Donations for War on Iran, Tim Canova

[BainsBane]

33. I'm sorry, I'd like specifics

Last edited Mon Jul 25, 2016, 05:05 AM - Edit history (1)

Not generalities. How exactly is he so much better that it justifies and end to a peace agreement with Iran? What are the concrete benefits that justify promoting a congressman who would support a GOP-Likud war on Iran? What about him makes up for the lives of Iranians, and for the ensuing clusterfuck that would inevitably follow?

It occurs to me that we are now faced with the citizens equivalent of a vote for war. I wonder if deciding war on Iran is acceptable because the guy endorsed Bernie should prompt some reflection on how people can continue to hold Clintons war vote against her while actively promoting a candidate who opposes peace with Iran?

Of course, selective outrage about war is in keeping with cries to return to the America of fifty years ago, resurrecting the heyday of the US capitalist empire, when the global south was firmly under the thumb of the US and the white bourgeoisie reaped the profits from their exploitation and death. It's clear the problem is not capitalism or empire but making sure the right people prosper from it. Canova's positions on Iran, Israel, and immigration are in keeping with that.

I expect this means we've heard the last about Iraq since war is now a "progressive" value.

Or could it be, as in the Tulsi Gabbard situation and the pro-life congressional candidate whose name I don't recall this second, issues don't matter in the least; what counts is they endorsed Bernie, and absolutely anything is justified because allegiances based of politcal patronage trump everything else.