General Discussion

JHan

(10,173 posts)

116. " because our party leaders are themselves also dependent on that influence. "

Wed Sep 20, 2017, 10:37 PM

Sep 2017

In other words you can't trust Democrats on this issue , that's the point you are making.

You do not trust Democratic Leadership on this, and despite your careful language to hide this, it's what you're arguing. You really might as well say they're no different to republicans.

"They can't be authoritarian and they can't ignore the plight of the poor, but they can't mount a very good attack on the deleterious influence of the rich because our party leaders are themselves also dependent on that influence. " Do you know when the SCOTUS decisions I mentioned were made, what motivated the rulings, and campaign finance law?

" They want democrats to fight right." - fighting "right", we're in a war.

I recommend you give Alinsky a read. ( EDIT: you don't have to agree with all of him, I don't, but this idea of fighting nice and "right" against the opposition to suit some self righteous belief and apply purity tests to say a Senator getting aggregate donations in a state dependent on a particular industry, isn't applicable anymore. The opposition has more money, more connections and influence)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

199 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Oh my god cant BELIEVE what I just heard Cenk Uyger just say [View all] Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 OP

This person gets one vote, right? WinkyDink Sep 2017 #1

You are kidding, right? Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #2

Good for him. I don't follow Right-Wingers. WinkyDink Sep 2017 #69

Except he likes to crow he is a progressive obamanut2012 Sep 2017 #164

As "progressive" as he claims he is, he has no qualms about taking money from conservatives. George II Oct 2017 #199

He's host of the Young Turks. I have a soft spot for them, but they've gone off the rails bashing liberalnarb Sep 2017 #184

"Large and influential" cwydro Sep 2017 #136

It's true Orrex Sep 2017 #141

Lol. cwydro Sep 2017 #144

Large and influential enough to have gotten a $4 million contribution from rightwinger Buddy Roemer. George II Oct 2017 #198

This person has a successful track record of disseminating propaganda do to people Ninsianna Sep 2017 #19

Well, I guess I don't read Republican propaganda enough to know all the players. WinkyDink Sep 2017 #68

One should look into the background of sources, you should always know the players Ninsianna Sep 2017 #106

I've been a politics junkie since 1960 and JFK; I was ten. I need ZERO WinkyDink Sep 2017 #123

I vote D as well, but for somoene who has been a political junkie for decades Ninsianna Sep 2017 #134

Are you saying Cenk is considered republican propaganda? 7962 Sep 2017 #157

He takes money from actual Republican donors, and yet he has the gall pnwmom Sep 2017 #166

wow, I never knew that. 7962 Sep 2017 #173

For example: pnwmom Sep 2017 #175

What Republicans fund him? RandomAccess Sep 2017 #88

Here you go. Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #95

Thanks RandomAccess Sep 2017 #102

No problem. I used to watch their show everyday...really liked them. Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #109

Buddy Roemer for one. Ninsianna Sep 2017 #103

Then "penny from wall street" becomes any donation by a democrat on walls street because the uponit7771 Sep 2017 #3

I wonder if I am allowed to post support for the Democratic Party here or not Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #5

Yeah too many lpc trolls jump post that support the DNC openly uponit7771 Sep 2017 #14

You two just inspired me to contribute to the reviled DNC NBachers Sep 2017 #41

Good for you. I contribute too. Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #96

I think that's an asinine, absurd, and demonstrably false thing to say. WinkyDink Sep 2017 #67

On what basis? Otherwise your post is just name calling. n/t pnwmom Sep 2017 #128

(on edit)it's likely that most wealthy Dems on Wall Street are to the right of most of the party Ken Burch Sep 2017 #38

Come on, that's no where near true 10s of thousands of people work on WS & not all of them are MAGA uponit7771 Sep 2017 #40

I didn't say they were MAGA Nation members. I'd say they're socially liberal economic royalists Ken Burch Sep 2017 #51

"but do you honestly think any of them wants a revived War on Poverty?" YES !!! Especially the uponit7771 Sep 2017 #60

Wow that's a whole load of negative RW stereotypes about urban Dems! Also- secretaries are desks, bettyellen Sep 2017 #63

Administrative support staff, then(I used the older term, because I wasn't sure the newer one Ken Burch Sep 2017 #75

I don't know what Dems you are talking about here: ehrnst Oct 2017 #188

I know lots of people from the NYC financial sector. Your post bears little relation to reality. Squinch Sep 2017 #71

There are probably individual people with humane progressive values with some sort of jobs Ken Burch Sep 2017 #80

Again, impugning Dems- all since the eighties *cough cough* ?!? bettyellen Sep 2017 #93

This is clueless. In the past I myself have worked in a decisionmaking capacity in a Squinch Sep 2017 #145

I've never equated any Democrat to "satan's spawn", or even thought in those terms. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #179

Uh huh. Squinch Sep 2017 #182

You have no reason to question my saying that. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #183

You do manage to take every issue and make it all about you and your history and your feelings. Squinch Sep 2017 #185

nice post Locrian Sep 2017 #162

"If we as a party are not going to say THAT." ehrnst Oct 2017 #189

For many on DU, lack of knowledge on a topic doesn't stop posting on a topic. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #192

Nice cut and paste don't you ever sleep snooper2 Sep 2017 #120

Not cut and paste. Just a sustainable argument. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #121

Bad crappy songs by salty captain snooper2 Sep 2017 #122

No, Cenk WAS talking about ALL the money from Wall Street, which is nothing but pnwmom Sep 2017 #130

Not correct. Anyone who lives in the NYC area knows you are very wrong. nt stevenleser Sep 2017 #104

You think every teller who works in a Wall Street firm is from the far right of the party? pnwmom Sep 2017 #129

I've made posts here distinguishing between the people you list there Ken Burch Sep 2017 #135

It's fun to move the goalposts... LanternWaste Sep 2017 #140

I distinguished my position from Cenk's from my first tweet in this thread. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #178

Yep. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #190

Ha, you can distinguish the ones Cenk is referring to. Not all listeners may have your insight. Fla Dem Sep 2017 #155

So what? The OP doesn't distinguish between them, and there's no way to distinguish between them pnwmom Sep 2017 #165

My brother works on Wall Street. He is a dedicated liberal Democrat. This demonetization of Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #152

Got some data to back that up? ehrnst Oct 2017 #187

But of course, aside from political contributions, Wall St banks can & often do make direct payments InAbLuEsTaTe Sep 2017 #132

Another one of these? HarmonyRockets Sep 2017 #4

But it's okay for him rusty fender Sep 2017 #6

Are you allowed to mention that here? Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #8

Only if the truth is not allowed rusty fender Sep 2017 #18

He's an idiot. He's also a blowhard jerk. He can pucker up and kiss my fat ass! NurseJackie Sep 2017 #7

Thank you. cwydro Sep 2017 #137

As To Being Allowed...I Don't Know Me. Sep 2017 #9

I got in trouble somewhere for telling the truth about Cenk, it may not have been here Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #12

If we take corporate money, we can't challenge anything in the status quo. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #39

LOL! Define "taking corporate money". What does this mean precisely? NurseJackie Sep 2017 #45

Large donations from the corporate wealthy. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #59

LOL ... Absurd. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #73

How so? Ken Burch Sep 2017 #76

You're smart. Figure it out yourself. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #86

oh, so now we are qualifying "large donations from the corporate wealthy" ehrnst Oct 2017 #191

So we unilaterally disarm financially? ehrnst Oct 2017 #186

Oh FFS! mcar Sep 2017 #10

We don't gain anything from taking Wall Street money. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #43

Which candidate is "taking Wall Street money"? Is this the same as... NurseJackie Sep 2017 #46

Accepting donations from people on Wall Street, as the OP discussed. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #56

LOL ... Absurd. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #72

You can't just say "Absurd"...you actually need to support an argument that it's absurd. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #84

Yes I can. I just did. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #85

Like support Sanders' Single Payer Bill that would cut drug reimbursement? Hoyt Sep 2017 #79

Oh my ... Ninsianna Sep 2017 #99

Thanks for the link. nt sheshe2 Sep 2017 #159

Oh my. OilemFirchen Sep 2017 #160

The people who are "very concerned" about those impure bastards who Ninsianna Sep 2017 #176

Sorry for this particular example, as you didn't bring him up... moriah Sep 2017 #125

With all the crap we have facing us mcar Sep 2017 #89

We need funding...and this demonetization of Wall Street is ridiculous. Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #97

Exactly. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #90

This line of argument is boggling my mind, Jackie mcar Sep 2017 #92

Absolute Purity Test bpj62 Sep 2017 #11

Thanks, that is what I thought he said. This will sink the D party for sure, which I believe is his Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #13

Many are trying from so many angles to primary successful incumbent democrats it seems lunasun Sep 2017 #112

he is trying to make $$ promoting himself. whatever it takes nt msongs Sep 2017 #15

I read recently in one of my FB groups that TYTs, The Nation Magazine TheDebbieDee Sep 2017 #16

Cenk is a RW libertarian IMO ecstatic Sep 2017 #17

Cenk needs to show us his taxes. All of these people undermining only Democrats R B Garr Sep 2017 #20

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2017 #21

Ah, so only the Democrats are the villians in your webshow idea?? R B Garr Sep 2017 #22

Welcome to DU. Here's the thing, Wall Street is in this Country. The Kremlin isn't. rzemanfl Sep 2017 #26

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2017 #36

What does that even mean? Squinch Sep 2017 #74

Sorry I missed the response. What did the troll have to say? rzemanfl Sep 2017 #138

More importantly. though, how are you doing in the aftermath? Squinch Sep 2017 #147

Thanks. We were very lucky here. Branches down and fence damaged, leaves off of trees from rzemanfl Sep 2017 #149

Can't even imagine. Take care of your back. You don't get another! I always Squinch Sep 2017 #150

I have been using heat and ibuprofen. Being 70 years old doesn't help. rzemanfl Sep 2017 #153

I'm glad it's getting better. Enjoy the swim and do take it easy. This kind of event needs to Squinch Sep 2017 #154

True. Getting back into the swimming routine will help. n/t rzemanfl Sep 2017 #156

Not clever or subtle at all. R B Garr Sep 2017 #77

So The Young Turds get to establish purity tests comradebillyboy Sep 2017 #23

I don't care two fucks what a GOP funded has been working for Russian TV says...screwel him. Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #98

But it's OK for them to raise $20M in VC capital right? Maven Sep 2017 #24

What did Dean say in response? Docreed2003 Sep 2017 #25

Well, this is awkward. Ninsianna Sep 2017 #27

Have you ever donated? dogman Sep 2017 #32

That seems to be a thing that the purists just don't quite get. Hoist on their own petard. Ninsianna Sep 2017 #37

Exactly what this means, I would have to hear from him or his pac. dogman Sep 2017 #47

Agreed, but his wife was actually attacking Cory Booker a few months ago Ninsianna Sep 2017 #50

It's easier with Corey, he has an actual record to judge him by. dogman Sep 2017 #54

Cory's only been in office for 4 years, Ninsianna Sep 2017 #58

Cory has been in elected offie longer than 4 years. dogman Sep 2017 #66

Sure, he was elected in 2006, it's not like he's been in office since the 1970's Ninsianna Sep 2017 #81

You mean his vote on the symbolic amendment on drug importation ehrnst Oct 2017 #194

This message was self-deleted by its author ehrnst Oct 2017 #195

wth? druidity33 Sep 2017 #82

Yes, well *I* know that but a great many people hissing the word "corporatist" Ninsianna Sep 2017 #91

SHHHHHH!!!!!!! ehrnst Oct 2017 #193

even if they represent new york? mopinko Sep 2017 #28

He is a joke. nt LexVegas Sep 2017 #29

Oh piss off, Cenk BannonsLiver Sep 2017 #30

.... JHan Sep 2017 #33

As opposed to taking money from the Kremlin, 6000eliot Sep 2017 #31

their selective purity tests will be the death of us all. Which is why I ignore TYT JHan Sep 2017 #34

Yeah, I thought TYT was anathema around here ProudLib72 Sep 2017 #42

Some still post their vids. JHan Sep 2017 #53

+1 uponit7771 Sep 2017 #61

Why totally reject the concept, though? Ken Burch Sep 2017 #35

I work for a large corporation in an industry and for a company widely disliked on DU. tammywammy Sep 2017 #52

I'd personally be for allowing you to make small donations, say of $50 per candidate. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #57

I'm perfectly fine with the individual limits as they are. tammywammy Sep 2017 #87

to clarify, I meant $50 per candidate...not overall. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #119

So Tammy is limited to less than three-fifths of a person? TexasTowelie Sep 2017 #115

Where did THAT come from? Ken Burch Sep 2017 #118

Because there is no such thing as corporate "Wall Street money" going to candidates' campaigns. pnwmom Sep 2017 #127

AAH thanks for reminding me to catch his show later!! m-lekktor Sep 2017 #44

He was on Mark Thompson on Sirius--saying pretty much the same stuff asuhornets Sep 2017 #48

Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2017 #49

He was bought off a long time ago by Republicans.. Historic NY Sep 2017 #55

a conservative who also has an issue with the influence of money on the Republican party, who JCanete Sep 2017 #62

I respect their effort to get money out of politics. Its not like they are supporting republicans JCanete Sep 2017 #64

If they want to take money out of politics they need to slam Citizens United day and night. JHan Sep 2017 #83

That money affects both sides of the aisle is not equivocation. JCanete Sep 2017 #101

that's contradictory .. JHan Sep 2017 #110

how is that contradictory? I completely disagree. Democrats have an entirely different base that JCanete Sep 2017 #113

" because our party leaders are themselves also dependent on that influence. " JHan Sep 2017 #116

The opposition will always have more. Giving money to dems is big industries ways of JCanete Sep 2017 #124

No, TYT is not overtly supporting Republicans. TYT is taking money FROM Republicans, pnwmom Sep 2017 #169

How is getting money out of politics an issue that helps republicans? TYT isn't about to support any JCanete Sep 2017 #171

The issue in the OP, the group TYT was targeting, was money from individuals who work in Wall Street pnwmom Sep 2017 #174

I guarantee that's a simplification that doesn't look at some of the more significant details of how JCanete Sep 2017 #177

I guarantee you it isn't. TYT wasn't talking about corporations supporting PACS, pnwmom Sep 2017 #180

Is wall street worse than denying the armenian genocide ? JI7 Sep 2017 #65

Cenk who? RandySF Sep 2017 #70

I don't pay much attention ... LenaBaby61 Sep 2017 #78

Consider that means less money and more losses...hmm. Don't they work for RT? Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #94

...no JCanete Sep 2017 #105

Oh right they are funded by Buddy Roemer...a Republican. Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #108

And who do you think the CEO of MSNBC is? Some altruistic progressive? JCanete Sep 2017 #114

MSNBC is not funded by a Republican operative and GOP donor... Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #151

I've spelled out already why its different, and the CEO of MSNBC has far more control over JCanete Sep 2017 #168

Haven't we heard ENOUGH from this asshole? NastyRiffraff Sep 2017 #100

Oh my God, I don't care. RandySF Sep 2017 #107

Another blowhard telling Democrats how to vote and what to think. leftofcool Sep 2017 #111

Perfect example of cutting off your nose to spite your face. n/t Calista241 Sep 2017 #117

Right, so no New York politicians ever. Because employees of NY firms like Chase Bank, pnwmom Sep 2017 #126

You listen to Cenk Uyger? cwydro Sep 2017 #131

Cenk who? Itchinjim Sep 2017 #133

He is an idiot and ratfucker. Weekend Warrior Sep 2017 #139

He was terrible on Make it Plain. An arrogant asshole themaguffin Sep 2017 #142

That is where I heard it. It is clear to me what he wants, either his way or Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #172

Wall Street gets what it pays for and it is not good for you or for me. alarimer Sep 2017 #143

An accident? cwydro Sep 2017 #146

He's missing the forest for the trees Blue_Tires Sep 2017 #148

Cenk returned to his republican roots after Obama's election. He tried to mask it, but it was... Tarheel_Dem Sep 2017 #158

THAT in spades!!! (no pun) haveahart Sep 2017 #167

So, let's start by dropping Elizabeth Warren... brooklynite Sep 2017 #161

He is a wingnut and genocide denial obamanut2012 Sep 2017 #163

what genocide does he deny. That sounds like the right-wing shit you'd read in the comment JCanete Sep 2017 #170

Can't stand that fucking fool lillypaddle Sep 2017 #181

Anyone working for RT or the Intercept has pretty much sold their credibility ehrnst Oct 2017 #196

You Said It! Me. Oct 2017 #197