HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » SoutherDem » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Sat Jan 22, 2011, 01:32 PM
Number of posts: 2,306

About Me

I am not an English Major. I do and will from time to time make grammatical and spelling errors. It would be appreciated if those errors are pointed out using DU mail, but if you must show your superior ability to use the English language by posting on the forum, do not be offended if I choose to point out your need to show that superiority on the public forum also.

Journal Archives

Message to the Republicans

Dear Republicans

Today some of our brightest minds in the political arena spoke. These great minds, Limbaugh, Palin, Beck, O'Reilly and Hannity among others had one common message. Obama is a Fascist, Communist and Socialist. Yes, they say he is all three. There is just one problem those are different political systems and don't coexist. Also, they are not telling just what Obama did to earn these labels.

These are the definitions of Fascism, Communism and Socialism. If they are going to call Obama one of these please at least take time to learn what they actually mean and understand you cannot be more than one they are very different. Also, please explain just how anything Obama has done could be considered any of them.

Fascism - governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Communism - a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.

Socialism - a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Please, insult President Obama if you like, we know you hate his guts, but at least call him the correct label and more over know what they mean because your really lose your credibility when you speak not knowing what you talking about.

Fair House Districts

We at times, quite often actually, hear of how the Republican state legislatures will draw district to guarantee Republican majorities in the U.S. House.

In my state the districts look like drunk people drew them, they snake one way then another grabbing a few people here and a few there.

I live in a district in which Democrats don't have a chance in hell, but if you looked at the general population in any logical division* it may not give a Democrat majority but it would give us a fair chance.

For Alabama we have 7 Representatives, we are 25% black but only have 1 black Representative (14%), we are 50% women but have only 2 women Representatives (28%), in 2008 39% voted for Obama but we have only 1 Democratic Representative (14%).

I know this is a pipe dream because states will not give up this power but would you be willing to give up the guaranteed Democrat districts that do exist if ALL districts were drawn in a logical* method or if politics were in consideration the balance had to be close to 50/50?

To me this is the only way to ever get fair elections for the people. What do you all think?

*By logical division/method would be using established borders of cities, counties, rivers or roads.

We pay twice as much for health care than other countries

But we serve less.

The market place working like a fine oiled machine. Gota love Capitalism.

Ok, I have given it a try but I hate it!

I am talking about the new show on MSNBC "The Cycle". I know at least one person out there agrees because they posted yesterday.
I feel like I am watching the kids table on Thanksgiving playing grown up. They just don't impress me.

Am I one of two or do others who have seen this agree?

ACA long term effect, beyond healthcare.

It appears many of the 26 Republican lead states will not set up there exchanges and turn down the Medicare funds. This will mean 24 states will have the full coverage and the rest some variation. Now lets look a few years beyond 2014. Lets say the ACA is not overturned or weakened by congress. Will the citizens of the 26 states which are still having health care issues start to demand being full participants of the ACA? Will this mean a Democratic take over of politics in some of these states? Could this be the progressive wave we have been hoping for?

Can someone explain Reconciliation in terms a 3rd grader will understand.

I have tried to find the answer and I simply don't understand how it works. When I last heard about Reconciliation was in the passing of ACA.

I do understand it does not demand the 60 votes in the Senate but still would require 50. Are there actually enough Democrats who could be willing to do something to over turn the ACA?

I am now looking forward to some polls on ACA now that SCOTUS has spoken.

I am not expecting miracles. I just want to know if public opinion has changed.

Do you think the ACA of today is just version 1.0

Will it be like Social Security and Civil Rights and one day there will be a 2.0,.3.0 ... with the end being single payer/universal healthcare?

The House of Representatives hard at work

Today they held AG Holder in contempt.
They will vote once again to repeal the ACA (once they get back from a well deserved break).
This is a vote which they know won't make its way through the Senate and would be vetoed by the POTUS but they want to show how they care for America.
I guess this is ok because they have given us a great jobs plan, oh wait, not they didn't. But, they did fix the college loan issue, no they haven't' done that either.

ACA in bullet form.

I know we can read the 2700 page law.

I know there is a summary on the official website but it takes many back and forth clicks to find all the information.

Has anyone see all of the benefits of the law in bullet form? No specific details, just an outline.

A one or two page list to be able to give someone one who doesn't understand the law or a tea bagger who is making ridiculous claims of "death panels".

Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »