General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWith One Speech Elizabeth Warren TERRIFIES The Koch Brothers and The Supreme Court
WOO-HOO.....
In a brief speech at the AFL-CIO convention, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) rocked the crowd by taking on the Koch brothers, and the corporate owned and operated conservative Supreme Court majority. Sen. Warren called the Supreme Court conservative majority among the top ten pro-corporate justices of the last half century, and said, “You follow this pro-corporate trend to its logical conclusion, and sooner or later you’ll end up with a Supreme Court that functions as a wholly owned subsidiary of Big Business.”
Warren roused the crowd by vowing to take on the powerful interests, “From tax policy to retirement security, the voices of hard-working people get drowned out by powerful industries and well-financed front groups The fight continues to rage, and the powerful interests continue to be guided by their age-old principle: ‘I’ve got mine, the rest of you are on your own. However steep our climb, I am proud to stand with you, to march with you, and to fight side-by-side with you.”
She also talked about the history of powerful interests standing against changes that benefit the many, “In every fight to build opportunity in this country … in every fight for working families, we have been on the front lines because our agenda is America’s agenda… But let’s be clear, we have always had to run uphill. Powerful interests have done everything they can to block reform. They attacked Social Security and Medicare. They attacked pensions and public employees. They attacked bank regulation and consumer protection.”
This is why Wall Street, corporate America, and the Koch brothers all fear Elizabeth Warren. She is saying the things that they don’t want people hear. Warren is mobilizing the masses by calling out the political front groups for corporate America and connecting the dots all the way up to the conservative Supreme Court majority. The right wing billionaires may have the money, but they are afraid of Elizabeth Warren. They fear her because she brings message to the American people that they matter. They fear her because she vows to fight for them, and she urges those who the powerful conservatives in this country try to silence to join the fight. Warren’s words carry extra weight because she not placing herself above those she is advocating for. The Massachusetts senator is standing with them.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/09/09/elizabeth-warren-koch-brothers-supreme-court-speech.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)She's setting herself up for a draft, in the best possible way, not as a political ploy, but just by being herself.
2 more years of .0001% insanity, and the country will be begging for her.
I'm almost beginning to fear for her life.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)to derail her like they did Howard Dean and then we will get Hillary Clinton much more friendly to Wall Street and the Koch bros.
Sorry to be so cynical, but that's what I think.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
merrily
(45,251 posts)But she did not send a tingle up Chris Matthew's leg.
Media pretty much killed Howard Dean's candidacy, too, by making it seem that letting out that whoop when speaking to his supporters was evidence of serious mental disturbance.
I think we have a lot less control over the process than we think.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)In 2008, the Establishment nonetheless preferred Obama. They thought that Hill had too much baggage to win the general.
That is why Harry Reid was selling Obama to his (Reid's) fellow Democrats. Remember that speech Reid made to his fellow Dems that came out later, about Obama's being articulate, etc?
If everything depends on the primary, what do you suppose the point was of Reid telling his fellow Dems what a great candidate for President Obama would make.
Not sure of your point, so forgive me if the above does not address it.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)The whole thing was clearly falsified by means of using only the feed from one directional mike. Then they all jumped in & played the scene over 600 times in the next few days.
But ya know what gives me hope? Syria. No, really. This time they weren't able to sell the public on their bullshit.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Even before constituents started calling in droves, quite a few House members were of the view that Obama's unilateral action in Libya violated the Constitution. IMO, it was those members going on TV in August to say that Obama should consult Congress before taking any action that brought media attention to the matter and got the public calling, not the other way around.
And I would not be the least bit surprised if we ultimately end up bombing Syria on the ground that we cannot trust Assad or Putin. I've been hearing plenty of that since Monday. Not saying we will, just saying I would not be the least bit surprised if we did, because they are laying the groundwork for that already.
Hey, it worked in Iraq.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)And I remain quite apprehensive about the whole thing getting derailed somehow as well.
It would be very easy for me to get very cynical and negative about a possible future strike and the manipulations behind it, but at this point I'm just hoping that the cost in public opinion and diplomatic consequences has gotten too high to carry on with the military interventions.
Hillary, if she is smart, will hitch her wagon to this star.
Side by side, Hill stands not a chance.
As for the establishment, we could overcome if we just hitch up.
blue14u
(575 posts) Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)And I see the Dean thing the same way you do, btw.
No telling what might happen in the next 2 years, though.
HumansAndResources
(229 posts)Greg Palast exposed who Created and Funded the DLC, along with the Thieving Nature of Koch Inc and some non-mainstream-publicised aspects of the XL Pipeline.
http://www.gregpalast.com/i-want-my-fair-share-and-thats-all-of-it-the-kochs-the-xl-pipeline/
Next Primary there must be a "No DLC, No Wall St, No Monsanto, No Pharma, No MIC, No CFR" litmus test applied to ALL Dem-candidates. Otherwise, just as now and with Bill Clinton, we get all of those heaped together.
merrily
(45,251 posts)all essentially the same, though the DLC has essentially shut down its own operations.
Next Primary there must be a "No DLC, No Wall St, No Monsanto, No Pharma, No MIC, No CFR" litmus test applied to ALL Dem-candidates.
I don't know if that will work. Too many DLC types in the party. Did you ever see Invasion of the Body Snatchers?
Besides, in 2008, I voted for Obama because I thought he was liberal. Fool me once... and it just maybe that I'm gullible.
HumansAndResources
(229 posts)What a politician "says" is much less important than what clan they hang with.
Edit: Oh, and you must see the Saturday Night Live spoof of InvasionOTBSnatchers from ~1980 with the "Reagan Pods". Freaking hilarious - they wake up spouting supply-side economics.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Especially if Axelrod is a campaign advisor.
I don't recall Obama campaigning on cutting social safety nets or a health care plan with an individual mandate and no public option.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)I was thinking Dean should run again and wouldn't Warren make a great VP or the other way around. We've got to get Dean back into politics. Maybe Warren could make him Secy of Important Stuff.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Have you met all your representatives now serving your district in office?
If not, join now. Put your money and your time where your mouth is. (Not meant to you personally, Cleita but to all DUers.)
That's a challenge.
And if you don't have a local Democratic Club, form one.
Just put a notice on a bulletin board near where you live, post on the internet that you want to meet with other Democrats and get going.
Take the initiative. Gather your friends and start your own Democratic Club. Petition your state organization on how you can get involved. Check your state Democratic organization online. Start registering voters in areas in which you think Democrats are located.
Again, this is not specifically aimed at you Cleita but at all DUers.
I know you are very active and may already belong to a Democratic group.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to remind everyone that we have no one to blame but ourselves if we allow the money and corruption to ruin our country.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)younger ones and I'm over seventy. I hate to tell you but the game is rigged and all the candidates pre-selected. We need campaign and election reform. I have been beating that drum for over a decade now and many agree with me but nothing changes. We need major reform within the party to return it to it's roots, the party of labor, the working class and minorities. Getting people on board to do something is another story.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I join in your cynicism, as a firm supporter of Dean.
We should feel them scheming already in preparation for this.
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)and wore UFO Kucinich T-shirts to out-mock these LAME talking points, that should NEVER have gained traction!
This, in retrospect of course.. But we CANNOT allow the M$M any quarter in 2016.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Unfortunately, most of our party has dissed liberals as much or more than the right has.
So, we're gun shy (no pun intended).
No more.
P.S. We should have called out the media, too. The right never stops lying about how the liberal media hurts them ( a double lie). We need to start calling out the corporatist propaganda media for what it really is. We should have been marching in front of the networks when they did that to Dean and calling their sponsors.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)don't know if she's ready but I'm ready for her!
ShadowLiberal
(2,237 posts)I'd love to have a president Elizabeth Warren, but I fear the 'main stream' media would do everything in their power to destroy her if she ran. A lot of the media heads would much lose if Warren got her way on everything because of all of their corporate power.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I was for Kerry at the time, 
but I saw what they were doing.
I was for Obama, too, in 2008.
In both 2004 and 2008, it seemed the fix was in and media was in on it.
With Obama, they did not so much bash Hillary--conventional media wisdom being that attacking a female candidate backfires--as they gushed over Obama. I remember 2008--the tingle that went up Chris Matthews' leg and the shouts of "He's a rock star!"
Not all that subtle.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
SammyWinstonJack
(44,316 posts)Sucks, but there it is. 
Scuba
(53,475 posts)leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)She would make a great Supreme, but I don't agree that Congress can neuter the President. Besides, what's to say we can't elect a more progressive Congress too?
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)i dont trust dems to vote in big enough numbers
Liberalynn
(7,549 posts)
blm
(114,637 posts)SQUARELY.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)I lurve me some Warren!
For POTUS.
2016!
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)polichick
(37,626 posts)
Z_California
(650 posts)...if she gets too much momentum they'll do to her what they did to the others (JFK/RFK/MLK)
Moostache
(11,160 posts)
You got my vote Senator Warren.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)I would support her candidacy if she chooses to run for POTUS!
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Already living inside a nation wherein the Supreme Court functions as a wholly operated subsidiary of the Big Corporations.
Both Sottomayor and Kagan were chosen for their allegiance to Monsanto.
And if we look to such middle class, property rights cases as occurred around ten years ago, we see that a low income woman lost her bought and paid for home to a local Big Business (forget if it was a country club developer or shopping mall developer.) The SCOTUS members decided in favor of the Big Business, with the "D"s on the court more quick than the "R"s on the court to divest the woman of her home.
Why is the above case so important? Because one way that the public could stave off the immense power of the banks to set up bubbles, collapse economies, foreclose homes and then keep them in inventory until; the price of renting is sky high is in the efforts of cities like Richmond Calif. to use eminent domain to stave off the Big Banks. But if SCOTUS is merely operating under the maxim of "Big Corporations Uber Alles," such attempts will go nowhere.
A link for more info on what this eminent domain practice means for citis like Richmond
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/jun/14/eminent-domain-breakthrough-idea/
defacto7
(14,162 posts)HumansAndResources
(229 posts)Time for Real Change. No More DLC.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)Autumn Colors
(2,379 posts)None in major parties, but there's a whole list right here, going back to 1872!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_United_States_presidential_and_vice-presidential_candidates
Beacool
(30,514 posts)That's funny.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)and Reps than she does. As for the SC, I don't know why they'd be concerned either. Those on the SC have a lifetime appointment and get to be the arbiters of what's constitutional and what isn't.
While her speech sounds great, she doesn't have the power or influence at this point to give either (the Koch's or the SC) a reason to be "terrified".
coldmountain
(802 posts)My mom fears for Rachel Maddow's life but Senator Warren has to have target on her.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)Warren is a firebrand.
RC
(25,592 posts)actually does care. That could lead to something positive being done by applying pressure to other congress critters to follow suite or get voted out. It can happen. Remember Todd Akin? It happen to him, but for a different reason. All it takes is for one person to get in front and speak the truth to power. And that is what Elizabeth Warren is doing.
And yes, she does needs to be careful, as they have no qualms about protecting their ill gotten turf.
Precisely
(358 posts)
dmr
(28,705 posts)She's not on the Beltway money train and she's not acquiescing to their demands.
They fear her because she knows how to speak to people in plain and simple language.
They fear her because she is what they claim to be - a patriotic American.
Stay safe, Elizabeth, please stay safe.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Go, Senator Warren!
gopiscrap
(24,713 posts)
Zorra
(27,670 posts)She definitely knows.
RC
(25,592 posts)If she should become President, she will either become another Obama or be assassinated.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Go ahead, Senate, and fix the rules so that they MUST stand there and talk, old-school style. Can you imagine a 12-hour filibuster of nothing but THIS?? 
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Elizabeth Warren WOULD use the White House as a bully pulpit. She would hire real economists instead of corporate hacks like Geithner and Bernanke.
Obama appears powerless because he gave his power away to the Wall Street big-wigs who funded his campaigns. I like Obama very much, but he paid a price to get where he is.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)if Elizabeth Warren runs for president, I'll become a Democrat again. Well, at least long enough to work for her candidacy and election. 
Paper Roses
(7,630 posts)Trailrider1951
(3,581 posts)Give 'em HELL, Senator Warren!
calimary
(89,898 posts)And her voice is louder and louder, and more and more powerful and compelling.
She's inviting people to think differently about where our country's headed - rather than following along with the fucking reaganthink of "trickle-down" and "millionaires on parade" and bettering the haves and have-mores on the false and misleading PRESUMPTION that you'll somehow get a piece of that if you Just Keep On Voting republi-CON and Keep On Believing the fairy tale.
Our country has to snap out of that. And we've had this constant drumbeat of corporatism that's been force-fed to us and slipped into our morning coffee and our drive-thru McDonalds and our Cialis ads and Ryan Seacrest and the E channel. The CONS made selfishness respectable, starting with ronald reagan - the very most dangerous and damaging individual who ever set foot on a national political stage. The CONS sought to raise IGMFU (I Got Mine, F-U) to the sacramental level. They wanted to turn America away from the idea of the greater good for all rather than the good of a selfish few. The needs of the many, outweighing the needs of the few, or the one. The idea of the collective, the community, and the benefiting of same - just went out with the garbage on trash day during the reagan era. That's what it was all about. Changing the public mind - AWAY from the New Deal, the Great Society, the war on poverty, the sense of team, the sense of a more perfect union. And TOWARD the "you're on your own," IGMFU, ayn rand me-first-and-screw-you (or at best, me-first-and-maybe-we'll-get-around-to-you-later).
Hopefully Elizabeth Warren's arrival on the national scene will start changing that. Because we NEED that pendulum to swing back, and swing back DECISIVELY. And she's quite correct (as usual) - it is a profoundly uphill battle. But it's a battle we HAVE TO fight.
TBF
(36,562 posts)
Uncle Joe
(65,053 posts)Thanks for the thread, Segami.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)G_j
(40,568 posts)'nuff said..
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Makes one realize how far down the rabbit hole we've gone.
I've definitely got her back.
-p
[center]Lizzie Warren had an ax
She gave the Supreme Court 40 whacks
And when she saw what she had done
She gave Scalia 41[/center]
- (on edit) You don't mess with those Mass gals....
Trailrider1951
(3,581 posts)
Initech
(108,658 posts) cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)
Agony
(2,605 posts)(except I wasn't using asterisks)
Go Elizabeth!
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)
Agony
(2,605 posts)CK_John
(10,005 posts)means nothing.
But if she were head of the cosummer protection agency she would be a threat to them.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)And judging from history, he sort of touched her back there for a while, but he really isn't doing much to support it.
The role of the consumer protection agency is only as influential, only as powerful, as the President of the US allows it to be.
That is why we need Elizabeth Warren for president in 2016.
How many people were foreclosed in this recent economic crisis? How many lost their businesses?
Don't you think that every one of them would vote for a candidate who could explain to them how that happened, why, where their money went, why our country has such a screwed up economy (like no rewards for small savers and lots for big lenders), why our stock market works to the benefit of a few and the detriment of everyone else, why our wages and therefore our social programs that are funded from a percentage of those wages are stagnating and not keeping pace with our claimed productivity?
I think that Americans, small business owners to the wealthiest to the poorest would like to hear Elizabeth Warren's analyses of these issues.
I know I would.
I don't expect her to be perfect, but she would be a billion times better than the corporate drones we now have in our government. I think she could shake up Congress. I think she could and would expose the Republican lies better than any other politician.
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts) Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)livingwagenow
(373 posts)defacto7
(14,162 posts)
wolfie001
(7,610 posts)
eridani
(51,907 posts)We can't do that just by changing presidents, even if that president is Elizabeth Warren. Just sayin'. Of course I'd strongly support her anyway.
wilsonbooks
(972 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)
alittlelark
(19,138 posts) cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... in this post when mentioned what might be done in the way of putting in Justice Ginsberg's replacement with a more progressive justice than a Republican or Obama on his own would nominate.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1265745
Kudos for the courage she shows everyday to help put out the message that she is the progressive option of 2016 that really helps put her high finish in the earlier Quinnipiac poll in perspective that unlike some would try to have us believe, I believe she has a STRONG chance of winning in 2016, if progressives work hard and don't believe the crap propaganda that she can't. Many of the issues she's for the 99% of America truly that so many of the other pols in Washington won't touch with Citizen's United, etc. There's no love lost for the criminal actions of banksters amongst independents or tea partiers either. She would get a lot of support from a majority of the populace on that one issue that she's lead the fight on in congress amongst others.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)But more precisely, I think she is for the 100%.
I think she wants a fair economy for everyone.
I don't think she is a wild-eyed socialist. Far from it. I think she is fair-minded and truly balanced in her approach. She is knowledgeable enough about how the institutions in our economy work and why they often do not work nowadays that she could bring reform, propose and sell reform to Congress, that would help everyone, rich and poor alike.
Who gets the most marbles is not the only test for what is fair. Punishing gross, extreme dishonesty and rewarding honest achievement without letting people suffer and starve would be enough to bring our country back into balance in my opinion.
Right now, the workings of Wall Street are about as trustworthy as those of an illegal casino. I should add that that is my personal opinion although I know others who will argue about that including some who are very close to my heart.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)That she is new to the Senate, that she has only run for national office once and that she does not have the kind of cash cows backing her that other candidates have are advantages in my book.
If she can steer clear of Wall Street money, and if we get that fact out to the public (stand on street corners if we must), she can win the election in 2016.
Would it take a lot of us working really hard? Harder even than we did for Obama?
Yes. But I am ready provided we can elect just one person to the White House this century who owes no debts to Wall Street and who will clean up the excessive influence of big money in our politics.
Big money + politics = corruption.
That's the equation. It works every time -- against the American people.
So here is my message to all DUers:
daleanime
(17,796 posts)For her run!
reformist2
(9,841 posts)
lastlib
(28,187 posts)The 1% don't like obstacles to their agenda, and they don't play nice. 
myrna minx
(22,772 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)By the way, in 2008 I got accused by a DUers of being anti-woman/anti-feminist just because I didn't want Hillary. (I'm a woman.) What say you now, accuser?
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Yeah, its a dynamite speech. But then I am old enough to remember lots of fantasic speeches and speakers, and we are still where we are.
lobodons
(1,290 posts)Warren V. Paul debates would be pay per view in 2016!!
mountain grammy
(29,004 posts)
tavalon
(27,985 posts)Now, for my prediction and let me just say that I want desperately to be wrong on this prediction. I predict that she will be Dean Screamed or some such idiocy. Why? Because populists like her don't get selected for the President and no, my use of the word selection over election was not accidental.
She's shown from the beginning that she is a Wellstone caliber populist. It would be a great joy to see her as President. We will be getting a female President this next time around but alas, I don't think it will be her. It should be, though.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Wow never thought I'd see the corp/conserv Supremes called out honestly and publicly!
closeupready
(29,503 posts)K&R
Beacool
(30,514 posts) Scuba
(53,475 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)Every little thing she does is magic.
tiredtoo
(2,949 posts)Ever since i heard of her and my admiration continues to grow. Carry on Elizabeth, carry on!
B Calm
(28,762 posts)
Jasana
(490 posts)but if she dares it and goes for it, I'll be at her back to support her