HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » eniwetok » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Spiritual home: the rocky Maine coast
Member since: Sun Mar 27, 2016, 08:06 PM
Number of posts: 1,629

About Me

Greetings... what can I say? I'm an old time hippie and anti-war activist from the 60's. I was radicalized then and have always remained political. One's politics can have different aspects. Economically I'm an FDR liberal. Socially I believe in the Ninth Amendment that government has no legitimate power to limit some rights such as responsible drug use, the right to choose, or one's sexual behavior. Politically I'm to the left of the Democratic Party. Why? Over the years I realized the focus of activists should not be stamping out brush fires and putting band-aids on problems. The effort must always be to keep in mind the root of most of our problems such as wealth inequality, growing corporate power, voter apathy, climate change, etc... is an electoral system that is incapable of measuring the popular will and a political system that is incapable of implementing it. Sadly, the Democratic Party seems to need a push to find a greater appreciation for... and to work towards, implementing common sense democratic reforms to both those electoral and political systems.

Journal Archives


A caller on the Thom Hartmann show suggest the Secret Service be placed on a strict budget... and gee, if it can't afford to pay for Melina to stay in NY... or for Trump's constant trips to FL... TOO BAD.


In politics if one's not constantly on the offensive, they're losing ground. Given this reality I've never understood why Dems are often so cowardly in exposing the Right's real motives even when a signature program like ACA is threatened with being abolished.

For example the Dems never really made it a key talking point that the GOP's starve the beast program was a dangerous sabotaging of the fiscal health of the government... not only threatening our ability to deal with emergencies... but an immoral theft of money from future tax payers.

As for health care, clearly the GOP cares more about tax cuts for the rich (that 3.8% surcharge on capital gains) and their small government brand than the health of the American People. They are soooo desperate to preserve this insanity that they'd rather see 400 billion pissed away on interest... maybe up to $800 billion in 8 years, than see that money be used to benefit the American People. In contrast we only spend about 20 billion a year for NASA.

And why have the Dems not gone after the fact that if not for government freebies... such as free intellectual property monopolies like patents, copyrights, and trademarks (Trump claims his "brand" is worth over $3 billion) there might not be any uber rich? Then there's free limited liability protection for corporate owners that protects their private assets in the case of corporate bankruptcy. Yes, Obama made some statement once about business owners didn't build everything on their own... and the right reacted violently... YET THE DEMS NEED TO OFFER A COUNTER NARRATIVE TO JUSTIFY A STRONGLY PROGRESSIVE TAX RATE.

GOP Wants CHOICE in health care. It's seductive... but what are the best agruments against "Choice"?

The GOP sells "choice" in health care as if it's "freedom" and no one can dare object to "freedom".. can they?

Of course the GOP sweeps under the carpet all that administrative overhead for all these "choices"

So how should we counter this seductive argument?

This might not be not the best argument... but here goes. States often have a simple gas tax collected at the pump which covers road maintenance... but an alternative is to have privately owned road with toll booths. You're free to pay or find the free roads. This offers plenty of CHOICE... but included in all those tolls is immense overhead... all the salaries/admin costs/profits etc needed to administer a system(s) of private roads.

Sometimes CHOICE is nothing but a needlessly expensive alternative to a simple plan that covers everything.

Why isn't HTTPS used when log in or when we post?

I'm rather surprised at this since it means our log-in user names and PWs are not encrypted...

Anyone remember Cheney's 1% doctrine?

Anyone remember Cheney's 1% doctrine?

"If there's a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al-Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response."

This also is essentially Trump's view on Muslims from nations with dysfunctional governments.

The difference here is Trump deluded himself there currently is no vetting, the borders were wide open and would-be terrorists were pouring in.

But the warning signs Trump is a Manchurian Candidate, subject to blackmail by a hostile power... or has illegal dealings with criminal regimes is red lining... so I APPROVE if the intelligence community feels some legitimate need to investigate. The stakes are pretty high. The problem with our right wing friends is they place Party over national security.

I APPROVE Of Wiretapping Trump!

A Manchurian Candidate or a president vulnerable to blackmail by a hostile nation WOULD BE A SECURITY THREAT to the US.

It would be negligent of the US intelligence agencies if they did NOT try to investigate.

Is This A Defense Against Big Pharma Gouging....

There are only a couple places in the Constitution that STATE INTENT... the Second Amendment and the Patent clause...

The Congress shall have Power....

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

This means drug patents exist ONLY to the extent they promote science and the useful arts... it's NOT for what the market will bear allowing the public to be gouged.

So can patents be withdrawn if a company then charges outrageous prices for pharmaceuticals? Have patents ever been challenged on these grounds?

For The Good Of The Nation: 25th OR BUST!!!

4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President
shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.


This is a repost because Chuck Todd on Meet The Press REFUSED to correct Rubio who claimed the People voted for Trump...

How many times have you seen news reports on the 2016 election that make claims similar to "Trump was elected to be a disruptor", or "Trump was elected by angry white blue collar workers"? Worst, Trump's win is seen by some as a continuation of BREXIT when BREXIT was a vote by real voters, and the EC vote was not. These are both false narratives... yet once out there can take on a life of their own.

Leaving aside that no one group alone ever makes a difference in a normal election any more than the last run in a ballgame wins the game... everything is cumulative, these reports are making the logical error that what the antidemocratic EC did, reflects what real voters did. But those real voters REJECTED Trump by nearly 3 million votes.

The EC has no "motives". The EC is a mindless, antidemocratic, winner take all, voting scheme that has little to do with the REAL motivations REAL voters had. So say otherwise gives false moral legitimacy to the Trump Junta.

I suggest that whenever we come across such reporting we write the news source to complain and correctly reframe the 2016 election.

Phone Tapping? The PERFECT distraction and BAIT to drag his base further from reality!

Remember when the Bush Junta accused Clinton staffers of vandalizing the Whitehouse? Man that got the attention off Bush's being installed as president even after being rejected by the People... AND get his base so pissed off at Clinton, they'd be happy to see him go.

I suspect Trump's latest Twitter Tantrum is designed to serve the same purposes... only to get the attention off his Russia troubles. His base will believe anything he says... and the more the MSM uncovers the Russian connection and discredits his latest tweent, he'll use that to drag his base further and further away from reality into his dementia.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »