SHRED

Journal Profile Recs Send DU Mail Ignore RSS feed

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Poway, CA
Current location: Leucadia, CA
Member since: Sat Nov 22, 2003, 01:17 AM
Number of posts: 19,149

Journal Archives

2017 (92)
- September (5)
- August (10)
- July (10)
- June (13)
- May (15)
- April (2)
- March (17)
- February (6)
- January (14)
2016 (97)
- December (7)
- November (12)
- October (6)
- September (4)
- August (5)
- July (1)
- May (5)
- April (18)
- March (10)
- February (16)
- January (14)
2015 (29)
- December (5)
- November (1)
- August (6)
- July (1)
- May (6)
- April (4)
- March (2)
- February (1)
- January (3)
2014 (16)
- December (2)
- November (5)
- October (1)
- July (2)
- January (6)
2013 (44)
- December (3)
- November (4)
- October (4)
- September (2)
- July (4)
- June (4)
- May (7)
- April (1)
- March (4)
- February (2)
- January (10)
2012 (56)
- December (5)
- November (8)
- October (3)
- August (1)
- July (6)
- June (7)
- May (5)
- April (8)
- March (3)
- February (5)
- January (6)
2011 (4)
- December (4)
Older Archives

When my conservative friends are losing a political discussion

Here are the two "go to" responses from them:

1. "I am an 'independent' voter."
The more emphasis that is put on this claim the more I know they are further to the Right Wing.

2. "Both sides are messed up."
The old 'false equivalency' tactic which used to try and throw off the conversation. This is used more times than not in a fit of exasperation when really falling behind in the discussion. A last ditch attempt.

So predictable.
And so common.

--

Posted by SHRED | Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:47 AM (49 replies)

Government Healthcare Delivery More Efficient Than Private Sector

Americans have been asked for decades to disregard basic arithmetic. Americans have been led to believe that private insurance is more efficient than government insurance, Medicare. Americans have been told that somehow “cost of health care” + “healthcare administration cost” is greater than “cost of health care” + “healthcare administration cost” + “advertising” + “profit.”

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/12/29/government-healthcare-delivery-more-efficient-than-private-sector/

---

Why is this so difficult for some people to grasp (RW family members and friends)?

Posted by SHRED | Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:15 AM (9 replies)

Where's the Democratic Party's "vision for the future"??

Here is a reply post by bvar22 that I strongly felt deserves a top post:

It is a sad day for the Once Proud New Deal Party...

...when simply "not Caving" to the Republicans is celebrated as a VICTORY.

What Obama and the Democratic Party Leadership FAILED to do over the last 3 weeks
was put a Democratic Party Vision for the Future
On-The-Table.

Instead, the Whole Fucking Debate is about what the Reoublicans want to do,
and How MUCH Obama is going to let them do.

This is NOT a "VICTORY" for a President who WON in November with a MANDATE from the People.
NOW, if Obama meets Boehner 1/2 Way to Plan B,
THAT will be touted as a WIN.

WHERE is the DEMOCRATIC PARTY VISION for The FUTURE?
THAT should have been On-the Table on Day ONE, the focus of all the TV Talking Heads and the focus of the National Dialog,
NOT Boehner and Plan B.

Things like:
*Lowering the Retirement Age to 62

*Raising the CAP

*EFCA

*Stop Federal Funds to Private Universities,
and DOUBLING or TRIPLING the funding for Public Universities

*Forgiveness of Student Loans

*Stop Subsidies to Oil Corporations

*MORE regulation of Wall Street

*EXPAND Medicare

*MASSIVE Jobs Programs, a la Republican President Dwight Eisenhower

*Medicare? allow Medicare to negotiate prices with Drug Companies

*Transaction Taxes for Stock Trades

*VAT Taxes or 15% Tariffs for Imported Manufactured Goods (like Europe)

*Fair Competition Regulations (Sherman Act)
that let Mom & Pop (small locally owned businesses) compete with WalMart
(Big Boxes) on a level playing field

*Not JUST let the Bush Tax Cuts expire, but go back to the Pre-Reagan Tax Rates

ALL that and MORE should have been put On-the-Table on DAY ONE.
THEN say to Boehner and the Republicans....
"OK. NOW lets talk compromise."

Those are just a few.
We don't have to get ALL of them,
or ANY of them.
But, as a Party, we DO need to give the American People an IDEA of WHAT the Democratic Party STANDS for.
THAT should be what America is talking about.

Boehner and the Republicans were very successful at putting their vision in front of the American people,
and having THAT as the focus of the national discussion for over 4 weeks.

Does ANYONE here KNOW what the Democratic Vision is?
...besides NOT letting Boehner have every-fucking-thing he asked for?
...besides NOT being quite as bad as the Republicans?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=267814

--

Posted by SHRED | Wed Dec 26, 2012, 09:14 AM (137 replies)

"...big government, small government..."

DEAN BAKER: Well, you know, I think this whole debate over big government has always been silly, because it’s not about big government. It’s about who your friends are. And in this case, you know, the friends of the Republicans are defense military contractors, so they don’t want to see them cut. I mean, you know, this whole notion of big government, small government—one side’s for one, one side’s for the other—it’s literally nonsense.

I’ll just give you, you know, one very simple example. We spend somewhere close to $300 billion a year on prescription drugs, because the government gives drug companies patent monopolies. I’d get arrested, you know, if I tried to produce, you know, Pfizer’s drugs. They have a patent monopoly. They get to charge whatever they want. If you didn’t have those monopolies, we’d spend about a 10th as much, somewhere around $30 billion. So that difference is close to $250 billion a year. That’s not entered on the budget, but the government is requiring us to spend extra money for drugs. That’s really big government, but the Republicans never, ever talk about that, because the pharmaceutical industry are big contributors. So we aren't arguing about big government or small government; we’re arguing about who gets the money.

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/14/dean_baker_the_biggest_myth_in

--

Posted by SHRED | Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:34 AM (4 replies)

Some quotes to remember:

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." - Thomas Jefferson

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini

"The real truth of the matter - as you and I know - is that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson." FDR

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to the point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism – ownership of government by an individual, by a group or any controlling private power." FDR

The most effective way to restrict democracy is to transfer decision-making from the public arena to unaccountable institutions: kings and princes, priestly castes, military juntas, party dictatorships, or modern corporations. -- Noam Chomsky

--

Posted by SHRED | Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:49 AM (1 replies)

When the wolves are at the door

You don't open the door to have a "discussion".
You open the door to beat them down with a baseball bat.

Plouffe, Durban, etc...need to understand that the wolves at the door are the private sector vulture corporatists and banksters disguised as the mainstream media and the Republican Party dying to feast on our safety nets.

---

Posted by SHRED | Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:43 AM (5 replies)

The framing of the "fiscal cliff" talks

It seems to me that we the working-class have already lost this frame and I am mad as hell.
The fact that Medicare, Medicaid, and especially Social Security are even in the "fiscal cliff" discussions shows to me that the corporatists have the upper-hand here. These corporatists and banksters have been trying for years to insert their privatization tentacles deeper and deeper into our public safety nets and they are succeeding.

Oh how I wish the Democratic Party, for once, had some unity and some testicular fortitude to tell the Republican party to go 'F' themselves. That they would tell the mainstream media that the people have spoken and elections do have consequences. That when it comes to the "Big Three"...OH HELL NO YOU CAN'T!!!!

Instead we have Democrats like White House senior advisor David Plouffe neutering our bargaining position even before we get started. With people like Rahm and David do we need any enemies?

I am with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
He is a fighter for us.

--

Posted by SHRED | Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:26 AM (3 replies)

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: This Is What Corporate Governance Looks Like

In 2008, the United States Trade Representative Susan Schwab announced the U.S. entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks as “a pathway to broader Asia-Pacific regional economic integration.” Originating in 2005 as a “Strategic Economic Partnership” between a few select Pacific countries, the TPP has, as of October 2012, expanded to include 11 nations in total: the United States, Canada, Mexico, Peru, Chile, New Zealand, Australia, Brunei, Singapore, Vietnam and Malaysia, with the possibility of several more joining in the future.

What makes the TPP unique is not simply the fact that it may be the largest “free trade agreement” ever negotiated, nor even the fact that only two of its roughly 26 articles actually deal with “trade,” but that it is also the most secretive trade negotiations in history, with no public oversight, input, or consultations.

MORE ABOUT THIS BEAST:
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12857-the-trans-pacific-partnership-this-is-what-corporate-governance-looks-like

---

Posted by SHRED | Sun Nov 25, 2012, 12:49 AM (3 replies)

The Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Keystone XL pipeline

We need to push our President like holy hell to oppose these monsters.

---

Posted by SHRED | Sun Nov 25, 2012, 12:21 AM (11 replies)

Filibuster on the "other foot"

Say the Senate filibuster is removed.

Then let's say the Congress and the President agree to raising the eligibility ages or other bullshit cuts to the big three (SSI, Medicare, Medicaid) instead of enhancing them via revenue increases like lifting the caps.

What tools would say a Bernie Sanders or an Elizabeth Warren have at their disposal, in the Senate, to stop the cuts?

--

Posted by SHRED | Fri Nov 16, 2012, 11:19 AM (6 replies)

Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »