Home | About | Donate

The Democratic Party’s Anti-Bernie Elites Have a Huge Stake in Blaming Russia


Yes, Rakal, I've made that exact point in other comments.

Nonetheless, he's part and parcel of the duopoly at this point, and while I like the platform the D-Party has given him and his ability to stay on message, I'm deeply skeptical about the whole thing being anything other than the typical bait and switch the D-Party establishment pulls every election cycle.


probably the best course of action right now, certainly. for some reason, people forget (or never knew) that party leaders make rules and that this rule-making power unique to leadership prevents any internal takeover form happening. See: superdelegates.

it's a simple decision: do the hard work of replacing the Democratic party with a people's party of some kind OR attempt the empirically impossible by taking over a Democratic party in which you have no access to the rule-making mechanism used to preserve neoliberal power. Which one is the least likely to succeed?

Good luck to you.


The MSM is helping the population, to move on.

They don't want the People to concern themselves with all of the 'as yet' unproven crimes and greed driven misdoings of this White House Crime Family.

I suppose the use of the word 'Complicit' might be applicable here.


The juxtaposition of Bernie and Perez was ludicrous--how is this roadshow going over out there?--On the Chris Hayes show, Perez was all boiler-plate, dodging direct questions asked of what his partner seated next to him just said--If nothing else the contrast drawn was stark!


I wish I could share your confidence, but to me the decision doesn't appear all that simple.

I'm probably missing something important - please help me if I am - but I think of the DP via a "train robbery" metaphor: If bandits (or corporate Democrats) highjack your train, isn't it a lot simpler/easier/faster (point taken about the DNC's structural impedements) to take it back, rather than build a whole new railroad?

The point being that if the "take it back"ers (Can't use "resistance" now, can we? :wink: ) don't have enough power to evict the "squatters," how in the world can they effectively resist the massed forces of the right?


Perhaps, he has conceded numerous battles, merely to keep his job.

Two weeks before the Democratic Convention, Bernie said, "We're going to take this fight to the convention."

Then, in a two day period he had a meeting with Obama, then one with Clinton.

He was a broken man immediately after these meetings.

Say what you will, but Bernie has vulnerabilities and if the past repeated itself with Bernie, I am not confident he could fight 'City Hall' all of the way.


I'm thinking Independent, like Bernie. The ground game was used for Perot. I wonder if it can be reawakened....


yeah, people booing Perez in some places--LOL.


… The most fascinating take away –from my perspective- is one of the links Normon Solomon provided when he mentioned;
“Relevant history was irrelevant.”
… This link references a fairly long, and very in-depth article from Foreign Affairs Magazine –which we all know is the magazine published by ‘The Council on Foreign Relations (which is also one the primary sources of ‘setting the narrative’ for much of what filters down/up to the neo-liberal elite, from a very western-hemispheric perspective)…
… The author (ROBERT DAVID ENGLISH is Associate Professor of International Relations, Slavic Languages & Literature, and Environmental Studies at the University of Southern California) spends a lot of ink going over the early years of our jaundiced, economic approach to the collapse of the Soviet Union, even using the term “shock therapy” to help define that agenda. He mentions Bill Clintons focus on Boris Yeltsin as the Wests ‘useful patsy’ for that same Western, neo-liberal bent on forcing the Russian state, as well as its population, to succumb to an IMF's (International Monetary Fund) own, all-to-familiar version of 'The Shock Doctrine.’ George Bush’s own neo-conservative policies are also included in this very sharp essay as well…
… It is a long –but highly informative- article that goes back to the early days (after the collapse), and continues right up to the present, with our current Western, political hacks continuing to demonize the Soviet State (including Putin), rather than taking stock of our own long history of myopic planning with regards to this very critical, geo-political relationship…
… My own take on this subject is simply that if the Foreign Affairs magazine is presenting this new –highly progressive- narrative to its own Council on Foreign Relations audience –can we now begin to see this anti-Putin echo chamber finally receding into the horizon? Hope springs eternal…
… Don’t miss that FA article –it’s a good one…


Democrats Contemplate How To Forfeit Their Power Upon Regaining The Senate -On HP, Schumer states he might restore filibuster. Thanks much, to the DINO wing of the Republican party.


Under some circumstance, you'd be right. I just don't think it applies in this one, which is why I emphasize how rules are made.

You and three kids form a club. You build the coolest clubhouse: it has kegs and pole dancers! Every kid wants to join. You start letting them in. But in doing so, you make a set of rules for the club, the first being the rule that only you and your first three friends make the rules and that the cool clubhouse is your exclusive property.

You think a hundred new members is going to take your clubhouse away from you?

Who you invited in, you can always disinvite out. Because you make the rules!

Parties are quite literally private clubs. And you weren't one of the first three kids...:slight_smile:

So again, to beat this analogy to a bloody death, if you were one of the new members who decided you wanted to ditch the pole dancers for, say, PS4s, which would be easier? Build your own clubhouse and make your own rules? Or stick around and hope the current club owners have a change of heart?

I like using the childhood analogy here because I think, when we were all kids, we understood this dynamic so much better than after a few years of adulthood convincing us of our powerlessness.

American politics is a merciless structure. It was never designed to facilitate change. On the contrary, it was explicitly designed to prevent it except under only the most dire circumstances where a large consensus emerged.

To operate in such a stultifying system, you have little choice but to form your own club and put in the work of building it up to the size where it can dethrone one of the current clubs. It's the only way this can be done.

And I'm not saying this is easy. It's not. It is, by design, likely to fail as it almost always has. But unless you're ready to head for the hills with the contents of Bubba Joe's God 'n Guns! (TM), it's the only real choice you have.


And it looks like Bernie might be too. Bernie and Ellison are in Omaha, supporting an anti-abortionist for mayor. Even Perez had the sense to duck this one and he sounded downright decent and far to the left of Bernie and Ellison. So much for the Unity tour. We're really getting to a screw 'em all we go gotta build our own moment. Or maybe we missed that bus altogether.



Folks, whether in the end we take over the Democratic or the Green Party, we can't turn back now and again become involved in the evil vs. lesser evil collusion the corporate elite has been ramming down our throats since time immemorial. We must be committed to progressive ideals from here on out, i.e. no more corporate or establishment Democrats running under false banners. This past election, we made a huge step forward, and we need to maintain that momentum. The young and enlightened are on our side, in time the rest of the marginalized in America will join us as well, once the last person sees what a con our current government is. Let us keep the faith. These may be painful times, but we shall overcome in the end.


If these neoliberal idiots want to keep taking legal(?) bribes and still continue to get votes, they could at least try adopting some Libertarian ideas like re-legalizing prostitution and ending the WOD. They could even adopt some Liberal Gun Club ideas (https://www.theliberalgunclub.com) and get some votes. And they could come right out and call themselves Conservative Democrats instead of posing as Progressive Democrats and repair their lying deceitful bastard images somewhat.

Direct Democracy


But if you hold up abortion rights as a litmus test around here, the D-Party apologencia will show up to scold you for being a purist.

The D-Party tent is big. Big enough for a spot where liberals can sit in a corner and STFU.


Nothing better to do than continually bash the guy who Woke Up the Nation?


Good analogies, drone1066. And I’m still chuckling about the mental picture I got from “Bubba Joe's God 'n Guns! (TM).”

As far as the “build our own new club” approach goes, I know a lot of people here think the Green Party is a viable option. I wish I could agree, but having had two less-than-salubrious experiences there, I’m extremely skeptical. (At least for now…)

My latest “old dog’s new trick” is Twitter, where I’m getting the impression that the DSA is trending. (Kinda surprised I don’t hear more about them here.) That’s probably going to be my next turn…

Of course, all these things that take a lot of time may run out of it, as far as the climate is concerned.


or the Independents, like Bernie!


I'm looking at Independents. It's already there and has a yuuuuuge membership, Bernie among them. :O)


Da po po Mericans tricked by da big bad Wussia. i wed all the stowies and I know it's twue. Or maybe it was a wabbit and not Wussia.