The Democratic Party Civil War Has Begun
I pointed out last week how a grassroots insurgency was threatening the corrupt Democratic establishment, which is in the process of co-opting 'The Resistance'.
This week the Empire Struck Back, and Bernie Sanders was the target.
Just check out these headlines:
Sheldon Whitehouse: 'Wall Street money' backed Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton
Bernie Sanders’s Misguided Attacks on the “Liberal Elite”
And especially this last one.
‘Russians Bots’ Is Latest Smear Campaign Against Sanders Progressives
The Russian election interference narrative has devolved into Clinton loyalists attempting to rehabilitate the Clinton brand, so it was inevitable that the narrative would be used to attack Sen. Bernie Sanders and his supporters. These attacks have ranged from baseless allegations that Sanders supporters are Russian stooges to reducing their criticisms of Hillary Clinton to being the result of Russian bot-fueled propaganda.
Months after the election, Clinton supporters are still re-litigating the argument that she was a good candidate, which is, in essence, the effect of their claims that the Russian government hired people to pose as “Bernie Bros” to inflame progressives’ criticisms of Clinton. There has not been any evidence to support these claims, yet the allegations have been sustained throughout the past several weeks.
You know you are dealing with a deeply sick and corrupt political party when it rejects and smears the most popular politician in America, not to mention his supporters, which are the most enthusiastic and motivated part of your political base.
So what brought this on?
These two articles should give you an idea.
Virginia
In the race for Virginia's governorship, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) has thrown his support Tuesday behind a candidate challenging the Democratic establishment's preferred choice. It's not exactly a surprising move for a former progressive presidential candidate who nearly upended the candidacy of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who would go on to lose to outsider Republican nominee Donald Trump.
Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam has garnered the support of "nearly every Democrat in the state legislature, congressional delegation and statewide office," The Washington Post reported. Sanders has backed Tom Perriello, citing his progressive ideals. The Democratic primary is scheduled for June.
During a private fundraiser, Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) asked Bernie Sanders supporters to join her re-election campaign in 2018.
“All of you who are Bernie supporters … I need you. I want you. I want to talk to you. I want you to be part of our effort,” McCaskill said. “We can’t get divided in a state like Missouri or we’re cooked.” McCaskill has previously voiced concern she is worried about facing a Democratic Primary challenger from the progressive wing of the party, though no candidate has yet emerged to challenge her.
“I’m a little worried about a primary against me because I think the Republicans would want to return the favor,” she said. “I think the Republicans might give a lot of money to one of my primary opponents doing a similar thing to what I did for Todd Akin,” in reference to ads McCaskill ran in favor of Todd Akin, the most extreme conservative candidate, during the 2012 GOP Primary.
McCaskill has received criticism from Sanders Supporters for her centrist stances, such as recently claiming Democrats blocking Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch would put the Supreme Court in “jeopardy.” McCaskill also voted in favor of most of Trump cabinet nominees.
During the 2016 Democratic Primaries, McCaskill served as a surrogate for the Clinton Campaign, having endorsed her for President in 2013, two years before Clinton formally announced her campaign. In June 2015, she complained the media was giving him a free pass because ““I think Bernie is too liberal to gather enough votes in this country to become president.”
The corporate Democratic establishment is starting to get a little nervous from the threats by grassroots groups like #WeWillReplaceYou, which has warned specific members of congress it may challenge them.
The perfect response to this uprising was voiced by none other than Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
“Respectfully to Sen. [Bernie] Sanders, we are already a grassroots party,” Schultz told MSNBC’s “For the Record with Greta.”
And America is already great.
This civil war is a good and necessary thing for Democracy. It absolutely has to happen, and it has to Go Big.
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren got together to introduce a bill to make public college free for the working class.
He also intends to introduce a "Medicare-for-all, single-payer" health care plan.
Comments
@gjohnsit
Speaking as one magically converted by the Clinton campaign into a White, male, racist, sexist, basement-dwelling, chair-hurling (and I can't at the moment recall the rest) - oh, yes, free-stuff-taker - I'm feeling very discriminated against by the corporate establishment and their lackeys.
But I think that their real problem was that reality has a well-known liberal bias and kept showing Hillary in a real light, which was totally unfair and probably RUSSIAN!!!-influenced. And it just won't stop!
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
No, the "resistance" is
not. Granted, the establishment is doing it's damndest to minimize, marginalize and otherwise deflate the "resistance," but it's mostly organic. It's more bottom up than it is top down. That's not to say that there aren't top down "Establishment forces" involved, but there are many legs to the "resistance." So many that nobody really knows where it's going, if anywhere, but it is "something" that the Establishment deems a threat.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Wink
Something that smells funny...
Edit: never mind.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
I have been harping on this stupid "Resist" meme
All it stands for is more DNC corporatist baloney. It means nothing except that for those who "resist" they are stating their hatred of all things Trump. It is simply another insulting variation of "we're not as bad" or "we are not Trump." It may make the professional class feel good about themselves that they are resisting Trump, but it does not address the real issues facing the majority of real people who are and have been worrying about keeping their jobs or even earning a living wage, putting food on the table, and being able to pay the rent for at least the last eight years. It is empty and meaningless just as the Democratic party is empty and meaningless.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Granted, the whole "resist"
thing is meaningless by itself. No one is going around holding "Resist!" signs like they did #OWS. So, yeah, in that sense it is meaningless, has no point. But, it was mostly born out of the Womens March, which mostly was made up of Hillary mourners expressing their grief. A mostly organic event. That the "Establishment" co-opted the aftermath, co-opted the "Resistance," well... that's what they do, and was expected. But, much that came out of that March was and is organic, relevant, continues to grow. And, yeah, some of it is Establishment, little more than more Hillary mourning. "Purity" something tough to own.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Thank you gulfgal!
Resistance my ass! It's a real shame that these mainstream elitist 'socially liberal' so called progressives are still flogging their dead horse. Everybody knew what they were about after 8 years of lame kabuki and people we're sick of it. Trump won because the Dems. we're transparently god awful. I can't understand why we're still playing this game and still dancing to their tune. Forgetaboutit they all suck and are complicit to boot. Seriously what good does wallowing in the duopoly's sick political farce and rehashing all this garbage do?
Resistance means you are against something
To win elections, you need to be for something.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
When biological tissue is replaced by minerals
…fossils form.
Senator Claire McCaskill should get a brain scan stat.
Populations don’t like wars. They have to be lied into it.
That means we can be “truthed” into peace. — Julian Assange
Funny how McCaskill now
looking for progressives to bail her ass out. Yeah, Claire, that'll work.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
IIRC, that's how she got elected the firat time.
Also, didn't she run against a particularly obnoxious (even for Missouri) incumbent?
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Fool me once... n/t
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
They are going around, over, and under the MSM.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
and still kicking Hillary's
lame ass. Yes, I'm still bitter. Fuck her and her bots.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
You know, there's an ultimate irony here.
To: and
If you are amused by such things.
The fact is, Bernie doesn't have any policies. What he has are Reagan policies that he wants to unwind. They are just packaged as "direct" new policies.
And what Reagan had was FDR policies that he wanted to unwind. They were packaged as direct new policies, but all they did was to reverse the policies and regulations that FDR put in place.
FDR was the one with real policies. Reagan and Bernie are just working the footnotes.
::
If you notice, every time a journalist tries to usher Bernie into a direct policy statement, he turns it into a Pen and Teller routine. No one can explain "what just happened" and everyone moves on. For example, that thing that's currently going on with Single Payer.
Everyone thinks Bernie is going to introduce a single payer Bill, even though a perfectly good one is already on the table.
Bernie may show up with a Bill, but it will likely be an "incremental" fix for Obamacare, extending its viability for the profiteers. He'll celebrated by people who call it the "pathway to Single Payer." Liz Warren will like Bernie's Bill. (I saw those two at the convention. I know who they are.) The Left may even buy into it, so starved are they for some love. It's scary out there without a Party.
But the pros know what's going on, like former prisoner and annoyer of "serious people," Margaret Flowers, MD, who was arrested during an Obama administration hearing, hauled off to jail, and repeatedly stripped searched.
Flowers believes Bernie is saying, “Right now we need to improve the Affordable Care Act and that means a public option,” because she saw it on the Internet. She thinks Bernie is saying he ultimately wants to “move toward" Medicare for all.
You guessed it: Flowers is a "purist" and she has come out swinging. I paraphrase:
If only Hillary were President. She'd sign that pragmatic Bill.
Populations don’t like wars. They have to be lied into it.
That means we can be “truthed” into peace. — Julian Assange
@all EB-ers - I am so darn confused ... and hate that
I am in another world right now and lost track. I would like to listen to what Sanders has to say, directly, not through "some site".
Do I have to follow him now, activating my facebook account, which I so "heroically" didn't use for years? I mean I would do it just for the sake of 'watching Bernie TV', I guess.
I have so weird experiences here in Germany, I don't know what is happening anymore in people's heads.
Can't even formulate it out yet. May be one day.
Well, I was in support of Bernie and all those 'resistance' movements popping up or pooping down are beyond my capability of following, understanding and evaluating.
Bernie had no policies? Germans ask me what is Obamacare and why isn't it good? I try to answer about the resistance to the mandate to have to be insured like I thought it is the case in Germany. Then I got attacked from my fellow extended family Germans that even in Germany there are people who fall through the cracks and have NO health insurance. I couldn't figure out who that group is in Germany. So, the public option vs. singly payer option and who tries to introduce what kind of legislative text where and when and what's the big difference is really something I haven't understood, neither in Germany nor in the US. I can't explain to my fellow Germans, who is and who is not health insured in the US and why or why not, and my fellow Germans can't explain to me who in Germany isn't insured and why not and who is and why. They can't tell me, which Germans are falling through what kind of cracks and why.
It's time people "kiss" here at EB. I want clarity for those of the 99 percent, who are not insiders like apparently lots of EB-ers are.
Wow. Just saying, my goal would be to understand both systems in the US and Germany, compare them, if it is possible, and I like to know what to support on the US side.
(this will be a longish, curvy explanation of my health insurance saga)
To make my own example. I have been in the US since 1982. First I was insured through my husband's health insurance given by the IMF to their employees. I was on a spouse Visa in the US. I hadn't given much thought about health insurance at that time. By the time of 1987 I knew I wouldn't stay in that marriage. I had no working permission under my spouse vise in the US other than finding an employer in the US who would hire me for the field I was educated in, ie Chemistry. I didn't find that employer.
I was on my way back to Germany, when I won the "Green Card Lottery" and got for me and my son a "life-long" green card, which allowed me to work in any job (ie waitress for example or janitor, ha, ha) in the US. So, I returned to the US now being what you would call a "dreamer" in today's lingo. I still dreamed about 'making it in the US' and watched the reunification and Berlin Wall coming down (it was the city I studied and worked in for four years, before leaving Germany for good) in the living room of my husband's house. So, I watched it and my jaws dropped and my mouth stood open without saying a word.
Some time later I heard and read about conflicts in the German population between "Ossies" (Germans who lived the former East Germany, GDR) and "Wessies" (Germans who lived in West Germany, FRG) and couldn't understand what it was all about just looking over from Washington DC to my 'reunited homeland'.
Meanwhile I started working in low-wage jobs for German media and they didn't offer health care insurance packages for their locally hired employees. So, I insured myself with a private health insurance in Germany, that offered their coverage worldwide. When I started to live by myself without being legally divorced, the German private insurance became too expensive for me to keep. So, I kept that German health insurance "in a hibernation mode", meaning I just paid them for having the right to reactivate that insurance, whenever I could prove them that I had no other health insurance in the world and the reactivation would be unconditionally and my age or pre-existing conditions wouldn't be counted.
Well, so far so good, as long as I was still legally married, but knowing it would be a complete hassle to claim anything from the "husbands" health insurance which still existed as being married, but with a non-cooperating absent husband.
I later always worked just for German employers that were located with in the US (Washington DC) with smallish offices and I was 'locally hired', meaning I was hired as a German within the US territory and they didn't offer a US health insurance package for their locally hired German employees.
Then one of them, my third German employer later in life, started to offer a US health insurance package for us German locally hired employees. So, I could put my German private insurance in hibernating status and get the US health insurance package. For quite some time I had both insurances. My sister in Germany, who had a seriously ill daughter (Hodskin's survivor with different cancers popping up during her life later on) in the US, always kept the German insurance while her daughter was in the US for all the years. Just to be safe, because if she needed complicated chemo and radio therapy, she wanted to be sure it's covered and she knew the German insurance would cover it. (Though my niece later on became a tenured professor in the US and had an excellent US health care package, which covered really all her awful therapies she got for her liver, breast and later brain cancer treatments in NY til she died. I think the fact that she was a tenured professor versus an adjunct professor made the big difference or her US health care coverage).
So, I worked, being with a German health insurance living in the US, living with a US health insurance package, working for German employers in the US, and finally got old, retired, and got now Medicare coverage with a package from Kaiser Permanente, an extended something, which would not cover me overseas.
That meant I had to be sure, if I return to Germany, that I get into the "public" German health insurance in Germany. The German law said I can get only in to our "Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung" (which I would call a public health care insurance system) if I can prove that I was in that insurance as the last insurance I had before returning to Germany. I hadn't. So I was not expecting to ever get back into our German (public) health care system)
Well, end of the story is I happened to work in Germany for six to eight month for a German company and was health insured in the "public, gesetzliche Krankenversicherung". That was in the 1999 time range. I had forgotten that already and never thought about it.
Coming back to Germany four month ago, having a permanent address and all here now, the reactivation of my private German health insurance would have cost me a premium I couldn't pay. My German "Rente" and my US Social Security are too low to afford their premiums. So, I got the advice from our "German public insurers, Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung" to go to their local office here in Germany and they would calculate for me how much premium I would have to pay with my current "combined US and German retirment income". I followed their advice and for sure their premium was way, way lower than the private German insurer would have demanded. The problem was, coming back to Germany after 35 years I could not prove that my last German health insurer was a public one, ie Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung.
I just told them by chance that before I left Germany in the late seventies, I was in the public Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung and they looked it up, found me being in that specific German health insurance also for six month in the late nineties and it was good enough for them to accept me back into the "publick, gesetzliche Krankenversicherung" in Germany.
Wow, that was a surprise for me and I am very grateful I am in there. On the US side I keep my Medicare and Kaiser Permanente package, which will cover me when I live in the US with my son and when I live in Germany with my sister I am covered by our German public health insurance system.
After that whole shebang, I like a little bit simpler explanation, what the differences are
1.between the US public option and the US single payer option and
2.how it compares to the German "public, Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung".
It's too confusing and everywhere I go, I meet elderly people who are confused as well and everybody tells you something different.
So, EB-ers "KISS" me please. I need it.
For the acronym-impaired: KISS = “Keep It Simple, Stupid.” n/t
What about "EBers" ?
Existential Buffaloes?
Really interesting comment though, Mimi.
Beware the bullshit factories.
Evening Blues
Roughly the group that formed to make this blog.
Ah sorry
I enjoy the EB. Love the blues.
Beware the bullshit factories.
@Big Al I do like
I do like the phrase "Existential Buffaloes" though.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It's a step in the right direction. Ryancare was a step in
the wrong direction.
If the Left couldn't make sweeping changes under a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President, what makes you think they can succeed under a Republican Congress and a Republican President?
I'm not interested in futile grand gestures. I'm interested in reasonable proposals that will at least show the voters how intransigent the people they elected are.
What will probably happen is that all requirements on Insurance companies will be lifted, but the mandate will remain. RyanCare is just a bill to legalize picking your pocket.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Really appreciate this comment
because I'm reaching the point with Sanders like I have with sadly too many on the left where I'm at a disconnect between the echo chambers of the Internet, both for and against the guy are painting him as some kind of hardcore progressive, and my own lyin' eyes and ears, which are catching a somewhat different message. All I'm hearing these days is incrementalism, 11th dimensional chess, and empty bluster (really, Bernie, we don't need another "what the Democrats need to do" speech. We all know it and as long you continue to go along with the program, apparently happy to continue sitting at the kid's table, it's just meaningless words.) I wish it wasn't true, but it just seems like he's all too content to speechify and maintain the status quo. Sorry, I don't have time for anymore long game, Bernie and neither do millions more.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Does it really matter?
Like a lot of us, Bernie just looking to change the playing field, get more Libs elected. Everything else is just everything else.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I wish, instead, that
he take it to the streets, bring his podium to college campii. But, hey, web tv better than nuthin'.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Rehabilitate the Clinton brand?
You know what? If you want to rehabilitate a brand you tell me what is good about your brand. Hiding in the woods and attacking better ideas isn't the way to go about this, unless...you've got nothing positive to say about your "brand".
The continuing underestimation of people's understanding of the issues is amazingly stupid.
But then, if you hired DBrock you probably have no respect for the folks you desired to lead.
"He's awful" didn't work on Trump
Once you see the emperor naked, it can't be unseen. People will not go back to the Democrats. They are at 25% and now have fewer self-identifying members than the GOP.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Bernie leading them back.
Dems retake the Senate in 2018, the House in 2020. May not be your particular "brand" of Dems, but Dems nonetheless. Likely the best "brand" we're going to get much before 2024. Too many "Dems" didn't support Obama. Not much is going to change any time soon.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Wink That's pretty much
That's pretty much the problem with following Bernie. I like him, but I don't think he's radical enough to get things done.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Who else gonna do
it? Warren? Ellison? Bueller?
Nobody, that's who. Bernie may not be who we want, but he's to the Left of anybody else. And while everyone pissed off about Bernie's "Betrayal," out there building their own Third Party this and Third Party that becuz Berniecrats aren't progressive enough, Bernie out there bringing more inside the tent.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Wink That argument is
That argument is based, like the Third Way's argument, on the assumption that one must work within the system to get things done. Believing that assumption requires one to chase the system rightward, as the people at the top who have actual power over the system change its nature to be more and more--I can't call it conservative, that is too positive a term--brutal, that's the term.
This assumption includes the idea that the terms of political reality can only be formed by a small elite which runs the two political parties. Possible membership in that elite is dangled in front of us like a carrot, keeping us within the machine, and powering organizations like Brand New Congress and Justice Democrats, just as it powered DFA and Wellstone Action in the first decade of this century. Of course, we never win enough to actually gain power over the party, which is not surprising, since the party's purpose is to purge people with our ideals out of public life.
Asking me whether I'd rather follow Ellison or Warren instead of Bernie is like asking me whether I'd rather move tar sands fuel by rail instead of by pipe.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Just to be clear--
I'm not pissed off at Bernie's "betrayal," and I leave it to the reader to decide whether those quotation marks are deserved or not. Even if he did betray us, I don't care, and I'm not angry at him. I'm a little sad, maybe, for someone who was, I think, an ethical fighter who actually cares about people, whatever deals he and the Democrats may have made in VT.
I understand why some people are angry at him--they have reason. My different reactions probably come from the fact that I know, a little bit, what it's like on the inside, and I can spare a moment or two of understanding and even sympathy for the man who undeniably let us down.
Actually, I may be a little angry at him simply because he should have known from the beginning what the end of this would be--but my best guess is that he didn't understand what a powerful reaction he was going to get, and never dreamed he'd be in a position to actually attain the Presidency. He didn't know we were ready for him--more than ready.
But I reject Bernie as a leader not out of personal anger or a sense of betrayal, but because he's doing exactly what you said in both your comments in this thread. I have no reason to put any of my resources at the disposal of someone leading me back to the Democratic Party and the "well, at least we'll get some Dems in; they may not be the kind of Dems you like, but it's better than nothing" mentality. If that's the strategy, there are dozens of Democratic politicians willing to sell it to me; I don't need Bernie for that. The only people who need Bernie for that are those who actually run the Democratic party, IOW, the Democratic elite and the pundits and consultants who work for them.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
This video pretty much explains my position--
Starting at 5:40
Except that I'm a little to the left of that.
And by the way, this is who I'm angry at. Not Bernie, but the establishment that put us all in this position, which is the same establishment Bernie is working for now. Those are the people who have the power, and they're the ones responsible for this crap we're all living in, and this crap political system.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I'm a J.D. fan, agree
with him about 98% of the time, including here. What's to disagree with? Dore is a Bernie fan if not BernieBro.
I don't agree that Bernie is a Keith Ellison Dem, and neither would Dore.
And, I don't believe that Bernie knows where this is going any more than anyone else does. Nor do I believe he gives two shits about the DNC, the party PTB, or the Dem party. If this goes in the direction of rebuilding (or "reforming") the Dem party then that's the way this goes. If it goes in the direction of Third Party or "building a new party" then that's the way this goes. I don't care which way it goes and I doubt that Bernie gives a flying flip either. The whole point of this Bernie thing since day one is getting more progressives elected. That ain't changed.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
@Wink Bernie
Bernie supported Ellison. Did he change his mind after Ellison said this? Is there some video somewhere of Bernie condemning Ellison for saying this?
If not, then people will assume, and should assume, that Bernie still supports Ellison. That's what happens when you come out in support of someone publicly. You are assumed to still support them until you say otherwise--publicly.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
wtf difference does
that make? If he supports him does that mean he's toeing the DNC line? Dore doesn't think so.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
unless...you've got nothing
positive to say about your "brand"
Bing!
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
Thank you, @dkmich!!
These people have NEVER been progressive nor liberal!!!!! They are either Repukelican Lite or RL supporters. Good gawd! Rec'd!!
Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.
All I can say is
"About goddamned time".
This should have happened after Gore lost. We suffered through Bush Junior's regime for nothing, it seems.
Now we'll have to suffer through four years of El Trumpo. If we don't get this done now it'll be even worse next time.
I've got a simple litmus test for a candidate, they have to be willing to say "Nationalize the banks" on television. If they can't do that, they can go run as Republicans.
"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Albert Bartlett
"A species that is hurtling toward extinction has no business promoting slow incremental change." -- Caitlin Johnstone
All war is a lie.
ALL. It's a principle.
Pages