General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDear Democratic Leaders: I Propose a Cease-Fire
I, and others who simply want Democrats to act like Democrats, are regularly told that we must stop criticizing elected Democrats, or else Republicans might get elected.
Fair enough.
I propose a cease fire. You people stop attacking me, and I'll stop attacking you.
For example, yesterday I read this delightful piece on DU:
Obama finalizing plans to have your tech job replaced by foreigners
The President is apparently getting ready to unilaterally, using his Executive powers, effectively double the number of H1-B visas granted to foreign workers each year. These visas are used to give technology jobs to lower-paid foreign workers. Having workers who'll accept lower wages drives down tech wages, and increasing the supply of workers in the US pulls wages down even more.
So if Congress won't act to lower tech wages, President Obama will!
Great stuff!
Tell you what, Mr. President and other Democratic leaders: while my assaults on you are simply empty flails on the Internet, your assaults on me and the rest of the 99% have real consequences. Yes, of course there'll be more money for Jamie and Lloyd, as always, but the consequences that I'm more concerned about are joblessness, homelessness, and hunger among us little people.
So, let's make a deal for a cease fire: from this point on, I pledge to not to bring up all the stuff that's bothering me about what you guys have done, and in return, all I ask is that you don't do any new garbage, like effectively doubling H1-B visas, that's clearly an assault on the 99% so the 1% can buy more yachts.
Deal?
I hope so!
And, who knows? If both sides abide by this for long enough, we might actually arrest the continuing decline of the 99%. And maybe we can even start turning things around! Wouldn't that be great!
Your partner in peace,
First-Way Manny
P.S. In case anyone thinks the H1-B program is for anything other than #$%^ing with tech worker wages, take a gander at this:
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Fixed that for you.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Yet.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Here's the pertinent part of what I said:
Kind of changes the meaning from what you would have me saying ... doesn't it?
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Well that explains that then
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that's not what I said.
To be clear, the are many "progressives" that are not, and will have nothing to do with, Democrats.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)You made a clear distinction between Democrats and progressives. If Democrats aren't going to be progressive, that means they are either status quo or regressive.
Hell, I've had a so-called Democrat on here say he is happy the party is moving to the right.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Democrats cover the gamut of the political spectrum, from the center (even, right center) to the far Left ... none of which can lay claim to being any more Democratic than the other.
Why is it so difficult for "progressives" to understand that no one faction gets to define the whole?
bobduca
(1,763 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Should I apologize to you or your DU idol, directly?
bobduca
(1,763 posts)fucking persecution complex much?
oops on edit 3?1?1?!?1?1 better alert the FBI!
hack89
(39,171 posts)Rhode Island is a blue state with a lot of moderate Democrats.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)You sure you picked the right party?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Yes ... I'm positive that I, from the day I registered to vote (i.e., was never registered as, or voted for, anything but a Democrat), picked the correct party.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)ETA: But then, my manny-speak translator has been on the blink.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Very sad.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I didn't say that either.
I said ...
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but I already have.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)a link.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)profits for THEM and joblessness for American workers? I can't figure out what you are for or against. Being a Democrat doesn't mean supporting every wrong policy your party gets on board with. It means keeping your party on the right track, which, being a Democrar also, means the party of the working class. We already have a Party for the Corporations.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)He didn't say that, either.
I expect that he didn't even post.
Nor are these the droids we're looking for.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)and who isn't. Is he saying that Dems are NOT and that's okay, 'pragmatic' or whatever, but Progressives ARE which means Progressives are not Democrats? Does that mean that Democrats have disowned the base of the Party and don't need their votes? Because if Progressives are not Democrats then why would they vote for them?
That sounds like a losing political strategy to me.
But again, I don't know if that is what he meant, but that is what it sounded like to me.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)That's the first prediction on DU you have gotten correct!
And then you go a spoil it with this:
Well ... Iguess for some 1 - 9,000,432 is good enough to establish a fan-base.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I do not support giving away jobs to Corporate interests in order to ensure higher profits for THEM and joblessness for American workers. In fact, I do not support any policy that weakens U.S. workers' competitiveness.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)workers are going to be paid what an American doing the same job would be paid.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)But I don't see the pay provision in the administrative action, nor am I up to date on the wage rules.
I do, however, know that at my place of employment, VISA workers are paid the prevailing wage and have had the effect of raising wages for U.S. citizens, as we take the VISA employment process seriously.
But that is merely anecdotal.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)I am asked to apply Affirmative Action goals to foreign workers with these visas. I always refuse.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Affirmative Action for STEM employees with VISAs? Would that be a lot like applying Affirmative Action goals for Canadian hockey players to play in the NHL?
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Our system is corrupt.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Virtually nobody in DC gives a #%^* about us little people.
Which is why I love Elizabeth Warren. She gives a #%^*. She really wants to turn the thing around, I think.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"Us little people" class ... Mr. Ivy league educated, high-earning, former republican?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I'm hundreds of thousands of dollars per year away from being a 1%er.
The people who own our government have so much @#$%^ing money it blows my mind. We have some friends in that league. I was at one's house about a week ago. The finished basement of his house had floor space bigger than - no, I'm not making this up - FDR's entire mansion. I'm sure of it. 15 minutes from Boston.
Maybe I'm a medium fish, but... damn... miles and miles from Jamie, Lloyd, and the rest of the crowd.
And getting into an Ivy League school was a fluke, the details of which I'll only divulge if plied with liquor. And it wasn't like Harvard or Yale... we had stuff like:
http://www.manuremanagement.cornell.edu/
https://www.hotelschool.cornell.edu/academics/ugrad/
http://agsci.cals.cornell.edu/
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)you just haven't received your just due!
As I thought:
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Why FDR did?
Your accusation is disgusting, an affront to every single person fighting for positive change.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but your approach is distinctly different from Warren's and FDR's.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Nothing.
Even worse than throwing @$!# at every American fighting for positive change, you try to wriggle out with nonsense.
Shame!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You are the poster boy for the white privilege thing ... You did the Ivy League ting ... You did the republican thing ... Now, it didn't work out for you ... you do the revolutionary thing.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Fabulous.
Brilliant.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)But you have neither the stature nor efforts/accomplishments of EW ... this is about you.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Painfully, incredible.
But the first step to all healing is self-reflective ACKNOWLDGEMENT.
Number23
(24,544 posts)But for God's sake, PLEASE just don't mention Flying Monkeys!! 
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Your entire argument boils down to "shut up, whitey."
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)well ... it says far more about you, than me.
And, BTW ... I have never used the term "Whitey."
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)It basically looks like you don't want to hear any perspective not your own, as if anyone who doesn't share your specific background and experiences somehow isn't qualified to have an opinion. Sadly growing more common in our national discourse.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Was his perspective any more accepting of my perspective? Yet, it is me that you choose to castigate ... interpreting it as somehow racist.
Here's a mirror ... Take a peek.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Well, that certainly excuses your vitriolic subtext. "Mr. Ivy-League" I believe you called him, among other things. Nope, no dog whistles there.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I went further than that ... and there was NO sub-text ... I called him:
All of which are all accurate representations of what he has disclosed about himself ... when he wasn't/isn't casting himself as some "poor, working class" stiff.
You may be fooled by his act, or maybe, inconsistencies; but, I am not.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)but rather because he's not from where you're from? So he's Ivy league, high-earning, and former republican. I take it you're not any of those three. Because his perspective is different from yours, you hold it inferior and invalid. Is that not a form of bigotry?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and/or sincerity of someone's argument. If you choose to fan-boy/girl a snake-oil salesman ... that is your choice.
WOW ... Now there is a perspective that I will dismiss as inferior and invalid!
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Gods forbid you should have your perspective challenged or (gasp!) even change your mind about something.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)they are not who they claim to be ... one is wise to believe them, regardless of the words that follow. A Ivy-league educated, high-incomed "ex-republican" that continually claims to be a member of the "poor, working class", is ... well ... inconsistent, to say the least.
Wouldn't you say?
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Maybe he thinks that because he has to go to work every day instead of living off his investments, that qualifies him as working class. Maybe he has to budget and decide what bills to pay, so he thinks that because he has to pay attention to money that qualifies him as poor, or at least not-rich. I don't know, because I don't know him. Maybe he doesn't know what it is to scrape by, to have to decide what bills get paid and what falls through the cracks. But that doesn't make his addition to any conversation less worth hearing, and it certainly doesn't rate the dismissive and pejorative treatment he was getting from you. Just MHO.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I have no doubt he is sincere in his opposition to the 1%, and in his support for "progressive values" ... I have no problem with that. (Though I suspect that his concern is born of feeling, personally, betrayed by a system for which he was comfortable with until he wasn't as richly rewarded as he desired/"deserved to be"
.
However, my grievance with him (and most "progressive" on this site) is their claiming the whole of the Democratic Party for themselves, defining it by their narrow set of interests, while, at best, ignoring/minimizing, and in the worst - but, most frequent case - attempting to re-define the interests of the Democratic Party's most consistent membership, e.g., PoC, in a way that is antithetical to how we have defined them. I am specifically referring to his/their penchant for telling PoC that the racism that we face, pales in comparison/is less relevant than, classism.
That is not our experience; it is dismissive and offensive ... it serves to make his/their issue OUR issue; while leaving OUR issue, OUR issue.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Otherwise, please do the right thing.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"Us little people."
Manny changing his meaning in ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Last edited Fri Sep 12, 2014, 09:00 PM - Edit history (1)
You're wrong.
It's pretty clear that you're playing games at this point.
Sad.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)there nothing I wrote should be a mystery to you.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)why didn't you correct Jester Messiah's assumptions about your own wealth above?
You should stop digging now. The constant attempts at smear and division get very, very old.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I find that hilarious. In this thread, he talked about his own wealth and tried to discredit voices of people who ARE poor, smearing protests about inequality as acts of self-interested and disgruntled "revolutionaries." 
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025436103#post261
Response to 2banon (Reply #255)Mon Aug 25, 2014, 11:32 PM
1StrongBlackMan (13,284 posts)
261. I make no apology for ...
my hard earned wealth.
But you are correct, this discussion has been illuminating ... the more you wrote the more support you lend to this anonymous quote, I found on line:
Revolutionaries are rarely as dissatisfied with the system as they are with their position within the system.
So if the poor speak out against inequality, they're just disgruntled and self-interested, and if the non-poor speak out against it....
What was that argument again?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Better late than never, I guess.
I have not disparaged or attempted to discredit poor folks for protesting income inequity ... I did, and will continue to, disparage/discredit manny (who is NOT "poor", though he plays one on the internutz, from time to time) for the reasons I have stated, whenever he plays the "Me and the Poor are about the same thing" card. The poor oppose income inequity because they are poor ... he (and most of the DU progressive crew) opposes income inequity because he/they are not rich ... enough.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 13, 2014, 07:29 PM - Edit history (2)
I will say this gently, and I mean it in all seriousness:
You should stop now, because these posts do not help your case, just as your posts in the thread I linked above do not help your case. Especially this outrageous little gem:
The poor oppose income inequity because they are poor ... he (and most of the DU progressive crew) opposes income inequity because he/they are not rich ... enough.
I'm gonna link to a response I made to another corporate poster who did what you just did: flailed around and tried to draw that outrageous artificial line between what you seem to consider ACTUAL poor people out in the country and people who post on DU:http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022654982#post70
Perhaps it is natural, if your own primary mission is advocating for the interests of a political "team," to assume that anyone responding to you is also posting merely as part of an opposing "online group or team".....to assume that the fear and horror and anger that people express to you over these needless assaults is just "team rhetoric" like your own and could not possibly be genuine or related to their own or other actual human lives in any way.
[font color=blue]On edit right now: I find your immediate assumption that there was a "Save Manny Call" incredibly revealing in this regard, too. You really do imagine that everyone operates like the corporate posters, don't you? [/font color]
The reflexive and facile certainty with which you announce this imaginary distinction between people talking to you at DU and "ACTUAL" Americans who would be affected by the Chained CPI says volumes about how you view these discussions and the level of seriousness you attribute to them.
DU was a discussion board for human beings on the internet before the corporate defense talking points arrived. We are people, and the vast majority of us are not paid to be here. We are out here living the policies that you so blithely assume are just rhetorical games for us. Our lives, our families' lives, are being assaulted by the one percent and their politicians who apparently also see us as just some abstract advocacy group to be defeated with clever rhetoric.
You just drove home for all of DU the problem Cal has been underscoring here, better than Cal or I or anyone else ever could. I don't think I've ever seen a post more revealing of why Americans are mad as hell at what is happening to our country and our government and our media. It is all a game of Monopoly to the one percent. The propaganda is a game. The rhetoric is a game. And the voices of Americans trying desperately to be heard by the ones wielding the ax are dismissed as just talking point scrimmages to be managed and gleefully defeated with rhetoric.
I have written several times this week that the Third Way mask has come off to reveal what corporate-style empathy and morality and compassion really look like. Your post here takes the cake.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You seem upset that I pointed out that your DU hero is an Ivy-educated, not-poor, ex-republican, that seems to be about "progressiveness" because his status quo, Plan A, failed him.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)in light of my new understanding of his alleged education, wealth, and former party affiliation, he seems like something of a well intentioned advocate for the little guy. His posts seek justice for the disaffected whereas yours seem to fight for a vicious status quo.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)where have I ever fought for, supported or defended the delay in addressing, ANY status quo condition?
But that said ... You really don't consider, an Ivy-educated, wealthy, ex-republican telling PoC that the racism we (PoC) experience is less relevant than our intersectional, and mutual, economic/individual freedom interests, to be NOT self-serving?
I reject that frame because, as I've said on numerous occasions, at the end of the day (with plenty of historical precedent), our (PoC) joining the fight results in our just having a different white person to struggle against for equity.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Manny....I got a post hidden for it.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)That sounds painful!
(Yes ... I know that's a Band ... that I am completely ignorant of.)
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)If he were able to absorb information rationally, and was intellectually honest, he wouldn't be flailing around in the bizarre damage-control spectacle we're witnessing.
Just awful to watch.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Or some on DU engage in hyperparsing of language with a side order of fantasy.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)African-American voice here at DU. And your reaction has been quite interesting.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)But it is me that should stop digging.
With every attack, they reveal more about themselves ... And support my premise that DU progressives are out-lyers of the Democratic Party and NOT friends of the non-white left.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)This is the kind of grossly obnoxious behavior *and* commentary about poverty and human beings that really makes you wonder about Third Way motives for alienating voters.
I'm out of this one now. Just in full dismay.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I guess attacking me, in defense of your DU hero didn't gain you the "Yup Chorus" that your hero has ... Maybe you should ask for guidance?
druidity33
(6,446 posts)i considered alerting on this post.
That was an unnecessary dig with the quote but it was clever enough to pass. The emoticon just makes you look mean though. Usually i respect your posts. Manny a little less so. This here... you didn't need to go there.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)The emoticon? ...
I'm sorry; but, that is all I see with manny (and most "progressives" here) whining about their lot in life, while casting it as concern for "the working class." Because of their constant ignoring/minimization of others, particularly, PoC having been, and continue to be, cheated by the "system", their concern seems is not so much about "the working class", but rather all about their feeling personally cheated by "the system."
Honestly, I might be convinced otherwise; but for, their constant telling me/us that "we will get to YOUR status quo problems, after you help us deal with OUR status quo problems, because the REAL issue that you face is classism".
But because you brought my conduct to light, I will reconsider my post.
druidity33
(6,446 posts)but he's not always wrong. Often i'm angrier at him when he's right than when he's being obnoxious. This is one reason why i don't post much... other reasons are I type slowly (and poorly) and can't waste time with anger and outrage. I'm sorry i criticized your response. In the scheme of things it was fine. At first read it seemed mean-spirited... but it's hard to judge through pixels, y'know?
Have a good night...
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)AND ignorant. Debate the topic already and stop with the character assassination, it only makes you look stupid.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I guess you got the "Save Manny" call, too.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)You need to stop digging. Seriously.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)less time on figuring out other people, and more time self-reflecting, you wouldn't have felt compelled to defend {On Edit: hero team.
How about we skip this?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Now *that's* funny!
First off, there ain't such a thing unless I've been kept in the dark for my own protection.
Second, why use it unless it's needed?
Think!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)So you claim ... so you claim?!?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)- have been a Republican more than three decades ago
- to have graduated from Cornell (as a Democrat, by that point)
- and to earn a higher-than-average income (while living in an area with a much-higher-than-average cost of living)
are deemed to be true.
But the "Save Manny" signal - which wouldn't even have been useful because even those kindly inclined towards you chimed in that your behavior was appalling - you just kinda know that's true.
Perhaps you should think on all of this a bit.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You stop telling PoC that the racism we experience is/should be less relevant, as to not merit a mention among "progressives", other than a/the blanket, and proven false, "All men are created equal" type statements; and, I will stop telling you (and other DU "progressives" that your progressive value statement that minimizes/absents racial equality, does not represent the values of Democratic base or Party.
Deal? 
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Impressive!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I have NOT changed the topic, nor added a Strawman. But you will argue it and your fan club will cheer you on.
So be it.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)I am sure interning Japanese people in camps was not an American ideal either, yet saint FDR did it.
I for one hate h1b visas and would ban them, point blank, however, this game of "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" you are playing with 1strong black man just because he dared criticize your words is beneath you, and beneath us.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
And a corporatist with the name "Democrat" attached is still... a corporatist.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)with "progressive". See you must make the distinction because you believe the Democratic Party is now the Conservative Party. I don't think that Manny agrees. When he says Democrat he means Progressive.
I don't think Manny will object to my changing his words slightly, although I don't think they need it.
The Conservatives, via help from the wealth of the 1%, have co-oped the Democratic Party. There are now Democrats (so-called) that support fracking, the TPP, the XL Pipeline, and the Patriot Act.
* All it takes to become a Democrat is to simply call yourself a Democrat, just ask Arlen Specter.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)The Democratic Party is not, and never has, been synonymous with "progressive."
No ... It is you that believes the Democratic Party is now the Conservative Party. I believe the Democratic Party is the Democratic Party, with members holding spectrum of political views, most of which fall on the Left of the political spectrum.
Yes ... I have no doubt that when he says "Democrat" he means "progressive", but more, "progressive like me", i.e., "value what I value." However, he is NOT the standard bearer for what is, or is not, a Democrat.
And we now have Democrats that completely minimize/ignore racism, sexism, misogyny, all in favor of "progressive" values. Go figure.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)defense funding, environmental policies, and security state policies that are more conservative than the Republican Party of the 1960's.
And your desperation is showing using the new "anti-progressive" meme:
Progressive values include fighting misogyny, racism, sexism, AS WELL as trying to save our infrastructure, environment, personal privacy, economy, and jobs. Your attack on progressives is, not only absurd but damaging to our chances for victory in Nov.
Fracking is damaging the health of millions of lower class Americans but conservatives don't care as long as profits are up.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...but THIS is the Democratic Party I joined 47 years ago:
Among these are:
*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
*The right of every family to a decent home;
*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
*The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
[font size=3]America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.[/font]
Please note that the above are stipulated as Basic Human RIGHTS to be protected by our government,
and NOT as COMMODITIES to be SOLD to Americans by For Profit Corporations.
There was a time not so long ago when voting FOR The Democrat
was voting FOR the above VALUES.
Sadly, that is no longer true.
Unlike you, I take no joy in this fact.
In the future, my vote and support WILL go to whoever BEST embodies the above values.
I am too old and tired to again support the Least of the Worst.
Let the chips fall where they may.
You will know them by their WORKS.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I take joy in not being able to trust that a vote for a Democrat is a vote for the above values (despite the fact that the manifesto you cite has never, to my knowledge, been adopted by the Democratic Party)?
That's just plain silly.
But my larger, and clear, point in this discussion, is a sincere rejection of the Democratic Party being cooped by folks that would, in one breath say, "established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed" and in the next say, "after I have secured my economic and individual freedoms for myself."
It really shouldn't be that hard to understand.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...was the State of the Union Address given by the leader of the Democratic Party FDR in 1944 where he set these goals
and claimed these Values for America and the Democratic Party.
The SOTU is more than a "manifesto".
These were carried through the Johnson Administration with his Great Society programs and the War on Poverty.
It was never perfect, but we WERE headed in the right direction.
Unfortunately, these values were sold out for Corporate Contributions by Bill Clinton & "The Centrists" (DLC) back in 1992.
Just out of curiosity, which of the above Democratic Party Values stated at FDRs SOTU do you disagree with?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I stated that I agree with ALL of the values. I also stated, specifically my grievance ... that you can't seem to address.
This is why PoC are leery of "progressives" ... you don't listen!
kwassa
(23,340 posts)bobduca
(1,763 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)First tool of corporate propaganda:
Divide, divide, divide.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #136)
Post removed
tblue37
(65,334 posts)I don't think that change is useful, 1StrongBlackMan.
I too get pretty darned tired of the constant attacks on Obama that seem so much more vicious and relentless than any attacks leveled at the Republicans who are making it so difficult for him to do his job, and I usually agree with your posts. But "progressive" is not a bad thing. In fact, I am at heart a Bernie Sanders socialist--though I do realize that our benighted country is not going to establish a European socialist state, no matter how much I wish we would.
I think Obama tries to push us in the right direction, but as Jimmy Carter once said when asked what surprised him most about being president, the president's power is more limited than most people realize (unless, of course, like W he is willing to do exactly what the amassed power of the deep state, the sociopathic hyper-rich, and the corporations want).
Nevertheless, I do think that Obama took a while to figure out how to most effectively use the power he does have, and while he was learning he probably gave up rather more than he had to. And I also am often disappointed when he appoints a fox to guard the henhouse or when something like this executive order comes down the pike--though I certainly understand how such things happen in politics.
Many years ago Alan Alda starred in an excellent movie called The Seduction of Joe Tynan. In it, Alda played a progressive politician who worked very hard to get into a position to do something good for the country and its people. But by the time he got to that position of "power," he was hemmed in on all sides by the compromises and trade-offs that he had to make to get there at all.
My guess is that there is some policy or issue that Obama considers to be essential (maybe more than one), but the only way to get any movement on it is to go along with this particular crap sandwich.
I have been amazed at how much he has accomplished under the radar by way of incremental movement, but of course incremental movement under the radar is by its very nature not splashy or attention-getting. Consequently, his progressive accomplishments get completely overlooked or, even if they are noticed, they are discounted as being less significant than they really are.
What happens to politicians who stand on principle more forcefully is that they get marginalized--like Kucinich or Sanders. I like that Sanders is making noise about running for president, butI am sure he doesn't expect to win the nomination. He is running to force the Democratic primary debate more to the left, so that no matter who is the ultimate nominee, she or he will have to accede to at least some of our demands. Obama got himself into a position where he could do some things by realizing that he couldn't do everything--nor could he be seen as too obviously attempting to do all that much. That is why so many of his successes have been under the radar and incremental, though they are likely to have real impact in the long term.
So anyway, although I usually do agree with your posts, I hate to see you use "progressive" as if being a progressive is somehow different from and antithetical to being a Democrat, and as if it is something one should perhaps not want to be.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I agree with everything you have written; except, maybe, that I use the term "progressive" as antithetical to being a Democrat ... when I've speak of "DU progressives", or in this case, "progressive like me", I am speaking of the very narrow, but loud, segment of "progressives" (on DU) that seem to just love telling PoC that they view our mutual economic/individual freedom battle as more relevant to OUR (PoC)interests than the racism that WE experience ... and then, claim that frame as the value frame of the Democratic Party ... it is not.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)I saw how a poster just harassed and harassed you, and was happy to be part of the Jury that hid his response. The fact that a certain posters response was hidden will hopefully remind you some of us do not agree with that poster did, and BTW, proud to have been Juror 5 to vote that pestering idiot out of here.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I seem to have found quite the following since I said something unflattering about a DU hero. 
Number23
(24,544 posts)Good job to you and that jury for hiding that foolishness. Too bad the other juries didn't have nearly as much of a clue nor apparently, the one upthread high fiving his stalking.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)And some wonder why I have such a problem with "Centrist Democrats."
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Who want the party to keep moving further and further to the right. See, that way we get to keep the "D" but we also get to co-opt all those great 1980's Republican policies.
Sigh.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)Well said, First-Way Manny.
-Laelth
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Smart, hard-working immigrants will create jobs, not replace them.
Marr
(20,317 posts)I've seen this first hand over the last 15-20 years or so. It creeps into one segment after another-- slowly displacing whole crews of well-paid professionals with immigrants doing the same job-- literally occupying the other person's vacated position-- for a fraction of the price.
I've seen what the constant threat of losing your job to an H1B visa worker has done to wages. The wages stagnate, as workers accept less and less, hoping to just hold onto their job.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Problem is, median real wages have fallen since the mid 1970s, not massively increased, e.g.,
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/the-uncomfortable-truth-about-american-wages/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
The top graph probably understates the situation, but it's the best I could find without digging. In any case, wages sure aren't increasing massively!
Labor time has not likely dropped, either.
People work more and earn less. All of the productivity gains have gone to Jamie and Lloyd et al.
Also, what did you think of the video in my post? Does that jibe with prosperity for all?
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)that there are not enough STEM graduates to fill the needs of industry in this country.
Yet at the same time, there are huge numbers of competent and more than competent STEM graduates in this country who cannot find jobs.
Please explain how that adds up.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)They are not. The worker gets 6 years. There's a few ways to extend that, but they are nowhere near "forever".
Tommymac
(7,263 posts)I have had my Fortune 150 high paying tech job outsourced from under me 2 times in the last 14 years.
I have worked 4 short term contractor gigs at major Fortune 500 companies training H1B foreign scabs to replace other domestic Tech workers in the last 17 years.
I am a highly skilled, intelligent person but I was making less in real 2014 wages in my last job then I was in 1997. My yearly salary has taken a 7% hit in those 18 years - no raise for this American tech worker.
To be fair to the human beings who are H1B workers just trying to better their lives - I have watched 8 H1B workers pile out of a car in the morning to go to work. They all lived in one apartment, and their contracting firm held their visas, making them virtual indentured servant's until their time here was up.
And though I have tried to organize, it is hard to get through the Randian libertarian philosophy most it workers seem to hold.
I am currently unemployed, in my mid 50's and have little hope of ever landing a tech job.
Have a wonderful day.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)So much for welcoming the huddled masses.
Tommymac
(7,263 posts)It's personal now.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)for third world salaries?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)There was a post on tht earlier today.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)The whole point of the movement is to depress wages. Was this not obvious?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)
onecaliberal
(32,826 posts)Iraq illegally so he could rip off the oil.
Uncle Joe
(58,349 posts)Thanks for the thread, MannyGoldstein.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
BuelahWitch
(9,083 posts)Eventually got replaced by people who will work for less...
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)then got huge raises.
No doubt.
BuelahWitch
(9,083 posts)Just not for Americans...
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)"I, and others who simply want Democrats to act like Democrats, are regularly told that we must stop criticizing elected Democrats, or else Republicans might get elected."
And to prove it, here's a thread in which everyone voicing an opinion about the President's action (and the surmised policy position of his proxy, Hillary Clinton
) is critical of said action and where nobody is being chastised for their criticism.
Outta the park, Dead-End Manny!
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)But they do speak volumes about the poster.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)This just ain't your night, is it?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Because I'm me.
And because your lovely post will remain as a reminder to all of what you're made of.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)I'm laughing my ass off.
Jeff Rosenzweig
(121 posts)Two months out from an election where the candidates, for good or ill, are locked in, where polls continue to show we not only stand little chance of eating into the House Republican majority but that we might well lose what's left of our majority in the Senate, and all you can do by way of trying to influence the vote is to continue bleating about how crappy Democrats are and how disappointed we should all be.
Your OP, and your subsequent rebuttals to those who take issue with it, might - might - have contributed something positive maybe a year ago. They sure don't - as I've said to you before - at this juncture.
It's very hard to parse this OP, among others you've "gifted" this forum with, as anything but ego-tripping or deliberate Democratic voter suppression. In the interest of giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'll lean toward the former, but that's only barely less contemptible than the latter.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)not with the deed itself, as clearly demonstrated by the just fates of Chelsea Manning, John Kiriakou, and so many others.
But is the fault *entirely* mine? Or does the press also bear some responsibility?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Just
Excellent summation.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Don't talk about the ACTUAL POLICIES! It will suppress VOTES!
Think about that for a moment...
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)If you are a Reagan Democrat, on the other hand, you get to act like you are the "real" new deal.
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)FDR democrats and similar commies are not members of the Reality Based Community(TM)
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)just can't be critiqued.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)They're "legal" now. DU Revised Code 3.1a.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)than giving them full-throated endorsement through legalization.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)The Federales don't want to get involved.
Rob Schneider films, OTOH, are covered by Amendment Blech.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Rob Schneider films are a fucking war crime.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Its like putting Nativity scenes up every few hundred feet and then crying foul when some one says, "Do we really need a nativity scene every 100 feet?"
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)giving not much pay,but a certain amount of freedom. Once the grant ran out I applied around. In indirect answers I was given to understand that 2 young people from China would work for approximately my salary.
There you go!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)which hurts immigrants AND Americans.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)You want a dictator!!
The Republicans!!!
He can't just waive a magic...oh wait.
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)are Indian outsourcing firms.
The law also sets a minimum wage "The employer must pay the H-1B employee the higher of the actual wage or prevailing wage, as described in, "H-1B Employers: What Wage Must You Pay?"
The senate voted on a new immigration bill (2013), increasing h1b visas from 65000/year to 110000/year (depends on openings, could be 180000) with all 54 Democrats voting yes. That would include Elizabeth Warren and 54 means that they counted Bernie too.
Why do you suppose that both the President and the Democrats in the Senate are trying to pull tech wages down?
Do you agree with the 30+ Republicans who voted against the bill?
pa28
(6,145 posts)You really can't be too cynical can you? Democrats are supposed to protect American workers from bloodless scumbags like these.
Instead President Obama seems perfectly happy to assist them with their goals.
Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)have to take the form of "attacks" at all?
To me, an "attack" is the activity of a "foe". Are you a foe?
What an "ally" of a larger group does is have a momentary or ongoing "disagreement" over policy with another member of the same group.
I thought the object was to maintain the civility within a group and reserve attacks for members of opposing groups.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)
OhioChick
(23,218 posts)One of the canards H-1B supporters use is the claim that H-1B is not used to depress wages because the law requires employers to pay the prevailing wage. Yet, whenever the government releases salary figures for H-1B programmers they are significantly less then what Americans make. The following is a real example of how the system can be manipulated to pay H-1B workers significantly less than Americans.
Background
In 2001 Bank of America (BofA) in Charlotte, NC "outsourced" its Human Resources (HR) functions to a company called Exult. As part of the arrangement, the Bank of America employees supporting these functions were made Exult employees.
At the end of 2001, Exult announced it was "outsourcing" its computer programming work to two "H-1B bodyshops", HCL and Hexaware. Unlike in the previous "outsourcing", the existing employees were fired and replaced by foreign H-1B workers. The American BofA/Exult employees were forced to train their replacements in order to collect a severance package.
The affected employees had very specialized skills in that they worked with PeopleSoft and Oracle. The lowest advertise salary we found in the Charlotte for PeopleSoft programmers was $65,000 and the highest was $115,000. This range is consistent with the reported salaries ($70,000-$90,000) of the BofA/Exult employees who lost their jobs.
More: http://programmersguild.org/archives/howtounderpay.htm
Snip~ "The law only requires H-1B workers to be paid within 95% of the prevailing wage. The employer takes 95% of $41,246 and comes up with a wage of $39,184. Thus, the company is paying the H-1B workers about half of what the workers they replaced made."
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)This should be an OP, too.
OhioChick
(23,218 posts)H-1B visa holders are "taken advantage of" and, contrary to claims by US industry, are paid less salary than similarly qualified American citizens, says a new study.
Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) vice president Phiroz Vandrevala even admitted that his company enjoys a competitive advantage because of its extensive use of foreign workers in the United States on H-1B and L-1 visas, according to the study by IEEE-USA, a unit of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
"Our wage per employee is 20-25 per cent less than US wages for a similar employee," Vandrevala said.
"Typically, for a TCS employee with five years experience, the annual cost to the company is $60,000-70,000, while a local American employee might cost $80,000-100,000.
More: http://www.hindustantimes.com/news-feed/nm16/h-1b-visa-holders-paid-less-in-us/article1-147259.aspx
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x451653
OhioChick
(23,218 posts)Federal agents on Thursday said they arrested 11 people in six states in a crackdown on H-1B visa fraud and unsealed documents that detail how the visa process was used to undercut the salaries of U.S. workers.
Federal authorities allege that in some cases, H-1B workers were paid the prevailing wages of low-cost regions and not necessarily the higher salaries paid in the locations where they worked. By doing this, the companies were "displacing qualified American workers and violating prevailing wage laws," said federal authorities in a statement announcing the indictments.
Employers are required to pay H-1B workers prevailing wages, but those wage rates can vary significantly -- by tens of thousands of dollars, depending on the region. How many U.S. workers may have been displaced was not detailed by federal authorities.
The arrests were carried out by federal, state and local agents working in Iowa, California, Massachusetts, Texas, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and New Jersey. The government's action "is the result of an extensive, ongoing investigation into suspected H-1B visa fraud, mail fraud and conspiracy," said Matthew Whitaker, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, in a statement. The investigation was dubbed Operation Pacific Vision.
More: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2531027/it-outsourcing/fed-indictments-tell-how-h-1b-visas-were-used-to-undercut-wages.html
One instance of many.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)OhioChick
(23,218 posts)U.S. workers protested job losses to foreign workers by displaying American flags in their cubicles
June 10, 2014 03:10 PM ET
This is the story of an IT worker who was replaced by a worker on an H-1B visa, one of a number of visa holders, mostly from India, who took jobs at this U.S. company. Computerworld is not going to use the worker's name or identify the companies involved to protect the former employee from retaliation. For purposes of this story, the worker has been given initials -- A.B. (They're not the person's real initials.)
At A.B.'s company, about 220 IT jobs have been lost to offshore outsourcing over the last year. A.B. is telling the story because, initially, there was little knowledge among fellow employees about H-1B visa holders and how they are used. They didn't know that offshore outsourcing firms are the largest users of H-1B visas, or exactly how this visa facilitates IT job losses in the U.S.
"I think once we learned about it, we became angrier toward the U.S. government than we were with the people that were over here from India," A.B. said, "because the government is allowing this."
The IT workers at this firm first learned of the offshore outsourcing threat through rumors. Later, the IT staff was called into an auditorium and heard directly from the CIO about the plan to replace them. It would take months for the transition to be completed, in part because of some new system installations.
More: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2490610/it-outsourcing/this-it-worker-had-to-train-an-h-1b-replacement.html
And let's not forget this gem:
H-1B workers in line for Obamacare work
IT requirements of the Affordable Care Act are being met under state contracts that allow, in their silence, the use of temporary visa workers
September 25, 2013 06:14 AM ET
Some state governments are willing to hire offshore IT service providers to work on healthcare IT projects under controversial contracts that don't bar use of temporary foreign labor, or workers on H-1B visas.
Two multimillion-dollar government healthcare IT projects, one in Illinois and the other in the District of Columbia, illustrate what's going on.
In Illinois, Cognizant was awarded a $74.1 million contract in June to upgrade the state's Medicaid systems to meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare.
In January, the District of Columbia awarded Infosys a $49.5 million contract to develop a health benefit exchange and replace its Medicaid and eligibility systems.
More: http://www.computerworld.com/article/2485039/healthcare-it/h-1b-workers-in-line-for-obamacare-work.html
Snip~ "The hiring of temporary visa workers "isn't due to a shortage of U.S. IT workers, but instead for the simple fact that those H-1B workers can be paid less than the market wage," said Hira."
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)we need to open H1-B to positions in government so that someone might actually represent all of us instead of the top 5%!
