McCamy Taylor's Journal
Member since: Tue Nov 9, 2004, 07:05 PM
Number of posts: 16,194
Number of posts: 16,194
Here is my fiction website: http://home.earthlink.net/~mccamytaylor/ My political cartoon site: http://www.grandtheftelectionohio.com/
- 2016 (6)
- 2015 (72)
- 2014 (79)
- 2013 (4)
- 2012 (69)
- 2011 (13)
- December (13)
- Older Archives
versus using this forum in order to spread RNCish innuendo/dirt? For example the "Clinton kill list" is probably not something that belongs in a Democratic primary discussion---but it has been brought up here. The molehill that still has not made it to mountain status "scandal" involving her emails is widely discussed as a sign that she can not be trusted. The only thing it symbolizes to the Dems I know in real life (as opposed to DU) is that the GOP still hates and fears Clinton. So, is the fact that the GOP still hates and fears Clinton a legitimate topic of discussion at DU? Might be, if the point you are trying to make is that the GOP will mobilize their own voters using Clinton-o-phobia. However, being the target of multiple right wing attacks does not impeach a person's character. And do real Democrats really do eye rolls when someone mentions that the Clintons have been the target of right wing attacks
Once the party selects a nominee, no one will be allowed to spew conspiracy theories about any of the Democratic candidates. Pardon me for being suspicious, but sometimes I wonder who are the people taking advantage of the temporary ban on the ban against bad mouthing Democrats? How much more will we have to read about Vince Foster and Monica and Whitewater before next summer? How many times will I have to read about Clinton's emails here, on a site that is supposed to be free of corporate media bias?
This can hurt any Democrat, by the way. So, before you decide that it's ok as long as it only affects Clinton, ask yourself how you will feel if your candidate moves up in the polls---and suddenly he or she has his or her very own "kill list"? And no fair saying that all the conspiracies about Clinton are true, but any conspiracies about anyone else originate from the Clinton campaign---that is just another GOP Big Lie that was proven wrong in 2008 when she did not "crib death" Obama's campaign at the convention. Clinton is too good a Democrat to shoot her party in the foot.
Are we as good at being Democrats as she is?
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Tue Sep 22, 2015, 01:00 AM (19 replies)
“My running for president is a way of sending a message — we have an opportunity to lift everyone,” she (Clinton) said.
Irish-Americans: This spring Clinton was inducted into the Irish American hall of fame for her work in bringing peace to Northern Ireland. This had not won her friends in Great Britain, btw. Some members of the British press can be downright catty when it comes to the former SOS. But who needs Great Britain,m our former colonial master? Not me. Vive la revolution!
Mrs. Clinton spoke about her work with women in Belfast when her husband worked on the 1998 Good Friday agreement, a major step toward ending the long sectarian conflict known as the Troubles.
Burma Hillary Clinton was the first US SOS to visit Burma since 1955. One year later, Aung San Suu Kyi, with whom Clinton met during her Burma visit came to the US to receive the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Clinton went on to note that “vercoming the past, healing a wounded country, building a democracy, would require moving from icon to politician.”
“People,” she continued, “fight and die for the right to exercise politics.”
Hillary Rodham Clinton remembered the power and grace of Nelson Mandela, calling the late South African president a "giant among us" as she accepted a human rights award on Friday.
China "Women's Rights are human rights." We all know who said that and when. Here is the back story on the speech that made Clinton famous around the world as a champion of the rights of the oppressed.
In planning the speech, Mrs. Clinton’s clashed with White House aides who thought a first lady should not dive into delicate diplomatic issues. Mr. Clinton read the speech in its early stages, but his advisers did not. The White House chief of staff, Thomas F. McLarty, told the curious press corps that Mrs. Clinton would not break any new ground in her trip to Beijing.
“Before I went there was a lot of handwringing and concern in the Congress as well as in the administration, but I made it clear that I was going to go,” Mrs. Clinton said in the interview on Friday.
Aides who traveled with Mrs. Clinton to Beijing remember the staid United Nations delegates pounding their feet as she declared “it is a violation of human rights when babies are denied food or drowned” simply because they are born female, and “it is a violation of human rights when women and girls are sold into the slavery of prostitution.”
After the speech, women dressed in traditional garb from various nations poured over an escalator to try to touch Mrs. Clinton, who wore a powder pink suit. Tens of thousands of workers with nongovernmental organizations who were not allowed to attend the conference, gathered amid a downpour and the heavy security in Huairou, 30 miles outside Beijing, to hear Mrs. Clinton deliver a version of the speech.
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Tue Sep 22, 2015, 12:38 AM (4 replies)
The proposed line up sucks. People complain that there will be too few debates, but with the current cast of characters, we will be lucky if Americans tune in for even one of the shows, let alone a half dozen.
Who have got so far? A old white haired white guy:
Another old white haired white guy:
A slightly less old and less white haired white guy:
And another slightly less old and less white haired white guy:
Along with an old white woman:
Wow. I saw more diversity at Sanders South Carolina rally. If we want to get viewers we need a little more of this
And especially this
Yes, I know the last five (beloved) Democrats support Clinton. Too bad. If they REALLY support her, they should get into the primary so that the debates will attract large audiences.
If you have a thousand debates, it won't help any of the candidates if no one watches except die hard Democratic political animals who have all made up their minds whom they plan to vote for already. And if no one watches, Dems will go to the polls and pick the most familiar name. Hmm. Maybe the boring line up is a sinister plot by Clinton? Maybe she has used magic powers to get all the truly telegenic and charismatic Democrats to support her so they won't run so no one will watch the debates....
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Mon Sep 21, 2015, 02:30 AM (33 replies)
The Democratic Party umbrella is huge. The party welcomes people whom the GOP and the MSM dismiss as "fringe" ---even though taken altogether the "fringes" make up a larger part of the democracy than the so called "norms"--you know the white , male, heterosexual, not disabled non Muslims. There are many different sections of the Democratic Party base. Some people belong to more than one. Here is a summary of some of the most important (in terms of numbers and votes).
1. Unions. This should be numbers 1 through 3, but I will just limit it to one. So far, All Your Union Base Are Belong to Clinton. Except for National Nurses United, which has given its support to Sanders. In 2000, NNU supporter Nader over Gore. All the other unions that have declared so far ( including teachers, machinists, plumbers) have declared for Clinton. I am going to go out on a very short, very sturdy limb at this point and predict that if Sanders does not get some more union support, his chances of being the party nominee are close to zero. So, his number one job is win over the unions.
2. Women. Women vote for both parties. But women lean heavily Democratic while men are more evenly split. Making women an important part of the Democratic Base. All Your Female Base Are Belong to Clinton (and Will Always Belong to Clinton). Period. That is not to say that some women will not vote for Sanders. Some women will also vote for the GOP nominee. Some would vote for David Dukes if given the option. But if given a chance to vote for another woman, turnout of women will be higher and GOP women will cross over. Here lies the mathematical key to Clinton's victory. No man will be able to separate her from her base. No voter suppression will be able to suppress the enhanced turnout of giddy women who are finally ready to have their day in the sun.
3. Blacks. As Toni Morrison said, Bill Clinton was the first Black president--until Obama was the first Black president. Hillary is married to one of these man, and she was Secretary of State for the other. In addition, she is Obama's anointed successor, and in 2008 she very graciously buried the hatchet at the Convention and campaigned for her primary opponent in a way that other Democratic nomination losers (see Ted Kennedy 1980) did not. Can Sanders peel away Clinton's Black support? Maybe. But people who live in fear of being shot by the police for no reason at all take politics pretty seriously. They are not likely to give up a "sure thing" in order to take a chance with something new.
4. LGBT. Last I heard, Hillary owned this portion of the base. LGBT believe that she is a member of this portion of the base. All Your LGBT Base Are Belong to Clinton, and Sanders would be advised to not even waste his time on this one.
5. Irish-Americans. Forgot about this one, didn't you? Irish-Americans are an important part of the base. Hillary brought peace to Northern Ireland. Hillary won New Hampshire in 2008 because of the tradition of strong female leaders among the Irish-American Matriarchy. Sanders chance of peeling off the Irish vote? See number 4. All Your Irish-American Base Are Belong to Clinton.
6. Latinos. With Julian Castro rumored to be on board, All Your Latino Base Are Belong to Clinton. Sanders had better pick himself a Latino running mate pronto if he plans to compete for this demographic. Or better yet, suddenly discover that one of his parents is Hispanic.
7. Young people. Not a chance anyone young and hip will be caught campaigning for an old woman who wears pant suits. This portion of the base belongs to Sanders---unless someone younger and hipper shows up. All Your Youth Base Are Belong to Sanders (let's just hope they can be reminded to get out there and vote).
8. Jewish DemocratsHard to say. I am pretty sure that Jewish Democrats would like a Jewish president to make up for all those years of discrimination. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton has shown a willingness to commit US ground troops in order to combat genocide. Bill was the one who vetoed sending troops to Rwanda, if it was up to Hillary we would have been there in Africa saving lives. And even if she did not actually dodge bullets in the Balkans stopping a genocide, she and her daughter were there on the ground showing their support for a mission that the GOP hated because it was not intended to prop up the price of oil, it was supposed to save lives. Sanders, on the other hand, is running as the No War, Not Ever candidate. Never, Bernie? Not even to stop another Hitler? Proof that you have to be careful when creating your brand image. I am pretty sure that Sanders would have voted "Let's go kick Hilter's butt!" But he is already being labeled the "Peace Candidate" .....with no qualifiers.
If I left out any portion of the base I am sorry! It is late. For Sanders to have a chance, he needs to get the majority--not just an even split of the Unions----and he needs to snag the Latinos. Can he do it?
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Fri Sep 18, 2015, 02:15 AM (153 replies)
You said earlier this month that you now wish you had supported Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries instead of Barack Obama. You said that she would make a better president.
Gore Vidal: Well, I was in a thoughtful mood.
Do you really wish you had supported Mrs. Clinton?
GV: She would have been a wonderful president.
In a recent interview with Larry King on Ora TV’s PoliticKing, the Dalai Lama, the face of Tibetan Buddhism and one of the planet’s most recognized spiritual leaders, said that the world is in need of more women as leaders. “According to scientists, women have more sensitivity than men. Sometimes I really feel that more women should take responsibility in the leadership of our planet. It would mean less violence,” his Holiness Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, said.
"I don't know that a man would be treated the same way that Hillary is," Sanders said. "So all that I can say is I have known Hillary Clinton for 25 years. I admire her. I respect her. I like her. She and I have very different points of view on a number of issues."
Fiorina on Clinton in 2008: “She was a great candidate. She has helped millions of women all over this country. Women of any political party owe a debt of gratitude to Hillary Clinton and I will bet that every woman up here agrees with me.”
Rory Kennedy knows exactly who she wants to see in the White Housenext.
When asked by HuffPost Live's Marc Lamont Hill about who she's eyeing for 2016, Kennedy was direct: "Hillary! I am so ready for Hillary, 100 percent."
DEPUTY FIRST MINISTER MCGUINNESS: Well, if I could say that it’s an incredible good fortune for all of us on the island of Ireland and the north that Hillary Clinton has been appointed the new Secretary of State. She has for many, many years, alongside her husband, been a true friend of all of us, a true friend of the peace process, contributing tremendously to the transformation that has taken place over the course of the last number of years.
Franken is not only looking towards the new legislative session, but also the race for the White House. Citing Howard Dean’s recent endorsement of Hillary Clinton, I asked whether it was good for the party to have leaders endorsing someone who hadn’t even entered the race yet.
“I think that Hillary would make a great president,” Franken replied. “I think, I certainly feel I haven’t announced that I’m supporting her, but does this count? I guess, maybe this counts.”
But would he need to see who all the candidates are, I asked, before endorsing Clinton?
“No, no,” Franken said, “I think that I’m ready for Hillary. I mean, I think that we’ve not had someone this experienced, this tough, and she’s very, very impressive.”
Now (Gloria) Steinem believes that the former secretary of State could become the first female president (if she runs in 2016, that is). "I don't think we know whether she wants to do it, but if she should decide to run, she could win," Steinem said. "At this point, I think she herself has been such an example of a woman in high leadership that now people can imagine it. By her own example, by both her toughness and her grace, and her intelligence and her hanging-in-there — in the primaries and in the presidential race, and also as secretary of State — I think she's created her own possibilities."
Clinton noted that the struggle for the right to vote was central to the civil rights movement. But that struggle has not ended. Once more voting rights are under attack. Once more barriers to voting are being erected by those who fear a true vote of the people. Once more we need citizens to mobilize to demand their right to vote. Once more we need courageous leaders to defend that right. With this powerful speech, Hillary Clinton has stood up to be counted in that fight.
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Mon Sep 14, 2015, 02:30 AM (22 replies)
At least, if he is the man I think he is, he is weeping. Here, on the first page of DU's primary forum, we have been told
1) Clinton's efforts to appeal to women as a woman herself are sexist
2) If you worry that mainstream America might not vote for someone who is Jewish then you are anti-Semitic.
3) If the mainstream media launches a groundless attack on a Democrat, we should help them as long as the Democrat is a rival of our candidate. Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Even if the enemy of my enemy is Fox News.
4) Democrats only want shiny new candidates, presumably because we get bored easily and treat our candidates as toys. Saying "I am tired" of a candidate is considered "issues" related criticism.
5) Being a "Democrat" is something to be ashamed of and we really wish that we belonged to some other party instead, but we do not have the guts to join that other party---why? Because that other party does not have a snow ball's chance in you know what of winning. See number 2 for extra irony.
6) "Kerry waffles" was a MSM abomination, but "Hillary waffles" is undeniable fact.
7) "Gore is a liar" was a MSM abomination, but "Hillary Lies" is undeniable fact.
8) Clinton has "shenanigans".
9) Clinton has a "kill list."
Gotta love the Democratic Primary. "Bull moose in heat" (Hunter S. Thompson) does not even come close. Party on, dudes and dudettes!
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Wed Sep 9, 2015, 02:04 AM (111 replies)
Because hey! I can say that (fill in a politician) is (fill in an adjective) because (fill in a story), and if it fits a currently fashionable Big Lie then folks will rate it on up. The popular wisdom being all that some people need to decide whether or not something is news.
OK, so now a link. At least it is not an anecdote with no link, no video, no nothing.
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Sun Aug 16, 2015, 02:04 AM (20 replies)
In 1955, 15 year old Emmett Till from Chicago visited relatives in Mississippi. A white shop owner accused him of flirting with her. In response, the woman's husband and associates kidnapped the boy, beat him, gouged out his eye, shot him and finally disposed of his body in the river. At their trial, they were acquitted. After the acquittal, they bragged about the killing to reporters.
When Till's body was sent back to Chicago for burial, his mother decided on an open casket, so that the world could see what kind of "justice" the American South delivered to a boy for the "crime" of flirting with a white woman.
Sixty years later, in 2015, Sandra Bland, also from Illinois was driving through Texas when she was pulled over and issued a ticket for failing to signal a lane change. When she refused to put out her cigarette, she was ordered from her car, thrown to the ground, threatened with a taser and arrested. While in jail, she died from asphyxiation---for the "crimes" of failing to signal a lane change and smoking a cigarette in her own car.
I have lived in the South all my life. I have seen some things change and too many other things that have not changed enough. Getting rid of the Confederate Flag will not even begin to fix what is wrong with this region of the country. Yes, there are pockets of sanity in the South, mostly urban areas. But there are also pockets of racist insanity--like Waller County, where Ms. Bland died, Waller County which has repeated attempted to deprive the mostly Black students of Prairie View A&M University of their right to vote.
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Thu Aug 6, 2015, 12:56 AM (8 replies)
I have never gotten a ticket. I have been stopped several times in my life. And each time the po involved has given me a warning and sent me on my way. Why? I am not delusional. I know that it has nothing to do with my charming personality. I do not get ticketed because I am a feminine (looking) white woman. These cops are not on the road to keep the world "safe" from me---they are there to keep the world "safe" from those who have been declared society's "enemy"---Blacks, Latinos, gays, Muslims.
Being a young man of color in the US means being a perp until proven otherwise. Being an academic of color means being stigmatized as someone who only made it thanks to affirmative action "stealing" a university spot meant for a white person. Being a politician of color makes one a lightening rod for anger. Being a shopper of color means having the eyes of store security all over you--while the white woman shoplifts undetected. Being a motorist of color means that you may die in jail for failing to signal a lane change. Being a parent of color means worrying that the phone call at night is the one you have been dreading.
Being LBTG means being a pedophile until proven otherwise. It means being assaulted on the streets. It means being labeled "the devil" and the cause for acts of gods, like Hurricane Katrina. It means that you have to prove yourself fit to be a teacher or Boy Scout leader or foster parent.
Being Muslim means having your religion denigrated. It means being one of a small group for whom the Bill of Rights does not apply. Muslims do not have freedom of religion in this country. If you are a Muslim, you do not even have the right to fly on an airplane. You do not have the right of habeas corpus. Your coworker can wear a cross on the job, but you can't wear a headscarf, because someone might be "offended".
Being Latino means you had better have your ID handy at all times, because you could be rounded up and shipped back to a country you have never visited at any moment. It means that your breadwinner could be taken from you and your teen aged kids forced to quit school and go to work to keep the family going.
As a white, non-Muslim voter (who has had a hysterectomy), I know that no matter which party wins the election, my family is secure. I despise white privilege, but it will keep me safe, even as minorities see their voting rights chiseled away and watch their children die at the hands of those who are supposed to protect them, even as women die from back alley abortions, even as immigrant families are torn apart, even as mosques are fire bombed----
Vote as if this election matters, and you will vote for the candidate who can win. It isn't a cop out, it isn't weakness, it isn't laziness, it isn't out of "habit" or blindness or because someone told you to. It is because you can not afford to lose.
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Wed Aug 5, 2015, 01:42 PM (0 replies)
By now, most folks have heard about the copper plated ACA insurance plans, the ones with the $5000 deductible and low availability of providers. Some people with chronic diseases like copd, dm, cad have signed up for this coverage because the premiums are so low--they can not afford to move up to silver or gold--even though they can not afford to use this new insurance.
Have these folks withered away due to lack of access to their insulin, heart specialists and inhalers. Not in Dallas County, thanks to Parkland, the so called "charity" health care system.
Insurance companies are usually pretty good at guessing how much they will have to pay out in care costs for their enrollees. However, ACA was a new type of insurance. Folks with massive medical illnesses like congestive heart failure now qualified for the same plans that healthy people bought. Luckily for the privates, most people with truly devastating illness are on Medicare or Medicaid, However, there are some middle aged people who are quite ill who do not qualify for either, because they are not old enough and not poor enough. These are the folks who benefit most from ACA--and they are the biggest risk for the privates that participate in ACA. The high deductibles, coypayments and limited provider lists were supposed to cut down on insurance utilization.
Despite these measures, insurers under the ACA in Texas are asking for double digit premium increases next year, citing higher than expected utilization of insurance.
High utilization? Really? How can folks with no money afford these high deductibles and copyaments? How can they find providers?
One way is by getting their health care at places like Parkland in Dallas. Two years ago, some public hospitals attempted to pay their patient's premiums in order to get them enrolled in private insurers which would then reimburse the public for so called charity care. As best I can tell, attempts to pay patient's premiums were thwarted. However, the public hospitals have a new way to help you get more out of your copper insurance plan. Parkland's solution---waive the high deductibles and copayments that are intended to keep patients from seeing doctors except in dire emergencies.
This is a great deal for someone who has to buy ACA insurance because their income is just barely high enough to qualify but who can not afford a policy that really meets his or her health care needs. And, it allows a public funded hospital district to recoup some of its losses from Texas' decision not to expand Medicaid. However...
When a public hospital and clinic makes it easier for people to bypass the deductibles and copayments which were intended to discourage use of the insurance (and insurance company bills) this is turn leads to higher than anticipated spending by the insurers---and rate increases.
While some may call the rate increases unfair, remember that all urban residents pay for the unfunded care which their counties offer. There is no "free" care for anyone. We either pay more in property taxes or we pay higher insurance premiums. The important thing is that people with chronic diseases like cancer get the care they need.
Of course, in a "perfect" state, Medicaid would have been expanded, the feds would have stepped in to pay for the care of the low income, chronically ill uninsured people whom public hospitals have been treating with funds provided by local taxpayers. This would allow the privates who participate in ACA to focus on the not so chronically ill people who are not guaranteed to generate tens of thousands of dollars of medical bills each year.
So, if you do not like the sticker shock of your health insurance rate increase in Texas, maybe you should apply a little pressure in Austin to accept the Medicaid expansion. Texas cities are not sitting on limitless sources of wealth. They can not afford to pay all the health care costs of all their (older, sicker, poorer) residents. And right now, they are not paying all the costs. Folks with ACA insurance are helping them.
If you know anyone who rejects the Medicaid expansion because they do not want to be forced to pay for the health care of strangers, you might want to remind them that they are already paying. The Medicaid expansion will just make that funding more equitable.
Posted by McCamy Taylor | Thu Jul 30, 2015, 02:34 PM (0 replies)