HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » SouthernProgressive » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »

SouthernProgressive

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Member since: Wed Aug 26, 2015, 11:43 AM
Number of posts: 1,810

Journal Archives

The 2019 version of HA Goodman takes a swing at Warren.

The founder of the progressive online channel "The Young Turks" criticized Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) over her economic patriotism proposal, calling the name of the plan “goofy” and an “obvious political wordplay.”

“I think economic patriotism, it’s a little goofy," Cenk Uygur told Hill.TV’s Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti during an interview on Friday in reference to Warren’s proposal. “I mean, it’s an obvious political wordplay.”

Warren's platform, released earlier this month, would include a $2 trillion investment over the next 10 years in green research, manufacturing and exporting green energy technology. Warren also would help create domestic demand for new American products through $1.5 trillion in federal procurement over a decade.

Uygur went on to praise Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), another progressive giant vying for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, for his embrace of democratic socialism.


The Hill

It's well known that this guy is a sexist pig with a solid right wing track record. How are these people not transparent to everyone? If Cenk and HA had an intellectual sparring bout it would never end. Neither has a punch to throw in their arsenal.
Posted by SouthernProgressive | Tue Jun 18, 2019, 04:01 PM (12 replies)

Where does your primary support stand today?

Top five and would not vote for.

1/2) Warren - Biden - Such different ideology but they both bring something great to the table. I don't think anyone is as uniquely equipped as Biden to get the agencies of the federal government going full steam ahead again. He will have amazing people ready to go on day one. I also believe he will have the largest coattails out of all the candidates. I see him as our best bet to make gains from coast to coast. He will regain respect around the world overnight. Warren will utilize really good people and will force her plans down to congress as much as possible. This will probably end in legislation starting out from a stronger progressive position. I also think she can do better in PA and other states than many think. She is throwing out plans, not blowing smoke up peoples ass. I think white men will get on board with that. I wish this was the totality of our primary. Just these two.

3-4-5) Klobuchar - Gillibrand - Harris - Really really like all three. I think they would all have a difficult time in the general. I think Harris would have been our rock star but she didn't seem to be really coordinated out of the gate. Seems they concentrated on getting out strong with some big rallies but didn't follow it up with anything special. She is probably one of my favorites running. I really like Gillibrand a lot. She speaks extremely well for us. She is flat out a no-go because of Franken. She pissed off too many people with long memories. Klobuchar. I am so glad she entered. As someone who wasn't very familiar with her I can say I love pretty much everything about her. Klobuchar did great at the She the People forum and others.

Would not vote for.

1 - Sanders - Gravel -Gabbard - Williamson - I like Williamson a lot. I don't think this is the job for her. At all. Out of those four I think that Gabbard is probably the most competent today.

All other candidates I could vote for in the primary.

Final note: I'm really looking forward to learning more about Inslee, Hickenlooper, Salwell, and one or two others.

Posted by SouthernProgressive | Tue Jun 18, 2019, 12:00 PM (42 replies)

Elizabeth Warren and AOC discuss Game of Thrones.

https://twitter.com/SenWarren/status/1130864643063328768

They look very happy together.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez dangles 2020 endorsement: Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren?

LA Times
Posted by SouthernProgressive | Wed Jun 12, 2019, 02:45 PM (3 replies)

Bernie Sanders and Chuck Todd Have Terrible Takes on Abortion

When the Meet the Press host alleged women get abortions when they don’t like the gender of the fetus, the candidate did not push back

But just a few seconds later, things went off the rails when Todd inexplicably asked, “Are you in all concerned, though, about this idea that people may try to worry about the sex of a child, or essentially, are those types of restrictions on abortions something you’re open to?

Bernie, obviously caught off guard but also obviously uneducated on the issue, capitulated. “That, I mean, that’s a concern,” Sanders said, adding, “Well, that’s not a, I wouldn’t use a restriction on, that’s an issue that society has got to deal with, and it is of concern.”

Todd followed up to the question asking, “How would you deal with that in the law?”

“I don’t know how, at this particular point,” Sanders said. “I would deal with it, but that is an issue that we really have got to deal with.


Rolling Stone

Rights are being rolled back and he is highlighting this a a concern when asked about it. I don't think he is concerned like I am. I am concerned that they are limiting access to abortions in any and every way possible.

This is a current issue.

Supreme Court compromise on Indiana abortion law keeps issue off its docket

But the court said it would not revive another part of the law, which would have prohibited abortions if the woman chose the procedure because of a diagnosis or “potential diagnosis” of Down syndrome or “any other disability,” or because of the fetus’s gender or race.


Washington Post

Posted by SouthernProgressive | Wed May 29, 2019, 03:52 PM (18 replies)

Kamala Harris: REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ACT

Blocking Dangerous and Deadly Abortion Restrictions Before They Take Effect


We are living through an all-out assault being waged on women’s health and reproductive rights. From Alabama to Ohio, and Missouri to Georgia, the goal of Republican politicians is clear: Overturn Roe v. Wade and end safe and legal abortion in America.

With the specter of a hyper-partisan Supreme Court, these attacks have laid bare the pressing need to pass federal legislation protecting reproductive rights, including access to abortion. But the truth is, simply codifying Roe v. Wade isn’t enough. Extreme politicians in state legislatures have been working to systematically chip away at Roe for decades, enacting over 1,000 measures since 1995 designed to wipe out access to abortion.

States have mandated that women submit to invasive ultrasounds, passed laws requiring survivors of sexual assault to carry their rapist’s child to term, and placed onerous and medically unnecessary restrictions on health clinics. These restrictions do nothing to make people healthier or safer. Their sole purpose is limiting access to abortion.

Kamala Harris believes we need to fight back and block these dangerous and deadly laws before they take effect. That’s exactly what she intends to do as president. Similar to the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act, Harris will require, for the first time, that states and localities with a history of violating Roe v. Wade obtain approval from her Department of Justice before any abortion law or practice can take effect.

HERE’S HOW WE’LL DO IT

States and localities with a history of unconstitutionally restricting access to abortion will be required to pre-clear any new law or practice with the Department of Justice.

Under the plan, states and localities will be subject to the preclearance requirement if they have a pattern of violating Roe v. Wade in the preceding 25 years. For example, violations will include settlements or final findings by a court that a law or practice runs afoul of Roe, such as rulings in South Carolina, Iowa, and Georgia.

While the Supreme Court’s partisan majority gutted the Voting Rights Act on grounds the preclearance formula was purportedly “outdated,” it explicitly invited Congress to update the formula along these lines.

From 1965 to 2013, preclearance under the Voting Rights Act prevented hundreds of discriminatory laws and practices from going into effect. Just as states and localities enacted facially neutral measures to suppress the right to vote – including literacy tests, poll taxes, photo ID laws, and the closure of polling locations – states have similarly done so to limit reproductive rights – including placing targeted restrictions on abortion providers, requiring waiting periods, and imposing medically unnecessary doctor supervision requirements. A preclearance requirement will make it harder for states to implement these dangerous and deadly laws and practices. Like the blatant voter suppression the Voting Rights Act was designed to prevent, these restrictions on abortion fall disproportionately on people of color.

No abortion law or practice will take effect until the Department of Justice certifies it comports with Roe v. Wade.

Under the plan, any change with respect to abortion in a covered jurisdiction will remain legally unenforceable until DOJ determines it comports with the standards laid out by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade, as applied in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, and the Women’s Health Protection Act, which Harris co-sponsors in the Senate.

More than just codifying every woman’s federal right to an abortion, this will shift the burden to jurisdictions with a pattern of violating Roe to prove any new law or practice does not deny or abridge the fundamental right to access abortion.

Jurisdictions will be required to submit any proposed change to DOJ. If the jurisdiction is unable to prove the change comports with Roe and the Women’s Health Protection Act, DOJ must object to the change.

Guardrails will ensure DOJ enforces the law even under an administration that’s hostile to women’s rights—and patients and providers will have standing to sue if they don’t.

DOJ will have an affirmative duty to review submissions and make formal determinations, which will be posted publicly.

Women and health care providers will have the ability to challenge DOJ’s approval of a law or practice in federal court, serving as a check on hostile administrations.

This is just one way Harris will fight back against the all-out assault being waged on women’s health and reproductive rights. She’ll also protect Planned Parenthood from Republican attempts to defund essential health services, nominate judges who respect Roe v. Wade, fight to repeal the Hyde Amendment, reverse the Trump Administration’s illegal attempts to cut evidence-based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program grants, and immediately roll back dangerous and discriminatory rules the Administration put in place to limit access to contraception and safe abortion in the United States and around the world.

Throughout her career, Harris has fought for women’s access to health care and reproductive rights. As Attorney General of California, she petitioned the Supreme Court to reverse unconstitutional abortion restrictions, protect women’s access to contraception, and ensure women have access to essential health care regardless of their for-profit employer’s beliefs.



https://kamalaharris.org/repro-rights/

Kamala Harris, in Town Hall, Lays Out Plan to Require Federal Approval for Abortion Laws

Senator Kamala Harris of California unveiled a plan on Tuesday that would require states and localities with a history of unconstitutionally restricting abortion rights to obtain federal approval before such laws can take effect.

Ms. Harris, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, called for what is known as a “preclearance requirement” in the plan, released as numerous states have passed laws to sharply limit abortions.

“When we look at a law like what’s happening in Alabama and they’re saying they’re going to sentence a doctor to 99 years, as a prosecutor, let me tell you, I got a real problem with that,” Ms. Harris said on MSNBC on Tuesday night, referring to an Alabama law intended to ban most abortions in the state.


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/28/us/politics/kamala-harris-abortion.html

Posted by SouthernProgressive | Wed May 29, 2019, 10:30 AM (8 replies)

As Mayor, Bernie Sanders Was More Pragmatist Than Socialist

So when dozens of antiwar activists blocked the entrance to the local General Electric plant because it was manufacturing Gatling guns to fight the socialists in Central America, the protesters expected the mayor’s full support.

Instead, he lined up with union officials and watched as the police made arrests, saying later that in blocking the plant, the activists were keeping workers from their jobs.


Back then, the Democrats were considered the old guard, his adversaries; in many cases, Mr. Sanders aligned himself with Republicans to get things done.

“Even though he talks revolution, he’s an incrementalist,” said Richard Sugarman, a longtime friend and a professor of religion at the University of Vermont. “He knows that things will only be changed little by little, one by one. That’s why he’s been effective.”


Critics on the right said their socialist mayor gave the city a bad image, wasting time on foreign affairs, including trips to Nicaragua and the Soviet Union. At the same time, critics on the left said he compromised too much with business interests and did not go far enough in pursuing socialist ideals. Over the span of his mayoralty, the number of families living in poverty grew — to 798 in 1990 from 563 in 1980, an increase of 42 percent.


“Our slogan was we would ‘out-Republican the Republicans,’” said John Franco Jr., who was assistant city attorney in the Sanders administration. “The Republicans on the board liked that, and so on fiscal issues, they would side with us and we would have a governing coalition.”


This was the logic behind his support for the workers at the General Electric plant making Gatling guns, which opened him to criticism from activists on the left.

“It was a big disappointment that a fellow leftist did not support us,” said Jay Moore, a longtime Vermont political activist who was among those who had blocked the General Electric plant.


Mr. Sanders wanted to open up the lakefront, long marred by a decrepit rail yard, for public use. Eventually, that is what happened. But for a time he backed a private proposal to build a complex of high-end condos, hotel and commercial space that critics said would block views of the lake and limit public access.

More deal maker than ideologue, Mr. Sanders later worked for a compromise that scaled back the proposal and added public amenities like green space. He said the compromise, supported by most of the aldermen, was the best he could get and that the development would expand the city’s tax base, bringing millions of dollars into city coffers.


But environmentalists and others accused Mr. Sanders of selling out to business interests. The dispute led to a highly contentious campaign over the bond issue.

“We fought like hell,” recalled Sandy Baird, then part of the Green movement, now a professor at Burlington College. “We wanted that land open to the public.”


NYT

The difficulty many see is the inconsistency of his history. It's littered with inconsistencies. For private lands. For selling private lands. For Democratic Socialist policies. For direct and near unfettered capitalism. One of the few consistencies is his rhetoric involving crackdown on immigrants and yelling about income inequality. The former he is on record with votes, the latter is empty rhetoric.
Posted by SouthernProgressive | Mon May 20, 2019, 02:31 PM (2 replies)

Medal of Freedom Recipient: Joe Biden



Read the Full Transcript of President Obama Surprising Joe Biden With the Medal of Freedom









Posted by SouthernProgressive | Fri May 17, 2019, 01:59 PM (1 replies)

Harris Demands Delta Cease Anti-Union Activities

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Kamala D. Harris (D-CA) on Wednesday sent a letter to Ed Bastian, CEO of Delta Air Lines, urging him to bring an end to Delta’s coordinated, strategic anti-union campaign, which has included distributing fliers to its non-unionized workforce discouraging unionization, playing anti-union advertisements continuously in employee break rooms, and holding weekly anti-union activities.

“The right of workers to join together in a union and collectively bargain has been fundamental in helping to build the middle class in this country,” wrote Harris. “Unions have a substantial impact on the compensation and work lives of both unionized and non-unionized workers. Union participation can improve an employee’s wages, health care, job security, workplace safety, and retirement benefits.”

Harris continued, “Delta’s Don’t Risk It. Don’t Sign It. campaign is disingenuous, disrespectful, and misleading. It is an attempt to interfere with its employees’ legal rights and hinder the ability of thousands of workers to make an important decision about their lives and livelihoods. I urge you to cease this campaign and allow Delta employees the ability to determine whether to unionize free from inference, intimidation, or retaliation.”

Harris.Senate.gov

Full Letter Harris.Senate.gov
Posted by SouthernProgressive | Thu May 16, 2019, 10:33 AM (2 replies)

I attended a very conservative oriented business meeting this morning.

Talk turned to politics and the overriding theme was Trumps instability and what it has and will do to the financial markets. We had a representative from a large investment firm speaking. He talked about the fear of Trump in his industry. They fear instability. They said Clinton is more of the same which is viewed fondly.

I have not fact checked this and don't know how true it is.

He stated markets almost immediately dropped %1.5 after Comey sent his letter. He stated in his industry that alone is frightening.

He also stated our election is directly influencing Mexico's currency. Good news for Trump or bad news for Clinton alone is shifting the value.

I left with a very positive attitude. This was a conservative environment and there was no positive talk about Trump. It was all negative about him from the members.
Posted by SouthernProgressive | Wed Nov 2, 2016, 09:35 AM (78 replies)

How You Can Fight Donald Trump Right Now

One day, Americans who were too young to have followed the 2016 campaign will look back and try to make sense of it. They will want to know how such a dangerous person could have gotten so close to the presidency — a man who spoke of abandoning our allies, admiring foreign despots, weakening constitutional rights, and serially molesting women.

Those future adults may also pose a more personal question to their elders:

Mommy and Daddy, what did you do in response to Donald Trump?

It will be a fair question. The reality is, Trump could still win. It is unlikely, yes, but the gift he received from a surprisingly bumbling F.B.I. shows that campaigns aren’t over until they’re over.

With seven days left, it is not too late for anyone alarmed by Trump to get involved. As it happens, Trump himself has pointed toward the best way to do so. Again and again, he has attempted to undermine democratic legitimacy, be it inviting foreign interference or flirting with voter intimidation.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/opinion/how-you-can-fight-donald-trump-right-now.html?_r=0

Posted by SouthernProgressive | Tue Nov 1, 2016, 09:16 AM (3 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »