Spintested: 10/21/10

President Obama Films 'It Gets Better' Video To Combat Gay Bullying

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Yes, it's in response to your post.

The measure of a person's intentions is by his actions. Obama's actions, on a whole host of issues, don't match his words. I can't help that you don't get it, but it's outrageous that you the gall to assume that you know better than others who are living it, like Dan Choi.

Obama's 'most ardent supporters' are no different than Bushies, and are the most immediate problem we face. You need to get the h3ll out of the way, stop blocking for Obama and let us get what he promised us all.

You are your own worst enemy.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

President Obama Films 'It Gets Better' Video To Combat Gay Bullying

The DoJ has no obligation to file a brief in favor of DOMA ( http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/choice-to-defend-doma-and-its.html ).

Obama could end DADT tomorrow but just not filing an appeal.

Obama's DoJ has filed briefs defending DOMA in the court challenge of DOMA advancing legal arguments that, if pursued by the courts, could greatly damage gay and lesbian rights (that homosexuality is the equivalent of incest and pedophilia/child rape).

How does a Democratic president, on the heels of the most criminal and corrupt administration in the nation's history, not replace Bush-era US attorneys? Presidents may fire US attorneys, and they do so routinely at the beginning of a new administration. It is unusual to fire US attorneys in mid-term (as Bush did) except in cases of gross misconduct (which wasn’t the case during the Bush administration). This is what Obama's US attorneys do instead of returning the democracy to the American people -- Instead we get Bush-style obscenity prosecutions:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_691667.html

As a liberal Democrat, for this and so many other reasons (like 'preventive detention' and Obama's claim that a president can k!ll US citizens with no due process) I don't know how any self-respecting Democrat can defend Obama.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Angela Wright, "The Other Woman" of the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas Hearings (Flashback)

I beg to differ.

I think it does a lot of good to relive this.

We are saddled with Clarence Thomas and rightwingers because Democrats didn't think it would be any big deal.

Because in the face of a bully (Republicans) who said, "We're going to fight to the de@th", Democratic senators on the Judiciary Committee backed down.

It's not enough that Joe Biden voted against confirming Clarence Thomas when his name came up on the floor of the Senate. You throw everything you have against these people at the time you have it, and try to block their forward momentum every way you can.

Democrats haven't been doing that for decades.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Angela Wright, "The Other Woman" of the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas Hearings (Flashback)

No, I say smiling, I meant Joe Biden's other redeeming qualities.

I've always thought Arlen Specter was a sc**b*g, but all Biden has going for him is a 'D' after his name and a demeanor that suggests he's a liberal champion of the People when he's not.

Republicans play hardball and Democrats cave. The most well-meaning ones years ago caved because they were easily dissuaded and intimidated by Republicans who were prepared to go to their de@ths rather than give in. Now, we're dealing with DLC Democrats, who are as bought-off by corporations as Republicans.

The entire Congress needs to be purged of incumbents, both parties, and Americans need to get active in politically in the parties themselves, and put real populist candidates into office. That's the only way there can be the necessary reforms for a functioning and healthy democracy. Neither party supports public financing of campaigns and elections. Neither party supports ending corporate personhood.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Angela Wright, "The Other Woman" of the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas Hearings (Flashback)

Ginni Thomas called Anita Hill the morning after the NYTimes published this story about her online:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/09/us/politics/09thomas.html?_r=2&scp=2&sq=virginia%20thomas&st=cse

I think it's a safe bet to suggest she called Hill hoping to get the heat off herself and this story.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DCCC Chair: We're Keeping Our Eye On Results From The Northeast

Again with the name calling? Shameful. The Tea Party has a place for you with your uncivil tongue and illogical attacks. Clearly you are not worth my time or thought. Poof! You're gone.

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

I'm a liberal Democrat, you m0r0n. You start it and then you have the nerve to howl when it's returned back in kind.

What Obama says and what he actually does on a whole host of issues are two distinctly different things.

But you don't know that. You just listen to the pretty words and think you know what's going on.

It's ig.no.rants like you who are responsible for the mess we're in. You have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't stop you from weighing in with an opinion.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Angela Wright, "The Other Woman" of the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas Hearings (Flashback)

This doesn't speak well for either side of the aisle.

We've been stuck with Clarence Thomas and an ever more aggressive conservative takeover of the government because of feckless collaborationists within the Democratic Party.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DCCC Chair: We're Keeping Our Eye On Results From The Northeast

The first time most of us heard of Barack Obama, he spoke about rising above red America and blue America and seeing the UNITED States of America. Is it his fault the Republicans won't cooperate?

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

From his actions since taking office, Obama clearly didn't mean that for Republicans. He meant that for the base of the Democratic party. That Democratic voters should cave to Republicans. Because all that Obama and the Democrats in Congress have been doing under his authority is churning out Republican-like legislation. Then Obama chastises the base Democrats for not supporting his conceding away their positions.

You are an id-jit.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DCCC Chair: We're Keeping Our Eye On Results From The Northeast

How is it that it's always the ones who lob the first stone that cry "foul" when it's hurled back at them?

You're an id-jit. You have no knowledge. Let's take your Social Security comment for an example.

It's Obama & Democrats, behaving like Republicans, putting Social Security on the table for cuts and privatizing by his Debt Commission:

Obama Packs Debt Commission with Social Security Looters:

Obama has filled his new 'debt commission' with Wall Street insiders determined to gut Social Security

http://www.alternet.org/story/146183/obama_packs_debt_commission_with_social_ security_looters?page=entire

Obama Packs Debt Commission With Social Security Privatization & Benefit Cut Supporters

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/05/10/obama-packs-debt-committee-with-supportes-of-social-security-benefit-cuts-and-privatization/

http://www.truth-out.org/obama-catfood-commissioner-threatens-small-town-with-nuclear-annihilation62852gt;

You don't put Social Security on the table at all before a 'Deficit Commission' (it's not in danger of going broke, to begin with) or put people like this on your commission if you weren't signaling that you're open to doing it.

And Chris Van Hollen made an interesting parsing slip on CNN about that very point (he never was the brightest color in the box -- Democratic voters are d00med if this is the future leadership of the party). Go hunt: http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1008/15/sotu.01.html

[Hint: "partial"]
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DCCC Chair: We're Keeping Our Eye On Results From The Northeast

I ask where the line is for you, you dance and jig.

It could be any issue of the Democratic Party's different special interest groups, Democrats have been more than willing to sell any group's interests. And Obama's been particularly 'oily' (slippery) on the issues. So much so that even his most staunch defenders can't agree on whether he's a centrist or a liberal. This is just on a woman's right to choose:

You can't get an abortion in 87% of the counties in the US.

There are 3 states in the country that have only one abortion clinic, Other states heavily restrict abortion, ban abortions in clinics or any facility that receives public funds, or ban abortion counseling or clinic recommendations.

Why bother making it illegal if you can just make it impossible to get?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/02/no-choice-87-of-us-counti_n_210194.html

Healthcare reform legislation = ending insurance coverage of abortion services

http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/17/gwu-study-yes-the-stupak-amendment-would-end-coverage-of-abortion-services-over-time/

http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/17/gwu-study-yes-the-stupak-amendment-would-end-coverage-of-abortion-services-over-time/
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DoJ Accused Of Hypocrisy For Appealing DADT While Letting Park Proselytizing Ruling Stand

She can be critical of him, but last year when the healthcare debate was revving up, with teabaggers taking over townhalls and representatives were canceling townhalls, MSNBC's line-up went from pressuring Democrats to live up to the promise of a public option to backing down.

All administrations 'buy' off the media, with interviews, and you can pretty much track it with MSNBC's on-camera bunch, too. In the closing days of the healthcare bill going through in March, Rachel had become a cheerleader for it. She'd been invited to the White House and within days she had an "exclusive" sit down interview with Tim Geithner.

It's hard not to look at that as unconnected.
About Obama Administration
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Let's get some definitions on the table.

I am an old FDR liberal Democrat. I'm against privatization of government, and for regulated capitalism (like Naomi Klein, I'm for a mixed economy). I'm for social safety nets; those we have, those we've had, and others which we would have had had it not been for the Reagan "revolution", and which would have come in handy during tough times like this, and which might have prevented this meltdown from happening at all. Most of all, I'm for education. Free to all, all the way.

I am one of the 70% of liberals that comprise the Democratic Party.

The DLC (pro-corporate, anti-populist, the Republican wing of the Democratic Party), through no acclaimation of the People or Democratic voters, controls the Democratic Party. The DLC, DINOs, are ideologically the moderate Republicans of the 1950s & 1960s. It's a t00l of the corporations, just like Republicans.

Most Democratic voters have no idea what the DLC is or who is in it.

Obama isn't a centrist; he's a neoliberal ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism ). As the president, he heads the national Democratic Party, i.e., he's the de facto head of the DLC. He's a DINO. Obama & Democrats are NOT doing what Democratic voters put Obama & Democrats into power to achieve on their behalf, i.e., undo 30+ years of Republican programming.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

We saw how this played out through the 2009 summer debate over healthcare reform. Obama disappeared from the public debate, which was especially onerous during the town halls when teabaggers came into prominence & disrupted any real discussion. Obama cut secret deals with Big Insurance, PhRma, hospitals, the AMA, etc., & lied about it.

Elevating the TeaParty to prominence enabled Obama's watered down legislation, making it Republican-like & thus he could deliver to the corporations, move the DemocraticParty even farther to the right in order to attract moderate Republican politicians & their supporters into the Democratic Party.

Expect more of that after November 2nd, when Obama will put more NAFTA-like free trade deals through.

But we can't discuss that and other issues important in this election now, because it's all about witchcraft and Ginny Thomas.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

The Koch brothers are getting a lot of press for their role in the Tea Party's rise, but the truth is that they got a lot of help from Obama, Rahm Emanuel & the DLC machine.

Obama came into the WhiteHouse with Republicans not just on the ropes, but on the mat & down for the count. Obama issued a pardon & let them rise again.

After just one month in the White House, instead of going after Republicans & how their failed policies have brought us to the brink of destruction, instead of hammering BushCheneyGOP for our economic woes & wars of choice, Obama & RahmEmanuel went gunning for SarahPalin & RushLimbaugh, two people with no role in the RepublicanParty.

Obama & Emanuel never mentioned MitchMcConnell, JohnBoehner, EricCanter, KarlR0ve, GeorgeW, H.W., JebBush, Cheney, NOBODY who is actually IN the RepublicanParty as the problem. They still don't.

The Tea Party serves them in several ways. If they could choose any Republican to run against in 2012, it would be Palin, and elevating the Tea Party makes that more of a possibility.

It also lets Democrats keep a legislative agenda to the right of center. If the teabaggers are far rightwing, then everything to their left is ground the Democrats can claim (and that's a lot of ground).

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

No matter what the outcome of this election, Obama will spin it as a mandate for continuing a pro-corporate, anti-populist agenda. The TeaParty is an effective nemesis for him, but in fact, they're toothless.

There are only 600 registered nationally, & what they actually are is the Republican base. There are only a handful of them even running, & even if they all won (O'Donnell's 20 points behind in the polls), they'd move to the left as Scott Brown has done ("Sarah Palin, who?") or remain fringe. But in any case they'd be controlled by Republican leadership in the Congress. They're really not a "growing movement" any more than Republicanism is growing -- They're the Republican Party. They're not any more conservative than the party's been for 30 years.

But my problem is with a Democratic Party that is utilizing the same fear tactics that Bush-Cheney utilized before elections. Only now it's fear of teabaggers scaling the walls of our democracy with knives between their teeth to behead us, instead of Al Qaeda.

Once the election is over, what Obama & the DLC-Democrats are going to do after November 2nd are things we'd be discussing (and objecting to) now, pre-election, if we had the chance -- More NAFTA-like treaties outsourcing Americans' jobs.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Obama, RahmEmanuel, the DLC, DavidAxelrod, DavidPlouffe, all have worked their @$$es off to prevent real progressives getting into office. One example right off the bat is Blanche Lincoln.

The White House put its full weight & support behind Blanche Lincoln over the true progressive (& union-backed) candidate in the primary, Bill Halter.

This wasn't unlike when Obama made a deal with Arlen Specter and put the full weight and support of the Democratic machine behind Specter during the 2010 primary in Pennsylvania, trying to buy off (among other alternative candidates Democratic voters in PA might have wanted to vote to have representing them) Joe Sestak. Consider that -- Obama actively went about trying to prevent Democratic voters from choosing their preferred candidate for the US so that a DINO, Republican Arlen Specter, could retain the seat.

BlancheLincoln's 18 points down behind the GOP candidate JohnBoozman.

Guess who could beat Boozman in Arkansas? Lt. Governor BillHalter. Because, like just about all Americans, Arkansans would prefer an authentic, likable candidate, even if it's a progressive.

But more progressives in Congress means real populist legislation getting passed into law. Real reform bills, that re-regulate banks & big business. Real stimulus bills, with jobs creation, green clean energy development, and more. But that's not who or what Obama & the DLC-controlled Democrats are about.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

Obama, RahmEmanuel, the DLC, DavidAxelrod, DavidPlouffe, all have worked their @$$es off to prevent real progressives getting into office. One example right off the bat is Blanche Lincoln.

The White House put its full weight & support behind Blanche Lincoln over the true progressive (& union-backed) candidate in the primary, Bill Halter.

This wasn't unlike when Obama made a deal with Arlen Specter and put the full weight and support of the Democratic machine behind Specter during the 2010 primary in Pennsylvania, trying to buy off (among other alternative candidates Democratic voters in PA might have wanted to vote to have representing them) Joe Sestak. Consider that -- Obama actively went about trying to prevent Democratic voters from choosing their preferred candidate for the US so that a DINO, Republican Arlen Specter, could retain the seat.

BlancheLincoln's 18 points down behind the GOP candidate JohnBoozman.

Guess who could beat Boozman in Arkansas? Lt. Governor BillHalter. Because, like just about all Americans, Arkansans would prefer an authentic, likable candidate, even if it's a progressive.

But more progressives in Congress means real populist legislation getting passed into law. Real reform bills, that re-regulate banks & big business. Real stimulus bills, with jobs creation, green clean energy development, and more. But that's not who or what Obama & the DLC-controlled Democrats are about.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Are you kidding? It's the only chance real Democrats have, as you can see below that Obama & Democrats are already planning on moving the Democratic Party even farther to the right, caving more to Republicans.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Obama's already broadcast what he & Democrats are going to do if Democrats remain in the majority -- More caving by Obama & Democrats to Republicans:

==According to excerpts from the Times, aides say that the president's been spending "a lot of time talking about Obama 2.0," brainstorming with administration officials about the best way to revamp the strategies & goals of the WhiteHouse.

And despite the predictions that Democrats may relinquish a large degree of legislating power, including perhaps control of the House & even Senate, Obama isn't thinking of the next two years as a period that'll be marked with the same obstructive nature from the GOP.

"It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, [Republicans] feel more responsible, either because they didn't do as well as they anticipated, & so the strategy of just saying no to everything & sitting on the sidelines & throwing bombs didn't work for them," Obama says in the article. "Or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals & work with me in a serious way."

DickDurbin says Obama's post-election agenda "will have to be limited & focused on the things that are achievable & high priorities for the American people." TomDaschle says Obama has to reach out more: "The key word is inclusion. He's got to find ways to be inclusive."==

http://www.huf fingtonpost.com/2010/10/13/obama-new-york-times_n_760774.html
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Thank the DLC for that.

Do you know what the DLC is, and who is in it?

The DLC are DINOs, ideologically the moderate Republicans of the 1950s & 1960s. It is anti-populist & a t00l of the corporations, just like The GOP. The DLC, through no acclaimation of the People or Democratic voters, controls the DemocraticParty.

That's who you're defending, protecting.

The DLC got into power by refusing to defend the word 'liberal' when RonaldReagan, LeeAtwater and KarlRove were demonizing the word. Instead of educating the public about liberalism, & how liberals were responsible for creating the largest middle class in the history of the world, a strong regulatory system that provided clean water systems and nutritious affordable food for everyone, a public education system that led the world & more Americans with college degrees than any other nation, etc., the DLC convinced Americans that liberals could never win another election.

The DLC attributed to ideology what is more accurately explained by lousy campaigns, outmaneuvered & outgvnned by dirty tricks campaigns & election fraud.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Trying to get the DLC & you, BillLoney (who is a political operative paid to spread disinformation by the DNC), out of the Democratic Party

Notice how none of you can argue the issue, or defend Obama and the DLC-controlled Democrats in Congress on anything they've done.

If you and Obama and the DLC-Dems can't win me over, you can't win. You won't win.

Getting the DLC out of the Democratic Party is the only way that the average, ordinary American citizen is going to be able to get the country back on course, working for the middle class.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

"While it's impossible to tell for whom people are voting,"

That's what the article says.

Never presume.

Voters aren't limited to voting for just Democrats or Republicans. There are other alternatives besides sitting out the election or voting for Republicans. There are other candidates running as independents, from Green to Libertarian, in just about every race.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Obama's already broadcast what he & Democrats are going to do if Democrats remain in the majority:

==According to excerpts from the Times, aides say that the president's been spending "a lot of time talking about Obama 2.0," brainstorming with administration officials about the best way to revamp the strategies & goals of the WhiteHouse.

And despite the predictions that Democrats may relinquish a large degree of legislating power, including perhaps control of the House & even Senate, Obama isn't thinking of the next two years as a period that'll be marked with the same obstructive nature from the GOP.

"It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, [Republicans] feel more responsible, either because they didn't do as well as they anticipated, & so the strategy of just saying no to everything & sitting on the sidelines & throwing bombs didn't work for them," Obama says in the article. "Or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals & work with me in a serious way."

DickDurbin says Obama's post-election agenda "will have to be limited & focused on the things that are achievable & high priorities for the American people." TomDaschle says Obama has to reach out more: "The key word is inclusion. He's got to find ways to be inclusive."==

http://www.huf fingtonpost.com/2010/10/13/obama-new-york-times_n_760774.html

More caving by Obama & Democrats to Republicans.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Woolsey heads the ProgressiveCaucus, & had she & the 79 others who pledged not to vote for a healthcare bill unless it had a PublicOption kept their word, we'd have a healthcare bill containing costs now. Instead, we got a great big corporate giveaway that doesn't provide universal healthcare or reform a broken system.

If Obama really wanted BlueDogs' votes or JoeLieberman's vote on legislation like real healthcare reform, he'd have done to Lieberman & the BlueDogs what he did to DennisKucinich (the last hold-out on the ProgressiveCaucus, all of whom had pledged to vote for a healthcare bill only if it had a public option, and who all caved). Obama flew to Cleveland and rallied Kucinich's constituents against him and he got Kucinich's vote.

Where was that mentality with JoeLieberman, BlancheLincoln, the other BlueDogs and even OlympiaSnowe? If the president of the UnitedStates had used the bully pulpit against them, a lot of progressives would have respected that and said, "You tried your best". But Obama didn't try. He cut a deal, months earlier, cutting the will of the People off at the knees. The public is powerless in backroom deals.

Whichever of us is right (& I can back up my contentions with much evidence of Obama's not being any more ethical than BushCheney, beginning with his assertion that the president has the right to k!II American citizens with absolutely no due process, no oversight), how is his government's ineffectiveness working for you, for us? (I ask rhetorically)
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

I still support Obama it's the rest of the Democratic Party I'm having a problem with. When my rep Lynn Woolsey campaigns for a neocon like Jane Harman...something is WRONG! Dem politicians are becoming so right wing I barely recognize them anymore.

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

I suggest that you consider Democrats & Republicans as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. One side (Republicans) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, & when the People have had enough, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric.

Once in power, Democrats consolidate Republicans' gains from previous years, & continue on with Republican policies but renamed, with new advertising campaigns. They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't what WeThePeople thought they were.

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigans & all the different ways they've been tricked & start seeing Democrats as no different than Republicans, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business -- This current one, because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc., is custom-tailored to Obama's 'bipartisan cooperation' demeanor. It's smirk-worthy when you realize they're trying to sell that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do, & that's "a good thing".

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

Did your local newspaper report that Woolsey is campaigning for Harman?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

"Pretending"?

I'm an old liberal Democrat. An FDR Democrat. You're a political operative paid to spread disinformation.

Anyone who tells Democratic voters to be quiet, not criticize Obama and Democrats, that you must vote for Democrats because they're "the lesser of 2 ev!ls", should be shouted down, told to cram it, because they're trying to deny voters holding their elected representatives' feet to the fire, to live up to their campaign promises.

Right now, this very period, the weeks leading up to an election (voting's already begun and it may be too late) is the most important, the ONLY time really, when voters have any clout. This is it for making our deals with the candidates. Citizens have little enough of a Constituti onally-gua ranteed role within this democracy as it is. We have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted. The founders were nothing if not ironic. Our elections every two years is a window period, a time to re-up or opt-in/opt-out.

Vote incumbents out who have failed to achieve on their campaign pledges. For whatever reason, they are not capable of achieving what they claim to be their own and their constituents' shared objectives. Vote against them now or forever (in another 2 years) hold your peace.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Early Voting Shows Surprising Turnout For Democrats

You are not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republicans. There are other alternatives besides sitting out the election or voting for Republicans. There are other candidates running as independents, from Green to Libertarian, in just about every race.

Anyone who tells Democratic voters to be quiet, not criticize Obama and Democrats, that you must vote for Democrats because they're "the lesser of 2 ev!ls", should be shouted down, told to cram it, because they're trying to deny voters holding their elected representatives' feet to the fire, to live up to their campaign promises.

Right now, this very period, the weeks leading up to an election (voting's already begun and it may be too late) is the most important, the ONLY time really, when voters have any clout. This is it for making our deals with the candidates. Citizens have little enough of a Constituti onally-gua ranteed role within this democracy as it is. We have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted. The founders were nothing if not ironic. Our elections every two years is a window period, a time to re-up or opt-in/opt-out.

Vote incumbents out who have failed to achieve on their campaign pledges. For whatever reason, they are not capable of achieving what they claim to be their own and their constituents' shared objectives. Vote against them now or forever (in another 2 years) hold your peace.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

"Pretending"?

I'm an old liberal Democrat. An FDR Democrat. You're a political operative paid to spread disinformation.

Anyone who tells Democratic voters to be quiet, not criticize Obama and Democrats, that you must vote for Democrats because they're "the lesser of 2 ev!ls", should be shouted down, told to STFU because they're trying to deny voters holding their elected representatives' feet to the fire, to live up to their campaign promises.

Right now, this very period, the weeks leading up to an election (voting's already begun and it may be too late) is the most important, the ONLY time really, when voters have any clout. This is it for making our deals with the candidates. Citizens have little enough of a Constitutionally-guaranteed role within this democracy as it is. We have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted. The founders were nothing if not ironic. Our elections every two years is a window period, a time to re-up or opt-in/opt-out.

Vote incumbents out who have failed to achieve on their campaign pledges. For whatever reason, they are not capable of achieving what they claim to be their own and their constituents' shared objectives. Vote against them now or forever (in another 2 years) hold your peace.
About Military
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

Obama and the DLC-controlled Democratic Party & the GOP are corporate t00Is, trying to outdo each other in delivering for their real constituent, BigCorporations.

The trick for the DLC has been to make it seem as if they were really working on behalf of WeThePeople, and get Democratic voters to believe that Democratic politicians were for strong regulations on banks & WallStreet, 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 occupations of Iraq & Afghanistan, affordable, quality universal healthcare, etc., when they're not.

The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to these & all populist issues, because like the RepublicanParty, the DLC works for the benefit of transnational corporations.

We've been doing it your way (the DLC's way) for 20 years now, & the government & the Democratic Party keeps moving farther to the right.

If you and I are on the same side, if you and I want the same policies (real Democratic policies), and going about getting them your way (protecting Obama, siding with Obama) is getting Republican policies, NOT Democratic policies, when do you realize that maybe you don't know what you're talking about?

Do you ever realize it?
About Military
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

The outcome would have been the same had Nader been in the race or not. Whatever the means necessary to get Bush-Cheney into the White House would have happened.

If the means to getting Bush-Cheney into office required a close election and Nader not been running, some other means would have been used.

For pity's sake, the CIA was working on GOP absentee ballots in the weeks leading up to election day in Florida. Jeb Bush & Katherine Harris had been working for two years to purge voters from the polls. Close to 200,000 ballots were never tallied, never even examined, due to undervotes.

Do people forget all the different ways that that election was gamed by the GOP, and all of the ways that the Democratic establishment abandoned Gore? And that's just in Florida, and just the ways that we learned about because of legal proceedings in the post-election days.

Independent voters have nothing to beat themselves up about; Nader is now just a handy excuse to keep the status quo in place, and 'We the People' in line, forever agreeable to voting for whoever they believe to be the lesser of two ev!ls.
About Military
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

RachelMaddow said it eloquently last week:

=== RobertGibbs said today “The best way to end it is for the Senate to follow the lead of the House of Representatives so that end can be implemented in a fashion that‘s consistent with our obligations in fighting two wars.”

“But absent that action,” he said, “The president, again has set up a process to end this policy. The bottom line is that this is a policy that‘s going to end. It‘s not whether it will end, but the process by which it will end.”

Here‘s the thing: The WhiteHouse line, the line from the administration on this now is that they‘d like the Senate to repeal it. Absent that action, the spokesman said. Absent that action. Absent the Senate voting to repeal it. Absent the moon crashing through the atmosphere & turning us all to green cheese.

Absent that action of the Senate repealing “DADT”, the WhiteHouse says there's an orderly process underway to get rid of the policy. And that orderly process is that the Senate will repeal it? The WhiteHouse is sternly ensuring everyone that the policy will end.

And when you drill down on how they say it will end, they say it will end because the Senate will end it even though the Senate has just chosen not to end it & the Senate is poised to get more conservative not less in the imminent elections.

This is incoherence. ==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wakRmwaphik
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

You are not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republicans. There are other alternatives besides sitting out the election or voting for Republicans. There are other candidates running as independents, from Green to Libertarian, in just about every race.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

DADT Conflict Explained: Why Obama Administration Lawyers Fight For A DADT Policy Obama Opposes

All that Obama has to do is NOTHING. No appeal. DADT would end.

From RachelMaddow's program last week:

== AaronBelkin, an expert on the issue at UC SantaBarbara told the NewYorkTimes that, “Unless the president declines to appeal the ruling in LogCabinRepublicans versus the United States, the ‘Don‘t Ask, Don‘t Tell‘ policy probably will remain law for years.”

Unless you believe the US Senate is going to do the right thing by g@y people. This year, with JohnMcCain still there & a slate of homoph0b!c Republican Senate candidates poised to enter. Unless you believe that the US Senate after this year‘s elections is going to do the right thing by g@y service members, then the decision by the ObamaAdmin istration, whether or not to appeal this ruling, is likely a decision between k!lling this policy now & letting it survive probably forever.

Obama's DoJ appealing this ruling was not an inevitability. The administration is not obligated to appeal. If the administration believes the law is unconstitutional, there's precedent that supports the administration not appealing it & letting the law d!e.

An orderly time frame for the de@th of a law can be arranged with the court. That's the way it is. A plan that has no chance of becoming reality is not a real plan no matter how much you say it is. You can either end it or you can stop saying you will.==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?=wakRmwaphik
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Temporarily Upheld By Appeals Court

He could do an EO or he could've done nothing, not appealed & DADT would have been a relic on the scrap heap of history.

Last week on RachelMaddow:

== AaronBelkin, an expert on the issue at UCSantaBarbara told the NewYorkTimes that, “Unless the president declines to appeal the ruling in LogCabinRepublicans versus the United States, the policy probably will remain law for years.”

Unless you believe the US Senate is going to do the right thing by g@y people. This year, with JohnMcCain still there & a slate of homoph0b!c Republican Senate candidates poised to enter. Unless you believe that the US Senate after this year‘s elections is going to do the right thing by g@y service members, then the decision by the ObamaAdmin istration, whether or not to appeal this ruling, is likely a decision between k!lling this policy now & letting it survive probably forever.

Obama's DoJ appealing this ruling was not an inevitability. The administration is not obligated to appeal. If the administration believes the law is unconstitutional, there's precedent that supports the administration not appealing it & letting the law d!e.

An orderly time frame for the de@th of a law can be arranged with the court. That's the way it is. A plan that has no chance of becoming reality is not a real plan no matter how much you say it is. You can either end it or you can stop saying you will.==

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wakRmwaphik
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Temporarily Upheld By Appeals Court

Montana Republican Party wants to make homosexuality a crime

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/montana-republican-party-homosexuality-crime/
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Temporarily Upheld By Appeals Court

You're correct. Obama wants Congress to overturn it. The House already has, and the Senate voted it down two weeks ago. Obama is counting on the Senate taking it up again in a lame duck session after the election. It's not likely to happen then, either. John McCain has vowed to filibuster it should it come back.

All that Obama had to do was not appeal and DADT would have been a relic on the scrap heap of history.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP