HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » BrentWil » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Sun Apr 25, 2010, 11:54 PM
Number of posts: 2,365

Journal Archives

Today President Obama deserves a HELL of a lot of credit for the Mental health benefits in ObamaCare

I am not sure if everyone fully grabs how ObamaCare will expand access to mental health. The below link provides some details.


From expanded access to preventative care, the President should get a lot of credit for this. Expanded access is one way to prevent future days like Friday.

The President isn't going to beat the NRA and pass strong gun legislation:What's the other options?

I think it is rather obvious that nothing strong gun legislation that bans types of weapons isn't going to pass. We don't have the house and even if we did, the gun lobby is strong within the Democratic Party.

That said, what's the best plan forward? What alternative could get the votes in Congress. Something has to be done. I am not sure what is possible however.

Beating the NRA: Gun License Requirements , not Gun Control

We really need to try to do something with this shoting. If I were the President I would focus on Gun License Requirements , not Gun Control. These are the reasons why.

1. It works politically. The NRA always says that "the person kills, not the gun. Fine, let's go after the gun. To own a gun you should have psychological exams, background checks, and gun safety. Also, there should be a felony for someone else to use a licensed gun owners guns in a crime. That person should be held liable.

Also, make a yearly requirmdnt that firearm owners to submit to proficiency test, inventory, and mental health checks.

2. This might be more effective then simply banning any type of gun. There are always loop holes, etc

3. It works with laws that the Gun lobby has already pushed for concealed carry.

The gun lobby is strong. They have to be beat.

Winning control of Congress in 2014

The most important thing we can do for this country is work together and win full control of Congress in 2014. This would be seen as a final rejection of Tea party extremism.

There are a few factors that may work agaist us. The first is that the Senate map really favors the GOP in 2014. Moreover, the GOP did rake advantage of winning big in 2010 and gerrymandered many house districts. However, hopefully we will be in better economic times and we have a chance of taking the house and keeping the Senate.

I find this jury decision troubling...

I has a thread on www.thirdway.com. I have never hide the fact that I am a moderate democrat. However, hiding this thread is crushing debate and a free flow of ideas.

At Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:26 PM, an alert was sent on the following post:

Third Way (www.thirdway.org): What actual positions do you find probamatic?


This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)


Third party advocacy. Read some of this guy's other posts and you'll see his is all over every center right republican position. TOS is checked so this goes to MIRT.


A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Wed Dec 12, 2012, 10:43 PM, and voted 5-1 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: In the TOS: "advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground"

I think that is pretty clear.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given


You will no longer be able to participate in this discussion thread, and you will not be able to start a new discussion thread in this forum until 11:43 PM. This hidden post has been added to your <a href="/?com=profile&uid=258114&sub=trans">Transparency page</a>.

President Obama is a Republican from the 1930s to 1960s

The spectrum has shifted to the right. By the standards of the 1930s to 1960s, Obama is a center right president. So what? We ain't living in the 1930s and today's political center is today's political center.

I would note that this is only a shift on economics rightward. However, Obama would have made a good moderate Republican in the 1940s, at least economically.

Third Way (www.thirdway.org): What actual positions do you find probamatic?

Another thread clued me into a group I didn't know existed. Third way (http://www.thirdway.org) is a website I have spent part of the day looking at. Many of the policy positions make sense to me.

That said, I would like to better understand the view on the group here. I would like to challenge anyone to go on the site, find a position, and state why you are agaist it. It could be a nice debate and would allow me to better understand the problems with the group.

Is it immoral to make a certain amount or have a certain amount of wealth?

Simple question. Is it immoral to make a certain amount or have a certain amount of wealth?

Our future is center-left not far-left. The business community and DLC, not OWS

Mic Check....

At one time, OWS received a lot of love on DU. However, it wasn't a relevant movement. The last election wasn't won because of groups like OWS. The last election was won because we were the lesser of two evils, in many minds. The American people don't want radical change. They want moderate reforms. With moderate reforms, we are much more likely to find allies in the business community, then a group like OWS. In an age where the tea party is coming to dominate the GOP, the business community needs allies that can offer them stability. They are the natural organizations to work with to ensure pragmatic reforms for the future.

Protest movements are most effective when they use civil disobedience to highlight state polices that are not just. Two key examples of this are Martin Luther King and Gandhi. Gandhi with his Satyagrah and Martin Luther King with his nonviolence, practiced one thing that OWS never had: Discipline and leadership. OWS is a leaderless organization by its own admission. Nor does not it have a clear set of goals. As such, it does not have the ability to enforce behavior standards on its members, as both Gandhi and King did. Without discipline and leadership, OWS was quickly demonized as radicals. They were more effective for the right then they were for the left. In many ways, they are similar to the Tea Party. They are quickly denounced as radicals and more useful to the other side. However, OWS did of a core truth. The simple message that “this level of wealth inequality is unhealthy”, is a powerful message. To bring that message to bear, one has to be focused and disciplined. That is something the far-left lacks. Moreover, quick and radical change is often more damaging then good. Long-term pragmatic reforms are the way to help the whole of society.

We on the Left should not want the business community to fail. Their success should be rewarded and we should want American companies with American workers to succeed globally. That said, we should work with them to find means to address what is a fundamental weakness of the American system, extreme inequity of wealth. The American economy needs a strong consumer and a strong middle class is how an economy maintains a strong middle class. A government that has a safety net, a progressive tax system, and programs to build a middle class is good for everyone. Instead of demonizing the business world, we should be working with them.

This may seem odd to some. However, the Republican party is dominated by the Tea Party now. They favor an extreme ideology that will undermine the very system the business community needs to remain profitable. The fact is, no one has more to lose from another debt ceiling fight then the business. That is why Obama is reaching out to them now. That is why we should move to position our party as the moderate party. Yes, we believe in a solid middle class. However, we also believe in American business. We do not think that American business is our enemy.

Does the US need an Army, Air Force, Navy or intelligence agencies?

What sort of national defense apparatus does the United States actually need to protect its people?
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next »