HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » stupidicus » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next »

stupidicus

Profile Information

Name: Jim
Gender: Male
Member since: Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:33 PM
Number of posts: 2,425

Journal Archives

DC Press Corps Spins Itself Silly Over Sanders’ Specifics

I think sillier would be a better description of the HC-supporters conduct, which includes those that benefited from her husband signing that 1996 Telecom Act into law. But we know how it goes -- they'll cling to their talking points like a Pee Partier does their guns and bibles -- with the mythical tenacity of a Gila Monster -- and similarly, they'll retain some vestige of truth to them long after they are thoroughly debunked.



Among the frenzied were the Washington Post‘s Chris Cillizza, The Atlantic‘s David Graham and Vanity Fair‘s Tina Nguyen, with CNN‘s Dylan Byers telling about it all. Having read the transcript of the interview, I would say that I certainly would have liked to see more specificity in Sanders’ answers, but I’m an economist. And some of the complaints are just silly.

When asked how he would break up the big banks, Sanders said he would leave that up to the banks. That’s exactly the right answer. The government doesn’t know the most efficient way to break up JP Morgan; JP Morgan does. If the point is to downsize the banks, the way to do it is to give them a size cap and let them figure out the best way to reconfigure themselves to get under it.

The same applies to Sanders not knowing the specific statute for prosecuting banks for their actions in the housing bubble. Knowingly passing off fraudulent mortgages in a mortgage-backed security is fraud. Could the Justice Department prove this case against high-level bank executives? Who knows, but they obviously didn’t try.

And the fact that Sanders didn’t know the specific statute—who cares? How many people know the specific statute for someone who puts a bullet in someone’s head? That’s murder, and if a candidate for office doesn’t know the exact title and specifics of her state murder statute, it hardly seems like a big issue. http://fair.org/home/dc-press-corps-spins-itself-silly-over-sanders-specifics/

Why Hillary Isn't Sweating Losing Wisc.

because she's hopelessly corrupt and unfit for the high office?

Given the invisible handwriting on the wall the BS campaign has revealed, it could well be that it is all downhill for her kind whether she buys the office this time around or not. Hopefully it will mean another primary challenge in 2020 if she does.

In short, that deal secured the support of a significant number, if not a majority, of the super delegates for Hillary. In essence, she purchased them with the help of the DNC and the 33 state parties cast their vote for Clinton long before we cast our votes. It explains everything you need to know as to why super delegates are vowing to support Hillary regardless of the outcome of their state's primary or caucus elections.

This arrangement whereby the fealty of powerful individuals to their sovereign could be bought through the payment of money, land or other "favors" used to be called Feudalism. But we don't have kings and queens in America, anymore, at least not in the legal sense. However, what we have is a sham "democracy," i.e., a Potemkin facade of a democracy, where the majority don't get to decide who runs for office, the rich, powerful and well-connected do. The elections in the Soviet Union are the closest facsimile to our modern day political system.

It's one of the reasons that Bernie's campaign is a historic event in American history. Despite all the money and skullduggery and flat out corruption by the movers and shakers of the ironically named "Democratic Party" directed against a virtually unknown, self-described Democratic Socialist is unique in this era of Oligarchic control of the political process. Powered only by the enthusiasm of his supporters and their small, but far more numerous donations, Bernie has pushed, arguably, one of the most corrupt candidates in my lifetime to spend far more money, time and effort to secure the Democratic nomination than she ever anticipated, one which she no doubt once believed would be a stone cold lock the day after the results of the Iowa Caucuses were counted.
Well, as Cenk says, it's "her party," though even the candidate who now appears more electable versus any Republican in the national polls is her opponent. Of course, we are witnessing the same drama play out on the Republican side, with a full court press by the Republican establishment to do anything to stop Donald Trump, even if that means getting into bed with the loathsome Ted Cruz. http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2016/4/6/125944/4747

The Clinton/Trump AIPAC ‘Pander-Off’

this is pretty common stuff for neocons and islamophobes alike -- painting the Israelis as saints, and all their enemies as the ONLY sinners.

For instance, former Secretary of State Clinton depicted Israel as entirely an innocent victim in the Mideast conflicts. “As we gather here, three evolving threats — Iran’s continued aggression, a rising tide of extremism across a wide arc of instability, and the growing effort to de-legitimize Israel on the world stage — are converging to make the U.S.-Israel alliance more indispensable than ever,” she declared.

“The United States and Israel must be closer than ever, stronger than ever and more determined than ever to prevail against our common adversaries and to advance our shared values. … This is especially true at a time when Israel faces brutal terrorist stabbings, shootings and vehicle attacks at home. Parents worry about letting their children walk down the street. Families live in fear.”

Yet, Clinton made no reference to Palestinian parents who worry about their children walking down the street or playing on a beach and facing the possibility of sudden death from an Israeli drone or warplane. Instead, she scolded Palestinian adults. “Palestinian leaders need to stop inciting violence, stop celebrating terrorists as martyrs and stop paying rewards to their families,” she said.

Then, Clinton promised to put her future administration at the service of the Israeli government, asking: “The first choice is this: are we prepared to take the U.S./Israel alliance to the next level?”
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/22/the-clintontrump-aipac-pander-off/

Hillary Clinton goes full Neocon at AIPAC, Demonizes Iran, Palestinians

http://www.juancole.com/2016/03/hillary-clinton-goes-full-neocon-at-aipac-demonizes-iran-palestinians.html

but Bernie's the bad guy for not rubbing elbows with the warmongers.

So HC loves dirty coal too eh

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/03/07/hillary-clinton-showed-support-associates-profited-building-world-s-largest-coal-plants-south-africa

I'd bet the planet would like to vote against her too

The "Bernie is unelectable" meme is hogwash

and as certain as Bill Clinton's claims about Iraq wmd.

AWK AWK he's gonna wither under the concerted assault of rightwingnuts!!!!

AWK AWK the polls taken now are useless because no one knows he's a closet socialist!!!

and related to that is the false assumption imo, that there are more dirt and skeletons that will be of concern to the voters, in the Sanders closet.

What seems to be missing from the various "electibility" concerns is the undeniable fact that it's not like the opposition is "clean".

for example -- who here wants to try to make the case that without grossly and demonstrably lying, that Bernie can be burned to the extent that Trump can by the uncontested/undeniable in his record?

Last week, Sam Stein reported for the Huffington Post that none of his GOP rivals had even “completed a major anti-Trump opposition research effort.” When Trump gets to the general election, that’s going to change. Voters are going to hear plenty about not only his many bankruptcies, but also his fraudulent scams, mob ties, shady licensing deals, tax avoidance schemes and hypocritical embrace of immigrant workers for their cheap labor. Journalist Wayne Barrett has reported that some of his past associates – “I’ll hire the best people, they’ll give me the best advice” — have been caught up in drug smuggling, trafficking underage girls and various stock market swindles. We’ll hear all about the Japanese gambler who stiffed him for $4 million – “they’re stealing our money!’ – and the Mexican sweatshop workers who make his ‘Make America Great’ hats. So far, he’s gotten a pass on his supposed business acumen, but in a general election we’ll hear all about how he’d be richer today if he’d just invested his money in the stock market and spent the past 30 years lounging on a beach somewhere. http://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/donald-trump-should-enjoy-his-super-tuesday-win-because-hes-going-to-be-crushed/






Hillary does it again

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/young-voter-challenges-clinton-on-african-american-issues-is-dismissed-and-ushered-out-by-aides/

that expression on her face is quite telling and priceless, no, reeking of indignation as it does.

Gee, Bernie hands them a mic and commits a mortal sin, while she looks down her nose at them and....

Ed Schultz gets it right

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/watch-ed-schultz-crushes-longtime-clinton-crusader-david-brock/

imo and especially on the TPP.

Question submitted by stupidicus

The text of this question will be publicly available after it has been reviewed and answered by a DU Administrator. Please be aware that sometimes messages are not answered immediately. Thank you for your patience. --The DU Administrators

The Sanders "Economic Plan" Controversy, or who's lying an why?

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/02/sanders-economic-plan-controversy

This is happening to the story about Sander's proposals, and Friedman's analysis of their effect on the economy. For example, Kevin Drum, who originally wrote, "Bernie Sanders' Campaign Has Crossed Into Neverland" is taking it back. In "On Second Thought, Maybe Bernie Sanders' Growth Claims Aren't As Crazy As I Thought," Drum actually puts Sanders' proposals through some actual analysis – none of the other critics had done this – and writes, "t turns out that...Friedman isn't projecting anything wildly out of the ordinary after all. ... I set out to take another whack at these projections, and I didn't really get what I expected. So I figured I should share."

Unfortunately Drum still says these are Sanders' claims instead of Friedman's. But you take what you can get.

So the turnaround is beginning. In the 90's the "establishment" may have gotten away with this and established a "truthiness" to the claim that Sanders' numbers don't add up (even though they are actually Friedman's numbers). Spending on fixing our infrastructure actually would "create jobs" and raise wages. Shifting health care costs off of people's and business' backs though a Medicare-for-All plan actually would help the economy. Increasing Social Security benefits and the minimum wage actually would enable people to spend more at local stores, boosting the economy.

We don't have to accept slow growth, resulting from austerity policies, as the "new normal." Our economy is currently resisting treacherous global economic conditions and those conditions, if anything, could plausibly argue for the U.S. to accelerate against the global headwinds to prevent us from joining other countries in an economic spiral downward. In fact, it is in the interest of the rest of the world for the U.S. to play this role. And that is exactly what Sanders' proposals do.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next »