Latest Threads
Greatest Threads
Home » Discuss » Journals » Liberalynn » Archives Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Liberalynn's Journal - Archives
Posted by Liberalynn in General Discussion
Wed Aug 10th 2011, 09:16 AM
but this is just too pessimistic even for me.

Look this maybe sappy but hey:

If our forefathers gave up just because the opposition seemed unsurmountable and better armed we would still be singing "God Save the Queen!"

Should Susan B. Anthony have just given up on Women's rights because the odds were stacked against her? Sure getting women the right to vote took a hell of a lot longer than it should have but it eventually happened.

How about Frederick Douglas or Martin Luther King. Should they have just given up on Civil Rights because of the opposition they faced?

The truth is there has been and always will be opposition. You can argue that things have changed and the opposition is fiercer, but I am sure at the time, things looked just as insurmountable to past Americans throughout our history. Yet people like the above mentioned didn't give up.

You might not win now, you might not win ever, but if you keep fighting at least you can say with dignity "I didn't surrender".
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in New York
Thu Mar 12th 2009, 08:41 PM
This pains me to say this about a fellow Democrat, but then I really am starting to doubt New York Governor Patterson is really a Democrat at all.

I think he is one of the worst Governor's this state has ever seen. Those "nuisance" taxes he was proposing were stupid, to begin with. So thanks to the stimulus from our wonderful President Obama, he is now dropping them. However, unlike our President, who is trying to get better health care for the working families and the poor, Patterson is trying to make it harder. Cutting aide to hospitals, taxing health insurance etc. Not to mention what he's doing to education, raising tuitions, etc. All the while saying he doesn't want to raise taxes on the wealthy.

He says they will take their jobs and run away. Please if they were creating so many jobs that we can't afford to loose why is there a fiscal crisis to begin with? We should be swimming in a pool jobs if all we need to solve a fiscal crisis is to put the entire burden on the middle class and the poor, and make sure the rich never pay their fair share, and can still shower their sons, daughters, wives, and mistresses with hummers, diamonds, and million dollar real estate. That's what this entire country has been living with for the last eight years so why are we are in the toilet?

If the middle class can't buy goods, because they have to pay more for their kid's tuition, and their health care, whose going to be buying the stuff businesses produce? Without a demand for the products the businesses don't need to exist, and if business dosen't exist, jobs don't exist.

Oh well at least those European yacht companies will be doing well, and the Hummer dealerships.

I think Patterson is a complete ass, and I sure hope we have another choice for the primaries.
He can run for the Republicans cause he's not a true Democrat IMHO, and we need a real one to save N.Y. State. He's a looser and if we NY Democrats nominate him, we will deserve to loose.

So Spitzer had a hooker, I still think he could have done a better job, and though I hate to say this, and am almost choking doing so I think even Puke Pecker Head Pataki wasn't as bad or as much of a Bush clone, as Patterson is.

I wish we could recall him, we didn't vote for him to begin with,and if he is the Democrat candidate for our next Governor, I won't vote for that office because I won't vote for a Repulican, even one who calls himself a Democrat.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Nov 06th 2008, 12:31 PM
Yes it is utterly fantastic in some ways that we now have a Democratic President and control of both houses.

Yet Howard Dean was on the Stephanie Miller show today congratulating himself on courting the Christian Evangelical vote, and it almost completely ruined it for me, and despite my promises not to complain yet, I am going to anyway.

Yes, there are issues we can agree with evangelicals on like the enviroment and helping the poor, I will give him that, but that's where it should end period. I just can't seem to manage the blind "faith" that others here seem to have that it won't go beyond that, into continuing to allow them the free reign that they have enjoyed for the past eight years, and even expanding beyond that.
The first ammendment is being burned away.

How can we say that we are any different from the Republicans if we don't make it clear, that while we will not deny religious people their own rights under the constitution, we will not allow them more rights than others, as not all, but many evangelicals seem to be demanding? Also why can't we make it clear that we will not alter the Constitution to appease their narrow minded "moralness?"

And that if they continue to violate the seperation of church and state as they clearly have been doing, they will be TAXED currently and retroactively with interest from the time they began their breaking of IRS laws.

I am straight so this is not coming from a personal agenda or based on Prop 8 alone, though that is a good an example as any. Its coming as an American who loves the Constitution and does not want to see the first ammendment erroded by either party.

Its coming from a citizen who believes we are all created equal period and no one has the right to dictate to anyone else how they pursue personal happiness as long as it does not physically harm another human being or impede on the rights of another human being.

That's not something that can be voted aways simply because it might offend "religious" sensibilites and all parties need to stop pandering to "religious sensibilities" period. And there is no reason to deny gay marriage other than it offends "some born again religious credo.

What's next Women's Rights, because some religious bigots believe women should stay silent, barefoot and pregnant? Make no mistake if they succeded in denying gay rights, the next time, they will be coming for yours too, so I wouldn't be breathing a sigh of relief yet, and offering false assurances and pleas to our gay brothers and sisters, to be patient. Why should they? Would you be silent if it were your rights?

Again I am not gay, but I am not going to be silent, while their rights are taken away. I sure as hell hope they won't be silent when the religious nuts come for mine.

If we don't except that we need to defend the first ammendment and stand up together against the religiously intolerant, then we don't deserve the protection of the Constitution, and we don't deserve to say we have a conscience, any more than the other side does.

Call me an unsatisfiable heathanistic reverse intolerance whiner bitch if you want to, but that's my opinion on the matter of the mixing of church and state, and it will never change no matter what party tries to sell me on the reasons to see that line crossed. Its my line in the sand, and for me, I still see no good or legitimate reason to ever cross it.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Fri Sep 19th 2008, 09:53 AM
Speaking about Wall St. lawbreakers.
Read entry | Discuss (25 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Mon Jun 05th 2006, 03:13 PM
One day I was roaming the country side looking to bag a mouse and a hot babe or two when my attention was caught by a lower life form (female human) walking with another lower life form(female dog). I thought about it for a moment then decided that if the dog was able to wrangle free meals and a place to sleep, there is no reason I shouldn't be able to score the same thing. So I moved myself into a storage barn on the property. I would have shot for the house, but no way was I sharing my digs with that dog. I have my standards you know.

Turns out the human is a bleeding heart liberal with a huge soft spot for animals. Sucker!!! Sure enough she started to serve me my meals and a fresh bowl of water every day and even gave me a comfy box to sleep in.

As if that weren't enough to put this fat cat in heaven, something else was soon to make it even more cushy. A female cat who had heard around the neighbor that this particular human was an easy mark came to crash in the same barn.

Sure enough the sappy woman fell for the poor kitty act once again, and allowed the new comer to stay too. Man she sure is one pretty momma, my new barn mate, not the human.

The roomies's name is Cally by the way. She's not half bad to live with all though some times she comes over and smacks me across the face with her paw for no reason. Of course I hold my own.

Well Cally and I didn't take too long to become better aquainted if you all know what I mean!!

Ernie(M), Missy (F), Stormy(F), and Sparky(F) are the results of that special encounter.

The human's hoping to take Cally and have her spayed soon which is okay with me. I do like the brats, I mean my offspring, well enough. They are fine looking specimens, they have my genes, you know!

It's just I don't want to have to share space or food with many more of them, that's all. The human's also talking about keeping Ernie and Missy too, and making sure we all get to the Doctor, for our shots and everything. Missy's got a balance problem. She falls over a lot. Hope the Doc can find out what is wrong with her.

Sparky and Stormy may end up being adopted out, but that is okay too. I know the human will try to find them good homes, and if she can't she'll keep them too. Again because she is a SAP, with a capital S.

The human is okay over all I guess. I only feel the need to give her a swat with my paw or nip her on her fingers when she tries to kick me off of one of my favorite napping spots. Her lap. She says I am too fat and make her legs tired after awhile. PLEASE!!! Should I call the wambulance for her? Doesn't she know I am his Royal Highness Cole, king of the all I survey? I should decide when she is able to leave the barn, and go back to spending time with that mutt in the house. The human claims it is a prue bred. As if I care?

Well that is about all I have to share with all of you, my loyal subjects, for the moment. I am late for my nap. I may visit at a later date. In the meantime, I will leave you, admiring my royal countenance.


King Cole!

Read entry | Discuss (10 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Sat Jun 03rd 2006, 06:37 PM
Okay, so in an entertainment disscussion board I frequent the subject of the Dixie Chicks was raised. There was the usual preaching from the "I personally don't agree with everything Bush does either but he is the "duly elected president of the United States, and should be totally respected simply because the 'majority' of the people elected him," crowd. Then there was the predicatble response from the crowd, I think Stephanie Miller," would label as the "deliverance wing, of the Republican party:" "If those Dixie chicks don't like America, they can damn well leave it, and if they don't voluntairly agree to do so, we ought to deport their skinny ass butts." Then a handful of "They should just entertain. Simply Shut up and Sing" crowd chimed in. Also there was one response that stated we as Americans simply blame Bush himself for far too much. I am paraphrasing a bit here on all of them, but you get the general idea.

Also a number of people, did leap to the Chicks defense.

This was my personal response. What do you think? How did I do?:

America was a country founded on challenging leadership.

My lord, if John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Ben Franklin all believed we should respect a government official just because he is a government official, there would be no United States of America. We would all still be singing "God Save the Queen." No offense to the Brits here meant. I just mean, we would never have had our own independence.

Read some things on the philosophy of government, those who believe we should not criticize the President, please? The Federalist Papers, the Magna Carta, Locke, Hobbes, Common Sense, the Declaration of Independence, are some of my suggestions! Or how about some books on the history of Germany and the path to World War II?

Some of these long respected tomes, teach us that not only DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT to QUESTION OUR GOVERNMENT, when we think our nation is being led down the wrong path, but the MORAL OBLIGATION AND DUTY as a citizen to do so.

The PRESIDENT is not above the people or the law for that matter. He does not get a pass from criticism simply because he was "elected."

By the way, I know the dictator comparisons, are sometimes over used, and sometimes used unfairly, and often insensitively, and inaccurately. Just for some historical perspective, however, some of the totalitarian regimes in history, actually started out as a group of electorally chosen public officials.

The Nazi Party actually won some elections in 1930's Germany.

As for an example in U.S. History- John Adams, even though he was one of the founding fathers' of U.S. Democracy , blew his Presidential credibility by signing into law the "Alien and Sedition" acts. For all intents and purposes making it against the law to criticize him, or his decisions. The main reason, most believe he did so was because Alexander Hamilton was poking a big stick at Adams' colossal ego. A president's ego or feelings should not matter more, than a citizenís right to dissent. Said, Alien and Seditions acts were removed shortly after and thankfully are no longer law, in the United States.

So therefore, I respectfully submit for your thoughtful consideration, that as far as elections are concerned, they have never been a 100 percent viable guarantee, in and of themselves, that officials won't abuse the power the public has entrusted them with.

Only the protected and continued right to dissent after said officials are in office, offers the strongest hope of at least trying to keep them honest and holding them to their duties and promises. And even that hasn't always worked.

As for 2004, I have some serious questions that for me personally at least, I would like to see answered about how the election itself was conducted. Read the new Rolling Stone article by Robert Kennedy, Jr. about what allegedly, note I am emphasizing allegedly here, went on in Ohio and several other key electoral states like New Mexico and Florida in 2004.

How can we find out, however, if Kennedy's claims, which he is not the first or only one to raise, hold any basis in validity?

There should be, IMHO, a congressional investigation into such serious allegations, considering they deal with such a fundamental right as voting, to determine whether they are true or false.

I have little hope if any, however, that we will see that happen. Since all our elected officials including some of the Dems, seem to be more concerned with protecting their own piece of the pie, rather than doing their job of standing up for the people by ensuring the laws of this country are being upheld! I'm none to pleased with most of the Dems right now either, including Kerry.

All I am saying is, IMHO, our right to vote should be held sacrosanct and if there is any question, on either side, they should sure as heck, find away to assure that the voting is as unquestionably accurate as it can possibly be. If I am being told, I can't even believe in the power of my vote any more then that just is not right.

The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, and historical precedent, tell us that neither the President of the US, nor its Congress for that matter, are now, or ever have been, or ever should be sovereign beings, that cannot be questioned or criticized. They are most certainly not GOD. That supreme being who is the only entity above criticism, and that is only for people who are believers, and then even some Catholic Priests will even tell you, you have the right to question, and God will understand.

The president needs to earn respect, the respect of the governed, which are technically his bosses, not be given it out of hand. As for him being blamed unfairly? Harry Truman said "the buck stops here," and George W. Bush, himself, declared proudly and loudly, "I'm the DECIDER." So whom exactly should I blame when those decisions don't seem to be quite working out for the best?

I love the Constitution far more than I will ever love any leader Democrat or Republican. It saddens me to think that even one American, IMHO, would hold any president's or any other political officials', "assumed" right to unquestioned respect, as more important than the legally documented right of dissent, which has been granted to the citizens of the U.S. by its Constitution and upheld by hundreds of Supreme Court decisions, and years of other legal precedent.

The exact same Constitution that is the basis for all the freedoms those of us lucky enough to be U.S. citizens currently enjoy. Also this is the very same document, that has been held up for over 200 years as an example and bastion of freedom, for millions of democracy advocates worldwide.

The beloved Constitution of the U.S., IMHO, seems to in jeopardy, of being trampled to the dust more and more, and very few seem to care. It is like so few even understand the words written in it anymore, let alone the Bill of Rights it contains. I'm no longer even sure that many know the true purpose for its being written in the first place.

It seems to me we are all too concerned about being "politically correct," whatever the hell that means, and not damaging our fellow debaters' "feelings" even when standing up for the most basic of our Constitutional and Human Rights.

Sorry to go on so but it just personally makes me sad and yes even more than a little hopeless. So few seem to remember the Constitution or the sacrifices made by our ancestors like Adams, (initially at least), Jefferson, Franklin, Frederick Douglas, Susan B. Anthony, and yes all those soldiers who have given their very lives, to win and protect the right of those who want to protest government actions they feel unjust, to do so. It will never cease to surprise me how little our right as citizens to do that is respected or even exercised any more.

And by the way, back on topic, art has always been one of the most fundamentally recognized ways through out human history, as a medium of freedom of expression. People protested the Holocaust with art, People protested the Vietnam War with art. Song lyrics, though not always, brilliant or tasteful, have always been recognized as a form of artistic expression. So the Dixie Chicks are not breaking some "entertainment" rule, by using their artistic medium to express their opinion. They are simply following in a long line of predecessors. Bob Dylan, the Beatles, Peter, Paul and Mary, Steven Spielberg, Van Goh, Kafka, Tolstoy, Dickens, have all used their own artistic mediums to voice dissent with their leaders and the state of the world in general. Not comparing the quality of any one's works here, just the principal of art as a form of dissent.

Also another historical tidbit, one of the first groups, the Napoleons, Stalins, Hitlers, and Mussolinis of this world sought to repress, were the artists. They are traditionally number 2, right after the intelligentsia.

History, its not just about memorizing dates, or analyzing the battle strategies of Antitem or Bunker Hill. It is also about studying cause and effect.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

End of Rant. :

I actually felt like ending it with "I am Liberal. Hear Me Roar. Deal With It. Neener, Neener" but I refrained.

*Note added for DU. I still basically respect Kerry, and do realize he must have felt like he was between a rock and a hard place, in terms of getting a Republican controlled Congress and Supreme Court, to actually rule in his favor in any would be election challenge. I mean we all know what happened in Gore's case but IMHO, he could have been stronger in making a case about it to the American People. The same with the rest of the Dems on all our issues. I think we need to be stronger as a whole on being the dissenting party and loyal opposition. JMHO. I love and respect most of them, but just because they can't win at this point, doesn't mean they should be silent about what matters most right?" Again JMHO. Also I am personally pretty convinced the election was stolen, but I still believe the issue needs to be tried in a court of law. I know dream on. *

Read entry | Discuss (18 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Thu Apr 13th 2006, 01:27 PM
A Political Pondering In Poetry
by Liberalynn:

Calculating ponderous steps,
crush humanity, pulverize benevolence
flaunt brazen lies, selfishness,

Elephants on Parade

Sightless, mindless, matching strides
annihilate hope, ravage dreams,
exhibit endless, soulless cruelty,

Elephants on Parade

Brutal demolishing procession,
fracture progress, shatter time pieces,
promote regressive mediocrity,

Elephants on Parade

Authoritarian, staccato marchers,
violate rarity, splinter diversity,
display insipid ignorance, similitude,

Elephants on Parade

Read entry | Discuss (4 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Thu Feb 23rd 2006, 01:47 PM
Yep. I sure have far to go. The even bigger problem is I am not even sure where it is I am supposed to be heading?
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Wed Feb 22nd 2006, 03:57 PM
and I admit I still don't know what the world is about.

I only know that I love my family, animals, books, television, music, movies, and you guys and gals here at the DU and Democrats every where!

Now can I have Julian Mcmahon on top please?

Read entry | Discuss (16 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Mon Feb 20th 2006, 02:32 PM
I have two:

Finger Lakes Community College- Suny NY- A.A.-Social Science - A.A.S. Paralegal

and Nazareth College of Rochester, NY - B.A. History- Minor Political Science

Both contributed majorly into converting me into a proud Democrat. Bless you my wonderful profs at both.
Read entry | Discuss (150 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Mon Feb 20th 2006, 02:19 PM
Listening to the Stephanie Miller Show on Air America.

She cracks me up especially that song "you're a lying flaming sack of crap." I have been singing that a lot lately.

Another Catholic School Escapee from Upstate.

Keep up the good work, Stephanie. At least you make me laugh through the tears.
Read entry | Discuss (4 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Mon Feb 20th 2006, 02:15 PM
Don't just love the media shills making such a big deal out of Bush's so callled campaign to end dependence on oil?

Hmmm When and Where Did I Hear That Before? Oh yeah Jimmy Carter proposed it back in the seventies and the shills mocked him out and told him to go back to "peanut farming."

Imagine if we'd have actually listened to President Carter back then. It might have made a difference in a whole bunch of things. Especially since that was a President who actually believed in the concept and was willing to work for it.

Not just one whose trying to use it as a political selling point while reaping tons of profits from the sale of said oil in the meantime.

Hey I am showing my age bigtime here but I actually still have that Energy Crisis single on 45 that they released in the 70's.

Remember the one that ended "we would like to continue this broadcast but we have just run out of energy."
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Wed Feb 15th 2006, 06:56 PM
In response to What are my guilty pleasures?
and South Park.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in The DU Lounge
Tue Feb 14th 2006, 09:28 PM
The party that stands for the fundamental principles of human rights and basic freedoms.

The party that actually cares about people and the world we live in.

So all hail we Dems.

Thanks for letting me be among you.

It was my 1000 post and I couldn't think of a better way to use it, then to say thanks to the best party and partiers ever.
Read entry | Discuss (9 comments)
Posted by Liberalynn in General Discussion (Through 2005)
Thu Jul 07th 2005, 01:03 PM
in my opinion do "hide true" history from us. I only felt I began to learn a portion of the truth when I studied History in college. I don't ever think we will know the full truth about any thing though to be honest, because alas "truth is subjective."

I also use to believe in the quote "those who don't learn from the past are condemned to repeat it," that's why I studied History to begin with.

Now as I grow older all I can do is draw more reluctantly and ever sadder to the conclusion that Nietzche was closer to the truth than I ever wanted to admit: "The only thing we learn from history, is we don't learn from history."

My B.A. was in history and I minored in Political Science.

Sorry to be a pessimist but that's how I feel on days like today. I am not giving up because I know we have to keep speaking out for a better world, it just gets harder and harder to believe that enlightenment is still achievable somehow, someway.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Profile Information
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your ignore list
3934 posts
Member since Mon Nov 8th 2004
Finger Lakes Region, NY
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Susan B. Anthony-

My goal in life - Never again to allow myself to be victimized by gender discrimination but to raise my voice for equality for all people when and where I can. It is what I owe to those women who came before me, and what I owe to those who come after me.

Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.