HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » reACTIONary » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: Sun Jun 5, 2011, 07:28 PM
Number of posts: 4,821

Journal Archives

Indeed, You did not...

.... so I'm deleting my comment.

However, i will leave you with some interesting assessments from today's wapo concerning Hillary's ability to govern vs sander's .

Sanders’s all-purpose argument is to call for a “political revolution” that will vanquish the dark interests standing between the nation and his vision. His campaign is not about governing in the real world of trade-offs and constraints. Which is to say, it is not about governing at all. It is increasingly worrying that large numbers of Democrats appear to believe otherwise.

Bernie Sanders’s angry, unrealistic call for ‘revolution’ http://wapo.st/1SrBsg5

On issue after issue, Clinton proposes incremental solutions that take into account our political system as it is: sharply divided along ideological lines and warped by gerrymandering and virtually unfettered campaign contributions. Sanders proposes dramatic solutions that will only be possible when power is wrested from “big money” interests that refuse to do “what the American people want them to.”

Will Democrats choose evolution — or revolution? http://wapo.st/1P0LceT

Mostly, though, /Clinton is/ the classic one-eyed person in the land of the blind: Who else is there? Pray, not Bernie Sanders. If he played Capt. Renault in “Casablanca,” he would have said, “Break up the big banks” instead of “Round up the usual suspects.” To him, it’s the same thing.

Hillary Clinton, enough with your ‘plans’ already http://wapo.st/1SsFKE4

I have a squert gun!

What exactly are the Oregon Arsonists guilty of?

According to the typical news article they claim to have lit the fires to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

Acording to the Justice Department:

The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire.


No, FDR was not....

.... a socialist of any sort. He ran against FOUR socialists in 1932. He never called himself a socialist and anyone who did was just trying to smear him.

FDR was a liberal welfare statist, and a capitalistic reformer. If you believe in reform within a market based capitalistic system , it does you no good to characterize yourself (or others) as socialist.

And Denmark is not socialist:

"I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism," /Denmark's prime minister/ said, "therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.... The Nordic model is an expanded welfare state which provides a high level of security to its citizens."


Eugene Debbs was a socialist; FDR was no Eugene Debbs.
Go to Page: 1