HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Laelth » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Wills Point, TX
Home country: USA
Member since: Sat Oct 16, 2004, 02:36 PM
Number of posts: 32,014

About Me

I am a native Georgian who's currently hiding out in Texas. I am a liberal, and I am extremely proud of the imperfect (but evolving) republic that we call the United States of America.

Journal Archives



Way back in 1928, Herbert Hoover's surrogates bragged that Republican policy had delivered to America the greatest prosperity the nation had ever seen--a chicken for every pot and a car in every garage. Democrats, led by Al Smith, responded by noting that Hoover's wealthy friends all had chickens in their pots and cars in their garages, but that America's newfound wealth was not being equally distributed. The working class was not getting a fair share of the national wealth, these Democrats argued.

Welcome to modern, American politics. This debate from 1928 remains at the heart of our political discourse.

The "original recipe" chicken story is older. King Henry IV of France wanted to insure that every peasant in his realm would have a chicken in their pots (on Sundays, at the very least). He didn't want his people to be any poorer than that. Suffice it to say that the working people of the Western world have been looking for that chicken ever since. We were promised it. We haven't gotten it yet--not by a long stretch, especially not in the United States.

Those of us who voted for Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders in the 2020 Democratic primaries voted for these politicians because they insisted that the working people deserve THE WHOLE CHICKEN. It didn't matter to us whether or not these politicians could actually deliver THE WHOLE CHICKEN. We were simply pleased to know that they agreed that the American people deserve THE WHOLE CHICKEN. We voted for Bernie and for Elizabeth because they were willing to fight for THE WHOLE CHICKEN ... for the American people.


That, my friends, is THE WHOLE CHICKEN that most Americans want in their pots! It's what the American people need, and it's what they deserve. We know that we're the wealthiest nation on Earth. We also know that we're the hardest-working people on Earth. The primary purpose of the Democratic Party is to give the people some economic justice--to spread the wealth and to make capitalism work for all of us and not just the rich folks.

If the Democratic Party can just give us the neck (Eliminate the Filibuster), I have every reason to believe that Joe Biden can and will be a transformative, liberal President. So I hope. Give us the neck, and we can make some Real Democratic Soup that will lead us to THE WHOLE CHICKEN. Go JOE!

If you're with me, simply respond (here and elsewhere) by saying:


The American people deserve it.


Part 2 will follow with a careful examination of each part of the chicken and why the American people deserve THE WHOLE CHICKEN and not just the bits of chicken that the Democratic Party has served up since the Age of Reagan.

Eliminating the Filibuster.

It is my sincere hope that Democrats will regain control of the Senate early next year. When that happens, I hope we will be able to forward a lot of new, liberal legislation to President Biden’s desk for his signature. In order for this to happen, the filibuster must be eliminated. It’s just a Senate rule. It can easily be changed if and when a majority of Senators agrees to change it.

If this hypothetical Democratic Senate tries to eliminate the filibuster in 2021, the Republicans, naturally, will raise holy hell. This is how I would respond to their objections (and this is the point of this thread).

If our esteemed, Republican colleagues are so fond of the filibuster, they will be welcome to restore it as soon as they re-take control of the Senate. If they do not restore it when they have the power to do so, it will merely prove our point—that the filibuster has outlived its usefulness and no longer serves the best interests of the American people.

What do you think?


Which of these old white guys can beat Donald Trump?

Joe Biden Age 77 (Joe is the youngest of this group!)

Bernie Sanders Age 78

Michael Bloomberg Age 78

Daffy Duck Age 82 (In all fairness to Daffy, he may not qualify as a white guy.)

I honestly can not believe that, in 2020, given the depth of our bench, the diversity of our party, and the obvious excellence of our candidates, my party seems determined to nominate one of these old, white guys. Admittedly, each and every one of them is far better than Agent Orange.

Blue no matter who.



I have to pull out the big guns, now.

The American people think they deserve what Bernie Sanders is promising to fight for:

1. Universal, taxpayer-funded health care for all.
2. A massive increase in the minimum wage.
3. Free college tuition at state colleges and universities.
4. Student loan debt relief.

Bernie is relentless in hammering home his intention to fight for these things for the American people. His message is focused, and it resonates. That's why he is winning.

The Democratic Party needs to get with the program. The American people don't give a darn about how we are going to pay for these things. They're just happy to vote for some politician who's willing to fight for what they think (rightly) that they deserve. I strongly encourage Democrats to listen to the people and follow them as Gandhi did for his own people. The cost to our party will be immense if we don't.


Does it matter to you (or to the electorate) that these two people are NOT married?

Michael Bloomberg and potential First Girlfriend Diana Taylor

Of our 45 presidents, to date, 44 have been married. James Buchanan, elected in 1884, is the only President who was not married when he became President. Does this matter to us any more?

More importantly, for your consideration, will this be an issue at tonight's debate in Nevada? Will the moderators bring up this issue? Will Bloomberg's opponents bring up this issue? Should they? Does it even matter?


"What Obama Is Saying in Private About the Democratic Primary"

What Obama Is Saying in Private About the Democratic Primary

NewYork Magazine - By Gabriel Debenedetti - 02-17-2020

The truth of Obama’s silence on the 2020 primary is that it’s not just about his obvious wish to stay out of the spotlight, but it also reflects a choreographed strategy. With the race looking more and more likely to grow bitter and messy, and maybe even wind up in a contested convention, the former president and those around him are increasingly sure he will need to play a prominent role in bringing the party back together and calming its tensions later this summer, including perhaps in Milwaukee, where the party’s meeting is scheduled to be held in July. So he is committed to not allowing his personal thoughts to dribble out in the meantime, directly or via leaks, conscious of how any sense that he’s taking sides in intraparty disputes could rock the primary in the short run and potentially undermine his ability to play this larger role in the months ahead. “He says one sentence about being woke at some conference, and the Twitterverse freaks out,” recalled one of his friends, referring to the former president’s comments at an Obama Foundation meeting in Chicago that set off a firestorm. He and his advisors “are very aware [of the effect of] one word that Barack Obama says.” And he’s being careful to ensure he can be seen as an honest broker in June and July — a potentially necessary designation given both his status as the party’s most popular figure and the real possibility that Sanders, or another candidate, could enter the summer with a plurality of the delegates needed for the nomination but not an outright victory. “Obama is going to look at the [delegate math to determine] the outcome. If the math brings someone [to the nomination], he’ll back it in full,” one person who still speaks with the former president told me recently. “His biggest dilemma is if Bernie is at 35-40 [percent of the delegates], and no one else is [at] 20. Does he say, ‘You have to go with who won [a plurality of] the delegates, and who looks to be the true front-runner?’”

But Obama is hardly the only Democrat sweating that particular possibility, especially with Michael Bloomberg — who some in Obama’s orbit favor but many regard warily — poised to swoop in on the process in March. Sorting out that confusion might be the most complicated scenario for Obama, the person added. The reality might be more simple: “It’s not gonna happen before the convention, [but] he’s gonna be all-in for Bernie if he’s the nominee.”



Which of the following PROVES that Donald J. Trump TRULY IS "The Great Pumpkin"?

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9