HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » yurbud » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ... 64 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Sun Jul 11, 2004, 07:58 PM
Number of posts: 37,836

Journal Archives

Which does more damage to our democracy: crime committed by Snowden or crimes his leaks revealed?

It's an obvious question, but sometimes we need to ask these because a handful of people here on DU know how to make their views seem far more widely accepted than they really are.

RAVITCH: Why Does Ohio Give More Money to Lowest-Performing Charters?

This is what the corporate-backed education reform movement is really all about: funneling taxpayer dollars to companies who made the right campaign donations.

Do we really want K-12 education to be as corrupt as defense and intel contracting?

Pretty soon regular public schools will be told there's no money for chalk, but the for-profit charters will be using million dollar per piece, radar guided chalk, and we'll be paying for it.

Supporting links in original.

Innovation Ohio, which keeps a close watch on the education budget and policy issues, reports that the state increased the budgets for charter schools operated by men who are generous donors to Republican elected officials.

The point:

"Republican mega-donors David Brennan (White Hat Management) and William Lager (ECOT) saw major increases in their funding. Meanwhile, Charter Schools that actually do a far better job educating children received far less additional revenue.

"To give you an idea of just how much better Brennan and Lager's schools do, take a look at this statistic: Brennan and Lager run 33 of the state's 369 Charter Schools, or 9 percent. Yet according to the Ohio Senate's Charter Schoolsimulations, Brennan and Lager's schools will receive $8.6 million additional over last school year. That represents 38 percent of all the increases to the rest of the 336 Charter Schools. So 38 percent of the increase to Charters went to 9 percent of the schools."

This is called rewarding political friends, not rewarding excellence.


If Hillary is the candidate in 2016, how will right wing smears go over with the public?

I am not advocating for her candidacy or saying that a rerun of old smears should disqualify her either, but this is one aspect of her candidacy I'm curious about (I'm sure she is too).

I sent in an alert, but never got an email on the outcome

It was yesterday on one of the ad nauseum "DUers are racist" threads.

What will it take to fix America's big problems?

Looking at the big picture rather than just whatever issue is hot at the moment, how do you think we can get from here to the real change country needs to get off the path of grinding the middle class into dogfood?

Does anyone take Harry Reid seriously when he "threatens" to curb filibusters?

He has mentioned it again about GOP obstruction of Obama nominees.


IMF plan to stabilize economy, end gov't debt, and neuter bankers' power

Mayer Rothschild, uber-banker, once said, ""Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws," and truer words were never spoken nor more accurately describe why we are in such a financial mess and why it is so impervious to political activism.

Private bankers make our money out of thin air by loaning money that they don't have that we pay back with the sweat of our brow both for our own debts and the debts of our government that has to borrow the created money from them too.

The ability to make money out of thin air means we could never hope to match their political campaign donations and certainly not offer politicians the kind of jobs they get working for the banks and Wall Street as lobbyists, consultants, lawyers, CEO's, and do nothing board members when they leave office.

Shouldn't banks be businesses like any other instead of our masters?

The history of debt in this article is must read as well.

The trick to this proposal is getting from here to there.

One could slash private debt by 100pc of GDP, boost growth, stabilize prices, and dethrone bankers all at the same time. It could be done cleanly and painlessly, by legislative command, far more quickly than anybody imagined.

The conjuring trick is to replace our system of private bank-created money -- roughly 97pc of the money supply -- with state-created money. We return to the historical norm, before Charles II placed control of the money supply in private hands with the English Free Coinage Act of 1666.

Specifically, it means an assault on "fractional reserve banking". If lenders are forced to put up 100pc reserve backing for deposits, they lose the exorbitant privilege of creating money out of thin air.

The benign side-effect of their proposals would be a switch from national debt to national surplus, as if by magic. "Because under the Chicago Plan banks have to borrow reserves from the treasury to fully back liabilities, the government acquires a very large asset vis--vis banks. Our analysis finds that the government is left with a much lower, in fact negative, net debt burden."


GRAPH: Can the public tell fake from real scandal? Impeachment polls Nixon v Clinton v Baby Bush

Considering that the Wall Street Journal article that I got the original graphic from was about the only mainstream media source to discuss impeaching Baby Bush his numbers are even more impressive.

Republicans don't improve their electoral chances playing the scandal card, but it does help their short term strategery of obstruction.

Let's hope the public reacts the way they did to the Republican impeachment of Bill Clinton's penis and give BOTH chambers of congress to the Democrats.

And then let's hope the Democrats actually use those new majorities to do more than agree with conservative stupid ideas.

Since Repubs are cranking up big scandal machine, any Dems could mention to shut them up?

Democrats have given Republicans and especially Republican presidents a pass on some serious, serious shit.

Nixon doing back door negotiations with the North Vietnam to undercut LBJ in the 1968 election, the October Surprise, criminal charges for Iran Contra, vote rigging and vote suppression in several elections, violating as many parts of the Geneva Convention as possible in the invasion of Iraq, including lying (not being mistaken) about Iraq being a threat, and approving and even orchestrating torture at the highest levels, no bid contracts in Iraq, wiretapping CONGRESS and on and on.

Democrats thanks for all this has been a sharp, pointy, steel tipped cowboy boot in the ass, and Republicans squealing like a stuck pig every time Democrats do something they would enjoy doing more.

Is it paying off for Democrats to leave this stuff untouched?

If not, what could they go after that would give them the most bang for the buck?

Will Obama piss away the rest of his presidency sucking up to Repubs and playing the scandal game?

The article on Huffington Post about Obama musing about going "Bulworth" prompted this.

The guy has done some good in office (cue THE LIST posters), but for the most part, he has spend his whole first term and first part of his second trying to prove to Republicans that he doesn't really like Democratic ideas either.

I'm not an idiot. It ain't about ideology or bad "strategery." Like the Republicans, he's playing to the big money people, and if he didn't, he wouldn't have made it as far as the White House, and wouldn't have been allowed to stay there.

But since the Republicans are going to threaten to impeach him no matter what, why not earn it by doing something good and daring the GOP to undo it?

Figure out what the most is he can do with executive orders, or in foreign policy to set things right, and watch the right wing wither like the Wicked Witch in the Wizard of Oz when they threw water on her.

Hell, he could even do some good with just his declassification power: declassify the Saudi pages of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and destroy the very last shred of GOP claim to be the better party on defending America.

Set the Justice Department after the vote riggers, and felon voter purgers, or hell even Wall Street. Treat those who destroyed the world economy with the same legal creativity he did some crank in Yemen whose blog posts MIGHT have inspired POTENTIAL terrorist acts.

He would be a hero and make it easier for Democrats to hold onto the White House and retake both chambers of congress.

Will he do any of that or will he continue to tape a kick me sign to his own ass before bending over in a room full of Republicans?
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ... 64 Next »