HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » NYC_SKP » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next »

NYC_SKP

Profile Information

Name: N/A
Gender: Do not display
Hometown: The Golden State
Home country: www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&f
Current location: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1243&pid=30906
Member since: Thu May 29, 2008, 11:43 PM
Number of posts: 68,644

About Me

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12593371#post1 [div class=excerpt]http://www.democraticunderground.com/124384291 http://www.democraticunderground.com/124384554 1. It need not be unanimous. But there must be the consensus. I tend to think that if one person is strongly opposed to a lock, and is making that stand based on some principle they are able to articulate, then that position should be respected and consensus does not exist. But if some people are just-kinda-meh-not-sure opposed to a lock, then you can assume that consensus exists. But I think the bigger picture is that if everyone is doing the job in good faith and being polite to each other, then it should not be very hard to determine if consensus exists and act accordingly. http://www.democraticunderground.com/12595617 [/div] ~~~~~~ Hi Jerry!!! :thumbsup:[font color=blue][b][link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1269|Visit the new DU \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Progressive Media Resources Group\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"][/font size][/font color][/b]:thumbsup: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/121223012937-11-obama-face-1223-horizontal-gallery.jpg :thumbsup:[font color = blue][b][link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1269|Visit the new DU \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Progressive Media Resources Group\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"][/font size][/font color][/b]:thumbsup: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/121223012937-11-obama-face-1223-horizontal-gallery.jpg [b][link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1269|[font style=\\\"color:#0000ff !important;\\\"]:thumbsup: Visit the new DU Progressive Media Resources Group] http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l217/Shockwave_73/warren_2016_bumper_sticker.jpg blue color is color:#0000ff

Journal Archives

Welcome to DU, Feel the Bern! And yes, it's a Cunning Stunt!

I say that to myself every day, over an over.

It can be a tongue twister!

Bill Clinton put a lobotomy patient to death to look tough on crime in 1992.

I vowed right that moment to never support him or any among his family.

Despicable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricky_Ray_Rector

That his wife would run on a crime and punishment plank doesn't surprise me.

Neither does it surprise me that, depending upon her audience, she would waffle on it.

"We don't know who this candidate is, and we can't afford to find out." ™

HuffPost: Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

HuffPost link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/26/clinton-foundation-donors_0_n_7441486.html

David J. Sirota is an American political commentator and radio host based in Denver. He is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, Democratic political spokesperson, and blogger.

Full story is from International Business Times:

Clinton Foundation Donors Got Weapons Deals From Hillary Clinton's State Department

By David Sirota @davidsirota d.sirota@ibtimes.com, Andrew Perez @AndrewPerezDC andrew.perez@ibtimes.com on May 26 2015 8:44 AM EDT


Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments had given millions to the Clinton Foundation. Yana Paskova/Getty Images

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States' oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At a press conference in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.

http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foundation-donors-got-weapons-deals-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187


David J. Sirota is an American political commentator and radio host based in Denver. He is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, Democratic political spokesperson, and blogger.

Sanders launches 2016 presidential campaign from Clinton's left

Source: Associated Press via ReadingEagle.com

Sanders launches 2016 presidential campaign from Clinton's left



The Associated Press Tuesday May 26, 2015 11:00 AM

BURLINGTON, Vt. — Challenging Hillary Rodham Clinton from the left, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders formally launched his Democratic presidential campaign on Tuesday by vowing to start a "political revolution" to address core economic issues, massive student debt and the role of big money in politics.

Already in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sanders was opening his campaign with a kickoff event — complete with free Ben & Jerry's ice cream — in Burlington, the place where he won his first election by beating a longtime incumbent Democrat by 10 votes to become mayor.

"I know what I believe," Sanders said in a fundraising email hours before his launch that pushed back against "the billionaire class" trying to buy the election. "That's why today marks the beginning of our political revolution."

Sanders, a self-described "democratic socialist," is trying to ignite a grassroots fire among left-leaning Democrats wary of Clinton — a group that pined for months for Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to get in to race. Some still do.
- See more at: http://readingeagle.com/news/article/sanders-launches-2016-presidential-campaign-from-clintons-left#sthash.ck11IL0v.dpuf

Read more: http://readingeagle.com/news/article/sanders-launches-2016-presidential-campaign-from-clintons-left



Here we go, baby!

Watch his video at 5:00pm Eastern:



https://berniesanders.com/news/bernies-announcement/

MotherJones: "How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking to the World"

Tip of the iceberg, this is an example of why we need to aim higher.


How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking to the World
A trove of secret documents details the US government's global push for shale gas.

~snippet~

The episode sheds light on a crucial but little-known dimension of Clinton's diplomatic legacy. Under her leadership, the State Department worked closely with energy companies to spread fracking around the globe—part of a broader push to fight climate change, boost global energy supply, and undercut the power of adversaries such as Russia that use their energy resources as a cudgel. But environmental groups fear that exporting fracking, which has been linked to drinking-water contamination and earthquakes at home, could wreak havoc in countries with scant environmental regulation. And according to interviews, diplomatic cables, and other documents obtained by Mother Jones, American officials—some with deep ties to industry—also helped US firms clinch potentially lucrative shale concessions overseas, raising troubling questions about whose interests the program actually serves.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

"Clean Energy" and "Hydrogen Economy" usually mean "Natural Gas" (methane).

The gas industry has shamelessly co-opted "clean energy" with little resistance.

And, the "hydrogen economy" idea brought to us by Bush, LOL.

95% of hydrogen is produced from natural gas.

And, yes, Hillary Clinton is one of them, she worked on Chevron's behalf while SOS.



http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

Hillary Clinton Chevron

.

.

.

You and Hillary against the right to education and healthcare? We have to get that on our own?

And if we elect her she'll help to make that opportunity available to everyone???

Like, get government out of the way? Enable people to lift themselves up by their bootstraps?





OH, man, you'll never live this down on this board.

Hillary vs Bernie re: supporter point of view

Hillary supporter, I was born into this world, I need to help make opportunity available to everyone so that we all have an equal chance at success.

Bernie supporter, I was born into this world I have a right to food shelter clothing education and healthcare. Someone needs to provide it for me.


That's just some sick shit, there.




Bernie! "Our Independent Voice for ___________"

Our independent voice for seniors, workers, children, LGBT, minorities, everyone.

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_banners/3193944696/1431732301/1500x500




Bernie Sanders on the issues:

Voted YES on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act. (Feb 2013)
Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Sep 2004)
Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)

Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record:
Rated 100% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 97% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 93% by the ACLU, indicating a pro-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery. (Jun 2008)

ENDA: prohibit employment discrimination for gays. (Jun 2009)
Prohibit sexual-identity discrimination at schools. (Mar 2011)
Endorsed as "preferred" by The Feminist Majority indicating pro-women's rights. (Aug 2012)
Enforce against wage discrimination based on gender. (Jan 2013)
Enforce against anti-gay discrimination in public schools. (Jun 2013)
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment. (Mar 2007)
Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender. (Mar 2001)

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/bernie_sanders.htm#Civil_Rights

For people who think GMOs are just about labeling, some video suggestions.

We have the horrible corn lobby.

Horrible Monsanto and more.







"Clinton supported following the advice of a bipartisan commission that favored raising..."

Senator Clinton supported following the advice of a bipartisan commission that favored raising the retirement age.

This can be inferred from her exchange during a debate:

OBAMA: Well, no … because the alternatives, like raising the retirement age, or cutting benefits, or raising the payroll tax on everybody, including people who make less than $97,000 a year — … those are not good policy options.

Senator Clinton responded with more wishy-washy defense of her position. Sounding like an old-time Republican, she gave the old mantra of America’s fiscal class war:

“When it comes to Social Security, fiscal responsibility is the first and more important step. . . . And with all due respect, the last time we had a crisis in Social Security was 1983. President Reagan and Speaker Tip O’Neill came up with a commission. That was the best and smartest way, because you’ve got to get Republicans and Democrats together. That’s what I will do.”

She promised not to “impose additional burdens on middle-class families – that is, implicitly defining the middle class as those who earn from $97,000 to $3,000,000,000 per year. This remarkable definition of “middle class” has yet to make it into the sociological textbooks, but I’m sure the University of Chicago will soon make the requisite adjustment.

Senator Obama was quick to respond: “That commission raised the retirement age, Charlie, and also raised the payroll tax.” He said that she was proposing a “magic solution.” (This was the equivalent of “voodoo economics” of which Pres. Bush I accused Ronald Reagan of practicing.)


In the same exchange, she said:

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness. We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year – $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That’s not fair.

… I want businesses to thrive and I want people to be rewarded for their success. But what I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don’t have it and that we’re able to invest it in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

In response, Sen. Clinton say said:

CLINTON: … I don’t want to take one more penny of tax money from anybody.”

MODERATOR: Would you say, ‘No, I’m not going to raise capital gains taxes’?

CLINTON: I wouldn’t raise it above the 20 percent if I raised it at all. I would not raise it above what it was during the Clinton administration.


I don't want to call her a Republican, but it sure reads as if a Republican had taken over her brain and made those comments, doesn't it?



http://michael-hudson.com/2008/04/resurrecting-greenspan-hillary-joins-the-vast-rightwing-financial-conspiracy/
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next »