Obama Assault Weapons Ban Proposal Recalls Memories Of 1994 Battle

Let me exemplify the problem that I, as an old liberal Democrat, have with the state of our government and elections.

You would think that Democratic politicians would be for the same things that I, as a liberal Democrat, am for -- Smart, progressive policies.  Even just the basics, what might be called "compromises", like leaving marijuana illegal, but just rescheduling it.  Or leaving it illegal for recreational use, but leaving medical marijuana dispensaries alone.  Like (on another topic), forget about stopping GMOs from getting into the food supply (oh how I wish), but at least allowing states to permit the labeling of GMOs on food so that I can make a choice whether I want to put GMOs into my body and my children's and grandchildren's bodies.  

Here is the roll call vote on the 6/21/2012 US Senate vote on a bill to permit states to require any food, beverage or other edible product offered for sale have a label on it indicating that it contains a genetically engineered ingredient.

Guess who else voted against this?

Democratic senators Al Franken, Sherrod Brown, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Ben Cardin, Jeff Bingaman, Tom Harkin, Debbie Stabenow, among other Democrats. Monsanto has bought and paid for them.  I'm told they're referred to as "The Monsanto Senators".

Al Franken, fercrissakes.

Unless and 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. But that is NOT going to happen under Obama or the DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party as we'd hoped when we put them in power in 2008; it's not even on their 'To Do' list.  Both parties are corrupt to the bone.

This liberal Democrat is done with the Democratic Party.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Assault Weapons Ban Proposal Recalls Memories Of 1994 Battle

Democratic politician­s in liberal districts get to talk a good game about being champions of the People, but when push comes to shove, if their votes are needed to cross over and kill liberal legislatio­n (like a public option or access to ab0rtion), the DNC will make sure they are covered come election time, with massive infusions of money into their campaign war chests and crushing any principled challenges to them from the left in their primaries.

The Kabuki theater that Democrats performed over promises like a public option and ending the wars (they're not ended; they're expanded and being fought with mercenaries paid for by you and me) are two great cases in point.  

Let's look more closely at the Progressive Caucus, what charlatans they are, and how they tag-team us.

As the head of the Progressiv­e Caucus, Lynn Woolsey led 79 of the 82 members of the caucus to pledge that they would not vote for any healthcare reform legislatio­n that didn't include a public option.  
Woolsey then led the 79 to renege on the pledge.

Lynn Woolsey likes to brag that she was the first to bring a resolution to end the war in Iraq.  She, and congressio­nal Democrats (and Obama) ran on ending the practice of paying for the wars through supplement­al emergency spending bills, and putting the wars on budget (see why that is significant here).

Democrats have had the ability to accomplish putting the wars on budget (and thus end the wars) since they took over control of Congress in 2006 and didn't it.  They didn't need Republican­s to do it.

Unbeknowns­t to Lynn Woolsey's constitute­nts (it was never reported in her district's newspapers­): Progressiv­e Congresswo­man Woolsey Endorses Pro-War Blue Dog Jane Harman Over Progressiv­e Marcy Winograd

'Progressi­ves' like Woolsey have let Obama continue with just about all of Bush-Chene­y's policies, and wars, and let Obama go Bush-Chene­y even better, by letting Obama assert, unchalleng­ed, that presidents have the right to kill Americans with no due process or oversight, push for 'preventiv­e detention' and no transparen­cy of anything a president asserts should be his secret.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Assault Weapons Ban Proposal Recalls Memories Of 1994 Battle

As we all know, politicians say many things; the proof is in their actions.  When it comes to Democrats, they talk trash to their constituents better than Republicans to theirs.

Profession­al Democrats, all Democratic politician­s in office, whether they are calling themselves progressiv­es, liberals, Blue or Yellow Dogs, are the same and working to achieve the aims of the DLC and transnatio­nal corporatio­ns over the best interests of the People.  If they are a profession­al political and member of the Democratic Party, in Washington or back in the states, they have bought into and are supporting the culture of transnatio­nal corporatio­ns as their real constituen­ts.  
 
Democrats in both chambers of Congress work as a team. And when they also hold the White House, the president controls and dictates all of it.  They identify what they hope to achieve (pro-corpo­rate legislatio­n) and then strategize how to get it while saving each other's hides with constituen­ts come election time.  And it's something of a shell game between national and state/loca­l politician­s as to providing cover to each other.  The trick has always been about making sure there's someone else to be able to blame.
 

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Assault Weapons Ban Proposal Recalls Memories Of 1994 Battle

As predicted, any effective changing of the filibuster rules will not happen - HarryReid Doesn't Plan To Advance Talking Filibuster.

And Republicans haven't been filibustering; they've been threatening to filibuster. HarryReid could have forced them to actually do it, filibuster, at any time. That is at the discretion of the SenateMajorityLeader (HarryReid). SenateRule 22. When it serves something that the DLC-contro­lled Democrats want, HarryReid can (and has) require the GOP to actually filibuster (stand and talk without end). 

HarryReid has had no problem forcing the GOP to actually filibuster when it's something that the DLC wants and perceives it needs. For example, when Democrats needed unemployme­nt benefits to continue because the masses were becoming 'critical'­, Reid had no problem calling Republican JimBunning's bluff to filibuster­. Reid said, "Bring in the cots, do it" and Bunning and the GOP caved. Benefits for unemployed workers continued.

Democrats could even have changed the supermajor­ity rule (it does NOT have to be done at the beginning of a new Congress, as some argued). It can be done at any time (see page 6 - http://fpc .state.gov­/documents­/organizat­ion/45448. pdf ].

But Democrats put off their critics for not forcing the Republican­s to actually filibuster and changing SenateRule 22 during the session by assuring fed-up Democratic voters, "We'll change the rule come the beginning of the next Congress".

They didn't.

There's not just one way (or even two or three) for Democrats to get bills passed without Republican votes.

But Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democratic­Party didn't and aren't doing that. Because it might actually work to get Democratic voters' legislativ­e agenda made into the law of the land and do good for the People. And that's not what Obama and Company are there for.

Obama and Company are there to do the work of the transnatio­nal corporatio­ns. Along with the Republican­s, as was clearly evidenced the time that HarryReid kept the Senate open (pro forma) so that Obama couldn't make recess appointmen­ts, collaborat­ing with Republican­s to keep progressiv­es and liberals out of government­. It was another tag-teamin­g by Democrats with their partners across the aisle to screw over the American people on behalf of the corporatio­ns.

Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people. They don't want to do it.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Assault Weapons Ban Proposal Recalls Memories Of 1994 Battle

Talk of Democratic politicians having no spines are greatly exaggerated, just like Obama's timidity is myth:  He's plenty tough when it comes to standing up to the Democratic base.    

Obama should be adding to the list of wants - Like Medicare for all, single payer, healthcare for the millions that ACA doesn't cover.  After all, we won.  

But Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama and Democrats want what they want. The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to all populist issues (like jobs, civil rights protections, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, public healthcare, WallStreet reform, environmental and energy issues, etc.). 

If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and Rove were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush and Rove were just more ruthless in doing what politicians and the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans -- If you keep at it, escalate your attacks,  don't take 'no' for an answer, never back away, you'll wear the opposition down.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish Clinton's machine (to get the nomination) and the oldest, most experienced politicians in US history (including the RoveMachine) by not having mastered these skills. Nor do Democratic politicians (more incumbents than ever, in office longer) not know how to do it. How do you think Democrats managed to keep impeaching BushCheney off the table, have us still reelecting them, not marching on Washington with torches and pitchforks?

Obama and Democrats know how to do it -- They don't want to do it. 

The trick for them has been to keep the many different populist groups believing that they really do support our issues, but they're merely inept. And to get us to keep voting for them despite their failure to achieve our alleged shared objectives.

Getting Democratic voters (and Obama's 'most ardent supporters') to understand that Democratic politicians have been taking us all for suckers and patsies is the most immediate problem and the challenge.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Will Push For Assault Weapons Ban, Says White House

I'm as pro-gun regulation as the next guy, but it's patently obvious that there's something more afoot to the record gun related deaths in the US than the plethora of guns here or the large capacity magazines.  People in other nations where citizens possess guns in large numbers aren't killing each other as we are in the US.  

I would guess that much of it has to do with our culture of fear, of bullying, and our nature in this country to resort to violence as our first response.  As a nation, we admire greed and audacious brazen crookery.  Until we change that, at the top, in our government, all the rest of this is merely for show.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Will Push For Assault Weapons Ban, Says White House

So what are background checks going to check for?  

Then are we going to preclude classes of people from legally owning guns?

Background checks aren't going to uncover people with mental illness without ripping through HIPAA laws.  Andinarguably, only a fraction of a fraction of those with mental illness are violent and a danger to others.  

More money to treat mental illness?  YES.

Outlaw large capacity magazines?  Sure.

But remember that while this is the headline, politicians are working to make out society less civil by driving more of us into poverty.  
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...