HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » 99th_Monkey » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 93 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Current location: Potlandia
Member since: Fri Sep 28, 2007, 03:39 PM
Number of posts: 17,594

Journal Archives

Hillary: The "No We Can't!" Candidate

Hillary: No We Can't!
By TomP * Monday Jan 18, 2016 * Kos

In 2008, Barack Obama campaigned on the theme of “Yes, We Can!” And while Barack Obama did not accomplish everything we and he wanted to, on many things he tried. When Rahm told him not to even try to reform healthcare because it was not practical, he tried anyway. The ACA is far from perfect. It left almost 30 million Americans behind. But it has helped millions and that’s good.

I’m not going to talk about Hillary’s misleading claims about Bernie, the ACA, and single payer. I want to talk about “No we can’t!”

Hillary talking about Barack Obama in February 2008:
“Maybe I’ve just lived a little long, but I have no illusions about how hard
this is going to be. You are not going to wave a magic wand and have the
special interests disappear!”


“No, We Can’t!”
Hillary in 2016 taking about Bernie Sanders:
I wish that we could elect a Democratic president who could wave a magic
wand and say, ‘We shall do this, and we shall do that.’ That ain’t the
real world we’re living in!


“No, We Can’t!”
Hillary learned from the debacle in 1994 when her health care plan lost.

“No, We Can’t!”
When it comes to breaking up big banks:

“No, We Can’t!”
When it comes to a $15 an hour minimum wage:


FBI/ATF apparently doesn't give a rat's ass about Domestic Terrorism in our face

Now they are using the Malheur Refuge as a national stage for white supremacists to promulgate hate, armed insurrection, and land-grabbing Federal property at the point of a gun.

"KrisAnne Hall, a prominent national face of the so-called patriot movement, will visit Burns on Monday to conduct public workshops supporting the point-of-view of those occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Hall, a Florida attorney and radio talk show host, is scheduled to lecture from 5-7 p.m. Monday and Tuesday at the Harney County Fairgrounds. Her assistant said she will cover two topics: sovereignty of the state and the constitutional limits of the federal government's control.

Hall is an outspoken critic of the federal government who supports privatization of federal lands.

In a YouTube video posted Jan. 5, she defended the tactics of Ammon Bundy and his group of armed protesters, who seized the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge 15 days ago and say they will not leave until the land is turned over to local landowners."


Eugene Robinson: Bernie Sanders’ Run Is No Fairy Tale

Bernie Sanders’ Run Is No Fairy Tale
By Eugene Robinson * Jan 15, 2016 * TruthDig.com

If you thought the political landscape couldn’t be more unsettled, think again. In the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Bernie Sanders is surging. Hillary Clinton now faces not a coronation, not a cakewalk, but a contest—one she could lose.

Has there ever been a worse election to be an establishment candidate? Certainly not in my lifetime. When a pitchfork-populist billionaire is leading one party’s race and a self-described socialist is rapidly gaining ground in the other, I think it’s safe to say we’re somewhere we haven’t been before.

For much of the past year, Clinton led Sanders in national polls by more than 20 points. Now, according to the Real Clear Politics average, her lead has shrunk to less than nine points—and the most recent survey, a CBS/New York Times poll released this week, showed just a seven-point gap.

State polls should make Clinton even more nervous. Her once-comfortable lead over Sanders in Iowa is now just four points, pretty much a toss-up. And in New Hampshire, Sanders—a longtime senator from next-door Vermont—leads Clinton by six points. It is within the realm of possibility that the presumptive Democratic nominee could lose both of the first two states. Then what?


Poll: Bill Clinton has NO effect on Hillary's support

Poll: Bill Clinton has no effect on Hillary's support
by Peter Sullivan * January 16, 2016 * The Hill

A majority of the public says that despite his marriage to Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton has no effect on who they will support in 2016.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Saturday found that 58 percent said the former president has no effect on their support. Twelve percent said he makes them more likely to support Hillary Clinton, and 15 percent said less likely.
The indifference is even stronger among Democrats. Seventy-three percent say Bill Clinton has no effect on their support.

Bill Clinton, a legendary retail campaigner, has been ramping up his presence on the campaign trail recently. But Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump and others have attacked him, tying his past sex scandals to his wife's campaign.

A majority of the public also said, though, that Clinton’s past sexual misconduct “made no difference” in the current race, according to the Reuters poll.

The numbers were higher among Democrats, with 68 percent saying it made no difference.


Andrea Mitchell: This Democratic Primary race is now "neck & neck"

on NBC news, discussing the Sunday debate.

No more references to Hillary as the "front-runner".
Now it's officially too close to call.

Never been fan of Mr. Bernanke; but now that a 2016 Crash appears to be underway .. thoughts?

Yes, I know. This is about 1-1/2 years old, but to me it makes it all the more interesting, since it
predicts a crash in 2-16 AND with the apparent crash apparently being underway.

Opinion: Countdown to the stock-market Crash of 2016 is ticking louder
By Paul B. Farrell * May 17, 2015 * MarketWatch.com

Warning bells just keep getting louder and louder as the countdown to the Crash of 2016 keeps ticking. Wall Street’s in denial, but the Washington Post warns: “U.S. economic growth slows to 0.2 percent, grinding nearly to a halt.” USA Today hears “Bubble Talk” at the Vegas “Davos for Geeks.” Earlier the Wall Street Journal warned, “declining population could reduce global economic growth by 40%.” Then recently the “slow-growth Fed” was blamed.

Wrong, former Fed chief Ben Bernanke counterattacked: “I’m waiting for the Journal to argue for a well-structured program of public infrastructure development, which would support growth in the near term by creating jobs and in the longer term by making our economy more productive.” But for years the Fed “has been pretty much the only game in town as far as economic policy goes.” Today “we should be looking for a better balance between monetary and other growth-promoting policies, including fiscal policy.”

Fiscal policy? No, Ben, not a chance. The GOP controls economic policy. And they will never give “growth-promoting fiscal policy” victories to President Obama and Hillary Clinton before the presidential election of 2016. Never. In spite of Bernanke’s obviously rational solution to the core problems of the American economy, one that would help the American people, the GOP will never, ever agree to fiscal stimulus programs that give the Democrats bragging rights and make Obama and Clinton look good before the elections.

The GOP is hungry for power, very hungry. They lost the presidency twice to Obama. They want it back. And now their collective ego is convinced that with the $889 million backing from the Koch Empire they can beat Hillary and take absolute control of the American democracy: win the presidency, hold Congress, gain the power to issue executive orders and veto legislation, appoint more than 6,000 insiders including cabinet officers, regulatory heads, federal judges, ambassadors, staff bureaucrats, and more. Yes, the GOP knows all that power is on the line in 2016.


Is Wall St. deliberately crashing the US economy just before the elections?

Dow drops (by mid-day) more than 500 points
by Sylvan Lane * 1/15/16 * The Hill

The U.S. stock market was hit with heavy losses Friday as the Dow Jones industrial average fell by more than 500 points by midday trading.

The S&P 500 at one point fell 3.5 percent, and the Nasdaq dropped more than 4 percent.

It's been a treacherous January for the stock market. The latest losses were spurred by the lowest crude oil prices in decades, disappointing December retail sales and concerns about slowdowns in international economic growth, according to The Associated Press. Other worries for investors include a third consecutive month of dropping U.S. industrial production and weak Chinese economic growth.

A plunging stock market could quickly become an issue on the presidential trail. President Obama touted the nation's economic recovery during his final State of the Union address on Tuesday, but critics say those gains haven't reached most Americans.

“The United States of America, right now, has the strongest, most durable economy in the world,” Obama said in his speech. “Anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling fiction.”

Republican presidential candidates ripped Obama's take on the economy during Thursday's night's debate. Chris Christie called it "story time with Barack Obama."


Oregon standoff: Feds forcibly removed black occupiers from wildlife refuge in 1979

A striking "similar" incident to the Oregon Malheur Wildlife stand-off with armed-to-the-teeth white
supremacists, occurred in Georgia, in 1979. But THESE 'occupiers' happened to be unarmed and
their skin was black, so it took the FBI exactly 2 days to get a court-order and promptly arrest &
forcibly remove them from the refuge
, which had been their home, before they were forced off the
land to build a fucking Airforce base.

~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ * ~~~ *

Oregon standoff: Feds forcibly removed black occupiers from wildlife refuge in 1979
by Joseph Rose * Jan. 15, 2016 * The Oregonian

The group's anger was a slow burn.

But after decades of being ignored by federal authorities, it's members decided to take a very public stand against what they saw as an unjust land grab by the U.S. government.

Without warning, they started an occupation of a sprawling national wildlife refuge. The year: 1979.

The drama unfolding with armed occupiers holed up at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Burns is similar to a standoff that made national headlines 39 years ago in Harris Neck, Ga.

But there are also stark differences, including the race of the Harris Neck occupiers – mostly displaced descendants of West African slaves -- and the tactics used by the FBI to quickly remove what the media casually called "squatters."

Also, the 40 members of People Organized for Equal Rights who set up a camp on the patch of land south of Savannah on April 30, 1979, were unarmed.

Instead of guns, the demonstrators, including prominent civil rights leaders, brought concrete blocks and bags of mortar to build new homes. Their protest was straightforward and, upon reflection, heartbreaking.

Following the Civil War, a white plantation owner deeded the land on the Georgia coast to a former slave. In the decades that followed, the descendants of slaves moved to Harris Neck to build houses, factories and boats. They fished, hunted for oysters and grazed cattle.

Harris Neck evolved into a thriving community. Its members were recognized as a culturally unique group of African Americans called Gullah.

But in 1942, U.S. military officials gave Harris Neck residents just three weeks via eminent domain to leave their property so they could construct an airbase for training pilots and conducting anti-submarine flights. ~snip~

In contrast to the Burns occupation, federal authorities secured a court order to remove the Harris Neck demonstrators a day after the 1979 camp-in began. However, four of the unarmed protestors -- Edgar Timmons, Jr., Hercules Anderson, Christopher McIntosh and the Rev. Ted Clark -- refused to leave.

On May 2, 1979, U.S. deputy marshals "forcibly removed" the men, according to a story in The Oregonian. "Their bodies taut and motionless," the men were dragged out of their tent, handcuffed and hoisted into a waiting van.

MORE: http://www.oregonlive.com/history/2016/01/oregon_standoff_feds_forcibly.html#incart_most-readnews

Legal experts: federal gov't has responsibility to prosecute Bundy's faux-militia for their crimes.

Legal experts: federal government has jurisdiction to charge Oregon militia
Scholars contend prosecutors could seek hefty fines and up to 10 years in prison for the
militia’s violation of multiple federal laws

by Sam Levin * Jan. 14, 2016 * The Guardian

Leaders of the armed militia occupying federal lands in eastern Oregon could face hefty fines and more than 10 years behind bars if government officials decide to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law, legal experts say.

Ammon Bundy and his crew of rightwing anti-government followers – who have refused to leave the Malheur national wildlife refuge since they took over its headquarters on 2 January – appear to have violated a number of laws that prohibit the unauthorized use and destruction of public property.

With the militiamen’s recent announcement that they plan to soon reveal how they intend to end the occupation in rural Harney County, many in the local town of Burns and across the country are wondering whether the militia will ultimately face consequences for the armed siege of a federal wildlife sanctuary.

“There are a panoply of federal statutes that focus on trespassing on federal lands and misuse of federal property,” said David Hayes, a visiting lecturer at Stanford Law School and former deputy secretary of the US Department of the Interior. “I’m confident that they will be prosecuted.”

The militia argues that they are reclaiming public land to protest government regulations and that the occupation is defending the constitutional rights of local ranchers to use federally controlled lands in their back yard. But experts say the occupiers lack any legal arguments that would shield them in court and that if charges were brought, the Bundy bunch could face substantial punishments.

Because the militia are armed and occupying a number of government buildings in a protected wildlife sanctuary, federal prosecutors would have jurisdiction to bring charges under multiple laws.


Stealing Our National Heritage: Oregon Militia vs. The American Public

This is one of the more thoughtful & informative pieces I've seen on the Bundy Gang's
felonious and seditious take-over of Federal land in Oregon. Worth a read if you've
been following this, or are interested in some of the more obscure legal issues.

~~~~ * ~~~~ * ~~~~ * ~~~~ * ~~~~ * ~~~~ * ~~~~ * ~~~~

Stealing Our National Heritage: Oregon Militia vs. The American Public
By Tom Ribe * Wednesday Jan 13, 2016 * Daily Kos

Making Sense of the Oregon Militia Showdown
The standoff between law enforcement and the Bundy militia at a national wildlife refuge near Burns, Oregon raises many important questions about public lands in the wild west. The problem at the wildlife refuge is really important to every American no matter where you live, since the Bundy militia is part of larger movement that is trying to take away millions of acres of land that we all own together (public land) and transfer it to states and private commercial interests.

Q: What’s going on out in Eastern Oregon?

A: A group of right-wing gun owners has broken into federal buildings at a 187,000 acre national wildlife refuge and is demanding that the US Government give the refuge to local ranchers or they might get violent with military style firearms.

Q: Isn’t it against the law to break into federal buildings while armed?

A: Yes, breaking and entering federal facilities while armed is a felony. These men have also been driving federal trucks, rummaging files, using federal supplies, and perhaps other federal property and they have vandalized fencing and signs.

Q: Who owns this land?

A: A quick history: the Malheur National Wildlife refuge, like the rest of the United States, was inhabited by native people until the middle 1800s when they were pushed out by European settlers and the US Army. After this the land was “public domain” owned by the US Government. In 1908 President Theodore Roosevelt designated this parcel of land (and many others) “public land.” This particular piece of land was established as a “national wildlife refuge” because it is critical habitat for tens of millions of migratory birds who need the marshes there to survive. Thus, the refuge became permanently federal public land, owned by all Americans, and managed for us by the US Fish & Wildlife Service.

Q: Why haven’t police moved in to arrest the people who broke in to the buildings? A: The FBI has a command post nearby and state and county police are amassed nearby, but so far no police have moved to stop the criminal behavior. This may be because the federal government is trying to avoid violence that could endanger officers and could give the far right a political football to play with in this election year.

MUCH MRE HERE: http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/1/13/1468807/-Stealing-Our-National-Heritage-Oregon-Militia-vs-The-American-Public
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 93 Next »