Another blazing con game and butcher knife in the back from corporate Democrats...

...and this one's a biggie. Corporate control of our only remaining source of un-corporate-filtered news and communication.

Only blithering idiots and paid propagandists will claim this wasn't the plan all along. Obama gets to claim support for net neutrality, while the corporate vipers HE APPOINTED pretend to go "rogue" to screw the people.

This is the level of contempt your corrupt government has for you. They really think you will swallow this horseshit story that the FCC is going "rogue." Just one more in a long line of assaults and betrayals and cons in which the president brazenly pretends to support policies for the people while working behind the scenes to do exactly the opposite.

We live in a corrupt, predatory oligarchy.

It was never a recovery. It was a restructuring on behalf of the One Percent.

206 Recs.

I had to be very careful not to slip on all the Third Way froth and spittle to come here and kick this thread, but it was worth it.

Thanks for pointing out, consistently, the moral bankruptcy of these vipers and their shills.

Record numbers of homeless children, that sort of thing. (Fortunately for you, the police state you've created keeps the unsightly urchins from view as you walk from your limo to your fabulous dinner parties, but they're out there, cold and hungry.)

Those who murder democracy hire lots of amoral voices to try to steer the conversation away from the real despair they cause. Thank you for rubbing their faces in it. If there are consciences there somewhere under all the spinning, they need to be rubbed in it, badly. If there aren't, they need to be exposed for what they are.

+1 Third Way talking points and corporate spin, 24/7.

We misunderstand our politicians and 2014 politics when we assume their goal is winning.

We are like mere dogs trying to understand the Internet.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2671211

The implementation of a corporate authoritarian state is clearly a necessary incremental step in the long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long. long, long journey toward a liberal, compassionate future.

They can't tell us people with limited smartness why, though. It's a secret.

+1 Lots of walking around the stink and pretending it doesn't exist.

+1 This entire complaining response was predictable. Corporate Dems know what "Third Way" means.

They know very well what "Third Way" means.

Those called out for sympathy with a predatory group try desperately to play victim and to twist the accurate label of the group into a pejorative, so they can prevent use of it and have it removed from the conversation. It's what authoritarians do...try to get rid of the *accurate* words we need to describe what they are doing to us.

I wrote about this before re: the constant attempts here to redefine both "authoritarian" and "Third Way as pejoratives instead of the useful and necessary descriptors they are:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3171893

Ah, the attempt to discredit the term, "authoritarian." I predicted this OP.

...Authoritarians (and Third Wayers) don't like being called what they are, and since they can't yet prohibit words and restrict others to an approved Newspeak Dictionary, they settle for flailing at and attempting to discredit the individual words they dislike.

...When someone uses an accurate word to describe what you are doing or advocating, just put the word in quotation marks, add some exclamation points, and try to neutralize it by pretending it's an epithet instead of an accurate descriptor. We have all seen it here 1,000 times. A person's politics are described as Third Way, and he or she rears up in indignation, expressing shock at the "namecalling."

Well, no. "Third Way" means something. It is not an epithet, but rather descriptive shorthand for a clear and specific set of political values and policies. You can see what "Third Way" means by going to the Third Way website, where the goals and policies - liberal on the social issues unimportant to the One Percent but corporate and authoritarian on virtually everything else - are clearly delineated.

Those who embrace the policies don't want to admit it, so they try to make the term an epithet...something to be banned by a jury so that it can't be accurately applied to them on the forums. And now we are hearing the same sort of defensive attempts to discredit the word when authoritarianism is called "authoritarianism."

Of course "authoritarian" means something. Brazen defense of a government's spying on its own citizens is indisputably authoritarian.

I always picture an indignant poodle rearing up in outrage and exclaiming, "What?! You called me a DOG?!"

Orwell was right. Defending against authoritarianism *requires* defending language, because authoritarians will try to twist, discredit, or take away the words that are necessary for us to describe what is being done to us.

The attempt to redefine the word into a pejorative and claim victimhood here is exactly like when they tried to make bankers into the poor, maligned victims during OWS.

The truth is that they *really* don't like people talking about that homeless kids statistic. They don't like people talking about the cruel, vicious real-word results of their policies.

Welcome to your low-wage, temp work future:

Low wage, crappy part-time jobs continue to replace careers.

This is exactly what the oligarchs planned: the replacement of careers with jobs for serfs.

It was a restructuring, not a recovery.

From your own article: