of the Earth, the “absolute weapon” is finally being normalized.

      With President Trump expunging the theoretical from Richard Nixon’s “madman theory” — that former president’s conviction that an opponent should fear an American leader was so unstable he might actually push the nuclear button — what is to be done? Once again, nuke-skeptical scientists, who have grasped the essential problems in the nuclear conundrum with crystal clarity for three quarters of a century, are pointing the way. In 2017, the Union of Concerned Scientists, together with Physicians for Social Responsibility, launched Back from the Brink: The Call to Prevent Nuclear War, “a national grassroots initiative seeking to fundamentally change U.S. nuclear weapons policy and lead us away from the dangerous path we are on.”

      Engaging a broad coalition of civic organizations, municipalities, religious groups, educators, and scientists, it aims to lobby government bodies at every level, to raise the nuclear issue in every forum, and to engage an ever-wider group of citizens in pressing for change in American nuclear policy. Back From the Brink makes five demands, much needed in a world in which the U.S. and Russia are withdrawing from a key Cold-War-era nuclear treaty with more potentially to come, including the New START pact that expires two years from now. The five demands are:

      No to first use of nukes. (Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Adam Smith only recently introduced a No First Use Act in both houses of Congress to stop Trump and future presidents from launching a nuclear war.)

      End the unchecked launch-authority of the president. (Last month, Senator Edward Markey and Representative Ted Lieu reintroduced a bill that would do just that.)

      No to nuclear hair-triggers.

      No to endlessly renewing and replacing the arsenal (as the U.S. is now doing to the tune of perhaps $1.6 trillion over three decades).

      Yes to an abolition agreement among nuclear-armed states.

      These demands range from the near-term achievable to the long-term hoped for, but as a group they define what clear-eyed realism should be in Donald Trump’s new version of our never-ending nuclear age.

      In the upcoming season of presidential politics, the nuclear question belongs at the top of every candidate’s agenda. It belongs at the center of every forum and at the heart of every voter’s decision. Action is needed before the W76-2 and its successors teach a post-Hiroshima planet what nuclear war is truly all about.

      1. Great summation. Thanks for taking the time to lay it all out. I learned a lot from it.

    2. One correction: it was Porky Pig who said “That’s all folks!” With a stutter. Porky is also a much better mascot for modern American politics than Bugs. 🙂

  21. Thanks for the laugh.
    I am looking forward to Bernie tonight.
    If they let him speak.

    1. P.Brooks McGinnis Avatar
      P.Brooks McGinnis

      Hi Nylene; Mr. Sanders is who I call him. Bernie sounds cute and Mr. sanders is not that. I made him well over a hundred cash donations in 2016. did I mention that Hillary Clinton is PURE EVIL? Anyway after Mr. Sanders stabbed us supporters in the back and stayed in the criminal DNC he actually gave some of my donations to Hillary Clinton and the criminal DNC.

      Anyway you think that Mr. Sanders will SAVE YOU? Really?

      1. David S. Pumpkins Avatar
        David S. Pumpkins

        I remember my first beer too.

      2. I was born in Kentucky, so sometimes I slip and call him Col. Sanders. 🙂 I’m also old enough to remember the real Col Sanders. He worked in a factory until age 65. Then he started selling his chicken through a local restaurant. Started the chain, then sold it for like $7 million in about 1970. Lived what seemed to be a happy life as a rich man until into his 90’s IIRC. He used to have a giant birthday party on the banks of the Ohio River with the greats of bluegrass picking tunes and everyone could go hear them for free.
        I don’t think Sen. Bernie Sanders, to give him his proper title, is perfect. But he’s also the best chance that the left has had since FDR to gain the White House. It is fascinating how many people complain about that.
        I’ll see who I vote for when those weeks come, but for now, I’ve got a TULSI Sticker on my car.

        1. Agreed. Bernie isn’t perfect but who else do we have? Tulsi is the best on some things and a curiosity on others. Who else?

          And for those who think he stabbed you in the back in’16. Please stop waiting for a messiah to lead a third party. The Greens have no one elected in any office from state to National levels. They’re not a real party, they’re a protest party. DSA is doing great stuff at local and regional levels which I really respect and support. Neither have any near-term hopes of being a national contender even if Bernie, Oprah, Jesus, and MLK we to join them.

          Bernie made a promise to back the Dem candidate and he did that. If he hadn’t he’d have been banished to the fringes with Nader and his efforts would have been for nothing. Instead, he played ball and has spent the past three years pushing his ideas to the point where now you have DNC charlatans like Booker talking in favor of them instead of mocking them as fantasies.

          Bernie believes in working within the system. That’s his choice and he’s made some respectable progress doing that. He’s not a savior but he’s a good person doing his best. Considering our other options I’ll take that.

          1. Johny Conspiranoid Avatar
            Johny Conspiranoid

            Lesser evil voting is dead because there is no lesser evil.

  22. I am laughing my ass off – thank you for your sacrifice! Hahahahaha!

  23. Hilarious. I’m crying. Such Bullshit8rs and Fakers; all of them.

    1. Well, its a shame they wouldn’t let Tulsi talk. And that the whole fake-debate was in a format that emphasizes one-liners with answers limited to one minute. I don’t get the impression that Tulsi is a faker. But, who knows, when they make politics and everything else so unbelievable, then it becomes almost impossible to spot the real thing.
      Meanwhile, Trump will conduct his first Republican primary debate against himself hosted by corporate Twitter. We must drain the swamp. No, the swamp is good. We must leave Syria. No we must attack Syria. We must hate and attack Iran. No, we don’t want war with Iran. I’m for the working man. No, I only like Billionaires

  24. Thank you Cait! I couldn’t bear to watch it myself, knowing junk media leads to genocide approval. They should not even be allowed to market it as a debate. Brilliant work as always. Keep our hearts awake and alive as we trudge through the fortress….

    1. Robin, you said it. I likewise didn’t want to waste time listening to nonsense rhetoric that is not informative. I enjoyed this review immensely because it told a very real view of the “debate” if one can call it that. Can’t wait to see what is said with the group talk tonight with the other bunch.

  25. “Please stop standing on top of your podium.”

    Thank you Catlin for the laughs. Not only does it feel good but it is best to laugh at all the professional politicians.

  26. Every four years Americans are treated to an elitist directed presidential puppet show. If we pick the wrong puppet, the elitist picked vice puppet will be installed. If a populist puppet pops up, a three way puppet show will split the vote, giving us a minority support puppet. Written as Ron Paul delegates were locked out of the RNC 2020 puppet show, the following is a satire on a century or true history of the CFR directed POTUS Puppet Show….

    “Rice*A*Romney….that must have Zombie Treat” > FauxScienceSlayer

    1. Boy, Joseph, are you ever right. It was the Ron Paul candidacies that really opened my eyes to these election fiascos and showed me what they really are. An actual voice of reason that they made certain would not be heard, in spite of his campaign continually breaking fundraising records that were almost never reported. Shut out of the media least people get to hear a nonwarmonger speak.

  27. Michel Bélisle Avatar
    Michel Bélisle

    I think it is Ms Warren who said that there must be universal free healthcare. That alone proves she is not the choice of the ruling elites.

    It is like saying that she wants a universal income or a society bases on the needs of the people instead of money.

    Many of the candidates are clownish characters, and the ruling elites will decide which one is the best to tell lies.

    No doubt we are in the end times and the Second Coming of Jesus is near. And it is a good thing because I do have seen enough. Keeping my Rosary close.

  28. Speaking of “War is bad” Tulsi Gabbard

    I have spoken very highly of, and with such admiration and high hopes for Tulsi Gabbard – her theme of “Servant Leadership” (“Service Above Self”) is all very JFK-ish and appealing.

    But she started to lose me with her presidential announcement speech. My reaction – Americans can’t be “who we are” until they “talk about 911”. I said to myself then … “she is going to get hurt …”

    And then came the interview with Stephen Colbert

    She seems to say all the right ‘anti-war’ things but then it starts to go downhill from around 2:50.

    At 4:20+

    Colbert: Do you believe that he [Assad] is a war criminal? Do you believe he gassed his own people or committed atrocities against his own people?

    Gabbard: YES – reports have shown that that’s a fact … [I’m afraid the rest is blah]


    I have really gotta start sticking to my motto – reason before hope.

    … and Tulsi is the best of this bunch !!

    1. willemina szabo Avatar
      willemina szabo

      Tulsi has the ability to talk to everyone… not just to herself…at least she’s open to hearing what others have to say. America went to war in Iraq on totally false assumptions… Saudi’s were on those attack planes… then the story changed that Iraq had WMD’s…when they could produce evidence the story changed again… Saddam was bad… killing its own people…Assad was accused of that as well.. OUR reports are all propaganda … though Tulsi seems to think them true. I say what happened to the Millions of Native Peoples on this continent … murdered because they were ‘inconvenient’ for those in control at the time.

      1. What attack planes?

      2. Does she really believe those things or is she aware the majority of Americans and the entirety of the media believe those things and to avoid getting the Kucinich/Paul treatment she plays their game while still speaking about anti-interventionism?

  29. I didn’t want to waste my time watching a bunch of idiots blather on, so thanks for this incredibly witty, insightful, and wonderfully funny synopsis. There’s not one single doubt in my mind that I enjoyed it at LEAST 50 times more than I would have the best moment of the entire thing. I can’t wait to see part 2! This really gave me a great laugh to start my day. Thanks so much for putting your talents and the effort in on this brilliant work. RESPECT!

  30. Was that a skit from Saturday Night Live perhaps? It should be. They all fell in line with the discredited Russian interference and investigation-impeachment tale.

  31. Douglas Newman Avatar
    Douglas Newman

    Nailed it, Caitlin! The “debates” were so very reassuringly Neapolitan neoliberal with a *huge* dollop of meaninglessness on top for good measure.

    “Will the *real* America please step forward?”

    (All the candidates step forward)

  32. I, unfortunately, spent several hours of my life watching that ridiculousness. Thanks for the summary – hilarious and brilliant!

    1. That debate was an insult to our intelligence. I think we should start a
      # No More Stupid Debates”. The best thing about it was your response,
      Caitlin. Thanks for the laughs.

  33. So, it seems clear MSNBC and the DNC will again do whatever they can to deprive us of a meaningful choice by manipulating the candidate debates. Their hubris is equaled only by their hypocrisy. Focus on Warren, shut out Tulsi Gabbard. Not even subtly.

  34. I’ll bet this is a perfect summary. I didn’t bother. Love though to see Tulsi use brass knuckles on Bolton or the pig.

  35. Anyone care for another piece of palaver pie

    1. Then join us tonight, same Bat-Time, same Bat-Channel.

  36. Best summary yet. 20:20 🙂

Leave a Reply