Fuck you too.
1 Like
Hi Beli_Tsari:
LOL, âsulking like Conanthe Barbarian,â a great visualâ but I just thought of one more for the hillary. She.s like Polyphemous, from the voyage trip home for Odysseus in the Odyssey. Polyphempus is the one eyed and horrific giant who thinks he can control the world. Like him, Hillaryâs one eye focuses only on her greed and that of the corporates-----but in the end, she too is blinded by her own hypocrisy! : )
1 Like
Gee, thanks? Iâm not sure, Iâll be able to sleep tonight, though?
1 Like
Here it is in 9 mins and 44 sec from Jimmy Dore and FDR.
Clearly and succinctly
FDRâs OPEN LETTER to TOM PEREZ - Written 80 Years Ago | Jimmy Dore
Hereâs the letter from FDR to Democrats that JD is reading from
FDRâs Letter to the Democratic Convention Delegates in 1940
Franklin D. Roosevelt Letter to the Democratic Convention
July 18, 1940Members of the Convention:
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.
3 Likes
Been looking at the Constitution just now. I am not seeing specific wording saying that the President can not fire judges. Someone who is more knowledgeable please chime in if I missed something.
Sometimes one must sacrifice in the short term for long term gains. As long as her core ideals donât show to be compromised, I am ok with that.
Check this out:
if the impeachment power is used to punish judges for their rulings, it undermines the vital independence of our judicial branch (from your link)
This is a false argument because the judiciary is NOT independent. If each new president can fill in empty judicial seats, then they are making political picks. What I would like to see President Sanders do is fire all trump appointments and create a truly independent board to oversea judicial selections. The judiciary must be taken out of the hands of the politicians.
(From the Constitution)
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent
of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Sen-
ators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with
the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambas-
sadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the su-
preme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose
Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which
shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest
the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper,
in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads
of Departments.
This section seems to give some amount of leeway into how lower court judges can be appointed.
i donât know if youâve been keeping with current events, but Sanders and AOC are not aligned with the Democratic party, They are despised by it probably even more than Trump is. They are members because they made the decision to have a better chance at being elected into office within the context of the single party system, (both partyâs are the same except in name). Their tack is to try and change the party from the inside. Your right though; AOC is out of line for supporting anything Pelosi supports, military funding, she even voted for Pelosi as speaker of the house - so sheâs not perfect. Underneath whatever confused approach and the mistakes sheâs made in her fledgling position, AOC is a Progressive. Sanders definitely is progressive, and there are a couple of others.
Newsflash: Socialism doesnât mean the same thing it did two hundred years ago any more than democracy means what it did, or republicanism, or libertarianism. or capitalism or communism or any other ism. Hell, it doesnât mean the same thing it did 25 years ago.
Holding to the strict definition of any of these is Reminiscent of Bill Clinton Saying I didnât have sexual relations with that woman.
Sanders has addressed that question âAre you a socialistâ many times quite informatively.
Whether Sanders is a socialist isnât the point anyway, Its whether hes the best choice - and he is.+
Taxes were high under Eisenhower because he inherited a country from recently departed FDR, and Sanders is closer in policy to FDR than anyone whoâs held office in all of American history. FDR was the most popular president in all American history because of his consideration for the American citizen rather than corporate interests. Republicans consider anything short of full out right wing Fascism to be socialism, but have no problem handing out billions in subsidies to the richest among corporations every year. This is funny because the NAZI party, (National Socialist German Workersâ Party), not far out of alignment with the current American right wing, was in fact Fascist, and traveled under the title of socialist. Subsidies for those who need them is where the corporations and the right wing disagree with democratic socialism, otherwise they are not opposed at all.
Câmon you reporters: itâs CARMEN YulĂn Cruz. All you have to do is google it. Sheâs been the Joan of Arc of Puerto Rico fighting against T-rump and his minions practically single handedly and you canât even get her name right? For shame. And nobody in comments noticed it either. And yet the commenters can spend hours on line cranking on about E Warren and her Native American racism. I despair of the Left.
1 Like
What left?
You do realize that was most likely a typo? Bad proof reading by an editor being the culprit more likely than poor research on the part of the author. Not excusable for a prominent media publication like Commondreams, but certainly not worthy of the unfounded (IMHO) wrath you are throwing at it.
No Warren is ahead in the national polls -there is a three way tie in Iowa----and Warren leads in N.H.----and Biden remains strong in SC----And I beg to differ I think polls tend to be very accurate----itâs some of the outcomes that should be questioned-------And thank you AOC for your kind words about Warren.
So Warren needs to confess that she will raise taxes to get to a Medicare for all plan----Yet Trump ran on " I will lower costs-----it will cover everyoneâit will be the best healthcare ever" And TO THIS DAY we have yet to see this great plan----BUT I DONâT HEAR THE MEDIA BEATING TRUMP OVER THE HEAD ABOUT THE DETAILS OF HIS PLAN. WHY ARE DEMOCRATS HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD?
And just understand if Bernie is the nominee-----he will be attacked not just by republicans but the whole establishment-----just as the establishment is very nervous about Warrenâs 2% wealth tax.
Right now Biden is dropping like a rock-----and itâs not in polling itâs in money-----and as I said before the establishment is looking for a replacement for Biden and it is not Warren.
RonboâŚ
Donât be too harsh. In fact, the âmeaningâ of words, outside technical jargon, is malleable, depending upon common usage. Words like âliberalâ, âdemocratâ, conservative, republican (once a synonym of âdemocratâ in US usage) and such are fuzzy concepts, and two people can use the same word and mean different things. Such words, therefore, must be explored in any conversation in which they crop up.
Itâs part of the beauty of human language that uncertainty of meaning exists. It allows us poetry, a chance to exercise our individual creativity. It sometimes does make prosaic conversation challenging, however. We need to be aware of, and address that challenge in those circumstances.
I have never read Plato but I have read Marx and he says much the same in his Materialist Conception of History. Its point is the history of the humanity is made up of a series of fundamental changes in social relations and that has an profound impact upon peoplesâ ideas and politics.
Yes, I agree society is constantly evolving and it is trying to understand the causes of such by placing them is a historical perspective. Few, for instance know, that the Scandinavian countries a couple of centuries ago were subject to famine conditions so the present state of prosperity is indeed an achievement.
Can you explain the rise of the Right in Denmark and Sweden? Is it simply a refusal to share their wealth with the less fortunate? I donât believe it is that simple.
It is a deeper alienation that all working people feel. A separation between themselves and control of their society, a powerlessness possessed by us all under capitalism.
I think I acknowledged that compared with many countries the Scandinavians are the more fortunate. Finland for instance give teachers the same status as doctors.
I do claim that the Welfare State in these countries are being reversed with budget cuts and the elections of more conservative governments⌠A view of the Happiest Country in the World, a couple of years back
I have to add that I appreciate that our disagreement has remained civil, a rarity on the web
âSocialism doesnât mean the same thing it did two hundred years agoâ
I accept language does change its usage but should it be permitted without challenge.
âWhen I use a word,â Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, âit means just what I choose it to mean â neither more nor less.â
âThe question is,â said Alice, âwhether you can make words mean so many different things.â
I guess the most recent case of word usurpation is the term libertarian
The right-winger, Murray Rothbard has publicly admitted to their stealing of the word libertarian from genuine anarchists:
âOne gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, âour side,â had captured a crucial word from the enemy . . . âLibertariansâ . . . had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over . . .â (The Betrayal of the American Right)
Another example is the DEMOCRATIC Peoples Republic of Korea, on par with the incorporation of socialist in the Nazi name to confuse and deceive.
1 Like
My take is that though Wall Street has great disdain concerning Warren, the DNC establishment thinks she may be malleable enough to support her when all the other centrists have gone down in flames in the hope of her grabbing the Progressive vote in the general.
As you know many use the word socialist to describe their policies and it was one of the reasons that Marx chose to use the term communist to differentiate his socialism from the other interpretations. Engels still used the word socialism to mean communism in the 1890s hence the title of his work Socialism Utopian and Scientific.
Some will say socialism has been tried and failed in both its models, Labourism and Leninism. I would suggest that it hasnât been tried at all and therefore cannot have failed. Neither was socialism except in name. (But I will be accused of the No True Scotsman fallacy, I know.)
What can be said for certain to have failed so far, has been the attempts to build a strong socialist movement to overthrow capitalism and establish a socialist society.
Why it has not happened when all the objective material conditions are present is indeed a big question. One that I have no definitive answer, other than conflicting ideologies have proved stronger, nationalism, racism, religion, reformism.
People today should look to Eugene Debs and his rival Daniel de Leon as inspiration and recognize the difference they have with Sanders and AOC. But I adhere to the principles of the World Socialist Party of the United States.
http://www.wspus.org/
1 Like
I realize this comment will not be popular: Frankly, I think all of this is quite moot because I donât see the current White House occupant going anywhere in 2020, unless he dies in office. Iâve thought this since he took office. He does nothing legally and with few, if any, consequences. I expect him to get back in one way or the other. Also, the same corrupt âelectionâ system that installed him is still in place including the Electoral College. And heâs even weakened the system. So why wouldnât he get another term, regardless of how people vote on a corrupt and easily-hackable voting system? Iâm just being pragmatic and realistic rather than engaging in wishful-thinking, which only leads to disappointment in the end at âelectionâ time.
1 Like