HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Starry Messenger » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »

Starry Messenger

Profile Information

Name: Decline to State
Gender: Female
Hometown: Bay Area, CA
Home country: USA
Current location: Left Coast
Member since: Sat Apr 9, 2005, 08:01 PM
Number of posts: 31,303

About Me

Artist, high school teacher and "hard-liner" (yet to be defined).

Journal Archives

Legendary radical activist Angela Davis: ‘We have to do whatever is necessary’ to stop Trump

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/legendary-radical-activist-angela-davis-we-have-to-do-whatever-is-necessary-to-stop-trump/



Famed activist and academic Angela Davis on Friday urged voters to “do whatever is necessary” to avoid a Donald Trump presidency, Fusion reports.

Davis, who is Distinguished Professor Emerita of History of Consciousness at U.C. Santa Cruz, was speaking at the Brooklyn Museum in New York on Friday, where she was recognized for her commitment to advocacy.

Davis cautioned against allowing GOP candidate Donald Trump to take the election in November.

“We talked about the emergence of new movements, but what we haven’t referred to is the extent to which racism has been revealed and in ways that many of us, who are seasoned activists, had thought to be consigned to dustbin of history,” Davis told a rapt audience.

Posted by Starry Messenger | Sun Jun 5, 2016, 08:10 PM (1 replies)

Who and How?



They identify voters who are known to be Sanders supporters or likely to be Sanders supporters by demographic information, new voter status, or whatever. Those are the ones who are most likely to be purged or given incorrect information.



Please tell me who was not sent the generic instructions that we all get in the mail, based on demographics. I will donate $100 to Bernie if you can prove that NPP registrations were not sent a copy of the booklet all registered voters get in teh mail, which is the image I posted in my post above.

I changed my registration from Green in Oct. to Dem so I could get a Democratic Primary ballot for President. By that measure, I should have been "purged" a la your theory, by demographic. But I got the ballot I needed and voted for a Dem Presidential primary candidate. So please, proceed.
Posted by Starry Messenger | Sun May 29, 2016, 11:39 PM (1 replies)

That has nothing to do with CA.

Your list was applied to mainly CA NPP registered voters. The instructions for CA NPP voters to vote in the Democratic primary are more than clear, and are sent out in the instructions that are sent out to everyone who is registered in any way. There are no mailings from the SOS that are sent to anyone based on party.

Voters can check their registration online, at any time. Voters could change their party status up until Monday.

Your comment that I got something in the mail because I might have been a future Hillary voter is salacious. There is no way the SOS would have known who I was voting for.

Your fishing expedition to try to lay a case for why Bernie is (probably) going to lose CA, is a fail.


Posted by Starry Messenger | Sun May 29, 2016, 11:23 PM (1 replies)

So your theory is that the CA SOS read my mind before I even voted

and sent me materials that were not marked in any way shape or form by any promotion for a candidate, and only sent me and other prospective Hillary voters, the instructions. That is your theory.
Posted by Starry Messenger | Sun May 29, 2016, 10:29 PM (1 replies)

CA sends several pieces of literature to people's home, telling them they can request a D ballot

I live here and I get them. There is no difficulty.

You can also skip all nine of those steps, and register as a Democrat, which is a lot easier to keep track of.
Posted by Starry Messenger | Sun May 29, 2016, 08:33 PM (1 replies)

AA and Latinos poll higher than whites in approval of socialism and disapproval of capitalism

http://www.people-press.org/2011/12/28/little-change-in-publics-response-to-capitalism-socialism/?src=prc-headline

I think it has more to do with Sanders than socialism.

Sanders' has stated that his approach is to bring back the New Deal coalition (white working class.) That coalition broke up with itself over civil rights though, I think this election will be the final break up with the left's old love affair with bringing that back as a path to victory.

Any socialist looking for gains is going to have to reach deeply into the population that approves of it more highly and find out together what we can build in the future.
Posted by Starry Messenger | Sat Feb 20, 2016, 08:14 PM (1 replies)

How Scalia’s Death May Grant Public-Sector Unions A Reprieve

A potentially devastating ruling for organized labor may no longer come to pass.



The unexpected death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia this weekend will scramble much more than just election-year politics. It could recast several decisions pending before the high court, including arguably the most important labor case in years.

With Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, the court’s conservative majority had the opportunity to make the entire U.S. public sector akin to a right-to-work zone. That would have given hundreds of thousands of public-sector workers the prerogative to opt out of funding the unions that represent them -- delivering a substantial blow to both organized labor and the Democratic Party it pours money into.

But with a 4-4 split in the court along ideological lines, there’s now a good chance that the lower court’s ruling in favor of the union will stand.

t didn’t always seems so. During recent oral arguments, the conservative justices appeared eager to overturn long-standing legal precedent and ban so-called fair share fees. Unions must represent all workers in a bargaining unit -- even those who don’t want representation -- so where state law allows it, workers can be required to pay fair share fees to help cover the cost of collective bargaining. For unions, such an arrangement assures that no worker gets representation for free.

<snip>



This is a big fucking deal.

Edit, I was so happy, I forgot the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/scalia-public-sector-unions_us_56bfdb1ce4b0b40245c6f855
Posted by Starry Messenger | Sun Feb 14, 2016, 12:05 PM (5 replies)

I have that group trashed.

I'm proud of whatever slagging they might do, it just shows where the tiny hearts are withered.

Of course they won't trash this one, and feel they can sling their insults with impunity, because the Admins defend anything that doesn't get hidden as acceptable discourse. Fish rots from the head. I like to imaging the sad little specimens mashing away on all the alert buttons in here like 12 year olds playing Call of Duty. Maybe someday grown-ups will be at this website again, but it's beginning to look like a vanishing possibility.
Posted by Starry Messenger | Sun Sep 13, 2015, 08:30 PM (1 replies)

Allies don't patronize and attack the people they claim to support.

Activists who wish to decrease oppression should avoid replicating the system of oppression created by the white male cis straight 1%.

http://tempest.fluidartist.com/sometimes-allies-are-bad-actors/



Even the most hardcore social justice warrior (or paladin, cleric, rogue…) can fail to be a good ally to someone from a different group or identity at some point. What matters, what always matters, is how you deal with your fail. Did you apologize? Did you sit with yourself and examine what happened and why? Did you think about what being a good ally really means? Did you recommit yourself to being a better ally in the future?

Or did you double down with the idea that you’re an ally, not one of those bigots out there, and you marched with King, and you supported some feminists in 1973, and you’ve done all this work, and therefore you didn’t do anything wrong, you find nothing objectionable in what you did (or failed to do), and so the problem must be with the people you’re allied to, and not with yourself. In other words: did you center yourself?

The kind of people who say Stop Attacking Your Allies are the kind who tie their allyship to specific behaviors from the group they’re supposedly interested in helping. They, the ally, want to dictate the terms of the relationship and want to be the one to say “Now it’s the time to address this thing,” instead of allowing the marginalized and oppressed folks to make that determination. The ally wants to set the rules for what is appropriate discourse, to determine the parameters for politeness, and the conditions under which they will use or set aside their privilege. Do I need to explain the problems with that?

Are we really “driving away” our allies, or are we making it clear that we won’t accept an ally relationship that is about the needs and comfort of the allies above everyone else? Yes, we might be making that clear with harsh language. And yes, in making that clear we might hurt some feelings. That happens when allies don’t listen to the polite, patient words that come before the yelling.

Posted by Starry Messenger | Fri Sep 11, 2015, 01:59 AM (0 replies)

Link to JustAnotherGen's link-roundup of greatest hits on "clarice"

and some her interesting opinions: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1187&pid=5199

I'll just leave that here.
Posted by Starry Messenger | Wed Sep 2, 2015, 05:52 PM (2 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »