Spintested: 09/14/10

Election Results Live: September 14 Primary Liveblog

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Democratic voters should have been purging the Democratic Party of DINOs, just as the fringe rightwing of the GOP (Teabaggers) have been putting the most extreme of the extreme in as their nominees, for the rightwingers like Mitch McConnell to control should they win in November.

Now what happens is a choice between the extreme fringe rightwingers (Republicans) and the rightwing of the Democratic Party.

The American electorate, particularly the Democratic voters, has to smarten up.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Election Results Live: September 14 Primary Liveblog

WTF are you so thrilled about?

Obama and the DLC has been working on bringing the Republicans into the Democratic Party.

The DLC's plan has been to shut out the Democratic base, the 70% left that make up the Democratic Party, and move the Democratic Party to the right of center, so that it can't "govern for 100 years".

Welcome to the Democratic Party, which is the old Republican Party, back in the days before Ralph Reed delivered the evangelicals to the GOP.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Stop. Think. Breathe.

What you're saying is BS.

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did. Nothing changed.

Democrats said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate". In 2008, we gave them the 60. And the White House.

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in America, than ever in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I.

No sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at d.e.a.th's door, Obama did a 180 on his promises & sloooooowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, and vote no on everything, in lockstep.

Since Obama has gotten into office, he's continued most of Bush's policies & his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of
About Financial Crisis
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Stop. Think. Breathe.

As an old liberal Democrat, Democrats really aren't. Not since the DLC took control over the Democratic Party.

You only think that Democrats are because of Democratic politicians' manner and style, the focus-group tested words which have us believing that Democrats are better when, in fact, they're continuing just about everything Bush and Cheney did. And worse.

The 'D' after the name is a brand you believe and trust in (as did I), despite the fact that it's the same 'soap' (product) as what Bush & Cheney & the GOP gave us.
About Financial Crisis
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Stop. Think. Breathe.

Dear Barbra,

Instead of trying to convince the People of Obama's deep and abiding commitment to them in spite of all evidence to the contrary, why don't you use your influence to actually do something tangible in your own backyard?

For example, how about getting your good friend Bill Clinton to denounce Meg Whitman's ads using old clips of him bad mouthing Jerry Brown?

How about getting Bill Clinton go out to California and campaign for fellow Democrat Jerry Brown in order to keep the governor's office out of the hands of Republicans?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Not only was Clinton fiscally conservative, he was socially conservative and landed some heavy blows at civil liberties.

When you lose ground on pro-choice rights, when you compromise away rights, that's not supporting a woman's right to choose.

What Bush did with telecoms, warrantless surveillance, actually began under Clinton.

And let's not forget that it was Clinton who is most directly responsible for giving us Bush-Cheney to begin with, by his not investigating and prosecuting Reagan-Bush for Iran-Contra, and for the impeachment that Republicans could run George W. Bush on a campaign to "restore dignity to the White House".
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Clinton was a decent president, he talks a good game, he was fiscally conservative (a good thing), but he gave away the farm on jobs (NAFTA) and regulations (Glass-Steagall) which were at least partly responsible for the economic mess we're in. Clinton once argued that the Republican congress would have passed the bills even without him. Then he should have vetoed the bills on principal and make them override his vote. I knew at the time both bills would come back to haunt us, and unfortunately I was right. Sad to say Obama is walking down a similar path by compromising the heck out of every major bill. The last president one can legitimately call a liberal was JFK.

===============================================

Except JFK wasn't a liberal.

He was perceived to be one (baby boomer families across the nation projected their values onto him), and in comparison to Joe McCarthy he might seem like one, but he wasn't. Kennedy was more socially liberal, but back then we didn't have the same wedge social issues that we have today.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Not only was he fiscally conservative, he was socially conservative and landed some heavy blows at civil liberties.

When you lose ground on pro-choice rights, when you compromise away rights, that's not supporting a woman's right to choose.

What Bush did with telecoms, warrantless surveillance, actually began under Clinton.

And let's not forget that it was Clinton who is most directly responsible for giving us Bush-Cheney to begin with, by his not investigating and prosecuting Reagan-Bush for Iran-Contra, and for the impeachment that Republicans could run George W. Bush on a campaign to "restore dignity to the White House".
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Let's also not forget that Bill Clinton got the same PDB that George W. Bush got.

He knew Bush was Iy!ng us into a war in Iraq. His wife didn't even read the NIE that was made available to her and all members of Congress in a locked & guarded room on the Hill. Senator Bob Graham, who did not vote to give Bush the AUMF (authorization to use military force against Iraq), told Hillary that she had better get herself to the room and read it. She admitted she hadn't. Is anybody seriously going to say that she and her husband didn't know the truth that Bush and Cheney were about to spend us into servitude, third world nation status (all the while the Clintons were making HUNDREDS of millions from hedge funds)?

Bill Clinton cut the safety net from beneath Americans with welfare "reform".
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

He really isn't.

It's his manner & the 'D' after his name, that has you believing that he is better when he's continuing just about all of what they did. And worse.

The 'D' after the name is a brand you believe and trust in (as did I), despite the fact that it's the same 'soap' (product) as what Bush & Cheney gave us.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Clinton's political success has relied on his being able to charm people. Particularly women, but men, too.

With Rachel, Clinton is at a disadvantage. Obviously I'm guessing, but it's a guess from observing him for many years and one that I mentioned long ago: Smart lesb!ans pose a special challenge to Clinton that unnerves him. He has to work to distract them, to mesmerize them, to get them to believe his words and not the actual facts.

As Clinton has gotten older (and especially after his cardiac surgery), he's not as sharp as facile at that as he once was. It was easier to charm people when they weren't aware of his track record as a bad boy. He doesn't have s#x to try to disarm or distract Rachel, and it's just one Rhodes scholar trying to BS another. I think Bill Clinton finds her to be frustrating. And in a similar way, ironically, that he found Sistah Soul-jah.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

As many have noted, others have said the same thing about Clinton (Michael Moore and Alan Greenspan are two who come to mind), without his turning all 'Sistah Soul-jah' on them.

Why now? Why now, Rachel Maddow, for saying it months ago?

I think you have to look at the context and could Clinton have had a hidden agenda?

He was helping Tony Blair hawk books.

In advance of Blair's appearance, Blair's been blasted by Democratic commentators for leaving out some significant events that would, or should if there was a G0d in the universe, lead to the arrest & prosecution of Bush & Cheney.

What better way to distract an audience than to chum the liberal blogospheric waters than with pieces of the left's sweetheart, Rachel Maddow?

It gives Clinton an opportunity to try to tout his administration while avoiding talking at all about today's economic woes. In the same comments, he patted himself on the back for ending welfare. He thinks that was a success. We have record numbers of people losing their homes, more people sleeping on the streets than any other time since the Great Depression and he frames cutting the safety net for the American people as "success".

That as Republican a twist as you can get.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Over the course of US history, corporations have managed to game our political system, and done it so effectively that the two-party system competes to serve corporate interests while defending that service as, "What's good for GM (corporations) is good for America (We the People)".

DLC Democrats (co-founded by BillClinton) who control the DemocraticParty & Republicans are corporate t00Is. Like siblings competing for the attention and approval (campaign contributions) of a parent, Republicans & DLC-controlled Democrats try to outdo each other in delivering for their real constituent, Big Corporations. The trick for them has been to make it seem as if they were really working on behalf of WethePeople.

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama&Democrats were for strong regulations on banks, Wall Street, investigations, prosecutions, restitution of what has been robbed from the middle class and poor for the past 30+ years, environmental clean-up, clean, sustainable renewable energy (& that isn't nuclear), putting an end to the wars and occupation of Iraq & Afghanistan, affordable, quality universal healthcare (which ObamaCare is not), and more. The DLC-controlled Democratic party gives lip service to these & all populist issues, because like the Republican Party, the DLC works for the benefit of transnational corporations.

Obama is no better than Bush-Cheney.

Unless & until there is drastic and uncompromising change to our campaign financing system, until corporations are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participating in elections and politics, all efforts to reform government are useless.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Correction -

Much of what you say is true.

Carry on.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Many of what you say is true (energy independence, surplus, wealth inequality, etc.), Carter bought into the privatization and deregulation begun under Nixon. Especially with regard to healthcare.

We need Democrats who fight like Republicans, with fire in their bellies, and who aren't interested in "working with Republicans in a bipartisan manner", but in driving them off the national stage and giving liberals microphones and access to the public's ear and eyes.

No more Mr. Nice Guy.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

This is very sad.

Comments, not by me but by others to which I'm replying, are being scrvbbed for no apparent reason.

Are H P m0ds able to do this? Are they able to shape the nature of the discussions by scrvbbing comments that lend political impressions they don't want out in the H P readership?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

This is very sad.

Comments, not by me but by others to which I'm replying, are being scrubbed for no apparent reason.

Are community moderators able to do this? Are they able to shape the nature of the discussions by scrubbing comments that lend political impressions they don't want out in the HP community?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

The Clinton years were economically the best for me so far in my adult life.

=================================================

At what cost?

You only think that because you've yet to stand back and look at what the real cost has been.

You've actually been robbed.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did. Nothing changed.

Democrats said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate". In 2008, we gave them the 60. And the White House.

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in America, than ever in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I.

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at d.e.a.t.h's door, Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", after Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, and vote no on everything, in lockstep.

Since Obama has gotten into office, he's continued most of Bush's policies & his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Like Al Qaeda with fewer than 100 in Afghanistan, the Tea Party has fewer than 600 members nationwide.

The Tea Party is the means by which the Republican Party tosses its most active fringees some red meat.

Makes you wonder why Obama and Rahm Emanuel didn't go after Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Feith, Wolfowitz, Yoo, Bybee, et al, or anyone in the Republican leadership or in Congress, but instead went after Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin (two people with no official role in the Republican Party).

The GOP was on the mat (not even the ropes) and de@d after the 2008 election, but Obama and Emanuel have let them rise again.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Bill Clinton co-founded the DLC, along with Joe Lieberman and Al From.

The DLC's mission statement is to move the Democratic Party to the right of center, in order to attract Republicans, conservatives, to the Democratic Party. In order "to govern (with the most voters, after having marginalized the extreme rightwing that controls the Republican Party and the base of the Democratic Party, the left, which make up about 70% of the Democratic Party) for 100 years".
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Do you know what Toni Morrison meant when she said that?
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Few knew what Glass-Steagle was, much less what its repeal meant. Or that the repeal was even happening.

The People were preoccupied with watching impeachment proceedings. "Look, shiny spinning things!"

The OJ trial gave Americans a taste for bl00d, and Court TV.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

That's what pro-corporatists mean by "growth". Building on every square in of land. Residential, commercial building, primary residences, vacation homes, 3rd, 4th, 10th homes. Clear-cutting forests, paving the ground, planting GMO crops and grapevines to drain aquifers, laying gas and oil and power lines to homes and businesses, pouring asphalt highways for trucks to deliver to the suburbs and big box stores (IKEA, Hickory Farms).

That's what Clinton did.

Overbuilt communities. He did it as it's been done for generations: Don't lay the infrastructure first. Create the conditions for runaway building, and when people are stuck in traffic most of their day, they'll then be pressured to agree to increasing the number of roads, give up their support of environmental protections. They'll even agree to privatizing the roads, because they won't want to be taxed.

If when the economy teeters (where was Bill Clinton when George W. Bush and Republicans were starting wars on lies & paying for it by blowing Clinton's "anticipated surplus" & giving out tax cuts to the rich?), foreign nationals will snap up US land and businesses at bargain basement prices.

No sooner did Mrs. Clinton become SoS, she helped further that plan -

http://www.mofopolitics.com/2009/07/14/video-mayor-bloomberg-hillary-clinton-stabbed-nyc-in-the-back/

Both of the Clintons are DLC, aka DINOs.
About Rachel Maddow
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Does anybody think Bill Clinton is going to denounce Meg Whitman's ads using old clips of him bad mouthing Jerry Brown in her ads?

Will Bill Clinton go out to California and campaign for fellow Democrat Jerry Brown, to keep the governor's office out of the hands of Republicans?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bill Clinton Strikes Back At Rachel Maddow

Did Clinton "strike back" at former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan when he said the same thing?

Meet the Press, Sept. 23, 2007:

MR. RUSSERT: Let me pick up on some interviews that you’ve given this week as you’ve been touring, talking about your book, “The Age of Turbulence.” You said this: “I think Bill Clinton was the best Republican president we’ve had in a while.” Republican?

MR. GREENSPAN: I’m sure he doesn’t like that joke, but if you look at his record compared to what I think appropriate policy ought to be, he’s for free trade, he’s for globalization, he was for welfare reform, fiscal restraint and—true enough, he’s not a Republican. I’m sorry, President Clinton, I didn’t mean to say that. But I must say, I had to follow an awful lot of your particular guidelines and found them very compatible with my own.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20941413/page/4/
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP