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
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Ferd Berfel
Ferd Berfel's Journal
Ferd Berfel's Journal
December 18, 2015
The Gloves are OFF! Looks like Bernie has had enough of the DNC BUllshit`
DNC phone Number 202-803-xxx
They must be in PANIC mode to pull Bullshit like this!
Bernie's people told the DNS about this in October
I'm having serious second thoughts about holding my nose and voting for hillary if she get the nomination. If the fucking democrats have fallen off the edge like this - what is the fucking point?
And save the BS about the right wing boogie man and the SCOTUS.
Pulling this shit the day before the rigged debate? Fuck 'em
Has the Choice really become Fascist or fascist lite?
Edit: Turns out that was a bad phone number - sorry bout that - HERE try this:
BTW - Just in case you want to tell DWS what you think of this crap
Here's a good tip from a FB poster on another site:
"Regarding phone calls to the DNC, call their cash donation line instead. That number is 877-336-7200. Calling this number forces live staff to deal with you, and keeps them from getting a donation call at the same time. You can use the call to tell them why you are refusing to donate. Let them know that you won't donate another dime until they get rid of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz as DNC chair. They will take notes. They guy who took my message even seemed embarrassed and seemed to agree. Call now, operators standing by."
December 16, 2015
The Bush administration has, up until now, avoided punishment for its shameful treatment of terrorism suspects. Recently, however, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that former Bush administration officials can be sued for how they conducted the "war on terror."
For almost a decade and a half, the people behind the Bush administration's shameful treatment of terrorism suspects have avoided punishment for their crimes, but that may be about to change.
The courts have had their say and have ruled that former Bush administration officials can, in fact, be sued for how they conducted the "war on terror."
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals made that pretty much official on Friday when it refused to hear a challenge to its earlier ruling in the case of Turkmen v. Ashcroft. That case involves hundreds of Arab, Muslim or South Asian men who were detained and then abused by our government in the weeks following 9/11.
Well for god sake, LET"S GET ON IT!
Court Rules Bush Administration Can Be Sued for Its "War on Terror" Conduct
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/34032-court-rules-bush-administration-can-be-sued-for-war-on-terror-conductThe Bush administration has, up until now, avoided punishment for its shameful treatment of terrorism suspects. Recently, however, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that former Bush administration officials can be sued for how they conducted the "war on terror."
For almost a decade and a half, the people behind the Bush administration's shameful treatment of terrorism suspects have avoided punishment for their crimes, but that may be about to change.
The courts have had their say and have ruled that former Bush administration officials can, in fact, be sued for how they conducted the "war on terror."
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals made that pretty much official on Friday when it refused to hear a challenge to its earlier ruling in the case of Turkmen v. Ashcroft. That case involves hundreds of Arab, Muslim or South Asian men who were detained and then abused by our government in the weeks following 9/11.
Well for god sake, LET"S GET ON IT!
December 16, 2015
Behind this effort is an alarmed corporate old guard that still runs the Democratic Party establishment.
?itok=Ud2dsuhy
Sanders' message, his campaign, and the resounding support he is receiving nationwide has sent chills through those whose primarily loyalty is to the wealthy donors in mansions and corporate suites and the policy architects on Wall Street
Perhaps you’ve noticed. Some people and institutions are working feverishly to convince us that real social change is not possible.
Their target is Bernie Sanders and the growing army of his supporters who are fed up with politics as usual and the grip of Wall Street and corporate America on our political, economic and social system.
The theme is to desperately convince us that Sanders can’t win. They repeat it over and over, even though Sanders polls as well or better than Hillary Clinton does against every leading Republican candidate.
Beware: Someone Is Trying to Convince You That Bernie Can't Win
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/12/15/beware-someone-trying-convince-you-bernie-cant-winBehind this effort is an alarmed corporate old guard that still runs the Democratic Party establishment.
?itok=Ud2dsuhy
Sanders' message, his campaign, and the resounding support he is receiving nationwide has sent chills through those whose primarily loyalty is to the wealthy donors in mansions and corporate suites and the policy architects on Wall Street
Gas-light-ing (gas-lighting) v. 1. a form of mental abuse in which information is twisted or spun 2. false information presented with the intent of making victims doubt their own perception and reality. Adj. gas-lit misled into accepting false information for the purpose of social control.
Perhaps you’ve noticed. Some people and institutions are working feverishly to convince us that real social change is not possible.
Their target is Bernie Sanders and the growing army of his supporters who are fed up with politics as usual and the grip of Wall Street and corporate America on our political, economic and social system.
The theme is to desperately convince us that Sanders can’t win. They repeat it over and over, even though Sanders polls as well or better than Hillary Clinton does against every leading Republican candidate.
December 12, 2015
--------------------------
http://economyincrisis.org/content/four-ways-the-tpp-will-affect-your-dinner-plate
If we allow the TPP to pass, our quality of food will be compromised. This is just another way the TPP is dangerous for America
Food safety has been a major issue in the United States for years. Not because the food we produce is bad, but because much of the food that is imported from countries like China and Vietnam is severely hurting people in the United States. Our food safety regulations are strict to ensure healthy foods, however poor countries have much lower food safety standards than we do.
Vietnam uses chemicals that are banned in the United States in their fish farms yet we still open up our borders to them. China has been notorious for mislabeled food with past due expiration dates on their beef products yet we still allow it to come through onto our dinner plates.
The fact is that 3,000 people in the United States die each year from foodborne illnesses. To make matters worse, if the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is to pass, this will only become worse. Below are four reasons as to why the TPP makes food safety an even greater issue.
The FDA is currently underfunded and has only the resources to inspect 1 to 2 percent of imported food. The TPP would only stretch that further since more food imports will be flooding in than now. “We don’t have the regulatory capacity to deal with increased trade from a food standpoint,” said Tony Corbo, senior lobbyist for Food & Water Watch.
Food from all countries involved in the TPP would be deemed equal, even though one country might have higher standards than the others.
Food labeling could completely disappear.
We would lose our food sovereignty
4 Ways The TPP Will Affect Your Dinner Plate1
Hey, what happened to TPP news? We (and democracy) are about to get screwed and we're ignoring it.--------------------------
http://economyincrisis.org/content/four-ways-the-tpp-will-affect-your-dinner-plate
If we allow the TPP to pass, our quality of food will be compromised. This is just another way the TPP is dangerous for America
Food safety has been a major issue in the United States for years. Not because the food we produce is bad, but because much of the food that is imported from countries like China and Vietnam is severely hurting people in the United States. Our food safety regulations are strict to ensure healthy foods, however poor countries have much lower food safety standards than we do.
Vietnam uses chemicals that are banned in the United States in their fish farms yet we still open up our borders to them. China has been notorious for mislabeled food with past due expiration dates on their beef products yet we still allow it to come through onto our dinner plates.
The fact is that 3,000 people in the United States die each year from foodborne illnesses. To make matters worse, if the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is to pass, this will only become worse. Below are four reasons as to why the TPP makes food safety an even greater issue.
The FDA is currently underfunded and has only the resources to inspect 1 to 2 percent of imported food. The TPP would only stretch that further since more food imports will be flooding in than now. “We don’t have the regulatory capacity to deal with increased trade from a food standpoint,” said Tony Corbo, senior lobbyist for Food & Water Watch.
Food from all countries involved in the TPP would be deemed equal, even though one country might have higher standards than the others.
Food labeling could completely disappear.
We would lose our food sovereignty
December 12, 2015
As the Donald Trump campaign turns from farce to tribulation, it’s worth noting that millions more Americans support Bernie Sanders than the Republican frontrunner.
Trump’s level of national support is 30.4 percent of GOP primary voters, according to the average calculated by Real Clear Politics, while Sanders remains in second place among Democratic primary voters with a 30.8 percent average level of support.
However, as the Philadelphia Daily News‘ Will Bunch points out — there are considerably more Democrats than Republicans.
The most recent Pew poll shows 32 percent of Americans identify themselves as Democrats, compared to 23 percent who describe themselves as Republicans — so that suggests far more people support Sanders than Trump, based on party identity and both candidates’ levels of national support.
Polling guru Nate Silver, who operates the 538.com website, cautioned that all the candidates’ poll numbers are misleading at this stage in the election cycle because most voters still aren’t paying attention.
(snip)
But some of those horrified observers might take comfort in realizing that Sanders, the democratic socialist, has earned more voter support than Trump — the fascist fabulist.
Fear not: More Americans support Bernie Sanders than Donald Trump — no matter what TV says
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/12/fear-not-more-americans-support-bernie-sanders-than-donald-trump-no-matter-what-tv-says/As the Donald Trump campaign turns from farce to tribulation, it’s worth noting that millions more Americans support Bernie Sanders than the Republican frontrunner.
Trump’s level of national support is 30.4 percent of GOP primary voters, according to the average calculated by Real Clear Politics, while Sanders remains in second place among Democratic primary voters with a 30.8 percent average level of support.
However, as the Philadelphia Daily News‘ Will Bunch points out — there are considerably more Democrats than Republicans.
The most recent Pew poll shows 32 percent of Americans identify themselves as Democrats, compared to 23 percent who describe themselves as Republicans — so that suggests far more people support Sanders than Trump, based on party identity and both candidates’ levels of national support.
Polling guru Nate Silver, who operates the 538.com website, cautioned that all the candidates’ poll numbers are misleading at this stage in the election cycle because most voters still aren’t paying attention.
(snip)
But some of those horrified observers might take comfort in realizing that Sanders, the democratic socialist, has earned more voter support than Trump — the fascist fabulist.
December 8, 2015
The pragmatic vs. idealistic divide is a hallmark of the Democratic primary and the party itself. But when it comes to the climate, the debate is not a theoretical one.
We’re close to an international climate agreement that most agree will be both a major step forward and insufficient to avert a catastrophe. Energy will quickly turn to what should be our next steps. The rival Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders campaigns lay out two possible paths: continued incremental advancement versus ambitious goals and sweeping agendas.
The pragmatic vs. idealistic divide is a hallmark of the Democratic primary and the party itself. But when it comes to the climate, the debate is not a theoretical one. Time is running out, and the path we choose makes, literally, all the difference in the world.\
(snip)
Last month Sanders sponsored the “Keep It In The Ground Act” which would “ban future fossil fuel leases on our public lands.” He would ban offshore drilling, Arctic drilling, natural gas fracking, new natural gas pipelines, mountaintop removal coal mining and nuclear power plant license renewals.
Clinton has yet to offer as many details, but what she has released indicates relatively modest goals. Her plan talks up investments in renewables, especially a pledge to install “half a billion solar panels” by the end of her first term. Notably, she doesn’t enumerate any additional federal spending to meet the goal,...
(snip)
Unlike Sanders, her plan is silent (so far) on what should remain in the ground. She did move toward Sanders on rejecting the Keystone pipeline, but her reasoning was that the debate had become a “distraction,” not that it was a beginning of a “keep it in the ground” philosophy.
----------------------------
Given time Hillary will triangulate her way around this more. But her handlers and polls will have to get their first.
Feel the BERN?
The World-Changing Choice Between Sanders and Clinton On The Climate
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/12/08/world-changing-choice-between-sanders-and-clinton-climateThe pragmatic vs. idealistic divide is a hallmark of the Democratic primary and the party itself. But when it comes to the climate, the debate is not a theoretical one.
We’re close to an international climate agreement that most agree will be both a major step forward and insufficient to avert a catastrophe. Energy will quickly turn to what should be our next steps. The rival Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders campaigns lay out two possible paths: continued incremental advancement versus ambitious goals and sweeping agendas.
The pragmatic vs. idealistic divide is a hallmark of the Democratic primary and the party itself. But when it comes to the climate, the debate is not a theoretical one. Time is running out, and the path we choose makes, literally, all the difference in the world.\
(snip)
Last month Sanders sponsored the “Keep It In The Ground Act” which would “ban future fossil fuel leases on our public lands.” He would ban offshore drilling, Arctic drilling, natural gas fracking, new natural gas pipelines, mountaintop removal coal mining and nuclear power plant license renewals.
Clinton has yet to offer as many details, but what she has released indicates relatively modest goals. Her plan talks up investments in renewables, especially a pledge to install “half a billion solar panels” by the end of her first term. Notably, she doesn’t enumerate any additional federal spending to meet the goal,...
(snip)
Unlike Sanders, her plan is silent (so far) on what should remain in the ground. She did move toward Sanders on rejecting the Keystone pipeline, but her reasoning was that the debate had become a “distraction,” not that it was a beginning of a “keep it in the ground” philosophy.
----------------------------
Given time Hillary will triangulate her way around this more. But her handlers and polls will have to get their first.
Feel the BERN?
December 7, 2015
He was later suspended from the cable network for two weeks. (not enough - he should be fired)
[link:http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2006923/bio|
Ralph Peters], a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army and frequently angry and acerbic Fox guest, presented his usual demeanor again Monday during a live interview in which he called President Barack Obama a "total pussy."
When Fox Business Network's Stuart Varney of "Varney & Co." asked about Obama's Sunday night address on terrorism, Peters melted down.
"Well, first of all, he keeps speaking about 'we can't give into our fears.' You know, 'don't be afraid.' Look, Mr. President, we're not afraid. We're angry. We're pissed off. We're furious. We want to see you react. We want you to do something," Peters' tirade began.
"You're afraid. I mean, this guy is such a total pussy, it's stunning," Peters exploded.
______________________________
FIRE - AIM - READY!!!!
Typical suicidal response from the wing-nuts. Don't think - just REACT NOW!
We cannot survive as a democracy when idiots like THIS are allowed a podium.
Fox Guest Explodes: Obama 'Is Such A Total Pussy, It's Stunning'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ralph-peters-fox-business-obama_5665be68e4b079b2818f4abeHe was later suspended from the cable network for two weeks. (not enough - he should be fired)
[link:http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2006923/bio|
Ralph Peters], a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army and frequently angry and acerbic Fox guest, presented his usual demeanor again Monday during a live interview in which he called President Barack Obama a "total pussy."
When Fox Business Network's Stuart Varney of "Varney & Co." asked about Obama's Sunday night address on terrorism, Peters melted down.
"Well, first of all, he keeps speaking about 'we can't give into our fears.' You know, 'don't be afraid.' Look, Mr. President, we're not afraid. We're angry. We're pissed off. We're furious. We want to see you react. We want you to do something," Peters' tirade began.
"You're afraid. I mean, this guy is such a total pussy, it's stunning," Peters exploded.
______________________________
FIRE - AIM - READY!!!!
Typical suicidal response from the wing-nuts. Don't think - just REACT NOW!
We cannot survive as a democracy when idiots like THIS are allowed a podium.
December 7, 2015
" I'm only voting for Bernie Sanders because these relevant issues haven't been addressed in debate or discussion. If anything, I've noticed that sensitive topics like Iraq are never discussed by Clinton supporters; the motivation to debate such issues inevitably becomes the topic of discussion."
However, I'm only voting for Bernie Sanders because these relevant issues haven't been addressed in debate or discussion. If anything, I've noticed that sensitive topics like Iraq are never discussed by Clinton supporters; the motivation to debate such issues inevitably becomes the topic of discussion.
Any relevant critique I make is either dismissed because I once wrote an article on Rand Paul, or because I must have a nefarious agenda, according to certain detractors. In reality, I'm a lifelong Democrat and this YouTube segment is what drives me to write about Sanders. Watch the YouTube segment or visit my website if you feel the need to question my motives.
Therefore, below are 20 questions from a Bernie Sanders only voter that hopefully some Clinton supporters can answers, without evasion, and without attacking the messenger. I'm curious if anyone can possibly answer the questions below, in a manner illustrating Hillary Clinton would be a better president than Bernie Sanders. If the questions below illicit an indignant response leading to accusation, then this reaction simply proves Sanders, not Clinton, should be the Democratic nominee.
20 Questions for Hillary Clinton's Supporters From a Bernie Sanders Only Voter
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/20-questionsr-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-voter_b_8736876.html" I'm only voting for Bernie Sanders because these relevant issues haven't been addressed in debate or discussion. If anything, I've noticed that sensitive topics like Iraq are never discussed by Clinton supporters; the motivation to debate such issues inevitably becomes the topic of discussion."
However, I'm only voting for Bernie Sanders because these relevant issues haven't been addressed in debate or discussion. If anything, I've noticed that sensitive topics like Iraq are never discussed by Clinton supporters; the motivation to debate such issues inevitably becomes the topic of discussion.
Any relevant critique I make is either dismissed because I once wrote an article on Rand Paul, or because I must have a nefarious agenda, according to certain detractors. In reality, I'm a lifelong Democrat and this YouTube segment is what drives me to write about Sanders. Watch the YouTube segment or visit my website if you feel the need to question my motives.
Therefore, below are 20 questions from a Bernie Sanders only voter that hopefully some Clinton supporters can answers, without evasion, and without attacking the messenger. I'm curious if anyone can possibly answer the questions below, in a manner illustrating Hillary Clinton would be a better president than Bernie Sanders. If the questions below illicit an indignant response leading to accusation, then this reaction simply proves Sanders, not Clinton, should be the Democratic nominee.
December 6, 2015
Presidential candidates from both parties came together at the weekend to call for beefed-up government surveillance programs in the wake of recent terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California.
The candidates did not agree, however, on what kind of surveillance – new dragnet metadata collection, tools to fight encryption or some even more powerful capability – was needed.
---------------------
Funny, Bernie has not climbed on this bandwagon. Hmmm. Maybe he understands what Truman Said.
Note to Hillary.............................
Clinton and Republican candidates agree: Increased surveillance is necessary to prevent terror attac
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/12/clinton-and-republican-candidates-agree-increased-surveillance-is-necessary-to-prevent-terror-attacks/Presidential candidates from both parties came together at the weekend to call for beefed-up government surveillance programs in the wake of recent terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, California.
The candidates did not agree, however, on what kind of surveillance – new dragnet metadata collection, tools to fight encryption or some even more powerful capability – was needed.
---------------------
Funny, Bernie has not climbed on this bandwagon. Hmmm. Maybe he understands what Truman Said.
Note to Hillary.............................
December 6, 2015
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/liberty-university-president-guns_566348bfe4b08e945fefc8a0
“Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here.”
The president of Liberty University urged students at the Christian school to carry concealed weapons on campus to counter any possible armed attack like the mass killings in San Bernardino, Calif.
“Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here,” President Jerry Falwell Jr. told students at a convocation Friday.
The call-to-arms was met with rousing applause from students, but some said Falwell went too far when he appeared to be referring specifically to Muslims, the News & Advance reported.
---------------------------
A mental test before you buy a gun would be good. Maybe there should be a mental test before you’re allowed to preach and have tax exempt status? Why are ALL OF US paying for idiots like this? Get your hands out of MY pockets. It’s time to end the tax exempt status of all religious organizations. Let their followers pay the freight.
Let's teach these idiots a lesson and remove them from their status as WELFARE QUEENS.
Liberty University President: If More People Had Concealed Guns, ‘We Could End Those Muslims’
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/liberty-university-president-guns_566348bfe4b08e945fefc8a0
“Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here.”
The president of Liberty University urged students at the Christian school to carry concealed weapons on campus to counter any possible armed attack like the mass killings in San Bernardino, Calif.
“Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here,” President Jerry Falwell Jr. told students at a convocation Friday.
The call-to-arms was met with rousing applause from students, but some said Falwell went too far when he appeared to be referring specifically to Muslims, the News & Advance reported.
---------------------------
A mental test before you buy a gun would be good. Maybe there should be a mental test before you’re allowed to preach and have tax exempt status? Why are ALL OF US paying for idiots like this? Get your hands out of MY pockets. It’s time to end the tax exempt status of all religious organizations. Let their followers pay the freight.
Let's teach these idiots a lesson and remove them from their status as WELFARE QUEENS.
Profile Information
Member since: Sat Jan 3, 2015, 12:39 PMNumber of posts: 3,687
