Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Autumn

Autumn's Journal
Autumn's Journal
June 19, 2023

Pence had about a dozen documents and Biden had a total of about 20 documents

in his possession so why is the investigation into Pence by the DOJ closed while the investigation into President Biden continues? Any one got any ideas why Biden got a special council and Pence didn't?

Seems kind of partisan to me.

February 8, 2023

That's one smart President. Sharp as a tack.

Fuck that bullshit that he's too old.

Four. More. Years.

September 27, 2022

Truthout tweet by Maya Schenwar

https://twitter.com/MayaSchenwar/status/1574784710584172544


One of the brightest lights has gone out. RIP Will. You are missed.
April 27, 2022

Warren Calls for Tougher Tech Regulation After Musk Twitter Deal

‘Concentration of power means less competition,’ senator says


Many Republicans express delight over Musk owning Twitter

Senator Elizabeth Warren said Elon Musk’s deal to take over Twitter demonstrated the need for “serious regulation for Big Tech.”

“It’s dangerous because one billionaire decides how millions of people will have an opportunity to communicate with each other,” Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat and prominent progressive, told reporters on Capitol Hill Monday evening, hours after Musk agreed to buy the social media platform for $44 billion.

Regulation of technology giants is essential, Warren said, “because it’s about concentration of power. And concentration of power means less competition, and ultimately means just one or a handful of people are deciding who talks, who gets heard and who gets shut down.”

Members of both parties have long demanded greater supervision of the technology giants, and the Biden administration has been considering antitrust action. A bipartisan bill advanced by Senators Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, and Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, is intended to curb the dominance of Apple Inc., Amazon Inc., Meta Platforms Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google.

“There is some power that the administration could use, but Congress should act to strengthen it,” Warren said. “Tech is creating a whole new set of conflicts that Congress needs to attack directly.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-25/warren-calls-for-tougher-tech-regulation-after-musk-twitter-deal
April 8, 2022

Rep. Bush explains vote against Russian oil ban

People are curious as to why two progressives voted against the Russian oil ban. It has nothing to do with web sites or Russian news sites. They both knew it would pass.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/597770-rep-bush-explains-vote-against-russian-oil-ban/


Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) on Thursday explained her reasoning behind voting against the House bill to ban Russian oil, saying that it “fails to address the underlying problem.”

Bush, one of 17 lawmakers who voted against the bill to ban Russian oil, said in a statement that she opposed the House bill because “it fails to address the underlying problem of imposing sanctions that are not accompanied with a clear diplomatic process for de-escalation, incentives for a ceasefire, and a condition of withdrawal of Russian military forces in Ukraine.”

The first-term Democrat from Missouri added that the push for a statutory ban is “being used to justify even more dangerous drilling at home and increased imports from other authoritarian governments like Saudi Arabia.”

She added that the approach to banning Russian oil “categorically makes our communities less safe” and “does nothing to jumpstart our transition to renewable energy.”


Rep Omars reason for her vote makes sense to me too. I have no problem with either of their votes.
December 22, 2021

Is Killing the Build Back Better Act Part of Manchin's Run for President?

William Rivers Pitt, Truthout

I’ve spent the last several months trying to settle on a straightforward explanation for why Joe Manchin decided to attack, denude and ultimately destroy the centerpiece of President Biden’s domestic agenda on the cusp of what already looks to be a brutal midterm season for the Democrats.

Manchin loves his coal, sure, so the clean energy provisions at the core of the Build Back Better Act (BBB) were poison to his own personal fortune. He’s a Democrat from a bright red state, and so must cleave at least somewhat to the economic fictions that sustain the right. Given the large chunk of hell he’s carved out for himself, however, these hardly seem like enough to justify the mayhem he has unleashed within his own party.

…and then it hit me in the middle of the night like an arcing splash of ice water dropped on my bed. I sat bolt upright in the gibbering dark and announced to the startled cat coiled at my feet: “My God! He’s running for president!”

Put yourself in Manchin’s shoes. Your own seat is secure until 2024, so there is no need to run for anything next year. Over the long process of murdering the BBB Act, you raked in millions in campaign “donations” from the energy lobby and other right-leaning interests, which means you’re flush enough to fund a national campaign.



Very good points and I think it's very possible Manchin could run aganst President Biden.
I think he sees it as his duty to stop Progressives and any Progressive agenda.

https://truthout.org/articles/is-killing-the-build-back-better-act-part-of-manchins-run-for-president/?fbclid=IwAR20Ela2ElFnc9pE2DsAsa7r_GtGE2S0dBqnbawZCBzZS65VWGZp5XT_1rg

November 5, 2021

More Americans Now Socially Liberal Than Conservative For First Time, Poll Finds

Americans are now more likely to be socially liberal than conservative for the first time since Gallup started polling the question in 2001, the pollster reported Thursday, reflecting a broader trend of Americans becoming increasingly liberal on social issues over the past decade—though a far higher share of Americans still hold fiscally conservative views.

According to Gallup’s poll, which was conducted May 3-18 among 1,016 U.S. adults, 34% of adults now identify as socially liberal and 30% as socially conservative, though the largest share of respondents (35%) hold moderate views.

While there have been a few times in the past in which an equal share of respondents have held socially liberal and conservative views, in 2015 and 2018, typically more have identified as socially conservative, with 36% identifying as conservative in 2019 versus 28% as liberal.


While younger Americans are far more likely to identify as socially liberal than older adults, all age groups have become increasingly socially liberal over the past 20 years. Adults ages 18-34 were largely split on social issues in 2001 and are now “substantially” more liberal in 2021, Gallup reports, while 35- to 54-year-olds have gone from “modestly conservative” to “slightly more liberal than conservative.” Those ages 55 and up have become “slightly less” socially conservative, though a majority still hold conservative views. Gallup also notes declines in socially conservative views have been “roughly equal” between white Americans and non-white Americans, though white Americans are still more likely to be both socially and economically conservative..



https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/06/24/more-americans-now-socially-liberal-than-conservative-for-first-time-poll-finds/?sh=332e871848d8&fbclid=IwAR22Az9T_6f0HOk0OgCH9n9-kpheOVhrKYoLeodFyTWD8yLD-l6t_ukXF2o

October 29, 2021

Just so we are clear. The chief executive of ExxonMobil, Darren Woods, was accused of lying to

Congress on Thursday after he denied that the company covered up its own research about oil’s contribution to the climate crisis.


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/28/exxon-ceo-accused-lying-climate-science-congressional-panel

For the first time, Woods and the heads of three other major petroleum companies were questioned under oath at a congressional hearing into the industry’s long campaign to discredit and deny the evidence that burning fossil fuels drove global heating. When pressed to make specific pledges or to stop lobbying against climate initiatives, all four executives declined.


This is the same chief executive of ExxonMobil, Darren Woods that talks to Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-W.Va.) office every week and he personally has participated in calls with lawmakers on the Democrats’ spending plan.


https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/578983-exxon-ceo-says-he-had-calls-with-lawmakers-on-reconciliation

They also come after an Exxon lobbyist was caught on tape discussing efforts to influence several members of congress on the reconciliation bill, including saying he talks to Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-W.Va.) office every week.

Manchin, a key Senate swing vote, later denied having weekly meetings with the lobbyist.

His opposition has resulted in at least one key climate program being cut from Democrats' spending package, which would have incentivized energy companies to move away from fossil fuel use.


Guess what? The fucking game is rigged and we lose.

Profile Information

Gender: Female
Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 44,532

Journal Entries

Latest Discussions»Autumn's Journal