HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » I wasn't coming back to G...

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:14 AM

I wasn't coming back to GD P but Skinner's post prompted me in a way to do so.

Does the party even acknowledge the issue of income inequality? I can't tell. And my name isn't bro. We'll see but working together requires mutual respect and acknowledgement. It requires a few basics, not "where else are you gonna go?". My thoughts. I'll drop in later. Thanks.

94 replies, 8985 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 94 replies Author Time Post
Reply I wasn't coming back to GD P but Skinner's post prompted me in a way to do so. (Original post)
mmonk Apr 2016 OP
JaneyVee Apr 2016 #1
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #20
Baitball Blogger Apr 2016 #59
Orsino Apr 2016 #39
randome Apr 2016 #2
pipoman Apr 2016 #4
randome Apr 2016 #7
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #9
randome Apr 2016 #11
aikoaiko Apr 2016 #16
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #19
randome Apr 2016 #23
cui bono Apr 2016 #91
yallerdawg Apr 2016 #17
randome Apr 2016 #24
yallerdawg Apr 2016 #34
randome Apr 2016 #38
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #78
randome Apr 2016 #84
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #88
artislife Apr 2016 #57
randome Apr 2016 #60
artislife Apr 2016 #61
randome Apr 2016 #83
artislife Apr 2016 #89
IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #28
randome Apr 2016 #36
IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #50
randome Apr 2016 #58
yallerdawg Apr 2016 #62
randome Apr 2016 #85
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #5
randome Apr 2016 #10
Arkansas Granny Apr 2016 #15
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #21
Arkansas Granny Apr 2016 #26
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #74
Arkansas Granny Apr 2016 #75
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #22
randome Apr 2016 #30
Armstead Apr 2016 #70
Punkingal Apr 2016 #80
VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #3
LanternWaste Apr 2016 #6
seabeyond Apr 2016 #8
IamMab Apr 2016 #12
Zorra Apr 2016 #63
IamMab Apr 2016 #64
Zorra Apr 2016 #69
bigtree Apr 2016 #13
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #25
bigtree Apr 2016 #37
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #45
bigtree Apr 2016 #49
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #51
bigtree Apr 2016 #53
floriduck Apr 2016 #79
Recursion Apr 2016 #14
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #27
Recursion Apr 2016 #35
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #73
TheKentuckian Apr 2016 #93
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #29
Recursion Apr 2016 #33
djean111 Apr 2016 #42
Recursion Apr 2016 #44
djean111 Apr 2016 #47
Recursion Apr 2016 #48
djean111 Apr 2016 #52
dreamnightwind Apr 2016 #40
Autumn Apr 2016 #71
djean111 Apr 2016 #18
Trust Buster Apr 2016 #31
ljm2002 Apr 2016 #65
Bluenorthwest Apr 2016 #66
berni_mccoy Apr 2016 #77
cui bono Apr 2016 #92
onecaliberal Apr 2016 #32
CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #41
Dragonfli Apr 2016 #43
Dragonfli Apr 2016 #46
mmonk Apr 2016 #90
ljm2002 Apr 2016 #67
Jitter65 Apr 2016 #54
BernieforPres2016 Apr 2016 #55
Chan790 Apr 2016 #82
BernieforPres2016 Apr 2016 #86
MineralMan Apr 2016 #56
mmonk Apr 2016 #87
Autumn Apr 2016 #68
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2016 #72
uponit7771 Apr 2016 #76
mmonk Apr 2016 #81
CorkySt.Clair Apr 2016 #94

Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:22 AM

1. Acknowledge income inequality?

 

Dems have only been talking about it since FDR, but carry on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:59 AM

20. Yes you are correct. The Clinton side supports it. They want to continue

 

to deregulates Wall Street and the Banks so they can "grow the economy". And we all know that a growing economy raises all boats. And that the Rich And Powerful will trickle down some of their profits.

Oh wait. The economy has been growing, and the raising tide has been only lifting the yachts and sinking the dingys.

The progressives have been talking about it but not Clinton. She said she might close a loophole or two but not reinstate Glass-Steagall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #20)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:07 AM

59. Worse, the dingy's have been pushed on shore and trapped in someone's

million dollar swimming pool. The pond just got smaller for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:22 AM

39. I'm very much afraid they're still only talking about it.

Present company excepted, but the urgency isn't there in our leadership and inequaluty is still on the rise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:24 AM

2. Sanders says things like: "Stand with Wall Street or the working man."

 

Which is a soundbite and not a policy proposal. Income inequality, LGBT rights and climate change are all important issues but they can't be solved with soundbites. We need specific proposals and someone who can push things through Congress.

Clinton has a lifetime of connections to get things done. Or at the very least a better chance to get them done.

Sanders has never worked well as part of a team, it's why he has fewer Senate endorsements than Ted Cruz.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:34 AM

4. And Clinton has never met a billionaire she wouldn't carry water for...

 

Income inequality isn't a concern of corporatists...anyone who thinks income inequality is anything but a sound bite for Hillary, and a life long passion for Bernie hasn't been paying attention....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #4)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:40 AM

7. Not sure if you've been paying attention.

 

http://correctrecord.org/the-points/hillary-clinton-a-lifetime-champion-of-income-opportunity/

Hillary Clinton’s record proves she believes that every American should be able to earn an equal day’s pay for an equal day’s work. As a Senator, Hillary Clinton introduced the Paycheck Fairness Act and was an original cosponsor of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

In the Senate, Hillary Clinton supported increasing the minimum wage and voted repeatedly to protect and increase it. She was an original cosponsor of the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, and authored the 2006 and 2007 Standing with Minimum Wage Act to tie Congressional salary increases to an increase in the minimum wage.

As a Senator, Hillary Clinton supported progressive tax policies that required millionaires to pay their fair share. She opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, and she supported a variety of middle-class tax cuts, including tax credits for student loan recipients, and keeping in place the tax cuts for those who make under $250,000 a year.

Clinton has said “that inherited wealth and concentrated wealth is not good for America,” and she has consistently voted against repealing the estate tax on millionaires, doing so in 2001, 2002, and 2006.

Hillary Clinton supported working families going through difficult times through no fault of their own. In the Senate, she was a bipartisan leader on fighting to extend emergency unemployment benefits.

Hillary Clinton knows that tomorrow’s shared success starts with today’s child, and her dedication to children began long before she ever entered public office. In fact, her first job out of law school was for the newly-formed Children’s Defense Fund, an organization she would later chair.

Hillary Clinton has worked to increase health coverage for millions of children in low-income and working families through the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, a program she helped created as First Lady. In the Senate, Hillary Clinton looked for ways to strengthen the program, introducing bills to allow states to expand it.

Hillary Clinton has worked to expand access to early childhood education for children of lower-income families. As First Lady of Arkansas, Hillary Clinton introduced her husband to the HIPPY program, which expanded early childhood education to economically disadvantaged children. In the Senate, Clinton partnered with Kit Bond in an effort to expand voluntary full-day pre-K for children from low-income families.

Today, as part of the Too Small to Fail Initiative to improve the health and well-being of children five and under, Hillary Clinton is working to close the “word gap” for kids in low-income families who often have smaller vocabularies than their classmates.

I'm not all that big on specifics, myself. I go by a politician's general stance. Intuition, if you want to call it that. I feel fine with Clinton as our next President.

And as someone who voted the same as Sanders > 93% of the time, well, I'm okay with that, too.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:42 AM

9. I don't trust David Brock's propaganda outlets. If he or his employees say it, I'm suspect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #9)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:47 AM

11. I can understand that. Brock is a loud-mouthed idiot and I wish someone would rein him in.

 

Still, to say that only Sanders addresses income inequality is not a fair statement, I think.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:52 AM

16. Sure, but people like me think her use of the phrase is cynical given her relationship w Wall St

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:56 AM

19. And yet you cite his website, lending legitmacy rather than pulling the reins....

 

Match the words to the actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #19)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:05 AM

23. Yeah, well, I didn't know that was his site. I'll remember that. But here's another.

 

Although it's short on specifics, too, it at least acknowledges the need to do something. All I'm saying is that I truly doubt Clinton would do nothing to address income inequality and to say that only Sanders would address it is disingenuous.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-goes-populist

She denounced the Bush administration for squandering those economic gains as well as a budget surplus in perhaps the toughest terms since she left politics for a non-partisan role as Secretary of State.

“That’s what happens when your only policy prescription is to cut taxes for the wealthy and then to deal with the aftermath of a terrible terrorist attack and two wars without paying for them,” she said. “Regulators neglected their oversight of the financial sector and allowed the evolution of an entire shadow banking system that operated without accountability.”

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #23)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:07 AM

91. Yes, well Hillary lies. What she says and does are generally two different things.

She constantly changes positions on issues. The ONLY reason she has 'gone populist' with words is that Bernie is in the race. She will never follow through on anything progressive she is saying now and her record proves it. Bill also ran as a progressive and then governed as moderate Republican.

She is DLC/Third Way. It's in her blood. It's in her bank account. One would have to be a fool to believe she is going to change now.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:52 AM

17. Opinion trumps fact everytime, don't you know.

Hillary Haters have their own set of "facts" and their bubble is impenetrable.

Absolutely "Ready for Hillary" and a return to a fact-based reality!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #17)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:08 AM

24. Sanders getting virtually nothing through Congress versus Clinton getting something done.

 

I'm not that good with math, myself, but I know that something is better than nothing.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #24)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:18 AM

34. You're staying away from...

Bernie math, then!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #34)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:20 AM

38. That video that was posted about Bernie Math was hilarious.

 

No offense intended, Sanders supporters! There are some outrageous memes and videos about Clinton that I find hilarious, too!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #38)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 12:18 PM

78. Which video? I must have missed it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #78)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:27 PM

84. This one.

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511837701
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #84)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:55 PM

88. That is funny.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #24)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:49 AM

57. But what will she get through?

 

That is what we don't trust.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to artislife (Reply #57)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:21 AM

60. I don't know. Neither do you. But she is a Progressive. That counts for something.

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #60)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:42 AM

61. She is for fracking and GMOs

 

That isn't a progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to artislife (Reply #61)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:25 PM

83. She's also said she wants to put coal mining out of business.

 

And I personally don't care in the slightest about GMOs. It's how we humans do things -we change our environment. That includes our food. But plenty of others don't care about this, either. Some do, and it's no point in denying that they do, but it's not a big issue for most that I can see.

And fracking? Well, two things: it's actually better for the atmosphere than burning oil. And she has said she's in favor of it with restrictions. http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/03/hillary-clinton-debate-fracking

You and I might disagree but I think it's a valid viewpoint that if fracking can be done without damage to the environment, it's not as big an issue.

The same can be said for nuclear power. We might be against that for many reasons but looking at things objectively, on balance it's not as bad on the atmosphere as fossil fuels.

All I'm saying is those are legitimate viewpoints, even if we don't agree with them.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #83)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 04:02 PM

89. smh.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:12 AM

28. Start with her work on the Walmart Board. It directly contradicts the first

 

line in your propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #28)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:18 AM

36. That certainly wasn't a very populist position to take, I know.

 

But that still doesn't refute the reality that she is a Democrat and a Progressive and she will get things done. With Congress' help and ours.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #36)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:40 AM

50. Inspired by you...and the people who don't know about her and Walmart.

 

ABC: Clinton Remained Silent As Wal-Mart Fought Unions
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511863871

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #50)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:01 AM

58. Maybe she wasn't in a position to actually change the direction of the Board.

 

I don't know. But you don't, either. I admit simply being on the Executive Board of Walmart doesn't sound good but, on the other hand, she probably gained valuable experience in learning how they operate. I'm not saying she was a trojan horse in their midst, just that it's important to understand things from all perspectives.

Apparently she did push the Board to include more women in executive positions and for better environmental practices. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/us/politics/20walmart.html?_r=0

And simply by serving on the board, it undercuts the GOP argument that Democrats don't understand economics.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #58)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:47 AM

62. It was the eighties (decades ago!).

Her husband was governor, Walmart is headquartered in Arkansas.

2016 standards for 1980's living. In Arkansas!

This is where a "fact" is associated with innuendo and speculation to create a false narrative.

Whatever.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #62)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:30 PM

85. All those things you mention paint a different picture than simply, "SHE'S EVIL!"

 

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:38 AM

5. LGBT rights? Clinton recently claimed Ronald Reagan was a hero of LGBT activism and the

 

original AIDS activist and her entire support group on DU cheered that comment, defended it or excused it. None of them objected at all to her public smearing of our history.

I'll vote for out nominee but I will not forgive her nor her supporters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:45 AM

10. That was a stupid thing to say, no doubt. And she apologized for it.

 

She says stupid things from time to time. I understand why it bothers you but I don't see why you can't accept her apology and move on. As I've pointed out before, my father is gay and I don't take offense at what Clinton said. Of course I'm one step removed from being the 'target' of her stupid statement but still...compared to the utterly outrageous and harmful things that the GOP says, I see this as a tempest in a teapot.

Obviously ymmv, and I can accept that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:50 AM

15. And she issued a swift apology for her misstatement.

Hillary Clinton today issued a second apology for inaccurately stating a day earlier that the late Nancy Reagan and former President Ronald Reagan helped to “start a national conversation” about HIV and AIDS.

“Yesterday, at Nancy Reagan’s funeral, I said something inaccurate when speaking about the Reagans’ record on HIV and AIDS,” Clinton wrote in a blog post on Medium published Saturday night.

“I made a mistake, plain and simple. …

To be clear, the Reagans did not start a national conversation about HIV and AIDS. That distinction belongs to generations of brave lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, along with straight allies, who started not just a conversation but a movement that continues to this day.

That distinction belongs to generations of brave lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, along with straight allies, who started not just a conversation but a movement that continues to this day.

http://www.advocate.com/election/2016/3/12/hillary-clinton-expands-apology-mistake-nancy-reagan-and-aids-history

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arkansas Granny (Reply #15)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:03 AM

21. And yet she refused to make equal amends and she has not explained HOW she could

 

have said such a thing. Let me be blunt with you. I have sat in the room with her while she heard and discussed the horrible things Reagan did. She now seems to have forgotten all of that. This is frightening. It is possibly a cognitive problem.
This is not a small thing. When Reagan finally broke his Seven Year Silence on AIDS 40,000 Americans had already died. There were massive protests all over the world.

Would you wave it away so casually if Bernie had 'misspoke' and said the George W Bush was the great hero of Hurricane Katrina, the sounder of the alarm and the savior of New Orleans? Would it be sufficient to say 'ooop, no he wasn't, I forgot that he was really the villain of Katrina not the hero'?

She never made amends, she never explained HOW and WHY she said that insulting shit. Her supporters on DU continue to excuse and defend those comments without explaining how or why they think such comments are acceptable.
I will vote for the nominee but I will not forgive her nor forget what she believes nor will I forget the calloused indifference of her supporters. Ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #21)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:10 AM

26. I'm sorry you feel that way. I suspect that nothing she could say or do would ever be enough

to earn your forgiveness.

I am very much aware of the effect Reagan's inaction regarding AIDS. I lost several friends who might still be alive if research had begun in earnest at an earlier date.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arkansas Granny (Reply #26)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:29 AM

74. Yeah, you make out like it's my fault. That's adorable.

 

I don't understand how you can just wave away that crap she said if you actually lost friends. Nor do I understand why you'd attack me.

She sought out TV cameras to make that bullshit assertion about Reagan and Nancy. She tweeted her 'apology'. That's not even an attempt at making things right. She lied to the country about very important things and then whispered a retraction in private.

You did not answer any question I asked you, but you did offer up judgement of me. And that's exactly what I am talking about. A lack of respect and a full assumption of superiority. It's disturbing to see such attitudes in this Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #74)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 12:13 PM

75. First of all, I did not attack you or pass judgment on you or blame you for anything.

Hillary said something stupid while eulogizing a dead woman, she was called on it and she apologized within hours. Her erroneous statement did not alter the truth about the horrendous way in which the Reagan administration reacted to the AIDS epidemic and no one was injured by her remarks.

If you want to hold on to your outrage and hurt feelings, there is nothing I can do about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:04 AM

22. Clinton's lifetime of getting things done have always favored the wealthy

 

She has not committed to stopping the growing wealth gap that has made her a very rich women.

Saying that one can stand both with Wall Street and the 99% is bullcrap and you know it. It means she will see that the banks make trillions and maybe throw some cake to the 99%.

For the last 30 years the Rich and Powerful have been getting more and more Rich while the 99% has struggled. That's the status quo she represents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #22)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:15 AM

30. Everyone in Congress is rich. And for most of that 30 years, the GOP was in control or obstructing.

 

I disagree with being unable to let Wall Street be Wall Street and still address income inequality. Regulation of Wall Street and greater taxation are the ways to do that. Getting things through Congress is much more likely with Clinton, imo. Sanders has few connections among his colleagues.

I think the opposite is more likely: she'll offer some modest tax incentive for Wall Street in exchange for funding something more to our liking. If she can help us regain the Senate, that's more likely.

And the real power resides in Congress, anyways, and they will help keep her feet to the fire so long as we keep their feet to the fire. We have allies in Congress. We need to use them.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:15 AM

70. You underestimate

 

And I know the standard response is "mayor is different than president" but ones skills and approach are the same. In any case it illustrates that he is much more than soundbites and actually knows how to get into the weeds of policy and governance and be a really good government CEO.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1863311

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:00 PM

80. That really isn't true about Bernie not working well as a part of a team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:30 AM

3. No, they don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:39 AM

6. Yes. The 2016 Democratic Party platform begins by addressing income inequality

 

Yes. The 2016 Democratic Party platform begins by addressing income inequality and the disparity and distance between the Dem and the GOP approach to the economy.

"I can't tell."
More accurately, yes-- you can tell, you've simply chosen not to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:41 AM

8. Do Democrats acknowledge income equality? "mutual respect and acknowledgement". If you do not

 

eve n recognize your Democratic party getting income equality and simply give this to Sanders as his issue, how do you expect "mutual respect and acknowledgement"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:47 AM

12. "Mutual respect and acknowledgment?" With stuff like this all over your journal?

 

"Both political parties seem to have a southern strategy to divide the electorate along racial lines."

I guess you continue to fail to understand that you must offer respect in order to be worthy of receiving it yourself. You're certainly not offering black Democrats much respect with such bullshit.

Peddle your relentless victimhood elsewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IamMab (Reply #12)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:51 AM

63. You've posted an average of about 45 posts per day since joining DU on April 8!



Account status: Active
Member since: Fri Apr 8, 2016, 01:55 PM
Number of posts: 951

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #63)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:55 AM

64. I must have missed the election where you became DU's Comment Sheriff.

 

Do you have any response other than an ad hominem attack based on how long I've been on DU? No? I thought so.

Goodbye forever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IamMab (Reply #64)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:14 AM

69. I'm your huckleberry.



buh-bye!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:49 AM

13. Hillary from 05/16/14

The former Secretary of State sounded a populist note throughout a policy speech at the New America Foundation, rattling off an array of statistics describing rising inequality and falling economic mobility in America.

“The dream of upward mobility that made this country a model for the world feels further and further out of reach and many Americans understandably feel frustrated, even angry,” Clinton said.

Clinton told the audience that middle class incomes had stagnated over the last decade even as the average worker’s productivity had increased significantly in the same period. She pointed to studies that showed 4 out of 10 children born into the lowest rung on the economic ladder remained there as adults.

She cited troubling statistics indicating that many younger African-American workers were falling out of the middle class. She noted that life expectancies for lower income women were dropping. She warned that news that middle class Canadians now enjoyed better wages, hours, and government benefits than their American counterparts was a “wake-up call.”

“And where is it all going?” Clinton asked. “Economists have documented how the share of income and wealth going to those at the very top, not just the top 1 percent but the top 0.1 percent, the 0.01 percent of the population, has risen sharply over the last generation,” she said. “Some are calling it a throwback to the Gilded Age of the robber barons.”

“As Secretary of State I saw the way extreme inequality has corrupted other societies, hobbled growth and left entire generations alienated and unmoored,” she said.

“The 1990s taught us that even in the face of difficult long term economic trends it’s possible through smart policies and sound investments to enjoy broad based growth and shared prosperity,” she said.

“That’s what happens when your only policy prescription is to cut taxes for the wealthy and then to deal with the aftermath of a terrible terrorist attack and two wars without paying for them,” she said. “Regulators neglected their oversight of the financial sector and allowed the evolution of an entire shadow banking system that operated without accountability.”


http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-goes-populist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #13)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:09 AM

25. That all is total rhetoric. "I see", "I want", "Regulators neglected", "that's what happens",

 

"she cited", etc.

“The dream of upward mobility that made this country a model for the world feels further and further out of reach and many Americans understandably feel frustrated, even angry,” Clinton said.

Not one of this paragraphs discusses any plans to take action. She never says we need to regulate Wall Street or the Banks. When asked about reinstating Glass Steagall, she said no, it's not enough or it won't help. But she doesn't say what will help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #25)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:20 AM

37. this is what the op asked for

...her Wall Street plan, much of which is already endorsed by Elizabeth Warren and Paul Krugman, for example, contains specific actions she would take.

Elizabeth Warren praises Hillary Clinton's Wall Street plan

“Secretary Clinton is right to fight back against Republicans trying to sneak Wall Street giveaways into the must-pass government funding bill,” Warren wrote on Facebook...

“Whether it’s attacking the C.F.P.B., undermining new rules to rein in unscrupulous retirement advisers, or rolling back any part of the hard-fought progress we’ve made on financial reform, she and I agree,” Warren wrote

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/12/07/elizabeth-warren-praises-hillary-clintons-wall-street-plan/



Hillary Clinton: How I’d Rein In Wall Street

SEVEN years ago, the financial crisis sent our economy into a tailspin. Over five million people lost their homes. Nearly nine million lost their jobs. Nearly $13 trillion in household wealth was wiped out.

Under President Obama, our economy has come a long way back. Our businesses have created more than 13 million jobs. People’s savings are being restored. And we have tough new rules on the books, including the Dodd-Frank Act, that protect consumers and curb recklessness on Wall Street.

But not everyone sees that as a good thing. Republicans, both in Congress and on the campaign trail, are dead-set on rolling back critical financial protections.

Right now, Republicans in Congress are working to attach damaging deregulation riders to the must-pass spending bill. They’re attempting to defund the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. They want to roll back common-sense efforts to prevent conflicts of interest by financial managers. And they’re trying to undo constraints on risk at some of the largest and most complex financial institutions.

President Obama and congressional Democrats should do everything they can to stop these efforts. But it’s not enough simply to protect the progress we have made. As president, I would not only veto any legislation that would weaken financial reform, but I would also fight for tough new rules, stronger enforcement and more accountability that go well beyond Dodd-Frank.

My comprehensive plan has already won praise from progressives like Sherrod Brown and Barney Frank. Here’s what it would do.

First, we need to further rein in major financial institutions. My plan proposes legislation that would impose a new risk fee on dozens of the biggest banks — those with more than $50 billion in assets — and other systemically important financial institutions to discourage the kind of hazardous behavior that could induce another crisis. I would also ensure that the federal government has — and is prepared to use — the authority and tools necessary to reorganize, downsize and ultimately break up any financial institution that is too large and risky to be managed effectively. No bank or financial firm should be too big to manage.

My plan would strengthen the Volcker Rule by closing the loopholes that still allow banks to make speculative gambles with taxpayer-backed deposits. And I would fight to reinstate the rules governing risky credit swaps and derivatives at taxpayer-backed banks, which were repealed during last year’s budget negotiations after a determined lobbying campaign by the banks.

My plan also goes beyond the biggest banks to include the whole financial sector. Some have urged the return of a Depression-era rule called Glass-Steagall, which separated traditional banking from investment banking. But many of the firms that contributed to the crash in 2008, like A.I.G. and Lehman Brothers, weren’t traditional banks, so Glass-Steagall wouldn’t have limited their reckless behavior. Nor would restoring Glass-Steagall help contain other parts of the “shadow banking” sector, including certain activities of hedge funds, investment banks and other non-bank institutions. My plan would strengthen oversight of these activities, too — increasing leverage and liquidity requirements for broker-dealers and imposing strict margin requirements on the kinds of short-term borrowing that also played a major role in spurring the financial crisis. We need to tackle excessive risk wherever it lurks, not just in the banks.

Second, I would appoint tough, independent regulators and ensure that both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission are independently funded — as other critical regulators are now — so that they can do their jobs without political interference. I would seek to impose a tax on harmful high-frequency trading, which makes markets less stable and less fair. And we need to reform stock market rules to ensure equal access to information, increase transparency and minimize conflicts of interest.

Finally, executives need to be held more accountable. No one should be too big to jail. I would seek to extend the statute of limitations for major financial crimes to 10 years from five and enhance rewards for whistle-blowers. I would work to ensure that financial firms admit wrongdoing as part of settlements in instances of egregious misconduct, and increase transparency about the terms of settlement and the fines actually paid to the government. Fines should be more than just the cost of doing business to these companies — they should be an effective disincentive for illegal behavior.

And it shouldn’t just be shareholders and taxpayers who feel the pain when banks make bad decisions; executives should have skin in the game. When a firm pays a fine, I would make sure that the penalty cuts into executives’ bonuses, too. And I would fight to close the carried interest loophole that gives some fund managers billions of dollars in tax breaks: They should be taxed like every other citizen.

Republicans may have decided to forget about the financial crisis that caused so much devastation — but I haven’t. The proper role of Wall Street is to help Main Street grow and prosper. When our financial sector works the right way, it helps families buy their first homes, entrepreneurs start and grow small businesses and hardworking Americans save for retirement. Rather than pursuing the kind of high-stakes speculation that devastated our economy before, Wall Street should focus on building an economy that creates good-paying jobs, rising incomes and sound investments so that more families can achieve the security of a middle-class life.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/07/opinion/hillary-clinton-how-id-rein-in-wall-street.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #37)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:28 AM

45. So what would she tell Goldman-Sachs so they would give her gold? If she

 

meant any of the above they would see her as more dangerous than Sanders. But they don't. Even the Koch Bros favor her. So what could she have told them to placate them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #45)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:36 AM

49. well, at least you can clearly see you were wrong

...even though you've shifted your complaint.

Did you miss Charles Koch's op-ed in support of Sanders?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-koch-this-is-the-one-issue-where-bernie-sanders-is-right/2016/02/18/cdd2c228-d5c1-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html

Koch Bros. *heart* Bernie:

Jesse Lehrich ‏@JesseLehrich
Every Democrat in the Senate voted to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank
Bernie channeled the Koch brothers:
#DemDebate



Jesse Lehrich ‏@JesseLehrich
Ex-Im was never controversial until Koch bros tried to kill it. Bernie was only D who joined their fight #DemDebate




Eric Bradner ‏@ericbradner
Never thought I'd say this, but on Ex-Im, @BernieSanders' rhetoric exactly matches Koch-funded conservative groups. http://cnn.it/1RNeAoO

Jesse Lehrich ‏@JesseLehrich
90% of Ex-Im transactions directly support small businesses.
#DemDebate


Jesse Lehrich ‏@JesseLehrich
@RepDebDingell & @RepTimRyan hit @BernieSanders for voting with Tea Party Rs to kill the Export-Import bank:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #49)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:41 AM

51. Didn't she tell us that Iraq had WMD and was harboring al qaeda. Can she be

 

trusted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #51)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:44 AM

53. knocked off subject by facts

...enough said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #49)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 12:34 PM

79. There is no way to prove anyone is right or wrong.

 

She's not in office yet and her actions versus promises aren't determined yet. Even our current president did not address all of his campaign promises. Gitmo is still open, campaign finance reform never happened as two examples.

But if she wanted to attack undue risks at all levels, the Glass-Stegel act would get the investment activities out of banks and visa versa. And the US Chamber of Commerce already assured their customers that Hillary will support the TPP once she's in office. So the right/wrong issue is still pending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:50 AM

14. Well, while I'm not a fan of hers, our leading candidate talks about it lot

What do you think of Clinton's statements about income inequality?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:11 AM

27. She is detached from reality. I spent my first 10 big earning years paying for things

 

the US government was neglecting to pay for as a pandemic took hold in the world and Reagan refused to do anything about it. I spent more than most people ever make. I will never catch up again with my peers who just sat on their straight wealth. I'm forever behind. Hillary says that I did not do any of that, she claims Reagan had to do all of that because people like me refused. She's full of shit. She should be speaking out for people like me, not for rich Republicans.

Let me know when she goes on TV and speaks the truth about Reagan and AIDS. Let me know when she tells America who paid their tab for them.

Horrible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #27)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:18 AM

35. Of course she is, but she's where the party is now

On the plus side, she's had some good things to sat about inequality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #35)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:22 AM

73. That's not responsive to what I said.

 

I will never forgive her nor the people who excuse that homophobic bullshit in our Party. I'm not a Reagan Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #35)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 05:59 AM

93. She was one of the people instrumental in moving the party to where it is so that is no excuse.

No credence to poor lil ol me I'm just going along with the crowd when you herded it there in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:13 AM

29. For being "not a fan" you sure sound like a fan. What statements? Do you have any

 

statements that says what she plans to do?

By the way, the growing wealth gap has made the Clinton Family in the top 1% of the top 1% of the wealthy not even counting her Foundation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #29)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:17 AM

33. So you don't even know what she's said about it?

Interesting...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #33)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:26 AM

42. What Hillary says is really just what Hillary feels, or is told, she needs to say, at any given

 

moment. So, to me, what Hillary says is irrelevant. All campaign blather.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #42)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:27 AM

44. So the transcripts don't actually matter? (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #44)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:33 AM

47. Oh, I know you think you are having a gotcha moment, don't you?

 



I have not been demanding transcripts. I already assume that the Hillary who speaks to money, for money, behind closed doors, is the real Hillary.

I think those transcripts are probably some real ugly stuff, unless one is a banker or member of the 1%. And I think they will be leaked if she is the nominee. And if she is the nominee, I will be totally removed from the political "process", and I don't know that I will even read about it. I won't see it on TV, I don't watch TV for news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #47)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:35 AM

48. Congratulations on getting played!

Her stonewalling campaign is, unfortunately, paying mad dividends.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #48)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:43 AM

52. How am I played?

 

All I really have is my support and my vote. She won't get those.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:24 AM

40. Here's an answer, I wrote it recursively for you, LOL

although it would more properly be iterative

step 1 decide you are going to be president
step 2 make a stump speech saying you'll fight inequality
step 3 make paid speech to the people responsible for said inequality. if any media are around fire up the white noise machine.
step 4 setup and attend $10,000+/plate fundraising dinner, give speech, collect money from the wealthy who would like to have you represent them
step 5 use that money against the candidate who has made it his life's work to fight inequality
step 6 evaluate if you have beaten the anti-inequality guy yet
Yes = you can move on to the step 7 general election
No = spawn a new thread at step 2 or step 3.
step 7 general election - fight with asshole billionaire who hammers you for taking all that money from the rich while saying you'll fight inequality
step 8 evaluate
Won the general election? Mission accomplished, thank your donors with policies that benefit them at the expense of everyone else
Lost? Blame the left for not fighting harder for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:18 AM

71. You keep saying that but your posts, they tell an entirely different story nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:53 AM

18. It is given a LOT of lip service. That is all.

 

And the planks of the Democratic Platform are just decorative. Kinda old and peeling and shabby. But only for show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:16 AM

31. The thuggery by Sanders people continues in the form of ridiculous hides.

 

I'd rather people leave than abuse the alert and Jury system. Yesterday I had a post hidden for merely pointing out that a poster had 164 post. This has reached the level of being despicable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #31)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 10:55 AM

65. Oh boo hoo...

...you got a hide when you thought you shouldn't; my heart bleeds for you.

Yours is of course a classic case of PROJECTION. Look it up. Hillary supporters are far, far less numerous on this site, and yet they impose their will, often through alert swarming, all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #31)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:04 AM

66. the jury system did just fine until the Hillary folks went ultra nasty.

 

As your post here demonstrates your cohort is focused on criticism of other Democrats, personal attacks and not on issues nor ideas. Whining that the community finds your standards lacking is just that, whining.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #31)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 12:18 PM

77. Thuggery is a racist dog whistle. You should delete your post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 03:09 AM

92. Why would you use a racist dog whistle? Why would you point out someone only has 164 posts?

You are complaining about others quite a bit but I think you need to worry about yourself.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:17 AM

32. All they offer are insults. They're driving us off a cliff and calling us stupid...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:25 AM

41. "Get back in your hole and pay some taxes because Hillary and her rich friends want a vay cay..."

 

She works hard for her money and how the hell can the 1% afford their lives and grow their hidden wealth if you and I and the other 99% don't carry our weight?



I don't think that DWS and the party leadership acknowledge income equality, I think they're willingly convinced that it's part of the business model everyone needs to follow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:26 AM

43. I have examined where Demoratic loyalties lie, you judge, I'll explain my position.

From my perspective, the party I joined thirty nine years ago was a party I believed in and so gave my loyalty, It was the party of The New Deal, The Great Society and at the time I joined also the party of civil liberty, equal rights and a war against poverty. I see a party in 2016 that is not that party. The question of my loyalty now becomes murky. I think my loyalty now only belongs to my class and because Bernie Sanders shares this loyalty to my class, I must support him every way possible.

So many in the party leadership and the party overall are comfortable and this place of comfort has made them cold to the reality that is daily life for a great many people.

They make many assumptions from ivory towers of middle class or wealth with little awareness it would seem of those that are lower middle class (quickly falling into poverty even tho they work harder with multiple McJobs than they did before lower middle class meant poverty).

As to the poor - they seem completely oblivious to them and convince themselves that welfare reform didn't harm anybody, I know Hill and Bill believe this, but it did and does to this day I assure you, it was not a pragmatic solution to a "welfare queen" problem handled well because a Democrat helped to all but destroy it. It will not be a brave pragmatic solution to "earned benefit queens" they will likely label SS beneficiaries, as they collude yet again with republicans to begin to shred these last vestiges of the new deal and great society.

They cause the poor to become poorer still while so many in the party applaud the politicians responsible. Their applause and support are what make them just as responsible as their political idols.

They think this is a game, or a sport with my team and their team, not realizing or caring that the ball that is tossed around in this sport is a child that only gets to eat at school and will soon lose that food, or the ball is an elderly widow or widower that can only afford to take their medicine every other day or maybe will freeze to death in a small flat during a winter they could not pay their gas bill (this happens ALREADY where I live).

There are many other balls tossed around for their sport and amusement, too many to list them all here, some are dead or dying, some are living under a tarp in a vacant lot hoping the cops don't roust them or the suburban teenagers don't decide to slum it and amuse themselves by assaulting them while laughing and taunting the "bum" for cell phone footage. Some of these comfortable people give advice to "the poor that in fact do OK" as a famous DLC Democrat once said. One of the Conservative DU posters once even suggested dumpster diving as a viable and reasonable option.

Too many of them applaud policies and politicians that make all these problems worse, they need to get it through their heads, many are dying and more will die of poverty, this is no game and the poor aren't doing OK, they are doing worse all the time with less help available all the time.

It is not serious, pragmatic, or brave to cause more people to suffer and die in poverty because it is referred to flippantly as "eating peas" or "being adult". It is not pragmatic even when the ones shipping away the jobs or destroying welfare "feel your pain". It never was bravery, but cowardice. It is not balanced when an increasing number of people fall into poverty and die while others become wealthier at an exponential rate.

The punditry, politicians, and comfortable may think it is a fun sport full of serious brave adults that make hard decisions.

Cowards all really, making easy decisions, easy because their decisions don't harm them, but rather the poor they barely acknowledge exist for the profit of the wealthy.

Sometimes they even have the gall to pat themselves on the back and reassure each other "the poor in fact do OK".

I feel very sincerely about these class and poverty issues, I give my loyalty completely to the forgotten, struggling and increasingly poor working classes that birthed me. You decide if that makes me disloyal to a party that has all but forgotten us save for donations and Pyrrhic election victories, because I will fight tooth and nail against any one of them or any elected Democrat that is harmful to my class, in other words harmful to most of America.

For these reasons and others, my loyalties now lie only with Bernie Sanders, politicians that share his views, and the revolution that is necessary if we are to fight and win against overwhelming odds, a fight I take on for my class, the very survival of countless people, and for a better future to leave behind for our younger generations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #43)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:31 AM

46. (added for clarity) If the Party Leaders (not the voters) had a favorite theme song it would be this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #46)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 05:59 PM

90. I love that one. I have ever since they did it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #43)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:09 AM

67. Hear, hear!!!

I was raised by a blue collar family, my single mom became pink collar then white collar, but we never climbed out of poverty until my brother and myself were in our teens. I have never crossed a picket line in my life -- the behavior is so ingrained, I'm pretty sure I never will, certainly not knowingly.

We never went hungry, though. One of our family friends liked to call us the "genteel poor", i.e. we were educated and with artistic and literary sensibilities. We also had a great public school system at the time, where I was able to pursue music, drama, and art as well as all of the usual academic subjects; and there were high academic standards. So all in all, I wasn't really that badly off, and when I finally did get to university, I had a solid foundation to build on, nor did I have to shoulder a huge (and non-dischargeable) debt to do so.

But going to university, and working with a lot of high-tech libertarians, never ever wrung the blue-collar kid out of me. I know where my roots are. I know what it's like to have the country club set look down their noses at you, thinking they are better than you are "just because". I know what it's like to hide the holes in your shoes, to be embarrassed because you don't have any new clothes to wear at the start of school. It's not that bad, certainly; there are many who have had it much much worse. But my experience makes me more empathetic to that, not less so.

People sometimes mistake class consciousness for class envy -- they think that because we critique the hedge fund billionaires, that must mean we are simply jealous and wish we had that money. And they truly believe in the "meritocracy", where those who make it do so out of personal virtue and hard work.

No, just no. If anyone has followed this year's primary, and listened to the various stump speeches, including of course Bernie's, they just have no excuse for this twisted interpretation of the critiques of wealth inequality.

Anyway I just wanted to say great post, it should be an OP. And here's to those who do not forget where they came from!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:47 AM

54. Has anyone really ever known a time when there wasn't great income inequality? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:49 AM

55. What is Skinner's handle?

I probably have him on Ignore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BernieforPres2016 (Reply #55)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:22 PM

82. Shockingly, it's Skinner.

 

Skinner is not his real name...that's David and he lives in the DC suburbs. (I'm not outing anything, this is publicly available information. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=100801 there used to be a picture of him and a short bio too on an Admins page that no longer exists.)

I used to see him in the grocery store from time-to-time when I lived in metro DC...I didn't say "Hi!", I figure he probably wants to be left the F alone while he's running errands so he can get them done with...I know I do. It would weird me out if random strangers came up to me while I was buying milk and cereal and started talking to me by name like they know me and I have no idea who they are.

Also, is it possible to block the Admins? I'd think not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chan790 (Reply #82)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:36 PM

86. Thanks for the info. I will check my extensive Ignore list.

I don't recall seeing that handle so doubt he is there. But I hadn't seen a post that the OP referenced and was thinking that might have been how I missed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 09:49 AM

56. Why not just stick around, mmonk?

There's no point in leaving and announcing it if you're just going to be right back. Nobody's telling you to leave. Just stay and be part of the conversation. That's my advice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #56)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:39 PM

87. My reply is #81. Thanks MineralMan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:13 AM

68. I saw that but didn't read it all. Was it supposed to be a lets all be friends and get along

again thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 11:21 AM

72. There are three reasons a person hangs out anywhere.

 

1) because it's profitable.
2) because you're productively pursuing personal philosophical goals
3) because you're among friends

That realization has provoked some introspection on my part.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 12:14 PM

76. Yes, just doesn't believe bullshitters like Devine Weaver can bring change

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 01:16 PM

81. Thanks for your replies though they seem all over the board.

I was still looking at signs on working together, executive actions that could be taken, pocket book issues left of the "recovery" type of things. Also more respect for people like Elizabeth Warren and a few others besides Bernie. Anyway, thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sat Apr 30, 2016, 07:42 AM

94. The long goodbye

 

That apparently isn't actually goodbye. Looks like the OP can't quit this place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread