HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » louis c » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next »

louis c

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Boston
Home country: USA
Current location: Boston
Member since: Fri May 14, 2004, 05:52 PM
Number of posts: 4,909

About Me

IBEW----AFL-CIO

Journal Archives

This Election is Not About Clinton or Trump

For me, it never has been. It wouldn't have mattered to me if we nominated Biden or Bernie or Hillary. It wouldn't have mattered to me if they nominated Kasich or Bush or Cruz or Trump.

I agree with Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan on one thing. This election is about the Supreme Court. All other issues pale by comparison. There will be as many as three new appointments. The first one will tip the balance of the Court immediately. The Republicans are willing to publicly call Trump a racist in one breath, and support him in the next. It's all about the Court. They get it and we should, too.

Whatever you think of Hillary (and, by the way, I love her and always have), she will appoint Justices who will side with us on all the key issues. Citizens United, Civil Rights, Voting Rights, Women's Rights, Union Rights (my chief concern), LGBT Rights, Environmental Rights and the list goes on. We here, at Democratic Underground, as well as the Democratic Party as a whole, are a coalition of people who have priority issues. Mine is Labor. Each of these decisions break along party lines. The Justices appointed by Republican Presidents tend to vote against us, the Democratic appointees vote with us. Occasionally, Justice Kennedy will swing our way. We know that a Conservative, Republican justice will be replaced immediately due to Scalia's death. Our hero, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, most likely will retire during the next Presidential term. Kennedy is then the next oldest. So, there is a very good chance a Conservative, A Liberal and Swing vote will be replaced during the next four years. Those terms are lifetime, and usually run for 30 years.

This is no time to quarrel among ourselves. This is no time to debate issues that we can debate during the primary process 4 years from now. This is a time to look at what will shape our lives and the precedents on issues that are important to us for the bulk of our lives (or, in my case, the rest of my life. I'm 63 years old).

Let's keep our eyes on the prize. This is a once in a generation opportunity, either for us or for them. This really is a perfect analogy of "don't bite your nose off to spite your face."

I am working to get Hillary elected President. When issues come up, I won't mind disagreeing with her, after the election. But I know what's important right now, and that's the Supreme Court. And we only have one chance to advance our causes. That chance is the election of Hillary Clinton. Period.

Accusations of Palgarism in Trump Speech

Watch this video and see if you can catch the phrase.

If I didn't hear it with my own ears, I wouldn't believe it myself. "Make America Great (again)."



Why the surprise that Trump shuns America's European allies in favor of Russia?

Hitler did the same thing in 1939.

http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/german-soviet-nonaggression-pact

How Do Democrats Really Feel about Racial conflict in this Country?

I was born in 1952. In 1968 I was politically active at 16 years old. I was brought up in a political family. I remember that year in detail, starting with the Eugene McCarthy upset in New Hampshire (he actually lost the state, but got over 40% against an incumbent President). Through the assassinations and Chicago convention, to the narrow Nixon (ugh) win. It shaped what I am today.

It was the most politically turbulent year in this country since the Civil War. But just as Lincoln gave one of the greatest speeches in our history at Gettysburg, Bobby Kennedy did the same thing in Indianapolis a hundred years later, and about 50 years before today.

Kennedy spoke to the soul of the Democratic Party during an American crisis. He spoke for me in 1968 and he speaks for me now.

Rasmussen Reports has Trump ahead by 4 Points

I used to work at a racetrack and the best way to assess how a horse would finish in a race was by studying "past performances (PP's)". That's why, if you go to a racetrack, you see all those old guys charting and studying prior races.

Having said that, I researched Rasmussen's "PP's", and here's what I found. A article on their website in November of 2012 with this headline "Romney Beats Obama Handily". Kinda sounds like Truman-Dewey circa 1948.

Link to the article:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_michael_barone/going_out_on_a_limb_romney_beats_obama_handily

The Right to Bare Arms

is an advocacy group for short sleeve shirts

Finally, Somebody Speaks to What is Really Causing Wage Inequality

Labor Secretary Tom Perez spoke to the issue of slow wage growth. He describes what I've long professed, wages grow when workers unionize.

<snip>
Perez participated in the discussions between Verizon and the Communications Workers of America back in May, which helped resolve a 40,000-worker strike. Verizon owns AOL, which is the parent company of HuffPost.

“Those are really good middle-class jobs,” he said of the Verizon workers’ jobs. “The more you strengthen collective bargaining, the more you strengthen the middle class. You get that through either unionization, or a workplace culture where workers have a strong voice at the table.”

At this stage in the economic recovery, the problem isn’t necessarily that unemployment is too high — it’s been below 5 percent for months — but that workers who do still have jobs aren’t seeing more in their paychecks.
<snip>



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tom-perez-more-unions_us_577fcc76e4b0c590f7e911e5?section=

America's Victim is Trust

I've been really thinking lately about why this country, the greatest country in the world, has so many citizens with so much distrust of one another. It's deep rooted and systemic.

Let me see if I can explain this. There are too many police who distrust minorities because of stereo-types, which leads to too many needless confrontations.

There are minorities who distrust every cop, which accelerates and worsens confrontations.

There are too many lazy voters who mouth that "all politicians are crooks".

There are too many people who think all union leaders are corrupt.

There are too many people who think that all priests are pedophiles.

You get my point.

I was taught to trust everyone until they give you a good reason to distrust them. That doesn't mean to be naïve'. Common sense still is needed. I wouldn't walk into a high crime area at 2:00 AM to just test the theory. I wouldn't send a $1,000 donation to a televangelist to see if he really could heal me over the TV. But, by and large, I've found this advice to be very helpful in my life.

It seems to me that too many people think the opposite. Be distrustful until the other person proves they can be trusted. And they live by stereo-types, which is distrust on steroids. I believe nothing breeds hate more than generalized stereo-types of any group of people and that hate holds us back as individuals and as a society.

Trump's Speeches Appear Rambling and Incoherent

I watched both of Trump's speeches, last night in Cincinnati and the night before in Raleigh. Both in their entirety. I know, it's like a form of self-torture, but I love information, and what a way to get it.

I have written speeches for lower level office seekers, organized political events for candidates, some as high as Congress (successful candidate, Katherine Clark of Massachusetts) and a Lt. Governor candidate.

I speak in public often, as part of my job. I've been doing this for 40 years.

I have never heard a more incoherent, rambling, nonsensical display from a candidate for any office in may life as the two speeches I watched Trump deliver over the past two nights.

To listen to Micah and Joe on MSNBC praise this nonsense is beyond me. What's up with that?

But I digress.

In looking for an answer to this confusing, intellectually baron recital from an unhinged man, I remember reading this article last week.

Give it a read and see if you think it fits.

Link:
http://gawker.com/rumor-doctor-prescribes-donald-trump-cheap-speed-1782901680



A Simple Hillary Clinton Email Defense

Intent.

The whole story revolves around intent. There is no evidence what-so-ever that Hillary mishandled classified emails with the intent to leak them to the press or any other unauthorized personnel. Although the personal server may have been ill advised (something she admits to), it was not a crime. In addition, could somebody please point to the harm this caused. Not potential harm, real harm. Even in that case, a mistake is not a crime. It's all about intent and the intentional leaking of information. That's the major difference in the Patreaus case and this one. Intentionally passing along classified information to an unauthorized person.

Case closed. Now can we move on to more important matters, like making sure we don't put the United States Government into the hands of an unhinged, incoherent, narcissistic demagogue. After all, that's the real threat to the Republic.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next »