Admiral Loinpresser
Admiral Loinpresser's JournalWe, Bernie and the pendulum.
Is the pendulum of American history reversing course? Far too early to say, but American presidents have often been reflective of those changes, e.g. Washington, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR and Reagan. Each was truly transformative in his own way (perhaps Jefferson also because of the Louisiana Purchase, etc.).
Because of wealth inequality, pitting people against each other with racism and the other “isms” and all the other ugly aspects of billionaire control, the American people may be ready for that pendulum to reverse.
Bernie Sanders’ election could be necessary but it is certainly not sufficient to effect that change. The thing I find most exciting about his campaign is that he has a clear vision of a mass movement of people (a “revolution” he calls it) to do the legwork to effect transformative change. This is how he can get his agenda passed, by massive organizing and action.
Check out the linked video interview at about 19 minutes in (or precisely 19:38 remaining). Katie Couric asks him how he can overcome McConnell, Boehner, etc., and actually get Congress to enact his programs if he is elected. His response? He calls for millions to get actively involved and for a million young people to march on Washington!
[link:https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-talks-to-katie-couric-bernie-120458581061.html]
I believe there are millions more people willing to participate in such a movement than was the case for the astro-turf Tea Party. Because of the Koch brothers' and Fox News' assistance that little astro-turf group was transmogrified into the most dynamic political movement in the US since the emergence of the New Left during the Viet Nam/civil rights era. Look how much power they have garnered by passion, without great numbers.
I believe Bernie can win the nomination and the general election, but that is just the beginning. Bringing an end to the Age of Reagan won’t take 100 million people in the streets. It might not even take ten million. But it will require millions of energized people and passion and commitment. That is what Bernie could catalyze. He is asking for a million young people to march on Washington and demand change on behalf of the people. Maybe it should be called “BernStock” or “Occupy on Steroids,” I don’t know. But I do know that a march on Washington by a million young people would be a damn good start. We have a selfless leader who is putting himself out there for us. But there are no saviors, we must save ourselves. The lesson of history is that the pendulum does not change of its own accord.
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-talks-to-katie-couric-bernie-120458581061.html
OK, Bernie, I give up.
I have looked at three presidential hopefuls for 2016: 1) Elizabeth Warren; 2) Martin O’Malley; and 3) Bernie Sanders (Hillary is right out for obvious reasons if you research fracking, TPP, Wall Street coziness and the Iraq War Resolution for starters). The first three potential candidates are acceptable to me even though each one has warts (as does every politician I have ever studied).
Elizabeth Warren is not running and I do not believe the American electorate is sophisticated enough to respond to a draft movement. Martin O’Malley is running and has the potential to be a great president. I gravitated toward him a couple of months ago and considered supporting him for the long haul, but his decision to wait to declare at the end of May was a strategic blunder. Bernie Sanders has gained momentum since entering the race and is starting to garner some positive press.
Initially I shied away from Bernie because I believed in the political “expert” perspective: Sanders cannot win the nomination and even if he could, he couldn’t win the general election. Here is my list of original reasons for rejection and my current thinking:
1) He’s old;
2) He’s funny looking and has a funny accent;
3) He’s Jewish;
4) He’s not the right physical type for the TV age; and
5) His socialist ideas are too radical.
Bernie is 73 years old, so he’s no spring chicken. Reagan was 69 when he first ran. Bernie is much more vigorous than Reagan and in terms of gerontological progress, the age of 74 today is perhaps relatively younger than 69 in 1980, when Reagan was running.
Bernie sounds and looks funny to many people I suppose, but I don’t think that is a show stopper for being taken seriously. Ross Perot sounded and looked much funnier than Bernie, but until Perot started acting crazy in the 1992 campaign, it seemed likely that he would win the election (he was ahead in the polls until his meltdown).
He is Jewish, but after a black president and viable women candidates, is this a big deal? I don’t think so.
In anthropological terms, Bernie may be what’s called an endomorph. He doesn’t look like the mesomorphs commonly elected (e.g. Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama). However George W. Bush is a little short by presidential standards, and also see the comments above about Ross Perot.
So it all comes down to his “radical” political beliefs. Bernie is a self-described social democrat, favoring the policies of Scandanavian countries. What’s radical about it is that it is largely the way American policies were headed before Ronald Reagan. Northern Europe provides college education for whoever wants it, without any cost. Everyone is guaranteed adequate food, clothing and shelter. Medical care is free. They can do this because they do not try to police the world and the rich and corporations are required to pay their fair share.
Except for health care, America did most of this before Reagan and still had enough wealth left over to engage in a very expensive cold war. Scandanavian health care costs less than half per capita compared to American health care. They insure everybody, while we have tens of thousands who die every year because of a lack of health care. His radical idea is to tax the rich and return to the values which gave America the largest, most robust middle class in the world.
Bernie’s other radical idea is that he believes in science. Scientists tell us climate change is our greatest threat and we need to get serious about it.
Bernie is gaining momentum because he is telling the truth and people are listening to him, another old-fashioned, radical idea. They are not reacting to his “image.” He walks the talk. He has fought his whole life for the 99%. Because of Reagan and the morons who have followed him, wealth inequality is at its worst level in history, rivaled only by the end of the Gilded Age. Americans have become “radical” because they have been layed off, pensions lost, homes foreclosed and no way to send kids to college. Meanwhile bankers not only don’t go to prison, their profits are bigger than ever. The American people have had enough and so have I. OK, Bernie, that’s it. I’m in.
Martin O'Malley 2016-- A shoutout to liberals.
Al Gore and Elizabeth Warren are both extremely unlikely to run. Bernie Sanders is, unfortunately, unelectable. So that left me looking for someone with a liberal record and policy positions, but also somebody who is electable. The only one who fits that description and is interested in running is Martin O'Malley.
“It was during his second term that O'Malley stacked up a list of progressive accomplishments that would make any liberal Democrat jealous: ending the death penalty in Maryland, raising the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour, implementing stricter gun control laws, legalizing gay marriage and giving in-state tuition to the children of immigrants in the U.S. illegally. The latter two policies survived a statewide referendum in 2012.”
His current name recognition is probably only around 1%, but it's very early. We could help change that.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/martin-omalley-hillary-clinton-progressive-challenger-iowa/
How the Democratic Party can save civilization.
I claim that I am about to speak a profound truth about American politics and the end of history (EOH). EOH is a phrase used by Noam Chomsky in this context: http://inthesetimes.com/article/17137/the_end_of_history
A major factor driving EOH is American politics, which has been in serious decline since the election of Ronald Reagan. This decline has been so dramatic that a recent Princeton study (using data drawn from over 1,800 different policy initiatives from 1981 to 2002) said that majority-rule democracy is more a theory than a reality in the U.S., that the interests of the wealthiest Americans are mainly served and what the rest of us want is largely irrelevant. The term “oligarchy” has been popularly applied to America in interpreting this study. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-democracy-america-tpm-interview
Now, if you have stayed with me, here is the profound truth: WE NEED A NEW WAY OF CHOOSING CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT AND IT IS WITHIN OUR POWER TO DO SO. The recent way of choosing a candidate is selecting from a limited menu of people who have name recognition, power and money sufficient to make it onto that limited menu. Before that the candidates (and the eventual nominees) were selected by old white men in smoke-filled rooms.
Here’s the problem. We are ever-accelerating toward the collapse of civilization (see the EOH citation in the first paragraph above). Anthropogenic climate change is a growing crisis and civilization must take radical steps to confront and adapt to this crisis, or collapse from a host of geopolitical, economic, agricultural, social and ecological effects. I don’t want to digress by getting into the vast reverse-Robin Hood transfer of wealth starting with Reagan, but this phenomenon is closely related to the lack of action on climate change. They are symbiotic crises.
These crises must be dealt with, but the American political system is non-responsive in any significant way. We can no longer afford to be passive and wait for those with power and money to declare their candidacies. INSTEAD WE NEED A NEW ATTITUDE AMONG DEMOCRATIC AND INDEPENDENT VOTERS (most Republican voters currently lack the ability to make a relevant choice).
People of good will need to decide who they want AFTER a rigorous debate, based on fact, logic and open-minded consideration. Much, perhaps most of it, can simply be done online. If a pre-emptive online candidate is chosen before Iowa and New Hampshire voters get to provide a charade of democracy, I believe the Democratic Party could come up with a much better candidate than the one approved by corporate money and power. This is a far cry from the passive method we now use, which has resulted in foreign adventurism, a new gilded age and a rapid march toward the end of civilization.
A Life-Changing Video (if you want to be healthier and happier).
A Life-Changing Video (if you want to be healthier and happier).
My daughter passed away a couple of years ago and at her memorial service one of her friends said something which has stayed with me, haunted and helped me. The friend said my daughter often told her “I know we can all do a little better.” Trivial, right? Not if you knew her. She was an old soul who became vegetarian at about four years old, if memory serves. She was the kindest person I have ever known. She had a belly laugh like an infant. Her spiritual quest led her to India more than once. And at 3:40am I woke up today and had an epiphany. I think it is part of what she was talking about. Anyway, the rest of this text is directed to the epiphany. I have linked an illustrative video. I started this morning and am already feeling the effects. I hope this improves your life!
Laughter has been called “the highest form of meditation.” Like breathing, eating, sleeping and loving, it is something we all know how to do but could be done more beneficially with discipline and forethought. Taoist instructors teach it as “laughing qiqong” (or “chi kung”). Yoga instructors teach it as “laughing yoga.” However it is known it is a powerful form of therapy and healing.
Why dedicate certain times of the day to laughing? Because it is instant medicine for the mind and body. Your biochemistry and metabolism change. You relax. You love more easily. Your day simply goes better. With a little discipline, you can make every day of your life better!
There are two kinds of people in the world. People who meditate in the morning and people who don't. If you do, add laughing qiqong to your routine (perhaps at the beginning). If you don't meditate, make laughing qiqong your new morning ritual. With practice, it takes less than five minutes, but feel free to do more.
Here's what I was taught by a Taoist master: 1) find an appropriate place, the more oxygen the better, if you are on break at work try to get outside, privacy is helpful, playful dogs should be sequestered (my German Shepherd jumps on me when I laugh hard); 2) relax, by breathing deeply, a little light stretching, wear comfortable clothes if possible; 3) sit upright on a chair (if you prefer, lay on your back); 4) place your hands gently on your belly or sides, whichever is more comfortable; 5) think of something really funny (usually this won't work, but it gets you in the mood); 6) start laughing-- usually the laughter is false at first, so fake it till you make, sometimes shaking your belly or sides will help induce real laughter, achieving real laughter gets easier with practice, just do it till you feel really good; and 7) wind down-- if you have a way of collecting your energy do it, or simply focus on how much better your mind and body feel. Congratulations, you have just loved yourself!
This can also be done in a group (as shown on the video). Like a really good dance party, it is awkward at first and no one wants to start and then by the end no one wants to quit.
Manuscript discovery supports anti-abortion position.
Alexandria, Egypt (AP)- August 5, 2013
Archaeologists from the University of Munich have announced the discovery of an earlier version of the bible which could have controversial theological ramifications. The manuscript was found in an archaeological site where the ancient Alexandrian library was located. The point of controversy in the discovered bible is a palimpsest located in the Book of Matthew. A palimpsest is an instance where a scribe would scratch a word or phrase and substitute another. The verse in question is the famous quote by Christ at Matthew 19:14: “But Jesus said suffer the little children to come unto me, for such is the kingdom of heaven.” In the earlier version, it appears the word “fetuses” rather than “children” was used. Because of this discovery some biblical scholars are surmising that in this verse Jesus was beckoning to visibly pregnant women, rather than children.
Ralph Reed, former Executive Director of the Christian Coalition, a pro-life group, responded later on the same day of the announcement of the discovery. At a press conference he stated “Christians all over the world feel further vindicated in their uncompromising defense of the unborn. Our scriptural basis in this movement is stronger than ever. Jesus didn't say 'suffer the little children' he said 'suffer the little fetuses.'”
Many critics of the movement have pointed out that pro-life support of the Republican Party seems contrary to Christ's teachings on the poor and marginalized, given the GOP's repeated attempts to cut social programs aiding women, children and the impoverished. Critics have gone so far as to suggest implementing greater restrictions on abortion while cutting such aid programs is hypocritical.
When questioned on that point, Mr. Reed responded with a smile. “I wouldn't go so far as to say 'God loves fetuses, but once you're born, you're on your own' ... but we now know there is a scriptural basis for such a statement.”
Another similarity between Obama and Bush:
Appointing foxes to regulate the hen house.
"The consensus among scientists at the FDA was that GMOs are dangerous, but key Monsanto executives, appointed to federal agencies under multiple administrations, including Obama's, squashed that information. For example, Obama appointed Michael Taylor, Monsanto's former vice president, as food safety czar at the FDA. That’s like having a tobacco executive crafting regulations on cigarettes."
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 3,859
