@Cassiodorus @Cassiodorus I need to think about the specifics more but the bonus video was simply priceless.

"He [the DNC's new treasurer] is the person who can go to rich business folk and explain to them why it's the Democratic party under which they will make the most money and succeed -- and by the way, give some of it to us."
-- Andrew Tobias

Yeah, I'd say that sums it up in a nutshell. Interestingly, I went to my local Democrats Abroad web site looking to see what local meetings I could attend and... voila... there were none. I emailed them. It'll be interesting to see what they say.

Andrew Tobias explains the Democratic Party

@detroitmechworks at Gos when Barney Frank engaged the community there.
I called him out on a couple of things and felt really bad about it later. I've since learned to respect that they at least engaged us and that was courageous to some degree.
Especially at TOP.
My suspicion was, later, validated (third way).

to read and respond to comments.
I have great deal of respect for those that answer openly and honestly. It lets me honestly disagree with them without personal animus.
On the other hand, those that obfuscate and spin?
It's probably the fastest way to earn my enmity.

@detroitmechworks

No word salad, please! Can't abide it.

Dude.

to read and respond to comments.
I have great deal of respect for those that answer openly and honestly. It lets me honestly disagree with them without personal animus.
On the other hand, those that obfuscate and spin?
It's probably the fastest way to earn my enmity.

@SnappleBC

... Right now, Russia is the thing you are to worry about. But so far, the evidence presented has been nearly non-existent. Yes, if it turns out that a foreign power is colluding with our President that is a serious matter. But the charges outpace the evidence here by miles and miles. ...

Lucky that there's been no evidence of anything but yet another false statement and even more false accusations in yet another apparent regime change effort by the US PTB.

But damn lucky that the Clintons didn't get in again, since (unlike Putin, who may suck in some respects but is sane, intelligent and who places public pensions over military expenditures even while lunatics mass on his people's borders and point missiles at his citizens, hoping to initiate Mutual Assured Destruction) the foreign power Hillary was definitely going to collude with as President is provably a pathological, murderous nutcase.

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/09/hillary-clinton-goes-militaristic-ha...

Hillary Clinton Goes to Militaristic, Hawkish Think Tank, Gives Militaristic, Hawkish Speech
Glenn Greenwald

September 9 2015

... As for Israel itself, Clinton eagerly promised to shower it with a long, expensive, and dangerous list of gifts. ...

... Echoing the vow of several GOP candidates to call Netanyahu right away after being elected, Clinton promised: “I would invite the Israeli prime minister to the White House during my first month in office to talk about all of these issues and to set us on a course of close, frequent consultation right from the start, because we both rely on each other for support as partners, allies and friends.” ...

At least Trump upset the Golden Apple-cart a little bit and slowed the destructive process a trifle, even if he also did babble promises to the Likud/AIPAC/certain billionaire donors. The things Hillary would have got done would likely have been the death of us by now. And by Her projections, will you know Her.

One of my cherished goals is to try to get "the left" and "the right" to understand that we are all getting screwed by "the man". I also want to sound reasonable and rational. So I made some notes from my own perspective.

1) Vote your political self-interest. The corporate media tell us every day that our self-interest doesn't matter, and that what matters is "Russia!" or some other such nonsense.

It remains to be seen whether “Russia!” is nonsense so we set ourselves up to look just as ridiculous as the Democrats do now. Claims have been made. Nearly zero supporting evidence has been produced. The story today is not credible but that might change. So I’d reword this slightly, perhaps…

Vote your political self-interest. Legacy media and talking heads tell us every day that we can’t figure out our own self-interest. Instead, we must worry about whatever they are worrying about. Stop and think for yourself. Look at your own actual day. What would make your life better? Vote for that. Right now, Russia is the thing you are to worry about. But so far, the evidence presented has been nearly non-existent. Yes, if it turns out that a foreign power is colluding with our President that is a serious matter. But the charges outpace the evidence here by miles and miles. I'm more worried about my ability to put food on the table. I'll worry about Russia when there is reason to. What do [em]you[/em] worry about?

2) Know your political self-interest. If you thought your self-interest was defined by more capitalism, you lost touch with history and with ecology. Capitalism will have exhausted the planet by the time your grandchildren are grown up. A stellar example of how this coming exhaustion is playing out now can be seen in gjohnsit's diary of recent: "Working yourself to death is now something to aspire to." The owning class is so desperate for sources of profit in this era of ecological exhaustion that it has turned to capitalist ideology as its main resource. Of course, people have worked themselves to death since the long 16th century; the difference today is that capitalism would die pretty soon if government were not propping it up, and capitalist ideology is the way in which they keep government in the capitalist orbit. An alternative version of self-interest would be based on humanism, on communities of people demanding their rights.

Uncharacteristically, I that that diary of gjohnsit’s was weak. I felt the stretch from the ad to the title sounded like something I’d expect to hear on GOS. Without a lot more supporting evidence for the claims in your version, I’d go down more immediate lines.

“We can look at the realities of today to see what “more capitalism” gets us. We have a two-tier judicial system. We have for profit penal systems and health systems… both of which are monstrous for distinct reasons. We have earthquakes in Oklahoma and poisonous water in Flint (and about 4000 other cities). And as a finale, we have continuous war. The United States has been at war for the last ???16??? years almost always with muddled strategies and muddled goals… sometimes justified with complete lies to the public. We dropped 26,000 very expensive bombs last year and you and I paid for them. Are you happy with the return on your investment? Are you content with the civilian death and destruction that caused >>. Frankly, I think I would have benefited more by domestic expenditures.

What I'm trying to do is stick with easily supportable claims and to bring things close to home in as neutral a fashion as I can. OK, I'm also pressing the anti-war angle but I suspect that might be a more commonly held opinion if people knew the truth.

I like the direction you're going with these though which is to encourage people to think for themselves rather than pushing a specific ideology. I wish there was some easy way to tell them, "Here's how you can research". I'm going through this with my brother right now about the sarin Gas in Syria. He does a quick google and comes up with a thousand legacy media articles detailing how Assad used Sarin gas on his people. It probably took him 5 minutes. I'm STILL wading through that Ray McGovern video trying to support each one of his statement. It's going to end up taking me 15 hours.

@shaharazade So I only commented on the voter guide part. But what I know is that periodically some new Democrat surfaces on my radar. Of course DKOS calls every last one of them "fine progressives". I, of course, am not so sanguine about that. I wondered if we (or someone) could host a discussion board for them... one board per candidate or somesuch... wherein discussions could be had.

When someone is brand new to the political world, like the school teacher I was just looking at, they have no real track record so it's hard to figure out where they stand. But new blood is pretty much the only hope so I need to find a way to vet them. I was seeing this proposal as a possible answer.

You surely do not think that picking any candidate 'available' and wasting time yakking about them for 2018 or 20 whatever will somehow be of use? Holy shit Cassiodorus is asking for a debate between the 'progressive' and assorted monsters of both party's who run for office? Why? Perhaps I have misread this post. Why would anyone of a sound mind want any of this current crop of pols or any future candidates that the current duopoly partisan system offers to even be considered. Are you speaking of individuals outside the duopoly who are running? Well good luck with that. I see no point in debating any candidates that are part and parcel of this horror show. WTF?

@riverlover they are nearly all tainted.
If I did run in 2018 and win, my operating mantra would be:
"This is what a genuine Progressive Democrat sounds like".
" These are the things we stand for. These are the things the current crop of Dinos never talk about. If you feel moved by what I am saying, YOU must be a genuine Progressive Democrat".
Then sit back and see who salutes.
However, I am way open to suggestions.

is desired, get more real people in and professional politicians out. A learning curve in a political position is good, if that person questions everything. Spending a short political career asking 'why?' can be good. Shakes up entrenched systems if there are 100 people asking 'why?' often.

I have good roots. My father as a second career taught modern European History at a University. He was quite leftist for the time. But he had a good friend Who was a Bircher. They could mix it up.[The Bircher had a Japanese wife and a farm with free-range hogs, in itself, interesting. Hogs in the woods.]

It's a plan to entertain.