HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Waiting For Everyman » Journal
Page: 1 2 Next »

Waiting For Everyman

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Home country: USA
Member since: Mon Jun 23, 2008, 12:17 PM
Number of posts: 9,385

About Me

My namesake... http://youtu.be/GgXzWhexJh0 ... If I were asked to recommend only one political / history book it would be this one... http://www.amazon.com/Treason-America-Anton-Chaitkin/dp/0943235006 ... Treason in America: from Aaron Burr to Averell Harriman, by Anton Chaitkin. I do NOT endorse all of the views by Chaitkin external to this book, nor all of his actions, nor all of his associations, but I DO highly recommend this book. It is one every US citizen and everyone interested in its history should read. It it well written, meticulously sourced, and it is eye-opening -- even for those who consider themselves already knowledgeable. If you have not read it before, you need to read it, it is need-to-know information, and what it has to say is not going to be found in many places, if anywhere, else. That is my tip for whoever is passing by.

Journal Archives

Clinton and Sanders are not similar, they are opposites.

They are the antithesis of each other, regardless of both voting for the same things at certain times. There is no compromise between the two as people or as nominees, in the same way that it's impossible to be a little bit pregnant. That is not a "purist" statement, it is a factual one.

(For an explanation of the above paragraph, read some of the many sincere and intelligent posts by Sanders supporters on this site, who have been writing about it and documenting it for months now.)

I saw the author of the OP article on one of the MSNBC shows yesterday, not knowing any of her writing including this article, and I was not impressed. The first quote below from her article, seems to be in the right ballpark, but although correct enough as far as it goes, it falls short because she does not get the full meaning of the statement I just made in my subject line and first paragraph above. The reason she doesn't get it, I believe, is that she was born in 1975 which makes her the same age as my children. (I looked up her bio in several places.)

My children (like many others their age, fortunately) understand more than she does because they know that folks who lived during the time events took place, are a better source than books on the subject. And this comes back to what I saw on tv today. She is commenting on a subject she believes she understands, which she does not. Of course, she's not the only one doing the exact same thing today. But the fact remains that the destruction of FDR's Democratic party and its replacement with the Clintons' disgusting Third Way, is something she didn't live, as we older Dems have.

She didn't exist to experience what an FDR America was still rising to achieve after WW2, she didn't exist during Nixon's atrocities and what all of that meant to life at that time, and she was a kid during Reagan's tragic demolition of FDR America, just as she was a school student through the Clinton years and all the well-hidden corrosion that administration produced then and since. Many principal players in these tragedies still remain on the stage today, more such as Kissinger are still in the wings mentoring people like HRC, and certainly their ideas are still very much at the core of the continuing destruction going on now.

The victors write history. So the reality of those times, especially times of such repression and persecution (read the Church Committee findings, and my sig line), has never been written into history book or treatises on this-and-that, which are used to indoctrinate people like the author at institutions of higher propaganda like Berkeley and NYU.

Could we get some professionals in the political media and commentary realm who know these issues first hand? Could those of us who were there and politically aware be listened to at all before we all drive off of this cliff in front of us? What does it take to restore some semblance of reality to what we're doing here?

Us old people are trying to tell you (general "you" Dems) you're putting pedophiles in charge of the kindergarten -- do you give a damn? The answer would seem to be no, judging by Clinton's "inevitability".

I could understand this if, as is usually the case, there was no GOOD CHOICE among the choices. But the reason why this election is so telling, is that there IS ONE, and it is being rejected for the worst of the worst. Good God, people, quit pounding your social justice bullshit drum for 10 seconds and look at what is true. Information abounds. The responsibility for this next chapter of tragedy for America is squarely on the shoulders of those forcing us into this disgusting madness of putting the Clintons in the White House AGAIN. Oh. My. God.

Which brings us back to this site. I appreciate what you tried to do by posting this article, Skinner. But if there is a clamp down on Sanders posters here, I fear it really will for all intents and purposes end this site as we know it, and that would be a shame in my view. I HOPE you don't do that. If you must, I really hope you take the suggestion of IdaBriggs and others above, and clone this site for us original Dems, the FDR wing. I value this site, I value many of the people on it, and I would like to see its resources continue, in some fashion.

That's my two cents, for what it's worth. The quotes below are others from the article. Bolding mine.

The ideological divide between Sanders and Clinton, however, is much wider than that between Clinton and Barack Obama. The 2008 primary was a battle over representation, raw because it pit the first female candidate with a legitimate shot at the presidency against the first black one. There was not, however, much of a gap between what Clinton and Obama hoped to accomplish in office.

This year is different. It’s a split between liberalism and the left, between those who seek greater representation within the existing system and those who would replace it entirely. Liberals can’t understand why those to their left refuse to recognize that incremental progress is better than none, particularly given the intolerable danger of the modern GOP. Leftists are increasingly convinced that liberals, ever eager to compromise, aspire to nothing beyond a more diverse ruling class and are thus obstacles to revolution.
On the other side is Khaldoun Khelil, a 39-year-old of Palestinian-Algerian descent who is appalled to see some of his female friends overlooking Clinton’s awful rhetoric on Palestine.* “I’m a passionate supporter of women’s rights and other progressive ideals, but when I ask for the same support from them to stand behind me and Palestinians—suddenly I’m a Bernie Bro,” he says. Khelil feels personally wounded by the silence of his Clinton-supporting friends in the face of their candidate’s lopsided pro-Israel rhetoric. “It just turned my stomach,” he told me. “I think the bad feelings will persist. It showed me that I’m kind of a lower peer.”
Talking to people on both sides of the divide, I heard similar sentiments over and over. People thought their friendships were built on a shared worldview. They thought their friends respected their experiences, their judgments, and their identities. But the primary has revealed opposing priorities and, fundamentally, different apprehensions of reality. “I feel like I’m living in the Twilight Zone,” says Katie Halper, a writer, radio host, and outspoken Sanders supporter. To her, Clinton’s flaws are manifold and glaring, and watching fellow feminists deny them is driving her mad. “This is the first time I’ve ever felt gaslit in my life,” she adds.
Angie Aker, a 37-year-old web writer and progressive activist in Kenosha, Wisconsin...

“I’m not going to refuse to do business with Hillary supporters or start fights with them at our friends’ bridal showers, but neither will I ever forget that when they had a chance to vote for and support a truly progressive future for people worse off than them, they decided a neoliberal feminist-in-name-only getting her turn was more important,” she replied. “It will color the way I see them from here on out, as I’m sure the force with which I’ve spoken against their views will color how they see me.” With that last part, at least, Clinton supporters will surely agree.

"The river is high
And the bridges are burning
I know I've been hurt
But I keep on returning

I have traveled the paths of desire
Following smoke and remembering fire
The night is falling
The path is receding
I don't need to see it to know
Where it's leading"

("Paths of Desire", October Project)
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Fri Apr 29, 2016, 08:20 AM (1 replies)

That's a very good question.

My answer is, most of the disgusting mountains of money raised for political campaigns gets paid to the media. People do not stop and think about this fact enough. I think it's a fact that Sanders should point out more. It's obvious, but people overlook it.

A big chunk of all the fundraising from all the big donors gets paid to them. So when Hillary is out collecting the big checks by selling influence and exemptions from our law to these predator donors, the money she's raising goes to the media. They are 100% aware of this all the time. When there is a story about Hillary's glam high-ticket fundraisers, the media licks their chops just like Pavlov's dogs.

She is important to them, and they like her a lot, as you can imagine. Same for the other establishment (meaning pay-to-play, sold out) candidates including the Repubs and the down tickets of both sides.

Do you think the media want the system changed? Do you think they are desperate to have anyone but Sanders win the election?

There's your answer. They would put any criminal in the White House, including the reincarnation of Attila the Hun, rather than lose their cash cow of windfall profits which they never should've started receiving in the first place, in a business in which the government, whose elections they are raking in all this cash from, gives them a license to use the public airwaves! You can't get nuttier than that. It's like the government giving the media a gun to stick up the government with! There is absolutely no reason for this to be happening. And this stranglehold on politics by the media in turn enables this same media to create more politically corrupt power in elected office to pay the media even more... the vicious cycle goes on until THAT bubble pops sometime.

It's similar to what goes on with all the other dysfunctional sectors of our society, the dinosaurs feeding on all of us which should've been in the rear view mirror by now, like: fossil fuels, private health insurance, student loan financing, etc. And who are they? Why, they're big donors of course!!! See what a great thing they have going at the cost of the destruction of the remaining healthy sectors of society that are left? The whole thing is a viruent disease, killing us all. But will they stop at some point? NOPE. We saw that in 2008, didn't we? They will even kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, to get one more for themselves. This is who we're dealing with -- psychos, who we have promoted and elected all the way to the top of the pyramid of power. And we're poised to elect another one.

So the media's attitude is... shhh, don't talk about Hillary's little problem with the Feds. Just keep putting surrogates on shows to keep lying and saying it'll be ok.

The only problem with that: I don't think Comey is going to be bought off. And he isn't the only one who can leak Hilly's little problem in a way that will be taken seriously by the public. So let's see who among the players swerves first, in this game of chicken. We might as well watch the interesting show play out, since we're along for the ride with no choice about it.

I would bet the ranch on this though: one day in the near future we're going to wake up and there will be shit hitting the fan all over the place.
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Wed Apr 27, 2016, 11:35 AM (3 replies)

She's the one who couldn't wait to take on Trump.

So have at it. I don't think complaining about being offended is going to do much to Trump, but far be it from me to point out reality to those who know it all already. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt and wore it out, not interested in doing it any further.

I'm ready. I've got my Go for it. Show us how it's done.

I did notice, however, that the first thing he said this morning when Hillary was brought up was, "so what's happening with the email scandal... "

Told ya so.
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Wed Apr 27, 2016, 08:14 AM (0 replies)

Same experience voting for Sanders in Frederick Co., MD.

It wasn't crowded, no line, simple process, easy as pie. In our state we didn't have to guess which delegates were for which Presidential candidate, they were plainly marked. We were to choose 4 men and 4 women delegates, which was interesting. There were 4 of each for Sanders, so that was an easy choice. I too, had all my choices pre-marked on a sample form that was sent to us by the state. It took me about 10 minutes too, start to finidh, at an elementary school 3 blocks from where I live. Couldn't be easier.

Turnout didn't seem any different from other years at the same polling location. I zipped in and out with the previous machines too, before our conversion this year to paper, in about the same time. Maryland is good at elections, which I appreciate (no way to tell whether the counting part of it is tamper-free though; I assume it's ok, unless we hear indications otherwise).

There's no reason every state can't do elections this smoothly. I feel really bad that so many people have to endure the misery that some states and parties put voters through. It is intentional voter repression, pure and simple, and it should be illegal. We need some guidelines on elections.

I saw on the tube this afternoon that an MSNBC reporter happened to see O'Malley outside of the Mount Vernon (my old neighborhood as a 20-something) polling place in Baltimore City. O'Malley said that he thinks Sanders can win California! Loved that! The reporter though, was not happy.

I could co-sign your whole post. I'm 66, and this was by far the best vote of my whole life!

I saw Jane Sanders on the tube earlier in the day saying Bernie is NOT leaving the race until all of it is completed. So glad to hear that in such definite terms. Bernie supporters in every state should get their chance to vote for him.

I realize tonight is going to be tough, but that isn't a problem. We know where the rough spots are in the calendar and this is one of them. Later this evening I will most definitely be donating again, just to make a statement countering the election results in my state. In it to win it to the end, and beyond.

So proud of Bernie, and so glad he decided to run this time. And I have a hunch he may pull this off yet, before it's all said and done.

Cheers, Berners! And don't let tonight throw you.
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Tue Apr 26, 2016, 07:13 PM (3 replies)

It isn't their choice to make, and it's presumption not math.

They are presuming how many delegates in each race will go to whom. Oh, really? They are fortune tellers now? How analytical and coldly objective of them! (not)

But the biggest point is, they have no say in the matter. It's up to Sanders, and his supporters. Period.

He doesn't have big donors who can pull the plug, and he hasn't had much media coverage throughout his campaign, so the media can't pull the plug on him either. Imagine how much he would be crushing Hillary if he had the equivalent of Trump's free "news" coverage all year.

And yes, I totally agree with the OP that the reason for "drop out mania" is they are worried he will win... and they're right to be worried, he probably will! Time is on Bernie's side, the more people hear about him the more his support grows.

In any challenge I believe it's always good to do the opposite of what an opponent wants, and that's exactly what he's doing. Good for him! Go Bernie!

AND I WILL BE VOTING FOR HIM TODAY IN MD!!! It's by far the best vote of my lifetime, and I'm 66. There's no way I want my friends on the other coast to miss the chance to do the same!

This is dedicated to the Clintonites, who are newly so afraid of time -- I would be too in their shoes, but I won't bring up that bad 3-letter "F" word...

Time Is (It's A Beautiful Day, 1969)

"Time is too slow for those who wait
And time is too swift for those who fear
Time is too long for those who grieve
And time is too short for those that laugh
But for those who love,
But for those who really love,
But for those who love,
Time, sweet time, precious time,
Lovely time, all the time,
Time, time, time, time, time, time
Time, time, time, time, time,
Is eternity... "

(Just a random trivia note for the heck of it... They are one of the best bands I ever saw, at Finnegan's Rainbow in Long Beach CA where David Bowie who was an unknown, opened for them. I like this song, but "White Bird" is my favorite, and one of a few that people still associate with me to this day. If anyone hasn't heard it, highly recommended. David LaFlamme, who had been a concert violinist with the Utah symphony, was astonishing on violin, which I could appreciate having played it some too back in the day.)

Another very slow cup of coffee, and then off to vote!

Oh, why not; I'd make this a link above but it doesn't seem to work... for those who have some TIME to kill, like me right now, check out the violin crescendo...

Time for us to fly! Let's do this, voters!
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Tue Apr 26, 2016, 08:32 AM (2 replies)

You did a great job putting this together, IdaBriggs!

I read it all the way through and will do so again, and bookmark.

I have a Notepad full of links that I started saving as of about a month ago, which is a mess because it is growing much faster than I expected. It isn't just Fox reporting this, there isn't a major source that is left out of the links I've collected. And that is just links that I happen to see, and links from those stories, etc., not in-depth research on my part.

So I can appreciate the great work you did here, in putting together the main points so clearly and logically, because I can estimate what it would take to organize the messy Notepad I have that well.

I'll be matching what you have here with my "collection". Some of the links I recognize, and some I probably missed and will add. That you! for the great job you did on this, and I hope a lot of people who haven't been paying attention to this will take the time to follow the info you provided here.

My opinion on the whole thing is this: there are an abundance of criminal charges that can be brought against HRC, most of which she has admitted to doing. She insists that it was fine, but no, it really wasn't. She's going entirely on bluff about this, just bulling through on blatant lies. Highly credible people, like former heads of the agencies involved, have said that what she did was criminal, along with numerous less serious legal issues.

Whenever the FBI releases its findings, her goose is cooked in my opinion. Because no matter what happens after that, the court of public opinion WILL believe the FBI and whichever Repub is running WILL harp on their findings 24/7, and her career will be DONE at that point, regardless of any charges to come out of it later. And the 38 civil suits will not be going away either. She won't be able to raise any other subject and no one will vote for her.

There can be nothing more insane the Dem party could do, than nominating her. But I think the people who are scoffing it off now will understand how real this is when the FBI checks in. When they do though, there might not be enough time to salvage this election for the Dem party.

And wouldn't it be absurd for one of those idiot Repubs to win, in a year when that should be impossible, simply because the Dems insisted on backing to the end someone they should never in a million years even consider allowing to run -- someone under active FBI investigation. It is gobsmackingly stupid.

Excellent job, IdaBriggs.
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:32 PM (1 replies)

Wow, thank you pat_k, for posting this! ^^^

Glad I came back to this thread, to see this because I don't read ATA much anymore.

And since I can't reply there in ATA, a big thank you! to Skinner for letting the conversation continue.

Very glad to see this, it's as good of a boost as this thread was a downer.
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:13 AM (0 replies)

Why is discussion so threatening on a discussion board?

What is everybody so afraid of? Oh, wait, I think I know.

Most of us don't come here to persuade anyone to change sides, but for information, to get it and exchange it. And THAT'S what some would like to shut down the flow of, especially about certain topics such as the ones the FBI is interested in.

Well isn't that patriotic? And from a host of the Sanders group? Wow.

I've written it numerous times this week, but one more "true colors".

If Skinner does as you ask, I will still get information and will still discuss Hillary but it won't be here, and I won't be back. But I think and I hope that Skinner has better sense than that.

We will see, as we wait for more to reveal who they are.
Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Wed Apr 20, 2016, 04:44 PM (1 replies)

Chuch Schumer probably remembers that

Bernie, and Bernie alone, gave the DEM PARTY the majority in 2010. How much do you think THAT was worth to the Dem Party? How much do you think the party itself and individual members benefited from THAT? Well I'll tell you, it was a lot. Everything for the two years of that congress that depended on having the majority, was owed to Bernie. All the committee chairmanships, for instance.

Grassroots Dems don't seem to know that because Bernie doesn't blow his own horn about everything he could take credit for.

Contrary to assumptions Bernie does have friends in Congress, and would have more supers if many weren't afraid of the Clinton machine. However that will likely change as the convention gets closer -- less time to endure their rath.

Some people (such as Chuck) do know the 26-year reality of Sanders' work in Congress, as opposed to the one-way talking points Hillary puts out.

As the following video shows, Sanders and Hillary couldn't possibly be more opposite as people. Hillary catalogs everything she considers a slight to her, and every favor she's owed something back for...

Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Wed Apr 20, 2016, 02:35 PM (0 replies)

A New York song for Bernie...

From the movie "Working Girl" which fits too because the theme was real ability winning out over the cheating image person. It has one of my favorite song lines...

"We, the great and small,
Stand on a star and
Blaze a trail of desire
Through the darkling dawn"

Let the River Run (Carly Simon, 1989)

"Let all the dreamers wake the nation!"

Posted by Waiting For Everyman | Tue Apr 19, 2016, 10:02 AM (1 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 Next »