Look, I suck. I get that.

[MannyGoldstein]

But, dammit, I can't recall ever seeing a spectacle quite as bizarre as the bankers über alles insanity in Washington.

It's a sickness. The virtual end of criminal prosecutions for financial crimes against the 99%, and Holder brazenly saying "Yeah, sorry, they're a protected class of people, not prosecutable". The fake fines imposed on banks that are so fake that Jamie got a 75% raise for his. And the full terms of these "settlements" are kept secret from the public - Elizabeth Warren's fighting to get them disclosed.

Now that SEC prosecutor telling us what we all suspected - that SEC jobs are really just an entrance exam for huge-bucks jobs on Wall Street. Hillary's "don't worry, I'm still on your side" $200k-per-appearance victory lap of that same street.

Remember when banker bonuses were in trouble, and Team Obama swooped in like a SEAL team on meth to save every last bonus dollar? In days, Wall Street's bonuses were safe again. Can you imagine if that kind of effort had been exerted on behalf of us little people? How come Jamie gets Presidential cufflinks, and I don't?

It's not as bad as phony wars, I guess, but people die from awful fiscal policies, too. Even with ObamaCare, a higher percentage of Americans are uninsured today then when Obama was elected. The 99% is in tough shape and the vultures are drooling.

I'm sick of this, sick of being peed on by everyone with power. And I'm sure that you're sick of me, so I'll STFU now, sorry.

[MindMover]

1. Please do not be sorry or stop being Manny ...

You are one of the few posters who use there mind for its purpose ... thinking ...

Grant you, sometimes your thinking should maybe stay with you, but overall it is still OK with me ....

[merrily]

80. Manny being Manny.

Theo Epstein, is that you?

[Roy Rolling]

185. Billy Joel said it best

"You may be right
I may be crazy
But it just may be a lunatic you're looking for"

[grasswire]

4. the old saying applies....

....there is no justice, just us.

[merrily]

87. Sometimes, I feel exactly the same and sometimes I think

Last edited Wed Apr 16, 2014, 01:59 PM - Edit history (2)

the basic framework was there from the days of the East India Company. Depends on my viewpoint du jour, I guess.

On edit: Oops. Guess I should have read "name removed's" the post more carefully before saying that I felt exactly the same. I was really agreeing with the sentiment about the rich running things, but I am sure the post was not removed for that part.

Wish I could remember whose post it was.

[grasswire]

3. I'm not sick of you, Manny.

You are speaking truth to power. There's never any reason to STFU about truth.

You are brave, and funny, and clever. Carry on!

[mimi85]

162. I AM sick of Manny and his negative rants.

Damn, could he ever be even slightly optimistic about anything?? All life isn't doom and gloom.

[grasswire]

164. didn't you get a hide button? nt

[mimi85]

205. Of course I did.

But that won't make him go away. Unfortunately.

[AverageJoe90]

199. Me too. Me too.

Frankly, this is about as annoying as hearing all this kerfluffle about (literal) "white privilege". or the resident climate doomers shitting all over perfectly reasonable climate articles whose points happen to disagree with their preconceived beliefs, etc.

Sick of all of that shit. C'mon Manny, you oughta get a clue, too.....like certain other folks around here.

[Vashta Nerada]

5. Righteous rant, Manny.

I, too, am against the oligarchy and I cannot wait to see someone in power topple said oligarchy.

[merrily]

111. If you are expecting someone now in power to topple the oligarchy, you

have almost a 100% chance of being disappointed. Those in power and those who put and keep them there are, by definition, the oligarchy. The oligarchy is not about to commit suicide. Murder, maybe. Suicide, no.

[sulphurdunn]

143. You are mistaken.

He has a 100% guaranteed certainty of being disappointed.

[Jack Rabbit]

171. If you are not an oligarch, then by definition . . .

. . . you are not in power.

[OnyxCollie]

6. I knew it was you by the title of your post.

Sad that you have to use a qualifier such as that.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. I figured that if I began by acknowledging that fact,

I might avoid the swarm that regularly swoops in to inform me of my suckdom.

Seems like it might be working... need more data points...

[OnyxCollie]

15. You suck is not a fact, it's an opinion.

PROPAGANDIST!

[MannyGoldstein]

23. Sounds like I rank with "evolution" in the pantheon

If my mother were alive today, she'd be very proud!

[Enthusiast]

116. I observe no suckage.

[treestar]

83. So did I

Could see the disruptive intent from the title.

[sabrina 1]

91. Got any comment on the Big Banks getting away with their corruption, not just getting away

with it, but being REWARDED with OUR Tax Dollars? Or is that just not important enough for us to bother with anymore? Airc, we were all OUTRAGED when Bush stepped in to protect the Mortgage Ind from being investigated by the FBI. Remember that? The FBI reported CORRUPTION in the Mortgage Ind and asked for more help in going after them. Bush, did the opposite, he moved FBI agents to 'terror' taking them out of the investigation into the Mortgage Crisis.

There was OUTRAGE across the Left blogosphere, justifiably imo. Were we WRONG?

[treestar]

128. Here's the comment

Criminals often get away with their crimes. The government has to prove it. And have the resources.

The bailout was for our purposes, not theirs.

Yes the outrage is silly. It's ginned up. Any government agency will have a hard time keeping up. Are you as interested in the failures of the FCC, the SEC, the EPA? I'm sure they don't get every bad guy either.

[sulphurdunn]

144. They cast a very large net

that catches only little fish.

[rhett o rick]

155. I am going to take a shot at guessing your point. You are outraged at the outrage. Am I close? nm

[awoke_in_2003]

167. "The government has to prove it"...

funny how very few people will investigate the people they work for.

[rhett o rick]

129. I you can see disruption in this thread, it might be a mirror.

Manny is complaining about the corruption of Wall Street, how is that disruptive?

[Dragonfli]

8. If you suck Manny (to some) it is only because the medicine required for a serious illness

very often is not only bitter but quite painful.

When the body becomes very ill, the conscious part of the body will try to rationalize any way it can how the medicine is bad, even worse than the disease and should be shunned, avoided, and even hated. The mind prefers to tell itself sweet lies such as "I am not really that ill" or "I am getting better without it". The mind can even convince you that the hope placebo you purchased online appears to be fighting the disease even though it is actually enabling the disease by replacing the true remedy that is so awful, you just don't want any part of it anymore.

In this case, the medicine needed to cure the madness in Washington is truth and a coalition to act on that truth. You speak the truth that placebo takers don't want any part of precisely because it is bitter, it is painful, and makes one nauseous to embrace and take the steps needed to cure the disease.

This country will not be healed by a placebo and carefully built denial of how deep the illness has reached and how much it has metastasized. Only the true remedy MAY possibly cure us, and that begins with truth and gazing into the true abyss of the reality we need to change if we are to survive.

Without the medicine we will surely die, even with it, it may already be too late and we may still die.

..but Manny, even if we might die, shouldn't we at least die trying to survive, even if the process is painful for the collective patient?

If you dare STFU, then surely I will have to make a trip to Mass. to place by steel toed work boot directly up your ass!! We need all the medicine vendors we can find....

[MannyGoldstein]

9. True. As Midnight Oil sang...

"it's better to die on your feet than to live on your knees".

The weird thing is that you're most likely to live if you're ready to die on your feet.

[nomorenomore08]

11. Very true. Most people who survive combat don't do it by hiding in foxholes. n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

17. I read a great book about Nazi Germany some years ago

"To the Bitter End" by Hans Gisevius. Gisevius was an early Nazi of some rank, who realized it had gone off the rails and quit the Party.

In any case, one of the things he wrote was that once he became a critic of the Reich it was important that he become a vocal critic. Until 1942 and the legal system disintegrated, the vocal critics were relatively safe because disappearing them would have been too obvious. The quiet critics disappeared... Poof!

[nomorenomore08]

22. Which is why I feel the need these days to stand up and fight, even if only with words -

and even if my commentary is mostly restricted to DU, Twitter and Facebook. I'm not fighting specifically against the Obama administration - I generally like the guy - but more against the whole entrenched, calcified, right-wing (Obama being essentially a center-right President) social structure. Which has just as much to do with individual citizens and their backward beliefs, as it does our corrupt government.

[sulphurdunn]

146. Yes, he is a status quo,

center right president, who had no problem selling himself twice as a slightly left of center presidential candidate to fools like me.

[arely staircase]

102. your like a brave nazi fighter in Hitler's Germany. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

150. Yes, that's exactly right.

[MannyGoldstein]

14. And speaking of medication...

One of the new medical weed shoppes will be opening soon a few blocks from my abode... Right next to the Whole Foods for tasty yet fibrous munchies. So if you do come equipped with your butt-kicking artillery, perhaps we can smoke a peace pipe before the main event.

[Dragonfli]

18. You're on! But I must warn you the peace pipe will drain all motivation to demploy said artillary

[MannyGoldstein]

21. That's kinda what I was thinkin'

I'm not as dumb as I look! (Thank God!)

[raouldukelives]

56. +1 nt

[WillyT]

10. You... Are The Wind Beneath My Wings !!!

YOU know what's goin on.

[MannyGoldstein]

24. It was the chili from Wendy's

Always does that to me. Sorry.

[Jackpine Radical]

104. I'm turning you in

to the EPA as an unregulated source of methane.

But no matter which orifice you're using you're singing my tune.

[KT2000]

12. Well said

The failure to prosecute and jail these criminals has sickened our country. Cynicism and distrust have grown out of this and it is changing the character of the 99%.
Communism is supposed to sap the life and enthusiasm out of its people. Capitalism and protection of its criminals has done the same in this phony democracy.

[calimary]

13. You had me at "Look, I suck. I get that."

[BuelahWitch]

16. Don't STFU

Ever.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

19. Don't you know our rich are what makes America great?

[merrily]

113. When can we look forward to that?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

120. Do you play the lottery?

[merrily]

123. No. Yet, I hope to win someday.

I used to bet all of $2 every time the payoff got huge. I'd get the ticket early, so I could be a multi millionaire (in my mind) from the time of purchase until the time of the drawing. That feeling for a few days seemed worth two bucks at the time. Then, I stopped buying entirely. Not sure why.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

133. Well, I'm in Vegas and we have video poker at the grocery stores....

Two weeks ago I won enough for a trip to Kmart.

It's a start.

[merrily]

134. I think one or two times, I might have won two or three dollars.

However, I split with the person who sold me the ticket--customary in my neighborhood--and then "reinvested" the "lucky" money in a losing ticket. Easy come, easy go, as they say.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

139. I've walked in with $40 and walked out with $1,000...

That sure paid off some bills.

[DeSwiss]

20. It's the ''isms'' -- they'll steer you wrong every time.

- If you've ever wanted to take the advice of a grown man playing a angst-ridden high school teenager who fakes illness by licking his palms and is sans vehicular capacity, now's your chance.

K&R

[Amonester]

25. Just fabulate that they won some kind of lottery.

Like, they 'found themselves' at the right place, at the right time in their lives, and with the plugs to win big. And bingo, they won the jackpot. There's nothing you and I can do about it, and you know it.

They won at 'some kind' of a lottery or something, we didn't.

Stop making ulcers about it, since it won't change anything.


On edit: Oops... forgot the thingie

[catchnrelease]

26. No, you don't. n/t

[DeSwiss]

27. Just for you Manny......

[center][/center]

[Caretha]

31. Hahaha

good one DeSwiss!

This is why I keep coming back to DU.

Manny's posts & those who are so damn thoughtful/brilliant like you.

[DeSwiss]

95. De nada.

[marions ghost]

37. ++++

[MannyGoldstein]

45. Aww, shucks

[raouldukelives]

55. Haha! Thanks for that! nt

[DeSwiss]

96. De nada!

[hueymahl]

63. So effing good!

Thanks!

[DeSwiss]

97. De nada.

[Jackpine Radical]

107. I just forwarded it to my list of Usual Suspects.

Beautiful!

[DeSwiss]

141. De nada!

- And thanks!

[Enthusiast]

119. That is a good one!

[DeSwiss]

142. Danke!

[haikugal]

28. I totally agree with you...

Never stop!!!!

No, you don't suck, they do!!

[newfie11]

29. We need more like you Manny

Keep it up! You don't suck!

[n2doc]

30. Today's bonuses are tomorrow's campaign contributions n/t

[Scuba]

32. Sorry, Manny, but you can't ever quit. We need you for stuff like this ....

[Maedhros]

76. The number of prosecutions holds steady, through Bush I and Clinton

and into the first year of Bush II.

Then 9/11 happens, and the number of prosecutions then steadily declines. Obama's poor showing in this regard is a continuation of the trend established by Bush II.

There was a fundamental change in the behavior of the Justice Department after 9/11, presumably because of the focus on "terrorism."
Convenient for corporate criminals, I guess.

[xchrom]

34. you're not alone in your 'suckage'. du rec nt

[99Forever]

35. Somebody sucks alright, Manny...

... but it sure isn't you.

[madokie]

36. Manny you remind me of my neighbor

who claims to be a democrat, is registered democratic but yet when I listen to what he says and read what he writes and pay attention to what he links too for me to read he is anything but a Democrat.
How do you round up that square hole?

[freedom fighter jh]

78. Yeah, I agree.

Manny claims to suck, even starts a thread with "Look, I suck" -- but he continues to post with insight and humor. How can you do that if you suck? How can you suck if you do that?

Manny, how do you reconcile these things?

[merrily]

131. In this thread, Manny linked only to alternet, described in wiki

as liberal/progressive.

[SwankyXomb]

182. You may be confusing Manny with Third Way Manny

The other name he uses. Third Way Manny indeed does suck mightily, and that's the point.

[ananda]

38. You don't suck, and your message is right on!

Thank you!

[TBF]

39. You're correct on this issue -

keep ranting & then rant some more.

[theHandpuppet]

40. Do you ever post a thread that doesn't begin with me, my or I?

It would be a nice change of pace.

[MannyGoldstein]

62. Looking at my last 10 posts, 3 had "I"

Including this one. No "me"s or "my"s.

The other two were "I think..." and "I'd like to thank..."

Given that I tend to post opinion, not news, I don't think that's too bad.

[merrily]

112. Yes, this thread, for one.

Granted, "I" is the second word, but this thread starts with "Look."

[sendero]

41. People don't get..

... or don't WANT to get, what is going on. The banksters own our government and they don't even try to hide it any more.

The sad thing is that even with all of this corruption, all of this extraordinary action to bail out the malefactors, our economy is still very likely to end badly and then what will the apologists say?

It will be a "who knew" fest just like after the Iraq war went south. Problem is, lots of people knew. Hell, everyone paying attention knew.

[Autumn]

42. Yes Manny, you suck. As far as some people are concerned.

The rest of us love you just the way you are. So you just keep on sucking.

[rhett o rick]

132. He's ok, I guess.

[Demo_Chris]

43. preach on brother manny. nt

[Rex]

44. You pissed off the establishment, nothing wrong with that!

What this town needs is an enema!

[malthaussen]

46. Sure, you're tense, irritable...

... but if you didn't suck, somebody else would have to do the job. Think of it as saving an innocent from humiliation.

-- Mal

[adirondacker]

47. Oligarchy, Love it or Leave it. And btw you Must be a Libertarian if you criticize it.

"MATT TAIBBI: So, HSBC, again, this is one of the world’s largest banks. It’s Europe’s largest bank. And a few years ago, they got caught, swept up for a variety of offenses, money-laundering offenses. But one of them involved admitting that they had laundered $850 million for a pair—for two drug cartels, one in Mexico and one in South America, and including the notorious Sinaloa drug cartel in Mexico that is suspected in thousands of murders.

And in that case, they paid a fine; they paid a $1.9 billion fine. And some of the executives had to defer their bonuses for a period of five years—not give them up, defer them. But there were no individual consequences for any of the executives. Nobody had to pull money out of their own pockets for permanently. And nobody did a single day in jail in that case.

And that, to me, was an incredibly striking case. I ran that very day to the courthouse here in New York, and I asked around to the public defenders, you know, "What’s the dumbest drug case you had today?" And I found somebody who had been thrown in Rikers for 47 days for having a joint in his pocket. So—"

[KoKo]

48. Recommend for Manny...and the other comments by the wise and funny on this thread...

[beerandjesus]

49. Speaking of those bonus dollars....

Remember how those bonuses just HAD to be paid because contracts are sacrosanct?


But for some reason, we never hear that same "contracts are sacrosanct" rhetoric when pensions are getting cut or axed outright!


That's what I found particularly galling about that whole episode... and by "particularly" I mean the icing on the cake of a situation that was already incredibly ugly....


+1 for keeping it real, Manny. I feel like you're an old friend, even though I'd never recognize you on the street unless you just happen to look like Nixon and Elvis shaking hands.

[marmar]

50. k/r just for this line ..............

"like a SEAL team on meth"

I've got to work that into a sentence today.

[Autumn]

53. I already did. Best line ever.

"like a SEAL team on meth"

[Le Taz Hot]

51. Nobody but the Party Faithful are "sick" of you, Manny.

But they're sick of anyone who doesn't pledge blind fealty to anything with a "D" next to their name. Keep posting Manny. I'm not posting on DU much anymore for my own reasons but I still read DU and you are one of the ones I look forward to reading. The Blind Patriots . . . not so much. They're boring as hell and they'll justify any action as long as their guy is doing it. That would be my definition of idiocy and I've never suffered idiocy well.

Keep posting, Manny. Most of us love you.

[RandoLoodie]

52. ideologues and propagandists

are the only ones who could possibly have a problem with what Manny said.

[merrily]

130. And people trying to pick up a few extra bucks by posting for $.

I guess they fall under the category of propagandists, even if they don't all do it out of conviction.

[raouldukelives]

54. K&R If at first you don't suck seed, keep on sucking til you do suck seed.

If the corporations were to be punished. Why, that would just punish each little individual owner and thanks to the funds from all those individual little owners, they never will be.
We get what we pay for.
We have people who try to get out the vote for progressive and liberal candidates and those who through corporate investments fund the attacks against them. Some people try to do both. Which, admittedly, is better than nothing.
Heck, with a heavy, concerted, door to door effort they might break even in their GOTV efforts.

[ballyhoo]

57. I just have started reading How America Was Lost

(From 9/11 to the police/warfare state) by Roberts and a lot of the things he says, you have posted here yourself, along with that dude here that got castigated for the "used car salesman" comment. Others too, but some now post with trepidation. I am not recoing the book because I haven't finished it--and may not because it is too scary. But I have read most of your posts since I started visiting here six years ago and see others see some things the way you do. I'm now into DDing the HR 2847 bill set to take effect 7-1-2014 with people from abroad and I'll be curious to see what you say about it along with Roberts. Oh, if Roberts is on a DNR list here, just forget it. Don't want to get you scurrilized (sic). Well, have a nice life, ace.

[Shivering Jemmy]

58. why are so many of your posts about you?

[Autumn]

60. Late to the party. That point has been covered already.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4828506

[dawg]

59. I think that the Democratic Party has made a calculated decision to be the party ...

of the *sane* rich and powerful.

The thinking seems to be that it is impossible to build a coalition of the little people because so many of them are apathetic, willfully uninformed, and willing to vote against their economic interests in order to give voice to their crazy religious and/or political beliefs.

Therefore, the only alternative is to appeal to upper-middle class professionals and rich people who do not share the insane religious and/or political beliefs being promoted by the Republican Party. As a bonus, the rich moderates have money and can make campaign contributions. Poor people cannot.

As a result, families making less than $150,000 a year or so have no one to represent us. We are a vast horde without a party.

(But the Democrats do give us lots of lip service, and ... hey ... they actually throw us a bone or two every once in awhile.)

[bvar22]

73. An ARMY of Poor People CAN demand "change".

Last edited Wed Apr 16, 2014, 12:52 PM - Edit history (2)

[font color=white]......[/font][font size=4]Obama's Army for “CHANGE”, Jan. 21, 2009[/font]

[font color=white].....................[/font][font size=4]"Oh, What could have been."[/font]

I fault President Obama for many things,
but the most grievous fault was to abandon his Army for Change.

He turned his back on his Army,
told them to Go Home and Shut Up while he helped the Banksters save their obscene "Bonuses".

[font size=3]"We can't begrudge them their wealth."
I KNOW some of these guys, "and they are just savvy businessmen".
"I mean, LOOK at all the baseball players."
"Its the FREE Market!"[/font]

The above words, spoken from the Bully Pulpit during overwhelming popular anger and demands for "Claw Back" are forever burned into my heart.
This was possibly the first time President Obama used the "Bully Pulpit" to advance a single issue in his Presidential Career,
and he used it to protect the Billionaire Wall Street Bankers while Main Street was drowning.



Opportunities for "change" like we had in 2008 only come around once a generation.
"Oh what COULD have been"
if President Obama had decided to LEAD the movement he created.

The movement eventually reformed as a Leaderless Movement for "Change" known as OWS.
We all know what Homeland Security did to them.


DURec for Manny.
Yeah, yeah...we all know you suck,
but you ain't no SUCKER.
You will never be left laying in the dirt of a Jonestown.

[font size=3]Think for Yourself.
Question Authority.[/font]
[font size=1]Thank You, Tim Leary.[/font]

[MannyGoldstein]

75. Bvar, I can't think of a single post of yours that I didn't love

But this one, and its variants, are best of all.

Thanks!

[rhett o rick]

154. Posts like that give me hope. We must fight on in spite of this set back. nm

[dflprincess]

189. ^^^what Manny said^^^

And I can't think of any of Manny's I haven't also loved.

[Maedhros]

79. I had never in my lifetime witnessed such incredible support for a Presidential candidate.

Those crowds were unreal. Even in a small backwater like Portland OR, Obama still drew a sea of supporters to hear him speak.

Then after the election, all we heard was "we don't have enough votes" to do anything. The gall! Have these people ever heard of whipping votes?

[bvar22]

88. But...but....

It was ALL Joe Lieberman's fault!
He was a BIG Supper Bully who beat up the President and the entire Democratic Party,
and RUINED everything!!!
It was HORRIBLE.
There was NOTHING we could Dooooo.

[Maedhros]

90. I'm serious, though.

Has nobody heard of Congressional Whips? Their job is to strong-arm recalcitrant party members into voting the right way. If recalcitrant members don't get in line, then there are consequences. This is how hardball politics works.

Shrugging their shoulders and saying "Oh well, Blue Dogs aren't on board" is an excuse and and admission that they really didn't try.

[MannyGoldstein]

149. LOL.

Lieberman is 12 feet tall! With huge sharp fangs!

[cheapdate]

173. Your sarcasm is actually quite accurate.

For those men and women in congress who were required to slog through the tedium of actually COUNTING VOTES, Lieberman was more than just a symbolic prop in an online argument -- he was an actual flesh-and-blood senator whose vote was necessary to move any legislation in a chamber divided on a razor's edge.

[bvar22]

177. Yeah, right.

President Obama and the Democratic Party were powerless over little Joe Lieberman.


[font size=3]"A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus."[/font]
-Rev Martin Luther King Jr.


Your Weak President characterization of Obama does him no favors.
The Presidency is an immensely powerful position.
Joe Lieberman could have been CRUSHED
ANYTIME Obama and the Democratic Party wanted to do so.
Lieberman served a purpose for which he was well rewarded.
Lieberman, former Chairman of the DLC, had nothing to lose,
so he Took One for Team DLC by playing Judas in the Kabuki Pageant.


Read Up on "The Johnson Treatment".
Get yourself educated on HOW politics is played.

"Johnson was the catalyst, the cajoler in chief. History records him as the nation's greatest legislative politician. In a great piece on the Daily Beast website, LBJ aide Tom Johnson, writes about how his old boss would have gotten a health care reform bill through the current congress. It's worth reading to understand the full impact of the "Johnson treatment" and how effective LBJ could be in winning votes for his legislation."

http://thejohnsonpost.blogspot.com/2009/08/johnson-treatment.html

President Obama is NOT a Weak President,
and it is an insult to characterize him as one.
He KNOWS how to play hardball.
He made it To-the-Top-of-the-Pile in CHICAGO...fer cristsakes.


Can you imagine what would have happens to poor little Joe Lieberman if he had stood up on his hind legs and told LBJ he wasn't going to vote for Medicare?

We would STILL be finding little pieces of Joe Lieberman's ass spread all the way from Connecticut to Texas.

If Obama had wanted to crush Lieberman,
he would have done so.
You are perpetuating Weak President myth (cover story) that any decent High School student can see through.
For you own sake and credibility at DU,
abandon this foolhardy mission.
The members of DU are much smarter than you think.


You will know them by their WORKS!

[cheapdate]

180. None of your bluster and insult,

Last edited Wed Apr 16, 2014, 10:15 PM - Edit history (1)

makes your argument any stronger that the political realities of the mid to late 1960s are legitimately comparable to the political situation in Washington and in the country today, and in particular, that LBJ would've easily 'whupped Lieberman into line or else he would've spread little Lieberman's ass "all the way from Connecticut to Texas."

LBJs own party had significant majorities in both chambers for most of his presidency. The going became much tougher after he lost that advantage. And even the opposition party at that time wasn't the opposition of today.

You couldn't time travel twenty-two of today's GOP senators back to 1965 and get them to vote for LBJs war on poverty.

You can try to dress up this highly speculative argument with all of the bluster you want but it doesn't make it one whit stronger.

1965 was almost 50 years ago. Barack Obama would've had a different presidency in 1965 (and probably passed a better health care law) and LBJ would've had a different presidency in 2014.

If wishes were horses and time travel was real....

(on edit : the corollary to your argument -- that if LBJ time-traveled to 2014 he could through sheer force of will push sweeping anti-poverty legislation through the GOP controlled house and over the 60-vote mark in the senate -- is utterly preposterous. Wake up to the real world. Fantasy is for little girls.)

[bvar22]

190. BS

[BlindTiresias]

194. Well

Its good to see people acknowledging the degeneration of the United States, I guess.

[cheapdate]

200. What's happened to civic and common virtues

in this country and how it's happened and who's been behind it is a story that's known to most people at DU, I'd wager. The patient and deliberate work of redefining Americans most basic conception of decency, compassion, the public good, etc., has been a long-term project of an organized, committed, well-funded, and well-connected group of ideologues that has borne fruit in the United States Congress on down to state houses and local governments from coast to coast.

But I'd like to believe that sanity and decency are turning the tide. The ugliness and meanness of their warped vision of society is beginning to show.

[BlindTiresias]

204. Ever heard of Nick Land?

Paraphrasing him: The trajectory of all societies is towards zombie apocalypse.

[cheapdate]

210. Bummer.

[sabrina 1]

92. Excellent post, bvar. 'There are none so blind as those who will not see'.

But the numbers of the willfully blind are shrinking. Someone is going to have to do something different to keep them in line. Cracking down on them with military grade weapons only confirmed their protests as legitimate. Wall St's army of robo cops were able to beat them up, put them in jail, eventually drive them off the streets, but they could not kill the truth they were telling. The powerful never seem to learn from history, that one simple fact, you cannot kill an idea and the more they brutalize peaceful protesters, the more legitimate the cause of the protesters becomes.

[BlindTiresias]

93. The seduction of the ring was too strong

[rhett o rick]

159. So do you think we were all duped? Or maybe the coup theory has some merit.

Maybe when Obama became president, he was given a talking to. We know that a lot of the powerful people that worked for Bush are still hanging around. Maybe the president is more of a figurehead than we would like to believe. Think of it this way. When Bush was president the executive branch operated without him. At least that's my opinion. So whoever was running the country then were still in power when Obama walked in the door. He didnt do any major shuffling, at least in the economic areas and intelligence agency areas.
Could Obama have been that good of an actor as a candidate?

[bvar22]

168. On my bad days, I see the same thing.

It doesn't matter WHO is sitting in the Oval Office,
or WHO holds majorities in Congress,
some things like Foreign Policy that supports Right Wing Police States and demonizes emerging true Democracies, and laws that favor the RICH NEVER change.

[font size=3]"Democracy will exist only as long as it is profitable . When it is no longer profitable , they will clear the stage , remove the scenery and throw open the curtains . Only then will you see the brick wall" [/font]--- FRANK ZAPPA


I believe we are at that stage where we can begin to see the brick wall.
I am guilty of believing the promises made to America's Working Class in 2008.

[rhett o rick]

208. I would state it differently than Zappa but meaning essentially the same.

"The Democracy charade is useful to fool the people into setting up a plutocratic oligarchy, after which the charade can be dropped."

We all shape the reality we believe in. There is no guilt in believing in hope and change. That's what really keeps us going. Reality may be that there really isnt much hope for reestablishing our democracy, but it really doesnt do us any good to go there. I do think it's harmful to deny there is anything wrong because our Pres has a nice smile and nice family. But people shape their reality in part to maintain their sanity. Poor Michael Ruppert couldnt deal with the reality he saw.

I believe in the elite theory of government. Not saying I like it, I just believe it's true. Our hope is that there are elitists that will recognize the value of democracy and a healthy middle class.

Keep up the fight, and keep posting.

[MisterP]

193. mobilize people for someTHING you have a goal: mobilize people for someONE and they can be passive

[Duppers]

61. Manny, you're the spice in our DU soup

Even if I don't *always* agree, we need your rants and humor, so keep bringing it to the table.

[hueymahl]

65. "swooped in like a SEAL team on meth"

Funniest thing I have read in a while!

Go get'm Manny!

[Hissyspit]

66. Paul Krugman: Why We're In A New Gilded Age

http://billmoyers.com/2014/04/16/paul-krugman-why-we%E2%80%99re-in-a-new-gilded-age

Thomas Piketty, professor at the Paris School of Economics, isn’t a household name, although that may change with the English-language publication of his magnificent, sweeping meditation on inequality, Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Yet his influence runs deep. It has become a commonplace to say that we are living in a second Gilded Age — or, as Piketty likes to put it, a second Belle Époque — defined by the incredible rise of the “one percent.” But it has only become a commonplace thanks to Piketty’s work. In particular, he and a few colleagues (notably Anthony Atkinson at Oxford and Emmanuel Saez at Berkeley) have pioneered statistical techniques that make it possible to track the concentration of income and wealth deep into the past — back to the early 20th century for America and Britain, and all the way to the late eighteenth century for France.

The result has been a revolution in our understanding of long-term trends in inequality. Before this revolution, most discussions of economic disparity more or less ignored the very rich. Some economists (not to mention politicians) tried to shout down any mention of inequality at all:

[G_j]

67. don't you dare STFU! eom

[SammyWinstonJack]

68. I'm not sick of you and I don't want you to STFU.

[Hissyspit]

69. Matt Taibbi: Too Big To Jail

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/gangster-bankers-too-big-to-jail-20130214

Gangster Bankers: Too Big to Jail

The deal was announced quietly, just before the holidays, almost like the government was hoping people were too busy hanging stockings by the fireplace to notice. Flooring politicians, lawyers and investigators all over the world, the U.S. Justice Department granted a total walk to executives of the British-based bank HSBC for the largest drug-and-terrorism money-laundering case ever. Yes, they issued a fine – $1.9 billion, or about five weeks' profit – but they didn't extract so much as one dollar or one day in jail from any individual, despite a decade of stupefying abuses.

People may have outrage fatigue about Wall Street, and more stories about billionaire greedheads getting away with more stealing often cease to amaze. But the HSBC case went miles beyond the usual paper-pushing, keypad-punching­ sort-of crime, committed by geeks in ties, normally associated­ with Wall Street. In this case, the bank literally got away with murder – well, aiding and abetting it, anyway.

For at least half a decade, the storied British colonial banking power helped to wash hundreds of millions of dollars for drug mobs, including Mexico's Sinaloa drug cartel, suspected in tens of thousands of murders just in the past 10 years – people so totally evil, jokes former New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, that "they make the guys on Wall Street look good." The bank also moved money for organizations linked to Al Qaeda and Hezbollah, and for Russian gangsters; helped countries like Iran, the Sudan and North Korea evade sanctions; and, in between helping murderers and terrorists and rogue states, aided countless common tax cheats in hiding their cash.

"They violated every goddamn law in the book," says Jack Blum, an attorney and former Senate investigator who headed a major bribery investigation against Lockheed in the 1970s that led to the passage of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. "They took every imaginable form of illegal and illicit business."

[1StrongBlackMan]

70. Yaaa, manny! eom.

[Phlem]

71. Manny You Don't Suck

But a lot of purist police on this board do. I'm with you 100%.

Stay in the game bud.

-p

[cheapdate]

72. I think a lot of your posts "suck".

I think that the practical consequences of your posts more often than not are to exacerbate artificial divisions along falsely drawn lines.

I think the atmosphere created by your mocking tone exacerbates shrill discussion, encourages intemperate self-righteousness, and discourages frank and thorough consideration of all aspects of the subject at hand.

I think that probably 95% or more of DUers are sick of getting "peed on", are aware of who is doing the peeing, and are equally as determined to stop the flow. But I think that many of your your posts, because of the way they frame the subject, often set up this weird dynamic where people who are in virtually complete agreement become embroiled in acrimonious argument over superficial matters.

[Maedhros]

81. The fundamental division is between people who think we should stay quiet, toe the line and give

unquestioning support to the Democrats, and people who think the Democrats need to be held accountable for their many failures.

Both sides can indeed get a bit shrill in their tone, but I think it's healthier to have vigorous and contentious debate than to go along to get along.

[cheapdate]

94. Debate is a passion of mine,

but this relentless drawing of lines in the sand over how far one is willing to go in demanding that the world conforms to a standard of ideal purity gets old.

I'm no longer amused by the way Goldstein frames these discussions. It inevitably leads to too much pointless posturing and misplaced indignation over largely imaginary and frequently irrelevant points of disagreement.

It's time to retire the act, in my opinion.

(on edit : any appearance that I'm suggesting that fighting for principles and ideals is not worthwhile is due to the limitations of posting online. That's not at all what I believe.)

[Maedhros]

106. Framing Manny's concerns as "ideal purity" is incorrect.

The policies of today's Democratic Party have strayed far, far from the traditional Democratic platform. Arguing for a return to traditional Democratic values is not a demand for "purity" - that language is disingenuous and designed to frame legitimate concern as fringe extremism.

[merrily]

110. Bomb throwing anarchists and those advocating and plotting the overthrow of the US

government by violent means used to be considered radicals. Now, it's people who think America should be run for the benefit of 99% of Americans and the Constitution should be obeyed.

By today's standards, even Ike would be part of the left allegedly lunatic fringe--and I am not one of those many Democrats who view Ike through a very rose-colored rear view mirror, either.

It's as though we've belatedly gone Through the Looking Glass straight into the Newspeak of 1984.

Luckily for the allegedy mainstream Democrats, Bill Maher got a lot closer to the truth, namely: Democrats have gone right and Republicans have gone insane. (Not his exact words, but close enough.)

Fortunately, the majority of Americans are sane, so those who admit to being Republicans will continue to be in trouble at some polls. It's a wonder that they win as many elections as they do. Well, maybe not a wonder, but I don't have a better word right now.

[cheapdate]

138. Excellent observation.

Last edited Wed Apr 16, 2014, 05:45 PM - Edit history (1)

I prove my own point. My argument was that Goldstein's manner of presenting the questions and issues inevitably results in "pointless posturing" over "largely imaginary" disputes -- and here I go and prove my own point by making a careless remark that generalizes and frames a common perspective as extreme and lacking any nuance.

Rinse and repeat. "Apologists" versus the "purity police".

I think Goldstein's incessant sarcasm provokes these dead arguments over and over again.

[xocet]

109. Instead of Manny retiring his commentary, it would be better if you retired your reading of his OP's

.... That way everyone wins.

[cheapdate]

147. I'm not suggesting that Manny retire

his commentary, or his opinion, or that he should moderate or change his beliefs in any way, or that he should refrain from speaking his mind on DU.

I'm saying that the sarcasm is overdone. Occasional sarcasm can be used to make a concise argument, challenge a belief, or to provoke a meaningful discussion.

It can also provoke needless confrontation and misunderstandings.

I think it's overdone.

[bvar22]

174. If "debate" is a "passion" of yours,

....one would think that you would be better at it.

[cheapdate]

176. One may believe what one wishes.

One may even propose my stated "passion" as a conditional argument.

[randome]

99. In your solar system, there is Mercury and Pluto. Nothing in between.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[840high]

74. MLK

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

keep posting Manny.

[Rider3]

77. If you suck, then I suck, too!

Because I feel the same way. Nice to have company.

[Fuddnik]

82. We're one big gravitational field here.

We all suck!

And rip the space-time continuum.

[Hutzpa]

84. Manny this fight is in a way a losing

battle, the deeper we go the more darker it becomes, every freaking asshole that we consider an allies is either a part
of or fighting to become a member of some kind of fraternity. "It is crazy out here for a/the pimp99%" I'm actually coming to the
conclusion that we're fighting a losing battle.

[MannyGoldstein]

85. It was like that in 1932, too.

But the good guys ended up winning. So there is a chance.

But the good guys don't always win, of course.

[Hutzpa]

89. And technology was also a thing of

future adventure, I can safely say that what we have going for us is technology and that is what we really need to hold on to and never ever
let go of because they are desperately seeking a way to eradicate the whole series of tubez. We too can create our own fraternity that will
be unbreakable. Now thats a start, if I can only google, maybe facebook it or tweet it I can be saved just that I do not want to become what
I'm fighting against.

This is not for the faint hearted, sorry.

[BlindTiresias]

98. Not similar

1932 had mass movements of socialists/communists and unionists that were placing significant pressure on the government to reach a compromise. There is no equivalent existing today.

[Dragonfli]

115. Thats a very good point because of the Red purges, we no longer have any voices farther to the left

than the moderate left which they actually claim inaccurately is "extreme" left. While unfortunately the fascists were not equally purged, they simply stopped identifying as such. Most of them kept their money from their dealings with Mussolini and Hitler and they remained entrenched as captains of industry, Prescott Bush comes to mind.

People forget that it was a compromise between the Communists and the Fascists that saved capitalism under FDR's moderate left Regulated capitalism with a dash of light socialism.

[bvar22]

117. There IS hope.

It was a losing battle in Venezuela and other Latin American countries.
The 1% OWNED all of the Media and occupied all of the positions of power in Venezuela before 1999.
Venezuela was being mined for its natural Resources by Global Absentee Landlords while the Venezeulan people starved by the millions in the favelas of Caracas.

The Bush Administration, obsessed with Iraq, took their Eye off the Ball in Latin America long enough for their 99% to hold fair elections and put representatives of The People in positions of power. This change has spread to numerous other Latin American countries.

NOW,the Poor are celebrating
and the RICH are protesting.
(as it should be)

They accomplished nothing short of a near bloodless Ballot Box revolutions.
They have given us the Blue Print for change.

When our Working Class & Poor realize we have more in common with each other
than we have in common with the 1% and their mouth pieces in Washington,
we can have change too.


Spread the word.
VIVA Democracy.
I pray we get some here soon!

[rickyhall]

86. Whoever thinks you suck SUCKS DONKEYS

[arely staircase]

100. ah. your favorite topic again nt

[Arkana]

101. It's cute that you think anyone cares enough.

[JohnnyRingo]

103. Is this the shiny object of the week?

"Accentuate the negative" could be the unofficial motto at Fox News. There's little to brag about among GOP pols, so Fox scours the headlines looking for anything at all that can shed unfavorable light on this president. Then, they script the story into language that appeals to the base that faithfully tunes in, and use it to reinforce the already discontented audience to the message that the wrong president is in the White House.

Last week you were boiling mad about Obama and the NSA, and this week you apparently found the only thing that Matt Tabaii ever said that conveniently drove you to rage. I've read Tabaii for years in Rolling Stone, and love his writing, but I don't recall ever seeing a post from you citing the damning evidence of republican interest in campaign finance fraud he's written about in detail, or how the GOP colludes with insurance companies to fix rates and diminish coverage.

Instead, you search the news of the week for a problem that may appeal to the liberal base here, carefully weave Obama's name deep into the issue, and word it in such a way as to repeatedly bash this president over the head. You get your accolades from the disillusioned and discontents, but your patented style of manufactured and keenly focused outrage is one that would make Roger Ailes proud. It seems to me that you're both working frenzied opposite ends of the political spectrum toward the same common goal. In this case, you slyly reinforce the Fox News accusations of "cooked books" on the ACA enrollment figure.

I'm hardly an Obama cheerleader here in DU, he's far from the liberal wet dream caricature that Fox News painted him as years ago, but I'm also not the polar opposite of one. You have that covered nicely.

I'm also not about to tell you or anyone else here to STFU, but it'll be interesting to read what new item gets under your skin next week, and how that can be crafted into a brief and undetailed Obama drive-by hit piece.

[msanthrope]

108. And for this, you win the Internets. Absolutely brilliant post.

An historical term I like to point out.....


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratfucking

Remember...the concerns always come from the "Left."

[hueymahl]

122. And there you go Manny

A couple of folks who think you do suck. They had to come crawling out at some point.

[JohnnyRingo]

140. I don't think I said that...

...and I hardly crawl from anywhere.

While the martyrdom is a new angle for him, I've noticed over time that his posts follow a certain format. In them, he always picks a populist cause guaranteed to garner support in DU, then uses as few words as possible to tie in Obama as the primary antagonist of our woes. not just sometimes or often, but always.

I'm certainly not in disagreement that the 99% is at a disadvantage, I only find difference in that we can all point our collective fingers at this president for doing nothing to help on every left wing issue we face today.

For a while I thought he was just a post count junkie who puts up five simple sentences following the proven formula of "I've had it with ____, and I'm not going to take it anymore!", and sit back to watch the replies and recs pile up, but given time I've grown to suspect that he may have a deeper motive.

I don't always agree with William Pitt, and he does his share of holding the president to account, but he always pens an excellent piece to make his point. I really like reading his well composed and sometimes wordy style. In the case of this poster, he seems to follow the proven propaganda rule that if it fits on a bumper sticker, everyone will read it, then honk and wave. Whatever the method, this guy always cleverly threads Obama's name into the very brief text to direct the collective rage toward his obviously intended target.

If I were to read this post to someone who never heard of DU, I imagine they'd come away with an assumption that it was written by someone who simply despised this president for one reason or another, and wanted to spread his underlying message that the wrong person is in office. Certainly one gets that impression upon reading his posts on a weekly basis. The format, if you'll notice, is always the same... only the cause is changed in each post.

I don't care if the reason for his (or your) disdain stems from the failure to get Hillary or Kucinich into office back in '08, or if there are other more base motives, but with each and every post it becomes more apparent that his cause is less than that of a liberal activist and more specific to discrediting this president. If that's what it takes to rally DU these days, so be it, but I'm not on board the bandwagon.

[bettyellen]

157. Yep, as formulaic as Mad Libs, and just as entertaining.

[arely staircase]

165. the formula

Obama sucks and me me me me .

[bettyellen]

198. HA.........I thought it was the reverse, but I guess that's how we keep the same ole same ole....

sounding fresh, instead of like the old turd it actually is.

[randome]

153. Your hero-worship is as annoying as Manny.

Just because Manny plucks your heart-strings doesn't mean he can't defend himself. Let him. He wants to make this about him, let him go at it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[MannyGoldstein]

156. .

[Number23]

161. A bit OT but did you see the post on Snowden a few days ago?

Last edited Wed Apr 16, 2014, 08:33 PM - Edit history (1)

It was a Huff Post article on how the Pulitzer win was also a victory for Snowden.

You should have seen that thread. It was nothing short of hilarious. It had about 50 recs and slightly more replies and the whole thread was Snowden supporters insulting everybody that doesn't think he's Paul Revere including calling folks "howler monkeys" and wondering when the folks that don't support him would "show up".

No one besides the lovers did and when they finally got done with their self-congratulatory high fives, back slaps and nervous laughter, I guess they finally looked around, realized that no one besides them gave even the tiniest of shits and the thread finally slept. That was one of those DU moments where I almost cracked a rib laughing and had to hold my head to keep my eyes from rolling out at the same time. I know that if you'd seen it you would have been cracking up as much as I was.

[msanthrope]

172. Yes...I tried not posting and laughing. Whatever masturbatory fantasy Comrade

Eddie is having about himself winning the Pulitzer, the reality is that the Guardian and the WaPo won...no one else..which is why that thread went no where. But it's not about Snowden, right? Guess who will be on the dias? Not Eddie.

[Number23]

175. Oh, he'll be there in spirt, there's no doubt of that. And I don't have a problem with that

to be honest. There would have been no story or Pulitzer without his theft of classified documents.

But it was the glee from his supporters that he has somehow been "vindicated" because of the Pulitzer win that had me scratching my head. The Pulitzer is affirmation of the reporting, not the subject matter and as with all prizes, it is open to subjectivity. Even the committee acknowledged that his actions were controversial.

But really, it was the maniacal tossing of insults and nervous high fiving while constantly scanning the thread for infidels that had me lolling. That was just classic.

[msanthrope]

178. Snowden can use his faux Pulitzer in his bargaining sessions with the DOJ. nt

[sabrina 1]

183. Lol! We know, the reporting of Snowden's leaks would have happened even if Snowden had never been

born!!

That is what I learned on DU.

It hurts for those who have broken our laws when Whistle Blowers are honored as Snowden has been over and over again, with the acknowledgement that what he has done for this country, took so much courage.

There will be more awards for him, and hopefully for Chelsea Manning who tragically sits in jail while the War Criminals she exposed, are wined and dined in this country, for now.

Thanks to all the Whistle Blowers, and those to come, and I have no doubt there will be more considering the long line we have seen since the criminal Bush gang began tearing apart our Constitution, for exposing them, time after time. And now finally, the people are getting it.

Pulitzer, under the bus, with Matt Taibbi, Jeremy Scahill, Amy Goodman, Thom Hartmann, Chris Hedges, Glenn Greenwald, even Kos, once a total DLC/Third Wayer, finally waking up like so many others, and the long list of Lefties who once were lauded here, now all under the proverbial bus, where most of us on the Left, now WANT to be.

It's been an education these past few years. A very, very valuable education.

Edward Snowden has been acknowledged in this award. It just cannot be denied that his leaks were invaluable information for the American public, not so for the perps though Bush's old cronies, like Clapper et al.

[BlindTiresias]

188. Wait

People hate on Chris Hedges? Why?

[sabrina 1]

191. Yes, maybe because, like Snowden, he reveals 'inconvenient truths'. I admit, it is hard to believe

we would ever see people like Hedges slammed on a Democratic forum, but times have changed, and as I said, we have been rudely awakened over the past few years to some pretty disturbing facts we were not aware of before. Hedges was one of those who was not as surprised as some of us more naive people. And for that, yes, some cannot stand him. Telling the truth in times like these can be a hazardous occupation. I doubt he cares, but it is interesting, no?

[BlindTiresias]

192. Indeed

That is simply amazing as he was one of the voices in the woods that fully condemned the Bush administration. Its not like he suddenly switched ideologies, he is merely applying the same standard against Obama that he was with Bush. If this is upsetting to people it shows more about their own commitments than Hedges'.

[Number23]

160. A+ thread winner

I've read Tabaii for years in Rolling Stone, and love his writing, but I don't recall ever seeing a post from you citing the damning evidence of republican interest in campaign finance fraud he's written about in detail, or how the GOP colludes with insurance companies to fix rates and diminish coverage.

Msanthrope's post covers this phenomena perfectly.

You get your accolades from the disillusioned and discontents, but your patented style of manufactured and keenly focused outrage is one that would make Roger Ailes proud.

[JoePhilly]

186. +1

The Wheel of Outrage spins round and round.

[sabrina 1]

196. You're not upset about Bush policies, like the massive spying by the NSA? Not upset

about what we once were very upset about, when Bush covered up for the Wall St? I wouldn't call these issues 'shiny objects, they are serious issues and Manny is certainly not the ONLY one to be upset about them. In fact, airc, some of the same people who now seem to be rather 'apathetic' about them, were absolutely OUTRAGED when it was Bush occupying the WH. Was it just a shiny object to them after all, because it was the 'other team' back then? I admit to thinking they sincerely CARED about those issues.

I guess like Manny, I was wrong. Good to know though, it hasn't helped that so many of us actually thought the issues themselves were serious enough that the Left/democrats were pretty united in working to change the policies left behind by Bush, the NSA eg, and the corruption on Wall St.

And btw, who cares what Faux thinks (they don't think) or has to say? This is the equivalent of worrying about what your fundie neighbors might think about how you dress on Sunday. Who cares? I personally only care about the opinions of people I respect and tend to ignore those for whom I have zero respect and just keep on doing what is right.

[JohnnyRingo]

203. Of course I don't approve of such policies.

I don't think that's what I take issue with. I just wonder what the brand new issue will hit the fan next week, as there seems to be an endless supply of outrage from specific people these days. I have to wonder how these particular malcontents even cope with day to day life, considering how easily set off they are and their seemingly constant state of furor.

It's different when a multitude of DUers voice discontent over legitimate gripes, I concur with the less conspiratorial of them, but when the same person runs what amounts to a weekly newsletter about what steams him at the moment and how Obama's to blame, it attracts attention and causes many to question the motive. As I pointed out, no matter the issue, he always threads Obama's name into the text as the primary antagonist. Not sometimes, or not even most of the time, but every single time.

In this case, the poster even casually cemented the Fox News talking point that the numbers for the ACA were fudged, and more people are without insurance than before he took office.

For the record, I didn't get that upset when I discovered Bush was tapping everyone's phone after 9/11. I figured it was a trade off for our life in the information age. What I didn't like was his purposeful policy of circumventing FICA courts when compiling evidence to use in court. I may be naive, but I don't believe that's happening now. At least I haven't heard of it.

[sabrina 1]

206. Apparently a whole lot of Democrats agree with this 'person' on issues that they do not, as you

appear to do, view as 'shiny objects' but take very seriously. These are NOT 'new' issues, the are now sadly old issues though no less important to the American people, unless of course those who don't like the US Constitution which grants some 'inconvenient rights' to the American people, as Bush said, that 'quaint old document'. We KNOW how he felt about the people having ANY RIGHTS and these are HIS policies which totally violated those rights.

But I understand now where YOU are coming from, thanks at least for being honest about it. This explains your problem with people like Manny, who is by NO MEANS alone in his views on our rights:

For the record, I didn't get that upset when I discovered Bush was tapping everyone's phone after 9/11. I figured it was a trade off for our life in the information age. What I didn't like was his purposeful policy of circumventing FICA courts when compiling evidence to use in court. I may be naive, but I don't believe that's happening now. At least I haven't heard of it.

I can't imagine anyone, especially on the Left, not having a problem with the most corrupt, illegitimate, anti Human and Civil Rights administration USING 9/11 so cynically to take away the rights of the American people totally in violation of his oath of office, which requires only ONE THING of our elected officials, 'to defend and protect the Constitution of the US'.

Do you know why this was considered to be the most important thing required of our elected officials? They are NOT asked to 'protect and defend the US', or 'the American people'. But to protect and defend the Constitution of the US against ALL ENEMIES, both foreign AND DOMESTIC'. It was brilliant. But you say you had no problem with Bush violating his oath of office.

How sad.

Maybe it is our educational system that has failed. Why would ANYONE trust ANY LEADER who was willing to violate their oath of office? The only thing I can think of is they do not understand the importance of that oath.

Anyhow, thanks for your honest response, it makes me very sad.

[JohnnyRingo]

211. I don't think you completely understand...

I don't know how old you are, but back in the '80s I was a member of the ACLU. What spurred me to join then was my UAW concern that companies were beginning to do random drug testing. I felt the practice was an opening for companies to do "fishing expeditions" on workers they didn't like. (me?)

I think we all know how that court battle went, but it wasn't the only thing on the ACLU's plate back then. It was the decade when we all realized that those fancy new cordless phones we were using were broadcasting our private calls to anyone with a common police scanner. The ACLU took up the fight to prevent police from being able to listen in when we weren't already suspected of a crime.

I didn't pay that much attention to the case, but I recall a court decision at the time ruled that no one should expect undue privacy when they're purposely broadcasting their signal through the airwaves like a small radio station. Police scanners and phone frequencies were changed to prevent our neighbors from listening in, but the signal remains accessible to anyone with a specialized receiver.

These days I have to wonder if using a wi-fi or 4G connection to broadcast your conversation is any different legally. You have to wonder why no one seems interested in taking the whole matter to court. Do you think it's because there's no chance of winning on account of the previous ruling? I'm no lawyer, and I don't follow it like you are, but I don't see anything effective currently proceeding through the legal system.

Regardless, those who believe their civil rights are being violated, should help out by joining either the ACLU or the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). Taking these cases to court requires money much more than blasting out an indignant and ignorant post on DU. If you (and Manny) really are seeing this as one of the most important issues we face today, then you should put you hearts and money into it. Otherwise it's just sad to hear people crying about something when they're unwilling to do anything material about it.

The base of the word activism is active, and don't try telling me that you're working tirelessly "getting the word out", because no one outside the DUniverse is listening. (Well, maybe the NSA too- LOL)

https://www.aclu.org/

https://www.eff.org/

You should at least go to those sites now to see where they are on NSA surveillance and find out how you can help ...or you can wait to see if a hopeful president Warren or Sanders rides in on a white horse in 2016 and does all the heavy lifting for you. I already know what I'd do.

[sabrina 1]

212. I am very, very familiar with the work of EFF and the ACLU on this matter down through the years.

But thanks anyhow. I certainly have followed the legalities from the moment the first Whistle Blower exposed what were clearly violations of the 4th Amendment.

Immediately afterwards in accordance with the current law at that time, hundreds of law suits were filed against the telecoms and anyone else involved in the violations of the law at that time.

Had you been following events and the obvious outrage, which most definitely did more than just talk on the internet, IT FILLED HUNDREDS OF LAW SUITS, I and many others, who were customers of one or other of the perpetrators at the time, learned that according to the law, should the Telecoms every violate the law were entitled to a settlement of at least $1,000. 00. That of course would have cost the collaborators quite a bit of money, not to mention those who were taking them to court.

So, you ask, why has more not been done by people like me and Manny?

Here is the reason why. No sooner did all the lawsuits begin than our Government decided something had to be done to protect, NOT THE PEOPLE, but the law breakers!!

They moved quickly to, incredibly, change the law, RETROACTIVELY, covering the period of the law breaking.

That little chess move became known as the FISA Bill Amendment! Instantly all of us who had, under the ACTUAL law, the right to sue or to claim settlements, millions of customers, suddenly discovered that Congress had removed those rights on behalf of the Telecoms.

So all the lawsuits went away as the law was now amended covering for the violators.

Imagine that. Being so powerful that when you violate the law of the land and get caught, you can go to the US Government and get them to CHANGE THE LAW on your behalf.

The people, including EFF the ACLU and many other Civil Rights organizations were outraged. And still are, see Manny, me and millions of others. And people will remain angry and continue to support those who are still working to try to restore the Rule of Law in this country.

I get that there are those who would like all of us to just 'move forward' from these egregious acts by our own Government to protect the law breakers, but that isn't going to happen.

Thanks for your 'advice' btw, but generally it is best to ask people what they are doing, who they are donating to, what they know before deciding to offer them advice they don't need.

As I said, your comment made me sad, not so much because of you, but because it demonstrated that they GOT AWAY WITH IT even with people who are generally more informed than the average person.

Because while people like me an Manny won't ever forget that travesty committed by Congress against the people, in order to undo the harm they did by covering up the crimes they KNEW were crimes, every person who is aware of what they did will be needed to try to restore some justice for the people in this country.

I never expected much help from the right on these Bush policies, they were too blinded by partisanship to even see the assaults on their rights, but I did, perhaps naively, think that our side would continue to fight those policies until the rights granted under the US Constitution were restored.

That is why your comment made me sad.

[JohnnyRingo]

213. Well, I'm glad to see you're actively doing something about it.

For that, I apologize for my assumption.

I'm personally more concerned with the downturn of union membership in this country and how that affects upward mobility for the working class, but I don't like the government to hear me talk on the phone to my girlfriend either.

I guess everyone has a particular issue that motivates them that others think is insignificant, but I don't think any one of them is the sole qualifier to be defined a liberal. Or sad pity.

BTW...
I'm obviously not as well informed as you about the topic, and I wondered if the government under this president has used any of the info they gleaned illegally in a criminal investigation, or as evidence in a court of law. If so, then I guess I understand why Manny et al are so upset with Obama and Holder. Clearly, that would mean he's no better than Bush on this matter.

[Fumesucker]

201. Only Reagan Democrats understand what it is to be a *real* Democrat

[erronis]

105. Is it too early in the morning for the gate crashers?

Has anyone else noticed that the RoWbots have been particularly quiet on this and a few other recent posts?

Are they regrouping? Are they huddling with the head RoVebot? Did their xxx Agency funding dry up temporarily? How will we ever know?

Keep on Mannying your post, please!

[Enthusiast]

114. Kicked and recommended! This thread should have hundreds of recommendations!

Where are they? How can anyone deny Manny's assertions?

[marble falls]

118. Nothing to apologize for. I'm with you on every word of this. More of us need to question .....

what you're questioning. Questioning the President's actions is not the same as slamming him.

[merrily]

121. I'm sick of it, too.

Maybe someday, we'll all be sick enough of it to do something about it.

Obviously, we are not in enough pain to take risks. Maybe they will never let us get to that point. Besides, they are very well armed, and we are very well surveilled. It's not 1931 anymore, or even 1961.

What if a lot of us stopped filing tax returns, even if we paid what we think we owed? Anyone willing to take even that much of a risk? If so, how are we going to publicize it enough to get a significant number on board?

[JI7]

126. .

[rock]

127. Unfortunately, you do not

Too bad.

[MineralMan]

135. Nah. Not going to bite.

Here's a little story I'd like to relate.
Every fish bite if you got good bait.

[frylock]

136. you suck like a fox

[Rex]

137. Continuous anger fueled by 175 recs...alternative source of energy?

How do we get it to the consumer is the real question.

[navarth]

145. I don't know why people hate on you but

I think you do NOT suck. My 2 cents.

[zeemike]

148. The only question I can answer is about the cuff links.

It is because you are not in the club Manny...not in the club.
It is a big club but you and I are not in it....no cuff links for you.

[BlueCheese]

151. Jamie Dimon gets presidential cufflinks because he's a savvy businessman.

President Barack Obama said he doesn’t “begrudge” the $17 million bonus awarded to JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon or the $9 million issued to Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein, noting that some athletes take home more pay.

The president, speaking in an interview, said in response to a question that while $17 million is “an extraordinary amount of money” for Main Street, “there are some baseball players who are making more than that and don’t get to the World Series either, so I’m shocked by that as well.”

“I know both those guys; they are very savvy businessmen,” Obama said in the interview yesterday in the Oval Office with Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which will appear on newsstands Friday. “I, like most of the American people, don’t begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free-market system.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aKGZkktzkAlA

[ybbor]

152. Don't ever STFU

I love your rants! Said so well and pointedly. Rock on Manny!

[stage left]

158. I'm in the unfortunate position of being to able to understand both sides of the Obama divide.

At least partly. And to agree with both sides at different times in different measures. So I think maybe you only suck North Northwest. Or maybe I'm schizophrenic.

[arely staircase]

163. rec'd for accurate headline. nt

[sheshe2]

181. ...

[nikto]

166. You DO NOT suck 1 bit

Those you criticize hold the monopoly on sucking.

And they do not share!

[vt_native]

169. I'm on team Manny!

Love your posts and your perspective!

[Corruption Inc]

170. But if we throw them in jail the ENTIRE ECONOMY WILL COLLAPSE, Ohhhhh Noooooo!

Everyone knows that if pure criminals aren't allowed to steal everything from us then we will lose everything!

The insanity of political propagandists and their criminal interests never ends.

[samplegirl]

179. The way you think does suck

by the way Elizabeth Warren is not running!

[sabrina 1]

184. Yeah, it sucks to care about this country. It sucks to want the rule of law to apply to Wall St and

War Criminals. It sucks to face facts, they ARE depressing. It sucks to tell the truth when some do not want to face the truth. All that sucks. But what sucks even more is the decline of this nation's working poor and middle class, what sucks is the economic inequality and that the Right Wing policies we USED to oppose are now supported by SOME on the Left.

I'll take Manny over War Criminals going free any day. I'll take Manny over Wall St Criminals never facing justice and worse, being rewarded for their crimes, any day.

I'll take facts no matter how depressing, over propaganda, any day.

It sucks that we are not in a better place after working so hard to get here.

And it sucks that anyone would be satisfied with the state of this nation, especially anyone on the Left.

[pecwae]

207. Bravo!

[Phlem]

187. Wow Manny you suck so much

you got 225 recs!

You totally suck........On Your Milkshake!

Seriously though there are some real assholes on DU, I'm glad you have thick skin.

Great Ops Manny, keep em coming.

-p

[blkmusclmachine]

195. "Too Big To Fail" versus "Too Small To Matter"

[octoberlib]

197. I highly recommend this book. The problem is systemic and has existed for a long time

It no longer matters who sits in the White House,” former Goldman Sachs managing director Nomi Prins writes in her new book “All the Presidents’ Bankers: The Hidden Alliances That Drive American Power.” “Presidents no longer even try to garner banker support for population-friendly policies, and bankers operate oblivious to the needs of national economies. There is no counterbalance to their power.”

Prins, who also worked for Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Chase Manhattan Bank, is now a fellow at the think tank Demos and a member of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ Federal Reserve Advisory Council. Salon spoke with Prins about a century of presidential coziness with bankers; Barney Frank’s defense of big banks’ power; and how to “break the alliances” before they “break us.” A condensed version of our conversation follows.


It’s no secret that big banks play a big role in shaping U.S. banking policy. Your book argues they play a big role in all kinds of areas, like foreign policy. How broad, deep and consistent is the role of big banks in U.S. policymaking?

Throughout the century that I examined, which began with the Panic of 1907 … what I found by accessing the archives of each president is that through many events and periods, particular bankers were in constant communication [with the White House] — not just about financial and economic policy, and by extension trade policy, but also about aspects of World War I, or World War II, or the Cold War, in terms of the expansion that America was undergoing as a superpower in the world, politically, buoyed by the financial expansion of the banking community.



http://www.salon.com/2014/04/15/we_are_in_great_danger_ex_banker_details_how_mega_banks_destroyed_america/

[MannyGoldstein]

202. That looks really interesting

I added it to my list, thanks.

[burfman]

209. Dude you captured my thoughts exactly....

I think the correct word to describe most of us here is suckers.....

Got to treat the rich with kid gloves or else you can't be elected in this country.....