HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » DonCoquixote » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 58 Next »

DonCoquixote

Profile Information

Member since: Thu Apr 17, 2008, 04:51 PM
Number of posts: 10,518

About Me

A disabled librarian from Tampa, Florida

Journal Archives

Wilmore is what Stewart was

and at the risk of sounding racist, because he is a black american, he can skewer race in ways the Noah cannot, because Noah has not lived the Black American experience. Granted, Noah could take a tip from Oliver and use his foreigner status in a more edgy way (like his comment about "for 100 dollars a day" his best high point yet.) In some ways Wilmore is BETTER than Stewart, because while he can be angry, he never has to use the "ar-e-you-fuckin-kidin-me!" Noo Yawk angry shock jock act Stewart did.

However, i will not panic, because while the Daily show is in flux, we now have Wilmore, Oliver, and soon Bee. More attacks, spread out. Of course, I have my idea for who could replace Noah. Get a male and female lead. For those who used to watch attack of the show, get Chris Hardwick and Olivia Munn, who could easily do the 2016 version of Dan Akryod and Jane Curtin.

hey, can anyone tell me about this guy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodwin_Liu

I confess I read about him and thought he would make a wonderful appointment, but if any of you know him better, this is a chance to say so

scalia dead, how does it effect things?

OK, first off, it does hand an advatage to us, if we take it. Yes the GOP will block anyone Obama nominates, but this is where, if we stand united, we can make the GOP look bad, as it will be obvious they are stalling for time. We can also wait until the GOP does their inevitable prayers for the death of Ginsberg, i.e. (when she dies, we can set the scales right)

This is an opportunity for Hillary IF she takes it. If she were to come out and name a few strong liberal justices, ones that WILL defend roe v Wade, will defend affirmative action, she wins. You basically have living proof of the one argument that is her trump, the "hey, you don't want Trump or Cruz stuffing the court full of GOP stooges, right?"

ut of course, Debbie will want to rein her in, as many of her backers and funders do not like anything to the left of Ronald Reagan, and want to commit to nothing in the hopes, after Hillary is declared winner they can take Hillary into that back room of the white house, play the REAL tape of the JFK assassination, and let her know which campaign promises she needs to break, or else.

If Hillary waffles (and let me state I doubt that, she is probably making phone calls as we speak) but if she does, Sanders has a chance. If Sanders goes and says he would nominate someone that gives Alito a stroke, let's say like

Godwin Liu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodwin_Liu#Opinions

if sanders does THAT, then he can gain on Hillary, because again, Hillary's main trump is that she will undo Scalia's damage. If she wiffles, Sanders can gain.

Like I said, I doubt she will. If she is not on the horn to Godwin Liu right this very second, she is a fool.

On Scalia dying

First off, I know I should not relish the death of anyone. Scalia was someone's father, someone's grandfather, and someone the age of my own Dad, who I pray makes it to his 80's, but I know once you go into your seventies, ever day is either sheer luck or a gift from God, depending on what you believe.

However, while I can sympathize with Scalia as a human being, I will not shy from stating the obvious: he inflicted scarring, almost mortal wounds to the very idea of America. In 2000, he turned the idea that we "elect" our president into a joke, by making a blatantly partisan judgement, meant to enrich his own power, which, as Alito shows, it certainly did. Add in Citzens United, aka "we rich buy whatever and whoever we want" and he came close to killing the very idea of American justice. With Billionaires (and perhaps even foreign governments) dumping billions into the elections, well, justice is not yet dead, but she is waiting for a call from the governor. I feel sorry for the man, but am I sorry for the person that might have done the harm to my country that even Hitler, Josef Stalin and Ben ladin could never have hoped to do?, no. And yes, yell Godwin law all you want, but few foreign governments could have ever hoped to corrupt us the way Scalia did.

a question about people stumping for Bloomberg

If people starting advocating for Bloomberg's threatened Third Party run, will they be sanctioned, up to and including getting "the pizza".

To hillary on this evening

1) thanks for not doing a Donald trump and being gracious in your concession speech. Your advisors will no doubt tell you to say some nasty things tomorrow morning, ignore them.

2) this goes to the second point. You gave many of your people, Mark Penn, Debbie Wassermann-Schultz, and others the chance to help you again, but it is obvious they are not helping. Do not let them ruin you again. If you fired a few people, it would scar people, but it would also say that you LISTENED, and that you are willing to let the public know that you will not be led to mediocrity by mediocre people. What will the rich do, sign checks to Trump or Cruz...?, even Blankfeld knows the GOP has nothing, nothing to offer buy bad comedy followed by tragedy.

Be the person YOU were meant to be Hillary, fire some idiots, get on the debate stage where you looked damned good.
Posted by DonCoquixote | Tue Feb 9, 2016, 09:35 PM (1 replies)

OK, let's insert a variable in or two

But do you know what would have to happen to make single payer a reality..... That's not going to happen. That's wishful thinking. But we don't need wishful thinking.

now, let's apply other variables

But do you know what would have to happen to make INDEPENDENCE FROM ENGLAND a reality..... That's not going to happen. That's wishful thinking. But we don't need wishful thinking.


But do you know what would have to happen to make GAY MARRIAGE a reality..... That's not going to happen. That's wishful thinking. But we don't need wishful thinking.

But do you know what would have to happen to make THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY a reality..... That's not going to happen. That's wishful thinking. But we don't need wishful thinking.

But do you know what would have to happen to ENDING THE VIETNAM WAR a reality.... That's not going to happen. That's wishful thinking. But we don't need wishful thinking.

But do you know what would have to happen to make WOMEN"S SUFFRAGE a reality..... That's not going to happen. That's wishful thinking. But we don't need wishful thinking.

You see, there are always the "realists" who in reality are the privilege upper middle class, or those that think they can become that class, who always wag a finger and show concern. Yes, most things worth fighting for are long shots, but when those long shots come in, they are what we all benefit from. The problem is that those who define what can be a "reality" are very often people who can take their prejudices and privileges and define reality, as if they were facts. I am not saying you are, but you may want to scrutinize those that are attempting to define your reality.

The United States of America was built by people who did not accept conventional wisdom.
Posted by DonCoquixote | Thu Feb 4, 2016, 05:09 PM (1 replies)

It breaks my heart

To see Obama having to smile and help the person that blew every dog whistle she could in 2008, mocked his policy in the book "hard choices", and yet is coasting along because of the efforts of those people who supported Obama. even as they were mocked and spat at by both the right and left wings of the party. Obama is a big enough man to do this, which is why, despite mistakes, the years will polish his legacy to a fine shine. The Clintons will always be the people that we admire for skill, but never ever trust, like those ex-con relatives you love, who can help you, but always leave with whatever valuables they can steal.
Posted by DonCoquixote | Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:39 PM (3 replies)

as someone who plans to vote o malley

I can tell you this article is true: not everyone who dislikes POSITIONS and ACTIONS Hillary has taken and IS taking is a sexist, and just like in 2008, people are using that term to make anyone who points out those positions and actions of Hillary to shut up or risk being demonized. Meanwhile many of the women whose family members would risk being sent to Syria, those female soldiers who have already done five tours in the middle east, those women who have had their houses stolen by bankers, or who are in hock for medical bills, are all magically erased from perception because all who are HURT by Hillary are supposedly all sexist college age white males.

This would not be so sad if this was not a proven failure of a technique. Hillary could have run a successful 2016 campaign, but instead, she is running the same campaign she did in 2008, with the same people, and for the benefit of those who seemed to think we could roll things back to 2008 and have that promised kingdom denied us by Obama. Obama is the person they exploit for the Afro-American vote, yet they sick out Krugman, who talked about him in the condescending, patronizing tone that many non-whites have heard come out of some "liberal" mouths, and who has resumed that same talk as he thinks he will get that cabinet position that Obama failed to hand him on a silver platter.

what is pragmatic?

I have been reading Paul Krugman about how we need to go to Clinton because she can be pragmatist. It is funny coming from someone that chided Obama about not asking for a big enough stimulus, or for being too willing to work with Congress. Another aeticle (the fourth of fifth to be named "the audacity of nope" basically says that Obama was an idealist, and now Hillary will go ahead and be practical.

http://www.vox.com/2016/1/28/10858464/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-political-realism

'The argument for Clinton is that she's best suited to handle this war of partisan attrition she knows how to work the bureaucracy, defend against a hostile Congress, and find incremental gains where they exist. This is a realistic vision of a Democratic presidency after Obama. It's a vision, as best I can tell, that's shared by Obama. But it's not a vision liberals want to believe in. It's not a vision that Hillary Clinton has figured out how to sell. Perhaps it's not a vision that can be sold.

Bernie Sanders's vision of politics may be less realistic, but it's a vision suffused with hope. And there's never been anything audacious about asking voters to hope."

Now that I have laid out two examples of what some call "pragmatism" let's scrutinize this. Yes, the GOP would probably find Clinton easier to work with, even as they keep fishing up material for an impeachment. However, while there were a lot of ugly, nasty choices Obama and Clinton made, the fact is that the very right wing 2016 congress is exactly the reason why trying to be "pragmatic" can be the least practical thing.

The fact is, thanks in no small part to the failure of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the GOP is at a point where they do not need to pretend to listen. Donald Trump has done things that, even in 2008, would have been political suicide, but only make him stronger. Trump is not the exception, as Ted Cruz, someone who is considered too extreme by many GOP, is a hot number two behind him. The conservative base, unlike the liberal one, fully expects to be let out of the attic and march right into the Oval Office, and sorry to say, Trump and Cruz represent the fact that they are getting what they want, even if Jeb Bush is about to faint. The right wing media (which never could have gotten so big without that "practical" gutting of the telecommunications act) is stronger than ever; you have media networks like OAN and Newsmax which purposefully report to the RIGHT of Fox news. Even MSNBC leans right, Rachel maddow notwithstanding. Of course, after Citizens United, the billionaires know they can just pump dollars into any idiot and buy a puppet. Many Congressfolk will see the example of Trump and Cruz and say "why dammit, I AM being practical, the more of an ass I make of myself, the more money I get!"

So, if the virtue of Hillary is that "she can get things done because she is practical" we have to be clear about what we mean. As shown with the Telecommunications act, a lot of things that seem practical short term are disasters long term. Add to this that we have one party that frankly, no longer needs to pretend it is practical, and you have a disaster. Add to this the idea that Hillary and some supporters really agree with the idea that a lot of programs need "reform", and you have a recipe for even greater disaster, as the negotiators walk into the room ready to give the other side concessions, without even thinking that the GOP does not merely want to divide a loaf, but they want to break the whole damned bakery because they think starving people is a virtue.

Yes, pragmatism is a virtue, but those who wish to keep the current problems always manage to cloak their motives in a false pragmatism, based on short term victories. There were practical folks which said we should never even think of rebelling from England. Was it pragmatic to keep kicking the can on the issue of slavery? On the right of women to vote? On fighting Jim Crow, or the issue of LGBT marriage? Now, we can look and say no, and that the delay in action wound up being anything BUT practical, but read back on those issues, and you will hear the self proclaimed "pragmatists" explain very clearly why ALL those ideas were impossible. The fact is, while we want to be practical, it is also pragmatic to realize that whatever gains we have made are because a barrier that was assumed to be unbreakable turned out to be much more vulnerable than the practical types said it was. The reason the "sensible people" said these walls were indestructible is because they had perched their nests at the top, which was a very practical way to keep their rears warm and dry.

However, let's attack one more sensible idea: "look, Bernie won;t be able to pass half the stuff he wants!" OK, let's grant that...at the very least, he would offer RESISTANCE, and be reluctant to go into that back room faux "negotiation" which is where the practical GOP types know THEIR GAINS are made. Compromise is supposed to be where two people split a loaf rather than starve, but the false compromises that the GOP offers are where they give you a crumb and poison it so they can loot your corpse. Even Moderation needs moderation, and being so willing to bargain that you walk right into a rigged Casino/ambush is nto pratical either.

AND BTW, no I do not hate Hillary, indeed, my beef with her is that , in a very UNPRACTICAL way, she is surrounding herself with the same idiots that crashed her 2008 campaign so badly, especially DWS. If Donald Trump can pretty much run in such a manner that he tells a lot of his GOP people to go jump in a lake (which is why the independents love him) why can;t Hillary tell DWS and Mark penn to shut up, let her get on debate television, and shine? It would be one thing of DWS had a winnign track record, but she does NOT.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 58 Next »