HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » reddread » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next »

reddread

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Fresno Ca
Home country: USA
Current location: Lexington, Ky
Member since: Thu Sep 19, 2013, 10:16 AM
Number of posts: 3,392

Journal Archives

deadline expires. Holder tried.

http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/holder-deadline-for-prosecuting-wall-street-executives-for-financial-crisis-passes-without-a-single-charge-150526?news=856582

Two people dead in shooting at Grand Forks Wal Mart

Source: Valley News Live

Grand Forks Police confirm two people are dead in a shooting at Walmart.

Police were called to the scene a little after 1 this morning in regards to a report of gunshots.

Upon arrival officers discovered multiple victims inside the store. Several of these victims were immediately transported to Altru Hospital for treatment for their injuries. The police department confirms there are two deaths as a direct result of this incident. All names are being withheld at this time pending family notification.



Read more: http://www.valleynewslive.com/home/headlines/BREAKING-Possible-Shooting-At-Grand-Forks-Walmart-304972251.html

Are there Fox Democrats?

or is this an oxymoron?
I think this term could apply to-
Folks who watch it, absorb the product as entertaining disinformation, and then maybe spread the offending noise from outrage.

Are there politicians or campaign personnel who appear on Fox regularly?

While that may be necessary, is it inherently self defeating? Legitimizing?

I know Kucinich was involved and drew some serious criticism.

What about others?

I really dont watch any of that stuff, and personally find CNN the worst of any,
and MSNBC completely reprehensible. Joe Scarborough has a show? all I need to know.

Maybe the term I would find most descriptive would be Cable Democrats?

Does ANYTHING these unregulated regulators of "information" apply to the people in your real world?

How does cable and Fox viewing impact serious voters, and Democrats in particular?
in your opinion?

What is President Clinton's legacy of great policy changes and legislation?

I would like to focus on the good things accomplished in the 90's,
as I am sure many would. I think I can recite the objectionable stuff
right quick, but there was surely a lot of great things done back then.
feel free to contribute, I wont have a negative thing to say here.
thanks!

The house that Babs built (or- refurbishing a legacy)

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2015/05/23/jeb-bush-having-new-house-built-for-him-family-compound-maine-even-prepares-for-campaign/mrVSwhPYkanfgL6nA4fRVK/story.html

ok, what is worse, defending a 14 year old molester or a 41 year old rapist of a 12 yo as a favor?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-stands-by-her-defense-of-1975-rape-suspect/

given a choice between Cornel West and the FOP, where would you prefer to be?

http://amsterdamnews.com/news/2015/may/22/dr-cornel-west-demand-medical-treatment-mumia-abu-/

How can the Saudi monarchy survive Hillary's rise to power?

clearly, her supporters will demand their heads.
Or are there no hobgoblins allowed?

why is lying acceptable from both politicians and our government?

would you expect or offer the same exoneration for yourself or your family members?
This is much more than the subtext of what ardent unquestioning supporters of all things
official imply.

Even if peace of mind for disengaged citizens hinged upon it,
why would anyone allow that sort of falsely pacified apathy to
impact others?

to me, that is raping the social contract.
but then that bull left the barn a while back.

As far as I can tell, almost everyone I know supports Bernie and Elizabeth

there are some exceptions, staunch Republicans and so forth.

But here is my SWEEPING GENERALIZATION about ALL of these Bernie supporters and Elizabeth Warren admirers-

EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM supports women's rights and the fundmental reproductive freedom concerns inherent to that.
And so many are LGBTQ that I dont think for a second that any are fooled by the windblown conversion
of a regular participant in the circle known as the Fellowship(*)

marriage rights may have faced considerable opposition over the last few decades, but that should not have stopped
anyone of conscience from supporting them.
Dont ask dont tell, DOMA (**), pandering to religious bigotry? (***)

To see these issues cited as reasons LONG time supporters back HRC,
or as deflections for valid criticism from Democratic voters?

how hollow that rings.
anyone who proclaims that another poster is indifferent to the lives
and well being of women here, or around the world
because they oppose HRC's actual policies and historical record?
should be much more than ashamed.
That is some serious dirt to play in.
a corrolary to hate speech, really, and every bit disingenuous.
shame on them.

* http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/09/hillarys-prayer-hillary-clintons-religion-and-politics

** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act#Enactment_and_role_of_Bill_Clinton

*** http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/hillary-clintons-gay-marriage-problem/372717/
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next »