Spintested: 08/19/11

U.S. Troops May Stay In Afghanistan Until 2024: Report

Friday, August 19, 2011

Americans are losing our jobs, our homes, our Social Security, Medicare, police, firemen, teachers, and going into debt to China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, (even our grandchildren won't be able to pay it off), for wars to protect and increase riches for the top elites (an oil pipeline & mineral riches in Afghanistan, not to mention the oil contracts in Iraq and now Libya). These are riches that ordinary Americans don't get profits from, but that the Establishment Elites (Dick Cheney & the Bush family among them) all are getting rich(er) from.

The American people derive only increased risk to our personal safety because those Afghans and Iraqis (and now Libyans) frustrated over the k!lling of their families and friends and of being occupied turn terr0r!st because they can't get at the political leaders ordering the bombing and occupation of their country (Obama doesn't fly commercial, doesn't have to be gr0pe-searched or exposed to X-ray radiation to travel for his job or visit family on Thanksgiving).

Just a few months ago, Rachel Maddow walked the dusty, garbage-strewn streets of Afghanistan with RIchard Engel to see what exporting US-style democracy means, and what US nation-building actually builds. Watch this to see where are our tax dollars going, and learn how we are not "nation-building", not making us safer, and not helping the Afghans or building their nation at all (or a democracy). Learn how this has all been just a huge rip-off of the American people:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR5BHnN__5M

The US as 'Empire' has been continuing under a Democratically-controlled Congress (from 2006 to 2010) and Obama that has had a bigger arsenal of tools available to them as the majority in power, and now, controlling both the Senate and the White House, than Republicans had as the minority.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

U.S. Troops May Stay In Afghanistan Until 2024: Report

[The Godfather, Part 2 - About the unrest in Cuba}

Michael Corleone: I saw a strange thing today. Some rebels were being arrested. One of them pulled the pin on a grenade. He took himself and the captain of the command with him. Now, soldiers are paid to fight; the rebels aren't.

Hyman Roth: What does that tell you?

Michael Corleone: It means they could win.

About Afghanistan
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Paul Ryan's Office Calls Cops On Jobless Protesters

HP's monitors have 86'ed and blocked my comment, but it's archived here. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Paul Ryan's Office Calls Cops On Jobless Protesters

Have any Democrats and Independents announced a run against Paul Ryan in 2012?

Good question. I hope so.

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

It's allegedly a swing district. Ryan's been there since the 1998 election. The DLC has a long history of blowing off races around the nation, not even trying to compete. In 2010, this was the best that the Democratic Party could run against Ryan? This is who you put up against a Paul Ryan when you really have no interest in taking back the seat, when Paul Ryan is going to get you what you want (ending social programs, pro-corporatocracy) in that unique a$$ backwards way that Obamab0ts fail to comprehend.

In 2008, Democrats ran Marge Krupp who, as best as I can figure out, blew off candidate debates due to "family emergencies". The stories are mixed; hosts say she never responded to their invitations.

In the four previous elections, Democrats ran the same candidate, a physician, Jeffrey Thomas, who lost to Ryan by a 2 to 1 margin each race. Thomas actually ran 7 times in all for that seat. As near as I can tell, the most money he ever raised to run against Ryan was $20,000 in 2006 to Paul Ryan's $146,000.

If the DNC was serious about the People's issues, the DNC would be funding these races, taking back control of both Houses of Congress and getting real reform.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Paul Ryan's Office Calls Cops On Jobless Protesters

Have any Democrats and Independents announced a run against Paul Ryan in 2012?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Staffer Sends Out Email Bashing Paul Krugman And The 'Firebagger Lefty Blogosphere'

Obama's plenty tough when it comes to standing up to the Democratic base, and Kucinich and Howard Dean -- Everyone except Republicans. Just to show you where Obama's and the DLC's real heart lies, there are so many things he and the DLC/DNC could have done, could be doing, to get real Democratic legislation through, but don't. Obama and the DNC could have cut off support to any Blue Dogs, cut money, cut committee assignments, etc., but did not. There is plenty that a President and a Speaker of the House and a Senate Majority Leader can do to pressure representatives and senators into voting as you want them to vote. We saw that Obama had no problem doing it when he wanted and needed Blue Dogs like Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu's votes -- He literally bought them. There is nothing that the Blue Dogs are doing that Obama and the DLC doesn't want them to do. Before the midterms of 2010, I asked, facetiously, if Obama's 'most ardent supporters' believed that if Democrats lost control of Congress, would they be as effective at preventing the Republicans' agenda from moving forward as Republicans have been at stymieing Democrats. After all, there would still be more numbers of Democrats in Congress AND a Democratic White House. Not one of Obama's 'most ardent fans' replied.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Staffer Sends Out Email Bashing Paul Krugman And The 'Firebagger Lefty Blogosphere'

Obama never pressured BenNelson (or BlancheLincoln, or any BlueDog). The Democratic leadership could've taken away committee chairs (BlancheLincoln's, too) of members in their caucus that filibustered a PublicOption for healthcare. They didn't.

The DNC could've taken away reelection funds. They didn't.

Reid could've actually forced Republicans and turncoat Democratic senators to filibuster. He didn't (and doesn't).

The ProgressiveCaucus could have kept their pledge about not voting for a bill that didn't include a robust PublicOption. They didn't.

Obama DID unleash the attack dogs to go after HowardDean when Dean said it was a lousy bill. Dean was then forced to get back into line. Obama went after Kucinich, the last remaining holdout on the ProgressiveCaucus, for threatening to vote no on the healthcare bill, and we all know how that ended.

There is nothing that Lieberman (or Nelson or Lincoln) is doing that Obama hasn't ordered. Obama and the DLC-Democrats want Lieberman there, doing what he's doing, which is to take the heat off of Democrats.

And the proof of this is that (since you mention Nelson), when Obama needed Nelson re: StupakAmendment, he 'bought' his support. That's what Obama could've done for Nelson's or Lincoln's vote at any time, on any legislation.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate and 435 in the House, and they and Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People and blame it on Republicans. Because they're DLC, aka Republicans-in-Democrats'-clothing.

Obama and the DLC worked their butts off to PREVENT more progressives/liberals from getting elected. Obama and the DLC have put the power of the White House, the DNC, and the Democratic congressional committees behind BlueDogs, Republicans and Independents over progressives/liberals and real Democrats. Some, but not all, examples:

BlueDog BlancheLincoln over progressive Democrat Lt. Governor BillHalter.

Republican-turned-Independent ArlenSpecter over progressive Democrat JoeSestak.

Republican-turned-Independent LincolnChaffee over Democrat FrankCaprio (which, in turn, was an effective endorsement of the Republican JohnLoughlin over Democrat DavidCicilline for the congressional seat Democrat PatrickKennedy retired from, and all of the other seats up for grab in RhodeIsland).

Republican-turned-Independent CharlieCrist over liberal Democrat KendrickMeek.

Republicans, with the smallest minority, have managed to thwart Democrats, who've had the greatest majority in decades. You would think that with Republicans controlling the House, Democrats would've turned the tables and thwarted Republicans' continuing legislation like Bush's tax cuts for the rich? Are Democrats just stupld?
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Staffer Sends Out Email Bashing Paul Krugman And The 'Firebagger Lefty Blogosphere'

Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people.

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

NancyPelosi and HarryReid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting BushCheney and beating Republicans back, among which were investigations, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the BushAdministration to testify under oath, and impeachment.

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we gave them 60 for the DemocraticCaucus. And we gave them the WhiteHouse.

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old raclst America than ever voted for any other presidential candidate 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 tool.

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 and Byrd, at death's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & slowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans", who had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything, in lockstep.

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation. Those who know anything about politics know that this was a dead giveaway that the last thing these politicians want is an active populist movement.

Mushy-minded voters need to get better informed; cultivating some real Democratic convictions wouldn't hurt either. Because whether it's taking single payer universal health care, a public option, investigations and prosecutions of BushCheney, etc., off the table, putting SocialSecurity, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans' care, etc., on the table, or continuing the BushCheney policies and going BushCheney one better (by asserting that presidents have the right to k!ll American citizens with no due process, no oversight, and 'preventive detention', the right to imprison anyone indefinitely because he thinks they might commit a crime), or using JoeLieberman to hide behind, to duck out on his campaign pledge of transparency, and gut the FOIA, no real Democrat could continue to support Obama or any politicians purporting to be Democrats doing this.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Staffer Sends Out Email Bashing Paul Krugman And The 'Firebagger Lefty Blogosphere'

How do you know that to be true, that paid Obama staffers are able to delete comments here?
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Staffer Sends Out Email Bashing Paul Krugman And The 'Firebagger Lefty Blogosphere'

In other words (the answer to my question is): You have no idea, you are clueless as to why you believe Obama's going to change his perspective, values, legislative goals, ideals, style, and what it is that he is trying to achieve.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Biden China Visit: Country Urges U.S. To Focus On Economic Recovery (VIDEO)

Do you know why there's a guy in Georgia making chopsticks for the Chinese?

Because China has run out of its own forests in making disposable chopsticks and is on to getting other nations to cut down their forests for its dining pleasure..
About China
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Biden China Visit: Country Urges U.S. To Focus On Economic Recovery (VIDEO)

Then there's Lynn Woolsey, head of the Progressive Caucus, 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 haven't done it. They haven't needed Republicans to do this for years and haven't done it.

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. And even when Obama didn't need the last holdout's vote (Dennis Kucinich's) to pass his health insurance windfall legislation, Obama did need to break Kucinich in a big public show in order to put down the public option/single payer movement. Even then, it didn't save Kucinich from being redistricted out of office (he's rumored now to be considering a move to Washington state in order to remain in Congress).

And 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

Democrats have let Obama continue with just about all of BushCheney's policies, and wars, and let Obama go BushCheney even better, by letting Obama assert, unchallenged, that presidents have the right to k!ll Americans with no due process or oversight, push for 'preventive detention' and no transparency of anything a president asserts should be his secret.

Democrats have abdicated their Constitutionally-required role of oversight of the executive branch; they failed to perform it during the BushCheney administration, and still don't with one of their own in the WhiteHouse.

Shall I go on?
About China
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Biden China Visit: Country Urges U.S. To Focus On Economic Recovery (VIDEO)

Then there's the Indian gaming industry and BarbaraBoxer. Few know of Boxer's cozy relationship with the Indian gaming industry (Indian gaming is spun by pro-corporate Democrats as great for the People, both native Americans and patrons, but in truth it's an underbelly industry where the People, neither native Americans nor casinos' patrons, aren't getting rich, only the corporate non-Indian partners) and the conflict of interest her support creates. Her son is in partnership with Indian casino development. Both Boxer and DianneFeinstein worked to get Indian casinos into California -- Not a good thing; they're exempt from state & federal laws, wreak havoc environmentally, financially & socially on the communities they're in and around.
http://articles.sfgate.com/2003-05-11/bay-area/17489097_1_casino-development-indian-casinos-southern-sonoma-county-pomos
http://www.cfspm.org/files/QuickSiteImages/Jackpot_-_A_short_history_of_Bay_Area_Gaming_Efforts_and_Influencers.doc

KEEP READING
About China
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Biden China Visit: Country Urges U.S. To Focus On Economic Recovery (VIDEO)

Even the most pro-choice of Democrats in Congress, alleged stalwarts who've spent entire careers, decades in public office, have failed miserably to protect women's rights and have let it get to this point. One example would be Barbara Boxer.

In 2006, Democratic senators and the Democratic machine publicly supported Democratic candidate NedLamont who was running for senator in Connecticut against newly independent JoeLieberman. Privately, working behind-the-scenes, Democratic senators and former president BillClinton were working to help Lieberman raise money to beat Lamont, and Republican AlanSchlesinger. Before Lamont won the primary, when Lieberman was still a Democrat, Boxer stumped for Lieberman. She was asked how she could support him given that Lieberman supports hospitals receiving public monies refusing to give contraceptives to r@pe victims, and instead of dodging Lieberman, dropping him like the bad character he is, she dodged the issue.

During the Bush-Cheney administration, she wrote two murder mysteries, because "It was always something I wanted to do if I had the time."

In the 2010 midterm campaign, I asked rhetorically, "If Republicans win back control of Congress, do you think Democrats will be as effective at stymieing Republicans' agenda as Republicans have been the last two years at stymieing Obama's/Democrats' 2008 agenda?" If what Democratic politicians did during the BushCheney years is any indication, no. Let's look at some of the alleged champions of liberals' issues.

BarbaraBoxer has been a terrible champion of liberal issues, but only those paying attention know this.

For example, as a member of Congress, you can't just be for or against something (like abortion) when it comes up for a vote. You have to be meticulous and actively work to set up the conditions surrounding your vote, to make sure it counts. Your 'yes' vote means nothing if there are more 'no' votes to cancel your vote/voice out.

Knowing that, what did Boxer do the entire 8 years of the BushAdministration? She effectively went on sabbatical. She wrote murder mysteries ("Something I always wanted to do, if I ever had the time"). She, of course, took her senatorial salary all those years.

Boxer's support of JoeLieberman in 2006 exposed Boxer's very 'conditional' support of a woman's right to choose (and her general level of ignorance)
http://firedoglake.com/2006/07/24/the-boxer-meltdown/

KEEP READING
About China
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Biden China Visit: Country Urges U.S. To Focus On Economic Recovery (VIDEO)

Pro-choice doesn't mean you can be anti-ab0rtlon. It doesn't mean you can be anti-ab0rtlon as long as you keep your mouth shut. You can't have anti-choice politicians in the Democratic Party, receiving money and support from the Democratic Party's members and the party's machinery. Yet just about all professional Democratic politicians want to make the Democratic Party hospitable to anti-choice people (and all 'other siders' of the Democratic Party's different special interest groups) , as noted in this article from 12/04.

The only way to do that is for the party to not take a stance on abortion, to remove any reference to 'choice'. That's certainly true of Howard Dean. During Howard Dean's tenure as chairman of the DNC, he indicated in several interviews that the intent was to move the Democratic Party from referring to abortion at all in its platform. Here's one of those interviews, from 11/1/05: Video | Transcript

January 14, 2005 - Dems May Waver on Choice, Repro Rights
Democrats haven't been taking care of women's issues. They're not vigilant about women's issues. Not reproductive freedom, not on economic issues, not on any issues. They're vigilant about their own careers, which are reliant upon pleasing transnational corporations, not American citizens.

KEEP READING
About China
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Biden China Visit: Country Urges U.S. To Focus On Economic Recovery (VIDEO)

it is easy to lump both parties together as liars, cheats, scoundrels of the first order...that's easy...but do some homework and look in to the goals of each and you will find they are very different.

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

You're confusing Democratic voters with Democratic politicians.

Political parties have platforms, written documents that come into being from the bottom up according to the party's registered members (special interest groups) reasons for coming together into a group, a 'union', written planks which state clearly what the party stands for, with an agenda and list of goals. For example, the Democratic Party's platform is crystal clear on reproductive rights and abortlon; Democrats "unequivocally support Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abort!on, regardless of ability to pay, and oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right".

Democratic politicians have abandoned reproductive/pro-choice rights. It's out of the business of being pro-choice because it's trying to turn the Democratic Party into the old Republican Party, grow the Democratic Party by attracting into the party anybody it can. It hasn't actually announced it publicly, but it only goes through the motions of seeming to be champions of women's reproductive choice. When it comes to actually championing the issue, Democratic politicians are AWOL, not only at the top, at the party organization, but absent also are the politicians whose talk as women's champions don't match the walk.

At the national headquarters, there have been the party's leaders, like Howard Dean, who have failed to serve women's issues.

Howard Dean's a nice guy, but he's not a liberal and definitely not 'married' to what I would say are sacrosanct Democratic Party positions, like pro-choice and public healthcare. He's a politician, just like all the rest of them.

You do not rise within either political party unless you have run the gauntlet and proven you're one of the team. You have to buy into the group think, and that group think accepts the status quo that they are beholden to transnational corporations.

KEEP READING
About China
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP