|
BigBearJohn's Journal of PROGRESS
they will leave Social Security and Medicare alone; then --
Let's give 'em ANOTHER TRILLION and maybe they will bring back some minimum wage jobs to this country; then -- Let's give 'em ANOTHER TRILLION and they might even allow GAYS to MARRY!; then -- Let's give 'em ANOTHER TRILLION and maybe they'll let us keep the Democratic president in office for another 4 years; then -- Let's give 'em ANOTHER TRILLION and maybe they'll give us back our right to PRIVACY; then -- And let's keep giving more and more TRILLIONS until eventually they finally give us back our COUNTRY; even though by that time there won't be much left to give back! I have to laugh when Lindsay Graham says the Democrats "ate their lunch" -- with a trillion dollar price tag, Graham is probably crying all the way to the bank! Wasn't it the Dutch West India Company who approached a group of Indians on Manhattan and traded Manhattan for some beads, cloth, and trinkets worth about 60 Dutch guilders, or about $24? Makes me wonder if we are descendants of the same tribe. Then again, maybe I should be more thankful -- more grateful -- shouldn't we all be more appreciative for the few crumpets the GOP and rich cats deem suitable for us? At least we are ALIVE. Gee, ain't life grand? Isn't this the same way a PROTECTION RACKET works? Pay up or you will suffer BIG TIME. So, people pay up. Oh well, I'll just shut up and eat my porridge. "PLEASE SIR, MAY I HAVE SOME MORE?" ![]() Only meant to divert our attention away from the
news revealing that the Fed Reserve gave away over $12 TRILLIONof our money to the banks.I think I saw a different side of him than I'd ever seen before.
I loved the fact that he made himself vulnerable and opened himself to any questions that were asked of him. (How many of YOU would allow themselves to be cross-examined by the likes of Jon Stewart?) Seems like Obama really reached out to the common man. Basically, he explained himself and I, for one, loved that. I felt like he was being more "real" and spontaneous during the interview. He made some excellent points and really answered Stewart's questions with something other than just a pat answer (at least his answers seemed genuine, intelligently reasoned and heartfelt). His ease with Stewart amazed me. His quick and deliberate responses to Stewart seemed unrehearsed and made sense to me. Though I might not agree with all his positions, I felt more confident in him today than I have in the last two years. More than just a politician, today I finally saw a President. No doubt some people here will say I must have had blinders on not to see it before, but at least I can say, "better late than never." I also give him a lot of credit for the way he answered the progressive bloggers. All in all, I felt a good deal more respect for the man today. I remain positive to see what he can accomplish in the next two years. I fully realize that a lot of you here could give two shits about whatever I think or feel; still, I wanted to say it anyway. Thanks for allowing me to say it. That's my 2 cents. More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/27/o... (edited to spellcheck) I was watching videos of Alan Grayson tonight and came across a spot he did on "Hardball" with Chris Matthews on 10/2/09.
At the end of the segment, Matthews told Grayson that he sounded like a liberal. Grayson smiled and suggested he was a "Progressive" or "Populist"... to which Matthews responded (and rightly so, in my opinion): "Hey, look. Don't hide from that word, 'liberal.' It sounds better. 'Progressive' sounds a little, well, I can't say it... 'pusillanimous'? 'Liberal' is a good word. You gotta make it sound good: 'Yeah, I'm a liberal. I believe in opportunity for everybody. I believe in freedom for everybody. I believe in liberty for everybody. I'm an American. Of course, I'm a liberal! People should say that. It would be more fun." I actually felt Matthews sincerity. Believe it or not. For once, I agree with Matthews. I DO like the word LIBERAL and I am going to start saying, "You're damn right I am a liberal. And proud of it!!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL5Hjn6xMmU Members of Congress should be compelled to wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers, so we can identify their corporate sponsors. Chimpanzee earns her stripes as a foster mother by caring for two white tiger cubsBy Daily Mail Reporter Last updated at 11:26 AM on 13th November 2008 Gently easing a bottle of milk into the cub's mouth, Anjana clearly demonstrates her skill at her job. What makes this so unusual is that Anjana is a chimpanzee and her charges are two white tiger cubs. The pictures from a Miami zoo show the doting chimpanzee tenderly feeding two-month-old Mitra and Shiva and cuddling up with them at nap time. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/...
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by BigBearJohn in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Wed Sep 17th 2008, 02:48 PM We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to fix Social Security
We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to fix Medicare We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to provide health care to ALL Americans We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to help out Americans losing their homes We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to help all our veterans returning from war BUT We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to bail out Bears Stearns We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to bail out AIG We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to pay for an unnecessary TRILLION DOLLAR war When the LITTLE GUY needs help, they scornfully say, "GET A JOB!" But when of their BIG GUY CRONIES need a bailout, what do they say? SURE, NO PROBLEM. Where's the checkbook?"But what about the debt we're leaving on the backs of our childen and their future?" "Children? WHOSE Children. OUR children won't have to pay for this. YOUR children will" The Republicans have had their hands in our pockets for 8 years. Now they are robbing us blind IN BROAD DAYLIGHT!!!! The Republicans have shown their true colors and now they expect us to vote them back into office? What's next? Should we bend over and spread 'em? Oh, I'm sorry, but we've ALREADY DONE THAT!! SEVERAL TIMES!!! Let's show 'em OUR color this November: BLUEPosted by BigBearJohn in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Sat Nov 04th 2006, 06:34 PM TO ALL MY FRIENDS AT DU: The Bush Administration has just give us what could be our best chance to actually convince our Republican (or Democratic) friends to vote their conscience and take action on Nov 7th to protect America from harm. Can I somehow please persuade you to send an email to everyone you know, Democrat and Republican alike, including those who might be sitting out this election, and especially any active groups you know interested in protecting our country... and ask them for their support. ====================================================================================================== Dear friend (Republican or Democrat), It's often been said that it is not a good idea to discuss politics with close friends. However, a situation has occurred that is threatening all our lives -- not as Republicans or Democrats, but as Americans. I will break my firm rule not to talk politics just this once because I feel it is my moral duty to try to cross partisan lines and reach out to all my FRIENDS, regardless of political persuasion who truly love their country and want to honestly protect it from egregious harm. What am I talking about? Two weeks before the government shut down a Web site holding an archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war, scientists at an American weapons laboratory complained that papers on the site contained sensitive nuclear information, federal officials said yesterday. Two documents were quickly removed. The Bush administration set up the Web site last March at the urging of Congressional Republicans, who said giving public access to materials from the 48,000 boxes of documents found in Iraq could increase the understanding of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein. But among the documents posted were roughly a dozen that nuclear weapons experts said constituted a basic guide to building an atom bomb. They were accounts of Mr. Hussein’s nuclear program, which United Nations inspectors dismantled after the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The site was shut down on Thursday night after The New York Times asked questions about the disclosure of nuclear information and complaints that experts had raised. Yesterday, federal officials said they were conducting a review to understand better how and when the warnings had originated and how the bureaucracy had responded. SOURCE: CLICK HERE TO READ NY TIMES ARTICLE On a 11/3/06 NBC broadcast, former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card confirmed the Bush administration’s role in posting nuclear weapons secrets on a public website. Protesting the publication of these documents, John Negraponte, Director of National Intelligence, said these documents were being published "at some risk." As described on Wikipedia: Operation Iraqi Freedom Documents refers to some 55,000 boxes of documents, audiotapes and videotapes that may or may not have been produced by the government of Saddam Hussein. The documents date from the 1980s through the post-Saddam period. The U.S. government seized the records after the 2003 invasion of Iraq and is releasing them on the Internet, requesting Arabic translators around the world to help in the translation. A report in the New York Times from November 3, 2006 states that the website has been taken offline because of security concerns regarding posting of sophisticated diagrams and other information regarding nuclear weapon design prior to the 1991 Persian Gulf war. Operation Iraqi Portal gave away the keys to the atomic store and our country is CURRENTLY being put at considerable national risk because of it. Representative Peter Hoekstra (R) Michigan and Senator Pat Roberts (R) Kansas originally argued for the need to publicize the documents in the hopes of leveraging the internet to find evidence of WMD in Iraq. "We are proposing that you immediately develop a process to, consistent with necessary security guidelines... release these documents to the general public. At minimum, this public assistance could 'point' the Intelligence Community to the small subset of information that is likely to be of importance... This proposal takes risk, but we believe it is manageable risk" The President himself overruled the Intelligence exerts like Negraponte who disagreed with the House and Congress Republicans by signing an order and thus creating this website. Not only did the administration publish dangerous nuclear secrets, but these secrets were written in Arabic, plainly readable by any terrorist with an internet connection. Mr. President, you say you are protecting us. Please tell me, sir: HOW DOES REVEALING NUCLEAR SECRETS TO THE PUBLIC STRENGTHEN HOMELAND SECURITY?Drug Dealer Had U.S. Nuclear Secrets Classified information stolen years ago from a major government-owned nuclear laboratory with a history of serious security breaches was accidentally found in a drug dealer’s mobile home. The computer disks containing nuclear secrets belong to the nation’s leading nuclear weapons lab, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and were first reported stolen in 2004. At the time, frantic authorities closed the New Mexico facility to search for the missing disks. Days later, they claimed it was all mistake because the disks never existed. This week the “nonexistent” classified disks surfaced during a New Mexico police department’s search of a drug-dealer’s mobile home. The man, also charged with domestic violence, got the top-secret information from a woman who is a contract employee at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. This is just the latest of many embarrassing incidents for the lab, which has seen numerous other security lapses, theft, and fraud through the years. In fact, the Energy Department has labeled the facility “a systematic management failure.” Regardless, the U.S. Government renewed the contract of the failing managers, the University of California, a few years ago for $512 million SOURCE: http://www.corruptionchronicles.com/2006/1... Posted by BigBearJohn in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Fri Nov 03rd 2006, 02:08 AM ... found this on huffingtonpost.com
BUSH ADMIN POSTED NUCLEAR BOMB BUILDING GUIDE ON INTERNET… We have lost nearly 3,000 of our beloved soldiers because of the threat of Iraq having WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and NOW the Bush administration is fucking PUBLISHING "nuclear bombs for dummies" on the internet?????? I mean, why the HELL aren't we just drop shipping 'nukular' manuals into Iran, Iraq and Syria? Holy shit. Do we realize the significance of this?!!@#$!!! If we don't jump on this with everything we got -- then we DESERVE everything we get. ![]() By WILLIAM J. BROAD Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who had said they hoped to “leverage the Internet” to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein. But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb. Last night, the government shut down the Web site after The New York Times asked about complaints from weapons experts and arms-control officials. A spokesman for the director of national intelligence said access to the site had been suspended “pending a review to ensure its content is appropriate for public viewing.” Officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency, fearing that the information could help states like Iran develop nuclear arms, had privately protested last week to the American ambassador to the agency, according to European diplomats who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity. One diplomat said the agency’s technical experts “were shocked” at the public disclosures. The documents, roughly a dozen in number, contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that nuclear experts who have viewed them say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums. For instance, the papers give detailed information on how to build nuclear firing circuits and triggering explosives, as well as the radioactive cores of atom bombs. (emphasis added) Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/mi... ![]() Posted by BigBearJohn in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Tue Jul 25th 2006, 03:58 AM Posted by BigBearJohn in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Thu Jun 15th 2006, 09:18 PM We need a TRUE leader who walks the walk and talks the talk.Posted by BigBearJohn in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Thu Jun 15th 2006, 04:17 PM http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathleen-rea...
Countering Terms of EnsmearmentMost current Republican strategists are masters of ensmearment. They've effectively connected the concept of pro-choice with PRO-abortion, suggesting a cavalier Democratic advocacy for the termination of "life in the womb." They've coupled consideration on key issues with indecisiveness, the impending disaster of global warming with "tree-hugging," reconsiderations of a "yes" vote on the war (now using actual facts) with flip-flopping, arguing for defense of the country against the real rather than preferred enemy with cowardice and undermining the troops, sensitivity to people in need with being a wimp or having a victim obsession, and criticism of the Iraq war with an overemphasis on the negative. So what are the options? Specialization is one important tactic. Democrats and their supporters need to become strategy specialists. They need to stop letting the first Democrat who leaves his or her office on a given day be the one who meets the press. They should be prepared with their own specialty or say nothing. Here are three of a host of potential specialties: Debate needs to be put on the backburner for a while. Unfortunately ours is not an era of debate in government and few Democrats or Republicans do this well anyway. To rely on debate at the moment is like a swim coach sending the proficient butterfly stroke guy into a pool to win a breaststroke race. He's going to lose. Better to find among Democrats and their blogger supporters the best debaters and have them ready for opportunities, but don't make this the only form of response. Retaliation in kind to terms of ensmearment is an option. But the opposition is better at this particular strategy. Nevertheless, a few associations of the non-gutter variety wouldn't hurt. As I mentioned in my prior blog, "giving them the rope to hang themselves" is often a useful strategy with the arrogant and vile -- a kind of gentle nudging toward the farthest reaches of their own hateful pathology. I'm not talking about all Republican leaders here or even most. Strategy needs to be targeted. And if members of the Republican leadership are reasonable and averse to low tactics, then treating them with respect is the best policy. We're talking here about multi-faceted strategy. For others, however, associations of callousness, dishonesty, desperation tactics of the most distasteful order, dragging the country in the mud, polarizing, alienating the country from the world and rewarding the obscenely rich again and again while rounding up "illegals" they let in to get richer are a few options. Short phrases capturing these would be best. Some Senators and Congressional Reps need to specialize in this strategic option along with some bloggers ready for the task -- ones capable of sparring on the edge without, figuratively speaking, drawing blood. Disassembling of ensmearments holds considerable promise, but it takes cleverness. Those who specialize in this tactic would be ready to substitute constructive for derogatory descriptors -- immediately. The example I use when training or teaching is one of referring to a job applicant as "stubborn" in a recommendation letter. The person wouldn't get the job. But one person's "stubborn" is another's "determined," "persistent," or "resolute." One person's Commander-in-Chief bashing is another's "patriotic duty." You get the picture. It's strategic reframing. It isn't just wordplay, but rather management of significant perceptions. The Democrats need a TOE (Terms of Ensmearment) Squad devoted to the immediate decoupling of insults conjoined to disparage their party. They need to select these people today and crush this underhanded campaign like a house of cards. |
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted
on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the
last 24 hours. Some things I enjoy about DU2 in its current configuration. 10 recs : By No Elephants Consulting firm with ties to Rahm behind paying astroturf groups to attend meetings? 7 recs : By madfloridian Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Discussion Forums
Big Forums
More Forums
Today's Featured Forums
|
