Latest Threads
Greatest Threads
Home » Discuss » Journals » Overseas Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
Overseas's Journal
Posted by Overseas in Latest Breaking News
Thu Sep 01st 2011, 11:42 AM
The GOP candidates are all so very crazy these days that no one will want to watch them. Even Huntsman has beefed up his Stomp on the Poor credentials lately.

The Republican candidates are so very crazy now that maybe the only people watching will be satire writers.

The GOP could have covered up that sorry situation by blaming our president for taking away their audience.

Now-- they've got nothing.

Except-- hey, look at Lord Orange disrespecting The President of the United States.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in Political Videos
Thu Jul 21st 2011, 08:37 PM

I do feel we have played along for far too long with Republican insanity and sheer lies (Bush tax cuts did not lead to massive job creation. We know that. Just because our president was too kind to beat GOP leaders over the head with those facts, doesn't mean they are not true.)and all that dangerous compromising has really intensified my depression.

I wanted to grab that clean bill.

And I wanted our reporters to ask any Republicans they interviewed-- You do know the debt ceiling was raised seven times for George W Bush? And 18 times for Reagan? You do know that we've seen this game before-- you all hassled Jimmy Carter about the debt ceiling-- then gave Ronnie Reagan a pass for 18 times.

Our reporters are supposed to be so inside-the-beltway savvy-- and yet they're playing out their talking points instead of giving us the sad history of such debt ceiling debates. Intense when Democrats are presidents, soft and easy when Republican presidents rule.

And Republicans run up the biggest debts. At least the ones since Reagan transformed their party from the practical ones to the grandiose liars. Prior Republicans wanted to balance the budgets-- not blow them to smithereens to bring down the government once and for all.

Prior Republicans valued constraints on business practices destructive to our ecosystems. They viewed legislation in terms longer than quarterly profit statements. Some of them wanted their kids to have a healthier planet and thought good government was a necessary way to level the playing field and hold all businesses equally accountable to follow best-practices, and monitor the results in order to improve them for the benefit of future generations. Most of us want our food safety to improve over time. And infrastructure maintenance to be top notch again. And less homeless people in our streets, in this richest nation. Republicans used to want that too.

We really need a dose of Keynsian economics right now. Supply Side -- giving the money to the rich and waiting -- crashed already. Way back in 2008. There has been enough looting. 90 percent of us are not recovering right now. A lot of noble work needs doing-- rebuilding America already. The modern Republicans really let everything deteriorate.

Someone has been pushing them to hate government and want it to fail. And to focus on quarterly profits above all. Their sponsors have homes in other counries.

We need to draw out the more reasonable Republicans a lot faster than we are. It was so pathetic to have so few Republicans with us on better health care when our citizens were being evicted from their homes by the thousands every day.

And not enough reporters asked Republican leaders if they weren't ashamed of themselves, for pushing healthcare further out of reach of their desperate fellow citizens.

So please, take my $300 now. I'd so much rather that, than losing hundreds of dollars a year in my 80's.

Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion
Sun Apr 17th 2011, 03:49 PM
to more sustainable long-term moderate profitability for a broader range of energy producers.

Just need the big old fuel providers to open their minds to a new business model. We don't want to zoom ahead furiously using up all our fossil fuels rushing through the next fifteen years. Most of us know full well that we will want to use fossil fuels for decades to come, so we need to increase our efforts on building in alternatives to stretch those precious supplies. We would rather use petroleum more carefully than scramble into pumping millions of gallons of poisons into the ground to force out the natural gas. That's desperation. Business as usual-- do whatever it takes to generate oil.

We want a more judicious approach. Much better safety to save the millions of gallons so callously wasted in deep water drilling so far. But using fossil fuels more responsibly involves a new business paradigm-- including the public good in business strategies. Businesses could no longer hide behind being legally bound by their charter with shareholders to maximize their quarterly profits. They have hidden behind that imperative so far-- Poison is cheaper so we've gotta use it. It's not illegal and we won't be liable for it since we paid to get the laws written in our favor. You know we'd like to do things more responsibly but gosh, we've gotta go for the cheapest production we can afford because we're obligated to maximize profits.

I remember a time when businesses accepted the value of pollution regulations-- all companies would be bound to follow the more expensive waste disposal procedures so none could get ahead with reckless disposal. Everyone's got to do it, so no one has the advantage. Businesses grudgingly accepted some constraints after they had seen rivers catch fire, and subsequently saw the ecosystems improve. They accommodated OSHA and saw less workers injured on the job. The value of those improvements was appreciated for a while. We were talking about the environment and sustainable development in the late 70's.

But in the meantime, alas, get rich quick guys were plotting away, to take back that Do Good money. Recycling and regulations were bothersome so they could work those angles. And after we had lost the War in Vietnam, talking about how wasteful the USA is compared to other countries could be portrayed as disparaging our country, being unpatriotic. We're America! We don't have to cut back! It's Morning in America...

That was the slick messaging of Ronald Reagan's era-- that environmental stuff is a real pain in the butt, why should there be any Limits to Growth? We're America! It's time to Get Rich Quick, squash those demanding unions, and exalt the Wisdom of the Free Market. Get people to think the Free Market will regulate itself. Unconstrained it will work for all of us and best practices will naturally triumph.

Now we know-- unconstrained, it worked to enrich the Top Two Percent of us by hundreds of percent increases in their annual incomes, and billion dollar corporations. Too many of them took those fabulous tax savings and invested them in lobbying Congress for more favorable laws like subsidies to off-shore production that had been done by those demanding unions, and better tax shelters. They didn't use the Bush tax cuts to create jobs; they used them to gamble by selling shady mortgages and repackaging and swapping them around until the Wisdom of The Free Market crashed our economy. Supply side trickle down economics failed miserably.

And yet the Koch Parties are still with us. The Chamber still spends millions to loosen pollution regulations and crush more unions. How very sad. Still using professional PR to inflame desperate citizens to vote against their own and humanity's best interests in order to increase the quarterly profits of multinational corporations.

Our media used to issue challenges to Republicans to defend outrageous ideas like defunding the EPA or cutting Low Income Heating Assistance. But our last Democratic president allowed media ownership to be deregulated into fewer, stronger, multinational corporate hands, so we don't see enough direct challenges to Republican officials.

I've been glad to see more Democratic legislators taking up the slack recently. I have really appreciated their direct challenges to the reckless cruelty of the GOP's budget. But I wish I'd seen more TV news people asking Republican officials directly to explain why they voted to cut over a billion from the EPA in these treacherous times for energy production. And why they voted to cut back on community clinics when we still have 50 million people uninsured.

Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion
Thu Apr 07th 2011, 11:51 PM
It highlighted another encroaching, gradually increasing scourge of giving up our national community to the control of private corporate states-- the privatization of compassion.

The ad was one of those-- Hey We Do Good! -- ones. But the point was that We Don't Need to Pay No Stinkin' Taxes. We do good with our billions On Our Own -- we give to folks, we create some jobs, we do good stuff with our billions of cash. We give some of it back.

In response to the "You Paid Zero in Taxes" campaign, they've got this slick spot ready to roll out. I guess the bright side is that those campaigns are having a bit of an impact, requiring a bit of a response.

But the key point for me is-- why does the Giant Corporation get to choose how to share its mountains of cash, exempt from taxes, while I cannot determine how many of my meager dollars are allocated to the Bush Wars to bully our way around the world's oil fields? I'd rather spend more on FEMA and the EPA and Planned Parenthood.

The millionaires' and private corporations' sense of entitlement to decide just who and what is worthy of the money they would be paying in taxes is quite appalling to me. Who will be worthy of the good lords' favor? It gets to seem very much like kingdoms and dynasties. Feudalization.

I feel much better when I have a good, efficient compassionate government, supported by all of us, that serves our national priorities like health care, environmental protection, education, housing, mass transit, first rate infrastructure and emergency services, poverty reduction programs and small business assistance as just part of a day's work. Good government can be great.

Much greater than privatized compassion entrusted to the imagined benevolence of corporate states.

Q: You Paid Zero Dollars in Taxes.

A: Yeah but we employed people and bought stuff from small businesses and invested in getting you all more energy. So it's all good.

Never mind that we spent millions getting citizens' groups stirred up and spewing hatred to defund the EPA and shut down government in general. Got them all to think low income heating assistance just isn't affordable anymore. Not while all those regulations impeding the magnificent progress of our corporate giants still stand. Got them all to shout to Shut That Down.

But then again, in the future, who knows, maybe Big Oil will create a heating assistance program that will help 10,000 families. And do a reality show about it. Or another series of soulful commercials.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in Latest Breaking News
Sun Mar 27th 2011, 04:23 PM
We've gotta put a gag order on those dolphin photos! Waves of compassion might overcome our people! Oh no! That's what I thought at first. They're probably arguing-- too cute! highly prejudicial!

Didn't realize that their greater fear was that the dolphins increased mortality rate would also serve as a deeper question to the public -- how much are we willing to give up in allowing such a reckless pursuit of oil?

We've been subsidizing billions of dollars of R&D with the tax breaks we've given Big Oil, and all we got were sham safety reports by and large. Cut & paste jobs. Reckless disregard for all life. No improvements to clean up technologies for decades. I was embarrassed to see how the BP disaster was handled.

We paid billions for that and Big Oil doesn't want us taxpayers to see that their cost cutting on safety, in spite of our generous subsidies, were shifted into the Quarterly Profit pocket and for that

we are losing thousands of beautiful, intelligent creatures beloved for millennia.

They don't want us to ask if it was worth it-- for safety money to have been diverted to increase private wealth while taking so many species from our planet's shared ecosystems. Our focus has been distracted from those questions many times over already, as more and more iconic species drop in numbers.

Highly prejudicial? Of course. And it should be. Giving up dolphins is a major choice to make.

Do the majority of US taxpayers believe we should continue to subsidize companies that are so brazenly making irrevocable decisions on our behalf, merely to help them become the most profitable companies in the history of Earth, by skimping on safety?

It is not a matter of To Drill or Not To Drill at all. It is To Drill Recklessly or Not To Drill Recklessly. We have been paying Big Oil all along to proceed with much greater care.
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion
Sun Mar 13th 2011, 09:16 PM
it has been really gratifying to see the TV stations completely turned over to the public interest. And I really appreciated the value of a solid science education as a national priority. Technical details could be given without dolling them up, and details about revised train schedules and rolling power outages were conveyed very efficiently.

During what would have been the wee hours in Japan, the TV was running lots of repetitions of the revised train schedules and electricity rationing schedules. I went out to do some chores while that was on, thinking it rather boring. But upon reflection, it was wonderful of their TV to do that. When a nervous populace is trying to sleep, they broadcast the dry news that the train schedule has been rearranged as follows, and power rationing plans had been composed... the engineers were still hard at work and in control.

After the day had gotten going, we saw how people were cooperating at major train stations, lining up way outside just to get into the station. The anchors were explaining alternatives people had mentioned in interviews and messages to the station.

When discussing the different categories of electricity consumers and how power would be rationed in the weeks to come, they also showed a short clip of a mom tending to the life support machines for her child, and how she adjusts them to battery power during the outage periods. That quietly helps put things in perspective.

They brought on engineers with charts of the reactors to explain the partial melting and the plan in action to cool them down in a calm, professorial manner.

They even showed and explained the process of people being tested for radiation exposure and what the various levels mean.

The information is not delivered in a flashy style. It is like a classroom lecture. Very reassuring to a traumatized public.

They also demonstrated a way to make 3 little Bunsen burners at home, with 3 soda cans, kitchen scissors, aluminum foil, and I'm not sure what the wick material was, and salad oil. They cut the cans and rolled the wicks into aluminum foil rings into the 1/3 cans into which oil was poured, and showed that a pot of water could rest on those, and one cup would boil in about ten minutes.

They also discussed how to handle various material that might be contaminated.

Soon after that there was an aftershock alert. A red box in the middle lower screen, the anchors stopped their current story for the announcement. We have just been informed that there will be a fairly strong aftershock in the following areas very soon. Please remain calm but prepare yourselves and move away from any objects that may fall. And within a minute the aftershocks occurred and the map was up with 3s and 4s on it. The offshore quake was around a 5.

Then back to regular continuous programming about safety and clean up measures, and more discussions about nuclear power.

I've also really loved the way the Prime Minister and his cabinet have all been wearing workers' uniforms. They look like technical engineers as they are asking very respectfully for public cooperation with conserving electricity and the rationing plans.

There's also a tsunami watch in place. You hear a distinctive sound and the broadcast is interrupted to announce the location and give details.
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion
Tue Dec 28th 2010, 12:00 PM
to surge forward with a 21st Century FDR approach on very practical, pragmatic grounds. That's why I was not worried about having a practical, pragmatic President. He would demonstrate how practical the FDR approach could be, with the Bush Republican Crash as clear evidence of the need for profound change. The Bush Crash was the spectacular failure of 30-years of Supply-Side Economics. Far from trickling down to us, our national wealth was torn away from us to patch up the disasters of deregulation.

Our Democratic legislators should have been readied as a block to stand up for a rebalancing of our economy to Democratic Demand-Side Economics.

Medicare for All could have been their compassionate cry for the people, because so many of us had lost so much in the crash and were being evicted from our homes. There are practical, pragmatic reasons for it, but Democrats could have distinguished their mandate by pushing very very hard for the public-private mixed system that is Medicare on purely compassionate grounds first. We are Democrats and we have a mandate to protect the people and strengthen our social safety nets. The people can't wait any longer for national health security.

While I wanted my Democrats to go ahead and wave the Democratic Demand-Side economic flag proudly, especially after the horrendous Republican crash of our economy and our military (by defying the Nuremberg principles and Geneva Conventions), Democrats could actually have done the "bipartisan" thing by pointing out that they were bipartisan with what Republicans claimed to be--

Republicans say they are fiscally responsible-- our major industrial competitors have the government handling medical costs, we should too. Let's finally get on an equal footing with them. That would help our small businesses compete.

Republicans say they are strong on defense-- but they allowed war profiteering and reckless conduct by military contractors, so we need to undo that. Brutal bombing wars have created more enemies for our country, we need to undo that. We will focus on intelligence and seduction-- building schools and hospitals and encouraging the establishment of more small businesses by the local people for the local people. Pouring our billions into jobs for the local people to rebuild their own infrastructure rather than pouring them into hiring giant American firms to contract out all those jobs for years and years.

Republicans say they are strong on defense-- so many of our wars were focused on securing access to oil, so by putting our desperate people back to work on infrastructure projects that included as much green technology as possible, we could reduce our country's use of oil, thus stretching the remaining supplies for use by the private sector, and catching up with the rest of the world in green technology markets. We would also make sure there is more oil left for our children to enjoy petroleum based goods if we could make our shared infrastructure as green as possible. We could also have more options in case restricting oil supplies was used as a threat against us in the future. That's a much smarter defense of our country and its future.

Republicans say they are fiscally responsible, so we will be bipartisan with that ideal and let the tax cuts for the top 2% expire on schedule. But since we all can see the data that tax cuts for the middle and lower classes are spent immediately, which stimulates local economies that need it desperately after the Bush Crash, we will keep the middle class tax cuts.

We could have even done that bipartisan thing if my Democrats had banded together behind that sort of plan. Bipartisan with Republican myths about themselves. Fiscal responsibility-- check. Stronger on defense-- we can do that too.

I really thought we would do that. That's why I was so excited to vote for a practical, pragmatic new Democratic President. Those moves would have been the most practical to rebuild our country after the Bush crash and ensure its long term health.

But my Democrats were not practical and pragmatic for the future of our country. They didn't recoil in horror from Supply-Side Economics after the spectacular and very painful Republican Crash. They didn't pragmatically seize the opportunity to ensure their majority for decades to come by standing as a block to really move our country forward to more sustainable, compassionate, effective policies, even with the mandate they were given by millions of suffering citizens who knew it was time for Democratic Demand-Side Economics again.

Sadly, it seems that pragmatism has been relegated to politicians' individual careers-- "Sorry pal, multinational corporations now have more power than nation states. We Democrats deregulated our mass media so conservative corporations own most of it now, with token liberal voices to sustain the illusion of a free press, so they can destroy any of us who pose a real threat to their absolute power. We've gotta be pragmatic about our individual re-election. Look at how corporate-funded right wing PR firms roused a bunch of tea party groups to push the Republicans even further to the right. That was their demonstration that they could crush any of us with a few million dollars, so we have to tow the party line.The private sector can do better. The private sector can do better. The unions are demanding too much. Those entitlements to stave off starvation are too expensive for us. Privatize it all. Let the rich decide who really deserves charity. "

Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion
Sat Dec 25th 2010, 12:27 PM
They have given people something to hide behind-- Gosh, you know, I would really like to help US workers, but this is a corporation and we've got to serve our shareholders by keeping production costs as low as possible. Sorry about the death of your towns and cities. Compassion is nice but our duty to make profits for our shareholders is absolute.

Those Republican campaign signs, "Country First," were lies in many ways, not least of which is that they support weakening government so that our policies become "Corporation First," even if those corporations are multinationals, not even paying US taxes.

The rich are just reaping the rewards of the cruel false dogma that "the private sector can do better" or Supply-Side Economics -- keep cutting taxes for corporations and the richest people and the benefits will Trickle Down to everyone. We waited for 30 years and here is what happened.

When it was clear that our economy had become as distorted in favor of the super wealthy as it was in the 1920's,

and the Bush Crash had made things even worse, many of us thought that finally, with a pragmatic, practical, compassionate former community organizer president, we would return to Democratic Demand-Side Economics, and put millions to work rebuilding the infrastructure that Modern Republicans had allowed to decay to finance the Bush Wars.

But instead we heard that we needed to compromise with the party that crashed our economy, and even with millions suffering we wouldn't get Medicare for All, we wouldn't even get a public option to control insurance costs which were zooming upward and bankrupting our people already being evicted from their homes from being suckered into fraudulent mortgages that were repackaged and swapped around the globe.

We didn't have Obama For America using the hundreds of thousands of voters they had gathered in 2008 to push our Democratic legislators to do what we know works best for the most of us, and our nation's long-term economic health. Apparently, they allowed OFA to be absorbed into the DNC, which had been taken away from Howard Dean (who recognized and told the truth about the major Republican lies "we are fiscally responsible" and "we are strong on defense") and returned to the (already old-fashioned in the 90's) "New Democrat" dogma of going along with Supply-Side economic policies so that Democrats could chalk up some "wins" and get larger corporate campaign contributions.

Those corporate campaign donations are very powerful, especially after Democrats were unable to prohibit right wing judicial activists from being appointed to our supreme court. My Democrats allowed another Republican lie, that they "oppose judicial activism," to only be applied to liberal nominees, not to consistently pro-corporate right wingers like Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito. And we got some Super Change, the unlimited secret campaign spending allowed to corporations, including multinationals.

I still hope that our government can be wrenched away from the Supply-Side Quarterly-Profits-Above-All ideologues, but my Democrats let them win on so many issues so far-- getting Some Change we are definitely celebrating, but keeping distorted tax rates in place and letting in the Social Security tax cut (which Democrats were convinced to raise in the first place years ago to ensure the solvency of social security to handle Baby Boomer retirement) even as the "Deficit Commission" wants to talk about cutting our social safety nets which are critically necessary after 30 years of Supply Side economics. How sad that they will not be focusing instead on the war profiteering which has run rampant over the past decade with far too much privatization of military services. When we used to do regular military services like electrical engineering and plumbing and cooking in house, our tax dollars did double-duty, they served as job training programs too. Our soldiers then had broadly marketable skills when they left military service. We traded that in for Private-Sector-Can-Do-Better moldy food and soldiers electrocuted in their showers.

Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Dec 09th 2010, 02:13 PM
Millions crossed party lines to vote Democratic in 2008 after the Supply Side dribble down mythology led to the Bush Crash.

Instead of all Democratic legislators using that failure to finally admit that Cash for Hoarders hasn't worked, our party bowed down to those who still wanted to believe those lies.

But millions of us voted for more significant change. For a return to Democratic demand-side economics. We didn't want our bridges to collapse like that one in Minneapolis. We wanted to get to work repairing the infrastructure that has been allowed to decay to finance the Bush Wars and because of Republican sanctimonious dogma against creating more government jobs (except in the national paranoia industry).

We are belittled as sanctimonious for wanting to keep homelessness at bay with more demand-side support. While the GOP's insistence against evidence to the contrary that "tax cuts create jobs" was allowed to stand.

I thought my new president would be far more pragmatic. After a 400% increase in incomes at the top, I thought he and our Democratic legislators would band together to pragmatically push the demand-side programs, using the Bush Crash as the imperative.

Many of us are disillusioned by the compromise also because of the proposals of the Deficit Commission. That it would even consider slashing demand-side social safety net payments that would be immediately spent, rather than boldly increasing taxes on those whose income has soared, has been particularly painful.

And as long as I've rambled this far-- I thought we could really get a whole new pragmatic approach going after having those Truth & Reconciliation hearings we longed for. Seeing how far the torturers had pushed our country off course could have led to a wake-up call on cruel economic lies too. That was my hope.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Sat Nov 13th 2010, 11:25 AM
Even though I had hoped the willingness to compromise was exaggerated and badly wish to believe that such discouraging words are hyped right wing spin designed to discourage Democrats even further.

I had hoped the top Obama strategists would have taken the election results more firmly to heart. That millions of Democratic voters had been demoralized by all the compromises made so far. The Obama Team that campaigned so progressively then implemented their old fashioned 1990's strategy of moving to the right, compromising with the party that had crashed our economy and crushed our national security. Add to that tossing slurs at the 78% of Democrats who consider themselves progressive and it all became just too much for all the new voters brought on board with the 50-state strategy of 2006 and 2008. They must have wondered a hundred times just what their new party was doing by compromising in so many areas with the party that had destroyed our country.

They voted for strong Democratic change and didn't get it. They got mild Democratic change after it had been watered down by begging for one or two Republican votes. So they came to the Jon Stewart conclusion-- there is too much corruption on both sides. So-called Democrats who had won them over in 2006 and 2008 by educating them about Republicans being fiscally irresponsible and reckless on national security were not fighting against those ideas but compromising with them. Giving the nasty and cruel right wing more and more time to build up their hateful opposition and obstruction.

Maybe some of those discouraged Democrats were thinking like me that being Bipartisan just meant explaining how particular policies are fiscally responsible and how they enhance our national security. Be bipartisan with the Myth of the Republicans that they are those things. That's bipartisan enough. We didn't expect bipartisanship with lies like "the private sector can do it better" when medical costs are a leading cause of bankruptcy in the USA, we lost millions of jobs when the Bush tax cuts for the mega-millionaires were rolled out, and military privatization led to worse war profiteering and increased torture.

Democrats have a built-in marketing opportunity in de-coupling the tax cuts. Fight for the Obama Tax Cuts for 95% of us and absolutely refuse the Bush/GOP Tax Cuts for the top 2% that clearly failed to create jobs.

Maybe those painfully old-fashioned 6-State Strategy New Democrats (already old in the 90's) are relying too much on an endless supply of Yellow Dog Democrats like me (who always vote, mostly D with a little Green) when we are a dying breed. No one told the youngsters that even after the Democrats kick 78% of their base in the teeth and let BP control its own crime scene etc etc, we are still supposed to drag ourselves to the polls and vote D because Dang It, Republicans are far worse. Of course they are, but why have so many Democrats gone so far to compromise with them then? Diving for dollars.

Maybe some of those kids who stayed home have parents like me. Obedient Yella Dawgs who did as expected while our government kept getting pushed further and further to the right.
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Tue Nov 02nd 2010, 10:53 PM
"Are you kidding me?" Dr. Dean said quite forcefully, with facts on his side-- "They've run up the biggest deficits in our nation's history. Time and again."

He would not have left the nation's wake up-- when Repubs were at 29% popularity-- go to waste. He or I would have suggested that if the President wanted to do a bipartisan charm offensive, then only a few of the Democrats should go with him. The others should work that national wake up-- The GOP crashed our economy and our moral standing in the world.

They claimed to be strong on national security-- 9/11 happened on their watch. They dismissed the Clintons' obsession with Osama and took their eyes off the ball. Those Republicans. They have made our nation far less militarily secure with their torture ridden war on Iraq, just as we seemed to have had Osama cornered.

Howard would have lots of Democrats out there in all 50 states, reminding folks of our shared bitter experience-- the GOP lies were exposed. They were not great at the economy-- they crashed it-- the gap between rich and poor has exploded since Reagan's cruel "trickle down"-- the economic graphs looked so similar to the 1920's -- I was just sure Democrats would finally push their way into government with their massive mandate and go super FDR on the country. It would be Democrats' big chance to win back the country for decades to come.

I'd expect Dean and a team of courageous Democratic legislators to be out there explaining-- Folks, you've seen it for yourselves-- the GOP myths-- "We're good at the economy." and "We're good at national security." are both lies. They crashed the economy and increased our international enemies tenfold.

The 50-state strategy was more of an All American Strategy-- recognizing that most Americans want us to lead on green technologies, to have Medicare for All, to value labor more, to rebalance our economy.

Sad so sad that legislators' personal re-elections too often trump our country's long term health. They think they need that corporate cash.

But yes, I miss Dr. Dean because he really busted open those long term easy PR lies-- Republicans crashed our economy and he would not have let that recognition in the majorities of Nov 2008 go to waste.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in Latest Breaking News
Wed Oct 20th 2010, 07:57 PM
I hope many others will follow suit. The seething right wing hatred and mean propaganda has too much control over our civic life.

Most of our fellow citizens would like to work together to restore good balanced government. We know the ostrich approach hasn't solved a thing. People like us get crushed when our infrastructure crumbles; we'd love to get to work fixing it back up. We want our tax dollars to give us a floor of national health security-- basic compassionate Medicare for All is long overdue, especially in turbulent times like these. And we want our tax dollars to subsidize our national scramble to regain our place in the green technology market worldwide. Subsidies are long overdue for transfer from old fossil fuels to new sustainable renewable energy sources. Solar panels and wind turbines are waiting to be built and installed all across our country.

We voted D for Democratic change. That which helps the most of us regain some ground pulled from our quality of life by the endorsement of greed in the top 2%. Privatization has wrecked a lot in our country and we'd like our government to take it back.

Government jobs, shouted down as socialist by hate media, provide double bonus points for our tax dollars-- they constitute job training programs also. Ingenious people can move along to all kinds of creative invention and expression, after learning the ropes through serving the common good.

We The People have been Democrats for a long time now. New Democrats in a much larger sense, since the Republican Southern Racist Strategy got rolling. Dog whistling to white men. While we Democrats regrouped in all 50 states; multicultural but united around separation of church and state-- which has enabled profound religious freedom and diversity in this country. After years of Reagan union busting, we see how the unions elsewhere provided a bit of balance in the societies that tolerated them-- forced a democratic recognition of rewarding the value of labor just a bit more equitably. As in France these days, where workers are fighting for recognition that many are worn out by 60 and deserve support. Rather than pretending as we are here that workers at 67 will be hired by any other than Walmart, to work along through 67 or 8 years old.

Energy independence seems like a laudable national security strategy to many of us. We want to give it a try. We're ready willing and able to dive into an Apollo project for alternative energy in every state of our union. But the economy crushing GOP has defeated many of our efforts. With that filibuster. We really need to have them carry out full filibusters next time. Let them rant for hours in opposition to alternative energy projects in other states.

So I'm hoping the Democratic creative problem-solving majority will rush to the polls and vote D for Driving Forward once again. And that more millionaires will contribute to Media Matters in a big way. We have far too much wanton reckless propaganda in the USA today.
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by Overseas in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Aug 26th 2010, 09:09 PM
You say what I want to say.

You show why I had hope for very significant, practical change in this country. The FDR plan just made sense, and we had a great new president coming in who has the capacity to explain, with passion and courtesy, just why our economy had crashed by going too GOP and letting government-haters take too much control of our government. People who disparage the phrase "good government" had been allowed too much control of our economy and crashed it.

People who had a powerful profit motive were allowed to control our national security and ran that into the ground too.

I had the naive dream that a Truth & Reconciliation Commission on Bush Cheney Team war crimes would take the wool off our national eyes across the board. A careful examination of war profiteering, along with disturbing reviews of Abu Ghraib and other practices, could have provided the platform to take a really close look at other moral emergencies.

Including the fate of our planet, overburdened with carbon emissions. Truth & Reconciliation is surely needed there. I'd hoped the green part of the FDR plan could have been in effect before Copenhagen.

But the bullying in Congress seems to be terribly intense. That it could override millions of suffering people and force my democrats to toss out their strongest, most effective solutions before even sitting at the table has been sobering indeed. Some powerful factors are keeping my democrats from doing what works best and letting too much destruction continue.

We gave away too much of our national media. So yes, I would love to see our president put a human face on poverty. And I'd love to see a solid team of Democrats behind him illustrating the erosion of our public services the Bush team had allowed, in order to finance their tax cuts for the already rich. Listing the deferred maintenance the Bush gang left behind, letting our infrastructure decay, rather than hire more government workers. Levees all across this country need help.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by Overseas in Political Videos
Sat Aug 07th 2010, 11:59 AM

by the campaign contributions (aka bribes) from multinational corporations to push for the strongest modern FDR agenda.

We jump on our president but we needed hundreds of Alan Graysons pushing for dramatic Democratic change. We needed our party to strategize before his inauguration about pushing through Medicare for All on basic compassionate grounds in view of the great suffering inflicted on our people through the Republican administration pushing our economy off a cliff.

But our Democrats had been compromised by campaign contributions for decades already. And many have used Republican opposition as an excuse not to promote the best interests of the majority of our citizens, like national health security.

When we didn't get Medicare for All during Bill Clinton's presidency, I wondered how so many Democrats could have avoided doing something that would have given our party millions more loyal fans for decades to come. Once you've experienced national health security, as I did living overseas for a while, you know how deeply moving that can be. Why on earth would they not have done something that could have ensured them victories for years? Something more powerful than electoral success was at work back then and still rules the roost today.

And the Republicans look like strong tough guys because they band together as a block to support the multinational corporations that rule our government. They have the easy job of standing up for Big Money and Plutocracy.

It may have been impossible for Democrats to assemble as a unit, to be willing to sacrifice millions in campaign contributions from privatized medical insurance, Big Pharma, and other strong corporations to push through Medicare for All. I wish they had had that discussion and readied themselves for that fight before President Obama took office.

We would have been so glad to have the terror of medical costs removed from us that we would have voted for Democrats for years to come. Grateful citizens could provide a counterweight to the truckloads of corporate campaign cash and corporate funded smear campaigns.

But I guess that just was not enough to make the whole group of Democratic legislators push our president and country into using our taxes to give us basic national health security. Even after the Republicans had crashed our economy with their reconciliation tax cuts and trillion-dollar wars.

Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this 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.