Fla Dem's Journal
Hometown: Boston Area
Home country: USA
Current location: NE Floriduh
Member since: Sun Nov 2, 2003, 11:45 AM
Number of posts: 6,846
Hometown: Boston Area
Home country: USA
Current location: NE Floriduh
Member since: Sun Nov 2, 2003, 11:45 AM
Number of posts: 6,846
both emotionally and by distance, sometimes weddings and funerals are the only thing that reconnects us to our past. For some that may not mean too much, but for others it means a lot. Seeing cousins, aunts and uncles, sometimes even sisters and brothers. A time to get caught up, reminisce, remember those who have already gone, have some laughs over the "old days" and to remind us we are part of a larger whole.
I know not every family has shared good memories of times gone by. But for those of us that do, funerals particularly for someone who has lived a good life, a long life, can be very comforting while sad.
Just my thoughts.
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Jun 22, 2016, 04:17 PM (0 replies)
on my neighbors driveway. I thought she was dead. That was 10 years ago. As a kitten she loved snuggling in my arms and on my lap. But about at a year old she began not liking me holding her or touching her. She still curls up next to me on the sofa and always wants to sleep on the bed, but holding and touching is not her favorite thing, although I still do it and she's not happy about it. But she is loving in her own way. Always has to be in the same room with me. If she comes in from the screened patio and I'm not in sight, she cries for me. If I don't answer her, she'll search every room until she finds me. Then gives me a disgusted look that says, "you could have told me where you were". The one thing she "allows" me to do is brush her. She will jump up on the hassock where I'm sitting and let me brush her until she's had enough. She'll give my hand head rubs and the occasional kiss on the hand, but when she's had enough, she's had enough.
She is definitely not the playful cat I see on videos. She doesn't climb on things or jump in boxes. I can't tell you how much money I've wasted on cat toys and houses and crinkly tubes just to have her ignore them completely.
But she's my Buddy, my Pal and my Friend. Together until the end.
10 Years ago.
Posted by Fla Dem | Mon Jun 20, 2016, 11:03 AM (1 replies)
It doesn't look Turtle McConnell is going to allow a vote on President Obama's candidate Judge Garland. If he continues to obstruct, that's at least one spot the new pres (HRC) will get to appoint. Then based on age, I would guess there could be 2 more in the 1st term; RBG will be 87 at the end of the 1st term, Anthony Kennedy will be 83. But who know. RBG may stay until she's 90, and given the sudden death of Scalia, someone may go unexpectedly. The good thing is if HRC is the president, there is no way the senate can block her nominee to fill Scalia's spot. We still end up with a 5-4 center-left Supreme Court. (Merrick Garland is 63)
As much as I admire RBG I hope she retires before the end of the first term. Kennedy and/or Breyer retires. Then we have the possibility of at least 4-5 Justices that will be in their late 50's early 60's.
Pres Obama's or HRC's nominee to replace Scalia
Replacement for RBG sometime during the first term
Replacement for the retirement of Anthony Kennedy or Stephen Breyer
Hopefully all of the replacement candidates will be in their late 50's to early 60's.
We could have at least 5 relatively young center/left Supreme Court Justices.
If they stay in good health, they could dominate the SC for the next 20 years. Of course I am supposing all this with the expectation that HRC will be the next President.
The last 9 justices retired or died between the ages of 70-90.
Antonin Scalia............died at 80
Sandra Day O'Connor retired at 75
David Souter............retired at 70
John Paul Stevens.....retired at 90
William Rehnquist.........died at 81
Lewis Powell............. retired at 80
Harry Blackmun.........retired at 86
Warren Burger..........retired at 79
Thurgood Marshall.....retired at 83
Only 2 justices stayed beyond 85,
Age of current SC Justices
Anthony Kennedy........79......Ronald Reagan
Clarence Thomas........67......George H. W. Bush
Ruth Bader Ginsburg... 83.......Bill Clinton
Stephen Breyer...........77.......Bill Clinton
John G. Roberts..........61.......George W. Bush
Samuel A. Alito, Jr......66.......George W. Bush
Sonia Sotomayor........61.......Barack Obama
Elena Kagan..............56........Barack Obama
Posted by Fla Dem | Thu Jun 2, 2016, 03:36 PM (3 replies)
So donated in her (Ebi for Ebony) memory.
Posted by Fla Dem | Tue May 31, 2016, 10:40 AM (1 replies)
I posted this in response to another similar post on Friday.
5 people Hillary might name as her vice president.
Sherrod Brown would be my pick.
As it says in the article:
" Clinton's opposite. Gruff to her polished. Populist to her, um, not populist. Blue collar to her white collar. And he's from Ohio — one of the swingiest states in the country. Brown could also be — and would likely relish — the traditional vice presidential role as an attack dog against the Republican ticket."
Plus he's 63, 8 years as VP would be a nice cap on his career.
He's been in the senate 9 years and the congress for 14 years. She needs a good operative to work those 2 houses to get things done and he knows his way around.
He has said he doesn't want it, but sometimes when you're asked....."I serve at the pleasure of the President".
Tim Kaine: Again, I think HRC will need the congressional experience to help her, especially if we don't increase our numbers this election. The one down side they had for him is; he's a white male with senator in front of his name. Well same thing for Sherrod Brown.
Amy Klobuchar: As much as I hate to say it, I just don't think we're ready for a female president AND Vice president. Maybe someday, but we've barely got this far with a female running for president. I wish it wasn't so.
Julian Castro: Would love to be able to say Sec Castro is my 1st pick, but he is so inexperienced. Mayor of San Antonio, Tx for 5 years before being appointed Sec of Housing and Urban Development in 2014. To me just not enough experience.
Tom Perez: Don't know enough about him, other than little or no legislative experience.
Now to add the others on your list:
Deval Patrick: would be a great VP. My only thought here is you would have a Pres and VP nominee, both from the Northeast.
Elizabeth Warren: again would be a great pick, but like Amy Klobuchar, not sure about 2 women on the ticket, then there is the fact they are both from the NE and I think she feels she can do the greater good staying in the Senate.
Mark Warner: I really don't have an opinion about him. Just don't know enough about him. However, he was a governor and is now a senator, so certainly has legislative experience. Also, technically from the South so the ticket would have some regional diversity.
Posted by Fla Dem | Sun Apr 24, 2016, 11:02 AM (1 replies)
2383 is the total number of delegates needed to be the outright nominee.
Currently HRC has 1446 and BS has 1200 not counting Super Delegates.
HRC is short of the 2383 target by 937, BS is short by 1183.
There are 1,668 remaining delegates in the primaries thru June 14th.
HRC will have to win just 56% of those delegates to reach 2383
BS will have to win 71% of those delegates to reach 2383.
Hillary will do well in the upcoming primaries, Ct, De, Md Pa, & RI.
For each one of those that BS does not hit the 71% goal, the percentage he needs to win goes up for each successive election/caucus.
As I pointed out this calculation does not include Super Delegates.
If you include the Super Delegates:
HRC currently has 502 Super Delegates.
When added to her Pledged Delegates(1446) she has a total of 1948 delegates.
She only needs 435 Delegates to reach 2383 to clinch the nomination or just 26% of the remaining delegates..
But Bernie's people continue to delude their followers into thinking he can still pull this out.
This from a post in the Bernie Forum this morning:
It is an excerpt from an email one of his followers received last night:
We didn’t get the victory we had hoped for this evening, but what’s important is that it looks like we’re going to win a lot more delegates in New York than any state that voted or caucused before tonight.
So what does that mean? Five important states vote one week from tonight, with more delegates at stake than Hillary Clinton led by coming into tonight. And if we do well next Tuesday, we remain in a position to take the pledged delegate lead when almost 700 delegates are up for grabs on June 7.
As you read this, thousands of supporters are responding to tonight’s results with contributions because they believe we can win. I need to know if I can count on you to add yours.
Ted Devine and Jeff Weaver don't want to give up on their gravy train.
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:39 AM (21 replies)
This is what she's basing her support on:
"I happen to think that Senator Sanders is 100 percent realistic about his goals for our nation."
Really! 100% realistic goals. Oh how I wish.
Yes, his lofty goal are wonderful and they are just that; GOALS!
We would all like to live in a land of milk and honey,
where there are no wars,
where the body of a 4 year old refugee boy doesn't wash up on the beach,
where there is a decent livable minimum wage of at least $15,
where parents can earn enough money to put food on the table and a roof over the heads of their kids,
where there is no racial, sexual orientation, or religious discrimination,
where the top 1% to 10% of the population doesn't have more wealth than the the bottom 90%
where kids can go to a state university to get a degree and graduate without a mountain of debt
where our infrastructure and transportation systems are as up to date, modern and efficient as those in other developed countries,
where our kids can go to school and we don't have to worry about some monster shooting them all to death,
where for that matter, you can go shopping in Walmart, or go to your workplace and not get shot by some crazy with a gun,
where everyone has access to good healthcare and not have to mortgage their home or spend all their retirement savings for that care,
where there are free and open elections, where everyone gets to vote, with no gerrymandering of districts, no voter id laws that disenfranchise a segment of our communities.
Yes, those are my goals, but what are goals and what can be accomplished in hopefully a 8 year term are two totally different aspirations. Hillary knows what she can get accomplished, she knows how to work and collaborate to get effective change. Will all the goals be met, hell no, but she will put us on a path so that maybe someday, in my life time those goals will be reached.
I do not have the same confidence that Bernie Sanders has the patience, finesse, political skills or experience to accomplish his promises.
Posted by Fla Dem | Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:53 PM (1 replies)
plural noun: super-delegates
(in the Democratic Party) an unelected delegate who is free to support any candidate for the presidential nomination at the party's national convention.
Kim Metcalfe is not an elected official.
The Role of Superdelegates in the Democratic Race
April 4, 2008 6:00 AM ET
It's widely viewed that the Democratic presidential nominee may be decided by the party's superdelegates.
Steve Inskeep talks to Democratic strategist Tad Devine about the origins of superdelegates. They also discuss how a protracted Democratic presidential nomination contest could affect the party's chances in the general election.
Superdelegates Primer: What You Need to Know
What's a superdelegate?
As much of America must know by now, superdelegates are those Democratic Party leaders and elected officials who are automatically delegates to the national convention. In order to win the Democratic presidential nomination, a candidate must win not only the pledged delegates who are apportioned according to the results of the primaries or caucuses, but enough of the superdelegates, who can choose to endorse whichever candidate they wish, regardless of the results of primaries in their state or district.
Who gets to be a superdelegate?
Every Democratic member of the House and Senate, every Democratic governor and members of the Democratic National Committee (such as state party chairs, vice chairs and national committeemen and women) automatically get to be superdelegates. Also included: former Democratic presidents and vice presidents, former Democratic House and Senate leaders, and ex-DNC chairs.
How do superdelegates decide which candidate to support?
Though they aren't bound by the results of primaries or caucuses, superdelegates will often throw their support to whomever they think will make the stronger presidential nominee in the general election. Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar says that's one of the reasons why she decided to endorse Obama on Monday.
Sometimes, pressure back home makes a difference. Georgia Rep. John Lewis, an influential member of Congress, initially endorsed Clinton last year. But his district went overwhelmingly for Obama in the February primary, so Lewis made the unusual decision to switch his support to the Illinois senator.
More at link:
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Mar 30, 2016, 02:38 PM (0 replies)
Sarandon appeared on Chris Hayes’s MSNBC show Tuesday night, where she made her case for Sanders, citing his record on free trade, prisons, genetically modified foods, and more. Hayes pointed out that elections are choices, and asked whether she would vote for Clinton in a general election matchup against Donald Trump.
“I think Bernie would probably encourage people , because he doesn’t have a lot of ego in this,” she said. “But I think a lot of people are, ‘Sorry, I just can’t bring myself to do that.’” As for herself, “I don’t know. I’m going to see what happens.”
“Really?” an incredulous Hayes asked.
“Some people feel Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately,” she replied.
Hayes accused her of adopting “the Leninist model of ‘heighten the contradictions,’” and she happily agreed. Isn’t that dangerous, he wondered?
“If you think it’s pragmatic to shore up the status quo right now, then you’re not in touch with the status quo,” she said.
This approach worked so well for Ralph Nader. What did he ever accomplish except to help Bush be appointed President in 2000, So we ended up with 9/11, the Iraq War, and so many anti-progressive Supreme Court decisions. Elections have consequences. Where was the Great Revolution? Oh sure we had Occupy Wall Street, to what end? What did they accomplish?
Where are all these lefties during the mid-terms. Change starts from the bottom up. OWS would have been better off supporting progressives and getting them elected to local and state positions as assembly people, mayors, state reps, senators and congressmen and governors. That's where you effect change. But that's hard work. If and that's a big if, Bernie gets elected, without the senate and congress working with him NOTHING WILL CHANGE. He'll get the same stonewalling Obama faced for his 8 years.
Bernie is not a compromiser, as evidenced by all the bills he voted against that were 90% laws to help "We the People" but may have had an amendment he didn't like so he voted against.
Also in all his years in congress and the senate, he's introduced a ton of legislation, but only 3 bills were ever passed, 2 were for the naming of Post offices in Vt. So he hasn't really shown an ability to build consensus.
So Susan Sarandon can call for Revolution all she wants. Didn't happen in 2000 and won't happen in 2016.
By the way, I will vote for Bernie if he is the nominee. Hopefully he'll make good decisions in nominating Supreme Court Justices.
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Mar 30, 2016, 10:11 AM (1 replies)
DU will lose many, many Bernie bugs and trolls. Their work will be done here and they will have failed.
Monday, February 1
Iowa caucus (results) 52 D, 30 R Closed
Tuesday, February 9
New Hampshire (results) 32 D, 23 R Mixed
Saturday, February 20
Nevada caucus (D) 43 Closed
South Carolina (R) 50 Open
Tuesday, February 23
Nevada caucus (R) 30 Closed
Saturday, February 27
South Carolina (D) 59 Open
Tuesday, March 1
Alabama 60 D, 50 R Open
Alaska caucus (R) 28 Closed
American Samoa caucus (D) 10 Open
Arkansas 37 D, 40 R Open
Colorado caucus 79 D, 37 R Closed
Democrats Abroad (Vote March 1 - 8) 17
Georgia 116 D, 76 R Open
Massachusetts 116 D, 42 R Mixed
Minnesota caucus 93 D, 38 R Open
North Dakota caucus (R) 28 Closed
Oklahoma 42 D, 43 R Closed
Tennessee 76 D, 58 R Open
Texas 252 D, 155 R Open
Vermont 26 D, 16 R Open
Virginia 110 D, 49 R Open
Wyoming caucus (R) 29 Closed
Saturday, March 5
Kansas caucus 37 D, 40 R Closed
Kentucky caucus (R) 45 Closed
Louisiana 58 D, 47 R Closed
Maine caucus (R) 23 Closed
Nebraska caucus (D) 30 Closed
Sunday, March 6 Maine caucus (D) 30 Closed
Puerto Rico (R) 23 Open
Tuesday, March 8
Hawaii caucus (R) 19 Closed
Idaho (R) 32 Closed
Michigan 148 D, 59 R Open
Mississippi 41 D, 40 R Open
Democrats Abroad 17 N/A
Saturday, March 12
Guam (R convention) 9 Closed
Northern Marianas caucus (D) 11 Closed
District of Columbia caucus (R) 19 Closed
Tuesday, March 15
Florida 246 D, 99 R Closed
Illinois 182 D, 69 R Open
Missouri 84 D, 52 R Open
North Carolina 121 D, 72 R Mixed
Northern Mariana Islands caucus (R) 9 Closed
Ohio 159 D, 66 R Mixed
Posted by Fla Dem | Wed Feb 17, 2016, 03:24 PM (17 replies)