Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


calimary's Journal
calimary's Journal
May 1, 2012

She's quite correct. We have to get a LOT more militant about it. And relentlessly, too.

And it's really put us, and our country, our whole society, at risk. We've been WAAAAAY too lax on fiercely protecting the ground we've gained, at the same time that we have adversaries who are out for blood, around the clock, and NEVER rest or relax or savor what they've won. They're ALWAYS on a rampage. Which means we also ALWAYS have to be on guard. We can't just roll over and go back to sleep once some law has been passed or some new civil right has been secured or beneficial new program has been enacted. We have to back all of those up with determination and force, and be The Firewall From Hell to the bastards who would send us careening back in time to some imaginary utopian Beaver Cleaver America that never really existed (except for a very lucky and wealthy few).

We have to be combatants - on offense, not reacting or playing defense. Proactive like we've never been proactive before.

Scuba, I think your liberal sister just summed it up REALLY succinctly. Just NAILED it in a way I've not seen put to words so basically.

"Damn the Republicans and their long-term strategy -- makes me think of JFK's book 'While England Slept.' We've been doing our liberal thing -- live and let live -- while they've been taking over the weak minds of weak people."

We've been doing our liberal thing -- live and let live... I think that sums it ALL up.

Funny thing since you mention "live and let live." Anybody here old enough to remember the whole Anita Bryant mini-travesty? The one-time Miss America second-runner-up (she was Miss Oklahoma), became a pop singer and variety show staple during the '50s and '60s, a conservative Christian who made her religion part of her public persona, and later, a Florida orange juice spokesperson, who shot herself in the foot with the public in the late '70s when she careened off into this rabid nationwide anti-gay crusade. She was the bane of civil rights and gay rights advocates everywhere, and her strident anti-gay activism eventually killed her career. Her first marriage ended in divorce, and it was rumored that one of her sons was gay, although I can't find anything concrete to back that up. If anything, her oldest son was actually a LOT more tolerant and liberal than she was on the subject of gay rights. Even he once commented that he thought the rough times she went through after she stuck her neck out had forced her to rethink her extremism - by saying she learned to "live and let live."

In a 1980 Ladies Home Journal interview, following her divorce and in the aftermath of her anti-gay activism, Bryant commented on her anti-gay views and said, "I'm more inclined to say live and let live, just don't flaunt it or try to legalize it."[14]


Kind of weird - you look at her photos in this Wikipedia write-up, and if you put eye-glasses on her, you'd have sarah palin.

April 28, 2012

GOOD one, tanyev! "A time machine that's stuck in R."

Now, when you're driving and you want to move forward, what letter do you shift to?

April 28, 2012

Isn't that like romney asking for his comments on limbaugh's attack on Sandra Fluke

and merely mumbling that he would have used different language. What? "Whore" instead of "prostitute," willard? "Floozy" instead of "slut"?

Too late for this pipsqueak. He should have stopped and thought about it before he shot his mouth off on the internet. Now, he's shot himself in the foot, metaphorically speaking.

I have no patience for self-inflicted wounds.

April 27, 2012

I dunno - depends on when those concerts are scheduled.

If they're on the weekends, or something set up in the quad during lunchtime, I don't see the harm in it, really. Music is also education. Some argue, citing scientific studies, that music education enables virtually every other kind of education. It activates the synapses, empowering and exercising the mind. Enhances reasoning, creativity, flexibility, discernment, and memory, and lots of other good things. I interviewed Shari Lewis about that, once. Yeah, THAT Shari Lewis - of Lampchop and kiddie show fame. She was quite the Renaissance woman, producer, writer, singer, musician, raconteur, symphony conductor, on-camera talent, teacher, advocate. She was BIG on music education in all schools because of how it helped students' brain development and helped them learn. Cut back music programs in schools and you wind up screwing students in math comprehension and excellence. In verbal expression. And then you're deep into the English department, too. She felt music education in schools from the youngest grades was an absolute essential. I couldn't agree more.

Besides, make it a fund-raiser and the school gets some extra money. And there's PR value. James Taylor tonight? Who knows who it might be next weekend. At my son's high school, part of the school lore was that Slash had gone there as a freshman. Those boys would have LOVED for Slash to come back by to visit his school and maybe play something. They'd have paid admission for it, and eagerly so. Might mean more money for equipment in the music room or something.

Full disclosure here - I'm one of those who'd much rather see big money donated for and spent on the arts programs at my son's school. My son was a music nerd. The most athletic activity he ever got into was karate - and some fairly extreme and quite physical guitar playing. So that's the filter through which I see these things.

April 27, 2012

Hard to argue with anything stated here. I saw it in the high schools here.

One of the high schools spent $250,000 on something called a "Jumbotron" for the football field. There's a HUGE emphasis on the football team and sports in general, which I guess is valuable for a boys' high school. But honest-to-God - must it be the priority that overrules all other priorities? I heard the school explained that it was strictly alumni donations. But hell, couldn't someone have found some academic priorities that needed attention more than the newly-refurbished and renovated football/track field needed a "Jumbotron"? For Pete's sake, that's maybe four or five teachers whose jobs would be fully funded and/or who wouldn't be facing layoffs. Or they could add a couple more teachers and fully computerize their classrooms also. They could more completely outfit the Arts division because not every student there is an athlete. Some are writers. Some are actors. Some are musicians. Some are painters and sculptors. Some are videographers. What about the much-lacking science labs? Or any number of things! Give the teachers bonuses or raises - even small ones. Something! Start paying some of the long-suffering volunteer staff. Oh, I forgot, those are mothers. Mothers of grads. Women. Obviously we don't have to pay them much of anything - they'll work for scraps, just for the love of the school. Nice way to cheapen the value of both their work, and themselves, 'eh? SO many other ways they could have used that money.

One postscript:

I also heard that, during installation of said "Jumbotron," work crews actually dropped it. It's up, and evidently it still works, but the picture always has flaws in it.


April 27, 2012

Besides, wolf blitzer can't even read through a sentence without gasping for breath

at the most inappropriate and awkward places, in the middle of words and names. He's obviously never had any advice on breath control. Hillary (gasp) Clinton. Secretary of (gasp) State. Alright, we'll (gasp) see what else Donald (gasp) Trump has to say about... Let's check (gasp) in with our friend Jack (gasp) Cafferty and see what he has this hour in his Cafferty (gasp) File. I'm sitting (gasp) here with Mila (gasp) Kunis...

DAMN!!!!! Just makes me want to throw something at my TV every time I have the misfortune of listening to him!!!

April 27, 2012

It's sad and true. "Journalists" in Washington have sold their souls for access.

GOTTA get those invites to those chi-chi cocktail parties at those luxury Georgetown living rooms.

SIMPLY MUST fawn over all those newsmakers - don't care if they're crooks! GOTTA have that precious access!!! If we can't rub elbows with all these people - how will we ever get access to them?

For what?

Another in a continuing series of softball interviews?

I had this argument with a friend recently. If I had been news president at MSNBC or someplace, and my staff's coverage started getting so tough on these assholes that we were threatened with a cut-off of access, I would then make THAT the story! I would have had a drumbeat - NOT of "oh, poor me, locked out... boo hoo," but rather with a more aggressive, combative tone - "they've denied us access because they don't want to face objective questioning - in fact THEY'RE SCARED of it! 'Cause they know their version won't hold up if they're faced with anybody but our competitors - who always present themselves on their knees because they've just got to get into those fancy-ass VIP cocktail parties." We'd rather present the truth, with our own political stars and celebs - and there are PLENTY of them. But our competitors would shut THEM out, too. WE won't be doing that, or playing that cowards' game. You don't need to get into the back room or the private VIP cocktail party to report THE NEWS!!!"

Thinking back to the absolute 100% shut-out of objectors' voices during the run-up to the Iraq War, I can't help but think of the LEGIONS of experts, activists, and even the handful of war opponents in Congress and the Senate - who'd be GREAT to fill the airwaves and the face time with, were my news division to be shut out of interviews with contradicta or rummy or wolfie or dickie.

"TOO FREAKIN' BAD! You wanna see contradicta or wolfie or rummy or ari or scotty or dickie, go watch any other channel and you get the same stale Xerox'd version with the same big names over and over and over. YOU could play their part in any interview because you already have seen the same script blast-faxed all over everywhere. And you'll keep getting their lies and their spin and their tall tales that don't stand up to serious, legitimate, objective questioning. But WE would offer alternative views, alternative faces and voices, and thereby not only get the truth out to the public, BUT start grooming new names and faces as spokespeople and well-seasoned talking heads - on OUR side. It would have paid two different sets of dividends. WE are not a wholly-owned subsidiary as those other networks are."

Only now are we building the left-leaning media profile - with MSNBC, and to a much lesser extent, Current. That should have started a decade ago. Only now are we building bench strength and our own stable of credible talking heads. Once again, our side comes from behind. Hope we don't stay there too long. And they're STILL caving! If they weren't, Cenk would still be on MSNBC and nobody who works for that network in Washingon would even bother moaning and groaning about how the republi-CONS there are pissed off at our coverage and won't come on our show! It wouldn't matter!!! TOTALLY IRRELEVANT!!! There's such an easy way to turn it around - to our favor!

And nobody's thinking that way at the networks, cable or otherwise. Because they just can't tear themselves away from the hard-ons for that precious access. I don't get it! It's just so obvious!!!!

April 27, 2012

"This is tactical thinking: cold, hard and unforgiving. But it is fact."

Sad but true, Will.

And one other thing needs to be pointed out here: "Tactical thinking" is indeed cold, hard, and unforgiving. But it's the way we have to start thinking, on general principles, if we're gonna win in this day and age. That's the currency these days. Both on offense AND defense. And if we're to win, we have to get very good at that, very quickly. That's how the enemy fights, and if they're bringing guns to gunfights and we're still arming ourselves with feather dusters, then guess who'll win every time.

We especially have to be cold, hard, and unforgiving against all things GOP. Against ALL things GOP. No mercy - as you yourself would say - "utterly."

April 27, 2012

The patron saint of all those small-minded people searching for some justification

for sheer brazen unbridled selfishness. She validated it, made it cool, acceptable. Indeed, even a virtue. About as un-Christian as it gets.

April 27, 2012

I've always regarded DU as a kind of online think tank.

Really. You learn TONS hanging out here and reading all the comments. And following some of the links.

You also have to keep in mind - the people who post here are not only Dems or liberals or progressives or whatever label you want.

They're also...
veterans - of SEVERAL military conflicts from Vietnam to Iraq/Afghanistan
academics and teachers
various sorts of political reps or professional participants
VIPs and other prominent people
medical specialists
bloggers and writers
small business people
Native Americans
South Americans
Middle Easterners
media people, past and present
grandparents and other elderly
newly married
computer nerds
graphic artists
pet lovers
sci-fi freaks
single parents
newly bereaved
abused or molested
from large families
devoutly religious
new grads
crime victims
unjustly accused
financial experts
tough-love believers
...and so many more.

Just consider all that input, those filters, originating from all those different sources. All those different viewpoints intaking and processing what goes on around us in this country. The writing here often tends to be spectacular! Same thing for the analysis. What I've learned here, reading other people's opinions, considering their viewpoints and the world they come from that fuels those viewpoints, has lifted me miles beyond where I was when I first came here, not long after bush "TOOK" office in 2001.

I love following along when people are debating some issue or point, and it always enlarges my understanding of whatever issue or point it is.

I love how people can ask for help, either about information they need for some research, or talking points to refute some lout teabagger's astroturfed email; or prayers; or comfort after losing a loved one or even a pet, or a job; or advice or direction on some matter or problem that needs solving.

This is a one-stop-shopping online hangout. And a think tank. I marvel at the brain power here and the crackling sense of commitment to some genuinely great ideals. And I'm honored to be a member of this community.

Besides, you guys tolerate my ranting with such patience!

Profile Information

Gender: Female
Home country: USA
Current location: Oregon
Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 82,526

About calimary

Female. Retired. Wife-Mom-Grandma. Approx. 30 years in broadcasting, at least 20 of those in news biz. Taurus. Loves chocolate - preferably without nuts or cocoanut. Animal lover. Rock-hound from pre-school age. Proud Democrat for life. Ardent environmentalist and pro-choicer. Hoping to use my skills set for the greater good. Still married to the same guy for 40+ years. Probably because he's a proud Democrat, too. Penmanship absolutely stinks, so I'm glad I'm a fast typist! I will always love Hillary and she will always be my President.
Latest Discussions»calimary's Journal