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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
34. Why???
Wed Feb 5, 2014, 02:11 PM
Feb 2014

Here's why: The Neo-Dems of today (the infiltrators of the party after Jimmy Carter's defeat) and who now control the party, want all the focus to be directed upon those ''crazy-ass Republicans'' rather than upon themselves. That way they can be cast as the responsible adults in the room, and with this status they can command the lion's share of the corporate largesse. Once having gained such position, they can now accomplish in ''rear-guard actions and weak-kneed compromises'' what no Republican ever could with a frontal assault on social programs.

Quite ingenious actually. Of course it doesn't take elaborate planning to fool most Americans owing to their terrible educations and knowledge of their own history. As well as their basic inability to think independently, again due to their terrible educations.

Then you couple all that with a goodly sprinkling of mass layoffs, foreclosures and bankruptcies among the middle classes - allowing bankers to steal retirement funds with impunity -- giving war-induced PTSD drugged-up cops free reign to go upside the head of grandmas and/or bashing the heads of young people whether its for wanting to use marijuana to cure cancer, protesting for being mass-surveilled, protesting another goddamned corporate war, or because they've discovered that they're now slaves because their degrees ain't worth spit but their education debts will follow them to their graves.

Then you plaster all that over Youtube and the various social media outlets (all of which we now know are being monitored) -- and people can be made more malleable and accepting of diminishing returns on the social contract. A ''cat food once a week ain't so bad'' mentality begins to take over.

These Neo-Dems, these kinds of minds, it doesn't really matter what label you slap on the outside, they're actually pretty damned barbaric really. They're unevolved humans. Lacking an ability to connect with society's unwashed. Those of us who built it all. They're those who have little or no ability to empathize with others -- they act almost exclusively in favor of self -- and who live almost solely for plain 'ol greed. Clearly some of them are better at pretending and masking what they're doing than others.

- These problems can be solved, but it requires that everyone open their eyes first.....


K&R

[center][/center]

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Why indeed. n/t Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #1
O'Reilly yeoman6987 Feb 2014 #52
Hubris and arrogance n2doc Feb 2014 #2
How about 'confidence' and 'composure'? randome Feb 2014 #4
seriously? you can't possibly believe that. wait, you can. cali Feb 2014 #20
Oh you would think "hubris and arrogance".. which is totally Cha Feb 2014 #37
Really? A former General was on there talking about armed revolution cprise Feb 2014 #56
Remember Obama with Rick Warren in 2008? Jerry442 Feb 2014 #3
The Sally Fields of politicians. gLibDem Feb 2014 #16
I'm using that. DeSwiss Feb 2014 #25
I'm honored gLibDem Feb 2014 #35
I doubt it very much. Do you really think the President is stupid? Do you really think everything El_Johns Feb 2014 #40
No, I don't think Sally Fields was stupid. gLibDem Feb 2014 #47
Chuck Todd, "...not our job..." that's why, the M$M isn't illuminating their lies uponit7771 Feb 2014 #5
Thank you, uponit.. that why he did it to get the word out if Cha Feb 2014 #38
The Democrat Party and it's leadership heaven05 Feb 2014 #6
K&R G_j Feb 2014 #7
They're threatening revolution cprise Feb 2014 #8
"This time, I *know* they'll finally realize I'm a man they can do business with." MannyGoldstein Feb 2014 #9
Because O'Reilly paid for it would be my guess. OnyxCollie Feb 2014 #10
Well, that would be more than cynical, more than sick Demeter Feb 2014 #28
All the more significant a ret. general appears on Fox cprise Feb 2014 #36
Murdoch, doncha mean. Big supporter of education "reform". El_Johns Feb 2014 #41
Why did we watch the superbowl at all, given it was conveyed to us by and massively profited Fox? AtheistCrusader Feb 2014 #11
I too found it disturbing packman Feb 2014 #12
Because no politician can resist appearing before tens of millions of registered voters NewJeffCT Feb 2014 #13
well, 99% of them, anyway. I think yours is the most likely reason. cali Feb 2014 #21
More like Roger Ailes paid for it. IggleDoer Feb 2014 #14
both sides benefit from the fake scandals Enrique Feb 2014 #15
^^^^THIS^^^^ bvar22 Feb 2014 #27
+1 El_Johns Feb 2014 #42
Why preach to the choir notemason Feb 2014 #17
You've GOT to be kidding durablend Feb 2014 #19
uh, this wasn't the choir or not the choir. Fox carried the Superbowl cali Feb 2014 #22
Why? Perhaps...just perhaps Android3.14 Feb 2014 #18
If a Fox News person had to do the interview, I'd pick Shep MrScorpio Feb 2014 #23
With All Due Respect mrchips Feb 2014 #24
Excuse me! I will pay attention to you, mrchips.. Cha Feb 2014 #45
Spot on, mrchips. n/t sheshe2 Feb 2014 #50
Agree, but Obama made a fool of Bill-O and set in stone Bill-O's and Fox's idiotic witch trial. Coyotl Feb 2014 #26
O'reilly is all up in arms about criticism of his interview.. Cha Feb 2014 #46
He's probably losing sleep over this. Reality strikes home when your on the mat hearing the count. Coyotl Feb 2014 #48
One thing I didn't do and one I ddn't know DFW Feb 2014 #29
If Obama is serious about talking to those of us who spent the hours and hours and hours of JDPriestly Feb 2014 #30
I think it was a wash. progressoid Feb 2014 #31
Because it looks like he is trying to avoid the questions? treestar Feb 2014 #32
There's the ODS way of looking at this and Cha Feb 2014 #39
PBO doesn't get it...made me ill to see him grovel, on global TV, to even agree to such a thing libdem4life Feb 2014 #33
Newsflash.. President Obama wasn't "groveling".. You're the Cha Feb 2014 #43
I disagree. I don't at all admire people who are Dominants. Christie and Republican libdem4life Feb 2014 #53
Why??? DeSwiss Feb 2014 #34
O'Reilly Unloads On 'Weasel,' 'Beneath Contempt' WaPo Columnist Dana Milbank Cha Feb 2014 #44
I loved the interview kpete Feb 2014 #49
thanks kpete Cha Feb 2014 #55
I couldn't care less about Dana Milbank but Billo calling himself a "journalist"? Boomerproud Feb 2014 #51
I know huh?! And, he's on a "jihad" for journalist Cha Feb 2014 #54
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Juan Cole: The Cheapening...»Reply #34