January 30, 2016

I think I want a clear answer from her.

And I don't know if anybody has asked her this question (Correct me if I'm wrong), which is "would you fully support Bernie Sanders as Democratic choice, if you don't get the nomination?"

I know Bernie has answered that hypothetical question countless times because they would ask him the question all of the time. Hillary hasn't because no one asks her that question.

It should be clear to everyone that at this point she could very well lose. And after hearing her saying "I'll win so he doesn't have to" about Bloomberg threatening to run, I don't feel so comfortable. Because what, if Bernie wins, another Wall Street candidate HAS TO run?

January 28, 2016

Secular Talk: Hillary laughs off questions about Wall Street ties

I hope this one hasn't already been posted.

Kyle hit the nail on this one.
In this video, Kyle explains that the Clintons amassed wealth in the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS from Wall Street since 2001, and that's only including the speaking fees.

And why would they pay politicians that much money? I'm sure those cokehead psycho bankers were just very concerned about abortion rights. Go figure.

January 21, 2016

Republicans' obsession with the Clintons used to puzzle me.

Because they agree on core principles, which is their loyalty to the donor class.
And Hillary, especially, is very trigger-happy to do the bidding for the MIC just as much as any other average repug. They agree on a lot of things. And yet, they're always anxious to get the Clintons. They are so reactionary about the Clintons it's almost like a reflex to them. Why?

Well, I'm not puzzled anymore.

Underneath all the bullshit and the posturing, I think what the republican establishment really wants is make the Clintons disappear from political theater, and take their place as Wall Street's favorite puppet. Because Wall Street is where all the big money is, besides the Big Oil.

It's not that the average repugs are necessarily more corrupt than the Clintons (though they're certainly more crass, unsophisticated, misogynist and racist). That's not the reason that the repugs are always pissed at the Clintons.
It's because the Clintons are better at it. Wall Street loves the Clintons and their cronies more than they love the repugs. That's why they are pissed.

Like the repugs said in their letter to the Iranians, "senators have unlimited terms," as a result of gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement. So why not try to grab all the big money, when it's pretty clear that you are in power forever?
Why else would they try to repeal ACA after 55 times that they have failed, if not to prove to their deep-pocketed donors and lobbyists in the insurance and pharma business how tenacious they are? Damn the voters. We're gonna show our daddy how loyal we are. We're gonna shut down the government if need be.

Repugs are not going through with Hillary email scandal and Benghazi hearings because they hate abortion so much. I attribute their relentlessness and shameless partisan shenanigans to their desire to drive out competitors, the Clintons. Not the competition to court voters. No no. Donors.

Write it off if you want, but that's how I see it.

January 19, 2016

Umm...Okay. I was just blocked from Hillary Clinton group.

But I actually unsubscribed that group long time ago.
I'm kinda new here and I'm not familiar with all the rules.
I didn't think that was possible. To be blocked from a group that you already unsubscribed...?

And before I got blocked, anything recent that I said about her is that

1. She got endorsement from Human Rights Campaign because only 32 people on the board of directors voted, which by the way, is born out by reality. All of the endorsements that she got from unions and civic groups came about as a result of leadership decision, not by popular vote of the members.

2. I said that she's not gonna be a good commander-in-chief because she's hawkish. And that she's not gonna be "tough" on Putin as opposed to Bernie who's gonna be "weak" (because that's not how foreign policy works). And then I got accused of sexism (of course). Because that's what I am, right? After all, I support Bernie. So I must be a sexist. It doesn't matter that I'm a girl myself, and I've been dealing with sexism and harassment as a child and as an adult. If I prefer Bernie's dovish foreign policy stance than Hillary's hawkish one, then I'm a sexist.


I really don't understand their mentality.
And it's funny that I got blocked from a group I never want to be a part of.

January 14, 2016

"Will they like me? No. Will they play by the rule? You'd better believe it"

Bernie's new ad
"Two Visions -Bernie Sanders"

January 6, 2016

Killer Mike: "This opportunity in history is not gonna come in another 20 years"

Killer Mike on Stephen Colbert

January 1, 2016

Seeing Bernie speak against the first war in Iraq in empty house of congress

made me feel so many things, and I wanted to share them with you.

(I'd be talking about the very first part of the video 00:00~01:44)

Most of the clips in the video I've already seen before, and his speech against the first Iraq War I was also aware of it.
But I didn't know that the official legislative schedule was finished at the time, and no one showed up for his speech.
So who was he speaking to? He was speaking to the American people. But he wasn't really heard by American people as well. Rather, he was heard 24 years later.


I would say that I'm much to the left of Bernie, and I enjoy hearing from people who are to the left of Bernie; among them are my spiritual- and intellectual heroes Chris Hedges and Cornel West, who I believe are the prophetic voice for America and the entire world.
Dr. West is critically supporting Bernie, which is fine by me.
Hedges is just critical of Bernie, and for me that's also fine, because I think Bernie has to face pressure in some areas especially when it comes to Israel-Palestine issue. I fully expect that there will come a moment where I find myself disagreeing with president Bernie on that issue, and when that moment comes, we will need people like Chris Hedges and they will have to be heard.


I don't support Bernie because I agree with him on everything. Nor do I think he's perfect, or a savior of any kind, and I'm not at all certain that he'll be able to bring all the structural changes he wishes to.
I support him because I know he'll do everything in his power to do what he said he will do to millions of his supporters whom he set himself up to be the only people he's beholden to.
I support him because I know he'll stick by his principles. He's proven that over and over throughout his career even when he lost. He so stubbornly stuck by his positions that it cost him elections several times. Eventually he came out ahead, but average career politicians would have compromised in order to win.
Because winning is important, and you can't do anything when you lose. Right?
Well, I say no to that. Winning and losing are a part of life, and it's what you do when you win and lose that determines who you are and what you are really about.


Surely, I think he can win this. There are good many indicators suggesting that.
But I don't want him to win this by giving up his principles (and most likely he won't do that).
And even if he doesn't win the presidency, this should and will go on. Because the political revolution will have to come and that is an arduous task not defined by presidential election cycles. And as he repeatedly states, it's not really about Bernie.
Bernie phenomenon is being created not only by Bernie, but also his constituencies responding to him and his message. Because I think this historic nationwide support and record-breaking donations all go back to Occupy Wall Street Movement, which demonstrated what people initially wished for when they voted for Obama.
And on the dark side, Trump, too, is reacting to the populace anger as much as he's generating it because it's largely a disaffected group of people coming from Tea Party movement that's supporting him (Trump has pretty much devoured support that would have gone to all the Tea Party-leaning candidates like Paul and Cruz). And while the Tea Party movement is ghastly and dangerous in so many ways, you can't ignore the fact that it, too, is a (misguided and ill-informed) reaction to corporate America and Wall Street having destroyed virtually all essential safety nets and societal institutions that keep people secure, solvent, and sane.


Some people say Clinton used to have principles, but that's not true.
It's not a principle if you wouldn't sacrifice anything for it.
When you repeatedly give up your position on issues that are supposedly important to you, like Clinton has many times -on bankruptcy bills, health care bills, death penalty, you name it-, then you're just in it to win against something, not for something. And at some point, you're just in it for yourself. Money, power, glory and influence may come with that, but that doesn't prove that you have made good decisions for the people you're supposed to serve.


I support the person who has stood up for what he believes in even when it wasn't popular, because that is the best kind of public servant we can hope for, and a model to follow for all decent human beings.