Monday, March 28, 2011
Either you have a written spiel you keep to cut and paste & drown out the other person, or you are in a manic phase.
========== ========== ========== ========== ========== ========
How does the amount of my writing "drown out" the other person?
Favorite (0) Flag as Abusive Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marcospinelli 0 minute ago (11:12 PM)
1417 FansFollow
Blogger update error: Expected response code 200, got 400
This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.
This is exactly why progressiv es never get anywhere, & Republican s have cleaned our clocks for decades. You expect perfection . Majority of US is not progressiv e, they are middle of the road. Holding to a hard line doesn't win us anything.
And staying home instead of voting in in the last election, or voting for Nadar in 2000, gets us a bunch of Governor Walkers, who are doing an incredible amount of damage, or it got us a Bush/Chene y.
========== ========== ========== ========== ========== ==
Bashing Nader, again?
You are terribly misinforme d. When you become better informed, I won't need to write so much. But until then, I and others need to post facts in order to keep others who might be influenced by the talking points you've been programmed to spew.
2000 was a stolen election.
Al Gore won. Gore got more votes in Florida. Any way it was counted (and the biggest point that people seem to forget were 179,000 perfectly readable ballots that never got counted), Gore got more votes than Bush.
Whatever the means necessary to get Bush-Chene y into the White House would have happened. Had Nader been in the race, not in the race, whatever. Had Nader not run the outcome would have been the same. The powers that be were not going to let Gore win, no matter what, and gamed it innumerabl e ways.
If the means to getting Bush-Chene y 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.
Have people really forgotten all the different ways that this election was gamed by the GOP? And that's just in Florida. And just the ways that we learned about because of legal proceeding s in the post-elect ion days.
There was a coup d'etat in this country in 2000. A bIoodless coup, but a coup nonetheles s.
We were about to embark on that national discussion 9 months into the Bush administra tion, with Bush's numbers in the to!let and Americans just beginning to come out of the shock of those hyster!cal post-elect ion days in Florida. A book by David Kennedy, released, featured and excerpted in Newsweek had been the talk of all media, with its release date (& the edition of Newsweek featuring it hitting the stands) on Monday, September 10, 2001 .
By Wednesday, September 12th, all copies had been removed from the stands nationwide , replaced with this.
KEEP READING
Favorite (0) Flag as Abusive Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marcospinelli 0 minute ago (11:13 PM)
1417 FansFollow
Blogger update error: Expected response code 200, got 400
This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.
Democrats have been more than willing to sell out their base groups's interests, but none more than women & the pro-choice movement's . And Obama's been particular ly 'oily' (slippery) on these issues -- Even his most staunch defenders can't agree on whether he's a centrist or a liberal. [As I stated earlier, the debate is over: "Privately , Obama describes himself as a BlueDog Democrat".]
One example of how Democrats & Obama are real free and easy "compromis ing away" a base group's interests is Democrats' healthcare legislatio n which opens the door to ending insurance coverage of all ab0rtions). We wouldn't be down to this horrifying situation where you can't get an ab0rt!on in 92 percent of the counties in the US (& 3 states in the country that have only one ab0rt!on clinic, & other states that heavily restrict a woman's access to ab0rt!on, & banning ab0rt!ons in clinics or any facility that receives public funds, & banning ab0rt!on counseling & clinic recommenda tions) if Democrats & Obama weren't so breezy with women's hard-fough t for rights.
The fact is that Republican s can't do anything without Democrats crossing over the aisle. Faux Democrats are the problem. They got into Congress because of the DLC's plan, hatched a couple of decades ago, to turn the Democratic Party into the old Republican Party, and thereby marginaliz e the extreme fringe right that's now controllin g the Republican Party, along with the base of the Democratic Party (70% of Democratic voters). Then they'd "govern the country for 100 years".
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. That's because your way is to l!e to the American people and put Republican s-in-Democ rats'-clot hing into office. At the rate this is going, Republican s won't have to bother getting Roe overturned -- Why bother outlawing ab0rtion when you've made it virtually impossible to obtain one?
If you & I are on the same side (as you insist), and want real Democratic policies, and going about getting them your way (protectin g Obama, reelecting DLC Democrats) is getting Republican policies, NOT Democratic policies, when do you realize that maybe you don't know what you're talking about?
When do you realize that you've become that classic definition for 'insan!ty' ("Doing the same thing over & over again, expecting different results")?
Do you ever realize it?
Favorite (0) Flag as Abusive Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marcospinelli 0 minute ago (11:16 PM)
1417 FansFollow
Blogger update error: Expected response code 200, got 400
This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.
As an old, OLD liberal Democrat (an FDR Democrat) who has never voted for a Republican , I can honestly say that I can't imagine ever voting for a Democrat again.
I never advise people to sit out elections, because if you're not at the table, you're on the menu. It's what p!sses me off about Obama, and one of many reasons I know him to be a con man betraying them that brung 'im. Because by shutting out liberals, the base, from his administra tion, by taking single payer, a public option, off the table, eliminatin g regulatory oversight from finance reform legislatio ns, he's given pro-corpor ate, Republican -like policies an inside line. The People's advocates can't even get in the door of this government .
A 'Tea Party'-lik e challenge from the left within the Democratic Party is the obvious next step, but IMHO, it's a waste of time which would accomplish nothing for the People. To begin with, no one in the Democratic Party will do it. It would be su!cide for any profession al politician in the Democratic Party to run against the party's sitting president (the DLC has gotten too powerful, what with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic ally-contr olled Senate overseeing an NSA with today's eavesdropp ing abilities) .
Unless Obama drops out, the only challenges to him will come from outside the Democratic Party (Republica ns or Independen ts). That said, here are two powerful arguments for challengin g Obama from the left (either from inside or outside the party):
Michael Lerner's very powerful case for primarying Obama.
Ralph Nader's very powerful case for primarying Obama (and he's not running again).
Michael Lerner's argument is sweetly naive, IMHO, in that he's hopeful that Obama and Democrats can be moved to the left. I don't think that's true anymore. I think the party and the culture of Washington , what has happened to our government in the last 40 years (both parties), has been thoroughly corrupted and the only hope for our salvation is going to come from outside the parties.
I tell people that they're not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republican s. There are other alternativ es besides sitting out the election or voting for Republican s. There are other candidates running as independen ts, from Green to Libertaria n, in just about every race.
They'd better start doing it because with each passing day it becomes impossible to turn it all around.
Favorite (0) Flag as Abusive Share it
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Marcospinelli 0 minute ago (11:21 PM)
1417 FansFollow
Blogger update error: Expected response code 200, got 400
This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.
Obama has the best chance of slowing the corporate steam roller.
========== ========== ========== ========== ========== =
Obama has no interest in slowing the corporate steam roller. His only interest is in making you think so.
Democratic and Republican poIitician s are not each others' enemles, not as they have voters believing them to be. Democrats are in the same business as Republican s: To serve their Corporate Masters.
Think of them as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. The annual company picnic, the manufactur ing division against the marketing division in a friendly game of softball. One side (Republica ns) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, and when the People have had enough, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric.
Once in power, Democrats consolidat e Republican s' gains from previous years, continue on with Republican policies but renamed, with new advertisin g campaigns. They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't what we thought they were.
Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigan s and all the different ways they've been tricked, and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republican s, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business.
Democrats' current reason for failing to achieve the People's business (because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc.) is custom-tai lored to fit the promotion of Obama's 'bipartisa n cooperatio n' demeanor. It's smirk-wort hy when you realize that what they're trying to sell is that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do...And their ineptitude , like that's somehow "a good thing".
When it comes to achieving corporatio ns' business, Democrats are remarkably competent. Obama is even more competent in that he's been able to give himself some distance from policies that displease Democratic voters ('plausibl e deniabilit y') in a variety of ways that keep his favorable ratings high. Whether it's renaming Republican legislatio n ("Romney healthcare " to "Affordabl e Health Insurance Act") to getting other legislator s like Joe Lieberman to actually do the heavy lifting legislativ ely, Obama's 'most ardent admirers' lay themselves on the line for him out of their ig-no-ranc e of what he's actually doing. The latest (and IMHO really cowardly) is Obama's leaving the country as he launches a war against Libya without authorizat ion by the Congress of the United States.
Given the expectatio n that members of Congress must not criticize the president when he's not on US soil, Obama's timing is more than obvious, as is his contempt for the Constituti on's clear mandate that only Congress can declare war. And Democrats have been conspicuou sly silent on all of it.
