HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » stevenleser » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 51 Next »


Profile Information

Name: Steven Leser
Gender: Male
Hometown: New York, NY
Home country: USA
Current location: NYC
Member since: Tue Jan 4, 2005, 04:36 PM
Number of posts: 19,334

Journal Archives

My show this week, GOP Scandal mongering, Boko Haram, Serbian floods and more

Listen at http://goo.gl/kqu1DC

xPost from V&M: My take on Boehner "Me? Blocking? Immigration reform

Admittedly, my graphics skills are not great and certainly nothing close to EarlG's but...


My take on Boehner "Me? Blocking? Immigration reform

Admittedly, my graphics skills are not great and certainly nothing close to EarlG's but...


Video: New York Cabbie Fights For Right To Wear Nazi Armband - So much fail

If I could speak directly to this guy, I would say, "Mr. Diaz, as a fellow Latino who also has African heritage but in my case I have Jewish heritage to add to that, you would also be sent to the gas chambers if Nazis ever rose to power in the country where you live. They consider you untermenschen. Whatever help you need, please get it."
As CBS 2’s Lou Young reported Friday evening, Gabriel Diaz, 26, spoke outside of his family’s home in the Throggs Neck section of the Bronx, after he was suspended for wearing a swastika while driving the cab.

“I am. I’m a National Socialist – what you guys call a Nazi. I am. I’m a believer of it,” Diaz said.

Not just once, but multiple times, photos sent to the Anti-Defamation League and to the Taxi and Limousine Commission sparked an investigation.

“I don’t hate Jews. I’m critical of them, but I don’t hate them. That doesn’t mean that I’m anti-Semitic. That don’t make me a hater,” Diaz said. “Who says you have to be white to be a National Socialist? You don’t have to be white, it can by anybody.”

#BringBackOurGirls: New York Mayor and Reverend Al Sharpton March On Boko Haram School Girls Kidnap

I was lucky enough to participate in this march and rally


New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, the Reverend Al Sharpton, and at least 200 local residents, and elected officials, all representing a cross section of activists, and concerned citizens took part in a rally in front of the Nigerian Consulate on Saturday afternoon. It was the second such gathering in front of the Consulate this week with public attention squarely focused on the fate the still missing 200 plus female students kidnapped by the Boko Haram in mid-April.

The New York Mayor weighing in on the issue is significant for a locally elected official in the U.S. Most U.S. mayors and governors avoid speaking out on a global issue not directly touching their jurisdiction, even one as controversial as the kidnapping of the 200 plus female students in Nigeria.

That mayor de Blasio spoke out, and marched alongside fellow citizens will likely change the tenor of the debate in America’s most international of cities. De Blasio who addressed the crowd of roughly 200, said that the kidnappings in Borno State “should be denounced around the world.” His wife and daughter at the march that assembled in front of the consulate joined the mayor.

Me on the O'Reilly Factor criticizing Republicans for starting yet another Benghazi investigation

Poll: Do you support the attempts to slut-shame Monica Lewinsky

I don't believe in slut shaming adults for consensual sex and I don't think that doing so is compatible with Liberalism, Progressivism.

Do you support the attempts to slut-shame Monica Lewinsky?

Matthew Perry vs Peter Hitchens regarding Drug Courts & prosecution for drug offenses on BBC

Peter Hitchens is Christopher Hitchens' younger brother

Nader wants the most Progressive on the left, who barely tolerate Democrats, to join Libertarians?

As most of you know, I am around conservatives and right wingers a lot and the Libertarian ones among them are always asking me on and off the air whether I think there is a chance that progressives would vote for Rand Paul and support Libertarians in general.

I always give the same answer.

"You guys understand that many of these folks are routinely, almost continuously, upset at Democrats because they insist on Left-Progressive orthodoxy on a wide range of issues despite the fact that in my opinion, across the board the distances between mainstream Democratic thinking and Progressive orthodoxy are not particularly far. They routinely hammer Democrats each and every time they feel that distance is too great. You're not going to appeal to them by being fairly close to them on two or three issues, and light year distances away on the other 70. The first time one of those issues comes up where there are light year distances, they are going to run, not walk away from any proposed coalition, assuming you get any significant progressive group to begin to listen to you at all in the first place."

Now, I realize that despite the above missive, there are 1-3 progressive groups that might be tempted to explore this. Code Pink comes to mind and one or two progressive groups specifically aimed at marijuana/drug legalization are the other. But in the end, I think the leadership of those groups would be smart enough to understand that cozying up to the Libertarian right is a sure way to completely destroy their support in the progressive community and leave them with what? Support from Libertarians that would be tenuous at best anyway?

Not going to happen.

On Edit: Here is a video which seems really bizarre. As if Libertarians will try to raise the minimum wage or pass federal laws to regulate and reign in corporations. Will not happen.

I think there should be an emphasis on voting to hide ad-hominem posts.

I recently was part of a jury where someone accused someone else of identifying with mass murderers. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4812165

Not only is that ad-hominem (i.e. a personal attack) , the person attacked in no way identified with mass murderers. The jury barely hid the post and two of those who voted not to hide posted comments that made them seem unaware that ad-hominem is a logical fallacy and in general an ugly and toxic debate tactic. If you cannot win an argument without attacking someone personally, generally that means that your argument fails. Not to mention that directly attacking posters instead of their arguments is about the most direct way to make DU an unpleasant place to be.

I think that jury instructions should include an emphasis that suggests people hide ad-hominem posts and calls such posts out as, to use what has become a trite phrase, "making DU suck". Clearly, three out of seven jurors in the above mentioned jury seemed to have no appreciation for how inappropriate ad-hominem is as a tactic.

I think that emphasizing this as an inappropriate way to behave would pay dividends when primary time comes around.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 51 Next »