Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Results 1 to 26 of 26

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #1
    Karl Frederick's Avatar
    Karl Frederick
     

    A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    John Atcheson prefaces the following article about the Democrat power structure's opposition to Bernie Sanders with this quip by Jonathan Swift:

    "When a true genius appears in your world, you may know him by this sign; that all the dunces are against him in a confederacy."

    Well, it’s started. You knew it would. The Democratic establishment is going into attack mode as their anointed one – Hillary Clinton – is in danger of losing.

    Take a look at some of the assaults that have been launched within the last five days:

    • Sandy Goodman, a former producer at NBC Nightly News published a piece on the Huffington Post, entitled, Voting for Sanders is Voting Republican. The fact that Bernie does better than Hillary against Republicans is an inconvenient fact Goodman ignores in this ludicrous hit piece;
    • Paul Krugman’s column last Friday suggested that progressives voting for Sanders weren’t being “adults,” and had no idea how change occurred – in Krugman’s world, change doesn’t come from the people, apparently. It comes from party apparatchiks working with the plutocracy;
    • Thomas Friedman, another New York Times columnist, essentially called Sanders a communist – something he knows isn’t true, but it’s a great scare tactic;
    • President Obama said Bernie Sanders' ideas haven’t been tested yet and went on to heap praise on Hillary. It wasn’t an endorsement, but it came mighty close.
    All of these are coming from credentialed liberals who have been staunch supporters of the Democratic Party. And therein lies the problem. The Democratic Party’s interests are no longer aligned with the people’s interests and they haven’t been for a long time.

    And this comes after Debbie Wassermann Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, set up the modern era’s first stealth debate program, designed to guarantee a coronation for Ms. Clinton and keep real progressives like Sanders and O’Malley under wraps.

    Continued here: https://www.commondreams.org/views/2...sanders-begins
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 01-27-2016 at 01:43 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  3. TopTop #2
    BobHeisler's Avatar
    BobHeisler
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Not only has the Democratic machine been working against Bernie, but the major TV networks have been ignoring him...until now. He's become competitive in the polls and can no longer be ignored.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. TopTop #3
    rbloom's Avatar
    rbloom
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Karl,

    It may be true that the Democratic Party leaders and supporters are reflexively falling into line behind Hillary but some of the fears that they bring up are not unreasonable and must be addressed by Bernie Sanders and his backers. Whatever you think of the successes and failures of the Obama administration, he has been hogtied by a Republican Congress that has dedicated itself to shutting him down. What would Sanders be able to do if he doesn't have a sympathetic Congress? Not much. What does he have to do to insure that his supporters are elected to Congress so that he has some chance of making change?

    The right has been mobilized by having a black president. I believe that their willingness to obstruct is rooted in racism, a fear that "the other" is taking over their country. They will not be comforted by a New York born Jew who was a civil rights organizer, who has supported gay rights for decades, and who opposed wars that have been popular with the right. For older voters, particularly white older voters who turn out in greater numbers than any other demographic, socialism is equivalent to being unAmerican. And I think that anti-semitism is as virulent among right wingers as is hatred of blacks, the growing Latin population and immigrants. There is no doubt that the Republicans believe that Sanders is more vulnerable and beatable than Hillary. They are therefore laying off criticism of him in the belief that they can destroy him as a candidate once the general election comes. Current polls do not reflect any of the considerable negative campaigning that the right is capable of, and a Sanders candidacy could end up electing a Republican and perhaps result in a Republican sweep. It is a fear that should not be dismissed.

    Are these reasons to abandon Sanders? Of course not. But going forward without talking about these considerable political problems is folly. We have no trouble seeing the magical thinking of those who support Trump that somehow he is going to "restore" something that never was and make us all feel good again. We should not fall prey to that same magical thinking that somehow this lone man, Bernie Sanders, will singlehandedly transform America into the country that we hope it will be.

    So the question for me is where will the political muscle come from that will make the changes that we would like to see happen. And of course the answer is always local not national. Unless like minded people from all over the country are capable of electing people to office who will support the kinds of policies that Bernie has espoused and that people are rallying behind then little will change. The Republicans have tried to undermine voting with laws that are simply more sophisticated versions of the polling tax and literacy laws that prevented blacks from voting in the South. Unsexy races for the state office of secretary of state, the person who oversees voting, have tremendous impact. A heated race in Ohio in 2014 was unable to turn out the Republican incumbent. This is a state where voter fraud was probable but voter manipulation was evident, where people in Democratic districts were forced to wait hours in inclement weather to vote and people in Republican districts were spirited through. Ohio has often been a key state in presidential elections.

    It is one thing to rally behind an attractive presidential candidate who represents our views. It is quite another to do all the ground work day after day and year after year that will ensure that those policies have a chance of being implemented.

    I have to hand it to Bernie. He's four months older than I am and still leading the charge. He's going to need a lot of help. And even if he doesn't succeed, he will have made an impact. 48 years ago I was going door to door for Eugene McCarthy. Perhaps we had something to do with ending the Vietnam War. But we need to remember, too, that that year Robert Kennedy (and of course Martin Luther King) was assassinated and Richard Nixon was elected to the presidency. The right wing in this country doesn't roll over and cry "uncle."

    Richard Bloom

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Karl Frederick: View Post
    John Atcheson prefaces the following article about the Democrat power structure's opposition to Bernie Sanders with this quip by Jonathan Swift...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  5. Gratitude expressed by 8 members:

  6. TopTop #4
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by rbloom: View Post
    ...It may be true that the Democratic Party leaders and supporters are reflexively falling into line behind Hillary but some of the fears that they bring up are not unreasonable and must be addressed by Bernie Sanders and his backers. ...
    The fears are well founded. What is at stake is not Hillary vs Bernie but the S. Court, voting rights, health care, gay rights, etc. Bernie is a good guy but have we forgotten the crap Obama took over flag pins, socialism- Bill Ayers, etc, Bernie is basically an atheist , Jew, with video footage praising F Castro, Daniel Ortega, etc Do you really believe he can win a national election ? The Dems won with massive AA turnout, plus 35% of the moderate white vote not liberals and young people made the difference. Bernie will not get a high AA or Latino turnout- trust me on this as an AA. So, in the name of hearing things we like to hear, we ignore the strong likelihood that Dems lose the presidency and both houses of the congress and we will watch the hard fought battles won, slip away.

    We make the same error over and over , be it Mondale, Nadar, etc The world never works the way we want to believe is possible. It is slow grind not some well intentioned leader bringing us single payer health care, free college, expanded SS, etc. Don you think both Hillary and Barack wouldn´t have gone after these things if they thought it was possible ? Remember the Clinton fight for health care in 94 ?

    If we want real economic change, we must stop feeding Bankers and Hedge funds. Take your 401 k or IRA and foll it into a self direct IRA, make loans for housing, solar panel financing, peer to peer lending. These are real actions not dependent on following an inspirational leader. The stakes are way to high for playing feel good games, most of the country is not like N Calif.
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 01-31-2016 at 02:05 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  7. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  8. TopTop #5
    wisewomn's Avatar
    wisewomn
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Sounds perfectly reasonable, Richard, but you have overlooked the Right's hatred of Hillary Clinton. They won't be any more charitable or cooperative if she is elected than they have been with Obama.

    I read an interesting blog a while back about how, if Hillary is nominated, it would be better that the Repugs win because essentially nothing will change with Hillary due to her alignment with the banks, corporations, all the same old same old, etc. So then, when things continue to go to Hell with a Repug president (as they would with Hillary), then the Dems won't be blamed for it and will be able to win the following election (after this one) by a large margin.

    I thought that was a viewpoint worth considering.

    I personally don't believe much of anything Hillary says. She'll say anything to get elected but she will always be beholden to the moneyed interests who financed her campaign.

    In any event, Bernie won't win if no one votes for him, so saying don't vote for him because he can't win seems like a Catch-22. And it's delusional to think Hillary would be any more successful at dealing with a Repug Congress than Obama has been or Sanders would be. At least Sanders is familiar with all the characters in Congress, having worked with them for years.

    FWIW.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by rbloom: View Post
    It may be true that the Democratic Party leaders and supporters are reflexively falling into line behind Hillary but some of the fears that they bring up are not unreasonable and must be addressed by Bernie Sanders and his backers. ...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 01-31-2016 at 02:07 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  9. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

  10. TopTop #6
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn: View Post
    ...In any event, Bernie won't win if no one votes for him, so saying don't vote for him because he can't win seems like a Catch-22...
    That is not the point I aḿ making. Bernie can get elected. That´s the point. It is not about who is beholding to interest. Obama took sizable sums from corporate members. These people can give cash as firms, just individuals. If Bernie is to mount an even decent campaign it will take over billion $ , as it came close to than for the last Obama election. He had to take funds from where the came to get elected.

    Are you saying better to lose than make a rational choice to not lose 30-50 years of incremental gains ?
    Are you saying you know Hillary and Bernie personally ? Bernie has lied as all politicians will. It takes doing this dance to appeal to a broad cross section of the population.

    I am simply saying to any who will listen: Bernie can get enough votes to win the Presidency. If I thought he could, I would support him but the math will never work.

    You may be young enough to not remember W Mondale. He lost 48 of 50 states and we got R Reagan for 8 and Bush for another 4 and saw unions busted, SS reduced, mentally ill pushed out of secure mental health communities, Clarence Thomas, Scalia, Kennedy added to the court, just name a few. Now we have voting rights being dialed back, SS fighting to not be privatized, Latino children being deported after growing up here, health care - finally for most and because someone can argue that Hiilary is not fully honest, we should all vote for the guy who only sounds good to "progressives¨.

    I had personally wished Bernie lied about being a socialist and being religious. At least he would not alienate 60% of the population.

    In my 20ś I ran for congress as a socialist. I have some sense of how backward most of the country still is. It matters very little to people around here or people under 30 but this is not enough to do more than win a primary.

    Don assume Trump will be so negative that AA will automatically vote in big numbers for Bernie. Just go beyond your emotions and think about who will be affected by Bernie losing the election and stop operating on assumptions that none of us can verify and look at the numbers that win elections for national democrats. That is why the ¨establishment" doesn´t want Bernie. His claim about big money not liking him is bull. It is the same game politicians always play on us. There afraid of me because Iḿ pure. This T Cruzś rap. We are the establishment. It exists because we keep feeding it with our hard earned funds.

    When food stamps get cut back and SS get privatized and PParenthood is closed, and abortions are made illegal, will you feel self righteous ? I won´t, just sad. Remember Nadar gave us Bush.
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 01-31-2016 at 02:07 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  11. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  12. TopTop #7
    Glia's Avatar
    Glia
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    31 January 2016
    A message from Michael Moore:

    Tonight I officially endorse Bernie Sanders for President. Share my endorsement letter here:https://michaelmoore.com/myendorsementofbernie


    My Dear Friends,

    When I was a child, they said there was no way this majority-Protestant country of ours would ever elect a Catholic as president. And then John Fitzgerald Kennedy was elected president.
    The next decade, they said America would not elect a president from the Deep South. The last person to do that on his own (not as a v-p) was Zachary Taylor in 1849. And then we elected President Jimmy Carter.

    In 1980, they said voters would never elect a president who had been divorced and remarried. Way too religious of a country for that, they said. Welcome, President Ronald Reagan, 1981-89.
    They said you could not get elected president if you had not served in the military. No one could remember when someone who hadn’t served had been elected Commander-in-Chief. Or who had confessed to trying (but not inhaling!) Illegal drugs. President Bill Clinton, 1993-2001.
    And then finally “they” saId that there’s NO WAY the Democrats were going to win if they nominated a BLACK man for president — a black man who’s middle name was Hussein! America was still too racist for that. “Don’t do it!”, people quietly warned each other.
    BOOM!

    Do you ever wonder why the pundits, the political class, are always so sure that Americans “just aren’t ready” for something — and then they’re always just so wrong? They says these things because they want to protect the status quo. They don’t want the boat rocked. They try to scare the average person into voting against their better judgment.
    And now, this year “they” are claiming that there’s no way a “democratic socialist” can get elected President of the United States. That is the main talking point coming now from the Hillary Clinton campaign office.

    But all the polls show Bernie Sanders actually BEATING Donald Trump by twice as many votes than if Hillary Clinton was the candidate.

    Although the polls nationally show Hillary beating Bernie among DEMOCRATS, when the pollster includes all INDEPENDENTS, then Sanders beats Trump two to one over what Clinton would do.
    The way the Clinton campaign has been red-baiting Sanders is unfortunate — and tone deaf. According to NBC, 43% of Iowa Dems identify themselves more closely with socialism (sharing, helping) than with capitalism (greed, inequality). Most polls now show young adults (18-35) across America prefer socialism (fairness) to capitalism (selfishness).

    So, what is democratic socialism? It’s having a true democracy where everyone has a seat at the table, where everyone has a voice, not just the rich.

    Continue reading here: https://michaelmoore.com/MyEndorsementOfBernie/
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-01-2016 at 01:03 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  13. Gratitude expressed by 7 members:

  14. TopTop #8
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    If I am not mistaken - Michael supported Ralph Nadar with the same arguments. I may be wrong but that is my recollection. Michael doesn´t need food stamps or an abortion. His numbers assume AA and Latinos will vote is similar numbers for Bernie and whites will not vote out of fear. Obama won 51/49 the 1st time. I for one will not be rolling the dice. There is no us vs them only us.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Glia: View Post
    Tonight I officially endorse Bernie Sanders for President...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-01-2016 at 01:03 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  15. Gratitude expressed by:

  16. TopTop #9
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    My recollection was incorrect. He did not support Nadar. I still suggest you make up your own minds without another rich white guy telling you to take a chance on a long shot with little or no consequence to himself.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Joseph: View Post
    If I am not mistaken - Michael supported Ralph Nadar with the same arguments. I may be wrong but that is my recollection. Michael doesn´t need food stamps or an abortion. His numbers assume AA and Latinos will vote is similar numbers for Bernie and whites will not vote out of fear. Obama won 51/49 the 1st time. I for one will not be rolling the dice. There is no us vs them only us.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  17. Gratitude expressed by:

  18. TopTop #10
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn: View Post
    .....So then, when things continue to go to Hell with a Repug president (as they would with Hillary), then the Dems won't be blamed for it and will be able to win the following election (after this one) by a large margin.....
    that seems reasonable, but people aren't reasonable. I doubt that once things have gone to hell people will draw the lesson you hope they will.

    My experience is that people instead insist on doing what they did again, just harder/more. 'The Dems (may well) be blamed for it', being seen as obstructionists. For example, many might believe that the Mexican government would have built and paid for that wall except that they knew their sympathizers like Pelosi et. al. are on their side against the real patriots in America.
    And once we've gotten even closer to the gates of hell, it's likely to be hard to get back. So the gamble, gaining allies by showing them the nature of their folly, isn't likely to pay off.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  19. TopTop #11
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn: View Post
    Sounds perfectly reasonable, Richard, but you have overlooked the Right's hatred of Hillary Clinton. They won't be any more charitable or cooperative if she is elected than they have been with Obama.
    also, they hated LBJ. Sometimes for good reason. But he was able to use the tools he had to gain a lot of leverage. That's more likely to be a skill that Clinton has than Sanders - she should know where the bodies are, since according to many repubs she's had a hand in burying some herself.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  20. TopTop #12
    Glia's Avatar
    Glia
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Michael Moore hardly started out a a "rich guy" (although he did start out as a white boy); whether or not he is currently "rich" is debatable. He will suffer, or enjoy, the consequences of the election outcome just like the rest of us.

    Nader was not even vaguely qualified to be POTUS and had no business running. All he did was cause trouble. Sanders is very qualified, has experience with getting things done on the federal level (thankfully not with the same m.o. as LBJ), and is a long way from a long shot.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Joseph: View Post
    My recollection was incorrect. He did not support Nadar. I still suggest you make up your own minds without another rich white guy telling you to take a chance on a long shot with little or no consequence to himself.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  21. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  22. TopTop #13
    Shepherd's Avatar
    Shepherd
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Once again, film-maker Michael Moore nails it, with his blend of history, insight, and facts.
    Go Bernie!

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Glia: View Post
    ...Tonight I officially endorse Bernie Sanders for President. Share my endorsement letter here:https://michaelmoore.com/myendorsementofbernie...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-03-2016 at 10:55 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  23. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  24. TopTop #14
    starlite's Avatar
    starlite
    Supporting Member

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    You know, Joseph, I think you are neglecting to appreciate the immensity of the shift that Barack Obama's election represents. He got the votes of minorities. Yes, and Hillary is getting a lot of the female electorate's support. But Bernie represents a shift toward a different paradigm, I believe. It is the paradigm where the masses of those who are repressed economically have reached epic proportions and where they are rising up to make their voices heard. I admit I am a hopeless optimist and a visionary spawned by the 60s, but I strongly feel that our time has come and that all it takes is the will for change and the simple act of voting.

    Bernie has the experience, don't let the media fool you. He is not Mondale or Nadar and the time is Now, not our beleaguered past. Hillary and Obama were not able to make the changes they wanted because their timing was off. The Time Is Now. And the actions you suggest are wise for individuals and governments and businesses alike. I think Bernie will effectively go after the big banks and hedge funds, the IMF, and a host of others--maybe with Elizabeth Warren at his side in some capacity. I believe the time for change has come and that we are called upon as citizens of Gaia to exercise our rights to create a future that supports the continuance of our species along with many others.



    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Joseph: View Post
    The fears are well founded. What is at stake is not Hillary vs Bernie but the S. Court, voting rights, health care, gay rights, etc...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-03-2016 at 10:55 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  25. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  26. TopTop #15
    starlite's Avatar
    starlite
    Supporting Member

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    I wonder about some of your statements and their potential consequences. And I have a few questions. Is it so that immigrants and Latinos are anti-Semitic? Wouldn't it be better really to have a Democratic rather than Republican President in office even with an unsupportive Congress in order to stave off the potentially drastic policies that might be implemented by a Republican president the likes of any of the 3 potential nominees? Of course it is not possible for Sanders to single-handedly effect massive change, it is likely that he would make some slow steady progress for the good and have the support of the masses.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by rbloom: View Post
    Karl, It may be true that the Democratic Party leaders and supporters are reflexively falling into line behind Hillary but some of the fears that they bring up are not unreasonable and must be addressed by Bernie Sanders and his backers...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-03-2016 at 10:57 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  27. Gratitude expressed by:

  28. TopTop #16
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Hi- I had sworn off responding to these ,,, but you are an open soul and it is not my intent to take away your hope.

    I can only suggest that the"white horse¨ hope that we all seem to place on presidential elections says more about us than we think; -

    - we must believe that one person in this office can fix everything we think makes life difficult for us- this is realm of snake oil salesmen and women. If Bernie or Nadar or any of these people who promise more than they even believe is realistic for any one, they would tell you that before hand. The facts are that the only way anything of the magnitude that Bernie suggests is possible, the major shifts in congressional elections will have to take place and that is work over 3-4 election cycles not electing a President.

    - The banks are not why we are not happy, nor is it the ¨billionaire class¨. These are blames placed in a group of people who followed the rules of the game and won. The game may be misguided but these people are not the enemy. It says about us that we blame the better players for what is wrong with the economic system that we still seek to o be rewarded by. That is why I would rather remake the system through redirecting our resources and not blame the players. This also a tactic of a manipulator - find an enemy and direct your anger in belief if you can make them shape up, we will all be doing great.

    I offered some math a while back that said if you take most of the actual liquid holding from these people, who are rich from us giving them our money, it might add up to a $500 each and no more system that produced the resources to regenerate it. Just think about the concept of sustanability. You can use up all the reserves trying to satisfy a short term need. The problem with the current system is not that it should be more socialistic, it is that it does not produce real wealth. It is goofy stuff like inflated housing prices that we call wealth, not more housing.. The system relies on shortage to set value, not generating more real stuff for all. Socialism is even worse at creating wealth. It just redistributes shortages. Eeventually you have Cuba. Equal but poor. Bernie will not tell you that our success here means less for others not living here or that good jobs will not either be preserved or returning here, TPP or not. Global competition and replacement of people with robots and automation. I can blame Bernie for this, he is just and blind as most of the others and that includes Hillary. Obama knows but no one can openly speak the words. It is zero sum game and fewer and fewer become winners. That´s why we have these concentrations. Apple has almost a trillion dollars in profits being held because there is not sensible way to spend it. The same is true of many of these companies we buy products from. It is not money they did not earn of pay taxes on. A hihger tax rate will not get there money.
    - the other is that we think because we are surround by other that wish to drink ẗhe ´koolaide´ that most others must feel and see what we do. Nothing farther from the truth. Even with Bernieś success last night. The vast majority of his voters were college students and most of those wanting free college, having no idea what it would actually take to have this happen.

    - It also tells us that we think the world is a simple place and Obama just didn´t have the right approach or took money from the Billionaire class or some other explanation that says he should have been able to do more. He showed us that significant changes like health care are hard as hell to make happen- 70 years of efforts and now Bernie tells you and others we could have had single payer, like Obama just wouldn´t insist on it. Would you rather none of the people who now can get treated were left for another 10-15 yrs with out health care, or taken away the insurance many have to be forced into a new system.

    All I am trying to share with you is that placing you hopes on one man who is more like Mondale than you know, as Mondale was a very accomplished and principled Sen, like Bernie, can never do all of this. Some of it is not even in his power and the rest is highly dependent on a democratic congress that would be more years in the making- because of gerrymandering , than Bernie has legal years to see happen.

    Why we buy in, only makes us more impotent and not look for the collective options available to us. We feed the system it life blood and then blame it for being unfair. We want out property to increase in value, our 401kś to grow, we buy the new Iphone, Facebook and the blame them for not giving some of the money back and now we want a champion that will make everyone shape up.

    We really are all in this together- all of us - not just the less rich and real change comes when we recognize this fact and can make the case for another way to be in economic relationship to each other- more real wealth for everyone, everywhere, not some more of us here but China, Africa, Vietnam and that means no more intentional shortages to makes an organic zucchini cost $2.50 per lb.

    Hillary is indeed a politician but also a realist, Bernie, is either self hypnotized or selling nonsense, even if I tend to like the smell of it- free everything and someone else will pay for it- sounds great !

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by starlite: View Post
    You know, Joseph, I think you are neglecting to appreciate the immensity of the shift that Barack Obama's election represents...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-03-2016 at 10:58 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  29. Gratitude expressed by:

  30. TopTop #17
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Joseph: View Post
    ...I can only suggest that the"white horse¨ hope that we all seem to place on presidential elections says more about us than we think...
    I think we both have largely the same understanding of the political/economic situation, but a couple of things I'll take issue with:

    It's true that hoping for a hero to save us says more about psychology than reality, but no, we don't have to believe that one person can fix everything. And sure, our opponents in the game may indeed be the enemy. And taking a lot from the 'winners' has a bigger benefit than a one-time-only quick $500-per-person benefit.

    We do need to change the misguided game. Part of that does indeed include taking back the winnings from version one so we can start version two from a sound base. A poker player who leaves the table with his winnings pretty much eliminates the possibility of starting a new, fairer game - everyone left is too broke to play.
    It's going to be all about culture change. That's where we agree; major change can't happen just by dropping in a few new faces and changing a few rules. And I do worry about major short-term tactical losses (supreme court justices high among them). But I don't see any other way for it to evolve, except by people lining up behind disruptive figures. Even you dismiss socialism, for example, as if it's a single thing that's been tried and failed. And of course it's not. It's a broader concept of how to organize society.

    Without a person fronting a movement, there's no way to impose change on a nation. Sooner or later, someone's going to be the person in front of the parade, and they'll get the credit.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  31. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  32. TopTop #18
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    This is a useful conversation. I appreciate the exchange. We should all be testing each other facts and assumptions.

    Disruptive figures, to me, are from another era. The whole authoritarian idea is that some have a clearer singular vision that the rest of us. I really doubt this based on what we have as our history. My concerns are: This time around we need all of us, otherwise we will not include the needs and feelings of each of us. We know how that keeps turning out.

    we can´t get anywhere without taking the global population into the discussion. The world shortages reflect,as you know, creating product value. Success here takes resource and opportunity from somewhere else.

    - an old professor stunned me many, many years ago stating that socialism was a parasitic philosophy. He was a one time member of the Com Party, so it made me very curious. His explanation was simple. Incentive system to take risk and create new opportunity comes from a desire for personal and tribal security. It is easy to imagine redistributing what has been created but the incentive on the parts of the creators and the recipients becomes zero. Hence, we get state managed socialist experiments. Most end when economic growth ends and people get tired of seeing others having more.

    The heart felt intent of socialism is unarguable. I want to see fairness, just as you...
    I do not think the goal for us is equality but more for all to thrive and not just survive. I do not want to spend time dividing a shrinking pie. We should be celebrating the capacities that capitalism has brought us and the future provided to not need it any more. It is built into its DNA.

    It allows us to speak here or instantaneously anywhere, it offers the potential future of no more boring jobs, or make work time wasted. We have all the necessary ingredients to provide more than any of us need on a global scale, just not the awareness of it.

    Why not focus on the creation wealth, the expanding of food production ( cooperatively) , the production of cheap solar energy, etc.

    If you believe that the so called wealth of stock traders and others, will fix things, I have not ever seen number that suggest there is an unlimited supply from this ¨goose¨.

    I really don´t see any of these people as enemies, just people who played the twisted game better than most of us. It is like many who complained about the $85k salaries of the Muni drivers instead of asking why we all don´t make a comfortable income. That is a more fruitful question, to me. We are the economy, so doing it another way is just that. Step by step organizing economic around cooperative ventures and reaching out the rest of the globe to form a true global system.

    Politics is more social conditioning than and actual boundary requiring our engagement. It is one way we can marginally effect things but money has always made the decisions and we have always been in control of that, be it workers or investors. It just means we have engage and entrust with each other, Far more real than pointing fingers and complaining.

    Thanks for your responses. I may send you a few pages of thoughts to see what you think.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by podfish: View Post
    I think we both have largely the same understanding of the political/economic situation, but a couple of things I'll take issue with...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  33. TopTop #19
    Ronio's Avatar
    Ronio
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    I have to agree that I am leaning toward Bernie. I like his values. I also have to agree though that Hillary is much more politically savvy. That was my argument in supporting her over Obama in 2008. President Obama had to learn the hard way. He was soooo earnest, trying to make nice with the repugs. He certainly has matured over the long term into a real statesman though.

    I just am not sure about what exactly Clinton supports. As much as I would like to see a woman president I need to know more about what Hillary Clinton's real politics is all about; besides winning lol lol lol. Welcoming any other thoughts on this which seems like a toss up so far.

    My leaning is that if Bernie Sanders sticks to his real gutsy political stands he can inspire the populace to vote. If everyone votes there is no question about who would win. Remember that the Repugs are just an inspired minority. The Dems have to motivate the populace in order to win, regardless of who is nominated, Frankly I just don't see Hillary inspiring enough outside of a select subset of the populace. Of course I will vote for her if she wins the nomination. I see Bernie Sanders as an FDR. If the economy runs into the trouble I think we will see this year it could be the year for an inspired populace to turn out and vote for a real game changer.

    As for Nader I agree. He was just a special interest spoiler; and he certainly did spoil that election and the next eight years for that matter. Think about how different life could be without the Iraq invasion.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  34. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  35. TopTop #20
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Joseph: View Post
    Disruptive figures, to me, are from another era. The whole authoritarian idea is that some have a clearer singular vision that the rest of us. I really doubt this based on what we have as our history.
    I wasn't clear - I don't really believe that a visionary introduces new ideas, but new ideas aren't accepted without a figurehead to espouse them. Popular movements stall until a leader emerges. But as the cliche goes, "when it's time to railroad, people start railroading".
    Quote we can´t get anywhere without taking the global population into the discussion. ... socialism was a parasitic philosophy. .... Incentive system to take risk and create new opportunity comes from a desire for personal and tribal security. It is easy to imagine redistributing what has been created but the incentive on the parts of the creators and the recipients becomes zero.
    I think that's a big part of what's missing. Sort of a super-NIMBY. Globalization, the ability of people all over the world to participate in production, has forced advanced countries to share in the problems caused by inefficient distribution of that production. The much-lamented loss of good-paying middle-class jobs to outsourcing is a problem. But it's impossible to ignore that they only existed because, on a world scale, most of the US population counted as part of the 1%. So it's hypocritical to complain about our 1% monopolizing our production without being willing to look more broadly at the rest of the world.

    The key premise about capitalism that I object to is the last of your points I excerpted. People love to take risks. People do need rewards, too. But tying the necessities of life to that system is evil and a historical accident. Finding a way to separate the parts of the economy that provide food/shelter/health care from the part that provide entertainment, knowledge, and luxuries is what it will take to truly become a civilized society.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  36. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  37. TopTop #21
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Joseph: View Post
    ...I really don´t see any of these people as enemies, just people who played the twisted game better than most of us. It is like many who complained about the $85k salaries of the Muni drivers instead of asking why we all don´t make a comfortable income.....
    oh yah, missed this bit.

    the Muni guy's not an enemy, but he's easily co-opted by those who are. The enemies are those who not only profit from the current system but actively work to preserve and extend its most unfair aspects. That's my beef with a lot of conservatives who think they're moral exemplars, and think that people who aren't doing well need to become less self-destructive and just work harder. They're playing into the hands of those who would preserve a system that's inherently unfair and in dire need of reform.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  38. Gratitude expressed by:

  39. TopTop #22
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Lets not ignore history. The previous system- feudalism, was not desirable. Capitalism allowed individual initiative to expand the options and lead to people taking their reserves and investing them in new ventures. The system reflects us, not some good and bad people doing something sinister.

    We are the privileged who get to have these discussions about how wrong it is but we eat each day, most of us stay warm, etc. The conservative view point is equally useless but we, who have grown up in a society where most resources were available, have not sense of why the model societies, like Denmark operate. Yes, they share the wealth but the wealth is largely based on nationalized oil. The proceeds, like Alaska, provide a baseline for in citizens but we all know this is not sustainable model.

    The problem is a global problem and the ignorance of the conservatives is unable or unwilling to recognize that the current model was never sustainable once there is nothing new to exploit.

    Give the past itś due but short of global abundance, the questions of who gets and who does not persist, so I would rather embrace all in this system that we have all benefited from. It does us no good to feel self righteous or see good or bad people or blame the successful for trying to keep what they have. We all operate this way, perhaps in smaller forms but we want what we like to stay the way it is.

    It hurts me to see anyone suffer and that is what leads me to seek a deep and lasting solution, not just a replacing of the old with equality of poverty. We have got find ways of not expecting others to create for us what we can begin to create for ourselves. We need to stop falling back on the past beliefs, like socialism or wealth redistribution. The mid west of this country has people who have functioned cooperatively, yet independently, as they have coops for damned near everything, including their own cell towers, fuel, utilities, etc. Nothing stops us from joining together to create even more. It ain´t them, it's all of us.

    We need only ask why any of us hold the beliefs we have to see how much the same we all are.
    Starlite - I love Obama and know the significance of what he has accomplished but Bernie wants to change most of it and if he lets a Republican into the WH, most of what BO accomplished will be overturned. I accept the gradualness of political change, many on the left want socialism and weren't happy with much of what he has done and purity of belief is always unhappy with any outcome that does not validate itself.
    Thanks ,all of you for your thoughts !

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by podfish: View Post
    I wasn't clear - I don't really believe that a visionary introduces new ideas, but new ideas aren't accepted without a figurehead to espouse them...
    Last edited by Barry; 02-04-2016 at 05:33 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  40. Gratitude expressed by:

  41. TopTop #23
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Joseph: View Post
    Lets not ignore history. The previous system- feudalism, was not desirable. Capitalism allowed .....
    The problem is a global problem and the ignorance of the conservatives is unable or unwilling to recognize that the current model was never sustainable once there is nothing new to exploit.
    ....It does us know good to feel self righteous or see good or bad people or blame the successful for trying to keep what they have. ...
    that's my overarching point. The list of previous systems -is- history, and the historical forces that made each be adopted (notice I don't say made each successful) no longer exist, at least in the same way. So we don't have a few pre-defined systems that we're restricted to choosing from, instead we need to develop a new one that takes advantages of the modern capacity for production. It's only inertia that keeps us tied to the systems that helped start the agricultural and industrial age. ("only" - yeah, it's a pretty powerful "only").

    But hell yes it does us good to "blame the successful" when they fight to keep what they have at the expense of the rest of the world, and fall prey to the illusion that they earned everything they have. There's a term I can't remember, but a phrase used by Molly Ivins about GWB works too: born on third base, but thinks he hit a triple.

    maybe it's "survivor's bias" - the feeling that, even though the odds say someone's going to be at the clean end of the stick no matter what, if you're the one there, you give yourself credit for the achievement.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  42. Gratitude expressed by:

  43. TopTop #24
    BobHeisler's Avatar
    BobHeisler
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    I guess when things get mean, even family members will turn on each other

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Karl Frederick: View Post
    John Atcheson prefaces the following article about the Democrat power structure's opposition to Bernie Sanders with this quip by Jonathan Swift...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-04-2016 at 03:34 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  44. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  45. TopTop #25
    wisewomn's Avatar
    wisewomn
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    Here's an interesting blog from Thom Hartmann:

    If You Want to Win, Go Progressive

    The big question right now is whether to call Hillary Clinton a progressive, or a "moderate."

    And then there's the question of who is more electable in a general election: an unabashedly progressive democrat, like Bernie Sanders; or a "centrist" democrat, like Hillary Clinton.

    Jonathan Capehart weighed in on the matter on Thursday morning's edition of MSNBC Live with the claim that it will be important for Democrats to move to the center to win the general election - and he added that it will be easier for Hillary Clinton to do that.

    It may be conventional wisdom that a candidate has to swing to the center to win in a general election.

    And that conventional wisdom has been central to the Democratic platform ever since Al From's 1992 "bloodless coup" transformed the FDR/LBJ Democratic Party into the Clinton party of "centrist" corporatism.

    But that conventional wisdom just doesn't stand up to the scrutiny of history.

    The truth is, Democrats win when voter turnout is high.

    And voter turnout is high when voters have real progressive candidates to support.

    Back in 2014, Democrats were devastated by the midterm election results - Republicans easily won control of the Senate and strengthened their majority in the House.

    In Arkansas, Republican Tom Cotton beat Democratic incumbent Mark Pryor by seven points to win a House seat; in Kentucky, Allison Lundergan Grimes lost to Mitch McConnell by over 15 points.

    In West Virginia, Wall Street darling and state GOP legacy Shelley Moore-Capito won the Senate seat that Democrat Jay Rockefeller had held for 30 years.

    Moore-Capito easily trounced West Virginia Secretary of State Natalie Tennant, who ran as a so-called "centrist" democrat and campaigned against many of Obama's policies -just like Grimes had run away from Obama on guns.

    Perhaps most shockingly to the Democratic establishment in 2014, three-term Louisiana Democratic Senator and friend of the oil industry Mary Landrieu lost her bid for re-election by 11 points in a runoff election against Republican Bill Cassidy, because she campaigned as a "centrist" Democrat.


    Read more here. https://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/20...go-progressive
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-06-2016 at 01:37 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  46. Gratitude expressed by:

  47. TopTop #26
    Joseph
     

    Re: A Confederacy of Dunces: The Democratic Establishment’s Assault on Sanders Begins

    The facts: Democrats win Presidential elections when they have big turnout. accept when you are Bill Clinton. Obama won with larger turnout because minorities and younger people came out in much larger numbers. Young people ´ś increase was smaller by percentage than AA, and Latinos. Mid terms are always bad for Democrats no matter who is running, This likely comes from a lack of organization and not policy positions. It does not hold water that many Demś lost for not being progressive. The people who suffered were in Republican states and these Dems got in during hard times not progressive policy positions. As for policy positions, of course liberal money policies always win but even where these things were on the ballots, most of the candidates for the Dems lost. Don´t confuse more money in peoples pockets for people being liberal. The Repubs gets millions of votes offering tax cuts, does this mean most people are conservatives ? Just more snake oil. Think it through.

    This article misrepresents the facts to make a case.

    Fact: Bernieś big turn out in Iowa was 20% less than Obama is 2007. He won fewer voters over 30 than Obama by a significant margin.

    The argument on the right has been the same argument."We lose when we run to middle, so why keep doing it ¨. Now we hear running to the left is the answer.

    More than 50 % of the electorate is moderate. Both parties when when they get the larger share of the moderate vote. Obama actually lost this group both terms but made up for it with minority turnout.
    I warn all of you who by the assumption that Bernie will get a big minority turn out and it is clear he will at best equal Obama on the moderate group, so we are in for a "white wash¨, electorally speaking.

    Of no fault of his own, Bernie has not been engaged much with the AA and Latino communities, so he has little or no history to call on. He can pull a few younger AA, but Hillary has long standing relationships with both the AA community and Latinos. She worked on grass roots efforts for years and stay in their awareness. She spoke at Kings wife´s funeral, is a close personal friend of John Lewis, etc. This counts but we will all have to see if this can duplicate Obama´ appeal.

    Make a decision about this choice with the facts not this less than accurate statement of facts. Use your heads and remember what is really at stake. Bernie can claim he runs ahead of Trump in polling but as Iron Mike has said"everyone has a plan to win until they get punched in the mouth Bernie has not had to defend any of his passed associations and comment in the 24 hr national media, If he gets the nomination, it will be unfortunate to see what will come at him. It wont be fair but it is what this game is. Bernie is no Obama.

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn: View Post
    Here's an interesting blog from Thom Hartmann: If You Want to Win, Go Progressive...
    Last edited by Bella Stolz; 02-06-2016 at 01:37 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  48. Gratitude expressed by:

Similar Threads

  1. What The Assault On Whistleblowers Has to Do With War on Syria
    By arthunter in forum National & International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-28-2013, 11:26 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-2012, 12:46 AM
  3. The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment
    By Zeno Swijtink in forum WaccoReader
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-2010, 06:53 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-21-2010, 03:20 PM
  5. Pivotal Sexual Assault Case
    By Larysa in forum General Community
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-22-2009, 10:49 PM

Bookmarks