Home » Blog » Last LEFT Turn Before Hooverville
Blog for America
Last LEFT Turn Before Hooverville
Monday, February 11, 2008
Bush is the Symptom - Conservatism is the Disease
by Alicia Morgan
As many of us have predicted, the Republican presidential candidates are in a knock-down, drag-out battle to claim the mantle of 'the most conservative ever'. McCain, indeed, is labeled by the other candidates as a 'liberal', the pinnacle of epithets. 'Pedophile' would not be a more derogatory, insulting term. You might as well call him a 'Satanist who bites the heads off of blastocysts' and get it over with.
(Click Read More for the rest of this post)
Conservatives revere and revel in the label 'conservative' in a way that liberals ceased to do in the sixties, when conservatives began blaming liberalism for every evil under the sun. Before that, the majority of Americans self-identified as liberals; liberalism represented the things in society that Americans valued - equality, diversity, making sure that everyone had a chance at the "American Dream". The economic programs that gave us a middle class - strong unions, the GI Bill, Social Security, Medicare - are liberal programs. Liberals believe that you can't sacrifice people so that corporations can grow fat.Liberals know that the 'trickle down theory' is, as Dubya's father once rightly said, 'voodoo economics', and that the only boats that a 'rising tide lifts' are yachts. Liberals believe that we as a nation have a responsibility, not for, but to all of our citizens (there's a difference) and that government is not the enemy, but 'We the People'. It's not 'them', it's 'us'. But when conservatives, backed by the limitless coffers of Big Business Republican think-tanks who saw their vision ofconservative financial and social dominance slipping away, decided toattack liberalism as the symbol of all that's wrong with America,liberals did not challenge this assertion and it became part of the national narrative without liberals quite knowing what happened.
So, while statistics show that the economy does better under Democratic leadership and worse under Republican leadership, conservatives brag about belonging to the party of 'fiscal responsibility.'
While Republicans accuse Democrats of being 'soft on terror', their party and their President have increased and encouraged terrorism by attacking and occupying a sovereign nation without the resources to defend themselves, and created terrorism where there was none before.
While Republicans consider themselves to be the party of Morality and accuse Democrats of having no values, in the most egregious examples of 'do as I say, not as I do', the overwhelming majority of sex and corruption scandals have involved Republicans, not Democrats.
The [Republican] party that supposedly believes in 'small government' inevitably bloats it [government] to unprecedented numbers.
The [Republican] party that harps upon Personal Responsibility seems congenitally incapable of accepting responsibility for its failings, always blaming them on others.
Please note that I am not giving Dems a free pass here - no one can be in politics and keep their hands perfectly clean - no one. It's the way the system is set up. But the ones who claim to be more moral than everyone else because of their high religious principles and who are constantly pointing their fingers at others seem to be the ones that are doing every immoral thing they condemn others for.
And these are the people who are proudly claiming the mantle of conservatism.
For those conservatives who have reluctantly admitted that the Bush Administrtion has been, shall we say, less that stellar - is the reason for George W.'s failure as President simply that he is not conservative enough? Is that his problem? For the true believers, conservatismnever fails - it is only failed.
Somehow, with a Republican president, complete Republican control of Congress, and a majority of conservative Supreme Court justices - as well as a religious right that has been calling the shots in Washington for almost eight years - conservatism has not been given a real chance!
Please pardon me if I'm not hopping on that particular bandwagon.Yes, the party with absolute control of everything, that left Democrats completely shut out and voiceless for six years and when they got the tiniest sliver of a majority back, filibusters them into irrelevance without a murmur of dissent - that party has not had a fair shot at giving conservatism a chance.
I beg to differ, comrades.
We have had the implementation of unfettered conservatism for the past twenty-five years. In my upcoming book the Price of Right I've set myself the task to make clear why it is not just George W. Bush that is the problem - it is the ideology of conservatism itself.
Bush is the symptom; conservatism is the disease.
Even as liberals debate conservatives, we cede them the ‘rightness’ of their basic tenets, which I think is a mistake. I hope to show that conservatism – both social and economic – is detrimental to a democratic society. By ‘conservatism’ I do not mean prudence and moderation - which is what many people take conservatism to mean – but the political and social meaning which includes the myth of the ‘free market’, the elimination of as much regulation and taxes as can be gotten away with, the myth that privatization is the best way to deal with society’s needs, and that government is in itself a bad thing. The (usually) unspoken corollary to this is the ‘Conservative Golden Rule’ – he who has the gold makes the rules. In other words, the people with money and power are the best and most deserving – simply because they have the money and power! This is a strongly-held belief of many people, but it is not acceptable to say in so many words, so there are many euphemisms to describe it - ‘meritocracy’, ‘pulling yourself up by your bootstraps’, ‘reverse discrimination’, and so on. Conservatism’s message is connected to some very powerful societal myths that resonate deeply in the subconscious mind,making it easier to believe in the myths than the facts.
But America as a nation was built on liberal and progressive values, rather than conservative ones. If by ‘conservative’ you mean the status quo – keeping things the way they are, rather than changing, then conservatives would be the Royalists and liberals would be the Revolutionaries. The United States of America was not founded by people who did as they were told by the authority in power – in this case George III, who considered his power directly God-given. In fact, every significant advance in this country for the betterment of its people – freedom for slaves, women’s rights, child-labor laws, civil rights, the American 20th-century middle class itself – came about as a result of liberal ideals and policies.
For much of the 20th century after World War II, American values were liberal values. The New Deal gave us the American Dream – a thriving middle class. But the paradigm began shifting in the sixties, when the plan to rebuild conservatism intersected with the disappointment of Vietnam, which put a damper on what it meant to be liberal. Powerful changes were beginning, but they were under the radar of American consciousness.
We began feeling the rumbles of this seismic shift in the late seventies, when Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority injected politics into religion, ushering in the so-called “Reagan Revolution”. The admixture of moral righteousness with conservative economic tenets begat a Republican mindset that allowed for little or no consideration of other points of view. With this new majority, conservatives could afford to ignore the bipartisanship which would normally force it to mitigate or dilute its objectives. The liberal view became, not just incorrect, but morally flawed as well in the eyes of this new political meld, the Christian conservatives.Each group had its own reasons for criticizing liberalism before, but, fused together as a political unit, the two groups reinforced each other’s beliefs synergistically. Traditional liberal values such as tolerance, diversity, empathy and compassion became evils to be rooted out instead of solutions to the ills of society.
This set of 'values' insists that "Government is the enemy and Big Business is your friend." They believe, incredibly, that tax cuts plus borrowing and spending equal prosperity! The sad truth is that our government (and the rest of the world) is run, not by Democrats, or even Republicans, but by multinational corporations. These corporations want Republicans in power because they fit the most easily into the authoritarian nature of conservatism, and are thus much easier to bend to their will.
I don't believe that most conservatives (our family and friends, many of whom are affected as adversely as the rest of us by unregulated, laissez-faire capitalism) understand what their policies really mean in terms of the economy, the so-called "War on Terror", jobs, education, health care, the deficit, civil liberties, and our relationships with the rest of the world. But, as most people know by now, the Republicans have been positioning themselves for this complete takeover of government for forty years. It has been carefully planned and massively funded. And the way they have captured the hearts and minds of the American fiscal and religious conservatives was not an accident. It has been done by playing into the deepest wants, needs, and fears of people who are the most comfortable with authoritarian structure. It has been done systematically through the use of language and framing, and using the same subliminal techniques that advertisers use when they want you to choose their product over a competitor's; not because of inherent differences between the products, but by applying motivational 'triggers' which have nothing to do with the product itself. That's where the media comes in, The average American, who works harder and longer for less and less, sits down for an hour, exhausted, in front of the television set and takes it on faith that what he or she is seeing on the news is true. And when the narrative is skewed to promote the ideas that those in power wish to have the public believe, most people are not in a position to judge how much is true and how much is spin. The line between 'news' and 'commentary' has been completely blurred to boost advertising revenue, and the American people - you and I - are paying the price.
George W. Bush certainly is the worst president in American history, but he could not have achieved that distinction without the conservative philosophy that says "What's good for business is good for America." It is conservativism that has created the monster that is George W. Bush, not the other way around.
I believe it is time for liberals to call themselves liberals, and be proud of being liberal. It is time to stop ceding conservatives the moral high ground and start pointing out where conservatism has had a direct and destructive effect on the United States and the rest of the world.
Conservatism is inherently anti-democratic. Conservatives do not believe that all men (and women) are created equal. Conservatives believe that some people are more equal, more deserving, more entitled than others, and it's the fault of the 'others' if they are shut out.
Folks, the principles that our nation was founded on are the exact principles that conservatives oppose! We as liberals need to begin pointing that out. Nothing would make me happier than to see a Democratic candidate boast about what a liberal he or she was. That would give me hope for our country.
Remember - Bush is only the symptom - conservatism is the disease. Let's work togther for a cure.
http://lastleftb4hooterville.blogspot.com/2008/02/bush-is-symptom-conservatism-is-disease.html
3:09 PM EST
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=204089-1
Founders Day Gala -- Wisconsin Democratic Party, Milwaukee last Saturday evening
click Watch
Obama's speech starts at 1:16:00 into the 1:56:52 length video
at 1:44:50 into the video "I'm from the south side of Chicago; I may be skinny but I'm tough"
at 1:50:00 into the video "they gave me love, they gave me an education and they gave me hope"
Ron wrote "Senator Clinton's vote is there for all to see. Senators are called on to make big decisions. That one was morally, tactically, strategically, maybe even legally (what legal proceeding can adjudicate guilt of lawmakers making illegal laws?) wrong at the time it was made. Given that the only rationale for it was political, I am not surprised that HRC hasn't copied the contrite John Edwards or the confused John Kerry in 'apologizing' for it. To do so would only increase the political cost of the act. She writes off the loss without investing more to lose into it."
I want you to know that were it possible for me to switch my support to Clinton, it's your argument for it, more than that of any other Clinton supporter I've read or heard, that would help close the sale.
From the post: Martha wrote: I beg to differ, comrades.
Blast from the past. This is yet another in a long line of ridiculous posts. And to add insult to injury, the author writes ANOTHER diatribe in the first comment of her own post.
Come on, DFA. Tend to the blog.
shortcut to last one
http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/23920...
3:23 PM EST
When someone posts everything in bold and often in caps, it reminds me driving at night and of someone behind me with high beams on, or those new type of bright white headlights.
IMO it's distracting and I don't even bother to read through the post.
Obama Outlines Plan to Keep Ohio Jobs from Being Sent Overseas
COLUMBUS, OH—Senator Barack Obama visited Niles, Ohio today to tour a titanium plant, RTI International Metals Inc., and to meet with workers about job security and the state of the economy in Northeast Ohio. After the tour, Obama outlined his plan to help employers retain and create good jobs in Ohio and across the U.S.
“In the last year alone, 93 plants have closed in this state. And yet, year after year, politicians in Washington sign trade agreements that are riddled with perks for big corporations but have absolutely no protections for American workers,” Senator Obama said. “It’s bad for our economy, it’s bad for our country, and it will not happen when I am President...
===================
From Obama's website. He's saying what they want to hear in Ohio.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community...
Martha
It is easier just to call them "the people"
and if you can't imagine yourself sitting in that Wisconsin tavern tonight debating who to vote for, you aren't in that "class"
the problem is of the half that don't vote, 90% are in that "class" you talk about so in some ways it is fair for politicians to ignore them
the wildcard in Wisconsin is walk in same day voter registration, so you walk in with a water bill and a library card(if you don't have a drivers license) and want to strike a blow, nows the chance
Obama is not DLC
From last thread: #94 Susan Rowe -- excellent cartoon. LOL.
My thoughts, if anyone cares--or can indeed find them in the game of "hide the comments"
Last year, someone I know went to hear Hillary Clinton speak at a fundraiser for the Ohio Democratic Party. He was very impressed with her speech, and went on about how inspiring it was. I commented that I was unable to support her because of her repeated, calculated refusal to admit that her vote on the Iraq war resolution had been a mistake. My acquaintance said, "Oh, you have to get over that!"
No, I most certainly do not have to get over that! I mean, this is basic, basic stuff. We all make mistakes. The important thing is to have the humility to admit that, and to learn from your mistakes so that you don't repeat them. I expect this of my kids...why should I expect less of my elected officials? And what's more, refusing to ever admit you were wrong is not a sign of "strength". It is, on the contrary, a dangerous weakness, and I don't believe America can afford another president who stubbornly refuses to ever admit a mistake.
Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, said Sunday on CBS' Face the Nation that it was premature to discuss what the campaign would do.
"We're not backing away," Axelrod said. "What Sen. Obama said is, once the nomination is secured, we will sit down with Sen. McCain as the nominee, and we will talk this through."
Isn't Martha Miller the one that makes those boxes of corn bread mix??
6.
rd
Whoops, I'm trying to undue my bold now in #9 but it's the way it copied.
I agree with you. Bold and underlines are really for headlines and little else except to accentuate a certain word in the text.
11.
Renee,
Excellent blog in the Buckeye Blog.
It would also make a meaningful letter to the editor of a large newspaper. I always read those things and sometimes write them myself. I think many people who read them do so to get a feel as to what they themselves should be thinking.
Not that it will ever be seen, but IndySteve speaks for me with regard to the state of this blog. Bye.
11.
Renee in Ohio
Mon, 02/18/08
Reply to this
My thoughts, if anyone cares
============================
IMO
Hillary and Bill have the perception that collaborating with (or at least placating) the center-right was (is) necessary for political success (at least for national politics.) Though presently debatable, this is the way they perceived it in the 1990s.
Her refusal to admit wrong on the 2002 Iraq vote and her vote to condemn Iran's finest soldiers as "terrorists" are the clearest evidence of this Faustian bargain.
Renee wrote "I commented that I was unable to support her because of her repeated, calculated refusal to admit that her vote on the Iraq war resolution had been a mistake."
Her vote wasn't the mistake. It was a political miscalculation. The mistake was that Bush took her vote and didn't conduct the occupation in a manner that would further her political ambitions.
By the same token, Edwards didn't apologize for his vote because he felt the war was wrong. He co-sponsored the authorization measure, with Sen. Lieberman. He tried to get Kerry to hold off, as his running mate, when Kerry was regretting the vote and considering recanting it. Edwards' apology was a frank admission that his political fortunes had been side railed by his poor judgment, and it was prudent to make the necessary correction to get those fortunes back on track. Otherwise, he could have apoligized for his mistake anytime between 2002 and 2004, i.e., anytime before he saw the innate value of such an admission to the prospects for his second presidential run.
Renee
I don't disagree about the stubborn refusal to admit a mistake. But she still thinks war is an appropriate response as witnessed by her recent Kyl-Lieberman vote threatening war with Iran.
Hillary Clinton is a card carrying member of the War Party.
Barack Obama is not.
since the blog is messed up again,
try this link to the spies that love you.
Is Martha Miller just quoting an entire article from Alicia Morgan? And then quoting it again? FYI Martha Miller has been in DFALink for awhile. Still -- are we publishing entire articles from elsewhere?
Also Be Truthful joined DFA Link on January 30.
I guess everything will get garbagier and garbagier as we get closer to the election and oppo's and trolls come out of the woodwork.
Unfortunately the "conservative" has been hijacked. If any country is "conservative" it is Sweden, for recycling everything and being cautious to ban suspected toxins in products until they are proven safe for human exposure in the form of vapor breathed, and contact of sking and digestion.
But it takes high tax rates of the upper incomes to be conservative in this sense. That country is conservative in its appetite for wealth, in lieu of being liberal for good health.
The present "conservative" belief of American politics is essentially a belief in Pagan Fatalism - that the God (gods) control all human events and reward the good with fortune while God (the gods) punish the bad with poverty.
This belief is an instinctive inclination of human nature, and those in power do benefit by encouraging such belief.
It is also a red-herring for finding the ecological causes of our epidemic in chronic degenerative diseases. Blame it on the will of God.
I’m watching ever increasing excitement regarding Obama/Hillary race, all these emotions running high, war of words, defense, attacks, accusations of all kinds, counteraccusations, almost daily polls, etc., - the regular pre-election hype which is only more “hyped”. What it for?
American People becoming so fascinated by this race that probably have already forgot that there are NO any significant differences between both major Demos candidates.
Because by their very records:
- They both voted for it (for war or for its funding) and certainly might continue the same for as long as possible (to “secure embassy work”, or for some other “security” reason);
- They both will keep “all options on the table” regarding Iran or any other hot international issue (although the more “progressive” Obama seems ready to meet with Iran’s leader BEFORE using those options…, lol);
- They both will be ready to fight Al-Qaeda eternally if necessary (note, btw, that none of them is talking about changing American ME Policy which enables Al-Qaeda, as well as American International Policy in general from imperial to something more productive);
- They both, therefore will have to justify lack of recourses to improve live of American citizens in any significant way by very same concerns that concerned Bush&Co. for the last 7 years – the “security” concerns.
So, why, what for, all these hypes, fights, debates, attempts to suck from the fingers of both candidates differences that never existed?
That is for ILLUSION that we, the People have choice. That we have choice AFTER Kucinich, Gravel, Ron Paul, (even Edwards), everyone who really distinguished himself from the crowd, have been successfully and practically eliminated from the race!
I mean, we must not forget that NOBODY (even Obama!..., if he becomes President,...lol) can change our life. Only we, the People, can.
Martha and Thomas Miller have been posting here for years, and have been using the posting function of DFA link since day one on BFA if anyone would be reading all of the posting going on there.
random chance would promote a post of Martha's to the front page alot more often than someone who has never bothered to post there
the shouting (bold type) is causing the scrolling and the scrolling is causing the shouting
we went through all that with Bill from Madison
Bo Gritz for President (interesting bio)had a local supporter here who would rant in local LTE week after week . nobody paid much attention,probably should have
head lice
Fact is that the last person who gave a good goddamn about this blog was Alison Stanton. Since then it's been drifting to lower and lower levels of utility and civility. The peeps picking up their paychecks as "leaders" of this organization should be ashamed and embarrassed.
brown recluse spiders
32.
former
Mon, 02/18/08
American People becoming so fascinated by this race that probably have already forgot that there are NO any significant differences between both major Demos candidates.
=================
depends on your criteria for "difference" - Barack Obama is the first candidate since Carter to not praise the benefits of abortion (or the "choice" thereof) and birth control in his campaign issues. I would say that is extremely significant, regardless of how you feel about it (smart politics to avoid obsolete, divisives personal issues or "betrayal of women".)
About ten people regularly come to this blog and comment. On other posts on DFA-Link there is almost nothing of substance happening online.
DFA refuses to recognize this problem and take corrective action. Perhaps they don't think there is a connection between online activity and activism. People who come here for intelligent, well-written posts are disappointed.
Why would anyone donate to an organization that has spent a lot of time and money to build an online presence and then neglects it? HQ should answer that question.
I Do like being the blog hog today, where all my posts fall to the bottom.
I'd like to know about the technology that allows that to happen. If only I could do that elsewhere......! ;-)
puddle
Mon, 02/18/08
Hi, puddle. How's your backwater neck of the woods? BFA has become an online backwater due to neglect. I like backwaters. But there are snakes and other poisonous critters there.
Alison was awesome. Also the daughter of one of our favorite posters. But that was a long time and a lifetime ago. Times they are a changin'.
BTW, folks. At YearlyKos back in August of 07, I talked to DFA staff about the blog and they said they were getting ready to attend to its problems. I NEVER expected that meant making it worse!!
Still waiting.........still waiting.....WHEN, DFA?????
Hi, Indy! Ya. When you hire someone to "fix" something that ain't broke; someone who admits they don't *like* blogs, but do like forums, lol!, exactly what are you expecting? Wish mainefem would do a cost/benefit study on how many bucks have been sunk into the project of making this blog unworkable, when there are scads of free programs out there that do just fine. HEP is using a couple of them, for instance.
toe fungus
Fortunately, it's just as easy to scroll bold type as regular.
Hillary Clinton is a card carrying member of the War Party. Barack Obama is not.
Glad to see you've changed your mind about that from when you said both were.
"Since that's resolved, let me just make it plain that there are many posts put up here regarding things people notice that I don't care about. One way to detect this is that they don't elicit any responsive post from me. That's not the acid test. I may be too bored or lazy to write a reply to something worthwhile, but if I post in response, it's safe to assume that I care, for whatever reason, about whatever it is the blog post author has noticed. See if that also works from your vantage point."----
lol... a classic.
From my vantage point brevity trumps pomposity. But thanks for the chuckle.
Barack Obama is the first candidate since Carter to not praise the benefits of abortion
I won't hold my breath waiting for any quotations to back this up.
WHY THIS LADY IS TIRED OF BEING SPAMMED BY "THAT LADY'S" RATIONALE FOR NOT VOTING FOR HILLARY......
cuz I've seen it 3 times....alright, already;)
j/k
Honestly, I wish folks would lighten up a bit. I tire easily of the, "edwardians, Hillaroids, Obamanables" stuff mostly because it becomes tedious upon repetition but I'm surprised to see it causing lengthy diatribes invoking Samoan proverbs and all.
Basically, we're all on the same side here:) Seriously.
snapping turtles.
Here's a subject we've been wrangling about, adressed by someone with much wider respect than I........
National Primary Dayby Jerome Armstrong, Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 05:24:25 PM EST
This won't mean anything for this election, but for next time, the idea of a National Primary day, proceeded whatever sort of events the states want to hold, sounds good:
The simplest and most direct way to correct the worst elements of the current system would be to eliminate the entire charade of electing delegates to the conventions. Instead, we should hold one national primary, on one day, for both parties.The national primary is not a new idea. It is a Progressive Era innovation first proposed by Alabama Congressman Richard Hobson in 1911 and endorsed by political science-professor-turned-president Woodrow Wilson. In 1912, Theodore Roosevelt proposed it to William Howard Taft to settle which of them would be the Republican nominee; Taft, the incumbent, refused. From that time until 1979, the national primary has been put forward in Congress 126 times by a determined, dedicated, and tiny band of reformers, including Senator Estes Kefauver (D-Tenn.) and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Al Ullman (D-Ore.), the last big proponent of the idea.
But despite its small amount of support on Capitol Hill, the national primary has garnered majority support in nationwide polls. From 1952 until 1988, Gallup consistently polled Americans on their support for various nominating process reforms; the national primary always had wide support and never had opposition in excess of 27 percent. More recently, a 2007 New York Times poll found that 72 percent of Americans favored a single day for all primaries.
More here.
OMG, this is huge. David Axelrod created 2 politicians. He gave the theme and the lines to speak and they are reusing them. This is not just studying and copying some lines, these are main themes and same words. And on top of it, David Axelrod worked for Deval Patrick-MA before moving over for Obama's Presidential campaign.
Something tells me, some others are going to start doing some further looking. This kinda' makes Biden's plagerism look like a bad joke. But like I said, this isn't just copying words, these are main campaign themes and "words" and "speeches"
Patrick said.... Obama said....
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articl...
Sweet: Barack Obama lifts some lines from Deval Patrick speech. Video
comparison.
WASHINGTON--Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama lifts some lines
from Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick when he defended himself Saturday
night about being an inspirational speaker who may have more sizzle than
steak. In doing so, he borrowed a riff from Patrick (a native Chicago
South Sider) who shares with Obama a key strategist, David Axelrod.
"Don't tell me words don't matter," said Barack Obama at the Wisconsin
Democratic Party Founders Day dinner on Saturday in a rebuttal to Hillary
Rodham Clinton's assessment that he is about "speeches" and not
"solutions." He then goes on to quote some very famous lines. Just about
the same thing Patrick said in a speech in 2006, when he was running for
governor. Patrick is endorsing Obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8M6x1H08a...://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/02/sweet_barack_obama_lifts_some.html
More bad news for the Clintons.....
Texas poll shows dead heat among DemsA new CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll suggests the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination between Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois is a statistical dead heat in Texas, which holds primaries March 4.
In the survey, out Monday, 50 percent of likely Democratic primary voters support Clinton as their choice for the party's nominee, with 48 percent backing Obama.
But taking into account the poll's sampling error of plus or minus 4½ percentage points for Democratic respondents, the race is a virtual tie.
Two recent polls by other organizations also show the race statistically even. Map: National and state polling
The firewall is burning.
Linda in NM
Mon, 02/18/08
Are you serious? or are you joking? This is not like Biden at all. Using a phrase or words that are in the public domain, or themes, particularly from someone who supports you is not earthshaking.
After all, where did Dean get "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party from"?
Linda, have you gone off the deep end? Why such vitiol against Obama?
37.
Sitka
Mon, 02/18/08
Reply to this
Barack Obama is the first candidate since Carter to not praise the benefits of abortion
I won't hold my breath waiting for any quotations to back this up.
=================
My quote (out of context) was strictly referring to what he posts on his campaign website, on the "issues" segment. It was in no way meant to be a blanket indicatation of his sentiments in the absolute sense, only an indication of his political discretion (or indiscretion.) Check it out yourself...
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
My quote (out of context) was strictly referring to what he posts on his campaign website, on the "issues" segment.
I meant I won't hold my breath waiting for you to quote the other Democratic candidates you smeared.
cC, your Samoan comment was hysterically funny.
I think it was Michael (you too make me laugh) who suggested that we not identify ourselves so completely with the candidate of our choice. The word that comes to mind is enmeshment...and I prabobly mispeled it~ :-)
I like Ike!
Hey, sea...glad you're here. I'd really hate to think that folks are being pushed out of here because they aren't in lock-step...not what democracy is all about.
After the March primaries Hillary is most likely toast. Hope we can all unite at that point:)
53.
Indy Steve
Mon, 02/18/08
Linda in NM
Mon, 02/18/08
Are you serious? or are you joking? This is not like Biden at all. Using a phrase or words that are in the public domain, or themes, particularly from someone who supports you is not earthshaking.
After all, where did Dean get "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party from"?
Linda, have you gone off the deep end? Why such vitiol against Obama?
______________________________
LOL NO, but it sounds like you might have.
WHATSUP? I think what I posted was clear. These aren't my words, they are reporters and their investigations....as they apparently are just starting after Obama used word for word Deval Patrick's speech to the Wisconsin Democratic Party Dinner.
These are facts, not guess work...did you watch the video's and see the same speeches et all the two are using?
And if you don't want to accept that, there'e nothing I can do about it.
Back for a minute. Glad you got a laugh cChalfonte about the Samoan proverb. It's interesting how different things tickle our funny bones. Me, I love Peter Sellers falling into the pond in A Shot in the Dark.
I watched the YouTube video of Deval Patrick and Barack Obama. No, not the Biden thing. Same emphasis, some of the same quotes, but not true plagiarism. I was concerned because I don't respect plagiarism, but in my opinion this isn't it.
Here's the URL if you have the stomach for it of the downed cows in the slaughterhouse presented by the Humane Society.
https://community.hsus.org/campaign/CA_2008_investigation/w33buwur27jimi5w? I can't watch it, but there may be some who can. Phil, still haven't gone to the book yet, but I will.
New thread
http://blogforamerica.com/view/23841#com...
Nope, I'll have to split it.
https://community.hsus.org/campaign/CA_2008_investigation/w33buwur27jimi5w?
Sorry, for the repetition. It just won't work.
http://blogforamerica.com/view/23841#com...
new thread
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
Videos of some of the 64 House Healthcare Heroes standing strong for a public health insurance option
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Congressman Lloyd Dogget
Congressman Keith Ellison
Congressman Bob Filner
Congressman Phil Hare
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Blog for America
-
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Send a message they can't miss
By Mary R on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM EST -
Will the real Democrat please stand up?
By Mary R on Nov 11, 2009 2:03 PM EST -
3 Million and Counting
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:47 PM EST -
Is Sen. Nelson listening to Nebraska?
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:31 PM EST
Recent Blog Posts
-
Dreams wow gold
By wow gold w on Nov 22, 2009 3:17 AM EST -
the Psychobiology talk about the pc wow gold game
By wow gold w on Nov 21, 2009 11:39 PM EST -
Spring Trend 2009 Abercrombie & Fitch
By Abercrombie F on Nov 21, 2009 9:44 PM EST -
Vacationing?
By Phoenix V on Nov 21, 2009 2:07 PM EST -
Bags And Shoes Gucci or Louboutin
By Buy l on Nov 21, 2009 2:37 AM EST
-
By Martha Miller on Feb 12, 2008 9:43 PM ESTIn the United States, the 70% Common Population's Political Class and Culture makes less than $121,000 dollars a year to subsist upon; and, should any of the 70% Common Population lose their subsistence job's working for the 20% Professional Class & Culture or the 10% Elite Capitalist Class & Culture, they will fall into the ranks of the poor until when and/or if they get back onto their feet with a sufficient new job; therefore, the poor are a neverending part of the 70% Common Population's Political Class and Culture that will be with us always and can not be separated from the Common Population.
The 20% Professional Political Class and Culture is the NEW middle class population that earns $121,000 to 1 Million Dollars a year working for the 10% Elite Capitalist Class & Culture and can also fall into the ranks of the poor should they lose their jobs; as the Professional Political Class and Culture is the cream from the 70% Common Population's Political Class and Culture that have chosen to be a separate political class and culture, separated from the Common Population.
The 10% Elite Capitalist Political Class and Culture make Millions to Billions of Dollars per year and work only by choice.
The Common Population's Political Class and Culture are without subsistance rights and must realize the Common Population are liberals in need of holding a job for subsistance rights, instead of conservatives living off their own capital; but even more than that, the Common Population's DIVERSE Political Class and Culture needs to realize the Common Population are not only a political class, but are a political culture unto themselves POLITICALLY, and start defending their own political class and culture against the conservatism of the RIGHT, as well as the 20% Corporate DLC's Professional Political Conservative Class and Culture of the LEFT, represented in Congress by the corporate Democratic Leadership Council, the DLC. If not, there can be NO HOPE for the 70% Common Population to ever be able to regain subsistence rights in the nation.
Also, the candidates, the media and the blogs are always talking about the MIDDLE CLASS, can there be TWO Middle Classes?????? NO THERE CAN NOT!!!!!!! --- Because the 20% Corporate DLC's NEW Political Professional Class IS the Middle Class of the NATION earning $121,000 to $1,000,000. per year, while the SUPPOSED other middle class IS NOT A CLASS at all, BUT IS A CONSTITUENT PART OF THE COMMON POPULATION'S CLASS AND CULTURE, the MIDDLE of the Common Population EARNS $40,000. to $120,000. according to an NPR report, which is being promoted as the MIDDLE CLASS to divide the common population. The actual middle class is the Corporate DLC's MIDDLE CLASS & CULTURE of the Nation that earns $121,000 to 1 Million Dollars a year. Which middle are they talking about? Is it the Middle Class of the Nation, or the Middle of the Class & Culture of the Common Population? That is a BIG DIFFERENCE. Inquiring minds want to know, and this needs to be widely discusssed because their talking incorrect rhetoric about TWO MIDDLES, one middle earning $40,000. to $120,000., and another middle earning $121,000.- $1 Million Dollars just below the Elite Capitalists, the Corporate DLC's NEW CLASS & CULTURE, the Political Professional Class and Culture THAT CAN NOT BE IGNORED as they are the TRUE MIDDLE CLASS of the United States.
The middle class of the nation IS the 20% Professional Class and Culture, the DLC's new class, which is the one and only middle class of the Nation. THERE IS NO OTHER MIDDLE CLASS -- the middle they talk about is a median income for the Common Population Class & Culture, but a median income is not a middle class and culture, but is simply a median income of the 70% MAJORITY COMMON POPULATION'S CLASS AND CULTURE.
Misconstruing the COMMON POPULATIONS CLASS & CULTURE as the middle class is common with totalitarian conservatism because it can be accepted by the unknowing, and divides the 70% COMMON POPULATIONS CLASS & CULTURE to the benefit of the other classes. It is necessary to understand that raising or lowering the median income of the 70% majority common populations class and culture does not make another middle class. There is only ONE Middle Class in the three political classes and cultures in the United States listed as follows:
FIRST CLASS & CULTURE -- 10% Elite Capitalist Class & Culture's Millions to Billions of dollars yearly,
SECOND CLASS & CULTURE -- 20% Corporate DLC's Political Professional Class & Culture's $121,000. to $1,000,000. yearly, THE REAL MIDDLE CLASS, and the
THIRD CLASS & CULTURE -- 70% Majority Common Population Class & Culture's $0 - $120,000. yearly.
There is no way the so called $40,000. -$120,000. yearly income wages rhetoric can be misconstrued as the middle class of the nation, but is ONLY an income figure derived from the 70% MAJORITY COMMON POPULATION'S CLASS & CULTURE.
Now, WE THE PEOPLE are in need of legislation for a new party, representative of the 70% MAJORITY COMMON POPULATION'S CLASS & CULTURE, because our representation has been taken away by the Corporate DLC's NEW PROFESSIONAL CLASS & CULTURE, as neither one, nor two parties, can possibly represent THREE classes and cultures; and represent their own class & culture and the 70% MAJORITY COMMON POPULATION'S CLASS & CULTURE GOES UNREPRESENTED as swing voters with super delegates MARGINALIZING the 70% MAJORITY COMMON POPULATION'S CLASS & CULTURE continually.
WE THE PEOPLE of the 70% MAJORITY COMMON POPULATION MUST CONTINUE TO WAKE UP so that WE THE PEOPLE CAN MAKE DEMOCRACY MANIFEST, because orthodox democracy is nothing but totalitarianism.