Garrett78
Garrett78's JournalDemocrats need to hit hard against this "2 sides" theme.
Climate change, evolution, slavery, nazis...you name it, Republicans want to "Teech teh contraversi!!1!"
Combating that nonsense should be a talking point for every Dem who goes on the air, and every Dem in Congress. Time to go on the attack, Democrats. And, while you're at it, combat the "liberal media" mantra that has dominated the last several decades. That mantra has been highly effective and incredibly damaging.
Barring another leak, we may not know any more tomorrow than we know right now.
I'm not sure how many caught this: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9767187.
Is NBC saying the US official didn't disclose the name or the nature of the charges? Or is the US official saying Mueller will confirm what CNN reported but won't give the name or make known the nature of the charges?
Superdelegates: What's the argument for/against?
It seems the other thread about superdelegates has, perhaps, gotten out of hand. So, I ask that folks refrain from talking about the 2016 Democratic Primary in this thread. Instead, let's just focus on addressing the following questions:
What is the argument for/against superdelegates? If you support there being superdelegates, who should they be? How many should there be?
Define "far left" and "centrist."
Durbin spoke of a "sensible center," while many on DU have mentioned a "far left."
Are people just throwing around these terms without ever thinking about what they mean?
What does "far left" mean to you? What constitutes a "centrist?"
The madness ends when we bring about a substantial reduction in bigotry, particularly racism.
It's imperative that we combat/lessen bigotry, as that's largely what enables this madness. Absent racism, in particular, the Republican Party would cease to be viable. Promoting and exploiting bigotry by way of targeted dog whistling campaigns is key to getting people to elect those who wish to cut the social safety net and obliterate regulatory agencies. Folks will lament the fact that people vote against their economic interests, which is attributed to simple ignorance (but there's more to it than that). The reason people vote against their economic interests is because they are voting *for* their (perceived) social/cultural interests.
The Koch Brothers and the like know they can't advocate that Republicans openly campaign against Social Security, Medicare, labor laws, and so on. They, instead, engage in dog whistling so that people will elect those who will help achieve the Koch dream, which is divorcing the people from the federal government. Republicans make no mention of the ACA. Instead, they use the term "Obamacare" (the media and many Democrats have done the same). And if you don't think that has everything to do with Obama being Black, you're fooling yourself.
Make no mistake, the attention given to the Koch Brothers is not the stuff of crazy conspiracy theories. The 20 wealthiest individuals in the US, including the Kochs, have more combined wealth than the least wealthy 150+ million people in the US (let that sink in for a moment). The likes of the Koch Brothers have enormous power and influence. They actively direct policy and help Republicans strategize to make implementation of said policy achievable. And that strategy revolves around creating, maintaining and exploiting bigotry.
If there are organizations in your area dedicated to combating racism, sexism and other forms of systemic oppression, get involved. If there aren't, help start one.
Obama on Weinstein
In Obama's statement on Weinstein, he said, "Any man who demeans and degrades women in such fashion needs to be condemned and held accountable, regardless of wealth or status."
He should have followed that statement with something like, "Be that person a movie director or sitting President of the United States, he must face consequences for his deplorable actions."
We all know damn well that Republicans would not miss an opportunity like that. And it's not even a matter of taking the high road. It's a matter of being the forceful, fact-based opposition we all need the Democratic Party to be.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Aug 19, 2015, 04:47 AMNumber of posts: 10,721