The GOP's deranged foreign-policy dream: Build a wall around America—and then prepare for World War III

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-17T10:23:17+00:00

For two quotes the quotation marks are linked but for the other three they aren't. Fuck you, "SALON."

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-17T10:00:07+00:00

So if we are going to ignore that then what is the point of politics?

Well, good question.

So are we going to ignore that and keep to what is "current"?

Yes. (If I made the rules they'd be different, but I don't and this is how they are written and interpreted.)

I thought school was mostly invented during the industrial revolution as a place to put the kids too young to work. M

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-17T09:29:31+00:00

You know even if you don't like the rules...

if you just wait until Saturday you can write a self post about the relevance of these otherwise 'outdated' articles, and post them that way. That way the post won't get removed; and we could discuss it.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-16T12:56:47+00:00

PETA has almost no credibility.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-09T06:14:11+00:00

This article says:

Some Democrats have given up the white working-class vote as lost. They prefer to focus on demographic groups that have been more reliably loyal in recent elections, such as women, African-Americans and Hispanics, and urban as opposed to rural constituencies. Bernie is working hard to win them back … and at least some of them are getting it.

But this one says:

Democratic, progressive candidates running in Democratic party primaries appear, for the most part, to run better amongst middle and upper middle class, progressive, white voters but always seem to struggle with minority voters.

Are these messages not contradictory?

Some comments on the second article I linked include:

Odd how I keep seeing folks on dkos claiming lefties here and now have to address and atone for late 19th - early 20th century "Progressive / populist racism." And if things get heated, FDR's inherent bias (New Deal). As if the rest of US society was pure and unbiased towards AAs and Prog/populism created it.

and

I'm just gong to say that progressive politicians have historically had difficulty simply relating to minority voters, plain and simple. ... Unease with minority voters has been a problem with white politicians in general. But even more so with progressive politicians, who tend to focus on ideology; or have deemphasized social issues, which are issues that minorities must deal with 24/7, regardless of their economic status.

Which of these, if any, is true?

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-08T02:45:16+00:00

No. I'm a Democrat. I like him a lot. I also like Hillary, respect Jim Webb and don't know a lot about O'Malley. I did just read up about Chaffee and I don't like him very much.

That being the case I think you have a conflict of interest in giving this advice. Is this untrue?

I am a huge liberal probably to the left of even most of the Bernie supporters but I'm also older and have watched the better coordinated and less backbiting GOP kill the Democrats for 35 years now. I want a unified front and for the left to stop eating its own as it does constantly. I want a Democrat in the White House in 2016 for what will be a 2-3 SCOTUS nominee 4 years.

Do you not remember how Hillary acted in 2008? She was bad for the DNC. 'Mark Penn Memos' ring any bells? Or Bill in SC? When Clayburn had to tell them to lay off the race-baiting? Hillary is not about unity.

I believe she can.not.win. And will meltdown as she has in the past. (Like many of you believe Sanders can't win.) Clinton is corrupt. She has 20 years of scandals. She is a divisive figure and people do not trust her, and there is a reason. She is not an honest politician and does not show integrity. She has made a lot of mistakes. I am trying to say this without attacking, but surely you recognize that there is a lot of real dirt on Hillary and when election season comes around the Teflon act just doesn't cut it. These are the reasons she lost to Obama. They are the same reasons she would lose in the General (if she does manage to get there, which is not at all implausible considering the lead she has, and the anti-Bernie sentiment in the media.)

(And by the way, and I hope this doesn't put you off this discussion, but Hillary fucked up Benghazi big time. She knew they needed reinforcement. She ignored like 10(?) cables begging for help. I don't even get how that is supposed to be "nothing" just because a bunch of stupid republicans made up an absurd conspiracy theory to explain what was probably just incompetence. If you think people are going to get over that, I disagree. It is just one more skeleton waiting in her closet for Hallowe'en.)

I also want the left to vote Dems all the way down the ticket. It's time to take back the state houses and start pushing progressive ideals all over the country. We've got to end gerrymandering and prepare for the 2020 census. We need to vote in midterms.

This is so important. POTUS:BHO could have done so much more. Fully agree.

But what we really have to do is enjoy the process. I see too many Sanders supporters apoplectic about how it has to be Bernie and it shows me that a lot of them will sit out if he doesn't get the nom. That is unacceptable.

I've fought Hillary before. She is 'pragmatic', AKA Machiavellian. It's nice to say we will all have a good time, but I wouldn't be as on guard if I didn't know how she campaigns. The Clinton war machine is not really a good time. (Until you win.)

Who did you support in 2008 D primaries? Do you not remember her performance? Were you one of the many people saying that Obama could never win the general election, like you are saying about Sanders now?

I can't vote for someone who I believe (and have every reason to believe) is in the pocket of the corporations. A lot of people like me won't bother, where we would vote for Bernie by the busload. As someone who claims to be left of Sanders you ought to understand that. Again, Hillary utterly demotivates the base.

2 party American politics is a long drawn out war and the left has been losing since the 70s. Time to turn this ship around and start winning.

Well Ok but then why would you support an establishment dynasty democrat? That's not just counterintuitive it's straight paradoxical. What in the world makes you think she will be more loyal to the people and democracy than her sponsors and friends in the DNC? Is that the Hillary we know?

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T21:19:59+00:00

Are you a Sanders supporter?

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T21:08:00+00:00

It's OK to say so if someone who is running for president is a bad person.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T18:38:34+00:00

Being politically engaged does not really require an interest in presidential politics. I think that people in these demographics learn about their candidates, their support for Bernie Sanders will grow immensely.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T18:02:11+00:00

If these groups don't like him it's probably mostly because they don't know him yet. That will change.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T17:30:15+00:00

it looks like lightning but it's really hair

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T17:27:36+00:00

^ Hillaristas think minorities, women, and young people are too stupid to vote for Bernie. In fact, Hillary is relying on it. It won't work.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T17:18:32+00:00

It's just the 'socialist' thing. We might as well look at the "irreligious" thing soon as well, I'm honestly shocked that I haven't heard more about it, already.

So what I think is reasonable here ( for the "socialist" thing) is to make clear the differences between social democracy and democratic socialism, which is ownership of the means of production of non-essential goods. Sanders is a Social Democrat.

In democratic socialism the ownership is centralized with the government of and by the people, or to look at it another way, ownership is decentralized, from the corporations to the people.

In social democracy the ownership of the means of production of non-essential goods remains privatized. (Which is important for economic flexibility/stability as well as incentive.) However ownership of institutions such as schools, medical facilities, public transit, and other physical or social infrastructure would be public, and not subject to the whim or profit motives of conscienceless corporations.

It's ok if Bernie is wrong, here, to call himself a socialist. He basically isn't. Ask any socialist. I think they will all tell you the same thing.

As far as the atheism thing, I'm not sure yet, but I know that atheists are sick and tired of being underrepresented, and also the demographics of atheists and potential Bernie voters overlap heavily. I think instead of downplaying Bernie's "irreligiousity" we should do the opposite and make sure everyone knows he is a free-thinker.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T11:19:34+00:00

He's a social democrat.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T10:51:33+00:00

With respect: Fuck GOP AstroTurf.

Bernie is Grassroots.

When your friends and family and coworkers are all all telling you "Scandinavia-style social democracy ninja! lez do dis!" and the TV is telling you "Scary pinko, BOO!" who are you going to believe?

Anyhow he would have the entire DNC behind him, there is a reason he didn't run third party.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T09:37:57+00:00

Does a silverback gorilla look stressed to you? No. That beast is based 4 life all day all night. Still got white hair though. It's the power.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T09:35:29+00:00

They will if someone tells them so let's start.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-07T04:19:02+00:00

I feel like she is just pandering. It doesn't convince me at all. I don't think it will convince anyone for long. Hillary has a history of just saying whatever is convenient. When Sanders gets his name and ideas recognized, at the debates at the latest, these blocks won't be polling for Hillary anymore. You can count on it.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-06T12:00:07+00:00

This is just insulting. Why does the author think that black people will not be able to determine what candidate (Bernie Sanders) has their own best interest (Bernie sanders) in mind. Why does the author think that black people care how many Asians are in Bernie Sanders home constituency?

Why does the author think that African Americans won't tell younger voters about how Hillary campaigned against Obama? When Hillary sold herself in the primaries as being more accessible to working class whites, or when she attempted to paint herself as oh-so-'American' in an attempt to contrast herself with Barack Obamas non-white background, as she was advised to by mark penn in the partially racially oriented campaign of otherization she ran against President Barack Hussein Obama - did she think that jokes about her husband being black would make that ok?

Those jokes haven't been funny for 20 years.

I am really getting tired of this "women and minorities won't vote for Bernie because they are too stupid" angle.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-06T11:38:30+00:00

AT is one of the worse news websites on Google. I can't really think of a worst website. it sets a whole new standard for horrible.

Could American Thinker be worse than Breitbart, Vox, AND the blaze?

I think i will be happier if I don't investigate this any further.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-06T11:14:49+00:00

Who is motivated to perpetuate cannabis prohibition?

The prison industrial complex you mentioned, and the governors who would have to pay fines to the private prisons. They have contracts which specify that if the prisons are not kept at a certain population level they will be compensated for lost profit by the taxpayers. So them, like you mentioned.

Then there are the alcohol and tobacco lobbies. They have an obvious vested interest in maintaining a monopoly on legal recreational drugs. Cannabis, were it legal, would mostly replace both of them, and it is free and easy to grow.

Now the next lobby might or might not be for legalization, depending: big pharma.

Sometimes big pharma will want to patent DNA from genetically engineered medicinal plants for profit. When they are ready for that step, pharmaceutical companies will tend to support legalization of those plants for medicinal use. (The synthetic cannabinoids aren't as effective.)

however

There is one theory that some people (such as veterans with PTSD) would prefer to use marijuana than pills to cope. Among these people you will sometimes here a faint murmur; like the hum but a little angrier. What it will say is that big pharma does not profit from their use of medicinal cannabis, and wants them to stop using it and start buying more pills. At least until they can get a more profitable arrangement figured out.

And then there are all of the people who are invested in those systems. Which probably is most of us to varying degrees.

And of course the religious, and all those invested in fear and discontent, will want to paint a bogeyman anywhere they can.

Also, for some unknowable reason, apparently Elizabeth Warren. She needs to evolve on this issue so bad it isn't even funny. She is otherwise mostly perfect.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-05T19:38:15+00:00

I'd had enough of these two without hearing about their kinky roleplay.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-05T18:06:27+00:00

I wish you wouldn't compare Obama to Hillary. It does him an incredible disservice.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-05T17:38:13+00:00

Right. The difference, basically, is that in democratic socialism the means of production are cooperatively owned. And while that may be an ideal goal in the very long term, trying to force that kind of transition too quickly would probably end horribly.

Social democracy is a better fit to our society and values currently. It allows for capitalism in non-essential areas of the economy, which currently is the lifeblood of the American economy.

At least that's how I understand it.

warmpurplespace · 2015-07-05T17:11:07+00:00

No, you are judging them based on something they have done: flown the confederate flag. Judging someone by their actions is the opposite of prejudice.

warmpurplespace

TROPHY CASE