@Big Al @Big Al Because people know that if they give up on the Democratic Party, they are giving up on our political system. That terrifies them and makes them lose hope, because it makes it obvious that our situation, if not our behavior, is revolutionary. The possibility of reform, or of influencing the United States government in any way, is now defunct. It is a system which will steamroll over us in the order and time of its choosing, in the same way that its so-called "private-sector" counterpart, financialized corporate capitalism (mainly banks and big corporations) will steamroll over us in the order and time of ITS choosing. In fact, there is very little daylight between those two entities.

Very few people want to face the fact that they are fighting the US government, an insanely wealthy international banking cabal, the heads and boards of the most powerful and wealthy businesses in the world, and the armies, spies, assassins who are willing to work for them. Even fewer people can face that fact and then say: "So what should we do next? Let's plan."

EDIT: Which is not to say that there aren't plans that could be made, infrastructure we could build, ways to help ourselves and each other, ways to simultaneously undermine the structure above us. Of course there are, and I think they're well worth doing, but since there's no guarantee anything we do will save us--well, it takes a certain kind of person to want to build something without that guarantee.

This is more or less where I am. Don't know if there's going to be a ship for me, though. (Start at about 1:27)

http://www.openculture.com/2015/10/hear-ursula-k-le-guins-story-the-end-...

calling opposition to mass murder and genocide quaint. His support for Clinton and the democratic party destroys any moral authority he seems to think he has.

That's the thing people just aren't getting, it's people like the little CIA dude that ARE the democratic party. That's what it is and always has been. There's no changing that because you'd still have to coexist in the party with people like him and they own it, that's why he gets on TV. Why on earth do that? Why engage in a battle to reform a party filled with people like that? It doesn't make sense.

@snoopydawg

He said the exact same things about Bernie's supporters being white males only caring about economic issues and boy was he taken down in both the comments and the diary that Subir wrote in response, as well as Bob Swern today.
And of course the Hillary supporters went after anyone who disagreed with him.
He went on and on about the Bernie bros and said a bunch of BS about how they didn't care about women's rights and other nonsense that he didn't bother to back up with facts.
He said that he only recently became rich, but IIRC his family is very successful in El Salvador and they own a hotel chain or something.
Someone called him out on this and he and others went after that person.
And a few people said that he only wrote the diary for click bait
Many people pointed out that Bernie has a 100% rating by NARAL and Hillary said that she wasn't in favor of late terms abortions and that even Barack was inconsistent on abortion rights because he put the Hyde amendment in the ACA.

And guess who he got his talking points from? Her herself. Listen to the people cheering her as she says that economic equality won't fix a bunch of 'isms'
Apparently the Democratic Party members can't walk and chew gum at the same time since they think that women's issues have to be fixed before they can address economic issues. I think that they can work on both issues.

Heh, look at the Hispanic man on the right of her. He doesn't look like he's buying into her BS. The Black lady on her left doesn't look like she's buying it either.

@snoopydawg @snoopydawg to me. I noticed that when I first watched that clip in another diary. They'll do or say anything to avoid that gorilla in the room of economics as they've done all along.

Edited to add that our lousy economy hurts women and particularly children, and I'm quite sure poverty is a little bigger issue than sexism in that case but hey, never let some truth get in the way of a good narrative.

He said the exact same things about Bernie's supporters being white males only caring about economic issues and boy was he taken down in both the comments and the diary that Subir wrote in response, as well as Bob Swern today.
And of course the Hillary supporters went after anyone who disagreed with him.
He went on and on about the Bernie bros and said a bunch of BS about how they didn't care about women's rights and other nonsense that he didn't bother to back up with facts.
He said that he only recently became rich, but IIRC his family is very successful in El Salvador and they own a hotel chain or something.
Someone called him out on this and he and others went after that person.
And a few people said that he only wrote the diary for click bait
Many people pointed out that Bernie has a 100% rating by NARAL and Hillary said that she wasn't in favor of late terms abortions and that even Barack was inconsistent on abortion rights because he put the Hyde amendment in the ACA.

And guess who he got his talking points from? Her herself. Listen to the people cheering her as she says that economic equality won't fix a bunch of 'isms'
Apparently the Democratic Party members can't walk and chew gum at the same time since they think that women's issues have to be fixed before they can address economic issues. I think that they can work on both issues.

Heh, look at the Hispanic man on the right of her. He doesn't look like he's buying into her BS. The Black lady on her left doesn't look like she's buying it either.

@snoopydawg @snoopydawg

And guess who he got his talking points from? Her herself. Listen to the people cheering her as she says that economic equality won't fix a bunch of 'isms'
Apparently the Democratic Party members can't walk and chew gum at the same time since they think that women's issues have to be fixed before they can address economic issues. I think that they can work on both issues.

This is something I still scratch my head at because I'm still confused by the implications.

They say they are on a battle to combat and end racism and sexism and homophobia, etc. etc.

Ok, so my problem with this is, how do you legislate that away?

Economic equality is tangible. Money in my pocket. Healthcare is tangible. I can get a necessary surgery. Environmental protection is tangible. Hey the river isn't filled with oil.

But how do you legislate away a mindset? That is what racism and sexism ultimately are. Mindsets. Preconceptions that people latch onto.

Can you legislate things to mitigate an effect or correct a wrong, such as unequal rights? Yes, gay marriage for instance (which Obama erroneously gets attributed to which I hate).

I ask because look at the War on Terror. That is unwinnable. There is no end goal. Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology or state. I ask what is the end goal of ending racism, sexism, homophobia? I mean I say this as a bi guy. Are there people who will always just be uncomfortable around me? Yeah, you bet. Can I legislate that feeling they have away? No. Can we have legislation allowing gay adoptions or ending being fired for being gay? Absolutely.

Overall, I guess my point is that these aren't battles that just end. In fact, I don't think they can end. You can't legislate away internal thoughts or feelings. We can ultimately mitigate those actions that bubble to the surface. Trying to combat issues like this is more of social movements, of people working through biases and even potential hate. This isn't solved by a top-down executive order.

He said the exact same things about Bernie's supporters being white males only caring about economic issues and boy was he taken down in both the comments and the diary that Subir wrote in response, as well as Bob Swern today.
And of course the Hillary supporters went after anyone who disagreed with him.
He went on and on about the Bernie bros and said a bunch of BS about how they didn't care about women's rights and other nonsense that he didn't bother to back up with facts.
He said that he only recently became rich, but IIRC his family is very successful in El Salvador and they own a hotel chain or something.
Someone called him out on this and he and others went after that person.
And a few people said that he only wrote the diary for click bait
Many people pointed out that Bernie has a 100% rating by NARAL and Hillary said that she wasn't in favor of late terms abortions and that even Barack was inconsistent on abortion rights because he put the Hyde amendment in the ACA.

And guess who he got his talking points from? Her herself. Listen to the people cheering her as she says that economic equality won't fix a bunch of 'isms'
Apparently the Democratic Party members can't walk and chew gum at the same time since they think that women's issues have to be fixed before they can address economic issues. I think that they can work on both issues.

Heh, look at the Hispanic man on the right of her. He doesn't look like he's buying into her BS. The Black lady on her left doesn't look like she's buying it either.

@snoopydawg
HER logic processes make pretzels and corkscrews look like straightedge rulers.

on the Markos article.
There are some doozies in this..
http://emptylighthouse.com/wikileaks-emails-4-1453110518
Her thoughts on the TPP

Hillary Clinton Wikileaks Email #5780: True Thoughts on the TPP/TPA

This was what staffers were looking to say regarding the TPA/TPP:

Look, I'm focused on the final deal, and whether it will measure up. If it does, I'll support it. If it doesn't, I won't.

TPA is about Senate procedure - and in any event it's just a draft proposal making its way through a Senate committee. I want to focus on the substance: will TPP be a good deal, or not? We haven't seen the details so we can't answer that question yet.

Let me say this about TPA. I believe that President Obama should have the negotiating authority to conclude a transpacific agreement that works for the American middle class and advances American leadership. But I don't believe we should give an open-ended fast track to the next president. I hope I'm the next president, and I think I should have to justify fast track to the new Congress. And if a Republican is the next president, I certainly don't want to give fast track to them now - heck, that's why I voted against fast track for President Bush.

These are all procedural issues. The key for me is whether the final deal passes two tests: pass two tests: First, does it raise wages and create more good jobs at home than it displaces? And second, does it also strengthen our national security? Let's wait and see that final deal.

I'm not sure which way she is leaning on it but it's great that we never had to find out. I think she would have voted for it.

@dkmich Great comment!

He must have Bernie supporters confused with his blog.

@Phoebe Loosinhouse

1. Liberals will not continue indefinitely to be ignored and taken advantage of while the Democrats woo their new Moderate girlfriend. She gets room service at the Ritz while we get McDonald's and the backseat of a Pinto? I don't think so. At some point, we'll have to wipe the mascara from our tear-streaked cheeks and look for a new partner.

"McDonald's and the backseat of a Pinto"! Love that! And oh, so very true!

(You could re-post the entire Diary here, you know!)

The Salon article was beyond belief as well.

Messaging central and the machine mockingbirds are all on the same bizarre script and they continue to be organized in a concerted effort to define progressivism or Sanders ism as some kind of white male elitism that has no interest in social justice, which is beyond bizarre. The effort from the get go has been stigmatization, plain and simple, in order to make the line items Bernie stands/stood for (like single payer healthcare) unacceptable.

Kos deserves to mocked and ridiculed, as do others who try to work this angle. I think it requires ongoing scrutiny and commentary and disagree with those who advise us to ignore it and move on. I don't agree with Big Lies going unchallenged. Don't ignore it, but do move on and find better and more deserving vessels for hope and change than the Democrats. How much proof do people need that the Democrats are just not into Liberal/Progressivism and any evidence otherwise is window dressing and lip service?

The Democrats are going full steam ahead in their gameplan to isolate and ostracize progressives of the Sanders ilk, and to go major Blue Dog Centrist Nicer Than Republicans But Better Because We're Not Racists/Sexists. When Elijah Cummings makes repeated comments about needing more Blue Dogs, the handwriting is on the wall.

If there was ever any doubt about the possibility of reforming such an entity from within, I would say that goal is looking less and less feasible. Why sentence ourselves to more decades at the Kiddie's Table at Party gatherings? One of the very first diaries I ever wrote at Daily Kos was in fact Why Liberals Sit At The Kiddies Table At Democratic Party Events in 2000 and f-ing 11 and it could have been written yesterday because exactly nothing has changed. Actually, what has changed is that more people now will self-identify as "liberal" as opposed to "moderate" than back then but it wouldn't make a butterfly's flutter of difference to TPTB. What would make a difference would be if we organized ourselves into a completely separate tent outside of the Democratic Party's influence and control.

@Phoebe Loosinhouse you know. But for Big Tent Democrats its OK to compromise, after all, they're NOT racist or sexist but pragmatists and they know what can realistically be done. Bernie Bro's are pie in the sky idealists who are ONLY concerned with middle class white males so it's NEVER OK for them. And that tired message of the economy, can't these Berners see it isn't the economy stupid but the racism/sexism and by God, we're going to fix that! That, and only that, is important and if you don't agree, you're a racist misogynist, sheesh.

destroy Bernie that they just painted themselves into a corner over abortion, conveniently ignoring their own VP candidate from just a few months ago. Remember, all Pro-life Dems are a no-go for elected office now and in the future.

But,surprise, surprise, I imagine there will be exemptions very shortly for the Big Tent, Blue Dogs in Red States Initiative. "Did we say that? We just meant that only Bernie Sanders couldn't endorse anyone with pro-life sentiments, no matter how tepidly."

@Azazello @Azazello

The more that is paid into healthcare the longer the average lifespan will be. But the US is "exceptional" so we spend more on healthcare and get shorter lives.

It's what they know, it's what they do.
This is what the Wall St. Dems are defending:

@Azazello We are proud to have people die for the lack of medical care. Shows American's have moxy.

It's what they know, it's what they do.
This is what the Wall St. Dems are defending:

@jim p
in the part in the video where he says he was about to join the CIA and decided to work for the Howard Dean campaign instead made me think maybe the Dean campaign was his first assignment for the CIA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK6CinsGYC0

I've seen this guy on TV and there's not a cop in the country who wouldn't take him for a well-to-do white man. It's hilarious that he pretends 'working stiff struggling to get by' isn't the largest identity group in America; there's need to address them as voters. Then again his brief childhood in central America, member of a privileged family, plus his non-laborer income as a privileged internet company owner would let him pretend he's part of an oppressed minority and tend to make him blind to reality.
You'd think seeing fewer and fewer Dems getting elected over the life time of his website, would make him rethink his approach -- letting the trolls hound more and more people away from the party.
But then again, there's what a controlled opposition would try to get done.