“War has rules; mud wrestling has rules; politics has no rules.” — Ross Perot, 1992.
Independents can be fooled by politicians, just like party voters. However, our edge is that we like hearing the debate. But the “debate” between Joe Biden and Donald Trump wasn’t really a fair. It was mud wrestling with an old man whose age is catching up with him and a punch-drunk dirty fighter.
That said, clearly Biden has some ‘splainin’ to do. But, will his explanation appeal to we independent voters, the voters who will decide this election?
For us independents, here’s a most noteworthy piece written by independent journalist Lee Fang, “How Lobbyists Could Select the Nominee.” Fang lays out the two options for the decision; a more open process at the Democratic Convention in mid-August or the party elites, many being corporate lobbyists.
And, “Uh, What About The Nuclear Codes?” something even more unnerving addressed by ironic independent journalist, Michael Tracey, in his article published on July 4th:
these ‘alarmed’ and ‘concerned’ Democratic elites are restricting their ‘alarm’ and ‘concern’ to literally nothing but Biden’s ability to beat Trump, you can write them off as shallow self-serving hucksters who really ought to be nowhere near political power. They’re worried about the self-immolation of Biden only insofar as it could bring forth an undesirable electoral outcome — not because it could end up immolating humanity.
Michael Tracey
Political independents who follow the work of political scientists like Lee Drutman (author of the book Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop), Rich Winger (the publication Ballot Access News) and Prof. John Mearsheimer, respect all political party’s rights to nominate their candidates according to their own rules. However, political parties are private organizations and taxpayers should not be forced to pay for their primaries. We should also stop them from rigging ballot access requirements to stop competition. Leave us – American independent voters who today are 51% of the electorate – and our tax dollars, out of your partisan blood bathing madness!
Endless War Dangers Even From RFK, Jr.
RFK, Jr. is unacceptable to millions of independents (and most Americans) who want out of endless war.
I was recruited by Dennis Kucinich to work for the Kennedy campaign to coordinate his Texas operation. Though my work is not on the market (for hire), I decided to take the job in July of 2023. I left in October.
I wanted to give RFK a chance and to see if major media claims about him were fair. More than anything, I desperately wanted a viable peace candidate in this presidential election. No Labels was not an option, having been created by neocon, Joe Lieberman. Lieberman had also simply used the independent option to get around a primary challenger.
For me, RFK, Jr. himself chose a path that has rendered him unviable. I met many wonderful, competent and dedicated people working throughout the lower tiers of his organization. However, the upper echelon of his campaign organization is a total mess run by incompetents, or worse. It was clear to me that they were bleeding money on ballot access petitioning that I advised could have been spent on careful support for his greatest strength – a large loyal following. Instead, he hired irreputable, incompetent, and rip-off artists. What’s more, he is working with a guy who has been accused several times of physical assaults on women. The most recent found him in Riker’s Island.
Second, following the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, RFK, came out as a virulent supporter of Israel, urging that the US. give Israel “whatever it needs to defend itself.” That’s the Israel that now engages in ethnic cleansing, is on its way to genocide, and a very dangerous escalation of war in the Middle-East.
RFK called me when I served my two-week notice in October. I respectfully asked him to consider changing his Israel policies. I explained that I didn’t feel that I could represent him otherwise. I told him “We need a peace candidate in this race.” He said, “I am the peace candidate.” I said, “I don’t think you can be a peace candidate and support Israel.” He said he wanted to think about it and to give him a week.
Next thing I heard he was doubling down for Israel. So, I left on friendly terms.
On Ukraine, to be fair, I would add that Trump has an edge and the neocons behind Biden are totally to blame for our disastrous and dishonorable conduct in Ukraine. How do you hold peace negotiations without all the parties present? The braggadocio Trump at least gets what many of my Democratic friends do not acknowledge. The U.S. provoked Putin. We know this now because Biden wants Ukraine in NATO, and he and everyone has known for years that this is a red-line for Russia.
In the Trump-Biden debate, Biden put out the red-herring that Putin wants the Balkans. Putin doesn’t even want most of Ukraine! He has also repeatedly tried to get to the negotiating table. How many Ukrainian deaths have occurred, we cannot know because on deaths, our government lies and covers up. Remember Iraq – and false claims of WMDs — and the death toll. (1 million?)
I am ashamed to admit I have not paid attention to our foreign policy, so I, like most Americans must now wake up and smell coffee, or should I say coffins?
If we had an independent mainstream press, they would have asked both candidates about how our interventionist policies along with climate disasters are wreaking havoc with displacement of millions of people. This is why the border is in crisis. Instead, we get mud wrestling at best and a humanitarian crisis of mounting proportion.
What do we do now? We build the independent movement and let the Democratic and Republican nominees come get us with some policy meat and potatoes. Hold the mud.
Additional References:
- The provocation of Putin is well documented in Oliver Stones’, “Ukraine on Fire,” or watch any discussion of Ukraine with Prof. John Mearsheimer.
- The last 30-minutes of Glenn Greenwald’s System Update Show on July 4th “Dem Oligarchs Forcing Biden Out.”
Linda Curtis has been active in the independent movement since 1979, helped place Lenora Fulani on the ballot as an independent for President in all 50 states in 1988 and was the state organizer for Ross Perot’s Reform Party, 1996-2000. Linda is a co-founder of the League of Independent Voters of Texas, a 501c4 nonpartisan, nonprofit organization.
Editorial note: The opinions expressed in articles, commentaries, and other contributions published by Independent Political Report (IPR) are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IPR, its editors, or its staff. IPR is dedicated to providing a platform for diverse perspectives on third party and independent political movements. We encourage open dialogue and the exchange of ideas, but the publication of any opinion piece should not be construed as an endorsement by IPR.
Reality – You think history is relevant, but not the history of Ukrainian independence, because it happened 30 years ago and people are old enough to remember? Does that mean you think the British had a legitimate right to invade the US up to… what… 1840, or so?
“There was a western backed coup which deposed the elected president.”
That is a Russian lie. If you have ever wondered whether you were susceptible to Russian propaganda, now you know. The “evidence” for that amounts to four things:
1. There was a verbally expressed preference by some in the west that someone else was running Ukraine. If coups were built on such things, Putin would not be in power.
2. For decades after the dissolution of the USSR and Ukranian independence, foreign aid was given to Ukraine for things like Chernobyl disaster cleanup, family planning, AIDS awareness, anti-human trafficking, anti-narcotics, anti-corruption, small arms proliferation, and dozens of other things which hundreds of other countries get in equal amount. Some of the people affiliated with those recipient groups, often years later, ended up supporting the Euro Maidan.
3. Several politicians went there for a photo-op during the Euro Maidan.
4. Someone passed around a plate of cookies at the Euro Maidan.
Coups aren’t made of such things.
“They had an election, which they lost, and then took power extrajudicially. That’s known as a coup.”
Yanukovych signed an agreement agreeing to restore the 2004 Ukrainian Constitution and hold new elections sometime later in 2014 in exchange for the withdrawing of protestors. The Ukrainian parliament passed the bill to restore the Constitution the next day, but Yanukovych refused to sign it. Instead, he abandoned his office. Then the Ukrainian parliament voted 328 – 0 to remove him. Then Yanukovych fled to Russia. Then Ukraine held new elections. That’s what you’re calling a coup. Yanukovych abandoned his office, was voted to be removed by the parliament, and they held new elections. Or, was it just the fact that people were protesting, that you think was a coup? People are not allowed to protest corrupt and incompetent government? Years later Yanukovych was convicted in absentia of treason because he allowed the police to shoot into the crowd of protestors, killing nearly 100.
Igor Girkin and Russia’s little green men began appearing in Ukraine before Yanukovych fled the country. That was the start of the real coup.
“Noises aren’t action. It often takes a combination of things to push governments into war.”
True. In this case, it was the removal of Putin’s puppet and the attempt by Ukraine to exit Russia’s sphere of influence that did it. But, Russia already had the motivation to do it. They just needed the excuse. It had nothing to do with the US provoking Russia or Biden being agreeable to allow Ukraine in NATO. That last bit wasn’t even an option. NATO’s rules in effect in 2022 were that countries with border disputes cannot join. Ukraine has had a border dispute since Russia invaded in 2014, long before Biden became President. So, no, the article above is not correct. There was no possibility of Ukraine joining NATO while Biden was president, prior to Russia’s re-escalation of its invasion.
“Putin paused his invasion after Trump began running for president and talking about withdrawing from NATO because Putin did not want to cause any geopolitical waves which might disturb that possibility. Once Trump was out of office and that possibility over, it was game on.”
That’s one interpretation of history. I don’t think it’s correct. In any case, it remains true that there was no contradiction between your initial statement here and what the author said in the article above. It so remains true that:
Noises aren’t action. It often takes a combination of things to push governments into war.
“Your recited history of Ukraine is irrelevant, as is its demographics. Mexico has no legitimate claim over New Mexico and Texas, even though it once governed there and those states are a plurality Hispanic.”
This isn’t a good comparison. Texas and New Mexico are not 90% Hispanic, they haven’t voted or militarily attempted to secede (at least not since the 1860s, long before anyone alive today was born), and they weren’t annexed to the US within living memory. I disagree with your contention that demographics and history are irrelevant.
“There was no western backed coup that deposed Putin’s puppet in 2014. ”
There was a western backed coup which deposed the elected president.
“That was just Ukrainians tired of being forced to live in poverty because they were in Russia’s sphere of influence rather than economically tied to Europe. ”
They had an election, which they lost, and then took power extrajudicially. That’s known as a coup.
I wasn’t going to bother commenting here, firstly because I couldn’t be arsed to read the opinion piece further after it described either Biden or Trump a “punch-drunk dirty fighter”, when clearly both were “old m[e]n whose age is catching up with [the]m”, and secondly because none of the commenters evidently know even the first thing about the short and evil history of “Ukraine”. But this line caught my attention: “Mexico has no legitimate claim over New Mexico and Texas”
Says who? Says you, Jim? New Mexico and Texas are part of the lands ceded by Mexico to the US by the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo. Now there are plenty of arguments to be made about why that treaty was invalid and why Mexico did not have the authority or right to sign that treaty in the first place, but there is no denying that the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo has more legitimacy than the Russian Revolution which created “Ukraine”. It isn’t even comparable.
Now regarding the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo. Like so many peace treaties, it was signed under duress, which makes it legally null and void. The problem with this argument is that the same valid conclusion can be drawn regarding of the Treaty of Trianon, the Surrender of Guam, and every other treaty which only signed either through coercion or through deceit.
Another valid counter-argument is to say that “Mexico has no legitimate claim over New Mexico and Texas” only to the extent that all three are in fact Spanish, like Florida and California, or French and/or Austrian. If you want to start throwing around terms like “legitimate claim”, all three of those have at least as legitimate a claim to Texas and New Mexico as the United States of America or the United Mexican States do, and arguably a good deal more legitimate.
Now against my better judgement – because again, not a single one of you western idiots has the right to talk about this, because evidently not a single one of you knows jack shit about the situation in “Ukraine” or Russia – let me do a quick debunking of “The only coup in Ukraine happened shortly after Russia lost its puppet”:
– “Ukraine” is a Bolshevik experiment in state terror, which was created in 1917 and has revolved exclusively around the genocide of its minorities and neighbors and around the occupation of their lands and property since then.
– That experiment should have been terminated with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the land returned to its rightful owners – and the rightful owners returned to it.
– In 2004, Victor Yanukovich was democratically elected as president of “Ukraine”, but he was immediately ousted in what is called the “Orange Revolution”, which was a coup by banderite nazis financed and armed by NATO and EU member states.
– Ten years later, in 2014, Yanukovich was again democratically elected as president of “Ukraine”, and again ousted in a coup by banderite nazis financed and armed by NATO and EU, this time called the “(Euro)Maidan Revolution”.
– Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk were not willing to wait another ten years to see Yanukovich democratically elected and then ousted again, so they seceded and declared themselves independent.
– The banderite nazis responded by declaring them subhuman and swearing to wipe their very existence from the history books.
– They then back up their words by commencing a genocide of the people of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk – not to mention of Russians, Tatars, Hungarians, Romanians, Jews, etc. elsewhere in “Ukraine”.
– Meanwhile NATO and the EU did nothing to stop this; on the contrary, they cheered on and justified the Odessa Massacre, they covered up “Ukraine” “accidentally” shooting down MH17 and accused “those evil separatists” of doing it, they continued to supply the banderite nazis with money and arms so that they could continue their genocide.
– Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk appealed to Russia for protection, and Russia ever so cautiously and reluctantly heeded their cries and pleas.
– Crimea voted in a free and open referendum to merge with Russia, while Donetsk and Luhansk voted to become independent republics.
– The Minsk Accords are put in place, but the banderite nazis and their NATO and EU backers don’t care and keep violating them to continue their genocide.
– Eventually Russia has no choice but to launch a special military operation into “Ukraine” to liberate and denazify it, in order to stop the genocide – something which they should have done immediately in 2004, as soon as the “Orange Revolution started”, not in 2022.
So don’t you dare spout any of that regurgitated banderite “The only coup in Ukraine happened shortly after Russia lost its puppet” bullshit.
Reality – Your recited history of Ukraine is irrelevant, as is its demographics. Mexico has no legitimate claim over New Mexico and Texas, even though it once governed there and those states are a plurality Hispanic.
There was no western backed coup that deposed Putin’s puppet in 2014. That was just Ukrainians tired of being forced to live in poverty because they were in Russia’s sphere of influence rather than economically tied to Europe. The only coup in Ukraine happened shortly after Russia lost its puppet – when Russia sent its little green men into Eastern Ukraine in order to fake a secession. Those little green men being a mix of Russian special forces, GRU, and Wagner mercenaries. The local governments refused to go along with Russia’s secession plans. They were either overthrown Jan 6 style, with a mix of a few hundred locals and Russians and then the “new” government voted, or the existing governments were literally held at gunpoint and ordered to vote. Igor Girkin himself admitted years ago that local Ukranian governments were rounded up by Russian militias and ordered to vote at gunpoint. In that same interview Girkin claimed he was in Ukraine organizing things before Yanukovych even fled the country.
Putin paused his invasion after Trump began running for president and talking about withdrawing from NATO because Putin did not want to cause any geopolitical waves which might disturb that possibility. Once Trump was out of office and that possibility over, it was game on.
Is protesting always supposed to be free of consequences, even when it has consequences for others?
Thanks for everyone’s comments, whether we agree or disagree.
I posted the documentary “Ukraine on Fire,” which is great for those who haven’t considered the “other side” on Ukraine. I follow Prof. Mearsheimer’s Realism — a tendency in international relations that suggests you put yourself in your opponent’s shoes.
Most independents like myself, in the post-Vietnam era are/were decidedly anti-war. Many of us were young protestors who the Democrats absorbed “coopted” after independent leaders were assassinated, imprisoned or dropped out on acid.
Today, I see young people who are, anti-war (especially the Israeli conflict) and identify as independents.
Where are these young independents supposed to go to make their case? Protesting or even speaking out on Israel can get you in trouble — like protesting Vietnam did to my generation.
The safest place to “protest” is with your vote, but on war, it appears we have little to no choice.
My message is simple: Any candidates who want us independents need to fight for our votes with sincere plans to deescalate and move toward peace on the planet.
“That’s the Israel that now engages in ethnic cleansing, is on its way to genocide, and a very dangerous escalation of war in the Middle-East.”
The charge of genocide is grotesque insult on top of injury. There are about 10 million people in Israel proper, of whom about two million are Arabs. Another two million Arabs live in the “West bank” – Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem – and two million more in Gaza. Israel has the military capability to ethnically cleanse (exile) or genocide these six or seven million Arabs. No such attempt has been made. It hasn’t been contemplated, except in the imagination of a small percentage of Israeli extremists and far more Arabs and Arab sympathizers.
Tens of thousands of Arabs have died because Hamas has been using them as human shields after 10/7, an attack which, proportional to Israel’s population, was like if the 9/11 terrorists had killed 50,000 Americans, including by such methods as gang raping women to death and killing the children first in front of their parents, cooking babies alive in ovens, and took 8,000 hostages. To make the analogy somewhat closer to what happened, imagine if these terrorists operated an autonomous quasi nation along the Mexican or Canadian border.
There’s no contradiction between what Jim said and what the author said. Noises aren’t action. It often takes a combination of things to push governments into war.
Ukraine began to coalesce as a concept in the 19th century. It didn’t have administrative status in Imperial Russia. Governments purporting to be Ukraine controlled various areas that constituted the central-northern parts of today’s Ukraine during a period of multipolar civil war and chaos in 1918-22. During Soviet times, it had administrative status as a nominally independent Republic which was part of the Soviet union.
Parts of the Donbass to its East and of various central European nations that fell under the iron curtain to its west were added to Ukraine by Stalin. Crimea was added by Khrushchev. Ukraine existed as an independent nation state with the borders it claims now only in 1991-2014.
A western backed coup deposed the elected government there in 2014. That’s when areas to its east and south added to Ukraine by Stalin and Khrushchev which had never been part of anything called Ukraine before that – and overwhelmingly remain Russian culturally, linguistically, ethnically, religiously, etc – seceded from the nationalist coup regime.
The ongoing efforts to lay the groundwork for bringing Ukraine into the EU and NATO, and to conquer those Russian areas, are why Russia intervened in 2022.
“I am ashamed to admit I have not paid attention to our foreign policy”.
Nor to Russia’s foreign policy, it would appear. Russians have been talking about seizing territory in Ukraine since at least 1997.
“That’s the Israel that now engages in ethnic cleansing, is on its way to genocide, and a very dangerous escalation of war in the Middle-East.”
Horse leavings.