Home | About | Donate

In Display of 'Actual Sociopathy,' Trump Reportedly Asked CIA Why Drone Didn't Also Kill Target's Family


You are right. That’s why I agree on Social Security etc. As I’ve pointed out, that corporate stooge Roosevelt negotiated with regulated industries and sold us the cluck out. In fact, the entire New Deal was a sellout in that it propped up industries and benefitted corporate goons like Kaiser, etc. Hell, we’ve been sold out for years!


From a speech FDR ended up not giving to the Convention leading up to his third term.

In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government.

**The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values.**

The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress.

The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory.

It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened.

Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention.

It is best not to straddle ideals.

In these days of danger when democracy must be more than vigilant, there can be no connivance with the kind of politics which has internally weakened nations abroad before the enemy has struck from without.

It is best for America to have the fight out here and now.

I wish to give the Democratic Party the opportunity to make its historic decision clearly and without equivocation. The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time.

By declining the honor of the nomination for the presidency, I can restore that opportunity to the convention. I so do.

Chicken logic in bold.

This…The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values.


I’m familiar, thanks. Are you familiar with any of the legislative activities behind his legislation that grew far more progressive in later years? Because you would’ve thought FLSA etc. were the worst corporate sellouts in history. Some leftists said so at the time, you know. In fact, some unions didn’t like New Deal legislation because they thought it propped up management power. But we know, negotiation in any major legislation means corporate authorship. That FDR, the ultimate corporate whore, softly sell us out while petting us with kind words, just like that fellow Obama. They’ve been selling out true progressivism since the 1930s!


This country has been an empire in the making since the beginning. And empires are corrupt by the nature of how they build off of other people. 1st it was the natives and all the excuses as to why we desired and should take their land. When you can act like you are innocent while exterminating a people, you are exceptional.

That term has always bothered me, what we have been exceptional is in creating the most powerful empire ever. And empires are corrupt by their very nature of having to steal from others to build.

Actually empires always fall from within, they collapse because they can’t contain the corruption enough. Internal strife happens and they crumple.

There are many lies told about US history in order to make us seem exceptional. One example here is about WWII. We are the heroes who defeated the nazis. We fought against the evil nazis to save the jews. That is what we tell the children. And it is complete bullshit.

When the jews were fleeing Germany, the west knew what was happening, why the jews were fleeing. And no one wanted the jews in their country. The US forced many jews back to Germany. Anti-semetism was strong in the US at that time. We didn’t want them here and we didn’t care what happened to them.

What forced us into war was the fact that the US and Japan wanted the same territory for their empires and for decades before the war, we had been at odds with them. We opposed them at every point and made claims for the same islands. We aided the russians in their war against Japan. Even sent troops.

And our military force was growing in the pacific. Japan couldn’t keep pace easily enough with our forces. Which is why they decided upon a surprise attack to destroy as much as they could of our fleet. Though they hurt us badly, they failed to destroy our carriers. And the carriers turned the tide.

That was the real cause of WWII. Once we went to war with Japan, Germany declared war on the US and we responded in kind. It was not some noble cause for us, it was to protect the empire and to be able to keep growing. Of course these days we are taught that it was about fighting evil.

What is ignored is that at the time before the war, we had enslaved the population of the Philippines. They were revolting against the dictators that the US put into place and we had troops there to subdue the population. It just turns out that the Japanese were even a worse master than we were. After WWII we promised them their freedom, but instead installed another dictator over them.

And the philippines is just one country, the middle east after WWI, we made deals with the French and British to rule the middle east and install dictators who would be friendly to us. Like the royal Saudi family who still rules. It is why we still support the Saudis in spit of them spending the most money in the middle east upon religious fanatics who them hate the US. Forget the Iranians, they are in a poor second in terrorism. Their beef is with Israel and the Saudis.

And The reason why Israel exists in the 1st place is because the US, France, and Britain hated the jews so much that they didn’t want them in their country. So the grand idea was to create a country where the jews could go and leave those countries. Russia was happy to also agree with that. And until a few decades ago, the evangelicals and conservatives hated the jews. Then the end days movement gathered strength and according to that prophesy, Israel has to exist. And when the end days come, the jews will die or convert to christianity. Which is why they love Israel so much.

I understand Ponyboy’s frustration, my idealism has been destroyed by the reality of what will happen, not what can. I would love to see such a movement succeed, but I lived through the 60s’ and we had such glorious dreams. Equal rights for all, an end to poverty, a fairer society. We stopped one war, but another started. And equal rights never happened, poverty is worse, and we certainly are not a fairer society.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair. And most americans’ salary depends upon a person not understanding. To do so and try to act upon that means risking their job, their standing in a community, their friends, etc. Most people want security, more than freedom. Freedom is a grand idea, but it means a constant fight against those who wish just to be secure.

I know, because that is what I did. I worked in a skilled nursing home for over 21 yrs. When I was retiring, I got my final review. The 1st paragraph- Skip is the most stubborn person who has ever worked here and in spite of all efforts, he insisted upon doing things his way. We were not able to change him. I have always been proud of that 1st paragraph.

The 2nd stated that Skip was the best advocate of patient rights and in taking care of them that we have. And I never would have been that latter, if I accepted the system and kept my mouth shut.

So I know what it is like to fight against the system, I didn’t win. I didn’t change the system. I only fought against it. So I know how difficult it is to change the system. I am almost 68 yrs old and I know what it is like to piss into the wind, pardon my french. I’m in my corner with the cut man, who says throw in the towel. I have lost my optimism that I had when I was young. We were going to change the world, yet BLM still has to be, METOO has to be, all of it still the same old stuff.

It took bloody decades of fighting for the unions to win any concessions. And unions have been broken to a mere shell of what they used to be. And what they gained is steadily being lost. The teachers’ unions might be winning right now, but what about a decade from now? Will they still fight? And will they be all alone? The children of the 60s’ fought until the late 70s’ and then stopped. That is what happens to movements, they are either bought off for awhile or they wither and die.

History repeats itself. The rich lose some battles, but they have never lost the war.



I personally am all for a full blown Revolution, but just as the majority continue to vote for those parties who would keep us on a constant War footing, spreading Death and Human Suffering, they do not have the stomach for the energy needed to Revolt.

As in most other societies, the numbers of those who have reached an enlightened sense of what is needed in a peaceful, progressive nation, and vote accordingly, are generally very small.

I reject the premise that those of us who see better leaders in 3rd party candidates, and vote for them as “pissing in the wind.”

I’ll pray for all of those who are too short sighted and used to voting for Evil, that they may one day achieve a belief that voting for Evil is not in their best interest.


Let’s not forget the other three past presidents of late. Corporate whores Clinton, Bush, and Trump. G


It’s always a difficult matter choosing whether to have to vote for the “lesser of two evils”, or to vote your conscience, which is sometimes not a sensible vote either.
As to revolution, Ten Bears said: “Let it be life.” Here the ones with most of the firepower decided on peace.
I agree it will have to come to revolution because those with power, position, and wealth, won’t go down without using the police and possibly the military at hand to protect their status quo.
Either a lot of protesters will die, or we make sure we have weapons to respond to violent government. G


The majority worry that TPTB will use their weapons against us if we demand they leave power.

TPTB use that Fear to keep us from flooding the streets demanding they leave.

Until we all put Fear aside, we will let Evil Reign.

I personally would rather die than live in Fear.


You didn’t catch his sarcasm.


You assert arguments that I don’t make.

You make me out to be an anti-capitalist, which I’m not. I understand that in a democracy (which we mostly don’t have at this point) that individuals with various interests are allowed participation in government through lobbyists, etc., and that includes the interests of corporations.

I have never once asserted the ridiculous logic that you have projected upon my arguments, that any negotiation with corporations or wealthy individuals by any government representative in crafting legislation thus is equal to a complete selling out.

If only we had an FDR today. Since you have seen fit to beat me over the head with your dishonest arguments and projections using FDR, I am inspired to reply with FDR’s proclamations against concentration of wealth and power that align with my “chicken logic”.

One thing I understand now. We certainly are not allies. Not even close.

We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace–business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.

They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.

Damn “chicken logic” I tell you. As Lieberman would say…cries from “the far left”.

My guess is you would have been fighting against FDR at that time.


I’m merely reflecting the reality of your argument. Social Security left out a large portion of the workforce initially—far less coverage than the ACA, by miles. Did Roosevelt sell people out when to get it passed, he negotiated with the Farm Bureau (a lobby) and insurers (corporations)? Was the bill written by corporations? I’m following the logic of your accusations against Obama and Democrats regarding the ACA and I have to say “yes” regarding Roosevelt. He sold a bunch of people out. He should not have done that, emboldened southern Democratic and industrial opposition to the bill, and watched it fail I guess. Some unions were skeptical too—the payroll tax was hardly exciting—so he could’ve enjoyed more hits from his left as well.

I guess from now on, in any compromise legislation facing a strong filibuster, where skeptical members can exercise a lot of leverage, if provisions don’t all go my way, I know I was just sold out by corporations.


Blah blah blah.

If FDR were running against Clinton, he would have been cast in the same light as the DNC cast Sanders in.

And you would have gone along with the criticism.

The fact is FDR was fighting against corporate power, not aligning with corporate power.

So, again, please point to Obama fighting for the public option at the time it really counted. He didn’t. He didn’t want it.

I mean you can deny this fact until you are blue in the face, or red, or purple. I say purple.


I think he wanted it, but knew he wasn’t going to get it and softballed things as a result. I never denied that either. As I note above, my opinion was one of his biggest mistakes was letting Baucus waste all summer getting strung along by Grassley, not that he really had a choice.

On the FDR thing, I think you have it completely backwards. I suspect you’d be critical of him like other Leftists at the time for propping up management power and working with business interests. As I point out, he negotiated with business lobbies on Social Security, exempting entire industries. He included a regressive payroll tax in the bill that unionists denounced at the time. He made deals to get it done, some good, some not-so-good, but he got the law passed, though it wasn’t until years after his death it became anything like it is now.

I think we’ve beat this one to death now. Let’s just hope WWIII that certain progressives sought to avoid via the peace candidate of 2016 doesn’t come to fruition.


My God you are just so wrong. I backed Sanders, and Sanders never has asserted that corporations have no part whatsoever to play in their interests being served.

It’s the balance of power. Given what FDR was up against, it is amazing what was accomplished even with the compromises you cite.

Corporate State Democrats are aligned WITH that balance of power favoring corporations. There is plenty of evidence to show this is true, and the ACA legislative process is just chock full of evidence of this, that of course you sidestep and ignore.

You after all, insist that the DLC, the Clinton actions as President giving more power to corporations was all just because the people demanded it, which is absurd on the face of demonstrable fact.

More chicken logic…Dear Reader, this is from FDR. I know it is hard to distinguish KC2669’s arguments from FDR (sarcasm)

We believe in a way of living in which political democracy and free private enterprise for profit should serve and protect each other—to ensure a maximum of human liberty not for a few but for all.

It has been well said that “the freest government, if it could exist, would not be long acceptable, if the tendency of the laws were to create a rapid accumulation of property in few hands, and to render the great mass of the population dependent and penniless.”

Today many Americans ask the uneasy question: Is the vociferation that our liberties are in danger justified by the facts?

Today’s answer on the part of average men and women in every section of the country is far more accurate than it would have been in 1929—for the very simple reason that during the past nine years we have been doing a lot of common sense thinking. Their answer is that if there is that danger it comes from that concentrated private economic power which is struggling so hard to master our democratic government. It will not come as some (by no means all) of the possessors of that private power would make the people believe-from our democratic government itself.


I’m talking legislation, not speeches. FDR negotiated with business interests and left people uncovered in entire industries under Social Security. He did so with the FLSA too. He’s my favorite president and I have a shelf full of books I’ve read on the New Deal. The exact same criticisms of him that you make of Obama were made by Leftists at the time. You can ignore that fact if you want, but I won’t. There’s always compromise to get any major piece of legislation done and it always leaves certain quarters upset.


I see everything through the very precise lens that accounts for the FACT that corporate power and that of super wealthy individuals is completely out of balance with the interests of the masses.

I see everything through the very precise lens that has witnessed the turning toward that corporate power and that of super wealthy individuals over the last 40 years in particular, and has resulted in historic inequality that parallels the conditions of inequality that FDR sought to address.

You presume I’m doctrinaire such that I would not consider favorably an actual political fight to more balance the interests of the masses, e.g., if Obama had come out very publicly for the public option that he ran on, when it mattered, even if that fight ultimately failed.

No such fight occurred.

The reason no such fight occurred, was the politics was carefully managed toward the political weight of the corporate players that of course had to be involved in the process of leaving the monopoly of Big Insurers and Big Pharma the major infrastructure of health care delivery in this country.

You can project a simplicity of analysis on me all you want. It does not make it accurate.

More chicken logic…Dear Reader, this is from FDR I’ve been inspired by KC2669 to post FDR quotes

> The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism—ownership of Government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.


Show me where any US 3rd party did anything to win, instead of destroying the party it splintered from. And as you point out a majority keep voting for those parties. And no attempts to get them to switch their votes to a 3rd party has ever done anything but swing the vote to one side.

So if you just want to remain the deal breaker with 3rd party votes, then do so. Because that is all you ever will be. None of your ‘better’ leaders will ever be elected. None have ever been elected. We have a locked system for two parties. Just getting on the ballot for a 3rd party takes tremendous effort. And you have to repeat for every election. And still they only get a small % of the votes.

It is not short sighted, it is being realistic about the system that no one has ever been able to change. The only way a party changes is internally. That is where you should expend your effort. It still will be difficult but it can be done. It’s been done in the past with many examples.

Otherwise, yes you are just pissing in the wind. You have made no difference except to always elect the worst evil possible. That is your legacy. And you will remain defiant and mostly irreverent.

As you even state, there is only a small number of people who will pursue peace and progressive policies. And being one of them for over 6 decades, we have stayed a small minority for all that time. And in the history of the US, we have always been a small minority. The majority is not going to be for peace and progressive policies. Americans are easily scared and led into war during the history of the US.

I protested before the Iraq war. Watched how Bush and Chaney ginned up the fear. Watched as 70% of Americans say yes, let’s go to war. And it isn’t going to change, they are easily led by fear, the past election proved that. Trump appealed to the fear and hate and got a strong minority to vote for him. Appealing logically to people has never worked, people react on emotion. It always sways them better than reason. Always will.

Keep praying, hasn’t worked so far and never will, but hey miracles never happen. You live in a warmongering country that has built an empire using war. Americans are proud of the military history and ignorant on what that means. And they need that empire to continue. And it will until it falls. And it will fall, just when is unknown.


“When I saw him spending all his time of ease and recreation with the big partners of Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., with such men as the Astors and company, maybe I ought to have had better sense than to have believed he would ever break down their big fortunes to give enough to the masses to end poverty.”

Huey Long, getting ready to run from the left against Roosevelt.

Or, Earl Browder:

“Is not this trickery the hallmark of this Wall Street tool, this President who always stabs in the back while he embraces? How unctuous is his empty solicitude for the ragged, hungry children…with the ruthlessness of a devoted Wall Street lackey spending billions for war and profits and trampling on the faces of the poor.”

Sounds familiar. Should I dig through my books to get some quotes from unionists so you can see how they viewed Roosevelt’s regressive payroll tax?



We both have differing ideals and how we must get there.

That’s ok.


I respect your right to believe what you do.

Perhaps one or both of us will live to see a “sea change” in people’s behavior change as far as support for the Evildoers goes.


The fact remains that TODAY there exists a major imbalance of power between corporate interests and that of super wealthy individuals, and that of the interests of the masses, and that imbalance of power has resulted in historic inequality in this country.

The fact remains, that Republicans and Corporate State Democrats have favored such interests while creating that imbalance of power.

That imbalance of power was determinant in leaving monopolized power of Big Insurers and Big Pharma largely in tact, as the major infrastructure of healthcare delivery in this country.

Sure, go ahead and throw arguments at me that, according to you, I would have made against FDR at the time.

Had Obama fought for the public option when it mattered, I would have regarded that as a constructive step toward more justice in the hideous for profit “healthcare” system that is left mostly in tact by the ACA.

Just curious, were the groups advocating for single payer, the physicians groups or nurses groups afforded a place at the negotiating table during the crafting of ACA?

Did Obama ever put any pressure on Lieberman to change his stance? How about the other Democrats who were supposedly for the public option? I mean, again, where was the fight? When was the fight? Surely there is some evidence of that fight, right?

FDR would be castigated by today’s Corporate State Democrats as having notions that need “modernized”, just like Bill Clinton did with supporting the passage of the Financial Services Modernization ACT.

FDR would be sidelined, just like the Progressive Caucus in the House is sidelined each and every time they propose a budget.

It is that politics that you apologize for time and again, that would sideline an FDR today.