Member since: Fri Dec 10, 2010, 10:36 PM
Number of posts: 40,352
Number of posts: 40,352
- 2014 (439)
- 2013 (1370)
- 2012 (189)
- 2011 (3)
- December (3)
- Older Archives
They yell at others, name call and pretend they are superior to commoners. It's a sure way to end up being ignored by sane people.
Your friendly socialist (yes, I am more socialist than most), Obamabot cheerleading, authoritarian swooning pal,
P.S. Fascists suck, and all who act like them can KMG.
Posted by freshwest | Thu Mar 13, 2014, 12:51 AM (1 replies)
Gee, they were all anti-war liberals, too. Libertarians are more liberal than liberals, don't ya know, because they are pure as the driven snow.
All I could make out of the Faux Noise 2-minute Hate was O'Reilly was auditioning for Goebbels and Hannity was playing a Hitler wannabe.
I know about all the memes and how the Right and Reich and Libertarians and Teabags use them repeatedly to disrupt and demoralize Democrats to get them to not vote in the midterms.
Election seasons do NOT start after the primaries, they are in action all year, every year. We are being given the CREEP treatment just like Segretti did for Nixon, and was done in every election thereater.
This is the ammo to create another Tea Party victory in 2014 like the one in 2010, and people have still not gloomed onto the technique. The GOP gave it such an attractive name, too, Ratfucking:
Don Segretti 4.0, A Teabagger Nation
By Driftglass - **June 21, 2010**
'Ratfucking' is a method the GOP began during the Nixon era and consistently after that time. Since they have the money to fund pundits to do this for them, it will continue. Beware.
The practice has won the right many victories for them and very effective in causing Democrats to abandon their candidates and their party. The man who originated the term and method was:
Donald Henry Segretti (born September 17, 1941, in San Marino, California) is a former political operative for the Committee to Re-elect the President (Nixon) during the early 1970s. Segretti was hired by friend Dwight L. Chapin to run a campaign of dirty tricks (which he dubbed "ratfucking") against the Democrats, with his work being paid for by Herb Kalmbach, Nixon's lawyer, from presidential campaign re-election funds gathered before an April 7, 1972, law required that contributors be identified. His actions were part of the larger Watergate scandal, and were important indicators for the few members of the press actively investigating the Watergate break in in the earliest stages that what became known as the Watergate scandal involved far more than just a simple break in. Segretti's involvement in the "Canuck letter" typifies the tactics Segretti and others working with him used, forging a letter ascribed to Senator Edmund Muskie which maligned the people, language and culture of French Canada and French Canadians, causing the soon to be Democratic presidential candidate Muskie considerable headaches in denying the letter and having to continue dealing with the issue. Many historians have indicated over the years that Muskie's withdrawal from the Presidential primaries, and the disastrous Iowa primary loss to George McGovern that precipitated it, were at least partly the result of Segretti and some of the other "Ratfuckers" creating so much confusion and false accusations that Muskie simply could not respond in any meaningful way.
In 1974, Segretti pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor counts of distributing illegal (in fact, forged) campaign literature and was sentenced to six months in prison, actually serving four months. One notable example of his wrongdoing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old; the Muskie letters accused Senator Hubert H. Humphrey of sexual misconduct as well. After testimony regarding the Muskie letters emerged, Democrats in Florida noted the similarity between these sabotage incidents and others that involved stationery stolen from Humphrey's offices after Muskie dropped out of the race. A false news release on Humphrey's letterhead "accused Rep. Shirley Chisholm (D-N.Y.) of being mentally unbalanced" and a mailing with an unidentified source mischaracterized Humphrey as supporting a controversial environmental measure that he actually opposed.
In the 1976 film about Watergate, All the President's Men, Segretti was played by Robert Walden.
Segretti was a lawyer who served as a prosecutor for the military and later as a civilian. However, his license was suspended for two years following his conviction. In 1995, he ran for a local judgeship in Orange County, California. However, he quickly withdrew from the race when his campaign awakened lingering anger over his involvement in the Watergate scandal. In 2000, Segretti served as co-chair of John McCain's presidential campaign in Orange County.
He holds a B.S. in Finance from the University of Southern California (1963) and a J.D. from UC Berkeley School of Law (1966). While at USC he became associated with Dwight L. Chapin, Tim Elbourne, Ron Ziegler, Herbert Porter and Gordon C. Strachan, they all joined the "Trojans for Representative Government" group.
Back in the Nixon era
It would be tempting to label this "The Return of the Ratfuckers", but of course the GOP Ratfuck squad (from Corrente) --
Ratfucking is an American slang term for political sabotage or dirty tricks. It was first brought to public attention during the Watergate scandal investigation that during the 1972 presidential campaign the Nixon campaign committee maintained a "dirty tricks" unit focused on discrediting Nixon's strongest challengers.
According to Woodward and Bernstein, Nixon aide Dwight Chapin hired fellow USC alumnus Donald Segretti to run a campaign of dirty tricks (which Segretti dubbed "ratfucking") against the Democrats in 1972. The purpose of the operation was to create as much bitterness and disunity within the Democrat primary as possible. One notable example of Segretti's wrong-doing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old...
-- has never left us.
Much more worth reading at:
This is why we see one thing after another against Obama, Kerry, Pelosi and Democrats to gin up outrage. Some things we hear about are based on difference of opinion, tearing up Democrats and our leaders is not productive. Many of the issues have been manufactured about the things guaranteed break the hearts of liberal, progressive Democrats, but usually by Libertarians who do not want the same things. But they want to destroy the Democrats because they are the force that robs their coporatist masters.
So what happens is that Democrats feel betrayed and react accordingly, but they are seldom given opposing information.
And as soon as one issue is debunked, they move immediately to another. It is exhausting and costly to rebutt all of these, and after a while by repetition they are established as a truth by the inability to not rebut them at the speed they are sent out. They are the monied party, after all, now being sponsored by the really big money, like the Koch brothers.
Ratfucking relies upon the learned perception that the well of political discourse has been turned into a cesspool, and counts on the discouraged to lose the will to get in government and clean the mess up. Instead, in their place are Tea Party grifters as the voices of the sane and the compassionate stay out of political life. Thus the RW mission is accomplished.
Another major reason some smears are not rebutted is we don't have Koch billions to fund these smears, so they outvote us with their media dollars and paid pundits. We have to be smart and not allow this to divide us.
It applies to what is being done to attack Obama and most Democrats right now.
Anyone who followed the political scene for many years would recognize the approach being used with or without the term 'ratfucking.'
But the term is shorthand for a complicatd process. Its purpose is to destroy the reputation or credibility of the Democratic Party and Obama among those who should be rightly proud of our accomplishments. The media is owned by right wingers and they do not show our side in a credible fashion.
Make no mistake, it is not just the personality or the actions of our party or our president being attacked, it is the progressive ideas represented. And now we see that they are going after each and every Democrat on the personal level. That and we are the enemy of the RWers and Koch organizations who are fighting by going after our leaders and now, all of us. They will use Citizens United and every other weapon in their hands to defeat us and our hopes for a better America and a better world.
In more recent events, think of the method employed to ruin the Kennedys, ACORN and so many others. We must not be taken in.
**Yes, some of us realized what was happening as the media and pundits formerly trusted did this in the summer of 2010, and it worked very well. We tried to warn others, but they stayed away from the polls and many states now live under the boot of the Tea Party.
Will they succeed in 2014?
Posted by freshwest | Thu Mar 13, 2014, 12:33 AM (1 replies)
Unfortunately, the Koches and their ilk own the lying media. So we think this is news now. Guess we have to haul back to the 60s and 70s again because half of the citizens lost their memory from watching useless shit on television.
Government: The View from Washington, DC
Following the Second World War, the United States Federal government funded many kinds of research, much of it connected to Cold War concerns, and some of this happened to relate to climate change. During the 1960s, the government created major agencies for space, atmospheric, and ocean science, and in the 1970s, as public concern for the environment mounted, the agencies increasingly supported research targeted directly at climate change. But climate scientists were too few and disorganized to push through a unified national research program. Their budgets, divided among different agencies, would rise for a few years and then stagnate. During the 1980s, the funding and the science itself came under attack. The technical question of whether climate change might be a threat got caught up in political battles between pro-regulation environmentalists and anti-government conservatives. Demands for policies to mitigate global warming found little support among American politicians, who thought the ideas were politically unfeasible if not downright pernicious. (This essay describes relations between government and science, touching only briefly on arguments over specific policies. It covers only the United States government; other countries were certainly important, but I have not researched them. For international developments, see the essay on International Cooperation ).
Go to link to at the bottom to find each of these and links to download more:
Subsections: Cold War Organizations and Climate Research (1950s) - New Research Organizations (1957-1970) - Rising Concern about Climate Change - A Federal Program for Climate Change Research? (Early 1970s) - Attempts at Coordination - NASA and Other Funders - Global Warming Becomes a Political Issue (1980-1983) - Research Organization in the1980s - The Summer of 1988 - Resistance and Stasis (1989-2001) - Research Organization in the 1990s - The George W. Bush Administration - The Obama Administration
The one I'm most familiar with are the ones from the 1970s before the Great Leap Back Asswards. This was common knowledge and discussed at one time. The Pentagon, no matter how much we may hate it in theory, is not just about dropping bombs. That's just the stuff the news loves to talk about.
The USA government is being starved of resources to do its job for the American people by Koch lackeys, who are also destroying the knowledge base of the entire nation to create permanent castes in the population to use as little more than robots.
Right now, they provide the flesh and blood hands pulling the ballot levels for traitorous groups but later, they'll have something more sinister to do with them. JMHO.
Posted by freshwest | Thu Mar 13, 2014, 12:00 AM (0 replies)
They also miss the beloved pair, really into all of that tough guy stuff:
Sorry, I don't miss him and I'm not into strong man dictators.
Posted by freshwest | Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:06 PM (0 replies)
'You're either with us or against it and for the wars or you're a terrorist.'
I didn't let anyone shove that crap down my thought the first 50 years of my life, and not about to kiss new rightwinger ass or those who practice their methodology now, no matter how they try to disguise it.
What we can't get on this site is a proper discussion of the issues at hand without flaming. I don't trust people that start troll baiting threads and huge broadbrush call outs.
I asked1StrongBlackMan, who is a better and more thoughtful poster than many, about this. If one comprehends what he says in these posts, there is entire thought world to consider here, which vanity threads can't:
"...the guy that thinks there should be NO secrets/surveillance in government, and runs a private company/group based on brokering secrets gained through surveillance ... thinks the guy that is working to balance the privacy rights and national security interests of the American people (with real life consequences, should he get it wrong) is an embarrassment..."
The important consideration is... What do those legislators that have a similar responsibility as the President (i.e., balancing the privacy rights and national security interests of the American people) think?
Do you think it's possible to have this discussion here?
And his response:
I really don't think there is any possibility of having a reasonable discussion on this matter.
ETA: If anything, this is a perfect example of the difference between governments (and members of government) and private corporations ... the former is bound be rules (be they laws or moral stricture); that the latter is not bound to respect and must confront consequences that the latter can ignore.
This is the level of discussion that I signed onto to DU2 to get here. Now this place often lowers the IQ of the reader, cannot be recommended to Democrats, minorities or others looking to improve the world. These threads are like a flashing neon sign that reads:
Trolls Welcome! Please come and throw some feces about! We love that smell!
Posted by freshwest | Wed Mar 12, 2014, 09:50 PM (1 replies)
and family problems and it obscures the corporate method of paying less benefits and hiring less people, to maximize profits at the top.
Such exhaustion of workers also leads to less participation in society, as the workers are not able do anything off the job. Even voting is affected. If you scarely know when you are coming or going, it's the bottom of your list unless you are thoroughly informed on who is screwing you. The way people live, they don't have enough time to think about it
The other thing is just ending the bullshitting about titles that make some workers think they are better from others. This is a way of unifying society. It respects the individual and their time, which when all is said and done, is all that our lives are, a succession of hours and days and so on. What we can achieve with decent conditions will bring us back to a more sane society
Unions used to perform this function, now Obama is doing it for the non-union workforce as well. I was in a union where we negotiated a contract that went even further on overtime than the federal laws covered. They'd been working people for several days in a row, night and day, because the work was an essential service.
The company didn't want to hire anyone, because the law had come down on them and said they had to hire a more diverse work group. Women, gays, latinos and blacks were to be added to jobs previously all held by white males. The company had a quota, and tried to hire over half the new workers they needed from the white male pool.
As they year went, down the societal totem pole they went: latino males, black males, white women and finally minority women. The old 'last hired and first fired' routine.
Gays were added per race and gender. Rules were posted barring any discrimination or harrassment against any group and forbidding a hostile work environment for anyone. It was a great place to work for a long time.
(((And please, from what I saw of how those quotas were fulfilled, still protecting the dominant group. Cry me a river if you don't like quotas. I heard so much of that at that time and it created Reagan Democrats. No one was allowed to stay in the job if they couldn't carry their load, Period.)))
But despite the shenanigans, they were forced to hire more people end the way they were abusing overtime. We didn't have a load of titles that meant a person worked off the clock and was supposed to be the boss's pet. It was all on the clock, no matter what job it was, clerical, accounting, computer work, drafting, construction, transportation, whatever. No fooling around.
Obama is standing up for workers against corporations, but we knew that, just as 22 million union members knew:
We know the Koch brothers will be bankrolling the GOP to combat this. The battle is on.
Posted by freshwest | Wed Mar 12, 2014, 09:26 PM (0 replies)
Perhaps you should discuss that with EarlG, as he doesn't agree with that mindset:
Nor does Bill Maher:
When you say:
10. Another point... the fact that both parties are bought and in the hands of corporations. It makes the little people, us, feel like we have a say when we get to choose between the lesser of two evils.
I don't believe you made a point there, period. You just repeated the mantra.
Obviously, I do see a difference and not as much corruption as those who use that excuse to depress the vote by sullying those of us who have been long involved on the precinct level, and seen the public close up and in our faces. Politics is a rough trade, and it costs a lot personally.
My Democratic elected reps are on OpenSecrets as not having taken corporate, or even union monies, only accepting small donations.
They manage to win with razor thin margins, against millions of dollars being poured in for the GOP candidates and their corporate causes. Here my representatives got outspent:
And the corporations always support the GOP in elections - it's a myth that the parties are getting parity, or both doing the will of corporations, when it is the basic philosophy of the GOP that corporatism is good and that 'government should be run like a business.'
Yes, for all their cronies, and even, in the case of Cantor and others that can be researched at OpenSecrets and other such sites, their own personal enrichment. That is the type of American they actually believe in and they are not ashamed of it as it has been the way of the plutocrats since long before the Roman Empire, which they really loved.
Their Libertarian branch really love some Greek philosophers, and quote them widely to give creedence to their rants, never taking into context that their society was built on slavery, conquest and they were living at the top of the pyramid, so to speak, the 'leisure class.' They called those taken in war, slaves and women to not be spiritually fit to have any say in their own lives, but were from birth defined to be servants and tools.
That is not American thinking, it is not in the papers of the founders of the USA, who knowing classic literature decided that all were created equal and were still having to deal with their own class of plutocrats, the most vicious form of corporations of the day, plantation owners. So they were not perfect, nothing is, but it's the philosophy that is at the root of parties that will give the results, good or bad.
Democrats don't play the games the GOP does, if they do, the party tosses them out. Obama is not a corporate stooge, but fighting a real life circumstance of millions of citizens who have been disenfranchised, others who disenfranchised themselves with cynicism, a media that is the mouthpiece of rightwing billionaires who are extremely corporatist, and those who know exactly how dangerous Obama is to their interests and smear him daily.
A recent example of Karl Rove:
That is one party's vision for America. Not mine. You may put me on your list of Democratic Party partisan hacks or Obama cheerleaders, it's up to you. My conclusions of these conflicts are not the same as yours.
My reps work to protect us and stop wars, discrimination and destruction of the safety net, as frayed as it is by people who don't vote or do nothing but degrade those in office as if being cynical is going to ever change a thing.
I googled and have read most of your posts, except one you deleted. You seem reasonable but now appear in the same mindset that stayed home and created the horrible Tea Party majority, despite all proofs that the media distorted what was being done by Obama from 2009 until they took over. It was some wildly liberal stuff he was doing then, to the cat calls of the right and then the left for actions of obstruction that was planned the month before his inauguration.
The Tea Party majority may not have hurt you, as a former Mormon, Navy veteran, etc. but a lot of us have a lot to lose and giving up is not an alternative for us. Those who think the NSA is the only issue are not suffering what some of us have and will continue to suffer from a GOP majority.
You might give this a read:
We are facing in your face discrimination and denial of human rights for being the 'wrong' gender, orientation, religion or color to those in power and many who seek it, and many who deny it here at DU, too.
Those who have not been mandated to suffer object rape by the state and be denied the right to vote and the like, can afford to look at it all with a jaded eye and not care as they haven't yet experienced it.
So different people will regard such differently. You are okay with me FWIW, but on this you are singing for the wrong choir when you say that, IMO.
Posted by freshwest | Wed Mar 12, 2014, 05:15 PM (0 replies)
From another Texan comedian... Wingnut media will sell anything...
Posted by freshwest | Wed Mar 12, 2014, 02:52 AM (0 replies)
an ancient symbol in the form of an equal-armed cross with each arm continued at a right angle, used (in clockwise form) as the emblem of the German Nazi Party.
I don't care what the ancient esoteric meanings of the symbol are. We fought a war against these bastids and they have no right to rise from their well-deserved graves and march again. Fuck 'em.
Posted by freshwest | Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:48 AM (0 replies)
That was zany. You can see Obama isn't afraid of his critics.
And just who gave that guy clearance, again?
Posted by freshwest | Tue Mar 11, 2014, 11:37 PM (2 replies)