I was talking to a co-worker, a very smart woman, who will be giving up her car because she can't afford a repair bill.

As I left the office for the day, I saw the cleaning crew at work. They make even much less. How do they get by?

I make a pretty good income. Not 1%, but better than most. I suppose that I could praise myself for having worked hard and for making shrewd career choices, but that would largely be mythological bull@#$&. The fact is that I just showed up on this planet and got lucky. Born in a wealthy country with no serious handicaps, and I learn some things pretty quickly.

I wish we lived in a world, in a country, where we all helped each other out a little more, and where the lucky didn't habitually prey on the unlucky.

Where everyone can make a living and live a decent life.

Update: Incidentally, that was the goal of the Democratic Party back when I was a kid.

No, really, I feel terrible.

Ok, I'm totally lying. I'm busted.

I'm a little confused as to whether people are confused.

Which of the following do you think is true?

Rather, his veto is because Obama believes that he has the right to stop it, and does not want to give up that right to Congress.

As he wrote:

"because this act of Congress conflicts with established executive branch procedures and cuts short thorough consideration of issues that could bear on our national interest — including our security, safety, and environment — it has earned my veto."

Obama will make the decision himself, and that decision will allegedly be based on an environmental impact study that's been going on for ages. Based on how long the study's taking, I suspect that he hopes if he waits long enough, he somehow won't have to decide, e.g. the thing will become economically unviable and stopped because of low oil prices.

Also note that the White House is strong-arming the EU into writing its environmental regulations to permit use of Keystone XL tar oil, even though it's filthy. Elizabeth Warren and others have sent a letter to the White House asking them to cut that @#%& out.

I've read some posts that indicate some confusion over this.

Looks like 111 Congressional Democrats voted Third Way, 147 voted First Way.

It's quite some state of affairs that those who enabled such horrific insanity are now luminaries in our Party. I'm sure that many of them are lovely people, but I suggest that they be kept far from positions that involve important decisions about other people's lives.

That's the gist of a post just aimed at me.

Yes.

Yes, I'm still stuck on that. Millions of casualties, hundreds of thousands killed, and a key contributor to the horror of ISIS. I think it was an unbelievable disaster, spurred purely by low politics. And those responsible have more of a place in The Hague than in high political office.

Rigid thinking on my part, I know.

Sorry.

Oh, Hell, no I'm not sorry.

Did Obama allow ISIS to happen by not supplying shadowy Syrian rebels with advanced weapons?

that some "Democrats" think that Hillary is to the right of Bernie Sanders? When clearly, they are indistingushable from one-another other than their hair styles. And Hillary wanting human rights for ALL people, even bankers and billionaires.

Just wondering aloud what the agenda of these "people" might be?

Regards,

TWM

Let me start by stating that Howard Fineman, currently editorial director of the Huffington Post and former Chief Political Correspondent at Newsweek, is the most despicable "journalist" working today. I have no idea of why that's true, but I'm sure that after I write this piece, some helpful DUers will come along to tell us. (And to point out that it's very telling that I chose to air his views on DU.)

OK, so I was just listening to a really interesting podcast of On Point, a great NPR program that comes out of Boston.

Democratic Soul-Searching In 2016

The host, Tom Asbhrook, spent 45 minutes discussing our Democratic Party's agita* with a panel that included Fineman, the campaign manager of Ready for Warren, and one of the founders of the DLC.

It was a hoot.

Fineman mentioned that Our Next President™ has more than 200 economic advisors, which he said sounds great until one realizes it means that she has no particular idea of her own as to the right way forward, i.e., she's totally flailing. Totally stumped. Which is why we aren't hearing from her.

As to the current agitation by us pesky "Progressives" in any way slowing Our Next President™ in her quest to gain that which is rightfully hers, the DLC woman said that it would be totally unfair to associate Hillary with policies that happened 25 years ago: times are different now and so is Our Next President™! That got the verbal equivalent of an eye roll from the host (who does that maybe once a month), and Fineman indicated that it seemed implausible that Our Next President™ could be credible as a non-DLCThirdWayer, because that's what she is.



Of course, things quickly devolved into a discussion of Hillary vs. Warren. The DLC woman said that none of this Progressive crap matters anyway because Hillary and Warren would do the same same things as President. Finemen wasn't buying it, at all: he said that Warren was about going after a system that's corrupt to the core and which needs to be blown to smithereens and rebuilt, whereas Hillary was basically OK with the way things are - maybe a few changes, but nothing fundamental.

That's it. That's exactly the difference.

Now Fineman wasn't at all sure that Warren could get the thing done. And he was in no way discounting her running for President, he seemed to think there was a reasonable chance that it would happen. But here's the thing: you could tell he was sick of the status quo, sick of the limitless corruption that has replaced the souls of both political parties. And you can tell that he sees Warren as the light that might lead us out of this bottomless shit-filled pit we've been sinking into.

So that's the question, fellow DUers: do we have a system that's basically good and needs a few little tweaks? Or do we need to tear the roof off the sucker?

If you think the former, then Hillary's your candidate. But if you think we need change, real change, then you're Ready for Someone Else™.

============

*This agita doesn't actually exist, as we're also about to be told. Only a few malcontents on DU, maybe one other on Kos.

Your Massachusetts hero had a meeting with Our Next President™. Can there be any explanation other than Warren swearing a blood oath to Team Hillary?

No! No other possible explanation! OK, some other explanations sound reasonable on their face, but for technical reasons that you Lumpenproletariat wouldn't understand, anyone who meets with Hillary must have sworn to support her. No, Hillary didn't do it to shut you Firebaggers up, that's a really hurtful thing to suggest.

Looks like even that difficult woman from Massachusetts realized that there is not a sliver of daylight between her own views and those of Hillary 6.0, and she didn't want to be Left Behind by the Hillary Zeppelin as it leaves its mooring mast at Lakehurst NJ. (Left Behind! See how I was able to slip in a Rapture reference to attract our friends in the Faith-Based Community? That's why they pay me the big bucks, of course.)

So now that Warren has secretly sworn loyalty The Next One, how about you moonbats doing the same? We totally promise to totally respect your opinions, and we'll fight for income equality and all the other crap that you people like.

Regards,

Third-Way Manny