The Democratic War Party is a Dead End for a Revolution
A lot of people got punk'd by Bernie Sanders. All the talk about a "political revolution" and a people's movement was nothing more than shilling for the Democratic Party. Many, perhaps most got just what they wanted, except victory. Many are not happy campers right now with Sanders' signals of working with Obama (the democratic war party) to defeat Donald Trump, obviously meaning helping Clinton win whether he likes it or not. Many have become fed up with the democratic party. Imagine being fed up with it well before this election and then having to sit thru all this bullshit. Sanders was accused early on in this shamockery of an election of being a "Sheepdog" for the Democratic party.
"Bernie Sanders is this election's Democratic sheepdog. The sheepdog is a card the Democratic party plays every presidential primary season when there's no White House Democrat running for re-election. The sheepdog is a presidential candidate running ostensibly to the left of the establishment Democrat to whom the billionaires will award the nomination. Sheepdogs are herders, and the sheepdog candidate is charged with herding activists and voters back into the Democratic fold who might otherwise drift leftward and outside of the Democratic party, either staying home or trying to build something outside the two party box."
http://blackagendareport.com/bernie-sanders-sheepdog-4-hillary
Fast forward FOURTEEN MONTHS! and what do we have?
Sanders is saying his primary goal is to defeat Trump. That says it all right there. The only way to do that is to make it so someone else defeats him. Since it won't be him, Clinton is the only other option. Sanders honestly doesn't like the Clintons, either of them and who can blame him. But he's a D.C. politician and he's made it clear many times the primary goal is to defeat the Republicans and to revitalize the democratic party so our Congress will make the changes he proposes. That was Bernie's revolution. I suppose it continues but it ain't no revolution, not with the Democratic party and not with our Congress.
Sanders is working to get his proposals into the Democratic party platform and wants his "revolution" to help him make sure the party platform promises are adhered to. IT IS ALL DEMOCRATIC PARTY, and by extension a reliance on Congress to take actions accordingly. Our Congress, the U.S. Congress with the collective job performance approval rating of 8%. Our war loving, austerity pushing, wealth inequality enabling Congress.
Those comfortable with the Democratic party have no problem with that but those resisting the party do have a problem. Sanders' campaign for the Democratic party presidential nomination was viewed as something that could spur a people's movement whether he won or not and would be the start of really challenging the oligarchy and its political party duopoly. Some even thought Bernie would mount a legitimate third party challenge, maybe partner up with Jill Stein. That was never going to happen.
So what did we get? A whole bunch of people newly registered to the Democratic party. Some bullshit about the Democratic party platform. A new Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairperson. Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump. And Bernie Sanders telling his supporters his primary goal is to defeat Donald Trump.
Hell with that. The goal should be to defeat both of them. Neither of these psycho assholes should be allowed to be the President of the United States, no way no how. Sure, in the end it doesn't really matter who becomes President, Obama the Novel Peace prize winning murdering war criminal proved that once and for all. It's (almost) beyond belief it's gotten this far, like an episode from the Twilight Zone, but it's real and it should be stopped. There shouldn't be any picking one over the other of these miscreants, no self respecting person should stoop so low, so fully impugn their own integrity.
Even Noam Chomsky is advocating that the left, progressives, brainless, vote for Hillary Clinton. Here he makes a case for lesser evil voting, that Trump is worse than Clinton, Satan is more evil than Satan, and we should ignore the FACT that Clinton is a deranged lying murderer that should be in prison, not running for political office.
http://johnhalle.com/outragesandinterludes/?p=1065
Now there are the obligatory people's conferences and summits to "continue Bernie's Revolution" only to further entrench the "revolution" into the democratic party apparatus. The People's Summit and the People's Revolution and the same old speakers and same old demands, most with documented affiliations with the establishment. Campaign Finance Reform!! Voting Rights!! They have their lists of alms for the poor, none of which challenge the oligarchy, and their plans for more and better politicians who will magically make Congress come ALIVE! Everything geared toward using the Democratic party and relying on politicians to take action in Congress and Senate to make changes.
That is not a revolution, it is a path to more subservience to those that rule us, the oligarchy controlled by the plutocracy. The Plutarchy.
Undoubtedly most Sanders supporters will fall in line and vote for Hillary Clinton. Many won't, some estimate 30% or more. Those who do vote for Clinton were never serious about revolution, they couldn't have been. They wouldn't know a revolution if it bit them in the ass.
Those refusing to vote for Clinton and ending their relationships, if they had one, with the democratic party will migrate toward third parties or hopefully a real independent people's movement, one completely removed from electoral politics and geared toward a radical challenge of the power instead of hoped for incremental change as the oligarchy allows.
Many will get sucked into faux revolutionary efforts, like the People's Summit and the People's Revolution that will not challenge the power. These efforts will seek to funnel citizen unrest into the tidy confines of the electoral process and the democratic party. "Call your congressperson!", "write your Senator!", maybe, just maybe they will do the right thing.
Those with true revolutionary aims will need to unite in order to establish a workable framework to challenge the oligarchy.
The conditions are still very ripe for an independent movement against this corrupt political system. We have the perfect symbols to reject what the oligarchy is trying to shove down our throats. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The country has reached a zenith in absurdity. It's like the often used refrain, "if not now, when"?
Sanders goal of preventing Donald Trump from becoming president is just more duopoly tribal bullshit between the democratic party and the republican party. What this country needs is a full stop on this sham of an election to expose the illusions of democracy and We the People and force changes to end the oligarchy and its duopoly. That's the primary problem we can't keep putting off election after election. We live under an oligarchy, that has to be changed.
Comments
Notice the fire resistant suits in the upper right corner.
Just shaking the tree.
OK, maybe Bernie can't run third party
He probably had to swear to support the nominee to get into the Democratic primaries at all, and he keeps his word. It's one of the things we love about him.
But what about Jane Sanders? She didn't promise not to do it. I'd bet she would get a LOT of votes if she ran on the Green ticket. And we know her positions. It would also destroy Hillary's "woman card," especially if Jane shared the ticket with Jill Stein. That could work out really well!
Although I don't believe the electoral process and
our Congress is the answer, I don't have a big problem with third party efforts at this point. Anything to challenge the duopoly and oligarchy is better than what we're doing now. In some respects however it takes away energy and effort toward an independent movement outside the electoral process, just like the last 15 months of this primary spectacle.
The problem is, in the end we're still going to get Trump or Clinton as President.
The key: If it's Hillary, vote Green, vote Jill Stein
I will never vote for either Hillary or Donald. My first choice is Bernie Sanders on the Democratic ticket. Otherwise, my vote will be to express my opposition to the choice between Hillary and Donald by voting Green.
Be a Friend of the Earth, cherish it and protect it.
Haven't noticed much difference between Ds and Rs
in quite a bit. Both parties are just hired help to keep people distracted from those actually
running things - the Bechtels, the Cargills, the Mellons.
This country has been a corrupt oligarchy for a very long time. It's just been running a great propaganda machine for 70+ years, most effectively within its own borders.
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
To me it is the issue.
How can we do anything else if we don't solve this issue. We allow a small number of rich and powerful people to take the planet wherever they want and we're all just along for the ride, having to suffer the consequences and bear the burden. The democratic party is part of the oligarchy, our system of government was set up to be an oligarchy. By definition an oligarchy is a small group of people making decisions for everyone else. Our so called "representative" system consists of 537 people making decisions for 330 million. That's an oligarchy in itself. Then there is the small group of people that control the political oligarchy.
I noticed even Sanders said the word oligarchy in his speech to supporters. But he said it in a way to infer we're headed for an oligarchy which of course is wrong. Like you said it's been a very long time.
the country is too big
So that's insane. Obviously our congressional representative can't listen to...what is it now? three quarters of a million people? It's much easier to listen to one guy who comes in with a suitcase full of cash.
Honestly I think 1500 is about the right size to have one representative. That would mean we'd have over 200,000 reps. Which is so unwieldy that democracy breaks down. And that's the point, really. There isn't any democracy. When a small group tells us "this is who you have to choose from" then that's not democracy.
Still, I enjoyed Bernie's speech because it poked Hillary in her eyeball.
Which fact people in the European Union are waking up to.
In an E.U. with over 300 million people and a Potemkin (elected, but powerless) parliament, there can be no genuine democracy either.
It’s just too bad that at this point in history, the ones pointing out the emperor has no clothes have to be right-wing populists — the Left having gone missing in action, ceding its niche in the political ecosystem to war-and-finance neoliberals.
"too big" as in
TOO BIG TO FAIL?
******************************
Muerte al fascismo. Muerte a la tiranía. colapso total de los que promueven tampoco. A la pared con el unico porciento%
"too big" = can only fail
is how I read Shah's words. I don't want to agree with him, but the more I've thought about it since I first came across his writing of such an idea, the more I think he may be right.
The US is simply too big, both in size and in population, to succeed. A break-up of the nation-state into smaller, manageable units logically follows.
Now, can that be done peacefully?
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
No, it cannot be done peacefully
There never was a chance for multiple nations on what is now the USA. There would have been war over water and tillable land, over the gold and silver mines. This continent would be as battle-scarred as the Balkans, and sectional hatred would only have grown much worse than what we now have.
What we lack is leadership dedicated to benefit the vast majority of us instead of defending the plutocracy from the rest of us as the plunder what we have for themselves. Instead, the masses will be led by The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, for no other leadership will emerge.
Maybe the survivors living in isolation from each other can start a new process, but want and need will be great for a long time.
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
The country should probably be broken up.
I like the way this author breaks things up. It's not perfect. And it should be revised after the input of all Americans is included. But, perhaps now is the time to say goodbye to the idea of the United States of America, do away with all the states, and go with eleven or twelve different nations.
The U.S. Is Really 11 Nations
There is in me an anarchy and frightful disorder. Creating makes me die a thousand deaths, because it means making order, and my entire being rebels against order. But without it I would die, scattered to the winds.
-- Albert Camus
Interestingly
It appears that south Florida is not one of the eleven nations. The snake like configuration of the Midlands could be problematic if there were border disputes. Still, it is an interesting map.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Yeah, it would take a lot of tweaking.
I should revise what I said earlier.
Lots of different input, cuz it's just one guy, with a thesis. But it's a good start, IMO.
One of the biggest problems with the creation of the United States was the fact that the vast, vast majority of people living here had absolutely no input. We like to think of it as some great revolution for "the people," but in reality, the people did the fighting and dying, but most of the decisions were made by less than a dozen white guys with slaves.
We're more than two centuries overdue for a new constitution, and the input of 315 million people, instead of just Madison, Jefferson, Washington, Adams and a few others. I would imagine that there would be a lot of people who would prefer many smaller nations, rather than what we currently have . . . . which is basically ungovernable.
There is in me an anarchy and frightful disorder. Creating makes me die a thousand deaths, because it means making order, and my entire being rebels against order. But without it I would die, scattered to the winds.
-- Albert Camus
"A dozen white guys with slaves"
The sales job has been off the charts hasn't it.
Break it up.
I took that as a concession that
S. Florida will be under water soon.
Wisconsin & Minnesota are Yankeedom?
We don't have much in common with New York, and when I lived in Manhattan, they thought we were way out next to California. They couldn't understand why anyone might want to even picnic, and we are very outdoorsy. Etc.
Manhattan was excluded from "Nine Nations of North America"
The book I read 35 years ago excluded Manhattan, which was discussed as a distinct region, but not as a "nation."
Nine Nations of North America
I read a book 35 years ago titled, "Nine Nations of North America" by Joel Garreau. It was a #1 best seller. When I traveled the country I found some validity. This book gave me an appreciation of how well some of our past presidential administrations (pre-1980) had governed effectively, since this country is diverse. The book highlights the cultural, topographical and economic differences among the nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Nations_of_North_America
I have been thinking along these lines, too, Shahryar,
I wish I were smart enough to see the solution.
I haven't given up on Bernie.
'Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P. Dowd "
30,000 is the minimum
set by the Constitution. Ironically, it was to prevent the consolidation of power - some of the Founders were afraid that allowing for a smaller ratio of Reps to voters would lead to certain communities getting their own pet representative, while others favored an even higher number than 30K. The current cap of 435 was set by the Reapportionment Act of 1911, which said that America would be divvied up into 433 districts (they reserved two more seats for when New Mexico and Arizona became states). This should have been revisited in 1921 - Congress used to have to pass a reapportionment act after every census - but Republicans obstructed passage over fears of future electoral losses; they did come together in 1929 (when R's held the presidency and both houses of Congress) to make the 435 number official. James Madison may have worried that "In all very numerous assemblies, of whatever character composed, passion never fails to wrest the scepter from reason" (Federalist #55), but I wonder if he ever contemplated a scenario wherein three entire states (ND, VT, WY) would have smaller populations than the average congressional district.
Nice to see your handle here, UM! n/t
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Thanks, riverlover! I like this place!
Been signed up since March, but (lame excuse) been intruding so much that I haven't posted a whole lot, either here or at TOP. That should change tomorrow: I'm planning on posting what may wind up being the last History for (those guys) ever, given that it's about a bunch of disaffected Democrats revolting against the party establishment in New York in the 1830s.
I believe you're right
since there's no way I could vote for Her Ladyship, the Flying Spaghetti Clinton.
Bernie should have said "and oh, by the way, the primaries were crooked . There's no way the DNC which ran them were going to let anyone other than Hillary win. As you know, she and I disagree on many issues. So @%$^ her and the Democratic Party!"
It's a tree that
needs a good shaking. Good god why do sane people cling to this fiasco of electoral politics and believe that this is the only possible world? It's not the inevitable world as we find it it's an artificial concoction the want to and do rule the world assholes have carefully constructed. At this point I really could give a fuck what the Democratic party Hillary or the other fascistic candidate the boo hiss Republican Trump the biggest evil do. Including Bernie. I mean come on millions or people join the 'political revolution' and yet he joins the must defeat the Trump Democratic choir.
What about the blatant rigging of this primary by the powers that be and the media, crickets. None of these people who control the levers of power are going to do a damn thing except keep the power right where it is. The academic ivory tower left is full of shit. They rant and rave about what's going on and when push comes to shove the refuse to take it on. Why would they they too make a good living being the neutered useless voice of the useless left wing. So let it rip until enough ordinary people really do say enough is enough.
Any revolution will not come through the professional left, the ivory tower leftist elites or the duopoly anti-democratic assholes who play us with the sick game of electoral politics. The place all good movements inside the system are co-opted and called pragmatic or all your going to get. Lesser evil my ass. It's the same evil and it's not about to allow 'we the people' to have any choice. this is not what democracy looks like Bernie. Once again the people who do see what a farce this is are being told to fall in line. fuck that.
You called it.
We're just going to get the same old thing unless enough people can force the issue. All this talk about the end of the duopoly and the energizing of young people will fade away with the next headlines, the next shiny object.
I use a different...
I think predicting what is going to happen in this crazy cycle is crazy. Right now you can say you think such -n-such will happen, but the truth is none of us knows what the outcomes will be at the end of next month. Let's keep our knees in socket and not over-react. Now if Bernie had come out and said y'all be good and support Hellery I'd be with you. Right now I'm still Sanders and I'm going to wait and see how all the lose ends come together.
And let me add everyone is entitled to make any prediction they want...I just want to emphasize that many variables remain -Assange, Comey, Snowden, gossifer 2.0, election fraud suit,....
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Sure alot can still happen.
But the democratic party will still be a corrupt appendage of the oligarchy whatever happens. I've maintained all along that even if Sanders won, his revolution would still be all about electing more and better politicians, and trying to force them to do the right thing. And that's not a revolution, that's just more of the same trying to work within a corrupt and undemocratic system.
The party is indeed...
the oligarchy. I'm glad for the guccifer affirmation.
https://guccifer2.wordpress.com/2016/06/15/dnc/
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Something is off about this Guccifer 2.0 leak.
What hacker takes credit for their work by calling themselves after another hacker's (made-up) name by adding "2.0" after the first hacker? Hackers usually want to make a name for themselves, not build on another's brand.
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
Agrred, although I know no hackers.
Supposition is that it's Russia.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
I agree, but there is still some mystery
I agree something is "off". But there are so many things about this election cycle that are off. I'm taking a wait and see attitude because I've observed some things this primary that I had not seen before. Part of it is that I woke up to what the Democratic party is made of, but there are other oddities. Sometimes in politics, what something appears to be is just the opposite of reality.
OTOH, I’ve felt something’s been “off” since Nov. 22, 1963. n/t
Why does Clinton need our votes --
when she's got election fraud to get a nomination, and an opponent who appears to be throwing the election to her on the other?
Hopefully outrage will grow.
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
It does appear that way Cass.
I hope so too.
Here's Why She Needs Our Votes
Legitimacy. Demonstrating that the voting public supports her, the vote total must reflect a sizeable portion of the electorate. The average of those supporting a specific candidate divided by the total number of people who could vote (if allowed to) tends to be around 20%. To not meet that total anymore would reveal the lie that is our electoral process beyond the ability of the parties to spin the results through lying PR.
Can't sell freedumb and dumbocracy under militarized corporatist occupation without it!
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
She can get those by buying influence.
Which is in fact what she's done. Anyone here want to make a list of celebrities who have endorsed Clinton "just because"?
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
I agree she needs the
I agree she needs the appearance of legitimacy that a big win would provide. I disagree, that she needs us. As Trump ramps up his crazy rants, more "reasonable" people will vote for Hillary. We will be marginalized, as usual. She is not even trying to gain our support. She has been on the campaign trail singing the virtues of the Bushes and Reagan. That is where she is working the crowds for votes.
I think you're on to something, crescent moon. I mentioned
this very notion last week--that if FSC doesn't believe that she can garner a sufficient number of Bernie's supporters (and Wild Horses could not drag my Family to the polls to vote for her), she may take a very hard right-turn after the convention.
As a matter of fact--if I had one--I'd bet the family farm that she does.
As an aside, I listen to a lot of news programs, with reporting coming from all sides, or views.
Haven't seen anyone mention it, but there are several movements under foot in the Republican/Conservative communities.
1) Renewed attempts/plans to get delegates to deny Trump the nomination, by making a new rule--right to vote conscience. (that may have been discussed here)
2) Of course, more than a few Repubs, Conservatives, and Neoconservatives are openly endorsing and voting for FSC, or, at least, toying with the idea of doing so.
3) Some Repubs are pushing the Libertarian ticket--CNN is even going to hold a town hall or forum for Johnson and Weld, within the next few days.
4) And, even more worrisome to me, there is a write-in movement to elect deficit hawk and Social Security and Medicare destroyer, Paul Ryan.
(Of course, Ryan is on track, as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, along with our corporatist Dems, to further chip away at 'entitlements' during the up and coming Lame Duck session.)
There is no doubt in my mind that entitlement programs would be under a worse threat under FSC, than under any Republican.
Partly, because neither Party will undertake them, unless their is a split in Government. This way, they serve as convenient 'foils' for one another.
Just look at all the cuts to Medicare, the recent 'reform' of Medigap insurance policies, and the very recent 'reform' of Social Security and Social Security Disability Insurance that have been passed--some already enacted (Social Security cuts effective April 30, 2016), some not coming into effect for several years.
Oh, forget to mention the partial privatization of the VA. This Congress is set to expand the privatization to all vets, if they can pull it off. (More on this later. Doubt this train can be stopped, though.)
I seriously doubt that all of these cuts would/could have happened under a Republican President. Remember how far GWB got, when he proposed adding personal accounts?
What blows me away is--let a Dem take office, and for some reason, some (not all) Dems and/or progressives wring their hands about proposals to cut entitlements, but once it happens, they mostly go their way without uttering a peep. Never to mention it, again.
Whew!
Once the convention is behind us, I intend to post on the Clintons'--yes, including WJC's--past and present policy proposals/legislation. One thing I've learned since I began blogging, there is a lot of propaganda that has been internalized by some members of the progressive community. And, I hope to dispel some of those notions. As far back as Jimmy Carter (at least), conservative Dem Presidents have worked to diminish our Social Safety net--all the while, pretending that they are the great defenders of it.
I'm no longer in the camp that believes that FSC has no path to the Presidency. However, I plan to get out enough information, so that those who do cast a vote for her, will at least be aware that they are likely voting to completely dismantle our social insurance programs--incrementally.
Cheers!
Mollie
In Tribute To 'Barabas'
Please Visit Save Our Street Dogs [SOSD]
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
Please help me Cass,
I don't see Bernie throwing the election. I pay attention, but maybe to the wrong things.
'Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P. Dowd "
Actually it's Trump throwing the election.
Sorry, I thought that was obvious.
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
Hitting all the scripted
Hitting all the scripted notes.
Latest feint is his calling NAs Pocohantas
I think he IS throwing it. Which is also appalling. Who has he not offended?
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
She can win the presidency with Republican votes
Those are the voters she is reaching out to. Let them have her.
I can't agree that Bernie's bid for the Democratic nomination has been a dead end. If he ran as a third party candidate, his ideas might not have come to my notice...I've been a life long Democrat and have voted faithfully since 1976.
Bernie opened my eyes, and I have a hunch I'm not the only one. For the first time in my life I'm going to cast a ballot for someone other than a Democrat. The conditions are now ripe for the creation of a third party, one that will be truly viable.
More Americans now consider themselves independent than consider themselves Republican or Democrat. Capture a good chunk of those voters with a third party and that third party would be competitive.
Even the smallest person can change the course of the future
Your third party vehicle will be on the ballot: The Green Party
At present, the Green Party is on the ballot for about half the US population, but in a little less than half of our States. The Green Party is working hard to improve their numbers by General Election time. If it goes very well, they will be on the ballot in about 47 States, plus territories like Puerto Rico that will also vote for our next President. That is enough to win the Presidency for a Green Presidential candidate.
If Hillary wants to transform the Democratic Party into an overt vehicle for big business to take complete control of the US Government, then those of us who do not want her to do that will have to redouble our efforts to defeat her in the Democratic Primary by working and voting for Bernie. If we fail to accomplish that, we should vote Green in the General.
Choosing a crazy man like Trump in order to stop Hillary in the General is a fool's errand. Current polls give Bernie or Jill on the Green ticket a fighting chance in the General Election in a three way race against Hillary and Trump. If it comes down to such a situation, I want to be working for our best choice, not our least worst choice.
Be a Friend of the Earth, cherish it and protect it.
Some of us (apparently very few) have
understood from the beginning that Sanders intended to work on bringing the Democratic Party back to its roots. The Revolution is NOT Bernie Sanders. He has said that ad nauseum. It is not his fault people chose not to listen. It is the people who are willing the invest the time, energy, courage and whatever else it takes to nurture the seed that he planted. The ground had been furrowed by other movements, he planted the seed, now WE make it grow.
Some will want to stay in the Democratic Party. it does not mean that they are bought. It means that they think there is a chance to resuscitate it. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't It depends on the people who choose to stay and work on it.
Others, like myself, will go a different path. I prefer the third party option. Many who are starting out now will go that direction also once they get what they need from the Sanders' movement. Things like how to organize effectively (which is not a high point for most liberals), learning the pitfalls and a bunch of other stuff which I expect will include how to market themselves and their policies (very important).
I don't think Sanders cares how the revolution is brought about--within the party or outside of it--as long as it gets done.
Sanders did not ask to be made into a hero, a savior or a saint. If people are disappointed in him not being their ideal that is their own doing, not his. People need to start separating Sanders the person who has his own ideas of how to accomplish change from the Revolution itself. They are two very different things. We the People need to quit trying to box the Revolution in, pigeonholing it to fit a pattern that we are most familiar or comfortable with.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
I think you're right. And I think Sanders is a 74 year old
dude who has been caught up in a system so long he can't truly escape it, but would not object to a challenge outside the duopoly at all. I'm sure he'd welcome it, especially now after getting the shaft from the dem party and the system.
I think a quick transition from Bernie to an independent movement outside the duopoly should occur. Bernie should let it happen.
I think what Sanders is and will be doing is training people
to take the steps forward to make the Revolution more viable. One part of that is about building coalitions. Those coalitions do not have to be part of the Democratic Party just like Black Lives Matter is not part of the Democratic Party. What he is talking about is people coming together for a common purpose. that does not mean that they have to be in lock step.
I think Sanders has some things to teach us still, but we will move on to something outside of the two current parties. He will not try to stop it.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Bingo!
This is exactly how I saw Bernie. He was out there teaching us and showing us that we can do great things if we unite for our common goals. Uniting for common goals transcends traditional political parties.
What Al's problem is that Bernie chose to run as a Democrat. I have contended from day one that he had no other choice. The system precludes it. He would have never been allowed in the debates. Jill Stein was arrested in 2012 for even trying to enter the debate hall. As much as the media tried to ignore him, they were forced to acknowledge him, unlike Jill Stein who has gotten zero media coverage ever.
So I have a problem with Bernie saying that Donald Trump must be defeated because it continues the duopoly which is exactly why our government was so easily highjacked by the oligarchs. But that is a problem with the system, more than it is with Bernie. Clinton or Trump are symptoms of the the problem which is the entire corrupt two party system in this country.
I am extremely disappointed that Sanders has not called out election fraud, among other things. But I am still glad that he ran. Sanders has already done our people a great service by running because he pulled back the curtain on just how corrupt the Democratic party really is. Sanders proved that the people can have real power. So whatever Sanders does from now on is not the problem that Al sees.
I think that Al is underestimating the type of people who supported Sanders. Sanders supporters are not a cult of personality. They are better informed that the average voter. They are about issues, not identity politics. So are they automatically going to go with Hillary just because Sanders says so? I believe not. Those who do would have gone for her, absent Sanders being in the race.
So while I understand your rant, Al, I am still having problems understanding the harm that Sanders brought to this race.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
It Isn't Yet Time
"I am extremely disappointed that Sanders has not called out election fraud, among other things."
To do so before the Convention would mean being shut out of the proceedings. I understand lying low right now for that reason. But once the Convention starts, if Bernie isn't able to raise the issues we backers expect, then we find out what kind of a leader Bernie is. Then, maybe, will be the time for disappointment.
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
Yes,
Now that I think about it, you are probably right.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Right!
Thank you, especially for this:
Identity politics is the wedge that continues to split people with critical economic interests in common. For years organized labor had been a major barrier to black Americans. By the second half of the sixties Walter Reuther and other labor leaders were dragging labor into the civil rights movement one union at a time.
Racism didn't disappear. But white workers had black workers next to them on the line instead of coming in at the end of the shift as custodians. They didn't become instant friends. They didn't celebrate Thanksgiving together. But they played on the same softball teams; went to the same company picnics (Yes, companies used to have picnics for their workers then. Free hot dogs and sodas, usually cheap beer, sometimes pony rides or hay rides for the kids. It was nice.); laughed together; and consoled each other in the face of loss and illness. It gets hard to deny common humanity in that environment.
Nothing strikes fear into the hearts of management more than a militant, racially integrated picket line.
I well remember those company picnics. = )
My father was a dairy foreman back then. So at those picnics, we could stuff all the ice cream in us that we could hold. = ) The company also hired a band and local personalities come out to speak. An entity that I worked for had company picnics well into the 70s. They were community builders. Now what we get is isolation. Companies pit workers against each other now to maintain policies that adversely affect wages and other conditions.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
I saw the same thing in local govt.
It was all about comaraderie and working together until sometime in the 1990's when suddenly we were trained in the "new paradigm." That new paradigm was all about competition and not cooperation. It sucked to see co-workers back stabbing each other so they could gain favor with the bosses and get a bigger pay raise. Customer service fell way off as a result too.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
The Disney Character Vote
The separating of votes into the "Black Vote", the "Hispanic Vote", the LGBT vote" the "Young White Man Vote", "The Boomer Vote", "Old Lady Vote" and all the other categories was shocking to me. They did have one class categorization, "People under $50,000 a year" or some such thing.
What was worse than the weird categorization was the pandering. I almost upchuck when I see Clinton waving her arms around in a Black Church. What the hell a rich, privileged white woman doing in a Black Church waving her arms around and shouting hallejuleh? I thought it was blatantly anti-Semitic... Whoops, I forgot the "Jewish Vote". If one is for justice for Palestine, that is anti-antisemitism, not whitey hallejulehing in anti-semitic black churches.
"The Union Vote" Many of the unions in the USA are wet tissue paper compared to unions in Bolivia anyway. Our unions don't make a move unless the bases vote overwhelmingly in favor of something. A union leader declaring the union to be for or against someone or something without a 3/4 or 7/8 supportive vote of the bases would be run out of the union in the next meeting.
Even after Arizona, I was resistant to the voter fraud until Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico was one of the ugliest pieces of voter suppression and fraud I have seen in a long lifetime in Latin America. This is especially sickening given the giant fuck over of Puerto Rico that is on-going and now to the point where the gringos will own the island lock, stock and barrel and have a wonderful Latino slave labor supply of semi-educated individuals graduating from classes with 120 students per teacher and brain damaged from closed hospitals and malnutrition.
Then, somehow if you are white (or white Hispanic), if you don't support Clinton you are a racist, an anti-woman bigot whose white privilege is the cause, along with Muslim refugees, illegal "aliens" and Cornel West, of all America's problems.
Meanwhile, the Earth is melting down and them campaign donations and pay to play bribes keep on rolling...
From the Light House.
Exactly
Sanders had a message he wanted to get out, and he certainly would have been ignored if he had run as an independent. Him running for president was a bonus, not the end all and be all of the Revolution.
Others are spreading the word abut the election fraud. At this point, if he were to say much about it would only be taken as a negative by the media which could hamper his chances to further spread the word about what needs to be done. In a more distinctly quiet way, he is addressing it, starting with the super delegates. Maybe, rather than do everything himself, allowing others to walk on their own two feet (or however they get around) can be seen as a teaching moment. He did bring awareness to it on occasion, and has wisely (I think) left that for the people to deal with.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
I agree and have stated so
I agree and have stated so much of what you have written. Where I think that Bernie is currently doing harm is joining the chorus of fear mongering about Trump. Distraction and scare tactics are one and two on the list of ways to dupe the people and have them fall in line. It draws focus in the wrong direction and may lead to votes for Hillary. Look, staying in the democratic party and job number one being to defeat Trump, means voting for Hillary. I am angry for Bernie doing that.
And, as you said, ignoring the widespread and multifaceted voter suppression and almost total media blackout is tantamount to accepting corruption. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
While I certainly do not like Sanders rhetoric
about having to defeat Trump, I think it is what he is left with outside of saying he will endorse HRC. He has to say something in order to keep going, so attacking Trump is better than having to say something good about HRC.
Maybe he trusts voters integrity more than we do. Those who choose to vote for HRC would have done so anyway if Sanders had not run.
I am pretty sure that Sanders has looked at all the options and understands the fallout of any actions he takes in regard to voter suppression and the media. He has brought both up during ths campaign. He just has not made it a cornerstone of his run. Like a good leader, he has delegated those issues to the people.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
ISIS and Trump
Right after Orlando, Sanders joined the crazy chorus AND threw in a statement that ISIS was a priority to destroy. I thought it was Climate Change.
Frankly, they don't need any weapons to destroy ISIS and the rest of the ME. Just keep pouring out more CO2 and methane and count the number of dead after each heat wave. Like last year it was up to 140 F. India was just at 123 F. Bomb them with free air conditioners and sell them fuel oil fired generated power and they'll all be dead soon anyway. The drowning population in New Orleans will cheer on their demise while they use their imaginary ballots for toilet tissue.
Fuck Trump. Maybe someone will get a hold of his supporters mailing list and start sending them crack cocaine in the mail so they can be arrested and thrown in private prisons after there guns are taken away, nanochips implanted behind their retinas and electro-magnetic quantum stun guns embedded in their fundamentalist scrotums. Prison? Poor things! I am weeping. Their biggest fear will be realized as they get turned into women by having their schlongs chopped off by transgender Muslim communists from Guatemala. Just as long as they don't employ Clinton as a prison pole dancer I am OK!
From the Light House.
I share your concerns. But, from
all that I'm hearing on XM Radio, since FSC's negatives are sky high (like Trump's), scaremongering is exactly what the Dem Party Establishment has decided to use, in order to win.
Not to mention that corporatist Democrats will want to minimize 'issues' as a broader general campaign strategy, since there is no way that they are going to tack to the left. Remember, FSC has been, and will be heavily courting conservatives, moderate Independents, and Republicans--especially, the corporatist or business-friendly ones--especially, after the Convention.
IOW, it's really all they have left, with FSC as the nominee.
Reporters are already ticking off the names of the Dem Party lawmakers who are slated to be FSC's surrogates--you know, so that she can stay above the fray!
One of the most prominent will be Warren. (her Twitter 'war' with Trump has already been used as a fundraising tool by the DNC)
All the more reason that I intend to post about her, and her husband's toxic policies, legislation, and proposals.
Hey, hang in there! You won't be alone.
Mollie
"Every time I lose a dog, he takes a piece of my heart. Every new dog gifts me with a piece of his. Someday, my heart will be total dog, and maybe then I will be just as generous, loving, and forgiving."--Author Unknown
SOSD Rescues Available For Adoption Or Sponsorship
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
The US corporate media only cover the D and R debates.
In the US, the parties decide who can participate in their (private) party debates, which is why Stein was arrested for trespassing when she tried to crash a 2012 Dem debate.
This year, RT live-streamed a Green debate on May 9:
https://www.rt.com/usa/342429-green-party-debate-issues/
Apparently, the Greens haven't been able to break into even alternative online US media, like TYT, for debates. Gatekeepers everywhere it seems, though I'd love to be proved wrong.
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
No money in it, doesn't sell the tickets, get the page views,
perpetuate the "activism".
Think about Ukraine and how the State Dept spent billions to effect regime change. All the color revolutions and regime change efforts. We can bet on that happening ten fold in this country. Everyone is suspect under these conditions. Movements in other countries found that out, Greece, Portugal, Spain. If it didn't work they wouldn't do it.
Sanders called for "millions in the streets"
early and often in his campaign for a "political revolution." Don't know if he toned that down or his continuing to say it just wasn't reported.
Nonetheless, I've heard quite a bit about 10,000s at his rallies, but nothing about even a few dozen raising hell in the streets - as 1,000s are doing in France right now with 100,000s striking and thus generally causing chaos.
Where are the US revolutionaries vandalizing ATMs and business windows, engaging in running street battles with the police?
Where are even a few hundred Sanders' followers hitting the streets in peaceful, permited marches in support of his policy positions? I haven't heard of even one such protest march.
Has anyone?
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,
will make violent revolution inevitable.--JFK
The people tried peaceful. And until after the convention, i expect, it will remain so. There are many ways to cook a cat. The first way has been tried. The rest will come in good time, and there are lots of options. Getting from Point A to Point B is not always a straight line, and I can see the revolution having a lot of diverse lines. It is where those lines come together and how we deal with them when they separate that will determine whether or not we end up with a democracy.
I am not sure if the French police are decked out for all out war like ours are, and our police have shown no reluctance to hurt or kill anyone they so choose, so be careful what you ask for.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Do blatantly rigged elections
make peaceful revolution impossible?
Or does checking out of the whole corrupt mess by not voting at all (my option of late) qualify as "peaceful revolution"?
I'm a former yellow-dog, straight-down-the-ticket Dem voter, but, after watching this year's bizarrenesses, I've been wondering why the Dem Party is having a convention at all.
Just to throw a lavish party for themselves at the Wells Fargo Center?
Or are they hoping to create an excuse to call out the modern Police State in all its glory in the only US city (so far) whose police department has actually dropped bombs on its citizens?
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
Actually, I read somewhere that it is a big lavish
party for the donors. All the big names will be there: JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, etc.
What you do with your vote is your business, but I would not call it revolution myself. Not to be rude...may I ask if you read my whole response or just the quote?
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Ex-Yellow Dog Democrats Should Consider Voting Anyway
My dad was a yellow dog Democrat and when he and my mother went to the polls he always said "I'm going to vote so they know I'm still out there." (That was when Dems were still the party of FDR.) That doesn't mean one has to vote Democrat or Republican. (I'm voting 3rd party if it's Clinton or Trump.) There are other options, but please vote. It's all you have to register your existence. The oligarchy does not want you to vote. Look at the voter suppression in the Repub party and in this year's Democratic primary. There are 73 million people in this country who are eligible to vote, but are not registered. Bernie got some new people and Trump got a bunch. BTW, I was a yellow dog Dem and voted for Bernie since he was on the Dem ballot. Then I saw how Bernie was treated by the Dem elites. Now I'm a Independent and was "born" a Dem. Independents are a bigger majority than Repubs and Dems.
Oh, I may relent and vote for Stein.
She's really been speaking my language on Twitter lately. Not a deluge of tweets, but a lot of points really worth making - some of which are news to me.
If nothing else, if she gets enough votes - and the MSM reports it - the Dem Party will know where the left it didn't want went, and other former Dems where to invest $27 next cycle.
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
Cook a cat? Oh, noes!! nt
dfarrah
Sorry, I could not resist. = )
I try to avoid cliches (skin a cat), and my brain made a connection with Swift's Modest Proposal.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
I'm not sure if Bernie has toned it down.
I do know that there are groups forming everywhere. Right now, it seems most of it is centered around the convention.
There is DC to DNC, Bernie or Bust, Black Lives Matter, Anonymous, Bernie2016, The Wolf Pack (I have to ignore Cenk Ugar for the most part), TYT Politics, Fight for 15, etc...
There are some wonderful revolutionary voices H. A. Goodman, Tim Black, The Sane Progressive, The Humanist report, etc...
There are more but I'm kind of old and I'm not snapping to today.
'Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P. Dowd "
It is intersting that I have heard
lately of several people not too thrilled with Cenk Uygur. I turned him out a bit ago when he jumped on the "Time to quit" bandwagon. There are the others on the show who I find to have thought some topics out more in keeping with the advancement of democracy. Sanders staying in is exactly what democracy is all about. (Hint to Cenk: Why does everyone wants to silence at least 50% of the population?)
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
WOW, the perfect comment
winddancer13 you nailed YES
And from the beginning I've said that was a dead-end
tactic. The Party System as a whole is anachronistic and cannot be the vehicle by which the 99% take power. Playing by their rules is a sure fire way to lose.
I've also said from the beginning that Bernie's candidacy and it's outcome isn't as relevant as exposing the flaws of the system and getting folks engaged. I think Brand New Congress, Bernie's "win" page effort and all these must absolutely not reinforce the Democratic Party. If the "registered Democrat" route is the one they take the first step is to completely dismantle and rebuild the party. It'd be easier, and better, to simply form a third party and go that way, if they want to still work within the Party System.
So how do we unite?
I am in total agreement. I am currently registered Green, because I don't see any other options to challenge the duopoly.
I am hoping the People's Summit comes up with something. But what? A Rainbow Panther Party? I dunno.
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
It's so fucking complicated. There are so many players
and obstacles it makes it hard to even envision something that can turn this around. The bottom up approach, reorganizing societies into self sufficient socialist units all with equal status using a consensus approach appears to be the best bet going forward, but that doesn't address the global ruling class that controls the fate of the planet. At least probably not in time.
I think there should be a boycott of this election between Trump and Clinton. It can include those voting Green, those voting libertarian, those not voting, those writing in Bernie. It would have to be a united effort against the duopoly and by extension the oligarchy. These efforts by the people's summit, etc., are focusing on reform without challenging the power. Maybe we can start a challenge to the power using a boycott of this election as a springboard.
Boycott
I like your idea. I think the message will be stronger if people vote down ticket and leave the presidential line blank. No reason to abandon liberal/progressive voices.
More importantly, when low voter turnout in the US is brought up, there is a chorus that immediately begins singing that low voter turnout is an indication of public satisfaction with the way things are. If people were upset, the argument goes, they'd get out to vote. The possibility that no candidate is offering solutions to the things that are upsetting these people never comes up.
I have heard, about ballots
being trashed if you leave the presidential blank.
Is this true?
'Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P. Dowd "
That's exactly what happened in Puerto Rico
10 times as many voters for local office than for President. Of course, there was a reason...you had to go to two different places to vote for locals and President. But did anyone notice? Did anyone think, 'hey, what's the message here?" not that I heard.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Instead of boycotting, here's what I propose:
1. Start already insisting that 3rd party candidates are part of any presidential debates.
2. Make sure Green gets onto as many state ballots as possible.
??? Well, I'm (perhaps foolishly) still hoping for: indictment & voter fraud lawsuits soon enough before the convention, &, if need be, Bernie going Green.
How is the Green Party going these days?
I drifted away after Walt Sheasby died...
The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.
Re your first point, check out
my comment above:
http://caucus99percent.com/comment/115413#comment-115413
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
Perhaps first step is in your comment?
Maybe it's a small thing, but I've noticed this way of expressing party affiliation both here and at KFS. I think it's much better than reinforcing personal identity with a party (I am a...). Maybe no more possessive pronouns either? The Democratic party is not my party. It is the party with which I am currently registered.
I don't know if that would work with Rainbow Panther Party, though. It would be very hard to resist saying that I am a Rainbow Panther.
I think it will be about smaller groups
coming together for a similar cause. Helps eliminate some of the confusion about everything that needs to be done.
'Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P. Dowd "
The Devil's Advocate
Bernie is doing what he said he'd do from the beginning. I don't like that he's now living up to his word either (I'd definitely cheer a third party run), but would we respect him more if he didn't? He has a plan, and what happens has to wait until the convention is over. He isn't ready to act before that.
Bernie gave it a great run. He'd have won a fair fight. But as the infamous James Carville often said, "Politics ain't beanbag." Politics is a street fight anymore, and anything goes. Look at all the crap the major party candidates all pulled on each other, with the exception of Bernie. It's do or say what it takes to win, and the truth is the first casualty.
Bernie was trying to set a new example, one which incorporated fairness and integrity. He'd have to walk his talk, or he'd be dead meat under the attacks of the opposition of both parties. He is still walking his talk. For us to get hostile now reflects on us being impatient.
Save the acrimony for the convention, and use it to help Bernie. Once it's over, we'll know which way the wind blows, and we won't need a weatherman to figure it out.
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
I find the whole "he betrayed us" shtick highly
suspect as he is doing what he said he would do from the very beginning. People praise his integrity and then turn around and demand that he betray it by going back on what he has said time and again he would do.
If he does not get the nomination, he WILL support HRC (probably not in the manner she would like). He has said that forever. If he does not get the nomination, he will not run third party. His mistake has been in believing that We the People have equal integrity.
He is saying defeat Trump. He is not saying support HRC's policies. He keeps spelling out the policies that are needed and in no way do they reflect HRC's. Does anybody think he is going to turn around and say single payer, no never ever? Does anybody believe that he is going to say oh, yeah $12 is enough? Does anyone believe that he is going to say oh, yeah, big money in politics is not so bad after all?
He made it crystal clear in the Thursday speech what his policies are and how they can be achieved. Maybe some people are just afraid of the work and the disappointments that come when trying to make real change. Not many suffragettes or civil right's marchers left in the world today, is there?
Honestly, can anyone say what will happen to his ability to influence the agenda if he does not keep his word? Are people looking for a way to distance themselves emotionally from what they made Sanders out to be in their heads? Maybe some people need to take a deep breath and figure out why they are angry. Yes, we feel cheated...and rightfully so. I am sure Sanders is only to well aware that he was cheated also. Exactly what good would it do him or the revolution to call it out at this point? The Press: More whining from Sanders' campaign. And nothing will be done. Was the media, Obama and HRC right when they said that the voters saw him as a bright shiny new object?
If one really values integrity and honesty, then don't go around asking others to stop being honest and proving that his word means something.
Dammit.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
He said he'd support HRC
if she were the D nominee when asked in one of their debates - and that's when he lost me. (HRC waffled in her answer, never said she'd support Sanders if he were the nominee.)
But, when Sanders said he would support such a blood-drenched war-monger, well, that's when I lost interest in his "revolution" and felt vindicated in having already given up on and now continuing to stay out of electoral politics.
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
Your choice.
Of course you have weighed the consequences of his saying No and are satisfied that he actually had other options and still remain a viable candidate. I don't like that FDR's minimum wage system harmed Blacks, but that doesn't mean that I throw away the rest of his accomplishments, but that is just me. Everyone is free (at this writing) to do whatever they wish.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
WD, not everyone here feels betrayed. Heck, I've been trying
to convince folks since February or March of 2015 that Bernie had no intention of making a Third Party run.
Why did I say that? Because he told everyone who would listen, on national teevee--Sunday, after Sunday.
So, please, don't lump those of us who understood where Bernie was coming from--that he intended to work within the Democratic Party--with those who didn't get it.
Now, it is to be expected that some people, who didn't grasp what was happening, may experience feelings of betrayal, perhaps even deep betrayal.
IMO, we need to remember, that they are entitled to their feelings, as well. And that they have the right to express them here, the same as the rest of us--so long as it's done in a civil manner.
Otherwise, I think we're on the same page. Personally, I plan to work outside of the Democratic Party.
But, I certainly don't object to others working within the Party. After all, that's their business. (Not mine.)
FWIW.
Cheers!
Mollie
In Tribute To 'Barabas'
Please Visit Save Our Street Dogs [SOSD]
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
I know that there only a couple who have actually been
using the word "betrayed." It is such a $2 word, so fraught with implications. And I wonder why. Disappointed I can understand. Dissatisfied, unhappy, frustrated, chagrin...all good words to describe how many feel. Betrayed is a whole different animal. It would suggest that Sanders lied to us. He did not. Praise the integrity and then damn it when you don't like the results. It reminds me very much of a disinformation project I heard about somewhere.
I never lumped anyone together. I was speaking initially about the use of the word "betrayed." Then I tried to clarify what Sanders has said and what the results would have been if he had done otherwise. I then questioned whether or not people believed he was gong to start spouting HRC's policies. I do not believe that at any time I was uncivil. I try to present facts and ideas for people to think about, not demand that they agree with me.
(Yes, I know there are many people who heard what Sanders has said all along. I was addressing those who weren't listening.)
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass
Pages