The following is by one of my favorite writers (and human beings) -- toritto!!!
Yes. I busted my ass for Obama the first time around.Opened my checkbook, campaigned, knocked on doors. Did everything I could to see that he carried Florida in the Presidential election.Not an easy task when Fred Thompson signs were as common as plastic pink flamingos at the time and right wing nuts carried Soviet flags outside of local Obama campaign headquarters. Where women thought Palin was the essence of true feminism. I had the lone Obama sign on my lawn in a sea of McCain - Palin cardboard.But I got the last laugh. At least I thought so at the time.We had elected a progressive Democratic President and controlled the two Houses of Congress. And we carried Florida.Maybe something would get done.Maybe true universal healthcare. Maybe peace would come. Maybe a society which would leave behind racism. Maybe repeal of the Bush tax giveaways to billionaires. Maybe we would spend money on people rather than aircraft carriers. Maybe we would stop torturing people. Maybe Gitmo would close.Maybe.I knew progressives were in trouble when the public option went down without a fight. When the government would not negotiate with drug companies to set the price of drugs under the Medicare prescription drug program. When our war adventures continued. When Gitmo didn’t close. When no one was indicted for torture. When no bankers went to jail. When the assault on civil liberties was embraced and left standing.What progressives got was precious little. We got ignored. Thank you Dems. Seems like progressive ideas migrate to the Democratic Party - to die.And in the mid-term elections of 2010 every candidate I voted for lost. We had two billionaires running for Governor (We have 26 living in Florida) in the GOP primary, one of whom should be sitting in federal prison for Medicare fraud but instead he is now our Governor. The other billionaire candidate simply hung around on his yacht with Lindsay Lohan.The mid-term election saw much of the same across the nation - a Republican / Tea Party tide. The Dems lost the House. Why were we so surprised at the assault on the middle class we saw in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio?“Toute nation a le gouvernement quelle mérite”Every country gets the government it deservesSo true.So here we are into Obama’s second term with the wheels of government paralyzed by the minority – not that the wheels of government were turning anyway. The gerrymandered GOP House approved the dismantling of Obamacare some 40 times. Great work. The Senate can’t take a dump without 60 votes – and neither party wanted to change the rules until recently when the Dems pushed through Presidential appointments via the “nuclear option”. Finally.Americans were killed in Afghanistan this week. Did anyone notice but their families?We are leaving Afghanistan – except for the 9 military bases we will continue to occupy for the foreseeable future. Right.Gitmo is still open while prisoners are being force fed to end their hunger strike. Gitmo is a CONCENTRATION CAMP. Call it anything you like – but that is what it is.Our drones kill our own citizens without formal charges or evidence; they kill after coffee and danish at the White House. Our militarized police in Boston give an order to “stay home” and everyone does. Thousands of Americans are gunned down each year by other Americans but Congress sees fit to veto legislation requiring a background check at gun shows.The Justice Department is chasing leaks which affect “national security” (don’t all leaks always?) and had the Associated Press up in arms – like there are real investigative journalists anymore anyway. They have mostly been silenced and the few that are left take their futures in their hands when they speak out. Don’t make donations to Wikileaks lest you find your name on a terrorist watch list. If someone leaked the “Pentagon Papers” today they would undoubtedly spend the rest of their lives in prison.No one seems to care that Ed Snowden was right. No one was going to tell us what was going on until he did.Today, this very day, guys armed with automatic weapons and dressed in kevlar could break down your door and whisk you away under Presidential order without public charges, without the right to face your accuser, without the right to trial, habeas corpus or judicial due process, all under the umbrella of “protecting Americans” and fighting future “terrorism”. And then they can water board you.I might as well have burned the Magna Carta myself. Yeah I know. I’m being hysterical.If you happen to be a “suspected terrorist” and a US citizen overseas, the President can order you killed without charges, trial or presentation of evidence to the public. Your “due process” will be a meeting in the Oval Office on a Tuesday afternoon over coffee, before the drone takes off.After Boston, members of Congress stated publicly that they had no objection to “enhanced interrogation” of the remaining suspect - torture him for information. Many would support moving him, an American citizen, to Gitmo to be held at the King’s pleasure. To hear such statements from Glenn Beck is one thing; to hear it from a Congressman is just, well breathtaking. And chilling.Recently on several posting sites a number of folks I know and respect have been accused by other “progressives” of being somewhat overwrought and hysterical about the state of our national politic. Ready to throw America under the bus at every opportunity; unwilling to recognize the “good” of America and this administration.Now let me be fair. In the interest of full disclosure I got mine already. I live comfortably in the sunny South, got my steady income, my “socialist” medicare and prescription drug coverage that younger people wish they had but will never get. I sent my girls to college and grad schools and they are successfully out on their own. The world won’t run out of gas before I go and the planet won’t get too hot before I rot.I no longer march for anything – going on 72 I don’t want to risk getting my head busted. My daughter warned me to stay out of downtown Tampa during the last RNC Convention. Now I write mostly my “poetry” and I like to think some of it has “sting”. Writing about the current political scene sometimes seems a waste of time in that minds are not changed – but someone has to do it.I can’t change anything; but there is a difference in knowing you can’t change what is and being blind to what is……….especially when you are not really blind but just find it comfortable to keep your eyes closed – which many on the left are doing only because Obama is President.Seems to me more time is spent dissing the “traitorous snitches” rather than investigating what they told us. This week a Federal Judge appointed by George Bush no less said that Snowden was right.I see what is – even if I no longer write about it everyday. And I appreciate that others have picked up the banner to carry on the never-ending struggle. And for this good work they do not need to be criticized as “hysterical”.
[cross-posted on correntewire]
---------------
If someone held a gun to your head and threatened to kill you in order to let him destroy you and your descendants you would have no doubts who the enemy was and you would know you must fight back even if there was small chance of winning because if you didn't fight all life would be over anyway. There is no real fighting back evident at the moment and the suicidal maniacs are in control and nobody really is doing anything. The old saying is verified. Whom the gods wish to destroy they drive mad.When the planet dies it will take all life with it.
Great post... where is toritto publishing these days? R&R.
Jan, will we ever achieve a collective moral and rational "sobriety" in the U.S.? I more and more go back to the sensibility of Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. The "book people" who were morally grounded, as opposed to those who were controlled by their wall screens and were authoritarian followers incapable of critical thinking.
I know I am as susceptible as everyone else to the collective hypnosis (I bobbled my head for too many years more than most) and now want to try to stay vigilant trying to track down the real stories.
Of course we all want so dearly to trust those with power over our lives and welfare and over the lives of others and the planet itself.
I think of the old saying about the 100 monkeys. Once the 100th monkey "gets it" the awareness spreads through the whole monkey nation it is said. But I see the teevee as being the most profound obstruction to collective awareness in the US, and as I have said before, as only one of the forces, MSNBC is the propaganda arm of the Dem Party and teases with truth and sensibility and cherry picked morality in the way its seductive spokespeople frame stories and then does its MINIMIZING AND OMISSION game to indoctrinate its viewers into bobbleheaded co-dependency.
We are all co-dependent on our information sources. As Frank points out, honest journalism is drying up in America, so we are deprived of true and real information that can help us do our own critical analyses and allow us to be a true democratic republic "of and for and by the people."
Obama doesn't stop the torture in Gitmo, he prevents honest journalists access to report the reality there for example. Interest and then awareness atrophies. Covert CIA operations with Al Qaeda in Syria, say, do not get reported in the mainstream media, just as black ops operations for a very long time will not but now even more prevalent and unreported and mercenary-provided cases prevail unknown by us -- using always our own tax dollars and endangering more and more human beings, American and foreign.
Cronyism and lobby-bribery have diluted to such a profound degree any sense of commitment or responsibility our voted pols have toward us.
Celebrity, cynical, disinforming hype of media replaces serious moral and values clarification regarding our governance.
Jan, thank you for your ongoing thoughtful, serious, eloquent, earnest and honest comments.
best, libby
I know I am as susceptible as everyone else to the collective hypnosis (I bobbled my head for too many years more than most) and now want to try to stay vigilant trying to track down the real stories.
Of course we all want so dearly to trust those with power over our lives and welfare and over the lives of others and the planet itself.
I think of the old saying about the 100 monkeys. Once the 100th monkey "gets it" the awareness spreads through the whole monkey nation it is said. But I see the teevee as being the most profound obstruction to collective awareness in the US, and as I have said before, as only one of the forces, MSNBC is the propaganda arm of the Dem Party and teases with truth and sensibility and cherry picked morality in the way its seductive spokespeople frame stories and then does its MINIMIZING AND OMISSION game to indoctrinate its viewers into bobbleheaded co-dependency.
We are all co-dependent on our information sources. As Frank points out, honest journalism is drying up in America, so we are deprived of true and real information that can help us do our own critical analyses and allow us to be a true democratic republic "of and for and by the people."
Obama doesn't stop the torture in Gitmo, he prevents honest journalists access to report the reality there for example. Interest and then awareness atrophies. Covert CIA operations with Al Qaeda in Syria, say, do not get reported in the mainstream media, just as black ops operations for a very long time will not but now even more prevalent and unreported and mercenary-provided cases prevail unknown by us -- using always our own tax dollars and endangering more and more human beings, American and foreign.
Cronyism and lobby-bribery have diluted to such a profound degree any sense of commitment or responsibility our voted pols have toward us.
Celebrity, cynical, disinforming hype of media replaces serious moral and values clarification regarding our governance.
Jan, thank you for your ongoing thoughtful, serious, eloquent, earnest and honest comments.
best, libby
jmac, et al. I am traveling on holiday vacation and am inconsistent with access. Appreciate the comments on my recent blogs.
this piece of toritto's blew me away. so passionate, honest and thorough in inventorying what has happened since post-Bush regime.
best, libby
toritto's latest postings:
http://toritto.wordpress.com/2013/12/20/in-defense-of-hysterical-lefties/
http://www.writerscafe.org/toritto
this piece of toritto's blew me away. so passionate, honest and thorough in inventorying what has happened since post-Bush regime.
best, libby
toritto's latest postings:
http://toritto.wordpress.com/2013/12/20/in-defense-of-hysterical-lefties/
http://www.writerscafe.org/toritto
Sorry to disagree. I know from personal experience that you CAN change things, particularly at the local level. With my blog, I even nudge national and international events once every 500 times.
All of the outrages you talk about are lying around out there. My problem with perpetually 'hysterical' lefties is -- that if the volume is always turned up to 10 on the daily outrage, that makes it very hard to differentiate between things you can change and things you can't.
Perpetual outrage also leads to a sense of profound powerlessness. Your outrage over the NSA is a case in point. Between Google et. al. not liking $35B in losses from US snooping on overseas customers and US Senators who somehow don't like the idea that Big Unka is monitoring their cell phone conversations -- it looks like we are in the very early stages of Congress actually doing something about NSA abuses.
All of the outrages you talk about are lying around out there. My problem with perpetually 'hysterical' lefties is -- that if the volume is always turned up to 10 on the daily outrage, that makes it very hard to differentiate between things you can change and things you can't.
Perpetual outrage also leads to a sense of profound powerlessness. Your outrage over the NSA is a case in point. Between Google et. al. not liking $35B in losses from US snooping on overseas customers and US Senators who somehow don't like the idea that Big Unka is monitoring their cell phone conversations -- it looks like we are in the very early stages of Congress actually doing something about NSA abuses.
Yes, you are in big problems with your administration. And your administration is creating some problems almost for everyone in the world.
Please keep on writing about these things. Thank you.
Please keep on writing about these things. Thank you.
I was serious Libby. You deleted my question the first time.
How do you know who wrote this?
How do you know who wrote this?
It sounded like malice for malice's sake. How did I misinterpret?
ONL see and even feel your point to a degree, having perpetual mistrust and framing things as I do in the negative but I have not seen grounds for reframing or renewing trust with Obama regime, quite the opposite, and I want to counterpoint with my own research what is being swept under the corporate carpet by the mainstream media. I give Obama kudos on Cash for Clunkers but for most of his term plus I see a front man for oligarchs.
The Congress people I trust I can count on one hand with fingers left over covering both houses. There is something so systemically wrong, and I think the whole enchilada of corruption and incredible amorality needs to be acknowledged. For God's sake, it is the constitution being dismantled permanently. Why are people okay with that? Americans being murdered without due process. Anyone being murdered is not okay -- our wars for corporate plunder and profit. The 1% benefits and the soldier 1% gets to die for their unlawful profiteering and America assumes the ostrich position.
Where is the last straw? Taking food stamps from already hungry children or forcing people out of their very homes by cutting off unemployment support? Meanwhile pouring money out to the military and to Israel's military and giving $85 billion a month from Fed to the banksters who willfully broke the economy? WTF??? You can't say that enuf I am thinking and feeling.
I think like toritto the Dem Party has unforgivably betrayed and is in such a narcissistic stupor or even boiled frog stupor and locked horns gamesmanship with the rabid Repubs that they are beyond even recognizing morality and decency and serving the citizenry, especially those most desperately in need.
More power to you ONL with your sensibility of hope. I wish I had it. I don't. I have hope for citizens recognizing corruption. Not much for a change in these long time agents of corruption in our politics. We need a third party for the citizenry. Some kind of perhaps collaboration to form a third party? I think if people resigned from the Dem party that might have put some fear of God into the sell-outs who talk the talk but never walk the walk.
You know Congress, some, are being treasonous in terms of sinking peace talks with Iran for sake of Israel. But I also see Obama as not serious and more gamesman than statesman who is willing to betray one more country for hegemony.
best, libby
The Congress people I trust I can count on one hand with fingers left over covering both houses. There is something so systemically wrong, and I think the whole enchilada of corruption and incredible amorality needs to be acknowledged. For God's sake, it is the constitution being dismantled permanently. Why are people okay with that? Americans being murdered without due process. Anyone being murdered is not okay -- our wars for corporate plunder and profit. The 1% benefits and the soldier 1% gets to die for their unlawful profiteering and America assumes the ostrich position.
Where is the last straw? Taking food stamps from already hungry children or forcing people out of their very homes by cutting off unemployment support? Meanwhile pouring money out to the military and to Israel's military and giving $85 billion a month from Fed to the banksters who willfully broke the economy? WTF??? You can't say that enuf I am thinking and feeling.
I think like toritto the Dem Party has unforgivably betrayed and is in such a narcissistic stupor or even boiled frog stupor and locked horns gamesmanship with the rabid Repubs that they are beyond even recognizing morality and decency and serving the citizenry, especially those most desperately in need.
More power to you ONL with your sensibility of hope. I wish I had it. I don't. I have hope for citizens recognizing corruption. Not much for a change in these long time agents of corruption in our politics. We need a third party for the citizenry. Some kind of perhaps collaboration to form a third party? I think if people resigned from the Dem party that might have put some fear of God into the sell-outs who talk the talk but never walk the walk.
You know Congress, some, are being treasonous in terms of sinking peace talks with Iran for sake of Israel. But I also see Obama as not serious and more gamesman than statesman who is willing to betray one more country for hegemony.
best, libby
Hannu, thank you for all your contributions to this site and my blog in particular! best, libby
Thanks for the link to where Frank writes now. I have so much catching up to do it's unreal. Our then senator, Jeff Bingaman: I'll never forget this; the code pinkers and nurses, internists and doctors who know stuff stood up one-by-one to object to the 'great glossing over' and our Jeff and Chairman Max had those little grinning asides as the law hauled off the people. Then it was back to the business of what was off the table.
Thanks for posting this and providing Toritto's blog address. I intend to follow him.
Toritto wrote a good piece.
I emphatically share one of his points and just made it on Myles Spicer's blog: Snowden is beside the point - the NSA is the point.
I emphatically share one of his points and just made it on Myles Spicer's blog: Snowden is beside the point - the NSA is the point.
Your Israel references sound like a Saturday Night Live "Death to America" sketch. It wasn't Israel's idea for Bush to label Iran as part of the Axis of Evil while they were trying to reach out to us. It was France who torpedoed the last deal. There are a lot of reasons Israel has influence in Washington, but Obama is not a significant one. Obama and Netanyahu don't even like each other, and Netanyahu's administration dissed Biden disgracefully.
Obama is blatantly wrong about the NSA. You'll notice I've been extremely supportive of your position on that. I don't think there really are two sides to this issue because, bizarrely, the other side hasn't attempted a real case aside from the distraction of Snowden rather than addressing the actual policy issues. Iran, nukes, and Israel isn't remotely as cut and dried. Pretending it is won't make it so, and treating it like it's obvious will leave the impression that you're accepting a party line rather than actually analyzing anything.
Obama is blatantly wrong about the NSA. You'll notice I've been extremely supportive of your position on that. I don't think there really are two sides to this issue because, bizarrely, the other side hasn't attempted a real case aside from the distraction of Snowden rather than addressing the actual policy issues. Iran, nukes, and Israel isn't remotely as cut and dried. Pretending it is won't make it so, and treating it like it's obvious will leave the impression that you're accepting a party line rather than actually analyzing anything.
How would it be possible to keep Toritto alive at OS?
Maybe many of us could put his blog address in our links?
Do you think OS in general is going up or down now?
Maybe many of us could put his blog address in our links?
Do you think OS in general is going up or down now?
"I have not seen grounds for reframing or renewing trust with Obama regime, quite the opposite"
I agree with that.
But actually I didn't expect much else from Obama's administration. Concerning NSA things Obama already in his inauguration speech said that his administration will concentrate in knowledge gathering and in effect spying. The expanded drone war was more or less as expected, too.
I wrote in my blog earlier:
"It remains to be seen if Obama will continue the covert program of Bush, or if he will try another kind of diplomacy, or of he will... start still another war. Against Iran."
Now it seems that after the failure to attack Syria with missiles Obama's administration is again changing the plans. It is quite clear that Afghanistan's area was used as bases for spying planes mapping targets in Iran for the possible attack from air. And a preliminary attack was needed toward Syria. But Syria has proved to be a big obstacle on the way to Iran.
Now it remains to be seen if the recent easing of the sanctions against Iran is just a tactical move on the way toward an attack or a more permanent shift in the policy.
I agree with that.
But actually I didn't expect much else from Obama's administration. Concerning NSA things Obama already in his inauguration speech said that his administration will concentrate in knowledge gathering and in effect spying. The expanded drone war was more or less as expected, too.
I wrote in my blog earlier:
"It remains to be seen if Obama will continue the covert program of Bush, or if he will try another kind of diplomacy, or of he will... start still another war. Against Iran."
Now it seems that after the failure to attack Syria with missiles Obama's administration is again changing the plans. It is quite clear that Afghanistan's area was used as bases for spying planes mapping targets in Iran for the possible attack from air. And a preliminary attack was needed toward Syria. But Syria has proved to be a big obstacle on the way to Iran.
Now it remains to be seen if the recent easing of the sanctions against Iran is just a tactical move on the way toward an attack or a more permanent shift in the policy.
As good as Toritto is, and he is good, he can't get resurrected here. If you want I follow him, try Our Salon.
Unless you want to reproduce his work here. The only reason you'd get away with that is that OS management ignores us. They are likely to be very sensitive about him.
Unless you want to reproduce his work here. The only reason you'd get away with that is that OS management ignores us. They are likely to be very sensitive about him.
Sorry, "if you want to follow him"
On iPad
On iPad
Sorry Kosh.
He's not at Our Salon either.
Same reason.
Management there has published that, it's not my interpretation.
He's not at Our Salon either.
Same reason.
Management there has published that, it's not my interpretation.
Lorianne threw him out? Was it because of what he did here or was there another incident?
I think Progressives and T-Party have something in common. Granted both approach government from opposite ends of the spectrum, but both have found that the status-quo Democrat and Republican party leaders are not interested in anything but servicing the same corporate special interest that continue to bleed this country with out of control healthcare cost and war.
I consider myself a hybrid moderate because I feel free to pick and choose from both opposite ends of the spectrum. I do not buy the whole liberal conservative labels used to keep people from working together. Yes, all working governments and societies have to have compromise to function, but what is sold as compromise is nothing more than a select few acting like they are different when in reality it is one party that represents nobody but their own special interests.
Maybe what will come out of this is a sensible third party willing to put the needs of the citizens above the special interest and create a actual choice from the career politician only interested in keeping their jobs.
I consider myself a hybrid moderate because I feel free to pick and choose from both opposite ends of the spectrum. I do not buy the whole liberal conservative labels used to keep people from working together. Yes, all working governments and societies have to have compromise to function, but what is sold as compromise is nothing more than a select few acting like they are different when in reality it is one party that represents nobody but their own special interests.
Maybe what will come out of this is a sensible third party willing to put the needs of the citizens above the special interest and create a actual choice from the career politician only interested in keeping their jobs.
MTodd,
I don't see a route there. If it existed I think it might be supported, but getting there is a rough one. It might literally be easier to change one of the existing parties from the inside. The possibility exists that the majority of Democrats are more in line with Green positions than with Democratic ones, but that isn't adding up to people jumping ship in mass numbers. The opportunity that I think exists is that the support might exist in the field for changing the Democrats' direction because I think the elected officials are not in tune with the majority of their constituents.
I don't see a route there. If it existed I think it might be supported, but getting there is a rough one. It might literally be easier to change one of the existing parties from the inside. The possibility exists that the majority of Democrats are more in line with Green positions than with Democratic ones, but that isn't adding up to people jumping ship in mass numbers. The opportunity that I think exists is that the support might exist in the field for changing the Democrats' direction because I think the elected officials are not in tune with the majority of their constituents.
Kosh,
Disappointing as it may be to know, a leopard doesn't change its spots. That's all the clues you get. You know who to ask.
Disappointing as it may be to know, a leopard doesn't change its spots. That's all the clues you get. You know who to ask.
hi toritto!
I try to be hysterical at least once a day myself. its like exercise. gets the blood going.
toritto proves open salon has some actual boundaries.
I try to be hysterical at least once a day myself. its like exercise. gets the blood going.
toritto proves open salon has some actual boundaries.
Kosher, I think one of the biggest lies out of Washington is that a third party is not good for the country. What it is not good for is the status quo democrats and republicans. I think a lot of people get disappointed with the political process because in the beginning of the primaries there are fresh ideas, new faces and even a few that are willing to tell the truth. But, by the time we get to the end it is the same old same old blah blah blah republican and democratic party lines. Why because we have non stop talking heads telling us it won't work.
Not only would a third party give people a new choice, but it would make both parties better. Nothing makes change like pain. And I think a third party would give both parties a lot of pain and in essence we would have three viable options not just none.
My question is why should either side change, they continue to get elected, continue to take rivers of money from special interest and continue to take this country down the wrong path. I am not talking about a more liberal or more conservative path because those labels are just there to keep everyone fighting.
Not only would a third party give people a new choice, but it would make both parties better. Nothing makes change like pain. And I think a third party would give both parties a lot of pain and in essence we would have three viable options not just none.
My question is why should either side change, they continue to get elected, continue to take rivers of money from special interest and continue to take this country down the wrong path. I am not talking about a more liberal or more conservative path because those labels are just there to keep everyone fighting.
MTodd,
It's not that I think that a third party would be bad for the country. It's that I don't see an effective way of forming one without killing ourselves in the meantime. I have watched one party take over my state. I've heard so many assert "there is no difference" but the differences here are draconian. People without income won't be fed and thousands upon thousands of teachers now want to leave the state, and that's just two issues. Did I mention the fracking? At the moment, we have to stop these people. It's possible to stop them with a party we have, we think. The parties may not look different enough on a national level, but locally they sure do. It's not that I don't want a third party, it's that I don't know how to get there from here. It might be easier to wrest control of an existing one.
It's not that I think that a third party would be bad for the country. It's that I don't see an effective way of forming one without killing ourselves in the meantime. I have watched one party take over my state. I've heard so many assert "there is no difference" but the differences here are draconian. People without income won't be fed and thousands upon thousands of teachers now want to leave the state, and that's just two issues. Did I mention the fracking? At the moment, we have to stop these people. It's possible to stop them with a party we have, we think. The parties may not look different enough on a national level, but locally they sure do. It's not that I don't want a third party, it's that I don't know how to get there from here. It might be easier to wrest control of an existing one.
Stacey, thanks for commenting. I was dumbfounded by the pimped outness to the medical industry of our reps on both sides of the aisle as well as Obama and as Nader asks, why are what should be mere "vendors" deciding who lives and who dies in the US and extorting so much tax payer money from the government and from us as individuals for their own sociopathic over-profiteering when people in the US, millions, will die prematurely from over-priced inadequate health care or none no matter what Obamacare claims!!!
Dr. Margaret Flowers was one of those doctors arrested because she wasn't welcome at Baucus' table. The one Obama said would include everything and everyone and then he said universal health care was too complicated when the system is all set up, all they had to do was expand Medicare for All to include everyone not just those over 65!!! Would have saved billions of dollars and millions of lives. But the Dems serve the oligarchs. Citizens of the Dem party are still hearing so much framing from the "lesser evil" crowd that keeps us all stuck!!! Stuck, stuck, stuck. (she hysterically repeated).
29 million at least not to be insured was no biggie for the lesser evil Dems and Obama. Let's go incrementally with our capitalist inadequate health care and lets throw 29 million under the bus. Let's not go all FDR or anything!!! Collateral damage that our pimped out reps on both sides of the aisle are willing to do with their golden health care plans set up for them and all family members for life and apparently too many of our "lesser evil" talking faux-progressives who pragmatically are happy to let corporate a**holes take in $9000+ an hour for pay than let their fellow men, women and children live longer and healthier lives. WTF? Who are these people???? Why are they so willing to let people suffer and/or die? I am talking both pols and citizens?????
I once read that you can't get over a canyon in multiple steps. Make one good leap. That is what we should have done, leapt over the canyon of doom of corporate extorted health care in America to higher and fairer ground and expanded Medicare for all. Instead there was so much bull-sh*tting about the public option which was a trojan horse and conveniently disappeared once those of us working for universal healthcare were disenfranchised and marginalized from the Dem party.
And we are still being marginalized by demonization -- being "too emotional" over life and death issues. Dear God. How uncool? Is that what it is about? So many numbed out citizens who go all anti-feeling at the messengers of profound government corruption and I'll call it evil, hysteric that I am.
Congress people and the Obama administration Sunday were vilifying Snowden once again as traitor who should be punished and defending the Nazi ethos of following orders no matter what criminality was being perpetrated. We should not bobble our heads and assent. Snowden sacrificed his welfare to help inform us, and what do we do with the information? Let the real traitors in Congress and the WH and on corporate media tv twist reality and trash our rights to law and to honest information.
best, libby
Dr. Margaret Flowers was one of those doctors arrested because she wasn't welcome at Baucus' table. The one Obama said would include everything and everyone and then he said universal health care was too complicated when the system is all set up, all they had to do was expand Medicare for All to include everyone not just those over 65!!! Would have saved billions of dollars and millions of lives. But the Dems serve the oligarchs. Citizens of the Dem party are still hearing so much framing from the "lesser evil" crowd that keeps us all stuck!!! Stuck, stuck, stuck. (she hysterically repeated).
29 million at least not to be insured was no biggie for the lesser evil Dems and Obama. Let's go incrementally with our capitalist inadequate health care and lets throw 29 million under the bus. Let's not go all FDR or anything!!! Collateral damage that our pimped out reps on both sides of the aisle are willing to do with their golden health care plans set up for them and all family members for life and apparently too many of our "lesser evil" talking faux-progressives who pragmatically are happy to let corporate a**holes take in $9000+ an hour for pay than let their fellow men, women and children live longer and healthier lives. WTF? Who are these people???? Why are they so willing to let people suffer and/or die? I am talking both pols and citizens?????
I once read that you can't get over a canyon in multiple steps. Make one good leap. That is what we should have done, leapt over the canyon of doom of corporate extorted health care in America to higher and fairer ground and expanded Medicare for all. Instead there was so much bull-sh*tting about the public option which was a trojan horse and conveniently disappeared once those of us working for universal healthcare were disenfranchised and marginalized from the Dem party.
And we are still being marginalized by demonization -- being "too emotional" over life and death issues. Dear God. How uncool? Is that what it is about? So many numbed out citizens who go all anti-feeling at the messengers of profound government corruption and I'll call it evil, hysteric that I am.
Congress people and the Obama administration Sunday were vilifying Snowden once again as traitor who should be punished and defending the Nazi ethos of following orders no matter what criminality was being perpetrated. We should not bobble our heads and assent. Snowden sacrificed his welfare to help inform us, and what do we do with the information? Let the real traitors in Congress and the WH and on corporate media tv twist reality and trash our rights to law and to honest information.
best, libby
Glad you are so eloquent on NSA situation, kosh. To God's and the rest of America's ears.
We couldn't disagree more I suspect on Israel. Many AIPAC-serving representatives in Congress led by Menendez, Schumer, etc. are demanding more sanctions on Iran to sabotage Obama administration's efforts for a political solution with Iran and risking war. Once again, they do not even consider the will of the American people or in this case the will of the executive branch. Israel's lobbyists are flexing their muscle and the cost if they prevail will be deadly to humankind.
best, libby
We couldn't disagree more I suspect on Israel. Many AIPAC-serving representatives in Congress led by Menendez, Schumer, etc. are demanding more sanctions on Iran to sabotage Obama administration's efforts for a political solution with Iran and risking war. Once again, they do not even consider the will of the American people or in this case the will of the executive branch. Israel's lobbyists are flexing their muscle and the cost if they prevail will be deadly to humankind.
best, libby
Hannu, sounds like you share my respect for toritto. I miss him and his blogs and comments. best, libby
running out of battery power. will be back. thanks for comments. MTodd I so agree about a third party, btw!!!
note to kosh and aka, take walks across people's faces much?
note to kosh and aka, take walks across people's faces much?
That's not it all libby.
When people cannot form their own prose and resort to wholesale snips and grabs without credit to the true authors, I think they haven't any reason to expect or be accorded more respect than is due.
For instance, I like some of your photography. It seems fresh.
When people cannot form their own prose and resort to wholesale snips and grabs without credit to the true authors, I think they haven't any reason to expect or be accorded more respect than is due.
For instance, I like some of your photography. It seems fresh.
Libby,
Walking on faces?
I rarely demonize. I acknowledge complexities, because they exist. I worry about feasibility.
Why don't you?
I acknowledge Israel's guilt about a lot, but I'm not stupid enough to assume everyone else is innocent when there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. You like to portray Iran as Israel's victim. If you ignore Iran's actions completely, I suppose that's possible. What earns them that free pass from you?
It's one thing not to like Israel. It's another to state that some Israeli official thinks it's worth the risk to use chemical weapons in Syria in a false flag operation. Think about that one for a minute: Jews gassing children. You think that image would go over with the Israeli population if that saw the light of day?
And you think that the idea that Assad - who has killed thousands of his own civilians, was trying to take the area where Sarin was used, and has admitted to having Sarin stockpiles - used Sarin is Less Feasible than that the Israelis did it in cooperation with the Jordanians and Saudis, neither of whom they have diplomatic relations with, and who have enormous cultural baggage when it comes to gas?
I believe it's your obligation to think before you accuse. Hatred has to be pretty deep before it allows you to ignore evidence and logic to that extent.
And you do bring Israel into conversations where it has no place because you figure you have an opportunity to take a shot. This post is about Obama, but Obama is far from Israel's biggest ally in Washington, so you've managed to take a gratuitous shot at Obama and at Israel at the same time. A twofer.
I blame people for what I think they're to blame for. Nothing else. Doesn't matter what I think of them in general.
By the way, Toritto didn't lose his account for being too far to the left. If you think he was unjustly accused, make your case. Or are you aware of what that was all about? Your response to AKA indicates that you might not.
Walking on faces?
I rarely demonize. I acknowledge complexities, because they exist. I worry about feasibility.
Why don't you?
I acknowledge Israel's guilt about a lot, but I'm not stupid enough to assume everyone else is innocent when there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. You like to portray Iran as Israel's victim. If you ignore Iran's actions completely, I suppose that's possible. What earns them that free pass from you?
It's one thing not to like Israel. It's another to state that some Israeli official thinks it's worth the risk to use chemical weapons in Syria in a false flag operation. Think about that one for a minute: Jews gassing children. You think that image would go over with the Israeli population if that saw the light of day?
And you think that the idea that Assad - who has killed thousands of his own civilians, was trying to take the area where Sarin was used, and has admitted to having Sarin stockpiles - used Sarin is Less Feasible than that the Israelis did it in cooperation with the Jordanians and Saudis, neither of whom they have diplomatic relations with, and who have enormous cultural baggage when it comes to gas?
I believe it's your obligation to think before you accuse. Hatred has to be pretty deep before it allows you to ignore evidence and logic to that extent.
And you do bring Israel into conversations where it has no place because you figure you have an opportunity to take a shot. This post is about Obama, but Obama is far from Israel's biggest ally in Washington, so you've managed to take a gratuitous shot at Obama and at Israel at the same time. A twofer.
I blame people for what I think they're to blame for. Nothing else. Doesn't matter what I think of them in general.
By the way, Toritto didn't lose his account for being too far to the left. If you think he was unjustly accused, make your case. Or are you aware of what that was all about? Your response to AKA indicates that you might not.
I'm seeing hope that real opposition forces are little by little forming in America.
The problem to find realistic third party candidates and to get them actually elected is that of course the majority of the people aren't very active in politics. They know that dem's politics is not good and reb's politics isn't good either. But in elections they will vote for 'the lesser evil', because they think that the candidates of the main parties will win anyway and want to have some influence, who the winner will be. Their thinking doesn't normally go farther than this.
I think that the secret to start realistic third party forces (I think it is realistic to assume that there will be more than one) is to concentrate first in local elections. It is quite clear that it is possible to win over the main parties in such towns and cities, where local problems are really big. Even in big cities like Detroit.
The problem to find realistic third party candidates and to get them actually elected is that of course the majority of the people aren't very active in politics. They know that dem's politics is not good and reb's politics isn't good either. But in elections they will vote for 'the lesser evil', because they think that the candidates of the main parties will win anyway and want to have some influence, who the winner will be. Their thinking doesn't normally go farther than this.
I think that the secret to start realistic third party forces (I think it is realistic to assume that there will be more than one) is to concentrate first in local elections. It is quite clear that it is possible to win over the main parties in such towns and cities, where local problems are really big. Even in big cities like Detroit.
Kosh, you wrote:
"It's another to state that some Israeli official thinks it's worth the risk to use chemical weapons in Syria in a false flag operation. Think about that one for a minute: Jews gassing children. You think that image would go over with the Israeli population if that saw the light of day?"
I think that you assumed it is wasn't Libby who suggested that Israel did that false flag operation, but in reality it was I who suggested that. You'll find something about this issue in my blog, too; not only in that discussion thread, which I can't now find easily.
Israel has already various times proved to play 'real politics' in wars without any 'moral considerations'. They for example attacked Gaza certainly knowing that much more civilians would be killed than their real 'enemies'. I think that their logic went such ways that by killing lots of civilians, locals would go against Hamas, who are dependent on locals' support, because locals death followed anyway from the fact that Hamas is working in the area. This kind of tactic (I'm assuming Isreal had in mind) is actually quite common nowadays against such enemies who are dependent on local civilians and living among them.
In this case my logic to suggest that it was Israel who did it, goes like this:
1) First it is not at all realistic to assume that Al Assad did it. They had no reason or motive for it. At the time government forces were the winning side of the war and gas was not at all an effective weapon in the battle. And it was known that Americans might start operations with their own forces and effective weapons (besides hiring terrorists) in Syria, if gas would be used in the battles.
2) I think that it is quite clear it wasn't Americans who arranged it. Americans were seemingly not ready with their plans to attack. It they had done the false flag gas attack themselves they would have been ready to attack at once with their missiles.
3) I don't think it is realistic to assume one of 'rebel' groups would have arranged it by their own initiation. They know that to get an effective strike there from American forces, not to become hurt more by yourselves than the enemy, you need really good cooperation and planning of targets.
4) Israel had the real motive and reasons to do it. To get Americans to attack with their effective weapons. And their idea why the attack with missiles would be effective could have been exactly the one I discussed earlier. Hezbollah has already twice proved to be in previous fights more powerful than Israel's fighting forces. Already twice Hezbollah has chased Israel's army out of Lebanon. But if you would kill quite a lot civilians within American missile attacks, local people could turn against Hezbollah, who are dependent on locals. And on the other hand a quick missile attack would have destroyed quite much of Al Assad's forces' weapons.
5) Almost all knowledge I have read about the gas attack is telling that Americans got first the knowledge of the gas attack from Israel's army's services.
I'm using here only logical thinking based on known facts and not moral considerations, who is 'bad' and who is 'good' in this fight inside Syria.
"It's another to state that some Israeli official thinks it's worth the risk to use chemical weapons in Syria in a false flag operation. Think about that one for a minute: Jews gassing children. You think that image would go over with the Israeli population if that saw the light of day?"
I think that you assumed it is wasn't Libby who suggested that Israel did that false flag operation, but in reality it was I who suggested that. You'll find something about this issue in my blog, too; not only in that discussion thread, which I can't now find easily.
Israel has already various times proved to play 'real politics' in wars without any 'moral considerations'. They for example attacked Gaza certainly knowing that much more civilians would be killed than their real 'enemies'. I think that their logic went such ways that by killing lots of civilians, locals would go against Hamas, who are dependent on locals' support, because locals death followed anyway from the fact that Hamas is working in the area. This kind of tactic (I'm assuming Isreal had in mind) is actually quite common nowadays against such enemies who are dependent on local civilians and living among them.
In this case my logic to suggest that it was Israel who did it, goes like this:
1) First it is not at all realistic to assume that Al Assad did it. They had no reason or motive for it. At the time government forces were the winning side of the war and gas was not at all an effective weapon in the battle. And it was known that Americans might start operations with their own forces and effective weapons (besides hiring terrorists) in Syria, if gas would be used in the battles.
2) I think that it is quite clear it wasn't Americans who arranged it. Americans were seemingly not ready with their plans to attack. It they had done the false flag gas attack themselves they would have been ready to attack at once with their missiles.
3) I don't think it is realistic to assume one of 'rebel' groups would have arranged it by their own initiation. They know that to get an effective strike there from American forces, not to become hurt more by yourselves than the enemy, you need really good cooperation and planning of targets.
4) Israel had the real motive and reasons to do it. To get Americans to attack with their effective weapons. And their idea why the attack with missiles would be effective could have been exactly the one I discussed earlier. Hezbollah has already twice proved to be in previous fights more powerful than Israel's fighting forces. Already twice Hezbollah has chased Israel's army out of Lebanon. But if you would kill quite a lot civilians within American missile attacks, local people could turn against Hezbollah, who are dependent on locals. And on the other hand a quick missile attack would have destroyed quite much of Al Assad's forces' weapons.
5) Almost all knowledge I have read about the gas attack is telling that Americans got first the knowledge of the gas attack from Israel's army's services.
I'm using here only logical thinking based on known facts and not moral considerations, who is 'bad' and who is 'good' in this fight inside Syria.
A correction of a mistake.
I wrote: 'you assumed it is wasn't Libby'
Should have been: 'you assumed it was Libby'
I wrote: 'you assumed it is wasn't Libby'
Should have been: 'you assumed it was Libby'
Hannu,
I can go back and check but I don't think you were alone in that point of view. I distinctly remember making this objection to Libby at the time.
I'm not basing my assessment of Israel on moral considerations either. That wouldn't do any good with Libby, who views Israel as evil incarnate, so I have to restrict my argument to the feasible.
If Hezbollah were more powerful than the Israeli forces, they'd have taken a piece of Israel, at least. Keep in mind that the last combat between the two parties was initiated by Hezbollah, not by Israel. The reason Israel doesn't own a piece of Lebanon is that the Israelis don't view Lebanese territory as a part of Israel. And, unlike with the Golan Heights, it hasn't proven to be defensively necessary. The assumption that Israel lacks military technology is, frankly, ludicrous.
How does Israel have motive? The alternative to Assad is no better than Assad is for Israel. The combat is not, to my knowledge, spilling over into Israel. The disadvantage of keeping Assad is that he supports Hezbollah. The disadvantage of losing him is that you replace a pragmatist with religious fanatics utterly bent on Israel's destruction. Israel is way more comfortable with pragmatists than with fanatics.
Yes, Israel absolutely plays real politics and will absolutely do morally objectionable things for survival. However, this particular episode doesn't add. The potential benefits are iffy and the potential costs are enormous. The Israelis aren't known for being that stupid.
In terms of the intelligence coming from Israel, what else is new? They've been known for that for decades, and they are the chief US ally in the area.
I can go back and check but I don't think you were alone in that point of view. I distinctly remember making this objection to Libby at the time.
I'm not basing my assessment of Israel on moral considerations either. That wouldn't do any good with Libby, who views Israel as evil incarnate, so I have to restrict my argument to the feasible.
If Hezbollah were more powerful than the Israeli forces, they'd have taken a piece of Israel, at least. Keep in mind that the last combat between the two parties was initiated by Hezbollah, not by Israel. The reason Israel doesn't own a piece of Lebanon is that the Israelis don't view Lebanese territory as a part of Israel. And, unlike with the Golan Heights, it hasn't proven to be defensively necessary. The assumption that Israel lacks military technology is, frankly, ludicrous.
How does Israel have motive? The alternative to Assad is no better than Assad is for Israel. The combat is not, to my knowledge, spilling over into Israel. The disadvantage of keeping Assad is that he supports Hezbollah. The disadvantage of losing him is that you replace a pragmatist with religious fanatics utterly bent on Israel's destruction. Israel is way more comfortable with pragmatists than with fanatics.
Yes, Israel absolutely plays real politics and will absolutely do morally objectionable things for survival. However, this particular episode doesn't add. The potential benefits are iffy and the potential costs are enormous. The Israelis aren't known for being that stupid.
In terms of the intelligence coming from Israel, what else is new? They've been known for that for decades, and they are the chief US ally in the area.
Drone strikes have dramatically less collateral damage then B-52 strikes as used in analogous sanctuary areas of NVA in Cambodia, the Tribal Areas being similar in character as to Article 51 and lawful self-defense, although there are many policy considerations in such things.
Al Alwaki moved with the hijackers, and clearly had operational ties, and was more Yemen in the end, although within Yemen, as with much of the War on Terror, there are local and systemic issues at work, which calls for caution in such things.
As to Afghanistan, if we abandon them completely, then as before, non-combatants would be at grave risk of massacre, as in 1994-96, when Hekmatyar, granted someone we used to beat Ivan, said "Innocent people will die today. If they are good Muslims, they go to Heaven. If not, who cares, open fire."
Is that what you want?
To achieve a stable self-supporting Afghan government has eluded many, Afghans and non-Afghans alike, although there are resource transits from Central Asia that would be non-zero sum conflict resolutions, and without a government, that can't happen.
As to Gitmo, if you do not wear a uniform and engage in combat, you can be executed on the field lawfully, as to the term unlawful combatant, if there are other policy considerations, although, there has been a "repeat customer" problem from people who were released, if there are many policy disputes within the Islamic world with which the native "have gun, will jihad" element interacts. That is also something that has always existed to a point as to potential, if the modern version of that has complex sources as to resentments and such, which is why discretion is important, as to interventions that might not always be ideal, to be fair to your point, although neither would a caliphate be an advancement of many of the cause of the Left, if that caliphate ideal is almost delusional in character, given the divisions within the Islamic world, as to the original al Qaeda motive.
As to NSA, there was predictable blowback from longstanding Big Ear approaches, although generally speaking, if it makes you feel better, much of what is collected sits on shelves, although meta-level collection overseas and in interaction here with such things would provide strategic warning, something missing from American COMINT before Pearl, if they made up for that at Midway, showing though the centrality of COMINT in national security strategy. To be fair, the efforts of the COMINTERN historically speaking were a big reason for the creation of such an institution as the NSA, if not the only one, as to avoiding strategic surprise, which in the nuclear age could be the end of the country.
Al Alwaki moved with the hijackers, and clearly had operational ties, and was more Yemen in the end, although within Yemen, as with much of the War on Terror, there are local and systemic issues at work, which calls for caution in such things.
As to Afghanistan, if we abandon them completely, then as before, non-combatants would be at grave risk of massacre, as in 1994-96, when Hekmatyar, granted someone we used to beat Ivan, said "Innocent people will die today. If they are good Muslims, they go to Heaven. If not, who cares, open fire."
Is that what you want?
To achieve a stable self-supporting Afghan government has eluded many, Afghans and non-Afghans alike, although there are resource transits from Central Asia that would be non-zero sum conflict resolutions, and without a government, that can't happen.
As to Gitmo, if you do not wear a uniform and engage in combat, you can be executed on the field lawfully, as to the term unlawful combatant, if there are other policy considerations, although, there has been a "repeat customer" problem from people who were released, if there are many policy disputes within the Islamic world with which the native "have gun, will jihad" element interacts. That is also something that has always existed to a point as to potential, if the modern version of that has complex sources as to resentments and such, which is why discretion is important, as to interventions that might not always be ideal, to be fair to your point, although neither would a caliphate be an advancement of many of the cause of the Left, if that caliphate ideal is almost delusional in character, given the divisions within the Islamic world, as to the original al Qaeda motive.
As to NSA, there was predictable blowback from longstanding Big Ear approaches, although generally speaking, if it makes you feel better, much of what is collected sits on shelves, although meta-level collection overseas and in interaction here with such things would provide strategic warning, something missing from American COMINT before Pearl, if they made up for that at Midway, showing though the centrality of COMINT in national security strategy. To be fair, the efforts of the COMINTERN historically speaking were a big reason for the creation of such an institution as the NSA, if not the only one, as to avoiding strategic surprise, which in the nuclear age could be the end of the country.
Kosher, I guess where we differ is I do not consider myself any part of the us. Personally I found neither party represents the interest of the country. Both sides play lip service to their base, but in reality they sever the interest of themselves. Plus, I don't think one particular party or ideology holds a complete picture of what needs to be done. Personally I find myself holding what some would consider both progressive and conservative ideas. Frankly I do not even care which side of the issue is consider liberal or conservative because to me they are meaningless words used to keep party believers in check.
Myself I am pro-life and pro-second amendment, but that does not mean I will not work with a candidate who is for strong banking and trade reform that is neither. Nor will I vote for a candidate who calls himself pro-life while they continue to continue the wars that are destroying millions of lives and this economy.
The more viable voices in the argument produces the greatest chance of a compromised move towards fixing the problems this country faces.
Myself I am pro-life and pro-second amendment, but that does not mean I will not work with a candidate who is for strong banking and trade reform that is neither. Nor will I vote for a candidate who calls himself pro-life while they continue to continue the wars that are destroying millions of lives and this economy.
The more viable voices in the argument produces the greatest chance of a compromised move towards fixing the problems this country faces.
MTodd,
Sorry I didn't see this reply.
I used to just consider myself a Democrat. The Democrats are closer to where I am, but too far lately.
I'd rather have pragmatic discussions than moralize. Most of my writing here consists of liberal stands pushed on grounds onservatives can relate to.
Sorry I didn't see this reply.
I used to just consider myself a Democrat. The Democrats are closer to where I am, but too far lately.
I'd rather have pragmatic discussions than moralize. Most of my writing here consists of liberal stands pushed on grounds onservatives can relate to.
Kosher, I find myself looking at each individual regardless of party. My default setting is if both candidates show no promise then I vote against the incumbent. My reasoning is at least someone new will be in office who has not already been bought by the special interest.
In the last presidential election I was going to apply this rule, but in the case of Romney he was the special interest so voting for Obama was the only choice.
Frankly Obama has been the biggest disappointment not because he is acting just like all the others before him, but because I really wanted to believe he would be different. I guess chalk one up for the campaign handlers and speech writers, they suckered me into believing.
In the last presidential election I was going to apply this rule, but in the case of Romney he was the special interest so voting for Obama was the only choice.
Frankly Obama has been the biggest disappointment not because he is acting just like all the others before him, but because I really wanted to believe he would be different. I guess chalk one up for the campaign handlers and speech writers, they suckered me into believing.
No comments:
Post a Comment