General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWe are in a war for our lives. The war is between the 1% elite and the 99%. You are hopelessly
naïve if you cant recognize this.
The 1% owns almost all of Congress. There are a few that may care about the 99% but they are only a few. The 1% owns the NSA, the FBI, the CIA. Why would you think any different? They are tools to be used, not to protect the 99%, but to keep us under their control.
It’s naïve to assume that the NSA is looking out for the 99%. Why would they? The people that run these organizations are either members of the 1% or are on retainer. Why would you think they give a shit about us?
We all want to believe that president Obama with his beautiful family and nice smile, is looking out for us. And in some areas he is doing his best. But in the areas that directly affect the 1%, like the domination of Wall Street’s, and the dominance of the intelligence agencies, he is failing. For whatever reason he has continued to use those that were in power under Bush. How can a Democrat knuckle under to those Republicans? Tim Geitner, Lawrence Summers, Ben Bernanke, William M. Daley, Jeff Immelt, Alan Simpson, Dave Cote, Jeb Bush, Robert Gates, Gen Stanley McChrystal, Jacob Lew, Jeremiah Norton, Gen Petraeus, John Brennen, Chuck Hegal, Michael Taylor, James Comey, James R. Clapper, Robert Mueller. All are authoritarian conservative Republicans.
Even though President Obama belongs to the 1% club, we might hope he is looking out for us instead of his own group. But why? Why would he choose us over his friends like Penny Pritzker, the female Mit Romney?
And in 2016 the 1% will make sure that the Democratic candidate is Ms. Clinton. They would prefer Chris Christie for president, of course but would settle for Ms. Clinton. They have the resources to decide on both candidates. You will be allowed to vote but both choices will be theirs.
Unfortunately the progressives not only have to battle the idiot Republicans, but also the conservative Democrats that carry water for the 1%.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)forestpath
(3,102 posts)perfect illustration of his mindset.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)To me.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Spot on.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)But how, realistically, do we make that come about? I'm asking in all seriousness because, realistic or not, I really want to see it happen.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)A whole lot of folks will be ready for Warren.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)And I say that as a two-time Obama voter.
AnnieK401
(541 posts)
sibelian
(7,804 posts)K+R
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)On this very board.
Yecccchhh.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)maybe he is. Which is both sad and frightening. 
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)decade or so, rather than on his current actions.
He opposed secret Free Trade agreements at one time, was for ending the Drug War, etc.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)By Western European standards he'd be a moderate conservative, even on domestic policy.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)and I don't remember that those who elected a Democratic Candidate wanted to see Republicans restored to power.
We just can't seem to get rid of Republicans even when we defeat them.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)all those zombie flicks are so popular.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
dkf
(37,305 posts)I will wait to see where Hillary stands but I think it is possible she too is on the wrong side of this. I don't know if I could trust her campaigning either. I would be more confident of a Wyden type.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)and a pinched-shut nose.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)I'll be an undervote.
Stinky The Clown
(67,761 posts)I hear that excuse over and over and over.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)You know appoint wall street , keep chimpies Dept of Justice,
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)He's been reaching under the table.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 1, 2013, 12:24 AM - Edit history (3)
These corporatists are just getting started here. But they have already impoverished and killed masses of human beings all over the world, for profit. We are not special to them.
Under corporate rule, this government is already assaulting us and thumbing its nose at us, over and over and over again...and they are just starting here. Vast majorities of Americans want to protect SS and Medicare. Both parties want to cut them. Americans overwhelmingly oppose austerity. Both parties shove it down our throats. Americans want to scale back military involvement. Our government bangs the drums on Syria and Iran and starts proxy drone wars all over the Middle East. Virtually nothing coming out of this government bears any resemblance whatsoever to what the people have said we want and need, for quite some time now.
Secret trade deals. "Supercommittees." Fake crises. Closed door deals. Attacks on whistleblowers. Attacks on the free press that is supposed to be our primary check against government abuse. Attacks on peaceful protesters. Dismantling of the Constitution. All under a common theme of profit for corporations.
And now a surveillance infrastructure whose capabilities dwarf that of any totalitarian state in history.
This may be our last chance to save ourselves. Thank you, Edward Snowden. Keep in mind that states that build surveillance infrastructures also build propaganda infrastructures. We will hear incessant reassurance that everything is all right.
It isn't.
This may be our last chance.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)....and that we had prevailed, with the election of Obama.
Hard reality. We were suckered by TPTB.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)hurts
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)I feel bad about that. Understatement.
totodeinhere
(13,056 posts)
BobbyBoring
(1,965 posts)I thought the nightmare was over!
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)It may be
rwsanders
(2,594 posts)Please add:
raping the environment
attempting to privatize all the necessities of life (food, water)
(also I think "We are not special to them" needs all caps and bold)
tex-wyo-dem
(3,190 posts)We in the 99% are viewed by the corporate oligarchy as not people, but consumers. Billions of us around the world suffer and die from their actions, but those are basically viewed as collateral damage to the capitalist freight train. As long as their profits and revenue streams are secure, all is good.
Basically they couldn't give a shit about us.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)This is what V.I. Lenin warned workers about over a century ago. This is what Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels talked about.
It's here. Now the question becomes, what do WE do?
Civilization2
(649 posts)The tools are already available to us, we need only pick them up and use them.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023139717
We can make changes without the need to change the corrupted system,. bottom up is the way forward. As we withdraw support and resources from feeding their sick corporate system it loses power and real democracy and the people gain it.
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)' you can't expect a pig to slaughter itself'
Pig= MIC/ prison/ corporate/ banking system-- they are armed to the teeth and itching for another fight.
We have to declare independence from them, boycott, get off of their grid and create another!! I think around the world countries are trying to unplug from these people and trade amongst themselves.
I am hoping this is in our future-- because we need to create, teach and build a better future than this Hell.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)unfortunately, I don't think that it will work long term. As soon as any of these measures become popular, the political structure of the capitalist system will outlaw them. Which will put the practitioners outside of the law anyway. Again.
Taking political power and changing to a system that will SUPPORT bottom up changes rather than top down status quo is the only way to assure the long term changes that are needed.
Civilization2
(649 posts)Yes, we do need to see the power structures dis-empowered, I see building alternatives to them, more productive then marching in the street to "protest" them. Both tactics are needed of course,. but protesting AGAINST is tiring and largely fruitless,. where building systems we need is uplifting and immediately useful.
By all means fight the power, just don't forget that if you have no alternative to offer, there will be little change.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)Maybe the protesters should be hiding behind trees.
Civilization2
(649 posts)We can change this,. we must; Degrowth, Permaulture, Slow Money, Relocalize, etc.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)We really need to face up to it.
vanlassie
(5,663 posts)truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...i just don't think that many people realize it yet...
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)they almost always govern and create policy that appeases the Right. So whoever the Democratic candidate is .. they will be wanting your vote ... but like Obama, they will not be held accountable for flip-flops on their promises. And so it goes. When on earth will the American public wake up and take to the streets in millions like Brazil, Eygpt, Turkey and more? Are we so complacent and preoccupied with our smart phones and social networking that we're allowing this country to be take over by Fascism? I would think so.
October
(3,363 posts)They campaign as populists or liberals. I well remember being infuriated during GWB's campaign. Never expected to feel let down by Obama.
They're all crooks! Just like my grandparents always said.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)totodeinhere
(13,056 posts)of them to have any real power and make any difference. But just watch what they do if Senator Warren tries to get the 2016 Democratic nomination and it looks like she might succeed.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)Admiral Yamamoto is reputed to have said after leading the Japanese victory at Pearl Harbor: "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." Our own elites are arrogant and short sighted enough to make the same mistake, and they will.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)the NSA would tag this thread?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)True that!
The only times we enter the thoughts of the 1% are when they are looking for ways to screw us, need donations, or want votes from us.
LuvNewcastle
(16,834 posts)When I was in school, the Cold War was still going on and we talked a lot about the Soviet Union and how their system differed from ours. We were taught that the Soviets had elections, but the candidates had to be members of the Communist Party, so they really had no choices at all. I wonder what other countries teach about the American system now, with our Democrats and Republicans.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)LuvNewcastle. The thing we hated we have become.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Thanks for saying it so clearly and forcefully.
MuseRider
(34,095 posts)and thank you. Kick with sadness but kick for importance.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)
defacto7
(13,485 posts)and a sigh....
baldguy
(36,649 posts)You are hopelessly naive if you can't recognize this.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Wish I had thought of that reasonable explanation.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Clapper and Mueller.
It is interesting that the deniers choose Republicans like Clapper and Mueller over Democrats Sen Wyden and Sen Udall.
NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)amateur hour again?
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Only people with their heads up their butts are your friends.
Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)Please explain.
Hopelessly Naive
Apophis
(1,407 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 1, 2013, 12:34 PM - Edit history (1)
Kim Jong Un's? Castro's? Morsi's?
totodeinhere
(13,056 posts)
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)
Kurovski
(34,655 posts)
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)You are so spot on. K&R
hay rick
(7,588 posts)Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)It's what happens when governments push people too far. Naive people think it can't happen here but it can and will as long as our government continues to refuse to prosecute criminals that head up massive criminal operations.
polly7
(20,582 posts)spectacular as this as long as we're not suffering to the extent they are. We'll sit on our asses and let the (mostly OUR) 1% f* every other human on the planet as long as we're still semi-comfortable.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)halls of Congress and the White House and even in local government where developers fund campaigns and then build enormous, ugly, unlivable housing for us.
Money should not be so important in campaigns.
Dustlawyer
(10,494 posts)committed to COMPLETE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM (CCFR)! This would bring the fight on before they are really ready if we could organize it soon!
JEB
(4,748 posts)I read an article over at Common dreams that ties in nicely.
Published on Saturday, June 29, 2013 by Campaign for America's Future
“Believe It or Not!”13 Mindblowing Facts About America’s Tax-Dodging Corporations
by Richard Eskow
A judicious writer avoids adjectives like “mindblowing,” especially when covering political or economic issues. But no other word seems to describe the stunning reality of corporate taxation in modern America, which cries out for the italics-heavy, exclamation-point-driven format made famous by Ripley’s Believe It or Not.(Photo: Denise/cc/flickr)
Stylistic overkill? Read these thirteen facts and you may change your mind
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/06/29
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)At every opportunity mouthy TV Republicans tell us, "US corporate taxes are the highest in the world!" And I have heard President Obama say, "US corporate taxes are too high."
We have a lot of work to do.
Chaco Dundee
(334 posts)That has to be the most thought out and comprehensive opinion I hacve read in a while.let us see how well the rest of the world will deal with those facts.
Coccydynia
(198 posts)TRoN33
(769 posts)Is why most of Democrat voters would prefer to have Elizabeth Warren over Hillary Clinton. We know that she is obviously a part of 1% and doesn't really have any interest to be there for 99% of Americans.
Democracy are the biggest laughingstock. Its an international joke. That is why after W. Bush years, I lost my patriotism toward the U.S. flag because I realize that the plutocracy and dominionist elitists who controls Washington doesn't give any ounce of shit about us. They considered people with talents as a threat to their goals of world domination which would be movie stars, sport players (who aren't a donor to Republican cause), Universities' professors, independent politicians, musical conductors, well-educated people (this is the reasons why we are in deep debt because being educated is a threat to their goals), and free-will people.
Unfortunately, the 1% are winning.
ancianita
(35,933 posts)as ILLEGAL. Rigging in favor of center left lulls most of us away from the fact of rigging for yet another four years, but the reality is insidious and eroding the democratic process while the theatrics and narrative of the 1% prevail.
Control the voting process consistently and we can begin to control more of everything else that's "bought."
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)lost.
ancianita
(35,933 posts)no matter how long the counting takes, completely run by the public and neither party over a three day voting holiday weekend. With foreign or UN and non-partisan international lawyer observers. No police,military or other 'security' may interfere at any point of the vote count in any of America's 3033 counties except at the request of voting precinct captains or sealed container vote transporters. All votes will be stored in designated, secure locations. Libraries might be a good first storage spot.
On the ballot must be national referenda questions:
1. To leave or remove all non-public money from campaigning.
2. To pass or a Women's Constitutional ERA Amendment.
3. To reinstate Glass-Steagall.
4. To Dissolve Congress and hold special state elections by Nov. 30.
5. To Elect the Attorney General of the U.S., whose first act will be to arrest thieves of the US Treasury per evidence, regardless of intent; whose second act will be to charge Interpol with bring to the US all named holders of US cash over $1,000,000 in bank accounts of foreign banking jurisdictions.
6. Drop the voting age to full-time public high school seniors in good grade and attendance standing. Non-enrolled students must be eighteen.
7. Allow or disallow all released prison convicts to vote.
Sure, people can shoot holes in this, but we must start somewhere. We must. Occupy's first five general demands were also a good start. But I like the public control demand of all future elections, from length of campaigns, to how much money the public allows each party spend, to how, who and what gets on the ballot. No more J.O.B. lawyering for some longass slog. We must drag out our toughest bulldog lawyers -- get any lawyers from all over the world who have law degrees from US universities for their help.
No laughing. We must, must agree as a country to fight to totally control the machinery of voting and counting, or the free and fair is just fairy tale talk.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)ancianita
(35,933 posts)taking control of local voting machinery? I say not much. Rights are what the people can enforce. Voting and vote counting rights begin at all 3,033 county levels. 3,033 Occupies need to take over these county voting offices.
ancianita
(35,933 posts)The People either make a deal with county leaders to scrap rigged voting machines, or The People do what they have to do to end voting machine hegemony in the voting process.
*county
totodeinhere
(13,056 posts)They will throw us a bone once in a while such as the LGBT rights decisions because that issue doesn't directly affect the 1%. But that's it.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)That's right.. Primary those effers out in 2014! We have to start GTVO right now.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)
- The Matrix is not merely metaphor. You are hopelessly naïve if you can't recognize this......rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)You are definitely NOT hopelessly naive.
- We are ALL naive about some things, but it ain't hopeless unless you're not awake......
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Look around the world. Everybody's waking up.
We've wanted change for so long now. We've looked everywhere for the answers.
We thought they could be had in leaders, governments, institutions.
We now know that the answers were in ourselves all the time. One look away in a mirror.
Now that it's here, many can't recognize it. They fear the changes.
They'll look askance at the most horrid of things done in their name.
Kidnapping. Torture. Murder.
It took such a shock to wake the first of us up to the realization that this was bullshit.
Some have an advantage now, in that they're able to see what is happening more objectively than others.
You have your eyes cracked open. You may feel free to open them all the way now.
Once you see fully, it will serve you in the days to come.
Once the changes begin, it will seem to be happening too rapidly for most.
Most will try to maintain the old systems, the old paradigms.
But their time has come and gone.
- ''Chaos is required, for the veils to fall down.''
V: No. This is only the land of take-what-you-want. Anarchy means "without leaders", not "without order". With anarchy comes an age or ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordnung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course... This is not anarchy, Evey. This is chaos. ~V for Vendetta
me b zola
(19,053 posts)
jimlup
(7,968 posts)But rec'ed it anyway!
Well stated!
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)Monsanto.
If you must look to "leaders", there are only a few Democrats who appear willing to genuinely take on the plutonomy. If not, join with the people of this country demanding genuine democracy over corporations and the rich!
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)to assume that the 2% is on our side, or the 3% or even the 5%.
You think a family making over $177,000 is on the same side as me? Is in the same boat as me? That with a $6,000 bi-weekly paycheck that they are just living paycheck to paycheck? That most of them sympathize with the poor and lower-paid working class?
And so many people wanna tout Elizabeth Warren, but as Senator elect, she did not do anything, didn't take a stand at all about the fiscal cliff. I mean, one sure thing to tilt the favor towards the rich, is permanent tax cuts which heavily favor the rich. I don't see how that tiger gets put back in the bag no matter who is President. Not unless we can miraculously change 60% of Congress. Or maybe even just 20% of Congress, which would be unprecedented and might, just might, put the fear of the mob into the rest of them.
But as for the NSA, I am not convinced it makes all that much difference in the lives of the typical American. Is the NSA working for "we the people"? Well, I do not have much of a grasp on what they are doing one way or another, for good or ill. Were most of the victims of 011 members of the top 5%? Did the lost jobs from that attack impact the top 10% more than it did the bottom 90%? Insofar as they keep bombs from blowing up, planes from slamming into buildings, water supplies from being poisoned, bridges from being blown up, etc., etc., etc. Well "domestic tranquility benefits us all. It is not really their fault, per se, that the society they are protecting is so unequal.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)It is not really their fault, per se, that the society they are protecting is so unequal.
The 99% cannot change the problems that arise from the serious, very serious unequal distribution of wealth in our society. Only the 1% have the means to do anything about it.
Why should they?
The average person in the 1% feels that he or she deserves what he or she has.
But, the issue is not who deserves what. The issue is what kind of society do we want to live in. I want to live in a society that has opportunity for everyone -- the opportunity to find meaningful work, to earn a livable wage (a wage that can provide clean air and water, heat in winter, perhaps cooling in summer, refrigeration, sewage system of some sort, electricity, education, decent clothing, health care, dental care, eye care, some healthy recreation and fun) and to contribute to society and, perhaps raise a small family and own a modest amount of property. If we are to have a society in which everyone has the opportunity for those basics in life, then those in the poor and middle classes have to get a larger share of the wealth.
Only the rich can arrange for that in the economic and political reality we now have. The rest of us don't have the influence or the means to change much.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)certainly we out-number them and can out-vote them.
Collectively, the 99% also has more money than the 1% - lots more. The 1% gets perhaps 22% of the national income, leaving 78% for the 99%.
Two problems with that though
1. disposable income - the 1% may have more of that, because the bottom 80% uses most of our money to pay bills. Whereas the 1% has enough money left over to buy some Senators and maybe a President.
2. Again, the fact that the 2%, and 3% and even 8% are NOT, in general, on our side. The 99% has more income than the 1%, but the top 25% has more money, collectively than the bottom 75% by 31.8% to 68.2% in 2006 http://www.koch2congress.com/5.html
But that is what made BushCo so insidiously clever. The Bush tax cuts were not just for the 1%. They gave significant sums to those in the top 10% and top 20%, and THAT is why they are still with us today. Not because of the 1% stepping on those below them. No, because the top 20% are also quite willing to step on those below them (in general, there are, of course, many exceptions, just no enough exceptions for those of us at the bottom to win). When the Bush tax cuts became permanent, Mitt Romeny got almost a million a year in tax cuts. Why did that happen? I would say NOT because Romney types run the country, but because the same provision that gives Romeny his millions ALSO gives thousands of dollars to other members of the top 20%. They want those thousands and don't really care if Romney gets his millions.
The permanent Bush-Obama tax cuts give $1.3 trillion over the next decade to the top 5%, but "only $666 trillion of that goes to the top 1%, and another $1,1 trillion to the rest of the top 20%. With only $700 billion going to the bottom 60%. All that money is flowing uphill, not because the top 1% is pulling it, but because the other 19% of the top 20% wants, NO, DEMANDS, their $1.7 trillion in tax cuts. And if that means the top 1% get some $666 billion in tax cuts, then in the words of Hard Harry "so be it" and if that means we gotta cut food stamps and social security, then, again, so be it. Woe to the politician that tries to take my $5,000 tax cut away. Not only will I NOT donate to him/her, but I will donate instead to their opponent who promises to restore my tax cut.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)secrets? China. You bet we're hacking them. And your friend just helped the 1% move MORE of our jobs there. You know why? Because you are partly right. This IS about the 1% and who they want to use, abuse and throw away. Our workers have been thrown away like so much trash so our 1% can exploit them in China and Bangladesh. And they don't LIKE the government HERE knowing what they're up to.
JFC. You'd think you could SEE that. It's so obvious.
Calista241
(5,586 posts)are we talking about the CEO's of the Fortune 500? Fortune 2000?
or are we just talking about the deadbeat inheritors of other people's fortunes?
Initech
(100,040 posts)The oligarchs are stealing all of our money and using it against us. And it's happening all over the fucking planet. It's not limited to Wall St. - it's Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Brazil, really - pick a place, any place. It's a system that was setup under Nixon and Reagan - and it's an inherently evil one that must be stopped at all costs. 
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Spot on my friend!
SPOT ON!
-p
David__77
(23,334 posts)The 1% elite on top, and a 1% conscious political opposition. The question is who can mobilize and/or neutralize other, secondary forces more successfully. It certainly does not all boil down to elite vs "people."
AdHocSolver
(2,561 posts)First of all, President Obama is not part of the one percent. He only works for the one percent.
That said, he does care about the 99 percent, but he can only disagree to a certain extent with the powers that be.
History can explain what is happening in this country, and what needs to happen to reverse the trend toward economic and political collapse.
We are experiencing a repetition of the 1920's and the 1930's by the membership of the one percent.
The one percent are not totally monolithic. Their are two factions. the "reasonable" one percent and the right wing "rabid" one percent.
There were two groups of one percenters back in the 1920's and 1930's. One group was headed by crooked bankers and Wall Street types who supported what was happening in Germany at that time.
The other group of the one percenters opposed the lawlessness and crooked behavior of that group. They promoted one of their own to be the president, a guy named Franklin D. Roosevelt.
The rabid wing of the one percenters decided to pull a coup d'etat and approached Major General Smedley Butler to lead it. He exposed the plot and it never happened.
The lesson from history is that it would take a member of the one percent who was backed by the moderate centrists and who opposed the policies of the right wing in order to prevent economic and political collapse. This is the type of people we need to find and elect to office.
There is no way a progressive could get elected, and no way anyone could successfully fight the "rabid" wing of the one percenters without the support of the moderate centrist wing of the one percent.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)AdHocSolver
(2,561 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)the top 1% by wealth. I am sure he is in the club. I am willing to say that, at least to a point, he cares for the 99%. Although his nomination of Penny Pritzker makes me pause.
But as you say, that might not matter. I dont believe he has much power. He seems to have some in areas that dont affect the 1% Elite, but the only reason I can see that he appoints Republicans to power positions is that he hasnt a choice. Presidents come and go, but the 1% Elite Cabal that runs the country pretty much stays the same.
I do agree we need to find members of the 1% that will fight for our freedom and liberties. But I dont agree that the centrists will carry the fight. We have had 30 years of centrists rule and it's almost killed us. We need people like Sen Warren, Rep Grayson, Rep. Duckworth, Sen Sanders, Sen Wyden, Sen Udall, etc.
We need progressive actions like the New Deal. FDR wasnt progressive but the programs that brought us out of the Depression were.
AdHocSolver
(2,561 posts)The progressives that you mentioned for president could never get elected, and at best, they would be figureheads fronting for the real power brokers.
Moreover, we have not had thirty years of centrist rule. We have had centrist-appearing administrations who were doing the bidding of the far right and, at best, promoting a rearguard action against the extreme right wing agenda.
FDR's agenda was to save capitalism by defusing a desperate population that had nothing more to lose after the economic collapse and would be ripe for engaging in a massive rebellion.
The New Deal wasn't progressive. It was centrist and designed to prevent the collapse of the existing economic and political order.
Essentially, Roosevelt was acting to prevent another Civil War.
Forget judging where the power lies by the amount of money these people have. The power lies with those who can push through their agenda, and the evidence suggests that the power is currently held by the far right.
Time is running out. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. To solve a problem, one first has to understand what the problem is and then devise a viable solution that can fix it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)These were very progressive especially for that era.
Yes time is running out. That's exactly why we need drastic measures not the wishy-washy centrist policies that get us one step ahead while we are being pushed back 10 steps. No one is expecting "perfect", but it's a nice goal. Ending poverty, for example. Is that so radical?
Why would you think Ms. Clinton can do what her husband and Pres Obama cant?
AdHocSolver
(2,561 posts)A socialistic program would have nationalized the factories, nationalized the banks, taken over the Federal Reserve and made it a true central bank, and made all workers permanent employees of the federal government under the civil service system.
The government would place all citizens under a single payer health care system with government run hospitals and medical clinics paid for out of taxes. That would represent a socialist system
That is not what happened. The FDIC was designed to bail out capitalist banks who lost their assets through incompetence or malfeasance.
The Glass-Steagall Act was designed to separate commercial banks from investment banks so that the investment banks couldn't take over the commercial banks and gamble away the depositors' assets on the stock market and other scams (which is exactly what happened when Glass-Steagall was repealed.)
"Make work" schemes are as much a capitalistic practice as it is for any other economic system. Projects like "the bridge to nowhere", and the continued manufacture of nonfunctional or obsolete weapons systems solely for profit are prime examples of capitalist make work schemes. At least the New Deal projects worked for the benefit of the country as they involved building infrastructure such as roads.
Drastic measures are not needed and won't solve the underlying problems. We need to restore the New Deal measures instituted by FDR and make the crooked schemes of the bankers and Wall Street illegal, and prosecute them when they break the law.
Another important task is to renegotiate NAFTA and other trade agreements, and, in general, take the power over international trade away from the multinational corporations such as Monsanto.
Other tasks include rewriting the tax code to eliminate the use of offshore tax havens, undo the effects of the concept that "corporations are people", and eliminate the "revolving door" between the corporations and the government and the military.
This is just the beginning, and we need supporters with the credentials and knowledge of the elite one percent to lead a reform of the system.
As for Bill Clinton, with pushing NAFTA, repeal of Glass Steagall, and other of his "accomplishments", he did more damage to the 99 percent than Reagan. I wouldn't expect any better from Hillary.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)And especially what you say here, "As for Bill Clinton, with pushing NAFTA, repeal of Glass Steagall, and other of his "accomplishments", he did more damage to the 99 percent than Reagan. I wouldn't expect any better from Hillary."
It might sound like a conspiracy theory but I think the entire Monica Lewinsky thing was an orchestrated media circus (smokescreen) to distract us from a damaging legislative agenda that in fact did more harm than Reagan. "The Right" has had this nation by the ass for a long time and that has not changed.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)He's a total tool of the top one percent posing as a Democrat.
There are oodles of "Democrats" in Congress and in state legislatures who are fakes.
DLevine
(1,788 posts)
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)Hope and Change - Don't Get Fooled Again.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)But it is
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Your post is excellent, and outlines the status quo very very well. But there is one word I would have changed.
Unfortunately the progressives not only have to battle the idiot Republicans, but also the conservative Democrats that carry water for the 1%.
Change that one word to Statist. Because Nancy Pelosi is hardly conservative, and is a big supporter of the NSA/FBI/Does anyone know all the letters that should go into this thing?/CIA/DHS spying program. So it is not just the Republicans, and the Blue Dog Democrats, it's many that we herald as Liberals who are convinced that such things are necessary to look strong on the war on Terror.
Those people believe that anything the State does is a good thing, which means they are really working for the 1%, the Intelligence Industrial Complex, The Military Industrial Complex, and not working for those of us who tapped their name on voting machine.
Go back and look at the record, a lot of "good liberal" representatives voted for the PATRIOT ACT reauthorization and so it isn't just the blue dog conservative Democrats that need to be jerked back to the party line on this.
Senate Vote on reauthorization from 2005. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/109-2006/s29
House Vote on reauthorization in 2005. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/109-2005/h627
In 2011, a new President, a President who had said that he would oppose the PATRIOT ACT when he was fighting tooth and nail to get the nomination. The act is again up for reauthorization. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2011/h376
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2011/s84
In 2005 with 9-11 still fresh in the minds, and the nation clamoring for action. 251 votes were cast by the House in favor.
In 2011, now a new President, one who we said was a good man, a good moral man who would oppose it. This cooling public support for the PATRIOT ACT was obvious given the support that Candidate Obama got during the Primary. In this era of cooling public support, when tolerance of the NSL's and the whole FISA thing was already starting to cause rumbles of discontent, what change happened in the vote? How could it have passed, it must have been such a close thing. 250 votes in favor. One less vote than in 2005.
Passed again. Passed again by God.
corkhead
(6,119 posts)I thought Nancy Pelosi's condemnation of Snowden was bone chilling.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023009756
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Leonard Cohen is a musical genius.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)H2O Man
(73,506 posts)Recommended.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)The country has been taken so far to the right that they think Obama is a socialist. He and Huffington and many new shuffle Dems are moderate Republicans from the early 90s, nothing more.
hue
(4,949 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)There is a whole lot of that "hopelessly naïve" going around
Great point about Ms. Clinton and C. Christie. These two are our acceptable choices. That is why we must resist them.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"Hope" is the thing with feathers—
That perches in the soul—
And sings the tune without the words—
And never stops—at all—
And sweetest—in the Gale—is heard—
And sore must be the storm—
That could abash the little Bird
That kept so many warm—
I've heard it in the chillest land—
And on the strangest Sea—
Yet, never, in Extremity,
It asked a crumb—of Me.
Emily Dickinson, because cynicism and despair never liberated anyone. Gunna free da people with sarcasm and a message of hopelessness? Bon chance!
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)
polynomial
(750 posts)“Now, a surveillance infrastructure whose capabilities dwarf that of any totalitarian state in history.” Reading that from the comment from the person, Woo me with science, is possible to help open debate that flows to the real story mainstream media suppresses. Here goes;
Telecommunications patterns have been researched for decades. Adding to that university systems across America have with full funding through tax dollars developed ways to sift data to determine mental, economic, living patterns of individuals. The Irony is the middle class, and poor tax dollars have funded the very secret systems that are used against the citizen.
Sound crazy, yes; it is the wildest slice of hypocrisy ever indulged in that those that represent America through Congress and the Senate are caught up in a decadent spiral down by lobby money that is a fair legal entity endorsed by our supreme court.
Money seems to carry an auditory capability that not only takes a space time continuum; but also moves molecules in a way that yours ears hear something. Money talks. So everyone should try an experiment by putting a stake of money down next to you and try to have a reasonable conversation with the stake of money. LOL. Money does not have to move air molecules; it moves mental molecules that suggest saying spend me.
On the other hand, Many will agree that it is possible to create by non-intrusive development via telecommunications data collected can profile by synthesis a person’s DNA structure. DNA information can profile medical, criminal, economic, liability, or even used as marketing information. Many submit that a third party to access of this kind of information is a serious flaw in the intelligence paradigm.
This done by secret methods likely has shown that Snowden likely interprets as a violation of Constitutional rights in a massive way.
Please understand that I totally respect the system and many of the people in it but there is always a chance a huge mistake could be made in crafting legislation by both parties especially in this era of war that is indirect and seems to ongoing with no end. Here we have an anomaly where America needs vital information to thwart terror to protect the citizen. On the other had completely opens the citizen to unscrupulous third party crime. Here, Booz Allen Hamilton a private agency with serious ties to Arab investors that could be terrorist is a security flaw, totally not good.
Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)And the only way to unite the 99% is to lift the curtain. We must expose the 911 lies.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)WARNING: Lifting this Curtain can be hazardous to your health. -NSA
Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)There are some things in this video that I find very interesting. What are the chances that the two planes that hit the towers crossed paths at exactly the same time and just happened to shut off their transponders at that point? In other words, the planes were stacked one on top of the other, and this happened over the Stewart AFB. I'd say the odds against this happening are astronomical.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)For which you have no proof other than your general feelings of negativity towards your fellow humans.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)For which you close your eyes blindly to what's actually happening, either because you don't want to see it or because you have a vested interest in NOT seeing it.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)I sincerely doubt it'll be the last.
datasuspect
(26,591 posts)i can understand.
willful ignorance, not so much.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)Also anyone who has a say over the NSA itself, or the interests of the 1%
Most of the political figures who matter have been wiretapped and profiled by NSA. Not only them, but their staff; not only in D.C., but in their home districts. He didn't say specifically, but it follows that their families wouldn't be excluded from that.
He said this practice is systemic, and the ones he knows about personally are naturally only the tip of the iceberg. He elaborated on those he knows of from his own direct knowledge, to give us an idea of the kinds of people NSA is focusing on. Below is the list of those that he happened to mention in this interview. (He did say there were more he could name, but the interview went on to other things.) First he spoke in general of job categories, then he named some names, including Barack Obama in 2004. Yes, he knows that, he held the wiretap in his own hand and saw it with his own eyes:
journalists and news agencies
high-ranking military officers
members of Congress - Senate and House, both parties, especially those on the Intelligence Committees, Armed Services Committees, and Judiciary Committees
congressional staff
judges, 1 on the Supreme Court; 2 former FISA court judges
State Department officials
Executive Branch, including in the White House
anti-war groups
civil rights groups
US international corporations
Banks and financial firms
NGO's like the Red Cross
He names some by name
Barack Obama in 2004
Hillary Clinton
Sen. Diane Feinstein
Sen. Orrin Hatch
Sen. Patrick Leahy
Sen. Carl Levin
Rep. James Saxton
Rep. Peter Hoekstra
Rep. Tom Davis
Sen. Henry Waxman
Sen. Jay Rockefeller
Sen. John McCain
Sen. Evan Bayh
Gen. Colin Powell
Gen. Eric Shinseki
Gen. David Petraeus
He said that the one Supreme Court judge he saw an order for was Alito, but that his coworkers still inside the NSA say that all 9 have been tapped.
He is very worried about the opportunity NSA has to blackmail political figures, in fact he says that is principally why he became a whistlblower. The capability is certainly there, which is a problem in itself.
Going by what we have seen, of good people such as POTUS changing their positions against the interest of the 99%, this would explain a lot. It is entirely likely that we have not just a situation of money buying people off, but of the Surveillance State blackmailing those who can't be bought.
I think back to the very first news story after PO was elected, and it was the one about Jesse Jackson Jr. being arrested through a wiretap. I think it's possible that could have been meant to be a message to PO. I don't know that it's a fact (of course) but it is possible, that such blackmailing is going on. And the fact that it's possible, is a problem. The potential for blackmail has always been recognized as a security risk. Now we have that to the nth degree within our own government.
Below is Tice's interview from June 19th a few weeks ago. I'd post it from a different source but Tice said that other outlets have been afraid to have him on, and have even backed out of his recent scheduled appearances at the last minute. I started the video at 45 minutes in, where he starts talking about what's in this post and it continues to the end of the tape. But the whole thing is worth listening to. This man knows, and what he's saying is no joke.
Edit: apparently the link won't start where I wanted it to, so just go to 45:50 to find where he begins talking about this subject.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)We've seen no restraint, or any unwillingness to cross any line from these people before, so why would we expect that from them now? They don't go after and create these capabilities, not to use them.
It's only common sense that they did not mine 500 billion "transactions" as they did in the year 2012 alone, just to track a small number of terrorists. Clearly, they are coming after us the public in mass.
The targeting of our political leaders though is something that I simply hadn't thought about before. That makes it a much worse picture.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)We've seen this with John Conyers, Dick Durban, Harry Reid, Henry Waxman, Leahy, Levin and so many other Progressive Dems. They would come out supporting activist Democrats and then either have to eventually apologize for a comment, back out of support for an amendment or bill at the last minute either in Committee or final vote.
We've often wondered what Obama said to Dennis Kucinich on that plane ride that caused him to vote for the ACA without the public option.
Those of us who've been on this site since the early 2000's have seen time and time again what looked like sell out's at the last minute by House and Senate Dems that we thought were with us against what the Bush/Cheney crowd was doing. But, along the way something would happen and their position would suddenly change.
If they have been monitored by NSA/Private Contractors then it would certainly say that Blackmail is a strong possibility for their sudden shifts in support at crucial times. It wouldn't have to be something they had even done that could be held against them but family members whose actions could cause scandal....and they didn't want to have to see someone close to them be put through investigation and the ongoing publicity that their being an elected official would bring.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)Sometimes it might only be "watering down" legislation etc. Frankly, thinking back on it I have to wonder about the midnight Phil Gramm CFTC exploit that Clinton signed on his way out of office... effectively handing our economy to the bankers, and not only ours but the world's.
Between the fact that so much money has to be raised to run for office on one hand, and this surveillance sort of thing on the other hand, a lot of people could become very pliable.
If blackmail per se hasn't happened yet, we can bet that it will happen at some point in the future. The NSA has our leaders by the throat, that's for sure. And the rest of us too.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)would explain. Easy to scoop up Elected Officials names and then target them.. They know who they e-mail, skype, speak with...all the phone numbers. "Connecting the Dots" was what they were doing ..IF you were a Target. And with the Private Contractors collecting they could sell it to Wall Street, Bankers and all kinds of entities which might be seeking to "influence" legislation in favor of the 1%.
This is why the Snowden revelations are important. If it can be done...it is being done and he reveals the possibilities of what Massive Surveillance sitting there for years could be exploited for nefarious uses.
bigtree
(85,977 posts)Last edited Tue Jul 2, 2013, 07:39 AM - Edit history (2)
Our challenge as members of the majority working class has always been to achieve recognition and a voice above the 'elites.' The fact that there is a minority of rich people able to influence our politics and block the will of the majority has been the mantra of our party since the Dixicrats became republicans.
It always amazes me how folks can speak of these candidates as if there isn't going to be a mass of voters supporting a Clinton candidacy in the end (if she runs) based on the exact same pragmatics that has propelled each and every one of our nominees toward victory. The shame of it is, that the candidate who would carry an unabashed, unvarnished progressive agenda into the primary (or even the general, outside of the Democratic party) has had virtually zero success in getting anywhere near the presidency and people just as concerned about the issues you raised have made that judgment, time and time again, and refused to cast a vote in the end for a candidate who is clearly going to lose to the republican nominee.
That's been the reality, and the presidential candidate who advances will be based more on that reality than some nefarious scheming by the elites to force people to vote for Hillary Clinton. You claim that 'the 1% will make sure that the Democratic candidate is Ms. Clinton,' without any acknowledgement of the millions of average, 99%ers who will work their tails off to make that happen, for the reason I stated above and more.
And, don't ignore the fact that these 'conservative' Democratic candidates most often come out of conservative states and districts. Yeah, it sucks to have to compete with them, but it's going to still be a political reality, so I'm not sure what your point is. It's not as if I can just reach over from my generally liberal state and make a progressive candidate win in these regions.
What you describe has been the challenge our party has faced since I first began to pay attention in politics. We get the government that folks out there elect. It's still going to be our job to try and find a way to get these politicians (and voters) to support and advance our progressive concerns and initiatives. Pointing out the obvious, generational class-struggle to a community of Democrats is pablum. Get out there and work the political system, from within and without, to effect the changes you want to see. It isn't as if time and progress has just stood still over these inequitable decades.
CanonRay
(14,084 posts)K&R and thanks for saying this. Reality sucks.
Civilization2
(649 posts)
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
KansDem
(28,498 posts)Are progressives/liberals more pacifist? Do they believe in working within the system?
Right wingers sure don't seem to shy away from violence...
Joe Miller On The Issues: What He Has To Say About Guns, Hate Crimes, Social Security And Abortion
...and as the sign says, "Dictators Prefer Unarmed Citizens"
Dustlawyer
(10,494 posts)Fight for COMPLETE CAMPAIGN FINNCE REFORM (CCFR)! This would be the fight for control over the future of our country! The response will be swift and hard b/c they will not give up control w/o a fight! OWS caught them off guard, it won't happen again!
RC
(25,592 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_Pritzker
How can anyone on DU think this is a good thing?
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)They can refer to themselves what they will. They can bemoan the good works done by monetary support of corporations and hedge funds. They can never silence the voice inside them that speaks to them of the works they back and the legacy they own.
It's right there in the streets. Mom and Pops replaced by big box corporate stores. In the loss of quality education. In the loss of social services. In the eyes of every mentally ill person wandering alone. In the indignity those entrapped by the system feel in every stare. In the sludge covering the sea life gasping for air. In the shrieks of a drone strike. In the holowing and gutting of virtually everything our ancestors fought and died for.
Anyone can stand up for common decency and for treating people, animals and the planet with respect. The only first step is not standing with those who stand against it. Or as someone once said. "You must be the change you want to see in the world."
Response to rhett o rick (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
kimbutgar
(21,055 posts)While we complain about how the 1% is crushing us our neighbors, coworkers and relatives vote for these cretins. They are so brainwashed they vote and donate to causes that ultimately hurt them. Those are the people we have to reach and de program them. Until them the vise of the 1% will end up destroying us and taking away any rights we had. The sum premed did a lot of damage last week under our noses. Giving immunity to big pharma, taking away the ability to file lawsuits and other heinous things. It's his article will make you ill.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dont-let-doma-fool-you--the-supreme-court-is-restricting-your-rights/2013/06/28/cd0afa1c-de85-11e2-b94a-452948b95ca8_story2.htm
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)
Teamster Jeff
(1,598 posts)Apophis
(1,407 posts)But people will be duped and believe there's a huge difference.
The good thing about the 99% vs the 1% is that we have 99% of the people on our side.
dmosh42
(2,217 posts)My view coincides with yours, and I think strategically, the 1% always have their wacko Repuke candidates, in case we progressives try to have our own presidential candidate like maybe Howard Dean, as a for instance. This makes us almost have to back the 'corporate' types for now.
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)Saying we are alarmists. We are being slowly boiled, slowly choked. The is a definite goal. Financial elitists always have a "business model" and on a global scale it is to have the majority become enslaved to a system of finance and rules that supplant any constitutional ideas with a model of modern corporate fascism that will mimic human rights to the point that convinces people they actually have rights. History is showing the people are fighting this war battle by battle in the streets and courts. I am not young and I fear people in the future will read about how the battles were lost and the "system" has prevailed. That is, if people are even allowed to read about it. The battles are so under reported presently to the point that people are lulled into complacency. That is a big part of the business model leading to theocratic corporate fascism. People are dancing down the yellow brick road wishing they could just tap their heels and go back to the human rights ideals that took thousands of years for mankind to mentally evolve to. The Magna Charta, the US Constitution and other documents that represent human rights were high points in that evolution. Now the concept of greed has evolved to the point it is threatened by the ideals of human rights.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)
in a dark tunnel of ignorance.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)I am hoping the Democratic Party can unite behind election reform. We don't have a chance unless we have the voting rights act re enacted and get rid of Diebold.
No matter what there has to be a game plan-- let's get our voices back!! This, while finding some non corporatists to represent us 
if that is possible.
The RW is posed to steal their way in, and they will have us checkmated after that. We need people who will get rid of corporate personhood and reduce the military budget to finance social programs.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Their answer is basically: the peasants can fuck-off and die.
Their solution is to ignore the climate issue, allow the catastrophe to unfold, and in the subsequent die off retain human civilization as a vastly smaller subset of the current population, with just enough peasants to design/build/maintain the robots and computers required to service the elites.
This solution solves the resource crisis by eliminating most of the demand for those resources and returning the human population to what it was before the population explosion of the last 500 years.
For most of us, and our families and our gene pool- their plan is that we should all just disappear.
Auggie
(31,133 posts)indepat
(20,899 posts)have defined his political philosophy, shaped our national policy to much detriment, and indelibly stained his legacy imo. 
cali
(114,904 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Well, we should make it the biggest battlefront. Maybe in the primary elections + calling our reps, and other various activities.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)And good luck with your 'battles' ahead.
Rebellious Republican
(5,029 posts) reusrename
(1,716 posts)The criminals have the upper hand.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts) obxhead
(8,434 posts)On so many levels I agree.
Thought "Obamacare" wasn't the perfect deal? Wait until Hillary fixes it.
I could go on, but what's the point. This is a post on a board that..... eom
lordsummerisle
(4,651 posts)A Peoples History of the United States and it's amazing how the 1%/99% issue has been with us since the founding of the nation. Zinn even asserts that the New Deal was enacted to throw out a few crumbs to the masses to prevent a revolution. Usually, though, protests about equality, like OWS, are simply crushed...
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to the 99%. I know I should gut it up and read it.
Elite Theory contends that the Elites always lead everything. No matter what it is an elite few will end up in charge. The best we can hope for is that we find elites that are sympathetic to our struggle. My view of history shows that the elites, when faced with a revolution, will try to give out as little as they have to to end the conflict. IMO the New Deal went a lot farther than it had to. The Glass-Steagall lasted about 60 years and FDIC stills is in effect.
The 1% has to control personal media, as it is the new tool of the masses. Looks like the NSA and FBI are getting control.
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)Dead on!
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)here. The only difference is that the exploited, powerless and oppressed now includes just about everyone.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Response to rhett o rick (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)The govt likes us to be nice little serfs. Pay taxes and die, etc..
