Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Colgate 64

Colgate 64's Journal
Colgate 64's Journal
April 27, 2016

Mrs. Greenspan on MSNBC now, rolling her eyes and

making faces when Hillary is mentioned advancing her theory about how many Bernie voters may move to Trump. Kasie Hunt seconding her (hey, notice me) telling how 'she's talked to lots of millenials' at Bernie rallies and they tell her that they may vote 'for Bernie or maybe for Trump'. Upchuck Toad closed out the 'panel' discussion explaining why millenials may vote for Trump: because 'you know, he's going to shake things up', 'you know, turn the table over'.

Where did they get these people?

April 23, 2016

The lunacy has begun: 'MARCH ON THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION'

The following was just posted in DU. For your reading pleasure - and amusement: (I personally love the part about WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS>

...Bernie hasn't lost yet; however, Hillary and her supporters are already gloating over the crushing of Bernie's Political Revolution. That can't be allowed to happen! There are plans for a massive march on the Democratic Convention in support of Bernie Sanders and his agenda. There's a Facebook page for the March and two event pages:

March on the Democratic National Convention
Bernie Supporters March on Philadelphia - Democratic National Convention

The first already has 2.2K people who've signed up as 'going' and 6.8K who've indicated that they're 'interested.' (I

Come out to Philadelphia and join us as we march on the Democratic National Convention this July! This march is in protest to the highly biased and unfair treatment, demonstrated by the DNC, towards presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders. It has been blatantly clear that the DNC has tried to tip the scales during this election, and has NOT represented the will of the citizens. We have to make our voices heard. WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS! This march is also designed to put pressure on the superdelegates to cast their vote in accordance with their constituents. We must unite together, because that is what this campaign is about, not dividing us apart.

April 13, 2016

Why in the name of God does Lawrence O'Donnell

insist on having the RW asshole Hugh Hewitt on as 'expert' on the reasons Hillary won't be able to beat Trump. Was Limpbaugh unavailable? I don't get MSNBC.

April 13, 2016

OMFG, Rachel on now, giddy

as a schoolgirl because 17,000 people have said on Facebook that they're going to show up for Bernie's rally at Washington Sq, in New York City tomorrow. To quote Rachel "Something's up - watch this space". She did feel compelled however to at least admit that when Obaman in 2008 he rallied 24,000 at the same place - and then proceeded to lose the NYState Primary. As she grudgingly had to recognize, "rallys aren't votes".

Apparently he MSM (and MSNBC in particular) feels that they have to keep pushing "this is a horserace", come hell or high water until they've squeezed the last possible viewer out of the programming, facts be damned. I for one will be thrilled when April 19 comes and goes and even the most diehard Bernie fan will have to recognize that Hillary will be our candidate for President.

March 17, 2016

Obama's deal with the Repugs on Supreme Court nominee?

Source: Rachel Maddow Shoe 3/16/16

According to Nina Totenberg, NPR's Legal Correspondent appearing on the Rachel Maddow Show tonight Obama has made a deal with the Repubs that goes like this: The Repugs will still not consider or do anything with Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court until after the election in November. Then, if the Democrats win the Repugs will approve Garland for the Supreme Court. Totenberg stresses that this is in line with Obama's judicial philosophy of wanting judges (or Justices) who defer to the Legislature and the Executive.

No link yet.

February 9, 2016

To the kind DU'er who gave me a heart -

Thank you! Totally unexpected and most probably unearned but nonetheless totally appreciated. Thanks!

February 6, 2016

I think I see what the problem is!

Venezuela's new Finance Minister embraces the 'Bolivarian' idea that there is no such thing as inflation:

"Venezuela's new economy czar Luis Salas is tasked with controlling what is believed to be the world's highest rate of inflation, but comes to the job with an unusual perspective: that inflation does not really exist.

Essays written by Salas describe scarcity and spiraling prices as the result of exploitation by businesses rather than government policy, offering an academic underpinning to the "economic war" explanation that Maduro uses to describe the current malaise of recession, runaway prices and widespread product shortages."

snip

""Inflation does not exist in real life," he wrote in a 2015 pamphlet called "22 Keys to Understanding the Economic War." "When a person goes to a shop and finds that prices have gone up, they are not in the presence of 'inflation.'"


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-economy-idUSKBN0UL27820160107


January 15, 2016

Are these people just fucking crazy???



While recently Roto-Rooter skindiving over at Jim-Bob's cesspool I came across this gem:

"Trump is a “giver”... he gets enjoyment out of sharing and doing for others. In a time when jobs are scarce, people are hurting and the left has gone so far into oblivion... to find a man who cares and will give his talent, money, time and ideas... it’s a good sign he’d do the country a heap of good."

What is it that they're smoking over there?????

Got to go now - take a long, hot shower after that.


January 14, 2016

Venezuela’s Supreme Court Suspends the Opposition-Dominated Parliament

Source: Yahoo News

So much for Chavismo's 'belief in democracy':

Roughly a quarter of the way into a multi-hour speech last week, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro recalled a conversation he claimed to have had nine years ago with Hugo Chávez, his deceased predecessor. In Maduro’s telling, despite his electoral success, el Comandate had long harbored a secret desire to “break definitively” with the “old bourgeoisie structures of representation” that he felt distanced the government from the people. “This is a task we have still to carry out,” Maduro announced. Five days later, his government made good on that promise.

Over the past few days, tensions between the chavista government and the new opposition-dominated National Assembly, which was inaugurated last week after December’s landslide election, reached a fever pitch. On Monday, the constitutional chamber of Venezuela’s supreme court — which in over 45,000 decisions over the last dozen years has never ruled against the presidency — suspended the assembly and declared its leadership to be “in contempt” of the court’s authority.

It’s unclear what this determination means, since there is no constitutional basis for any of this. The supreme court claims that its ruling nullifies in advance any legislation the assembly might try to pass — unless the opposition acquiesces to the suspension of three of its legislators, whom the government accuses of buying votes in the remote state of Amazonas. The stakes are high, since the loss of even a single legislator could neutralize the opposition’s two-thirds supermajority, threatening its ability to reform the constitution or initiate a recall referendum against Maduro

Read more: Yahoo News

Profile Information

Member since: Tue Jun 17, 2008, 02:38 PM
Number of posts: 14,782
Latest Discussions»Colgate 64's Journal