A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 274 of 725
Quote:The gun nuts in Australia said the same thing, but then there was one massacre on April 28, 1996, in Port Arthur, Australia. Australian gun nuts are not even a tenth as nutty as American-gun-nuts/Republicans, who will never change their minds irregardless of how many thousands of massacres in America.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Whatever. You're never taking the guns. But keep bitching and whining about it like everything else.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://fortune.com/2018/02/20/australia-gun-control-success/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:The gun nuts in Australia said the same thing, but then there was one massacre on April 28, 1996, in Port Arthur, Australia. Australian gun nuts are not even a tenth as nutty as American-gun-nuts/Republicans, who will never change their minds irregardless of how many thousands of massacres in America.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Whatever. You're never taking the guns. But keep bitching and whining about it like everything else.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://fortune.com/2018/02/20/australia-gun-control-success/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Right.
So there was really no point in making this post because whatever point you were trying to make you already argued against on my behalf.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
By the way...
It's Monday. Shouldn't you be bitching about the Electoral College again?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Leading Civil Rights Lawyer Shows 20 Ways Trump Is Copying Hitler’s Early Rhetoric and Policies
www.commondreams.org/views/2019/08/09/leading-civil-rights-lawyer-show
s-20-ways-trump-copying-hitlers-early-rhetoric-and
A younger Trump, according to his first wife’s divorce filings, kept and studied a book translating and annotating Adolf Hitler’s pre-World War II speeches in a locked bedside cabinet. The English edition of My New Order, published in 1941, also had analyses of the speeches’ impact on his era’s press and politics. Ugly and appalling as they are, those speeches are masterpieces of demagogic manipulation.
“Watching Trump work his crowds, though, I see a dangerously manipulative narcissist unleashing the demagogic spells that he learned from studying Hitler’s speeches — spells that he cannot control and that are capable of eroding the fabric of American democracy,” Neuborne says. “You see, we’ve seen what these rhetorical techniques can do. Much of Trump’s rhetoric — as a candidate and in office — mirrors the strategies, even the language, used by Adolf Hitler in the early 1930s to erode German democracy.”
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Sorry to say, but Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Trump are too old or too dumb or too crazy to be President.
Afraid so. Sanders is a great voice to have, and an ethical thinker and can be a good no BS inspiration, but not as president.
I was liking Michael Bennet. Not choosing anyone yet but I liked Bennet. He first appeared on my radar with his senate speech.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Across the world, businesses, scientific institutions, investors, and governments are effectively unanimous in recognizing the urgent need for action on climate change. The science has made it inescapably clear that business as usual leads to disaster. Many debates remain over the best path forward, but the basic case for action has become unassailable.
And so for the most part, opponents of action — generally far-right coalitions fueled by a mix of fossil-fuel cronyism and populist ethnonationalism — don’t assail it. They do everything they can to distract from it.
That almost always involves attacking the messengers (“Al Gore has a big house”) and their proposed solutions (“the Green New Deal will take away your hamburgers”). The scientists are after grant money; the activists are undercover socialists; the leaders are hypocrites; the marchers litter. Casting doubt on the motives and authenticity of people fighting for progressive causes is the right’s primary political tool, with efforts now led out of the White House.
For climate scientists and advocates, it’s a familiar trap. Any political program sufficient to address climate change at scale is, almost by definition, going to be radical, which allows the right to dismiss it as “far left.” The go-to attack on the climate movement is that it’s a “watermelon,” green on the outside and socialist red on the inside — that climate change is just a cover story for the political program.
Greta Thunberg has sidestepped attacks on her motives by almost entirely refraining from endorsing specific political reforms or policies. “I can’t really speak up about things like [politics],” she told Wallace-Wells, “no one would take me seriously.”
Her insistence on this point was illustrated when she submitted the IPCC’s report on limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius in lieu of testifying to the House. Attached was a short letter that said: “I am submitting this report as my testimony because I don’t want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to the scientists. And I want you to unite behind the science. And then I want you to take action.” She refuses to allow her opinions to become the focus.
Coming from almost any adult, this strategy would be vulnerable. Adults have political worldviews and very few have the discipline to keep them entirely hidden. But Thunberg is, in her own words, an “uneducated teenager.” She’s 16 years old! She can’t be expected to know what actions government agencies need to take and she doesn’t pretend to.
She just drags the focus back, again and again, to the subject grown-ups want to avoid: the need for immediate action and their longstanding failure to take any.
www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/9/26/20882958/greta-thunberg-c
limate-change-trump-attacks-right-wing
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Great News! Wall Street Democrats Might Leave the Party!
Anything that accelerates the split in the decades-long marriage between the Democratic Party and Big Money should be celebrated. The transformation in policy that would ensue if Wall Street Democrats walk away from the party, freeing it from self-censorship and bad ideas, far outstrips whatever money they might raise for Democratic candidates.
“I want to help the party, but Warren’s going to hurt me, so I’m going to help President Trump,” said one private equity executive, in a perfect distillation of putting personal enrichment ahead of what he claims to be his political preferences. “They will not support her. It would be like shutting down their industry,” said another bank executive, warning that her policies will be worse for Wall Street than Barack Obama’s.
The most telling quote came from a hedge fund executive, who fretted that if Warren helped people discover that the Trump tax cuts only helped fatten corporate wallets, “Wall Street would not like the public thinking about that.” So their beef with “far left” Democrats is that they would tell too much truth about our broken tax code and the soaring inequality it fosters.
That’s exactly the right attitude, which Bernie Sanders has backed up with his constant invocations of the old FDR line about the economic royalists, “I welcome their hatred.” And proudly rejecting the support of Wall Street isn’t just a populist pose; it’s a viable economic policy. Just about everything that has ailed the Democratic Party since the 1970s from a policy standpoint can be traced back to an ugly partnership with Wall Street money.
As Brooks Jackson details in the seminal book "Honest Graft", Democrats, led by chief fundraiser for the House campaign arm Tony Coelho, cozied up to Big Money to hang onto power during the Reagan revolution.
This wound up betraying just about every New Deal principle there was, and muddying the distinctions between the party and the Republicans.
Whether you care about our broken health care system, the boiling planet, the breakdown of economic mobility and the middle class, or practically any other failing in our country, you can eventually find large financial interests at the heart of the policies that made it happen. And Democrats needing to tend to Wall Street interests for campaign capital resisted the necessary steps to reverse the cycles on all fronts. Solutions that would have followed the New Deal tradition, from universal Medicare to caps on bank size, couldn’t find their way through a corrupted, constrained Congress. The banks “frankly own the place,” Dick Durbin said in 2009, a year after the same banks cratered the economy.
If Wall Street bigwigs suddenly bolt from the Democrats en masse in reaction to Warren’s or Sanders’s nomination, suddenly nobody would have to check with some rich executive before deciding whether to endorse good policy. Suddenly, real options would be allowed to get onto the menu in Washington. Perhaps most important, you would have a clearer distinction between a party of concentrated capital and a party of the plain person in the street. That has been completely removed from our politics because of a band of predatory financiers who imagine themselves as worldly, socially liberal Democrats.
In cold electoral terms, New York and Connecticut aren’t going red even if the financial industry decides to flip entirely. But the Midwest and Sun Belt might respond differently to a Democratic Party that actually tends to their tangible needs, and not hamstrung by financial interests counseling caution and dangling campaign cash.
More at https://prospect.org/power/great-news-wall-street-democrats-might-leav
e-the-party/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Great News! Wall Street Democrats Might Leave the Party!
Anything that accelerates the split in the decades-long marriage between the Democratic Party and Big Money should be celebrated. The transformation in policy that would ensue if Wall Street Democrats walk away from the party, freeing it from self-censorship and bad ideas, far outstrips whatever money they might raise for Democratic candidates.
“I want to help the party, but Warren’s going to hurt me, so I’m going to help President Trump,” said one private equity executive, in a perfect distillation of putting personal enrichment ahead of what he claims to be his political preferences. “They will not support her. It would be like shutting down their industry,” said another bank executive, warning that her policies will be worse for Wall Street than Barack Obama’s.
The most telling quote came from a hedge fund executive, who fretted that if Warren helped people discover that the Trump tax cuts only helped fatten corporate wallets, “Wall Street would not like the public thinking about that.” So their beef with “far left” Democrats is that they would tell too much truth about our broken tax code and the soaring inequality it fosters.
That’s exactly the right attitude, which Bernie Sanders has backed up with his constant invocations of the old FDR line about the economic royalists, “I welcome their hatred.” And proudly rejecting the support of Wall Street isn’t just a populist pose; it’s a viable economic policy. Just about everything that has ailed the Democratic Party since the 1970s from a policy standpoint can be traced back to an ugly partnership with Wall Street money.
As Brooks Jackson details in the seminal book "Honest Graft", Democrats, led by chief fundraiser for the House campaign arm Tony Coelho, cozied up to Big Money to hang onto power during the Reagan revolution.
This wound up betraying just about every New Deal principle there was, and muddying the distinctions between the party and the Republicans.
Whether you care about our broken health care system, the boiling planet, the breakdown of economic mobility and the middle class, or practically any other failing in our country, you can eventually find large financial interests at the heart of the policies that made it happen. And Democrats needing to tend to Wall Street interests for campaign capital resisted the necessary steps to reverse the cycles on all fronts. Solutions that would have followed the New Deal tradition, from universal Medicare to caps on bank size, couldn’t find their way through a corrupted, constrained Congress. The banks “frankly own the place,” Dick Durbin said in 2009, a year after the same banks cratered the economy.
If Wall Street bigwigs suddenly bolt from the Democrats en masse in reaction to Warren’s or Sanders’s nomination, suddenly nobody would have to check with some rich executive before deciding whether to endorse good policy. Suddenly, real options would be allowed to get onto the menu in Washington. Perhaps most important, you would have a clearer distinction between a party of concentrated capital and a party of the plain person in the street. That has been completely removed from our politics because of a band of predatory financiers who imagine themselves as worldly, socially liberal Democrats.
In cold electoral terms, New York and Connecticut aren’t going red even if the financial industry decides to flip entirely. But the Midwest and Sun Belt might respond differently to a Democratic Party that actually tends to their tangible needs, and not hamstrung by financial interests counseling caution and dangling campaign cash.
More at https://prospect.org/power/great-news-wall-street-democrats-might-leav
e-the-party/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Another example of my prediction that the media would be "reluctantly" supporting four more years of Trump right here.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The dynamic here is excruciatingly simple: thousands of rich donors give millions of dollars to hundreds of Democratic Congressmen, who then feel that they have to listen for 2 or 3 minutes to the rich donors. All those donors are probably pretty good speakers or salesmen who have carefully prepared a sales pitch, which can influence a weak-willed Congressman. Strong-willed Senators such as Bernie or Elizabeth Warren would tell the salesmen to place them on the do-not-call list and hangup the phone, but most Congressmen want to be polite, which is unfortunate for America because the salesmen will sell the country what it can't afford and doesn't need.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Another example of my prediction that the media would be "reluctantly" supporting four more years of Trump right here.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
The only way for Congress to handle pushy salesmen is to not speak to them, but salesmen from Wall St got smart by donating to Congress.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What are you talking about, idiot?
Warren has said on many occasions that she's taking big donor money for the General.
Who gives a shit that she's not doing it in the primary when she's going to be bought and paid for in the end anyhow?
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/02/26/warren_will_forgo_b
ig_money_donors_in_primary_but_not_general_election_i_do_not_believe_in_unilateral_disarmament.html
Quote:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) talked with MSNBC's Chris Hayes Monday about her 2020 presidential campaign, including her decision to forego big-ticket fundraisers during the Democratic primary but not in the general election
The sellout went into great detail about this with Cenk of TYT as well, but TYT seems to have removed that video because they like the sellout.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME